The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
If There Was Hope It Must Lie in the Quote Tweets
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Ratioed hard:

The company once boasting about being the free speech wing of the free speech party is now so strongly associated with biasedly suppressing human expression it makes tin pot African dictators blush.

The biggest threats to human liberty no longer come from governments, they come from Woke Capital. The US government can’t get you kicked out of higher education for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital can. The US government won’t prevent you from opening a bank account for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital will. The US government can’t get you fired for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital can. The US government won’t provide your home address to nefarious actors interested in causing you bodily harm for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital will.

The oligarchs who own Woke Capital have the ability to extinguish the flames of madness they are stoking. The power the cancellers have to figuratively force hemlock down the throats of those who question the gods of the state is a power lent to them at the pleasure of Woke Capital. Hold the line against taking action unless the behavior is illegal and it all ends. There are still plenty of people who are happy to speak truth to power–so long as it doesn’t mean ending up emaciated and living under a bridge.

But Woke Capital doesn’t want to fix this. They view it as a feature rather than a bug. In the internet age there is always something to hang a worker with. McDonald’s loves being able to fire a cashier at will for liking the wrong tweet. Wokeism allows the neo-liberal establishment to destroy anyone at any time for anything. That kind of power will not be relinquished voluntarily. We live in a world of Saurons and Smeagols, not Frodos.

 
Hide 42 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Some variation on this line has been winning all around the Intertubes:

    “Uganda is a private country, if they don’t want Twitter then Twitter should build its own Uganda”.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @anon

    Of course, they'll pick on a small African country that can't effectively punch back, but they'll leave the Chinese and Iranians alone. Some things never change.

    Replies: @John Gruskos

    , @The Alarmist
    @anon

    In some ways, Twitter is busy turning the developed world into a larger version of Uganda.

    , @Wyatt
    @anon

    Truly, Uganda no de wey.

  2. You are going backwards in your understanding of the problem. Moldbug gave us the vocabulary–the Cathedral, etc–to talk about the real problem. It is not Woke Capital, but the collaboration of all sectors of the society due to having the same class membership with the same values. It is only a matter of time before the government is doing things we thought it couldn’t do. That’s the thing of utmost importance now is to take a hard line on 1A and fight things like domestic terrorism bills. I, for one, am already drafting a letter to my Congressmen. Also, although reaching out to the left is usually a pointless exercise, on this issue, we need to do that too.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Chrisnonymous


    Also, although reaching out to the left is usually a pointless exercise, on this issue, we need to do that too.
     
    That would be a smart move.
    , @Curle
    @Chrisnonymous

    “It is not Woke Capital, but the collaboration of all sectors of the society due to having the same class membership with the same values.”

    Try having a conversation discussing The Cathedral. I’ve field tested this. Woke Capital is an excellent formulation and even if not as all encompassing as The Cathedral few people are philosophers or have ever read an philosophical text. My two go to terms have been International Bankers or The R and D Donor Class or just The Donor Class. I’ve tried The Cathedral and do not get ready comprehension without messy elaboration. Donor Class and International Bankers is understandable without elaboration. I’m going to try out Woke Capital as I suspect it will work.

    Replies: @anon

    , @Stan d Mute
    @Chrisnonymous


    the same class membership with the same values.
     
    Aw hell no. It’s the indoctrination centers we call schools and the ability of any individual to resist indoctrination. Class is involved only insofar as the middle and upper classes are nearly entirely indoctrinated.
  3. Let’s see, they’ve got the government bureaucracy, including the Deep State, Woke Capital, the NGOs, most of academia, the mainline religions and most media. They can’t limp along much longer.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @iffen

    The Soviets had all of these things, too. The US dollar is the core powering all of this and if it's not in trouble now, it's never been in trouble and probably never will be.

    Replies: @iffen

  4. I’ll just say this again: There’s great power in numbers. The left figured this out back in the 1960s. The right has never seemed to figure this out yet. Plus, yeah, many more of them have jobs … for now, hence don’t have the time for political acdtion. This political situation will change when the financial SHTF.

    I don’t know which will come first, the financial SHTF or the final clamping down on all free thought and actions by Government. Either will be very painful, but I’m hoping the former beats out the latter, as that way the latter won’t be so likely to happen. A doomer guy name Gerald Celente I used to read years ago had his one tag line (that he pushed like hell): “When people have nothing to lose, they lose it.” Actually, that one is a silly way to put it, but really, when the people on the right have less to lose, they will be more bold, as big “TECH” won’t have the hold on them, and then, There is great power in numbers.

    • Replies: @Juri
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Do not underestimate asymmetric warfare. In Russian Empire, there were also numbers. Including millions of WW I experienced veterans.

    But somehow Lenin with his weirdos and snowflakes won. It the war, there is very little to do with numbers. Entire Taliban is barely 20 000 strong and armed only with handguns.

    Morale and willing to fight is what matters. You may have 100 million gun owners but when they think that it is not their business, somehow it goes back to normal and best thing is sit out the storm, then AOC with her obese lesbian and weirdo Antifa wins like Lenin did.

    Replies: @Stan d Mute

    , @Anonymous
    @Achmed E. Newman

    > "There’s great power in numbers...The right has never seemed to figure this out yet. Plus, yeah, many more of them have jobs..."

    "Having jobs" is no excuse. Working didn't stop the Right from forming the NRA...or building free state-of-the-art Shriner hospitals for kids with life-threatening burns...or coaching Little League. Guys with shitty jobs knew the solution was to form a dues-paying union whose paid professionals would advocate for them 24-7-365.

    The problem isn't having jobs. The problem is not having smarts. Or guts. Or organizing.

    Guys refused to fund a men's group the size of NOW to counter feminism. Ergo, they did jackshit for 5 decades while feminists attacked boys, masculinity, all-male colleges-clubs-unions-armies, and so on. You think men like that would fight effectively for Trump?

    Conservative men refused to unite and fight and became soft. They should have filled every city every weekend since November 3rd to protest the stolen election. Instead they did what they always do: nothing. They hoped Bigfoot, the Easter Bunny, and the Kraken would save them.

    Guys terrified of feminists have themselves now become women.

    Nice-conservative-Christian-passive-white men created today's cultural clusterfark. They turned their cheeks so much that their slapped heads swiveled 360-degrees. Meanwhile, the Left burned cities, attacked citizens, looted stores, and removed Trump.

    The Right expected Don...one guy... to do all the heavy lifting. His followers were content to read tweets and attend feel-good/do-nothing rallies. They acted as if the Third Army sat on its collective behind while Patton fought the Wehrmacht alone.

    > "when the people on the right have less to lose, they will be more bold"

    Don't count on it. Homeless folks are hardly known for being Spartans. When you have less to lose you tend to have less assets and energy. When your stomach is empty, you tend to lay down.

