Hard Truths Part II: Don’t Fear the Reaper

In the comments of the last “Hard Truths” post, several commenters alluded to the “death instinct” Freud says we have.  Several others mentioned the utter ineffectiveness of facts and reason.  Combine the two, and you get Hard Truth #2:

Consciousness is often more of a burden than we can bear.

In Gene Wolfe’s great series The Book of the New Sun*, there are throwaway characters called “zooanthrops.”  It’s set millions of years in the future, the sun (already a red giant) is about to go out, and so some people have decided to lay the burden of consciousness down — they get lobotomized and dumped in the woods, to live what’s left of their lives as feral animals, because hey, why not?  The literal end of the world is not far off; why deal with the stress?

We’re not quite to that point yet, but I’m sure y’all see where this is going.  Radical politics is an ideological lobotomy.  Drug addiction is something closer to a literal one, and it’s no accident that the drug of choice for the White underclass is painkillers.  Social media is something close to a social lobotomy; the Internet in general, an informational one — with access to everyone, everywhere, and every fact ever unearthed in all of human history available to us on a handheld device, we use that awesome power to construct our own little delusion-bubbles, and every new advance helps us shrink them smaller and smaller.

In the case of radical politics, at least, the urge to be lobotomized is obvious.  This isn’t a cheap joke — it’s right there, big as a mountain, and if we don’t see it, that’s because it’s so big, so ubiquitous, that we don’t notice it, like air.  We laugh at “victim bingo” because we think Leftists are engaging in conscious status-jockeying — “my level 3 sexual assault survivor beats your level 5 heterosexual Blackness!”  That is, we want to think they’re doing this, because the truth, though obvious, is horrifying — what they’re really doing is setting up a flowchart, so that they don’t have to think.  Evaluating grievances is stressful; micro-calibrating identities the way they do could entail making hundreds of judgment calls each day.  They want a clean, clear decision tree that covers every possible situation, so that they can get through their dreary, pointless days in blissful unconsciousness.**

That’s why unreason always wins.  It’s also why your higher IQ types tend to be — counterintuitively — Leftists.  Smarter people see farther, grasp logical entailments better, process information quicker.  But all that means is: Smarter people get to an uncomfortable mental place quicker, and more often, than dull people do.  No wonder they — we — retreat so readily to fantasy.  No wonder our fantasies are so elaborate and murderous — if you can lose yourself in the arcana of Dialectical Materialism, you can forget Materialism’s bottom line, which is that all our works and days do nothing but temporarily alleviate some of the physical misery of dumb, grunting, naked apes.

 

 

 

*the origin of my stupid nom de blog, btw.
**nerd confidential: Julian Jaynes, a research psychologist, hypothesized that humans only attained full consciousness in historical times — the Greeks of the Iliad, he says, were in effect automatons, following the orders of their gods, which they literally saw and heard.  The science of this is way above my pay grade, but such evidence of his that I’m capable of commenting on seems…. suggestive, to say the least.  For instance, the law of the excluded middle doesn’t seem to apply to schizophrenics.  Put two guys who think they’re Napoleon in the same psych ward and somehow, some way, they arrive at complete agreement — they’re both Napoleon.  Your really hardcore Leftists seem to have gotten at least halfway back there — how else to explain how the hivemind just knows what orthodoxy is today?  How else to explain the fact that the same people, having just screamed and  yelled and thrown rocks and ruined lives for A yesterday, are out there screaming and yelling and ruining lives for not-A today?
Loading Likes...

The First Year Experience

Along with “do professors really believe their own bullshit,” the most common question I’m asked as a former education professional is “do students really believe this bullshit?”  I’m much less qualified to answer that one, because I was never on the tenure track, so I didn’t teach more than a few classes, didn’t do any advising, and wasn’t required to do any of the “university service” baloney that such propagandizing usually falls under.  That said…

… yes, and only partly because they’re kids, therefore easily led (and, it goes without saying, entitled, whiny, and horribly maleducated).  The other part is more interesting, and it starts here.

