War, war, everywhere...

Oh my:

http://blog.jim.com/war/after-the-flight-93-election/


JAD is well and I urged you to attempt to debate him.

My disagreement with JAD is that I think Trump was put in power by Rothschilds and for the specific purpose of divide-and-conquer. I don't think we strong men win with a top-down collective. We can only win with an Apache-style decentralized paradigm reinvented with stronger knowledge and principles of cultural evolution. So although I appreciate JAD's knowledge and perspective, I will have to lead because I don't think he is leading effectively. And he is censoring me and refusing to let me post on his blog. Ditto Eric Raymond who in spite of writing about the damned facts, continues to not admit the truth about for example woman's suffrage and besides he has no kids and thus no skin in the game. And he also continues to censor me and not allow me to post on his blog.


That sounds like you don't want to refute:


You made a claim that conflicts with your stated thesis about morals (wherein you claimed that men can't be objective because they can decide that evil is really good):

I haven't inquired yet (been too ill to do much of anything) with my source who subscribes to Armstrong. Also I had stated last time, that I wouldn't again reveal private subscriber info during the week it is intended to predict. I might reveal it after the fact, since this does not harm Armstrong subscribers.

Interesting to me is that gold seems to move up whenever there appears to be the case that Trump is destabilizing the world order in a way that might lead to war. Or any pause in the stronger dollar move.

Yet then the reality is this strong USA stance drives the dollar up, so gold has to move back down.

I think we are likely to get a strong dollar before we get any war and believe any war going hot with the major players will be due to economic devastation of the coming strong dollar vortex. So I still see gold down as the general direction until (late or after) 2018, in spite of deadcat bounces. Will be interested to read Armstrong's perspective.

Armstrong (and I concurred) has always said gold could go as high as $5000 (not higher!) after this strong dollar interlude. Again I have my doubts about whether you will be able to cash in your physical gold at that price.

Did I use the word liar any where? You are a doctor and should understand what sort of effects 4 very powerful antibiotics can have (so liver toxic that significant number of patients can't continue them and I already had liver disease before I started treatment), as well as my repeated statements (and also private ones) that I couldn't even eat without urinating out of my ass (even before I started the antibiotics and I rushed the treatment because my health was failing so precipitously and acutely on return from Singapore). I told you in private as well repeated it in public that my cognitive state is highly diminished. Although I am a beast of a fighter in terms of managing to do athletics even while I am so ill that you admitted to me you can't do while healthy, the fact is I've probably been fighting active, disseminated Tuberculosis for several years! Years! My body is really messed up and curing this is a major risk.

Of course I didn't read all of your post, nor read any of it with a fine tooth comb. I told you I don't have enough energy. I responded to few small portions that I read. I may become energized for some moments I am not (as I am now) by being provoked, but the vast majority of the time I am not in good condition right now. I did have some burst of mild energy a few days ago and perhaps I get a few hours every other day or so, where I feel mostly awake.


I am making numerous errors like that that I have to correct when I reread two and three times, because that is the state of my cognition right now. My brain is semi-conscious, and I hear in my head not what I am typing.

Please note the edit:


To reiterate, I sometimes or often find religious and leftist (social activist) zealots to be demeaning with a superior holier than thou attitude, and thus I tend to feel I should react strongly as well, but as I said, I am trying to back off from such personalization. I realize by allowing myself to feel provoked, I am probably interfering with my own rationality (realize that when this discussion started, I was fighting for my life healthwise as I was in a rapidly deteriorating health episode and was afraid I was going to be admitted to ER again thus I was in a fighting mode and in an agggresively defensive posture with raised cortisol levels, etc). Also I don't want to insinuate you are a zealot. As I said earlier, I am lacking an appropriate word to use in your case, and besides I don't want to be judging or analyzing you at all. I'd rather we just talk about facts.


Edit: as I said I am happy for you that you have such a great wife who is a match for you. And also congrats on 4 offspring. Forgot to make it clear that I am happy for your successes.

I agree with criptix's comments.