    Do smart nations create/feed/train effective armies or count on weak and starving citizens to oppose enemies?

    Did Iron Mike Tyson work his ass off BEFORE fights or "train" for bouts by being a passive couch-potato?

    Did Usain Bolt "bang on the drum all day" or sprint-sprint-sprint?

    > "There is great power in numbers."

    How so?

    Is a mound of mush tougher than a dried-cement column?

    Numbers alone say little. Quality and quantity matter, too. Out-numbered Brits beat Frogs at Agincourt.

    Are a million ants tougher than one flame-thrower?

    Are a thousand babies more powerful than one MMA pro?

    Is a lawn covered with sand worth more than a bag of diamonds?

    Could the 2,545 females studying at Smith College defeat one 6-member Navy SEAL team?

    "Numbers" alone usually don't mean shit to a tree. What counts are things like power, will, timing, and luck.

    The Left has power because it is active, organized, well-funded, ruthless, populated with warriors, and focused on victory. Did gays give up on marriage when courts first found against them?

    On the other hand, even after getting ass-kicked for 4 years, Trumpers STILL let antifa attack with impunity, permitted Proud Boys to be jailed, and "knew" Don's 1,347-D chess would ultimately prevail.

    The Right lacks power because it is passive, disorganized, whiney, pacifist, filled with do-nothing talkers (Graham, Gowdy, etc.), and focused on its navel.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    , @Stan d Mute
    @Achmed E. Newman


    when the people on the right have less to lose, they will be more bold
     
    BINGO!!!
  5. @Achmed E. Newman
    I'll just say this again: There's great power in numbers. The left figured this out back in the 1960s. The right has never seemed to figure this out yet. Plus, yeah, many more of them have jobs ... for now, hence don't have the time for political acdtion. This political situation will change when the financial SHTF.

    I don't know which will come first, the financial SHTF or the final clamping down on all free thought and actions by Government. Either will be very painful, but I'm hoping the former beats out the latter, as that way the latter won't be so likely to happen. A doomer guy name Gerald Celente I used to read years ago had his one tag line (that he pushed like hell): "When people have nothing to lose, they lose it." Actually, that one is a silly way to put it, but really, when the people on the right have less to lose, they will be more bold, as big "TECH" won't have the hold on them, and then, There is great power in numbers.

    Replies: @Juri, @Anonymous, @Stan d Mute

    Do not underestimate asymmetric warfare. In Russian Empire, there were also numbers. Including millions of WW I experienced veterans.

    But somehow Lenin with his weirdos and snowflakes won. It the war, there is very little to do with numbers. Entire Taliban is barely 20 000 strong and armed only with handguns.

    Morale and willing to fight is what matters. You may have 100 million gun owners but when they think that it is not their business, somehow it goes back to normal and best thing is sit out the storm, then AOC with her obese lesbian and weirdo Antifa wins like Lenin did.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
    @Juri


    Morale and willing to fight is what matters.
     
    Which is what he implied when he wrote that we would see change when the right feels like it has nothing to lose. Until the normiecon feels directly threatened, that if doesn’t fight he will lose all, he will sit on his ass and make excuses why it’s prudent to wait and see. Since everyone has their own threshold for misery, we will see people on the right coming uncorked at various times due to various provocations and dispossessions. “Slowly at first, then all of a sudden” is a good rule of thumb.
  6. Whitepill: forcing the center-right off of leftist controlled social media is a major miscalculation. FAGATS (facebook amazon google apple twitter spotify) could shut down far-right propoganda and narratives on their own platforms. They aren’t going to be able to keep up the crusade of shutting down entire platforms and we aren’t going to just disappear. Within two years the center-right will be homogenized and radicalized just as the SJW left has done to the center-left. In two years your grandma will be talking about white genocide.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Catdog

    One can hope, but the financial nexus really is a hurdle. The Post Office, the phone company, the electric company, all have to provide you service. The banks do not. This is the ace up the Left's sleeve. As the economy financializes, digitizes and centralizes, they retain the power to shut off anyone's and anything's financial life support at will.

    I love Stontoss's classic as much as anyone

    http://stonetoss.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/right-wing-censorship-comic1.png

    but getting from the second frame to the third frame may be a bigger leap than getting from the third to the fourth.

    I'll see your Whitepill with one of my own: the Left would like to shut down 2A just as much as 1A, yet somehow 2A—from manufacturers to publishers to tradeshows—manages to keep turning over currency. I don't know how exactly, but they do. Maybe 1A could learn from 2A here.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

  7. The biggest threats to human liberty no longer come from governments, they come from Woke Capital.

    That’s true of course, but try explaining it to libertarians or to those on the Right who think the First Amendment will protect them. Try explaining it to the dinosaurs who are still obsessing about commies under the bed.

    Wokeism/SJWism isn’t a communist plot. It’s a capitalist plot.

  8. @Chrisnonymous
    You are going backwards in your understanding of the problem. Moldbug gave us the vocabulary--the Cathedral, etc--to talk about the real problem. It is not Woke Capital, but the collaboration of all sectors of the society due to having the same class membership with the same values. It is only a matter of time before the government is doing things we thought it couldn't do. That's the thing of utmost importance now is to take a hard line on 1A and fight things like domestic terrorism bills. I, for one, am already drafting a letter to my Congressmen. Also, although reaching out to the left is usually a pointless exercise, on this issue, we need to do that too.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Curle, @Stan d Mute

    Also, although reaching out to the left is usually a pointless exercise, on this issue, we need to do that too.

    That would be a smart move.

  9. That kind of power will not be relinquished voluntarily.

    “Then one day, for no reason at all…”

    When the left call Trump the new Hitler, they do have a kind of micro-point. I used to wonder how someone as “crazy” as Hitler got elected in as enlightened a place as Germany. Boy, the last few years have ended that question. I was never a superfan of “crazy” Trump, but I voted for him because he promised to bash the institutions that were most oppressive and divisive. As it turned out, all he really did was to rile them up and then capitulate to them, which is arguably the worst possible thing he could have done: first galvanizing them and then empowering them. So now we’re back where we were four years ago only more so. Woke Capital and the capital-government-cultural “Cathedral” convergence are worse than ever, so how to reverse the death spiral?

    Anyway, AE, I just wanted to say that this is one of your best “big picture” posts ever: succinct yet pithy.

    The US government can’t get you kicked out of higher education for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital can. The US government won’t prevent you from opening a bank account for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital will. The US government can’t get you fired for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital can. The US government won’t provide your home address to nefarious actors interest[ed] in causing you bodily harm for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital will.

    Wish I had written that myself.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Curle
    @Almost Missouri

    Apologies for the scolding, but do you really believe change to reverse more than 100 years of coordinated concentration of effort is reversible by one guy in one office?