That’s a City Journal article I saw at Ace of Spades, titled “Reeducation Campus.”  It details the goings-on in what’s known as the “First Year Experience,” an indoctrination program that 90% of schools in the country subscribe to.  It’s your usual “social justice” claptrap, but here’s the interesting part:

In 1970, after campus antiwar protesters ransacked and set fire to the administration building at the University of South Carolina, the school’s president appointed a task force to find a solution to student unrest. Many meetings, workshops, and encounter groups later, the university came up with an answer, and it was nothing so simple as expelling vandals and arsonists. No, the key was to teach students to “love their university,” starting with a new semester-long orientation course for freshmen.

The bold bits are the key, as Victorian era PUAs must have said.  See, it’s not just generic leftwing agitprop.  Everyone expects that, even the dullards who are only there to drink beer and grope ass.  It’s leftwing agitprop combined with a Party rally.  You learn to “love your university,” and in doing so, a subconscious but extremely powerful connection is made: Leftwing agitprop IS Education.  Microaggressions, safe spaces, trigger warnings, 37 genders — all of that stuff IS education; being “an educated person” = knowing what “cisgender” and “heteronormativity” mean.

The key to all this stuff is having an emotional — as opposed to factual — touchstone.  Education, after all, is measurable — I can wave my degree around all I want, but it doesn’t take more than a few minutes on the internet to make me feel pig-butt ignorant of a whole universe of things.  Which is why people who wave their degrees around always name the university from which the degree was obtained.  Here again, normal people are probably flummoxed — if I think your argument is bunk to begin with, I’m going to be even less impressed if you made it through a supposedly rigorous education at a name-brand place and still come off like a blabbering jackalope.  But the degree-waver doesn’t see it that way, for he has Been To College and you, sir — you have not.

And, naturally, the importance of Going To College varies inversely with the rigor of one’s major.  Calc III is Calc III pretty much everywhere; they don’t teach a super secret method of factoring quadratics at MIT; you can either do the math or you can’t, whether it’s Harvard or Flyover State.  I’ve met lots of engineers, and I’ve met lots of Harvard men.  I’ve even met some engineers that went to Harvard, but none of them told me in the first five minutes that he’s “a Harvard man.”

Every single one of the English majors did, though.

If Our Thing is ever going to get anywhere, we have to break this association between “being educated” and Going To College.  So far our efforts have been completely ineffective, because we’ve been barking up the wrong tree.  It does no good to point out to the Harvard grad that “gender studies” is a made-up field filled with imaginary bullshit.  It is, of course, but the gender studies major doesn’t care, because gender studies isn’t the point.  The point is: Xir is “a Harvard man” (“persyn of Harvardity,” whatever), and you are not.  You can’t understand, because you’re not of our class, dear.

What we’ve got to do is mock the entire notion of college.  Oh, you mean you spent your entire first year– which you went $40,000 in debt for — listening to Ta-neshi Coates (or however the fuck you spell it) and walking around in high heels, to better understand the nature of “privilege”?  Ha!  I was out working, making better than $40,000 and actually having sex with attractive women, not begging some blue-haired, nose-ringed fatty for a pity handie after an Intersectionality lecture.

Loading Likes...

The Hard Truths

Since I just don’t have the time to put together a Friday Book Club — sorry — maybe we can all kick in on this: A list of the hard truths.

I don’t mean stuff like “Blacks commit way disproportionately more crime” or “the 19th Amendment was a big mistake.”  While those are true enough, they’re also common knowledge — why do you think the PTB go to such great lengths to suppress any mention of them?  For “hard truths” I mean things that we ourselves — the students of History, the “conservatives,” the saturnine — have a hard time looking at straight on, and indeed try very hard to forget.  Stuff like this:

Humans can’t handle abundance.  One of my favorite “jokes” is that I’m the only guy I know who really believes in evolution.  By which I mean: If you grant that we humans are, in fact, great apes — that we share 96% of our DNA with chimps — then 96% of our behavior follows.  Any group of humans will invariably behave like an equivalent-sized group of monkeys, because we are monkeys.