Remember Rothschilds said they historically decided who goes to war and when, and I had documented upthread that they put Trump in office.

Posturing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raPlbnr2dCI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dt24oxcKUJc (Note China also moved ICBMs into firing position to reach the USA West coast)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNHReXfZFRg (Trump planning a missile defense system)

North Korea is a proxy which China controls and uses for leverage.

Where in the prior post did I state I thought you are liar? As far as I remember, you have told me you have 2 children (I wasn't going to mention that but you have quoted my 3 - 4 children statement and claimed I am claiming you are a liar).

(Note further upthread I stated I thought you were regurgitating lies, but that doesn't mean I think you are consciously lying, but rather I that I thought you were deluded by ideology. But in the recent post I am trying to move away from personalization of this issue.)

The 3 - 4 children is taken from your statement that orthodox Jews are averaging 4.5 children and also my rough, quick guessestimate of what is necessary to stay above replacement rate.

It seems to me you are trying so hard to characterize me as an unethical person, so you can take the holier than thou stance in your mind. This is typical of religious people. They think they are superior. I indeed tried to depersonalize while respectfully addressing the points you made. How did you invent this liar allegation in your mind ostensibly in order to support your ethical superiority? Where in what in my prior post is an objective evidence that I was alleging you are a liar?

As I wrote in my prior post, when we debate core life philosophies and ideology, it becomes very stressful. Who wants to question their own life plan after already making a huge investment in it that can't be changed analogous to the inertia of the Titanic. I tried in my prior post. And this is your reaction. So please stop trying to frame the debate as if you are the victim. The stress is mutual. As well, I am under acute health (and as a result also financial!) stress at this time.


What have you stated that you think is true which you think refutes my claim that putting the woman's hindbrain a par with the men's obligation to lead destroys the society with social activism?

Where have you refuted that fact that you claimed that men are unable to think for themselves and that only God can tell us what is moral and ethical?

Btw, since man invented God, then it is ludicrous to claim that God can tell men which morals and ethics are absolutely true:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD9f0XU_S78
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orFKj0coLXA


And that God is a creation of man is not disproven by this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pwp8DtPjCQ

(As I wrote before, I will be replying on the role of religion throughout history, but I've told you, I do not have a lot of energy, so I will get to it when I am able to. I had already written in our discussion that religion is for the weak men, and thus is a way that weak mean enslave themselves, i.e. are unable to think for themselves, because they are incapable of knowing and acting on the truth of how to organize their own cultural evolution. The message of Jesus ((which I claim is an invention of smart men)) is that men should relegate their own selfish goals for the benefit of humanity and any successful cultural evolution will require some amount of selflessness combined with some amount of competition. It is true that when the weak men fall away from religion to hedonism, then society collapses. It is also true in history that torture and war can be justified by religion, so it isn't purely working as an instrument of successful cultural evolutionary superiority but rather just appears to be a natural aspect of weak men. And even within religion, weak men are not following the teaching of religion, because they idolize women and give them suffrage when the Bible and Koran clearly state not to do that! I had stated upthread that my message is intended for strong men.)


Thank you. I hope so too. I am running out of time.

CoinCube, I propose we take a step back and depersonalize our discussion. I think what set me off is combination of factors including but not limited to:

1. Your statement that man can't know what is moral without a God, thus implying a holier than thou attitude (and that men can't think for themselves) about those who don't agree. And this combined with what I perceived to be personal judging, not all of it stated rather just a perception (and not all of our discussion being public but I am not insinuating you said anything to me in private that was obnoxious or demeaning). I don't want to try to explain this perception as it was a confluence of discussion where I perceive your allegiance to certain things (such as medical institutions) as absolute which I perceive to he holier than thou pedestals.

Personally I think it is much more meaningful when someone is empathetic to me not because God told him to do so, but because it in his own heart and mind. The God people always carry this holier than thou righteous, moral baggage which they can dump over our head at any time. And I have pointed out that it often doesn't correctly identify good from evil, given my stance that anything which does not further my cultural group evolutionary strategy is evil. But whereas the Bible is very clear that women should not have suffrage, yet then some religions ignore that wisdom so they are evil.