    “As it turned out, all he really did was to rile them up and then capitulate to them, which is arguably the worst possible thing he could have done”

    No. Never taking chances, never poking the beast, never riling it up is the worst possible thing he could have done. Why do you think the nature of the Beast is so apparent to you now? Did Paul Ryan reveal this to you? (joking)

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    , @My SIMPLE Pseudonymic Handle
    @Almost Missouri

    Not to be picayune, petty or small minded, but Hitler was never elected to any office.

    He tried and tried but never made the cut. The Nazi Party gained seats in the Reichstag through elections and finally when they held the majority they then appointed Hitler the Chancellor. When Hindenburg died Hitler assumed the office of President, combining both the offices of the Presidency and the Chancellor, and the rest is history.

    https://www.thoughtco.com/hitlers-rise-to-power-timeline-1221353

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @iffen

  10. @Chrisnonymous
    You are going backwards in your understanding of the problem. Moldbug gave us the vocabulary--the Cathedral, etc--to talk about the real problem. It is not Woke Capital, but the collaboration of all sectors of the society due to having the same class membership with the same values. It is only a matter of time before the government is doing things we thought it couldn't do. That's the thing of utmost importance now is to take a hard line on 1A and fight things like domestic terrorism bills. I, for one, am already drafting a letter to my Congressmen. Also, although reaching out to the left is usually a pointless exercise, on this issue, we need to do that too.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Curle, @Stan d Mute

    “It is not Woke Capital, but the collaboration of all sectors of the society due to having the same class membership with the same values.”

    Try having a conversation discussing The Cathedral. I’ve field tested this. Woke Capital is an excellent formulation and even if not as all encompassing as The Cathedral few people are philosophers or have ever read an philosophical text. My two go to terms have been International Bankers or The R and D Donor Class or just The Donor Class. I’ve tried The Cathedral and do not get ready comprehension without messy elaboration. Donor Class and International Bankers is understandable without elaboration. I’m going to try out Woke Capital as I suspect it will work.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    • Replies: @anon
    @Curle

    The Cathedral is not a useful term because it doesn't describe anything specific. It started as a catch-all joke to make fun of the pseudo-religious aspects of the left, but the idea that there is some consistent strain of thought tying the Reformation and Enlightenment to modern factions of Globohomo and their henchmen falls apart completely under scrutiny. Woke Capital is, I think, a useful term for this latter phenomenon, but is Pfizer part of that? How about the wars in the ME that everybody wants to end but can't? How far back in US history do we have to go to find a justifiable war?

    Notice also that Yarvin is arguing two somewhat contradictory things: one is that it matters a great deal what people think, ie The Cathedral, and the other is that we have a structural problem, that, when solved by The Patchwork, makes it unimportant what people think. I don't disagree, but would just point out that we had the patchwork in Machiavelli's day, as well as throughout much of colonial history. Perhaps we now need another iteration to collect more data, brave new world and all!

    Replies: @anon, @Audacious Epigone

  11. @Catdog
    Whitepill: forcing the center-right off of leftist controlled social media is a major miscalculation. FAGATS (facebook amazon google apple twitter spotify) could shut down far-right propoganda and narratives on their own platforms. They aren't going to be able to keep up the crusade of shutting down entire platforms and we aren't going to just disappear. Within two years the center-right will be homogenized and radicalized just as the SJW left has done to the center-left. In two years your grandma will be talking about white genocide.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    One can hope, but the financial nexus really is a hurdle. The Post Office, the phone company, the electric company, all have to provide you service. The banks do not. This is the ace up the Left’s sleeve. As the economy financializes, digitizes and centralizes, they retain the power to shut off anyone’s and anything’s financial life support at will.

    I love Stontoss’s classic as much as anyone

    but getting from the second frame to the third frame may be a bigger leap than getting from the third to the fourth.

    I’ll see your Whitepill with one of my own: the Left would like to shut down 2A just as much as 1A, yet somehow 2A—from manufacturers to publishers to tradeshows—manages to keep turning over currency. I don’t know how exactly, but they do. Maybe 1A could learn from 2A here.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Almost Missouri

    This is one of the great hopes of cryptocurrency. Or at least it was. I fear that institutional interest in cryptos is a bad thing in all but the short-run. The immediate impact is a stellar increase in prices. Not just bitcoin but others like ethereum have had a hell of a run. But it's not because people are using cryptos are a medium of exchange. It's because they're becoming speculative assets that big institutions are toying with getting involved in. Regulation and institutional capture follow, and there goes your Big Finance workaround.

  12. @Almost Missouri

    That kind of power will not be relinquished voluntarily.
     
    "Then one day, for no reason at all..."

    When the left call Trump the new Hitler, they do have a kind of micro-point. I used to wonder how someone as "crazy" as Hitler got elected in as enlightened a place as Germany. Boy, the last few years have ended that question. I was never a superfan of "crazy" Trump, but I voted for him because he promised to bash the institutions that were most oppressive and divisive. As it turned out, all he really did was to rile them up and then capitulate to them, which is arguably the worst possible thing he could have done: first galvanizing them and then empowering them. So now we're back where we were four years ago only more so. Woke Capital and the capital-government-cultural "Cathedral" convergence are worse than ever, so how to reverse the death spiral?

    Anyway, AE, I just wanted to say that this is one of your best "big picture" posts ever: succinct yet pithy.

    The US government can’t get you kicked out of higher education for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital can. The US government won’t prevent you from opening a bank account for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital will. The US government can’t get you fired for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital can. The US government won’t provide your home address to nefarious actors interest[ed] in causing you bodily harm for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital will.
     
    Wish I had written that myself.

    Replies: @Curle, @My SIMPLE Pseudonymic Handle

    Apologies for the scolding, but do you really believe change to reverse more than 100 years of coordinated concentration of effort is reversible by one guy in one office?

    “As it turned out, all he really did was to rile them up and then capitulate to them, which is arguably the worst possible thing he could have done”

    No. Never taking chances, never poking the beast, never riling it up is the worst possible thing he could have done. Why do you think the nature of the Beast is so apparent to you now? Did Paul Ryan reveal this to you? (joking)

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Curle


    do you really believe change to reverse more than 100 years of coordinated concentration of effort is reversible by one guy in one office?
     
    It can't, obviously, but that doesn't mean that attempts won't be made, and then blame laid when they fail.

    the nature of the Beast is so apparent to you now?
     
    Don't worry, the nature of the beast has apparent to me for a long time. I'm going on my third decade of irritating people IRL about this stuff. What I learned from Trump was how little others had learned.

    Replies: @Curle

  13. Jack: one man – one tweet – one time (though it will be erased.)

  14. @anon
    Some variation on this line has been winning all around the Intertubes:


    "Uganda is a private country, if they don't want Twitter then Twitter should build its own Uganda".