Monkeys, like all lower animals, are hardwired for life on the ragged edge of survival.  Malthus got it right, back in the 18th century – a given population will always expand to the limits of its food supply, and that explains the behavior of both the population and its individual members.  Dogs, for example, will breed any time there’s a female in heat, the males fighting it out among themselves for access.  Dogs will eat until they vomit, then go back and eat the vomit.

Humans work the same way.  But there’s one crucial difference — while every other population has hard limits on its food supply, ours is effectively limitless.  Ask any overweight person (these days, that’s pretty much all of us) who has ever seriously tried a calorie reduction diet.  It’s almost impossible, and not just because our foods are packed with high-calorie, glucose-spiking artificial crap like corn syrup.  Even if you go all natural, you find yourself overeating, because we have 24/7/365 access to all kinds of perfectly natural products that don’t suit us, and screw us up.  Yeah yeah, it’s “healthy,” “natural” food… but do you know how much sugar is in a cup of strawberries?

This isn’t some kind of Paleo diet manifesto.  I don’t care what you eat (and I myself am not the paragon of optimized nutrition).  I’m trying to point out that abundance is pathological in itself.  Because we’re just monkeys, our systems follow a kind of nutritional Say’s Law — supply creates its own demand, such that we give ourselves diabetes eating nothing but “natural” fruits from climates we’re not genetically adapted to.

And it’s not just our food.  Our environment, too, is far too secure for our firmware.  We’re wired for threat detection.  So wired, in fact, that city dwellers who go camping often freak themselves out in the quiet of the forest — did that bush just move?!?  Your threat-detection hardware can’t be shut off, so when you take away the constant barrage of stimulus in the city, you actually start to hallucinate threats.

In other words, the abundance of our environment has screwed up our eustress.  “Eustress” is beneficial stress, the kind that makes you stronger, and it applies to everything in your body.  Lifting weights is eustress on your muscles; solving math problems is eustress for your mind.  Everything about our biological life is designed around maximizing eustress — change your material conditions, and your body (and mind!) will adapt.  Humans are amazingly hard to kill — even in concentration camps, the numerical majority of those not killed outright by the guards survived to tell the tale.

That adaptability, too, is hardwired.  We can’t shut off our eustress-maximization mechanism — “life force,” “will to power,” whatever you choose to call it — any more than we can consciously, voluntarily shut off our hearts.  If there’s no stress available in our environment to eustress against, we’ll make some…

…and that’s modern life right there.  Again, look at the Kavanaugh circus.  The only thing wrong with those people is that they’re bored.  Feminism didn’t exist in the 19th century, simply — and it really is this simple — because sex often resulted in conception, and conception opened up the very real risk of painful death.  Add infant mortality to the mix — a 1 in 2 chance your child will die before the age of five concentrates the mind wonderfully — and you’ve got all the stress, eu- and the other kind, that anyone could ever need.  Only barren spinsters from rich families could afford to worry about politics back then; now we’re all barren spinsters.

The comments are open.

Loading Likes...

Shooting Your Wad

For the edification of younger readers (see comments in previous post), “shooting your wad” has nothing to do with pron.  Revolutionary War-type muskets were loaded with ball (the actual projectile), powder, and wadding, which was made of rags and had something to do with the ignition mechanism.  When you pulled the trigger, the whole load — wad and all — came flying out of the barrel.

I mention this piece of 18th century militaria only to remind folks what happens after the wad is shot.  As the reloading process was so cumbersome, even the best troops only got off a volley or two.  Then it was time for the cold steel of the bayonet charge, and after that — bayonets tend to break off in bodies — the musket was used as a club.  “War to the knife; war to the hilt” was the standard well into the 20th century.

That’s where the Left is now.