2. That this discussion has been ongoing while I have been in the midst of a very horrible nausea and in general delirious (nearly hallucinating) and generally not feeling well, because I been in the first two weeks of very toxic 4 drug TB therapy and also I was fighting some kind of salmonella poisoning (or whatever that was?) simultaneously.

3. Generally how everyone including yourself uses derogatory, demeaning terminology when referring to people with ideologies you disagree with. For example, you have said JAD is primitive. Excuse me, primitive would not be respecting women in a civilized society, it would dragging them around by their hair Neanderthal style.

4. In general how men who believe in women's equality feel very disgusted about men who ponder whether women should not be voting. The judging is palatable even when you aren't writing or speaking, just the reverberations of the word "primitive" is more than enough for me to know how you feel about our stance. It is quite demeaning to know that the other side thinks we are Neanderthals.


Btw, you playing the role of the victim begins to mimic the tactics of Marxists, so it is not becoming. And again I consider moralizing to be a weapon of mass destruction and also personally demeaning holier than thou judging, thus I could also play the role of the victim but I instead went on the offensive. Nevertheless how about we step back from the ledge of personalization and try to see if we can debate with more rationality and objectivity.

As for your wife, I have no reason to doubt that she is a great match for you (and no reason for me to not be happy that you have her), but my point is about the widescale effects of idolizing women in ways where we as men usurp our own natural obligation to lead. Most men can not find a highly educated wife who will stay home, bear, and raise 3 - 4 children. You have the advantage of having two degrees and being a doctor, so given the culture your wife originates from I think it is very likely she would subjugate herself in honor of her pride for her husband's very high status, because you know in her culture-of-origin status is very important. But how many men will be in that position (and what if they want a Caucasian woman who isn't impressed by status). I don't think you have reached 3 - 4 children yet either, but anyway I proposed to depersonalize this discussion. Because there are widescale impacts of putting the female hindbrain at par with the male when it comes to leading the society. And that is what suffrage for women does. And if we educate females too highly, then all sorts of bad things happen, including the fertility rate dropping below the replacement rate (and that is not including the social activism and Marxist education that most people get now at educational institutions). You claim this is not the case for orthodox Judaism, but you've also admitted that the Jews are very prone to fall out of orthodoxy and into social leftism and I assert this is because of overly educated women raising little boys and polluting their minds. Women are naturally drawn to social causes (even that orthodox woman's perspective I cited upthread has her mentioning doing work on social causes). It is their nature. And they do not appreciate economics. For them money and strategy are never more important than the babies and the social causes. So that is why they should not be voting. Otherwise we end up with social activism clusterfucks.

You apparently love your wife and view her as an objective, virtuous woman. But I mean in terms of cultural evolutionary strategy, I don't think a woman is capable of subjugating her priority set so she can become a man and have the man's priority set. So I am using virtuous in that context. A woman can be virtuous for nurturing.

You can't possibly teach men to be objective if you are inject the unfalsifiable God nonsense into the equation. And you can't possibly be objective about morals (ethics) and competitive cultural evolution if you are trying to be so idealistic that you idolize women (which the 10 Commandments tells you not to do and Genesis tells you Eve couldn't be trusted and woman is only a rib of a man!) and fairytales that don't exist.

Gödel was the guy who tried to prove God exists, but then was so ashamed of it he never published his attempt. So apparently he was suffering from some idealistic delusion as well. At least he apparently had some awareness of his insanity.

I mean you can claim that you are teaching your offspring something, just as your parents sent you to be educated. But that doesn't guarantee you aren't just spreading more idealistic delusion.

(I will follow up on Bruce Charlton's writings later)

That is somewhat accurate and it is humbling (humiliating?) to read that.