    Replies: @nebulafox, @The Alarmist, @Wyatt

    Of course, they’ll pick on a small African country that can’t effectively punch back, but they’ll leave the Chinese and Iranians alone. Some things never change.

    • Replies: @John Gruskos
    @nebulafox

    Give them time.

    They will pick on Iran and China eventually.

    But they will never pick on Israel.

  15. Anonymous[401] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman
    I'll just say this again: There's great power in numbers. The left figured this out back in the 1960s. The right has never seemed to figure this out yet. Plus, yeah, many more of them have jobs ... for now, hence don't have the time for political acdtion. This political situation will change when the financial SHTF.

    I don't know which will come first, the financial SHTF or the final clamping down on all free thought and actions by Government. Either will be very painful, but I'm hoping the former beats out the latter, as that way the latter won't be so likely to happen. A doomer guy name Gerald Celente I used to read years ago had his one tag line (that he pushed like hell): "When people have nothing to lose, they lose it." Actually, that one is a silly way to put it, but really, when the people on the right have less to lose, they will be more bold, as big "TECH" won't have the hold on them, and then, There is great power in numbers.

    Replies: @Juri, @Anonymous, @Stan d Mute

    > “There’s great power in numbers…The right has never seemed to figure this out yet. Plus, yeah, many more of them have jobs…”

    “Having jobs” is no excuse. Working didn’t stop the Right from forming the NRA…or building free state-of-the-art Shriner hospitals for kids with life-threatening burns…or coaching Little League. Guys with shitty jobs knew the solution was to form a dues-paying union whose paid professionals would advocate for them 24-7-365.

    The problem isn’t having jobs. The problem is not having smarts. Or guts. Or organizing.

    Guys refused to fund a men’s group the size of NOW to counter feminism. Ergo, they did jackshit for 5 decades while feminists attacked boys, masculinity, all-male colleges-clubs-unions-armies, and so on. You think men like that would fight effectively for Trump?

    Conservative men refused to unite and fight and became soft. They should have filled every city every weekend since November 3rd to protest the stolen election. Instead they did what they always do: nothing. They hoped Bigfoot, the Easter Bunny, and the Kraken would save them.

    Guys terrified of feminists have themselves now become women.

    Nice-conservative-Christian-passive-white men created today’s cultural clusterfark. They turned their cheeks so much that their slapped heads swiveled 360-degrees. Meanwhile, the Left burned cities, attacked citizens, looted stores, and removed Trump.

    The Right expected Don…one guy… to do all the heavy lifting. His followers were content to read tweets and attend feel-good/do-nothing rallies. They acted as if the Third Army sat on its collective behind while Patton fought the Wehrmacht alone.

    > “when the people on the right have less to lose, they will be more bold”

    Don’t count on it. Homeless folks are hardly known for being Spartans. When you have less to lose you tend to have less assets and energy. When your stomach is empty, you tend to lay down.

    Do smart nations create/feed/train effective armies or count on weak and starving citizens to oppose enemies?

    Did Iron Mike Tyson work his ass off BEFORE fights or “train” for bouts by being a passive couch-potato?

    Did Usain Bolt “bang on the drum all day” or sprint-sprint-sprint?

    > “There is great power in numbers.”

    How so?

    Is a mound of mush tougher than a dried-cement column?

    Numbers alone say little. Quality and quantity matter, too. Out-numbered Brits beat Frogs at Agincourt.

    Are a million ants tougher than one flame-thrower?

    Are a thousand babies more powerful than one MMA pro?

    Is a lawn covered with sand worth more than a bag of diamonds?

    Could the 2,545 females studying at Smith College defeat one 6-member Navy SEAL team?

    “Numbers” alone usually don’t mean shit to a tree. What counts are things like power, will, timing, and luck.

    The Left has power because it is active, organized, well-funded, ruthless, populated with warriors, and focused on victory. Did gays give up on marriage when courts first found against them?

    On the other hand, even after getting ass-kicked for 4 years, Trumpers STILL let antifa attack with impunity, permitted Proud Boys to be jailed, and “knew” Don’s 1,347-D chess would ultimately prevail.

    The Right lacks power because it is passive, disorganized, whiney, pacifist, filled with do-nothing talkers (Graham, Gowdy, etc.), and focused on its navel.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Anonymous

    Best image of the week:


    Could the 2,545 females studying at Smith College defeat one 6-member Navy SEAL team?
     
    Photograph, please!
  16. @Curle
    @Almost Missouri

    Apologies for the scolding, but do you really believe change to reverse more than 100 years of coordinated concentration of effort is reversible by one guy in one office?

    “As it turned out, all he really did was to rile them up and then capitulate to them, which is arguably the worst possible thing he could have done”

    No. Never taking chances, never poking the beast, never riling it up is the worst possible thing he could have done. Why do you think the nature of the Beast is so apparent to you now? Did Paul Ryan reveal this to you? (joking)

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    do you really believe change to reverse more than 100 years of coordinated concentration of effort is reversible by one guy in one office?

    It can’t, obviously, but that doesn’t mean that attempts won’t be made, and then blame laid when they fail.

    the nature of the Beast is so apparent to you now?

    Don’t worry, the nature of the beast has apparent to me for a long time. I’m going on my third decade of irritating people IRL about this stuff. What I learned from Trump was how little others had learned.

    • Replies: @Curle
    @Almost Missouri

    Ok, like I said apologies.

    Im probably repeating your own words back to you from years ago.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

  17. @anon
    Some variation on this line has been winning all around the Intertubes:


    "Uganda is a private country, if they don't want Twitter then Twitter should build its own Uganda".

    Replies: @nebulafox, @The Alarmist, @Wyatt

    In some ways, Twitter is busy turning the developed world into a larger version of Uganda.

  18. The Left want to EAT THE RICH.
    The Rich support the Left.
    LET THEM DESTROY EACH OTHER.

    Want to EAT THE RICH?

    I’ll bring the gravy!

  19. anon[366] • Disclaimer says:
    @Curle
    @Chrisnonymous

    “It is not Woke Capital, but the collaboration of all sectors of the society due to having the same class membership with the same values.”

    Try having a conversation discussing The Cathedral. I’ve field tested this. Woke Capital is an excellent formulation and even if not as all encompassing as The Cathedral few people are philosophers or have ever read an philosophical text. My two go to terms have been International Bankers or The R and D Donor Class or just The Donor Class. I’ve tried The Cathedral and do not get ready comprehension without messy elaboration. Donor Class and International Bankers is understandable without elaboration. I’m going to try out Woke Capital as I suspect it will work.