The Left always resorts to violence, because Leftism and violence are inseparable.  That “Revolution” stuff Karl Marx was always banging on about?  Not a metaphor.  Marx saw himself as the proletariat’s avenging angel, and as David Stove pointed out, you can’t be an avenging angel without a real appetite for blood.  It goes back even further than Marx, of course, to the Jacobins; to Rousseau and his desire to “force men to be free;” to the chiliastic sects of the Middle Ages.  It goes forwards, too, as all modern Leftism is derived from Marxism — romanticized violence against White people (Frantz Fanon), men in general (feminism), the whole human race (Sorel).

Violence is integral to Leftism, such that it’s a pretty good litmus test:  Does the logic of your premises require someone getting killed?  Then yours is a Leftist ideology, whatever euphemisms you use for “require” and “killed.”

Given this, I hope no one will be surprised if Kavanaugh’s confirmation — which now seems nearly certain — ends in violence.  I wouldn’t be surprised if it happened before the floor vote today.  The Left will start shooting — if not today, then soon, and not just because they have nothing left (and know they’ll face no consequences).  Violence is woven into Leftism’s very fabric.

Have they shot their wad with the character smears?  Then get ready for the bayonets.  It’s inevitable.

Loading Likes...

Keep Your Powder Dry

Now that it looks like the vote has been scheduled on Kavanaugh, which means he’s going to be confirmed, I hope the Republican senators have world-class security on them at all times.  What’s left for the Left but to get violent?  And as they know they’ll face no consequences….

Interesting times ahead.

Loading Likes...

The Deplorable Twitter Feed

We Deplorables, as you know, have a real problem meeting up to discuss stuff.

Form an actual club — The Deplorables of [City] — and we’ll be lawfared out of existence for “discrimination,” but only after being infiltrated.

Stage a meetup, and you get Charlottesville.

Form a Facebook group, get banned.

Tweet badthoughts, get reported.

And so on.  But I wonder if “social media” might not be the answer after all.  Just spitballin’, but I wonder if the way to stage a meeting isn’t as simple as announcing that you’re going someplace… then still using twitter to communicate for a while while you’re there.

Let’s say the Deplorables of [City] want to get together.  The wrong way is to tweet “Hey, let’s all meet at Harry’s Pub on 42nd Street at 7pm, Monday October 8.”  The right way might be simply to announce it, disguised as something innocuous.  “Hey, I hear Harry’s Pub is nice.  I’m thinking of going there this Monday to check it out.  It’s on 42nd Street.  Happy hour starts at 7.”

Everyone waits until 7, then checks his phone.  Nothing weird-seeming about that.  But then the organizer tweets “wow, Harry’s is just as cool as advertised.  Wish I could see the TV, though, it’s hard to tell what’s on.”  At which point, all the other Deplorables in attendance tweet something innocuous sounding, plausibly deniable, e.g. “Wow, tonight’s NFL game is really the pits.  Look at the way Tom Brady is standing in the shotgun.  He must be nervous!”

There’s your fellow Deplorable.  Unless you’ve got a real dug-in infiltrator — and we all know each other, at least by rep — that should be enough OpSec.  Then the organizer tweets something like “Glad I got a booth in the back corner!  Shouldn’t have worn my white Patriots hat, though – this looks like Yankees territory.”

And there’s your meetup.

The best part is, if you’re still unsure of someone, well, everyone’s always glancing at their phone, right?  I assume everyone knows what a “burner phone” is.  Exchange burner phone numbers and have a text conversation right on the spot, while you’re in the same location.  Or do it with burner emails.  Establish bona fides that way, weed out potential infiltrators, and then you’ve got your Deplorable Club of [City].

All subsequent meets work the same way.  Nobody has probable cause to mess with a bunch of guys who aren’t a bunch at all — they’re just ten or fifteen or fifty random dudes, who just happened to show up at the same time to the same place…

Eventually, of course, pattern recognition stuff would kick in, IF everyone still had to do the back-and-forth tweet routine. But since now we all know faces…

Anyway, maybe this is all just silly and there are a million problems with it.  But still…. I’m thinking about hitting Harry’s Pub next week.  I hear the food’s great.