I would say the #1 and #6 are factual, but let's replace "nutcase" with "zealot" but even I am not comfortable with that word. I see you as suffering a delusion of idealism. I don't know what word to use to describe those who are destroying this world by elevating women's hindbrain to equality with the men who need to lead. It think is a bat shit dumb crazy form of idealism (because of the impacts I think it has). The more I think about and the more I test this concept in terms of observing various things over the past days (I've been busy doing some research on this concept in the real world the past days), then more convinced it is the truth.

As for #2, you are framing everything in terms of religion and there is not sufficient objective reason to conclude that religion is the causal correlated factor or even the solution for humanity, rather a preference to frame it from that perspective. Whereas, religion has not worked. So what word to use to describe someone who wants to judge others (moralizing and even arbitrary morals which are evil) in terms of some arbitrary preference?

As for #3 and #4, I agree that I do not know if those correlate with your ideology. I've seen a lot of gay or effeminate men in these recent feminism marches and Trump protests. I've seen very masculine men in the pro-Trump side.

As for #7, I already stated that I don't see you as a person who is literally insane, but that I think the ideology you are professing is insanity (it should be clear that I think a majority of the people are suffering from this delusion of idealism). There is a distinction, and I put a lot of effort into making that distinction, so I am disappointed that you claiming I am saying you are insane.

As for #5, I presume you've been sticking to more or less one point of view your entire life, which is ostensibly the one you were programmed to have by your consistent educational environment from kindergarten to well into adulthood (sorry not trying to be demeaning but is it not a factual statement?). I have been changing and learning many different times. So which of us is more open minded? You've been on one set indoctrination plan since formative years. I have been out there in the real world learning by real world experience.

Does MA read my writings here, or do we just have a lot of similarity in our thinking:

Another scam.

I suppose analogous to how a drug addict loses the ability to feel, they've lost the ability to feel anything about their victims.

In China, the starvation got so bad, people ate their own children. Humans can be pushed into extremely aberrant behavior if they are pushed too far off kilter.


I ponder that they don't think it is OK and they know what they are doing is against any sense of sane society and value of humanity. Rather I suspect they feel that the world is not a caring world and thus they no longer care either, i.e. they've crossed the line into being sociopaths. They've probably rationalized that everything is part of nature and thus that their heinous acts are natural in some sense. It is of course insanity and any sane society will purge them.

If they've showed no restraint or true repentance (remorse), i.e. they've lost all conscience, they are probably beyond reformation and must be locked up indefinitely or otherwise purged from sane society. Also I think it is absolutely normal to feel this anger towards them regardless and the desire to give them the harshest punishment regardless.

For me the most sickening is when they rape babies. They can't possibly have any sense of value for human life whatsoever when they physically rape an infant. An infant has no capacity for sex. When they rape a young child or teenager, you can perhaps imagine that they are doing for wanting control and power, i.e. that is ostensibly former President Bill Clinton's alleged weakness. But in the case of infant, the infant is not even capable of recognizing the control or power. For me it hard to imagine even what is their motivation other than perhaps wanting to destroy everything human, i.e. pure evil and 100% sociopath.

The downtime is maddening:

I agree this is a very important point that must be emphasized.

Afaics, the reason religion doesn't work is because for the whites it doesn't appease (fill up) their intellectual capacity, but rather tries to tell them they can't think for themselves (and rewards their collective failure because they can always rely on God no matter what) and for the non-thinking brown skin cultures, they go to church as a superstition that they think will give them good luck in spite of all their sins. These days at the local Catholic church in the Philippines, I see 5 year old girls in high heels and mini-skirts (as JAD says, one giant brothel).

White men and women have high IQs and need to fill up that capacity with something. When they fill it up with ideology which is incompatible with competitive cultural evolutionary success (i.e. which is belies the reality of nature), then we end up with Frankenstein culling outcomes.