    Replies: @anon

    The Cathedral is not a useful term because it doesn’t describe anything specific. It started as a catch-all joke to make fun of the pseudo-religious aspects of the left, but the idea that there is some consistent strain of thought tying the Reformation and Enlightenment to modern factions of Globohomo and their henchmen falls apart completely under scrutiny. Woke Capital is, I think, a useful term for this latter phenomenon, but is Pfizer part of that? How about the wars in the ME that everybody wants to end but can’t? How far back in US history do we have to go to find a justifiable war?

    Notice also that Yarvin is arguing two somewhat contradictory things: one is that it matters a great deal what people think, ie The Cathedral, and the other is that we have a structural problem, that, when solved by The Patchwork, makes it unimportant what people think. I don’t disagree, but would just point out that we had the patchwork in Machiavelli’s day, as well as throughout much of colonial history. Perhaps we now need another iteration to collect more data, brave new world and all!

    • Replies: @anon
    @anon

    Perhaps we now need another iteration to collect more data, brave new world and all!

    Yay! 10,000 to 20,000 moar words of moldbuggery! That's the solution! MOAR words!

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @anon

    Yes, Pfizer is part of that. Flu vaccines are a great income stream for Big Pharma. Covid vaccines will be an even greater income stream for it.

    Yes, the military industrial complex is part of that, hence the industrial part. Raytheon, Honeywell, Halliburton.

  20. @Almost Missouri
    @Curle


    do you really believe change to reverse more than 100 years of coordinated concentration of effort is reversible by one guy in one office?
     
    It can't, obviously, but that doesn't mean that attempts won't be made, and then blame laid when they fail.

    the nature of the Beast is so apparent to you now?
     
    Don't worry, the nature of the beast has apparent to me for a long time. I'm going on my third decade of irritating people IRL about this stuff. What I learned from Trump was how little others had learned.

    Replies: @Curle

    Ok, like I said apologies.

    Im probably repeating your own words back to you from years ago.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Curle


    apologies
     
    None needed.

    I'm more interested in your refutation of my statement that what Trump did was

    to rile them up and then capitulate to them, which is arguably the worst possible thing he could have done.
     
    I wrote it because I hadn't seen anyone else write it, though as I said, I think it is arguably true.

    You argue it is not true.

    I am persuadable, if you care to make the argument.
  21. anon[366] • Disclaimer says:

    It won’t be easy, but we need to get back to realigning incentives from the ground up, supplanting Woke Capital the way a snake sheds its skin, rather than trying to argue against it. We’ve probably exhausted the topic of secession here for the time being (go Rangers!), but Tom Bell wrote the most practical companion guide I know of:

    Certainly read your Hoppe and Friedman — but while they are cloistered in their ivory towers, Tom is helping to write the legal code for the Honduran ZEDEs:
    https://prospera.hn/

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    @anon

    Moldbug is writing that topic too. Gray Mirror.

  22. @anon
    Some variation on this line has been winning all around the Intertubes:


    "Uganda is a private country, if they don't want Twitter then Twitter should build its own Uganda".

    Replies: @nebulafox, @The Alarmist, @Wyatt

    Truly, Uganda no de wey.

  23. @anon
    @Curle

    The Cathedral is not a useful term because it doesn't describe anything specific. It started as a catch-all joke to make fun of the pseudo-religious aspects of the left, but the idea that there is some consistent strain of thought tying the Reformation and Enlightenment to modern factions of Globohomo and their henchmen falls apart completely under scrutiny. Woke Capital is, I think, a useful term for this latter phenomenon, but is Pfizer part of that? How about the wars in the ME that everybody wants to end but can't? How far back in US history do we have to go to find a justifiable war?

    Notice also that Yarvin is arguing two somewhat contradictory things: one is that it matters a great deal what people think, ie The Cathedral, and the other is that we have a structural problem, that, when solved by The Patchwork, makes it unimportant what people think. I don't disagree, but would just point out that we had the patchwork in Machiavelli's day, as well as throughout much of colonial history. Perhaps we now need another iteration to collect more data, brave new world and all!

    Replies: @anon, @Audacious Epigone

    Perhaps we now need another iteration to collect more data, brave new world and all!

    Yay! 10,000 to 20,000 moar words of moldbuggery! That’s the solution! MOAR words!

  24. @Almost Missouri

    That kind of power will not be relinquished voluntarily.
     
    "Then one day, for no reason at all..."

    When the left call Trump the new Hitler, they do have a kind of micro-point. I used to wonder how someone as "crazy" as Hitler got elected in as enlightened a place as Germany. Boy, the last few years have ended that question. I was never a superfan of "crazy" Trump, but I voted for him because he promised to bash the institutions that were most oppressive and divisive. As it turned out, all he really did was to rile them up and then capitulate to them, which is arguably the worst possible thing he could have done: first galvanizing them and then empowering them. So now we're back where we were four years ago only more so. Woke Capital and the capital-government-cultural "Cathedral" convergence are worse than ever, so how to reverse the death spiral?

    Anyway, AE, I just wanted to say that this is one of your best "big picture" posts ever: succinct yet pithy.

    The US government can’t get you kicked out of higher education for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital can. The US government won’t prevent you from opening a bank account for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital will. The US government can’t get you fired for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital can. The US government won’t provide your home address to nefarious actors interest[ed] in causing you bodily harm for unorthodox opinions, but Woke Capital will.
     
    Wish I had written that myself.

    Replies: @Curle, @My SIMPLE Pseudonymic Handle

    Not to be picayune, petty or small minded, but Hitler was never elected to any office.

    He tried and tried but never made the cut. The Nazi Party gained seats in the Reichstag through elections and finally when they held the majority they then appointed Hitler the Chancellor. When Hindenburg died Hitler assumed the office of President, combining both the offices of the Presidency and the Chancellor, and the rest is history.

    https://www.thoughtco.com/hitlers-rise-to-power-timeline-1221353

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @My SIMPLE Pseudonymic Handle


    Hitler was never elected to any office.
     
    Lol, you're right: Hitler never won a popular vote (though he did enjoy broad enough popular support until about 1940—coincidentally, he started doing crazy stuff the next year: invading Russia, declaring war on the US), but then you could say the same about Trump, if we count all Dem votes as legitimate.

    Anyhow, I was using Hitler more as an (admittedly hyperbolic) metaphor for how people get fed up with their country's institutions.

    Replies: @Curle

    , @iffen
    @My SIMPLE Pseudonymic Handle

    At least the simple part is accurate.

  25. @Chrisnonymous
    You are going backwards in your understanding of the problem. Moldbug gave us the vocabulary--the Cathedral, etc--to talk about the real problem. It is not Woke Capital, but the collaboration of all sectors of the society due to having the same class membership with the same values. It is only a matter of time before the government is doing things we thought it couldn't do. That's the thing of utmost importance now is to take a hard line on 1A and fight things like domestic terrorism bills. I, for one, am already drafting a letter to my Congressmen. Also, although reaching out to the left is usually a pointless exercise, on this issue, we need to do that too.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Curle, @Stan d Mute

    the same class membership with the same values.