PS I am on Gab now.  I follow the Z Blog.

UPDATE: Spitballing an obvious problem: Say X wants to meet Y, but Y can’t go to Harry’s on Monday.  The innocuous, plausibly deniable workaroud: Y tweets something like “Last time I was in [city] on business, I went to Harry’s.  It’s ok, but Monday’s the pits.  You really ought to go on Tuesday; the hot wings special starts at 9.”  X tweets back “great idea, thanks!” or “no, the only other time I can go is Wednesday.  Ah well.  Have you heard about Dino’s Diner?”  Etc.

Loading Likes...

The Agon

Friedrich Nietzsche has a bit of a spotty record.  On the one hand, he thought Socrates was a nihilistic girly-man that forever feminized the Archaic Greeks, and he’s probably right about that. On the other…. this, apparently, was his idea of a manly man:

For the record, the Friedmeister is the one with the mustache.*

Nietzsche’s philosophy is complex, profound, and not altogether coherent, but it’s fair to say that he was obsessed with power.  Not political power (though some of the more intellectual Cat Fanciers thought so), but personal power — the power, that is, that one has in himself.  A noble spirit, he says, is obsessed with what the Greeks called agon , the struggle — against self, other men, fate, the gods.  It’s the fundamental thing that makes us human, and modern life, Nietzsche says, takes it away from us.

He’s not wrong.  You can’t look at all the hormonal blue-hairs of both sexes out there, chanting “Kava-not!” and pretending the judge attended pedophilic gang-rape parties 30 years ago or whatever we’re up to now, and conclude anything other than:

These people are bored, and boredom has driven them insane.

You might be tempted to say that they’ve always been insane, but crazy people aren’t organized enough to do all the legwork you need to get ready to run for something.  The Kamala Harrises of the world have always seemed nuttier than a squirrel turd, it’s true, but we’ve only ever seen her as a politician.  The cat lady who decided that a run at Congress would be more exciting than another shift at the DMV or whatever other 75-IQ drone work she’s actually qualified for wasn’t crazy, just stupid and bored.  American politics being what it is, though, this stupid, bored lady was catapulted straight to the top… and that’s no fun!  Taedium vitae set in once again, and now we have to listen to her ask Kavanaugh what kind of tree he’d rape if he could rape a tree.

Material prosperity produces these people, as sure as water and subzero temperatures produce ice.  Orwell once said that “the mere words ‘Socialism’ and ‘Communism’ draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, ‘Nature Cure’ quack, pacifist, and feminist in England,” and though ol’ George’s record is as mixed as Nietzsche’s, he’s spot-on here.  The reason is simply this: Nudism, pacifism, etc. are the preoccupations of the idle rich, and Socialists presume that their doctrines will make everyone into the idle rich.

They won’t, of course, but that’s beside the point.  Socialism makes emotional sense to bored, hormonal cat ladies of whatever gender.  Socialism propels them to “activism,” which temporarily staves off the boredom.  But as “activism” is really just spinning in circles — since, you know, everything they’re agitating for is either impossible, or has been given them long ago — pretty soon the boredom returns, stronger than before.  Thus they go insane.

If, many generations from now, our descendants want to give things like “indoor plumbing” and “living past 35” another shot, they must figure out something to do with these people.  All the civilized cures for boredom — sporstball, status striving, adultery — have comprehensively failed.  I’d suggest turning them loose on the African veldt, making sure that the lion population was good and hungry, but that’d be cruel to the lions (fruit juice drinking nudists are notoriously stringy).

I’m open to suggestions.

 

*The woman is Lou Salome, the Big N’s one-itis, whose brutal friendzoning led to all Nietzsche’s subsequent philosophizing.  The other man is Paul Ree, the guy she friendzoned Nietzsche for.
Loading Likes...

Playing the Numbers

Lenin gave us the “cadre.”  Antonio Gramsci gave us the “organic intellectual.”  Combine the two, and you get our current mess… and a possible technique for breaking it.