CoinCube is trying to be a very ethical person and wants to work for good. It is easy to want to admire him, because his intentions seem to be so pure. The problem is IMO he doesn't have an accurate appraisal of the reality of the good and evil, because his mind has been polluted by a lot of nonsense (ostensibly by attending very good schools since his formative years, whereas I attended all black inner city schools where we didn't learn a damn thing so I had to pretty much learn everything myself at least until 8th grade when I enrolled in a non-secular private school that afair wasn't yet infected with SJWs or maybe it was and I was afflicted from it). I also went out into the wider world and experienced a lot of sin (failure) and mistakes personally so I have learned by fire. It is what I didn't know that caused me to fail so much. I don't wish to make this personal, because honestly and frankly I know in my heart that CoinCube is such a respectful person and trying to be such a good and honorable person. And at times in my life, I became disillusioned and there were moments or periods where I didn't even try. So I can't stand on a high horse and judge CoinCube. It pains me that I can't get him to realize that IMO he is the one who in enslaved in evil. He may have a similar perspective about me, and observe how he is no longer judging me heavily in public (he only did that very briefly) so I need to also respect that this is not personal. He shifted his judgement to JAD, who is not here to defend himself. So we are having a debate here, and I want to try to be respectful, because really I don't want to be angry or offensive to my brother. It is the ideology he is professing that I hate.

When I use the word insanity, it is because it is men who have the natural capacity to use strategy, compete, and lead culture. Women can never do this. So if we say that we don't trust the strong men to lead and we instead wish to put the women's hindbrain in control of society, then what actually happens is society becomes dominated by strong men any way who take control of that power vacuum. This is why we have a global elite who are so empowered to control the minds of the populace.

Our only hope as men is take control and lead. Period. Until CoinCube gets this, I am afraid I will conclude his intellectual capacity has been filled up with insanity.

Having said that, @winter was correct to point out that those who need to demonize others, perhaps don't have good arguments. I am not demonizing CoinCube. I am using the word insanity, because I truly believe it is insane to fill up our intellectual capacity for sociology with anything other than a successful cultural evolutionary strategy. In fact, it is CoinCube who focused me on the importance of having such a strategy (before I was just lost floating aimlessly at sea). Now armed with a real purpose to my life, I feel energized as a man. CoinCube feels energized by his ideology (as do other SJWs) but how can they succeed when they are relegating their roles as males to be the strategy leaders and turning over society to control by the women's hindbrain and thus a power vacuum to be picked off over time by Marxism (top-down control by global elite totalitarianism).

P.S. I am on very strong 4-drugs anti-tuberculosis meds and I am basically so exhausted that I can only sleep continuously (about 20 hours a day) and eat. So I am in sort of state of near delirium, so apologies but the quality of my cognitive state (and thus prose) is highly diminished at the moment. I am posting on this topic because I think it is perhaps the most important thing I can possibly do with the limited moments I have awake. And because I don't have enough energy to do any real work (such as programming).

Whites are more prone to planning and use of the mind for organizing. This appears to be due to winter. I have a friend here in the Philippines who says one hard winter would kill 50% of the filipinos. JAD is correct that in every brown country, the whites run everything and keep the utilities turn on. In the Philippines, the Chinese actually run the country. Before that it was the Americans. Before that it was the Spanish for 400 years.

I suppose there were exceptions such as the Aztecs, but the white man was more productive and thus had better weapons and easily defeated the Aztecs.

Sorry your source is incorrect. Whiteness is a culture and thus produces a different philosophy. It also produces aberrant philosophies such as religion and ideologues.

I think we are still searching for the pragmatic white culture. I do not know the facts about whether we can take brown genetics and raise these offspring in a white culture and thinking and get the desired result. I need to try to do some research on this. I would appreciate if anyone can help me. I do note that JAD published a blog that showed that only the European babies have the gag reflex and fight back ferociously. I am not sure if this accurate or scientific. I need to study more on this.

My guess or intuition is that race also drives culture genetically, because for example I can tell you that very brown filipinas have a lot of trouble with their ears in cold climates. The cold air seems to get inside their ears in a way that it doesn't for us. And also they get very dry skin if they are not in a very humid climate. I am not pure white as I have some small % of Cherokee native American ancestry (enough that I am not that tall at 174 - 175cm in shoes and I am smaller boned), and I have noticed in myself that I have a need to exhaust myself physically before I can settle down into mental focus (but I am not sure if other whites don't also have this trait).