    Aw hell no. It’s the indoctrination centers we call schools and the ability of any individual to resist indoctrination. Class is involved only insofar as the middle and upper classes are nearly entirely indoctrinated.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
  26. @Achmed E. Newman
    I'll just say this again: There's great power in numbers. The left figured this out back in the 1960s. The right has never seemed to figure this out yet. Plus, yeah, many more of them have jobs ... for now, hence don't have the time for political acdtion. This political situation will change when the financial SHTF.

    I don't know which will come first, the financial SHTF or the final clamping down on all free thought and actions by Government. Either will be very painful, but I'm hoping the former beats out the latter, as that way the latter won't be so likely to happen. A doomer guy name Gerald Celente I used to read years ago had his one tag line (that he pushed like hell): "When people have nothing to lose, they lose it." Actually, that one is a silly way to put it, but really, when the people on the right have less to lose, they will be more bold, as big "TECH" won't have the hold on them, and then, There is great power in numbers.

    Replies: @Juri, @Anonymous, @Stan d Mute

    when the people on the right have less to lose, they will be more bold

    BINGO!!!

  27. @Juri
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Do not underestimate asymmetric warfare. In Russian Empire, there were also numbers. Including millions of WW I experienced veterans.

    But somehow Lenin with his weirdos and snowflakes won. It the war, there is very little to do with numbers. Entire Taliban is barely 20 000 strong and armed only with handguns.

    Morale and willing to fight is what matters. You may have 100 million gun owners but when they think that it is not their business, somehow it goes back to normal and best thing is sit out the storm, then AOC with her obese lesbian and weirdo Antifa wins like Lenin did.

    Replies: @Stan d Mute

    Morale and willing to fight is what matters.

    Which is what he implied when he wrote that we would see change when the right feels like it has nothing to lose. Until the normiecon feels directly threatened, that if doesn’t fight he will lose all, he will sit on his ass and make excuses why it’s prudent to wait and see. Since everyone has their own threshold for misery, we will see people on the right coming uncorked at various times due to various provocations and dispossessions. “Slowly at first, then all of a sudden” is a good rule of thumb.

  28. Is this for real??!!

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Talha
    @Talha

    If it is; this is a brilliant co-option of support-the-troops for further bifurcating the people within that movement.

  29. @Talha
    Is this for real??!!
    https://www.twitter.com/AIdrisPalmer/status/1349502814305869827

    Peace.

    Replies: @Talha

    If it is; this is a brilliant co-option of support-the-troops for further bifurcating the people within that movement.

  30. @anon
    It won't be easy, but we need to get back to realigning incentives from the ground up, supplanting Woke Capital the way a snake sheds its skin, rather than trying to argue against it. We've probably exhausted the topic of secession here for the time being (go Rangers!), but Tom Bell wrote the most practical companion guide I know of:
    https://www.amazon.com/Your-Next-Government-Stateless-Nations/dp/1316613925
    Certainly read your Hoppe and Friedman -- but while they are cloistered in their ivory towers, Tom is helping to write the legal code for the Honduran ZEDEs:
    https://prospera.hn/

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous

    Moldbug is writing that topic too. Gray Mirror.

  31. @Anonymous
    @Achmed E. Newman

    > "There’s great power in numbers...The right has never seemed to figure this out yet. Plus, yeah, many more of them have jobs..."

    "Having jobs" is no excuse. Working didn't stop the Right from forming the NRA...or building free state-of-the-art Shriner hospitals for kids with life-threatening burns...or coaching Little League. Guys with shitty jobs knew the solution was to form a dues-paying union whose paid professionals would advocate for them 24-7-365.

    The problem isn't having jobs. The problem is not having smarts. Or guts. Or organizing.

    Guys refused to fund a men's group the size of NOW to counter feminism. Ergo, they did jackshit for 5 decades while feminists attacked boys, masculinity, all-male colleges-clubs-unions-armies, and so on. You think men like that would fight effectively for Trump?

    Conservative men refused to unite and fight and became soft. They should have filled every city every weekend since November 3rd to protest the stolen election. Instead they did what they always do: nothing. They hoped Bigfoot, the Easter Bunny, and the Kraken would save them.

    Guys terrified of feminists have themselves now become women.

    Nice-conservative-Christian-passive-white men created today's cultural clusterfark. They turned their cheeks so much that their slapped heads swiveled 360-degrees. Meanwhile, the Left burned cities, attacked citizens, looted stores, and removed Trump.

    The Right expected Don...one guy... to do all the heavy lifting. His followers were content to read tweets and attend feel-good/do-nothing rallies. They acted as if the Third Army sat on its collective behind while Patton fought the Wehrmacht alone.

    > "when the people on the right have less to lose, they will be more bold"

    Don't count on it. Homeless folks are hardly known for being Spartans. When you have less to lose you tend to have less assets and energy. When your stomach is empty, you tend to lay down.

    Do smart nations create/feed/train effective armies or count on weak and starving citizens to oppose enemies?

    Did Iron Mike Tyson work his ass off BEFORE fights or "train" for bouts by being a passive couch-potato?

    Did Usain Bolt "bang on the drum all day" or sprint-sprint-sprint?

    > "There is great power in numbers."

    How so?

    Is a mound of mush tougher than a dried-cement column?

    Numbers alone say little. Quality and quantity matter, too. Out-numbered Brits beat Frogs at Agincourt.

    Are a million ants tougher than one flame-thrower?

    Are a thousand babies more powerful than one MMA pro?

    Is a lawn covered with sand worth more than a bag of diamonds?

    Could the 2,545 females studying at Smith College defeat one 6-member Navy SEAL team?

    "Numbers" alone usually don't mean shit to a tree. What counts are things like power, will, timing, and luck.

    The Left has power because it is active, organized, well-funded, ruthless, populated with warriors, and focused on victory. Did gays give up on marriage when courts first found against them?

    On the other hand, even after getting ass-kicked for 4 years, Trumpers STILL let antifa attack with impunity, permitted Proud Boys to be jailed, and "knew" Don's 1,347-D chess would ultimately prevail.

    The Right lacks power because it is passive, disorganized, whiney, pacifist, filled with do-nothing talkers (Graham, Gowdy, etc.), and focused on its navel.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    Best image of the week:

    Could the 2,545 females studying at Smith College defeat one 6-member Navy SEAL team?

    Photograph, please!