Lenin, you’ll recall, advocated the development of a small, hardcore group of professional revolutionaries.  “Bolshevik” actually means “majority” — Lenin was a dab hand at marketing, too — but they were really what would come to be known as “cadres,” the hardcore, whatever-it-takes professional revolutionaries who would direct the less dedicated members of the movement.   A well-trained cadre would be able to use each man according to his ability, so everyone, from the almost-fully-committed to the social butterfly, could be used, however briefly, to advance the Revolution.

The Revolution succeeded in Russia, obviously, but it failed in the West, in contradiction to the Scriptures.  But prophecy cannot fail, so Antonio Gramsci set himself the task of explaining how the bourgeoisie kept staving off the inevitable.*  His answer was “hegemony,” and you could probably fill a library just with attempts to define that word, but functionally it’s pretty simple: “Hegemony” is bourgeois culture.  Thus setting up one of those tautologies Leftists get so slobbery over — the middle class succeeds because of middle class culture.

The psychology of that is above my pay grade, but the conclusion is obvious: Turn your cadres loose in the places where they can do the most damage to bourgeois culture, and pretty soon you’ll have Revolution.  And there you have it.  That’s why all your professors in college were/are moron socialists.  They’re Gramsci’s “organic intellectuals,” subverting the system from within.

From there, it’s a numbers game.  From long experience in the undergraduate classroom I can tell you that 99.8% of everything the professor says goes in one ear, pauses just long enough to be regurgitated on the exam, then flies back out the other ear.  But 99.8 is not 100.  Back when colleges were just holding pens for the sons of privilege (i.e. up to about 1960), or even baroque jobs training programs for the middle class (up to c. 1990), that 0.2% didn’t matter. But now college is just extended high school, and for the kids of the middle class — that is, the class you need to specifically target in order to achieve Revolution — it’s all but mandatory.

That 0.2% matters, because that’s where the cadres get their shock troops.  We all like to laugh at persyns of gendertude like Trigglypuff, but they’re no joke.  They’re the cultural version of suicide bombers.  Just what do you think America’s Trigglypuffs — and believe me, they are legion — actually do all day?

Even a full time college student taking a heavy load is only in class 18 hours a week.  The Trigglypuffs, of course, more typically take 12, and you can probably guess how much homework the “Gender Studies Major” requires.  That leaves a LOT of free time for political agitation.  She’s fun to laugh at from a distance, but can you imagine that beast getting levered through your office door?

I’ve had a minor version of a Trigglypuff encounter myself, and I’m not going to like, comrades, I nearly soiled myself.  Not that she was actually in my office, mind you.  I wasn’t even directly involved. But I saw them getting ready to swarm some poor grad student TA, and it hit me: This is their life.

To us — meaning, the TA and all reasonable people — it was a minor matter, a procedural thing, something so trifling I don’t even remember what “it” actually was.  But to them it was life or death.  I saw in their eyes that nothing, nothing, was off the table.  You’ve seen the Kavanaugh klown show.  Now imagine that, but directed at some poor kid who’s absolutely sure he’s a good liberal, an SJW even!, on the side of the angels.  Even so, they’d have flayed him alive and danced around in his skin, just for crossing them on a syllabus change (or whatever trivial bullshit it actually was).

Trigglypuff has more free time than you’ll ever have, and she’s willing to use all of it to get you.  And the worst part is, you — the individual whose life she’s going to ruin — don’t even matter.  At all.  You were just in the wrong place at the wrong time.  The Twitter outrage mob needed its daily feeding, and you were convenient.

There’s hope, though, comrades.  I’m sure you’ve noticed the inverse relationship between material prosperity and intellectual rigor.  Well, that goes for OpSec too.  Back when they faced real resistance, Communist cadres burrowed in.  I read somewhere that Ho Chi Minh used so many pseudonyms in his revolutionary career that his troops were already kicking our asses before the whiz kids at Langley even figured out his real name.**  Nowadays, of course, they’re right out in the open.