Hey I am not against the success of non-white races and culture. If they can succeed, great. But I want to see it, not legislate what isn't.


Well I think this is largely true for the majority of whites who have fallen into ideological slavery.

The Dark Enlightenment appears to be about the awakening of white (and maybe also some of color) men who are not so enslaved.


Where are his references!?!!

I would presume that environmental factors were driving it as I have explained.


America appears to have been one of the Dark Enlightenment style movements.


America emancipated women and then it self-destructed because of it.

But I agree that religion was not sufficient to prevent the masses from ideological enslavement. That is my point.

And that is why when trying to design a really competitive solution, I realize it must be decentralized. Refer to my upthread explanations.

It isn't objective (not even smart) to equate an accurate understanding of nature with the primordial mental evolution of baboons.

All that academia brain washing indoctrination is actually a bat shit dumb cathedral.

And the arrogance that accompanies it. And he has no obligation to fix your ideological insanity either. The point was to see who can win the arguments, because I think he is more prepared than I am to refute you on point. It is the same genre of insanely stupid zombies we see in these videos spouting off about "I need a penis to get a job". I wanted to ask that pretty young lady to please go move a huge stack of concrete blocks up to the 10th floor on a construction zone for 8 hours and ongoing for 6 days a week, while I stay home and feed the cute babies.


ftfy. And if you still don't understand why, then you haven't been paying attention to the discussion.


Just open your eyes. Fertility dropping below replacement rates. Yet you think religion will fix this because of some minority groups with a higher fertility. Yet these groups continue to fall away into leftism as you admitted. Orthodox judaism is dead if they are educating and emancipating their women. It will slide left over time and/or be diluted from within.


That will always be true. You are proposing slavery. And JAD (and I) are proposing freedom. But you are blind.

Emancipating females turns them into whoring slaves to their hindbrain. And they fall into ideological mind control (slavery) and then the men do too. You are so enslaved that you don't even realize it.

Ideological mind controlled zombie bullshit is slavery. We have the huge armies of enslaved zombies on YouTube. Just take a few hours watching these protests and watch some videos of activists and academic activists, etc.. They will cull themselves. Guaranteed.

CoinCube, you are entirely wrong. And I am not sure if I have the patience, energy, and time right now to try to explain all the intracracies of why.

For one thing, I have a lot more real world experience than you do. Experience beats theory because theoreticians live in a bubble. I have seen personally all the whoring going on. And all the destruction due to "educated" emancipated females.  (You can't in general educate a female, because she is ruled by her hind-brain, and all your attempts and wishing will never conquer nature. Never!). Men unfortunately can be mind controlled by ideology, so in general education doesn't work for males also, but when it does work, those males dominate the others in a cultural evolutionary competition. Whereas the rare case of educated females (not ruled by her hindbrain) do not dominate and thus do not spread (dominate with) their superior genes+culture. Thus women can't be effective leaders in a cultural evolutionary context. These are inviolable facts of nature.

Religion failed the brown people in Latin America and especially the Philippines, and it also failed the white people. The brown people tend to adopt their feelings because their life is very physically based (due to climate and thus lifestyle+culture). The white people are fanatical about what ever religion they choose (atheism, leftism, judaism, christianity, etc) ostensibly because of the colder climate they have more propensity to be mental (i.e. spend time thinking+planning+organizing) and produce Frankenstein ideological disasters every single damn time. No exceptions.

Religion does not work. Period. It fails.

The only thing that worked (for that family, i.e. decentralized outcome not collective groupwise) was when parents used to stop the world from becoming one giant brothel, as JAD so eloquently explained.

You can think that religion can do the same, but that is in theory. In practice, it has other even more aberrant outcomes.

Here is the message I have been sending to filipinas to explain to them why many (most) of the foreigners they meet are playing with them and why many of the filipino boys run away when they make the lady pregnant. I'll send a variant of it to Western women too if they will even read (but I find they cover their eyes and ears and scream instead or just ignore).