  32. The US Government (s, if we include the public adminidtrators in the several States) are downstream of the Tech companies and the NWO intelligence agencies/corpocracts that are actually running things. So there is no fundamental reason to distinguish between actions taken by Twitter, and actions that the aforementioned powers-that-be would take to further their power if Twitter were not in their toolbox.

    They own it all right now. All the media, all the government minions/flunkies, all the armed force command, all the “justice” and “law enforcement” apparatus, all the academics *plus their minions and flunkies, all the financial/econ toilers, all the corporate types everywhere that matters. All the people who think they own some real assets, and can keep them. All the people who think that playing ball will be rewarded by keeping the Eye of Saraun (sp?) eleswhere. All the people who think they have something to lose. No exceptions, they have them all. And they are quietly (for now) but desperately afraid of losing their tenuous hold on a materially comfortable existence. And lose it most of them undeniably will, by intent and direct systemic theft or by spoiling when the system finally breaks and the real reset (not the fake one now in process) comes along.

    Who will all those enabling wannbes, the sort that work for Twitter scorching people, or YouTube deleting video, or the local po po rage at when they figure out how screwed they are? When they realize that their overlords are as contemptuous of them as of the people/cattle that are being herded by the Twitter sorts right now? And how long will it be until the globalist hold over these hapless enablers is fractured? Will the hapless enablers EVER realize how they got tricked, or just be incohately enraged?

    First a trickle, soon a torrent. Not now, but not to long either

  33. @My SIMPLE Pseudonymic Handle
    @Almost Missouri

    Not to be picayune, petty or small minded, but Hitler was never elected to any office.

    He tried and tried but never made the cut. The Nazi Party gained seats in the Reichstag through elections and finally when they held the majority they then appointed Hitler the Chancellor. When Hindenburg died Hitler assumed the office of President, combining both the offices of the Presidency and the Chancellor, and the rest is history.

    https://www.thoughtco.com/hitlers-rise-to-power-timeline-1221353

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @iffen

    Hitler was never elected to any office.

    Lol, you’re right: Hitler never won a popular vote (though he did enjoy broad enough popular support until about 1940—coincidentally, he started doing crazy stuff the next year: invading Russia, declaring war on the US), but then you could say the same about Trump, if we count all Dem votes as legitimate.

    Anyhow, I was using Hitler more as an (admittedly hyperbolic) metaphor for how people get fed up with their country’s institutions.

    • Replies: @Curle
    @Almost Missouri

    And if he hadn’t declared war on the US, how would FDR have forced the matter if he would have forced the matter?

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

  34. @Curle
    @Almost Missouri

    Ok, like I said apologies.

    Im probably repeating your own words back to you from years ago.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    apologies

    None needed.

    I’m more interested in your refutation of my statement that what Trump did was

    to rile them up and then capitulate to them, which is arguably the worst possible thing he could have done.

    I wrote it because I hadn’t seen anyone else write it, though as I said, I think it is arguably true.

    You argue it is not true.

    I am persuadable, if you care to make the argument.

  35. @My SIMPLE Pseudonymic Handle
    @Almost Missouri

    Not to be picayune, petty or small minded, but Hitler was never elected to any office.

    He tried and tried but never made the cut. The Nazi Party gained seats in the Reichstag through elections and finally when they held the majority they then appointed Hitler the Chancellor. When Hindenburg died Hitler assumed the office of President, combining both the offices of the Presidency and the Chancellor, and the rest is history.

    https://www.thoughtco.com/hitlers-rise-to-power-timeline-1221353

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @iffen

    At least the simple part is accurate.

  36. @nebulafox
    @anon

    Of course, they'll pick on a small African country that can't effectively punch back, but they'll leave the Chinese and Iranians alone. Some things never change.

    Replies: @John Gruskos

    Give them time.

    They will pick on Iran and China eventually.

    But they will never pick on Israel.

  37. @Almost Missouri
    @My SIMPLE Pseudonymic Handle


    Hitler was never elected to any office.
     
    Lol, you're right: Hitler never won a popular vote (though he did enjoy broad enough popular support until about 1940—coincidentally, he started doing crazy stuff the next year: invading Russia, declaring war on the US), but then you could say the same about Trump, if we count all Dem votes as legitimate.

    Anyhow, I was using Hitler more as an (admittedly hyperbolic) metaphor for how people get fed up with their country's institutions.

    Replies: @Curle

    And if he hadn’t declared war on the US, how would FDR have forced the matter if he would have forced the matter?

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Curle

    Good question. You could say that FDR was already forcing the matter, by doing everything he legally could (and a lot that was arguably illegal) to provoke Hitler into including the US in the war: giving the UK warships, contributing to Atlantic convoys, "Lend-Lease", taking over Iceland from the British so they could redeploy troops forward, financial and PR support of UK vs. financial and PR condemnation of Germany, etc.) but Hitler had, until 1941, resolutely refused to take the bait.

    Prior to 1941, Hitler was a remarkably deft politician. He had a finely honed sense of how far he could push others, both opponents and supporters, both at home and abroad. By 1940, he had achieved all of Germany's major objectives: the economy recovered; the Versailles Treaty abolished; the Rhineland restored; Austria, the Sudetenland, and Danzig (re)annexed; the Polish corridor closed and East Prussia reconnected; Poland, France, Czechoslovakia, the Low Countries, and Scandinavia prostrate; the UK kicked off the Continent; the Soviet threat defused and preoccupied. It was a stunning series of triumphs. Just a few years before, each of these things had appeared impossible. He did them all while hardly breaking a sweat. Germany's economy was not even on an official war footing. Had he stopped right there, he would probably be remembered at the German Ataturk: an opaque personality who had taken on long odds for his country and won, reconfiguring his nation and region. But, maybe because his popularity was already waning, maybe because of frustration with not having fully neutralized Britain, maybe because of the looming risk of Soviet betrayal, maybe for other reasons, Hitler didn't stop there. And he lost touch with the restraints that had gotten him and Germany this far.

    The main thing restraining FDR wasn't the law (even then US law was applied selectively) so much as public opinion. The US had a large Germanic sub-population, there were prominent media personalities opposed to US involvement (Charles Lindbergh, Father Coughlin, etc.), and even though WWI had not been a terrible war for the US, losses were real and few Americans wanted a repeat. Even after Pearl Harbor, which suddenly swung Americans in favor of war with Japan (remember when we used to need Congress to declare war? ), FDR was privately cursing Hitler because the US was about to get stuck with a war on the wrong side of the globe. Then Hitler brought FDR's Christmas present two weeks early. Even in 1942 there was still some rank and file grumbling that FDR was prioritizing war against Germany, who hadn't attacked us, rather than against Japan, who had. But as casualties began to happen (a U-boat attack here, an air crew loss there, Operation Torch) it became possible to stir popular resentment against Germany again. Popular resentment is always helpful for getting a democracy to go to war.