Most professors are, in the Z Man’s most excellent phrase, hormonal blue hairs.  They also live very nice lives.  They drive fancy cars.  Their kids go to private schools.  Which kinda contradicts the Revolutionary message they preach at undergrads, dontcha think?  And their intellectual lives are as schizo as their material ones — just as the most expensive car in the faculty lot always belongs to the wildest-eyed Communist, so the most virulently genocidal statements against White folks are made by professors who could be mistaken for a mayonnaise sandwich in a snowstorm.

Simply pointing these things out — with pictures, and quotations from their published writings — to the student body might clarify their minds wonderfully.  Yes, most of the kids and parents who learn these things — 99.8% of them –won’t care.  But that 0.2. now… well, as we’ve seen, that number matters.  Many American universities are already deep in the red.  Even a 0.2% reduction….

See what I mean?  We’re the Bolsheviks now.  We’re the cadres.  And best of all, we’ve got 100+ years of revolutionary experience to draw upon, to turn upon people for whom Harry Potter is a deep work of philosophy and history begins anew at dawn.

 

 

*Anyone not deeply enstupidated by Marxism knew the real answer: Because everyone in Europe was living better and longer.  But that, too, goes against the Revealed Word — Capitalism must result in ever-greater misery.
** It wasn’t “Ho Chi Minh,” of course, any more than “Stalin” or “Lenin” were their real names — “Stalin” means “man of steel;” “Lenin” means “from Siberia.”  Self-dramatization is crucial for any successful revolutionary, and if Our Thing wants to steal that, you may henceforth call me “Crash.”
Loading Likes...

One Upshot of The Browning

In the previous post, a discussion of the parlous state of public schools.  It occurs to me that the main problem with any kind of school-alternative — homeschooling, online skill certifications, hell, we could probably cook up a decent “alterna-college” with just the Dirty Dozen Readers* — is the “accreditation” process.  Even your home school must be “accredited” in some fashion, which means you need to get certified via some red-tape rigamarole by a public functionary…

Ever traveled in the Third World?  It’s a revelation in so many ways, but as your basic decent, law-abiding White guy (redundant at least 2x, I realize), the biggest one was the sense of license.  It was the freedom of American currency combined with Third World mores — I could live like a Kennedy, up to and including Ted at Chappaquiddick, so long as I had the cash… and given the exchange rate, I had the cash.  I carried a crisp clean Tubman folded into my passport — should I ever be unfortunate enough to encounter the Federales, I was confident that would do the trick.

These days, as we all know, lower tier government jobs are the exclusive preserve of the useless, incompetent Diverse (again redundant at least 2x).  Traditionally, the ranks of the education bureaucracy have been the preserve of White education major ladies too stupid to make it in the fast-paced world of Human Resources, but as America browns, that will change.  Might as well make the best of it, comrades.  You want to home school your kids?  Sheeeeeeit, as the Hon. Clay Davis would say, a Tubman’ll get you that.  You could probably get the local school board to certify your garage as belonging to the Ivy League for a Franklin.

The Third World is a blast if you’re cynical, ruthless, and have cash on hand.  Let’s use that!

 

*I forget who came up with that, but I’m stealing it.  With thanks, of course!
Loading Likes...

Permanent Revolution

By the (self-chosen) end of his life, the late great David Stove, one of the fiercest defenders free thought ever had, was arguing in all sincerity that expressing what he called “the equality opinion” should be a death penalty offense.  Admit that “society” will always be “unjust” so long as one person has more than another, and the whole catalog of totalitarian horrors follows, by necessity, as surely as ice follows from water and freezing temperatures.  He mostly meant “equality” in the material sense (this was c.1991), but even then the Left was making the Harrison Bergeron implications obvious — more looks, more brains, more talent, more drive, more self control, whatever it is, we shall never have Social Justice while anyone has more.

He was right.  A Stove-ian look at the history of philosophy forces one conclusion: The whole of Western social thought, stem to stern, top to bottom, is an attempt to change Envy from a vice to a virtue.  (This includes theology).  And the reason for it is simple: Philosophers have less.  Less looks, less self control, less money, less power, and often less brains and drive, too, and they damn well know it.  The only thing they have more of is talk.

Up to about 1500 or so, this didn’t matter, since nobody who had more ever listened to philosophers.  But by 1500 or so, European society was prosperous enough that lots of people had more, such that it was obvious that having more is not due to God’s special favor (which used to mean “blue blood”), but is largely chance.  As the now unjustifiably obscure philosopher Rodericus Stewartus once said, “Some guys have all the luck,” and instead of taking that as proof of God’s special favor like the bluebloods did, your Martin Luthers and John Calvins …

…well, ok, they took it as proof of God’s special favor, too, but they also — in a leap of “logic” that makes sense only to them and modern-day Leftists — concluded that God’s special favor can be purchased by saying the right things.  How do you know you’re among the Elect?  By having more… then feeling the overwhelming urge to lecture everyone about how sinful having more is (see the famous Codex Murus for examples).

But the philosophers still aren’t satisfied, because while the guys who listen to them have more, all right — that part of the doctrine’s rock solid — they themselves still have less.  And that doesn’t follow, because not only do they say the right things, they’re the ones telling everyone else what to say!  But when you point that out to the guys who have more — those Puritan merchants who just bought Manhattan for a handful of beads, for instance — they tell you to go get a job, parchment breath.

I’m sure y’all have noticed the inverse relationship between material prosperity and intellectual rigor, so fast forward a few generations.  Now it seems that “having more” is actually the default condition of mankind.  And yet, the philosophers still have less.  Which can only mean: There is an active conspiracy against the philosophers.  It’s the ____’s fault we don’t have more.  Fill in the blank with whatever you like: Jews, Capitalists, Aristocrats, Designated Hitters, it’s all the same, only the names have changed.

And now we come to the heart of the problem: Material prosperity produces these people, in the same way Stove says “the equality opinion” produces secret police and slave labor camps.  Indeed, it’s the exact same process, because the idea of The ___ Conspiracy simply is “the equality opinion.”  One’s expressed intellectually, the other emotionally, but it’s the same thing.  Objective considerations of emergent historical phenomena compel us to conclude, comrades, that first we must kill all the Kulaks, and then we shall have Utopia.

The only social policy question, then, is: What to do with these people?  A certain level of material prosperity will produce them.  It’ nature’s way of keeping the balance — just as a predator or a pathogen always evolves to kill off an over-abundant grazer, so human over-abundance results in an intellectual pathogen to keep us from amusing ourselves to death.

That’s what college was for, back in the days — a containment room for intellectual pathogens.  When Harvard was just a four-year sleepaway camp for the sons of privilege, letting them sow their wild oats before joining the family firm on Wall Street, it didn’t matter that all Junior’s professors were moron Marxists.  That was probably still the case into the early 90s, when everyone understood what “middle class values” meant — deconstruction and the like are fun to play around with over a few bong hits, but they’re useless out in the ‘burbs, so it doesn’t matter that all the “English” classes at Big State only study Derrida and Zambezi war chants.

The professors got to think of themselves as “revolutionaries,” and we agreed to let them, with our fingers crossed behind our backs — yeah yeah, “revolution,” but only in the sense of spinning around and around and around, constantly chasing your head up your own ass, going nowhere.

But just as material abundance and intellectual rigor vary inversely, so prosperity and pathology vary directly.  Now everyone goes to college, and people really believe this shit.  For proof I give you the Kavanaugh hearings.  That’s a freshman “diversity” seminar, comrades, at any college in the land.  And now we’re on the brink of civil war, though everyone with the power to stop it is too flabby and coddled and stupid to realize it.

What’s to be done with these people, should we ever decide to give things like “indoor plumbing” and “living past 35” another go?  David Stove said we should shoot ’em all on sight.  I’m really hoping someone has a better idea….

Loading Likes...