    Without Hitler's "gift" what would FDR have done? Probably have grudgingly fought Japan while using the the general mobilization to feed the US surreptitiously into the European war, trumpeting the loss of every convoy escort or Atlantic aircrew as if it were a second Pearl Harbor, hoping eventually to reach that popular resentment threshold where Congress would say the magic words. That's more or less how Wilson snookered the States into the First World War: waving the bloody flag of the Lusitania (sunk after a general warning in 1915) until Congress finally declared war (in 1917).

  38. @Curle
    @Almost Missouri

    And if he hadn’t declared war on the US, how would FDR have forced the matter if he would have forced the matter?

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Good question. You could say that FDR was already forcing the matter, by doing everything he legally could (and a lot that was arguably illegal) to provoke Hitler into including the US in the war: giving the UK warships, contributing to Atlantic convoys, “Lend-Lease”, taking over Iceland from the British so they could redeploy troops forward, financial and PR support of UK vs. financial and PR condemnation of Germany, etc.) but Hitler had, until 1941, resolutely refused to take the bait.

    Prior to 1941, Hitler was a remarkably deft politician. He had a finely honed sense of how far he could push others, both opponents and supporters, both at home and abroad. By 1940, he had achieved all of Germany’s major objectives: the economy recovered; the Versailles Treaty abolished; the Rhineland restored; Austria, the Sudetenland, and Danzig (re)annexed; the Polish corridor closed and East Prussia reconnected; Poland, France, Czechoslovakia, the Low Countries, and Scandinavia prostrate; the UK kicked off the Continent; the Soviet threat defused and preoccupied. It was a stunning series of triumphs. Just a few years before, each of these things had appeared impossible. He did them all while hardly breaking a sweat. Germany’s economy was not even on an official war footing. Had he stopped right there, he would probably be remembered at the German Ataturk: an opaque personality who had taken on long odds for his country and won, reconfiguring his nation and region. But, maybe because his popularity was already waning, maybe because of frustration with not having fully neutralized Britain, maybe because of the looming risk of Soviet betrayal, maybe for other reasons, Hitler didn’t stop there. And he lost touch with the restraints that had gotten him and Germany this far.

    The main thing restraining FDR wasn’t the law (even then US law was applied selectively) so much as public opinion. The US had a large Germanic sub-population, there were prominent media personalities opposed to US involvement (Charles Lindbergh, Father Coughlin, etc.), and even though WWI had not been a terrible war for the US, losses were real and few Americans wanted a repeat. Even after Pearl Harbor, which suddenly swung Americans in favor of war with Japan (remember when we used to need Congress to declare war? ), FDR was privately cursing Hitler because the US was about to get stuck with a war on the wrong side of the globe. Then Hitler brought FDR’s Christmas present two weeks early. Even in 1942 there was still some rank and file grumbling that FDR was prioritizing war against Germany, who hadn’t attacked us, rather than against Japan, who had. But as casualties began to happen (a U-boat attack here, an air crew loss there, Operation Torch) it became possible to stir popular resentment against Germany again. Popular resentment is always helpful for getting a democracy to go to war.

    Without Hitler’s “gift” what would FDR have done? Probably have grudgingly fought Japan while using the the general mobilization to feed the US surreptitiously into the European war, trumpeting the loss of every convoy escort or Atlantic aircrew as if it were a second Pearl Harbor, hoping eventually to reach that popular resentment threshold where Congress would say the magic words. That’s more or less how Wilson snookered the States into the First World War: waving the bloody flag of the Lusitania (sunk after a general warning in 1915) until Congress finally declared war (in 1917).

  39. @iffen
    Let's see, they've got the government bureaucracy, including the Deep State, Woke Capital, the NGOs, most of academia, the mainline religions and most media. They can't limp along much longer.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    The Soviets had all of these things, too. The US dollar is the core powering all of this and if it’s not in trouble now, it’s never been in trouble and probably never will be.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Audacious Epigone

    The US dollar is the core powering all of this

    If we all switch to Bitcoin will that get us to our revolution?

  40. @Almost Missouri
    @Catdog

    One can hope, but the financial nexus really is a hurdle. The Post Office, the phone company, the electric company, all have to provide you service. The banks do not. This is the ace up the Left's sleeve. As the economy financializes, digitizes and centralizes, they retain the power to shut off anyone's and anything's financial life support at will.

    I love Stontoss's classic as much as anyone

    http://stonetoss.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/right-wing-censorship-comic1.png

    but getting from the second frame to the third frame may be a bigger leap than getting from the third to the fourth.

    I'll see your Whitepill with one of my own: the Left would like to shut down 2A just as much as 1A, yet somehow 2A—from manufacturers to publishers to tradeshows—manages to keep turning over currency. I don't know how exactly, but they do. Maybe 1A could learn from 2A here.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    This is one of the great hopes of cryptocurrency. Or at least it was. I fear that institutional interest in cryptos is a bad thing in all but the short-run. The immediate impact is a stellar increase in prices. Not just bitcoin but others like ethereum have had a hell of a run. But it’s not because people are using cryptos are a medium of exchange. It’s because they’re becoming speculative assets that big institutions are toying with getting involved in. Regulation and institutional capture follow, and there goes your Big Finance workaround.

  41. @anon
    @Curle

    The Cathedral is not a useful term because it doesn't describe anything specific. It started as a catch-all joke to make fun of the pseudo-religious aspects of the left, but the idea that there is some consistent strain of thought tying the Reformation and Enlightenment to modern factions of Globohomo and their henchmen falls apart completely under scrutiny. Woke Capital is, I think, a useful term for this latter phenomenon, but is Pfizer part of that? How about the wars in the ME that everybody wants to end but can't? How far back in US history do we have to go to find a justifiable war?

    Notice also that Yarvin is arguing two somewhat contradictory things: one is that it matters a great deal what people think, ie The Cathedral, and the other is that we have a structural problem, that, when solved by The Patchwork, makes it unimportant what people think. I don't disagree, but would just point out that we had the patchwork in Machiavelli's day, as well as throughout much of colonial history. Perhaps we now need another iteration to collect more data, brave new world and all!

    Replies: @anon, @Audacious Epigone

    Yes, Pfizer is part of that. Flu vaccines are a great income stream for Big Pharma. Covid vaccines will be an even greater income stream for it.

    Yes, the military industrial complex is part of that, hence the industrial part. Raytheon, Honeywell, Halliburton.

  42. @Audacious Epigone
    @iffen

    The Soviets had all of these things, too. The US dollar is the core powering all of this and if it's not in trouble now, it's never been in trouble and probably never will be.

    Replies: @iffen

    The US dollar is the core powering all of this

    If we all switch to Bitcoin will that get us to our revolution?

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS