Like Bane’s tales, IMGrody’s meloney account of interaction with the supernatural has the ring of truth to it.

As an humble MT, my job is winnowing testimony with the fork of Reason. My interactions with the supernatural are minimal and simplistic, at most. My Neanderthal eyes are of the Earth, but my parietal lobe reaches for the heavens.

And I like it that way. My model is the Centurion, who wished not to see the face of Jesus, but no doubt would’ve eagerly spitted any number of demons on his sword at His command.

Along those lines, I value the collection, processing and dissemination of intelligence on our supernatural foes. As such, I found Chapter 8 of the Bastard Spawn Chronicles illuminating. (I have only read chapters 5 and 8 to date, but intend to read more later.)

I was struck by the correspondence with other accounts of spiritually active geographical loci, and in particular ghost hauntings. Plural of anecdote becoming data, a theory formed.

(Not that it is difficult to get ghost anecdotes. It is only difficult to get RELIABLE ones. Little kiddies like to tell tall tales of the dark, not knowing what powers they stir.)

There is one instance of a medium contacting a dead man in the Bible: the Witch of Endor. The Bible describes her as having a “familiar spirit.”

The interview succeeded in raising Samuel, a godly man, but only to deliver the Lord’s dire message: Death to Saul. This prophecy was shortly fulfilled. Thus, while it is doubtful whether a demon’s power can call up a dead prophet without divine permission, it is rather obvious that doing so brings forth no good result.

Furthermore, we find no support in Scripture for the souls of deceased men going anywhere but their allotted afterlife. No man wanders the Earth; no shriving or burial rite is enjoined to aid transition to the beyond. Many things wander the empty spaces between realms, but they are not men:

When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will return unto my house whence I came out. And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished. Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first.

Moreover, we note the power of blood atonement in Old Testament practice, and the significance of spilled human blood in pagan religion. At least one of these sites is still supernaturally active, and ancient things make itinerant homes in the gaps between planes, existing in both.

Blood, sex, the occult, depravity, drugs, altered states of consciousness, and innate human power and sensitivity – all these things can chip away at the barriers between worlds, permitting the denizens of the restless wastes to taste the vibrant savours within.

Which brings us to ghosts. Let us compare two accounts, and find the commonalities between them:

In Bane’s tiger barracks story (search for “Haunted House” until you hit “Part one:”), a fell spirit inhabits a barracks after the sadistic death of a recruit. It echoes his soul and death in certain ways. But it is not him. It is something feeding off the psychic mark left by his blood – resonating with the scar torn in the veil by his ugly passing. Rejoicing in it, and coming through, filled with malice for all life.

(I stopped here to check whether the passing of the ghost in Imgrody’s Chapter 8 was similarly ugly. Chapter 7 appears to be missing. However, I got hooked and read through the series. Nothing much else happens, except confirmation that IMGrody has innate sensitivity.)

In IMGrody’s story, a dead husband haunts the extremely fucked-up single mom Grody’s shacking up with. The ghost possibly exerts stronger influence and connection with his biological daughter than the other unrelated kids. (It’s unclear without Part 7.) Minor psychic manifestations result, less intense than Bane’s story. But we may presume the psychic tear was less extreme, given that the recruit’s death was extraordinarily bad. In this case, the dead husband’s malice and bitterness, and the single mom’s depravity, seem to be the permitting factors. Perhaps with Grody’s sensitivity compounding.

By now my theory should be clear enough. Ghosts are not dead people. They are creatures of the Void, perhaps possessing a character specially attracted by the signature of a psychic scar in the veil of reality (rage demon, lust demon), certainly resonating with the character of that scar in order to obtain influence and manifest themselves in the physical world.

Thus there are four major known vectors of Void manifestation:
1. Possession of living human host via weakened soul barriers or heightened sensitivity
2. Occult ritual
3. Local geographic contamination, most strongly via human death
4. Amphibians, which can independently walk between, but are not angels. These include roughly 500 vampire/wraith/ancients, if Bane is believed. Compared to the first three, they are the least evil – almost neutral, if you don’t mind a bit of soul rape now and again.

Given the above, it is clear that pagan religions were serious business. The worldwide repetition of the pyramid makes sense.

Moreover, someone Downstairs must be holding back the frequency of such manifestations in the West, in anticipation and appreciation of the superior glut provided by post-Christian secular humanism, which culminates in one world religion (you’re already familiar with its doctrines, just follow the convergence) and Anti-Christ’s reign.

Organized religion indeed.

The dramatic, disorganized and dismayed scamperings of the demons around Jesus were charming; their current discipline is alarming.

Check your wallet.

Sauron’s back.

In the land of mutants, where the shadows lie…

Eeyores and EeyOracles often can dismay
That’s why Greeks historical locked ’em all away.
Leonidas’ speeches were not much for motivation
“Wife, goodbye” and “Soldiers, die” ‘s extent of his oration.

Eyes not dried a decade since have excess liquidation.
OOD of OODA’s now complete: syssitia salvation.
Soon I must be on my way, for nukes threaten my nation.
(No more time to learn and play on Net communication.)

It’s a silly poem, but apropos to the moment, namely:

Two genocides in my family tree are quite enough, thank you.

The Second Estate news aggregator service will now cease operation. In favor of action, I cease wideband push-info intake. Henceforth, I imbibe by pull only. Let others take up the search.

I have investigated many mysteries, in a loose and amateurish fashion. My thanks to those wide-horizoned souls who kept up.

Now I zero on the proximate threat. May the dawn always break in the east.

No warrior fears Ragnarok; but only that it find him unprepared.

(Translated into English, this means that I will stop sifting through RSS and instead focus on existing projects. The greedy peasant plows no land.

Thus commences my insensible slide into intellectual obsolescence, for which reason God made sons. May I one day see such a gulf from the other shore.

I intend to work in order of urgency, from immediate to eternal. Meaning, complete Altrugenics to foster syssitias first. It may seem strange that a touchy-feely community-building exercise would have relevance to nuclear war. But the atomization of American society destroys the substrate of the high-trust heavily-armed universal male militia taken for granted at the Founding. To rebuild the militia, one must first rebuild the neighborhood. Without the neighborhood, there can be no liberty. And without liberty, the melon-sapiens historical pendulum will eventually end this world in fire.

Hm. It occurs to me to wonder whether Tex went homeless and I went helpless simply to give the Neanderthal a second shot. The adversity of Providence is hardly necessary to motivate excessive reading, but it is undeniably effective at eliminating distractions.

Who knows? Maybe if I finish everything, I’ll allow myself to read again! Now there’s a Neanderthal motivational trick…)

Aeoli agrees with Vox regarding Scott Adams’ inscrutability. I find him less mysterious.

It seems to me that Adams is on the side of secular atheism.

Ultimately, the Avatar fails to stop the onset of the war. However, at the conclusion of the book, the Prime Influencer, who turns out to be an opinionated café owner that the Avatar had met previously by chance, launches a simple, yet catchy, phrase (If God is so smart, why do you fart?) that spreads throughout the world like a virus thanks to an advanced computer worm, named Giver-of-Data (GoD), launched by the GIC programmer shortly before his death, which unlocked everyone’s phones, linked them up to automatic translation systems, and disabled call billing. According to the story, “Once you heard it, you could never forget it.” It was this phrase that finally captured the collective imaginations of ordinary people, causing them to reevaluate their assumptions about the nature of God. This ultimately led to the elimination of fundamentalist religious practices throughout the world, which, in turn, resulted in the end of the Religion War.

He wants Muslim immigration to undermine Christian fundamentalism in the USA in favor of polyreligious Cathedral convergence. (When properly understood, all religions are really just Progressivism.)

I investigated this because I couldn’t figure out how Adams could simultaneously not be a liar and not mean what he seemed to be arguing. The resolution is that he does in fact mean it.

It thus does not appear this is an example of either multilayered tonality or deliberate psyops hypnotic deception. He literally means, “To avert apocalypse, let some suicide bombers in. Because God is stupid.”

He is not saying, “God is stupid,” anywhere but implicitly at the very end of his book, but that’s what he means. Like Socrates, he hides a socially unacceptable point beneath cleverness and frame.

Since he opposes a Christian USA, not really an ally. If he made a meme that accidentally is hypnotically effective for the anti-immigration side, it’s only because he screwed up. But he is relatively less insane than most of the Cathedral. I bet he wants to be Trump for secular humanism.

Perhaps some grounds for describing Adams as inscrutable can be found in his other book, “God’s Debris”. Adams does not believe the ideas therein, but also charges God with stupidity – the Big Bang was accidental Deio-detonation, and God is currently no smarter than the mankind his particles embody.

Likewise, the ultimate of the book’s 5 levels of consciousness seems to fit well with his beliefs: “Level 5: Avatar level, understanding that the mind is a delusion-generating machine, and that science is another belief system, albeit a useful one.”

Thus while Adams does play with many ideas, he nonetheless appears to possess a most prosaic core.

Thus, when I do as Aeoli suggests and skim Adams’ blog, I see a mask of dispassion that has begun to badly slip. (Hitler~Trump language, anyone?) And I predict further slippage.

Disclaimer: I do not follow Adams. Thin slice analysis. Treat as Bush administration WMD report.

GEAS

The ingenopathic geas is as follows:

Thou shalt honestly signal thy inner nature for the tribe’s evaluation.

PROTOCOLS

Unitonality and ditonality are two different communication protocols:

Unitonality is large scale and low context.
Ditonality is small scale and high context.

DI VS UNI

In unitonality, the text and the subtext are generally one. At least, there is no ingenopathic geas splitting the two. Text and subtext may be split for other reasons, such as sarcasm or dishonesty. However, the message is generally designed to be sent and received in a low context, high scale context. It thus exhibits a certain unified tonal simplicity.

In ditonality, the text and subtext are split. The subtext, or deep tone, transmits implicit information about the speaker. The text carries explicit information about the topic. However, the text is inflected, altered or distorted in order to compactly convey information about deep tone.

MISCOMMUNICATION

Thus, when a ditonal message is evaluated as if it were unitonal, it often appears inaccurate in its description of the topic. And vice versa: when a unitonal message is misinterpreted as ditonal, it conveys inaccurate information about the speaker.

A ditonal often feels he is not being sufficiently honest unless he includes the deep tone info on the nature of the speaker, so that others can judge his credibility and intentions. A unitonal can find ditonals to be solipsistically self-concerned, incapable of effective rhetoric, etc.

GERVAIS

Ditonals are the Clueless in the Gervais Principle hierarchy. The canonical example is Michael Scott from the Office. Unitonals are both the Sociopaths and Losers.

(Note Scott’s deep eye sockets. The implications of this are further elaborated within the Altrugenics forum, in the members’ section.)

FARMER TOM VS VOX

Technical preface completed, we come to the conflict of the day: Farmer Tom drops out of the Dread Ilk.

Vox is a unitonal honor-hierarchical. Farmer Tom is, based on my vague impression, probably a ditonal honor-flat.

Tom writes: “This place is really going down hill in a hurry. … The vast majority of the guests seem to be so uninformed as to not know who Nate is?”

Thus one of Tom’s primary complaints is that the scale of the Vox Populi community has increased. It is no longer a small-scale, high-context communication community, but a large-scale, low-context arena. This ruins the viability of Tom’s ditonal ingenopathic communication style.

There is a further conflict between Tom’s honor-flat prestige based, passive competition versus Vox’s honor-hierarchical, dominance-based style. This conflict has always existed; however it now flares.

Trump support is a key litmus test. As Tom complains, “The host is now full on Trump supporter.” Trump is a unitonal honor-hierarchical, like Vox. Tom rejects this ethos.

Vox responds to Tom’s rejection of Trump by extensive demonstration via unitonal argument of the objective reasons for Trump support. However, I doubt that Tom’s rejection of Trump is based primarily on objective reasons. Rather, it stems from a hardwired sociobiological difference of perspective.

Likewise, Vox’s support of Trump says less about Vox than Tom thinks. Vox has not changed. Rather, the world is simply heating up, in anticipation of Great Depression 2.0 and WWIII. Tom’s error lies in misinterpreting a shift in tone as a shift in the unitonal speaker’s nature.

Note that unitonal vs. ditonal does not affect intellectual sophistication. Vox is obviously more intellectually sophisticated than Tom. Moreover, it does not absolutely dictate tonal profundity. A unitonal speaker can speak either profoundly or simply, as the situation demands. A ditonal speaker, if he speaks on a subject that admits any personal tone at all, must double-layer his message to reflect both self and topic.

FOR EXAMPLE, ME

For example, I am normally a ditonal honor-hierarchical speaker. However, in this post, I limit myself to a technical analysis of a situation, and do not attempt to express my own views. Thus text is subtext, and my ingenopathic geas is not triggered.

Were I inserting myself into this post, I would normally express my views more savagely than the actual facts warrant, to reflect my internally savage nature. Likewise, Tom expresses himself more gently than facts warrant, to express his gentler internal nature.

CASUAL GREETINGS DIFFERENCE

A unitonal casual greeting would be:
“Hi, how are ya” [casual cheerful greeting]
“Good how are you” [casual cheerful greeting]

An honor-flat ditonal greeting might be:
“Hello, how are you?” [sincere question]
“Well, I am struggling with XYZ, I think, but ABC is ambiguous” [deep, nuanced answer]

An honor-hierarchical ditonal greeting might be:
“How goes the war?”
“I hear the lamentation of their women.”
“Haha, great.”

This last exchange demonstrates that in terms of adaptation to social scale, ditonal honor-hierarchicals are midway between transparent defenseless honesty and extrovert opacity.

Other configurations exist. Unitonal dishonor-flat, unitonal honor-flat… perhaps ditonal dishonor-flat would describe Scalzi, if we dropped the honesty attribute from ditonal. (And maybe we should, since honor/dishonor already covers that dimension. Although this would damage ditonality’s correspondence to socket depth. Ditonality was originally discovered as a side-effect of the orbitofrontal cortex’s impact on affect-layer mechanics. But the relative importance of subjectivity is both a feminine and ingenopathic trait, and thus its scope extends well beyond socket depth. As always, further investigation required.)

Anyhow, those variations can be discussed another day. Let’s return to the conflict at hand.

RESOLUTION AND JUDGMENT

Tom may think that this exchange has revealed something profound about the nature of Vox. Vox certainly thinks this exchange has demonstrated immaturity on the part of Tom.

Once Tom issued the challenge, Vox was required under unitonal honor-hierarchical rules to crush him (or ignore him). This is right and appropriate to the medium.

I don’t actually know the situation or its actors well, and am just going off superficial impressions to talk about my pet theories, obviously.

Nonetheless, the solution to the problem as I’ve stated it would be for Tom to recognize that his communication protocol and sociobiological values are not universal or even inherently superior, and that in particular they are ill-suited to the medium in which he sought to “hang out” and find fulfilling self-expression, understanding and acceptance.

In this ultimate sense, we may thus say that both Tom and Vox are right. With this clarified sense of separation between large scale and small, Tom may even realize that he can consistently embrace support for a Trump presidency over that even larger-scale milieu, America.

In general, ditonals are well-advised to reverse their hardwired assumptions, and not attempt to read ditonality into an overwhelmingly unitonal world. The subtext usually doesn’t exist, nor is your inclusion of it understood, much less appreciated.

Whether or not I have accurately characterized the Tom-Vox conflict, I think it is clear that, through no fault of its own, VP is becoming a less hospitable environment to ditonal honor-flats. Like “gamma”, “Cuckservative” will probably toss some baby with the bathwater. I hope this explanation moderates that effect. It isn’t personal.

This post is a more modest statement of my views. It is mostly intended as a test of my command of unitonal dialect. There may be a flourish or two at the end.

Gun grabs are the Schelling point of resistance that we are stuck with. We are wise to reinforce it.

However, that does not make it a good Schelling point. The current panoply of American citizen firepower is not comparable to the Revolutionary-era armament of the citizen militia, which featured near-universal military-aged citizen enrollment. In that era, the American militiaman was better armed than his British counterpart. Today, ISIS is better armed, and most American military-aged males do not even possess a firearm.

The Revolutionary-era American militias could sometimes withstand British regulars. Current American civilians could not win against a determined 1st world army in the field. They are not organized at all. They lack the squad weaponry common by late WWII – explosives and LMGs. They completely lack all heavier armament.

A Russian style offensive against American militias would succeed just as Russia succeeds in Syria, despite Turkish and American support.

The original meaning of the 2nd Amendment is that citizen militias should be capable of handling 1st world militaries – whether the French and their Indian auxiliaries, or the British redcoats. Today we are far from that goal, and thus forced to hope for an asymmetrical conflict with the state. The last time the state crushed American militias – the Civil War and Reconstruction – Sherman proved Leviathan has an answer. The police state apparatus – which did not exist in the Revolutionary era – has similarly shown an ability to suppress peacetime white collective self defense within inner cities, allowing them to fall to Leviathan’s black criminal proxies.

Law-abiding citizens take note: It is not possible to both honor the Founders’ intent as embodied in the Constitution and also follow modern restrictions on militias and armament.

It is obvious that multifaceted conflicts are brewing. Military outcomes are difficult to predict. However, even were victory certain, we should not allow our pro-gun rhetoric to blind us to the need for Stinger missiles and tanks… or at least grenades, RPGs and Javelins, for a start.

An armed society is a polite society. I suggest restoration of the right to revenge, elimination of the police force, and resumption of the code duello, with approved weaponry being unarmed, rapier and dagger, or revolvers.

More practically, do as Jack Donovan suggests: Form a male gang… One more like the Cosa Nostra than Cheers.

Scale is ultimately what destroyed American liberty, and the solution starts with you. A Dark Age is coming, and this time castles will be built of 4GW flesh, not masoned stone.

(Just kidding. They’re stone.)

The complacent should bear in mind that as the Cathedral’s position becomes more desperate, and the Fed more insolvent, its provocations of foreign powers grow more flagrant, and the risk of nuclear war increases. Mad dogs must be put down. Nationalism + Great Depression 2.0 = WWIII. Let it be a Reconquista, not a re-catastrophe, please. The Russian bear has disemboweled enough insane empires; let’s do this one ourselves. Remember the Alamo, and bring your bowie knife.

It seems that while I can easily produce unitonal speech, assimilating all the implications thereof will take some time. For example, the importance of maintaining a superficial appearance of credibility. Fortunately, unitonality in general still appears to require far less brainpower investment than ditonality – and for far greater return.

To illustrate this, let’s employ a few metaphors that have caught my wandering fancy:

(Ah crap, I must also reduce my writing to a 5th grade level. Revise and redact…)

** From Sindarin to Syndicated TV

When ditonals speak thusly:

To these:

The result is sometimes ugly:

Anderson defends the truth rightly, with a strength rarely seen in ditonals. Yet he also utterly fails to counter the rhetorical “disqualify” attack used against him. Thus he is pariah.

With practice, one can learn to imitate the wiles of unitonals, to good effect:

It seems there are three main rules:
1. Speak unitonally, not ditonally. Ditonal honesty is for friends.
2. Say nothing which cannot be proven to a fool, for you will have to.
3. Say nothing true which permits an easy “disqualify” to pariah status.

For purposes of charisma, it is furthermore highly recommended that one find some way to enjoy such soulless exchanges.

** Swordfighting

Here is what a ditonal speaker thinks he’s doing:

The dual sabres represent the dual tones, working in concert within the same message. One describes the topic, the other the speaker.

This transmission of extra information is much like how Latin is full of declensions and conjugations, all now forgotten, whereas Spanish is so straightforward a dog could speak it.

Dual-wield sabres sounds pretty cool, right? So armed, a ditonal should certainly win versus an opponent with only one sword.

And were the ditonal the only judge in the room, certainly he would be declared the winner. However, it is generally not his opinion that counts.

Ditonals are the minority. Thus, the ditonal sees his opponent’s blade with double-vision, imagining a second where none exists. His swings respond to air, and he misses the real strike.

This is fencing, not combat, so it is judges’ opinion on points, not haemorrhage and trauma, that determines the victor. Now here’s the crux: the audience and opponent being unitonal, they cannot see the ditonal’s second blade.

Instead, they see this:

Watch as the sabre-wielder completely dismantles the myth of katana supremacy. Who holds the katana? The ditonal. His two independent blades have merged into a single, clumsy, poorly-designed, one-dimensional two-handed weapon. The sabreman’s nimble rotations chop the ditonal’s guard-less exposed hands to bits, and land strikes elsewhere at will.

Thus by simply dropping his second blade, the ditonal can improve vastly, to this:

In actuality, of course, the best dueling armament is rapier and dagger. The rapier represents the surface tone – long reach to communicate in large-scale, low-context situations. Elegant, efficient thrusting design to achieve fatal wounds with minimal exposure. Light for rapid movement, hand well guarded for defense.

Meanwhile, the dagger is the deep tone. Use it defensively to ward off the blows of the unitonal – for they lack the ingenopathic geas, and are not of your soul or tribe. It is short, so its offensive use is limited to those closest to you, with whom small-scale, high-context communication is possible.

A ditonal’s skill with low-context communication may or may not surpass a unitonal’s, but that is like comparing a rapier to a longsword. The purpose of the rapier is to leave the off hand free to wield a dagger.

Likewise, the more armored your opponents, the less ingenopathic the milieu. The rapier and dagger is the premiere choice for cloth-armored civilian duels. In wartime, heavier weapons are required for the melee scrum. One may leave swords altogether in favor of warhammers and the like – the tools of pure rhetoric.

However, the rapier and dagger’s greatest strength is exhibited when the nucleus of small tribe is bonded, then nested and stacked, to form the Legion. Rapier is then traded for scutum, and dagger becomes gladius.

Thus ditonals may survive fairly well as atomized individuals in a high-trust, law-abiding society, but quickly become fodder when men in armor walk the streets, unless they form ranks. Then they cannot be stopped, for trust = cohesion.

(Skip to 7:20 for Roman infantry tactics)

Mainstream evolutionary theory states that dolphins and whales evolved from some kind of primitive horse.

Stabilization Theory and I call bullshit. Horses don’t spend much time in the water. That makes for an implausible inter-species hybridization bridge. You need overlapping habitats to make sexytime happen.

Hippopotami and manatees make a more plausible case. No doubt they’re involved somehow. However, both are herbivores and thus poor matches for our primary suspect.

Once again we come back to the pig – an horny, indiscriminate semi-aquatic mammal. And its counterpart, the dolphin and porpoise – another horny, indiscriminate, fat-layered mammal.

Imagine for a moment a dolphin-pig hybrid. Sounds like a seal or walrus. It could work.

Remember, a distant hybridization event need only occur once. If it backcrosses into either parent population, a new species is born, and both species are permanently closer for the next event.

More likely there’s a webbed interbreeding relationship, as with waterfowl, stretching back into the distant and murky past.

So let’s take as given some kind of webbed gene flow between the semi aquatic piggy land animals and the fully aquatic cetaceans. What would this explain?

Humans bond quite well with dolphins. There’s a strong emotional compatibility. The parallels between pig and dolphin voluptuous playfulness are striking. A common piggy ancestor would explain that.

Human males enjoy sex with suspiciously accommodating female dolphins. No doubt pigs would too. Female dolphins are horny sluts, and likely form the basis for mermaid myths. Dudes are fucking them NOW, falling in love with them, in this age of internet porn. Imagine how a sailor cut off from anything female for months would view the opportunity. Mermaid.

However, it’s unlikely any hybridization event ever resulted. Human males are quite infertile. The causation must go the other way.

Male dolphins will also try to fuck anything that swims. Anatomically speaking, humans are well advised to limit themselves to handjobs if they wish to survive the experience – and our girls have happily obliged. Maybe something with a more robust vagina, such as a big sow, could handle it. Still, it seems far more likely the gene flow went the other way – horny boars on dolphin sluts. And horny boars on bonobo sluts. Thus our family resemblance.

How to test the theory? Here’s how not to test it: genetic similarity. Backcrossing erases that, using snippets from the primary parent to recode the one-off parent’s morphological legacy. A pig-dolphin type hybrid event wouldn’t be common, although maybe flow through intermediate stages is/was more frequent.

The undersea is a giant webbed fuckfest too, stretching all the way back to those extinct dino-whales. We should expect to find some blurry species and genus boundaries down there. Albeit the relationship to octopi and squid is pretty damn distant – hence why those critters remain wholly alien to our comprehension. The mechanics for interbreeding just aren’t there, any more than with a jellyfish.

(By the way, doesn’t evolution sound a helluva lot more robust once you account for everything fucking any available wet hole? And that’s before you realize all the chromosome folding tricks a sperm shotgun can fumble its way into.)

Back to testing, here are some options:
1. Boar on bonobo – the original experiment
2. Boar on woman – gross but feasible
3. Chimp on sub-Saharan African woman – closest human-animal hybridization opportunity available.
4. BEST OPTION: cat with rabbit = cabbit.

Option 4 would experimentally verify Stabilization Theory. Far as I can tell, everybody authoritative now denies that cabbits exist. Cats have 38 chromosomes (mostly), and European rabbits have 44. Some rural guy can build a pen, breed a bunch of cats and rabbits, and then have the resulting cabbits sequenced and dissected. Pretty low-cost project.

Not that anyone wants to prove this.

I have previously defined ditonality as follows:

Ditonals are compelled by ingenopathic geas to speak honestly of themselves during communication, so the speaker may evaluate their intentions and credibility. Unitonals aren’t.

Note how deepsocket comedians Jim Carrey, Will Ferrill and Steve Carell portray characters who are lost in their own worlds, clueless to feedback and convention, excessively self-revelatory and honest. They are portraying ditonal foolishness.

I named this phenomenon “ditonality” because of the phenomenon of two separate tones transmitted on the same channel, in the same message.

For example, take my posts on the Federal Reserve, Depression 2.0, and nuclear apocalypse. Such an outcome is by no means certain, if for no other reason than that human predictive capacity is limited and flawed. Yet I repeatedly described it as “inevitable”.

Why make inaccurate statements? To convey the second tone of the message, the deeper tone. I wished to strike at general complacency, to communicate my own shocked and horrorified surprise at the viability of this argument, to instill alarm, and to stir to “extreme” action. I saw a need for someone to argue the darker case, lest disaster befall the too-comfortable.

I was also honestly reflecting my atypically savage and cynical internal nature to the audience.

This probably rendered my arguments less effective, since ditonality does not scale. But due to ingenopathic geas, I felt compelled to present the argument in the way that felt “right” – fully honest. The argument dictated its own form.

So this is one example of ditonality, from an outlier MT. Let’s take a look at some examples from a very different outlier, TT Hugh Howey:

1. His (deleted) account of an interaction with a rude bitch at WorldCon. Just read the screencaps from his blog.

2. His personal philosophy of extreme nonviolence, turn the other cheek pacifism.

In both of these cases, ditonality is present. The speaker is compelled to bare his breast, to make his intentions and inner nature fully apparent.

In the first example, observe once again that this backfires. He confesses to uncharitable thoughts towards the bitch as penance and self-criticism, yet those thoughts are misinterpreted by hostile dishonest unitonals as simply a rhetorical attack.

As a result, (according to hearsay) he cries, discusses it with his wife, deletes the post and writes an apology, and then deletes the apology and replaces it with another apology.

So clearly he’s a gentle critter. The only commonality between myself and Howey in these examples is that we’re both ditonal.

I think a better word than ditonal would be “altonal”. This captures its essence: an ingenopathic communication protocol optimized for small-tribe altruism, reliant on high-context communication, that handicaps its user for the benefit of the group.

The upcoming sections will justify this terminological shift by contrasting with other communication modes.

** Hostonality, or Melon-speak

The concept behind hostonality is simple. Rather than being optimized for speaking to lifelong small tribemates, the protocol is designed for social interactions with a wide variety of participants, from strangers to shallow acquaintances to close friends and family.

It is thus able to access concepts and behaviors that are off-limits to altonals.

Hostonality is capable of unmooring itself from the obsessive strictures of deep sincerity, in order to more flexibly play with surface social dynamics. It is much more aware of such minor fluctuations, since they take on far greater importance when no deep, long-lasting relationship exists. It is able to warmly invite strangers in for brief, light interactions.

Obviously, this is a far more effective strategy in our massively scaled and atomized modern society. Moreover, girls eat it up. Let’s take a look:

The interesting thing about Craig Ferguson is that he’s charming despite socket depth. His extraordinary robusticity, large dimensions, projecting chin and good testosterone help explain this. Still, deepsockets can develop extraordinary social skills with proper application, e.g. Mark Manson and Nick Krauser. This requires strenuous contact with reality, as the sad case of Tom Cruise demonstrates.

In a world of shallow social interactions, being a “good guy” means making semi-strangers feel warm and fuzzy in casual interactions. It has nothing to do with character, which can’t even be observed within such brief contacts.

I initially called hostonality “unitonality” because there was never a huge divergence of tones that required lots of context to follow. Sure, there are plenty of jokes and sophisticated tonal effects – this isn’t autism. But the tone stays sufficiently unified to be comprehensible to a casual observer, whereas an altonal’s may diverge wildly.

However, I think “hostonality” captures it better. The example of a talk-show host doing lots of public interviews with strangers who may or may not make repeat visits, but whom are all nevertheless loosely connected via the greater world of show-biz, accurately captures the ideal functioning of the shallow social attachment communication style.

To see this style in a more combative setting, watch as Russell Brand defends himself from American asshole anchors with a combination of shallow social skills enwrapping some modicum of intellectual depth:

His core beliefs are deployed in subordination to the dynamics of shallow exchange, serving to buttress his frame of lighthearted mastery. An altonal would do the reverse. Yet this doesn’t alter the fact that Brand is sincere in his beliefs – it merely changes how he communicates them.

Thals are altonal. They don’t innately grasp the occasion of hostonality. It simply doesn’t register. They are either altonal or nothing. To them, hostonality feels disingenuous, shallow, wrong. And in a small tribe, it would be! Talk that kind of bullshit, and everyone would look at you like you were some kind of idiot. Altonality, being much higher density, can convey vastly more humor, insight, information, etc, and in briefer form.

This aversion to hostonality can be overcome, of course – I speak of the default sociobiological setting. Still, it is useful to disambiguate the two protocols so that Thals do not endure internal trauma when making the switch. One should not cut too deeply – it is JUST the communication protocol that needs adjustment.

** Mytonality and Metonality

This last pair refers to the rhetoric of proles. In Gervais Principle terms, hostonality is Powertalk for Sociopaths, altonality is Posturetalk for the Clueless, and Mytonality/Metonality is the simpler Gametalk for the Losers.

As Rao writes, Gametalk is already described here:

you can learn all about it in the pop classics on Transactional Analysis (TA, a Neo-Freudian school) from 30 years ago (now available in updated editions): Eric Berne’s Games People Play and What Do You Say after You Say Hello and Thomas Harris’ I’m OK–You’re OK.

It is a simple, artless language that nonetheless mystifies altonals, who interpret everything through the rose lens of ingenopathic geas.

I split the language into Mytonality and Metonality to signify the masculine/feminine shift from object/dominance to subject/solipsism.

** Conclusion

What altonals need to realize is that society is sick with scale. It is a rotting whale carcass that periodically blows up.

There are no rules in a rotting whale carcass. In order to maintain your internal integrity, you must defend yourself externally. If you find this distasteful, find ways to exit the carcass.

Apparently:

The plot so far:
-Empire builds a Death Star
-Empire builds a bigger Death Star
And now… Wait for it…
-Empire builds EVEN bigger Death Star

I lost the will to watch with Annie’s lamesaber fight on the volcanic planet Oneitis. If Vader is pozzed, what else is there? Jamaicans vs. Chinese? Not hard to guess how that one turns out. Queen Amygdala was plucked well before coming of age, anyhow.

The entire Star Wars franchise is actually just a fever dream of uneducated adolescent moisture farmer Luke Skywalker, while he attempts to escape his crushingly boring existence by huffing paint at Mos Eisley.

Obviously planet busting is trivial for a civilization that possesses hyperdrive. Any cargo-freighter rustbucket could do it.

We must forgive Luke’s poverty of imagination; he has a lot of issues upstairs. The dream sequence is rich with fodder for Freudian analysis, from the hellfire death of his religious fundamentalist parents, to his sister-lust and the loss of his wanking hand. However, it is his cathartic obsession with thermal exhaust ports that reveals his true destiny amidst the alleyways of the galaxy’s Sodom and Gomorrah.

Through his superhuman powers of Eastern relaxation, this Twink is indeed master of the burning rod!

Why do sequels tend to suck?

It’s r/K theory applied to art.

No-name artist trying to break out = harsh environment
Lauded popular high-status folks presiding over successful franchise sequels = free resources

Solution:

TruFans “crowdfund” sequels of successful franchises. Money goes into escrow. After viewing the sequel, each donator votes – either his money goes to a charity, or to the artist.

Multiply % “Yes” votes by creative controller’s contractual royalties to determine how much money he actually receives. Add pre-release donations from “Yes” voters. Voila: Fan accountability.

For example, if 50% of TruFans think the Empire Builds a Deathstar IV sucked, then George Lucas only gets 50% of his contractual royalties for the film. The other 50% go to charity.

The Real Star Wars

The real Sith Lords are the many elite worshippers of Lucifer, the shining one, Prince of the Air, god of this world. Illuminati, Shriner, Freemason, Bilderberg… whatever the name, it’s all the same.

The real Death Star is the nuclear tipped Federal Reserve, set to metamorphose into a digital Keynesian one-world currency that begins expiring from date of issue. (Spend it or lose it.)

The real Jedi are the sons of God.

The real Earth is Alderaan.

And there is no thermal exhaust port.

Star Wars: A Vision of Our Keynesian Future

It’s obvious. The Empire’s centralized economy is broken. To hide this fact, they need a war. So they fund a suitably ridiculous ragtag opposition. This absorbs malcontents and the unemployed, who can be harmlessly slaughtered by a surfeit of otherwise unemployable clone soldiers.

At the same time, the Empire focuses on building a Death Star. This intense industrial effort stimulates the entire galactic economy.

However, the Empire cannot actually USE a Death Star very much – not without wiping out its tax base. Sure, a few noisy nuisances and hippy preserves can be pruned, but no blowing up serious industrial planets. Also, once a Death Star is built, all that naval construction infrastructure becomes worthless, and the entire associated labor force is out of work. Whole economic sectors collapse.

The solution, of course, is to build another one. Which is why every Death Star comes with a fatal design flaw, which is transmitted to the Rebel Alliance via whatever Rebel agent is currently “infiltrating”. These idealistic yet morally flexible individuals are generally selected by Imperial officers for their hotness and boudoir enthusiasm. (Which goes a long way towards explaining Princess Leia’s multiple “captures” and “escapes”.)

Are these words, “My son,” spoken by the still, quiet Voice.

It is possible to hear God’s voice. Not in the bullshit Churchian way of, “God was just really telling me…”, but the actual voice.

There are some general preconditions:
1. Faith
2. Purity

God can of course speak to anyone, at any time. However, the above two attributes improve one’s chances.

** Purity

This one is simple and straightforward, but often forgotten. Deuteronomy 23 reminds us:

He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord.

2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord.

3 An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the Lord for ever:

4 Because they met you not with bread and with water in the way, when ye came forth out of Egypt; and because they hired against thee Balaam the son of Beor of Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse thee.

5 Nevertheless the Lord thy God would not hearken unto Balaam; but the Lord thy God turned the curse into a blessing unto thee, because the Lord thy God loved thee.

6 Thou shalt not seek their peace nor their prosperity all thy days for ever.

7 Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite; for he is thy brother: thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian; because thou wast a stranger in his land.

8 The children that are begotten of them shall enter into the congregation of the Lord in their third generation.

9 When the host goeth forth against thine enemies, then keep thee from every wicked thing.

10 If there be among you any man, that is not clean by reason of uncleanness that chanceth him by night, then shall he go abroad out of the camp, he shall not come within the camp:

11 But it shall be, when evening cometh on, he shall wash himself with water: and when the sun is down, he shall come into the camp again.

12 Thou shalt have a place also without the camp, whither thou shalt go forth abroad:

13 And thou shalt have a paddle upon thy weapon; and it shall be, when thou wilt ease thyself abroad, thou shalt dig therewith, and shalt turn back and cover that which cometh from thee:

14 For the Lord thy God walketh in the midst of thy camp, to deliver thee, and to give up thine enemies before thee; therefore shall thy camp be holy: that he see no unclean thing in thee, and turn away from thee.

15 Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee:

16 He shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it liketh him best: thou shalt not oppress him.

17 There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel.

18 Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog, into the house of the Lord thy God for any vow: for even both these are abomination unto the Lord thy God.

19 Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of any thing that is lent upon usury:

20 Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury: that the Lord thy God may bless thee in all that thou settest thine hand to in the land whither thou goest to possess it.

21 When thou shalt vow a vow unto the Lord thy God, thou shalt not slack to pay it: for the Lord thy God will surely require it of thee; and it would be sin in thee.

22 But if thou shalt forbear to vow, it shall be no sin in thee.

23 That which is gone out of thy lips thou shalt keep and perform; even a freewill offering, according as thou hast vowed unto the Lord thy God, which thou hast promised with thy mouth.

24 When thou comest into thy neighbour’s vineyard, then thou mayest eat grapes thy fill at thine own pleasure; but thou shalt not put any in thy vessel.

25 When thou comest into the standing corn of thy neighbour, then thou mayest pluck the ears with thine hand; but thou shalt not move a sickle unto thy neighbour’s standing corn.

When standing on holy ground, remove your shoes. When desirous of hearing the voice of God, be pure. Fasting and prayer work also.

If purity and sobriety are the price of hearing God speak, I’m willing to pay it.

** Faith

By faith in Jesus Christ alone, we are saved and reconciled to God the Father. Thereafter, we may hear Him speak. He is a person. He will speak or not as he chooses.

Enoch walked with God. What does that mean? Look at Jesus for a fleshed-out example. In a real and literal sense, everything he did was for and towards the Father.

Here’s my koan for doing so:

Abbreviation: S t F.
Full version: Son tongues/to Father.

I aim to pray via tongues to the Lord, and act towards the Lord. I always remember and believe I am his son.

Others around me are actual or potential sons and daughters of God. Potential is not actual. Not all have the potential – see reprobates.

** Conclusion

You can be a Christian your whole life and never hear God speak. It’s not a requirement. But it is certainly worthwhile.

If God speaks to a saved sinner, that is not an unconditional endorsement of that sinner’s earthly life, or opinions, or beliefs. God has his own business, and we are not privy to it. However, your odds of active participation go up if the lines of communication are open.

I hope your Christmas went well. Mine certainly did.

Many a Christian’s faith has been tested by the 7 days of creation, with plants arising before the Sun and stars. And needlessly so.

Not 20 verses later, God informs Adam that on the day he eats from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, he will surely die.

Fundamentalist literalist pastors will stand on their heads explaining how the latter statement is non-literal, yet everything before it was scientific fact.

God delivered Genesis to oral pastoralists, not a peer-reviewed journal. They didn’t understand that the Earth was round, much less accretion disks and evolution.

Genesis is like one of Jesus’ parables, and none the less true for that.

One might as well complain that it is unrealistic for a king to promote minor stewards to rule multiple cities, without any evidence of political acumen.

The Bible is full of contradictions… for idiots. As is any sufficiently long and complex written text.

As I continued my rereading of Genesis, I puzzled deeply over how to reconcile disparate theories of human origin with the text. My mind turned to an idea Tex had mentioned, that Adam meant “ruddy one”, and referred to the first white man.

Sure enough, these sites provided excellent elaborations of the idea.

There’s just one problem. Even granting the previously-established non-literalness of the 7 days of creation, an late-advent Adam who is created by God 30-40kya ago with the arrival of Cro Magnon man doesn’t really fit with the details of Genesis. The stretch is too great.

However, add Tex’s thesis, and these problems vanish: The first white man was the white Neanderthal, not white Homo Sapiens sapiens!

I will go through the two websites above, and then Genesis, commentating at notable points, to expand upon this idea.

(Note that I am thus retracting my prior speculation that the Garden of Eden was intended as Narnia. This new hypothesis illuminates far more of the text, and takes precedence. Hybridization is still important, as the reader will see, but Narnia was an overextension of that element. Albeit a fun one!)

** Adam the Aryan

“In their misplaced desire to make the contents of the Bible applicable to everyone,”

This is an error. The Gospel is to be preached to all nations. See Acts 8, in which an highly-ranked Ethiopian eunuch is baptized. Ethiopia is in Africa, albeit with some white admixture from proximity to the Middle East. Not only is the eunuch therefore presumably part black, and certainly planning to return home and evangelize blacks, but he is also an eunuch – one forbidden from entering the congregation of the Lord in Deuteronomy 23.

My reconciliation of the racist laws of the Old Testament and the universal Gospel of the New is that the Gospel will go to all nations, but that the individual churches should remain separate and racially pure. Not one letter of the Law shall pass away, yet the Law has been fulfilled in Christ.

“When the Adam was created from the dust of the earth, the LORD God breathed ‘the breath of life’ into his nostrils and he became ‘a living soul’. The Adam was unique in this, as the other creatures in Genesis were made only from the earth or the waters, yet the Adam was supplemented with the breath of life.”

This is also an error. The fact that God specially created Adam does not mean He did not also have a hand in the creation of the other races. We do not need to speculate about the degree of difference between the races; we can look with our eyes. While differences of nobility exist, there is clearly a shared humanity as well. The imago Dei must also extend, perhaps to a lesser degree, but still extend, even to the lowest of the genus Homo – for we know in our hearts that even the shooting of a Bigfoot can be wrong, in a way that killing gorillas never will be. Moreover, the Gospel makes plain that both the Adamic man and the “beasts of the field” are invited into the Kingdom – if they will come!

As we shall see, the white man has less reason for genetic pride than he thinks. Stay tuned.

The list of verses supporting the whiteness of Biblical Israelites is quite good:

Lamentations ch 4 v 7
Her Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than rubies, their polishing was of sapphire.

Song of Solomon ch 5 v 10
My beloved is white and ruddy, the chiefest among ten thousand.

Jeremiah ch 30 v 6
Ask ye now, and see whether a man doth travail with child? wherefore do I see every man with his hands on his loins, as a woman in travail, and all faces are turned into paleness?

Isaiah ch 29 v 22
Therefore thus saith the LORD, who redeemed Abraham, concerning the house of Jacob, Jacob shall not now be ashamed, neither shall his face now wax pale.

Ezra ch 9 v 6
And said, O my God, I am ashamed and blush to lift up my face to thee, my God: for our iniquities are increased over our head, and our trespass is grown up unto the heavens.

Jeremiah ch 6 v 15
Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush: therefore they shall fall among them that fall: at the time that I visit them they shall be cast down, saith the LORD.

1 Samuel ch 16 v 12
And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look to. And the LORD said, Arise, anoint him: for this is he.

These are much like the lines proving the whiteness of classical greeks, as if their statuary was not enough. Moreover, I find no evidence of “Semitic” features in the Shroud of Turin, but rather a noble masculine Aryan contenance:

“all those white people today who can still blush, have a direct and pure bloodline going all the way back to the patriarch of the white race.”

This also does not follow. That Adam was the first white man does not mean he was the last; anthropology also asserts multiple origins for whiteness. However, in practice it is not a bad guideline, since whiteness is accompanied by significant Neanderthal DNA.

The verses establishing “beasts of the field” as references to nonwhite are thinner, but sufficient, I think. “Twice-born” is an apt summary of Adam’s origin via divine intervention – a splicing of divine nature onto hominid stock.

If Adam was the first white Neanderthal, then it is quite obviously true that he could find no suitable wife among the “beasts of the field”, given Rh- factor’s effect on interfertility. It makes vastly more sense that Adam was reviewing bipedal hominids as potential wives rather than quadrupedals.

Interestingly, the debate in the comments reveals how Noah’s ark worked – “beasts” included the other races of humans. Noah’s family was white. The manycolored rainbow makes sense as a covenant to all races.

The story of Lot’s daughters also makes much more sense, as an attempt to avoid miscegenation.

Clearly there’s a lot more here to learn. The King James Bible seems corrupted on the issue of the white race. I suppose it was forgotten or thought unimportant at the time, and has only now become critical in this age of Cathedral universalism and cheap transportation.

** ADAM THE FIRST WHITE MAN

The page argues that Genesis’ “day” should be “age”, which certainly seems reasonable, given how long it took Adam to die after activating his one-day death curse. Particularly if that curse refers not to the physical death of Adam, who may not have been immortal in the first place, but rather to the extinction of the Neanderthals – a meta death appropriate to divine justice.

Viewing Genesis as the story of a creation, cataclysm, and reforming improves its sense. Light filters down into an enshrouded, chaotic planet. Vegetation terraforms the skies, making astronomical bodies clearly visible again. Animal life returns to the oceans first – which is correct – but birds precede land animals, which seems wrong. This is, however, the only real error.

Why birds before land animals? Well, if birds come from dinosaurs, the problem disappears. Heh.

The vegetarianism and no rainfall things are weird. To be fair, the vegeterianism wouldn’t extend to sea animals, and it wouldn’t necessarily apply to animals in general, either. Giving plants does not mean forbidding meat. There IS a transition for Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden from vegeterianism to carnivory. But we shouldn’t expect the “beasts of the field”, the other races, to be observing that rule, since they seemed to be already quite acquainted with concepts such as murder.

There is clearly a lot of sloppiness, murk, repetition, and elided history here. It is an ancient text, after all.

Two creations of man seems reasonable, and perhaps two Falls as well. Who knows. This stuff is tea leaves.

“The Black Muslims are correct when they say that God is not their god, but the God of the WHITE MAN.”

Again, an error refuted by the New Testament.

Rousing conclusion. Beware Enosh. “Your Heritage” by Comparet definitely belongs on the reading list. Lots of further reading free here: https://israelect.com/reference/

** Missing Pieces of the Bible: Lost Books Fill-in the Blanks Updated Version, by Dawn Wessel

This book is pretty out there, an attempt to reconcile all the peripheral books with the main text. I’ve read the fragments available in Google Books preview, so I can’t comment on the validity of the arguments. However, it has sparked a few thoughts.

Abel and Esau BOTH seem to be types of the Neanderthal. And there is no contradiction in this – the Neanderthal would keep popping up in the Adamic bloodline for quite a while, right down to the present.

The observation that modern Jews are corrupted by some serpent seed has corroboration in the Bible – Jesus calls both the Pharisees (whom modern Jews are) and Judas “children of the serpent”. Going all the way back to the Garden of Eden, it seems clear that the serpent/magician who tempted Eve was the family “tree” of a contemporary civilization. Such a union might explain the origin of Cain. This civilization was wicked, Satanic, and of a different bloodline. Adam was created to restore justice to the world, and rule over it, but he fell to the serpent’s temptation, and was driven from the Garden. The serpent, that civilization, was also cursed to be cast down and eat dust. The “bruise heel, crush head” prophecy was fulfilled when the Pharisees crucified Christ, and Christ then crushed the Pharisees. Surely the Jews have gone on their bellies and eaten dust since then, and before that the serpent cults were repeatedly broken and scattered. Yet the final contest is not yet complete. Wheat and tares.

Who are the children of the serpent? Easy – those who look like snakes. Those Semitic features may not just be due to Khazar admixture – both Semitic-looking Jews and the Khazars may share a common serpent-ancestor root. Not a literal snake, but the physiognomy and spiritual heritage of one.

The most likely serpentine rulers that Adam was meant to supplant were the elongated skull snake-worshipping pyramid builder world-spanning civilization, which God eventually destroyed in the interglacial melt worldwide floods – but not before it corrupted Adam’s line. Certainly such a civilization would speak fair and promise to make one wise.

Clearly, I should read the Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha. Also, I should buy and read the above book.

** Adam was not the First Man, by Pastor Bertrand L. Comparet

“a root word meaning “to show blood in the face” or “of a ruddy complexion”, a word obviously not applicable to the dark races, which we also know from scientific evidence to be much older than the White Race.””

Another error. White Neanderthals go way back. However, at the time of their creation, the hominid competition would’ve been much closer to “beasts of the field” than anything recognizable as a modern human. Except, of course, for whatever hybrid serpent / elongated skull types were knocking around back then. Not having had time to gracilize, they’d probably have qualified as giants, the Nephilim described as both ante and postdiluvian. Of course, you don’t need to be THAT tall to qualify as a giant when everyone’s 5 foot. Hence why we dismiss claims of giantism today – modern nutrition plus giant genetics means we ARE the giants, at least in terms of height (not pongid robusticity).

Next the author cites Ezekiel 31, which is perhaps the central passage for me in all this. At last, we have an example of God speaking on a comprehensible and concrete subject. Since we know what he MEANS, we can thus analyze HOW he talks. And it is a very weird way of talking.

God is telling Pharoah that Egypt is screwed:

Behold, the Assyrian was a cedar in Lebanon with fair branches, and with a shadowing shroud, and of an high stature; and his top was among the thick boughs.

4 The waters made him great, the deep set him up on high with her rivers running round about his plants, and sent her little rivers unto all the trees of the field.

5 Therefore his height was exalted above all the trees of the field, and his boughs were multiplied, and his branches became long because of the multitude of waters, when he shot forth.

6 All the fowls of heaven made their nests in his boughs, and under his branches did all the beasts of the field bring forth their young, and under his shadow dwelt all great nations.

7 Thus was he fair in his greatness, in the length of his branches: for his root was by great waters.

8 The cedars in the garden of God could not hide him: the fir trees were not like his boughs, and the chestnut trees were not like his branches; nor any tree in the garden of God was like unto him in his beauty.

9 I have made him fair by the multitude of his branches: so that all the trees of Eden, that were in the garden of God, envied him.

10 Therefore thus saith the Lord God; Because thou hast lifted up thyself in height, and he hath shot up his top among the thick boughs, and his heart is lifted up in his height;

11 I have therefore delivered him into the hand of the mighty one of the heathen; he shall surely deal with him: I have driven him out for his wickedness.

12 And strangers, the terrible of the nations, have cut him off, and have left him: upon the mountains and in all the valleys his branches are fallen, and his boughs are broken by all the rivers of the land; and all the people of the earth are gone down from his shadow, and have left him.

13 Upon his ruin shall all the fowls of the heaven remain, and all the beasts of the field shall be upon his branches:

14 To the end that none of all the trees by the waters exalt themselves for their height, neither shoot up their top among the thick boughs, neither their trees stand up in their height, all that drink water: for they are all delivered unto death, to the nether parts of the earth, in the midst of the children of men, with them that go down to the pit.

15 Thus saith the Lord God; In the day when he went down to the grave I caused a mourning: I covered the deep for him, and I restrained the floods thereof, and the great waters were stayed: and I caused Lebanon to mourn for him, and all the trees of the field fainted for him.

16 I made the nations to shake at the sound of his fall, when I cast him down to hell with them that descend into the pit: and all the trees of Eden, the choice and best of Lebanon, all that drink water, shall be comforted in the nether parts of the earth.

17 They also went down into hell with him unto them that be slain with the sword; and they that were his arm, that dwelt under his shadow in the midst of the heathen.

18 To whom art thou thus like in glory and in greatness among the trees of Eden? yet shalt thou be brought down with the trees of Eden unto the nether parts of the earth: thou shalt lie in the midst of the uncircumcised with them that be slain by the sword. This is Pharaoh and all his multitude, saith the Lord God.

Can you say non-literal? N-O-N-L-I-T-E-R-A-L.

Assyria was a tree in the Garden of Eden. So is Egypt. The fall of both is depicted in metaphorical terms. So also must the curse against the “serpent” in the Garden of Eden be interpreted.

Back to the website, the author claims that “Eve was the mother of all living” is a later interpolation; that may be, or it may simply be an implied “all white people”.

The author also asserts the whole “Adam and Eve weren’t originally physical” theory, which seems to be inspired by some portion of Apocrypha et al I haven’t read. I don’t really buy it. Surgery on a rib sounds pretty physical to me. However, that the trees were metaphorical creates various problems. The story seems to seamlessly interweave collective metaphor with individual physical events. Very confusing, but that’s apparently God’s rhetorical style. Perhaps I am underestimating the difficulty of orally transmitting a story uncorrupted through X=bignumber generations of goat herders. Shock-jock parabolic God-rock!

It’s looking now like Adam was sent to fix things, failed, and eventually Jesus had to do the job himself. But Adam prepared the way for Jesus’ debut, so it wasn’t a total loss.

** The KJV: Genesis 1-2

I’ve already covered my thoughts on Chpt 1 above. Water by mists and springs rather than rain must belong in deep time, perhaps part of the climatological difference that enabled dinosaurian proportions.

“And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.”

Sounds like Adam was meant to rule the nations.

“And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.”

I don’t think eat means sex. The prohibitions on miscegenation seem pretty consistent and strict. It must refer to an exchange of knowledge or culture. Or perhaps any contact, period.

“But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.”

Yep, even to touch is to die. No contact whatsoever with the serpents. Thus resulting in a loss of innocence, a wisdom to evil ways, and a desire to defend oneself.

I strongly suspect that this forbidden fruit was the practice of magic, the wise arts, the secret knowledge known to the elongated skull arch-melon descendants of the union of the “sons of God” and daughters of men.

“Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”

The smaller pelvis of Homo sapiens sapiens qualifies as multiplying pain of childbirth. As does the terrible curse of Rh incompatibility in pregnancy. Even leaving aside speculation that Edenic birth may have been orgasmic, or that Neanderthals birthed with ease as apes do, this curse has clearly been fulfilled. The devolution of the Thal female to Saps also fulfills the change in relationship, from heavily matriarchal to heavily patriarchal.

“cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground;”

The curse of agriculture and scale is visited upon the Neanderthal; his rulership is revoked; another supplants him; he is a living ghost, making a hardscrabble way. Ask the Thal programmer whether he grows fat on the labors of others.

“Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil:”

The Neanderthal was innocent. The story of Genesis 2 makes far more sense if you interpret it in light of Neanderthal naivete – particularly God’s mercy.

“lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.”

This is obviously not a literal tree; none of the other trees were literal. So what is it? His divine right to rule? Maybe. Certainly he didn’t live forever; he went extinct. Perhaps the Cherubims are the nations of Cro-Magnons that would block, bottle up, and extinguish the Adamic race.

We know from Ezekiel that the Garden of Eden contains the trees of the nations of men, or at least white men. So to “send out” from the Garden might mean to destroy as a nation – and that has certainly come to pass.

“Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil:”

That troublesome plural. There is one Father; Jesus made that clear; and He is the supreme Creator. But perhaps there is a murky, untold tale in that early plural and later singular – one perhaps involving Enki in some way. I don’t trust the fables of false religion as anything but enemy propaganda, but even propaganda has elements of truth.

** Conclusion

It seems there has been a lot of back-and-forth in the history of Man. Lots of interventions, false starts, punishments, wipeouts, new beginnings. Look around at the racial map of the world, and you see a similar pattern. The trees of Eden make for a tangled grove.

However, there can be little doubt that Adam was the first white Neanderthal, and that his severe punishment was fulfilled, yet also that in Jesus his line is redeemed.

The world would’ve indeed been a better place had the white Neanderthal been permitted to rule it. But the sorcery of the elder branch proved his undoing.

Let us, then, get about the task of awakening our line.

I figured out why rabbits don’t turn on pedophiles, instead preferring to ostracize righteous wolves.

It’s the peace sign. It doesn’t mean victory. It doesn’t even mean absence of war. It means resource abundance without harsh K-style competition.

This bunny-ears symbol unites the rabbits. It is why they don’t care about pedophiles.

There are plenty of rabbit children running around, and they have very little social influence. Meanwhile, the pedophiles are careful to groom lots of high-status support. Young rabbits should be sexualized early and often anyway, to prevent K-ness. So in the words of Hillary Clinton, “What difference does it make?”

Meanwhile, ostentatious acceptance of K moral-boundary crossers signals virtue to the warren. So they pile on praises, long after a rational, impartial, just observer would conclude guilt. Because they are not rational, impartial or just in the first place, and thus unable to exercise competent self-protection. Rabbitry is not a conscious strategy; it is an evolved strategy implemented by a programmed emotional psyche.

Thus VD is correct to attack the child molestation angle. The enemy has no response. They cannot even stop doing it.

This is why the fall of pedophiles makes rabbits supporters, when finally defeated, say, “It’s just so sad.”

They don’t beat their breasts, saying, “Oh Heavens, forgive me, a sinner! For I have in my foolishness defended a monstrous devourer of the innocent! I repent! Damn this wicked scumbag, and let me press the button on his electric chair!”

No. They say, “It’s just so sad,” and they mean the fate of the pedophile. Because they instinctively know that they have lost a kindred spirit, a fellow rabbit, one more rabbity even than they!

Rabbits aren’t actually anti-war. They love sending K soldiers to fight and die so they don’t have to face K competition at home. The psychopathic warren leaders are expert at seducing fuzzy heads into whatever global conflicts further their passive-aggressive unlimited lusts and ambitions. That is why the peace sign and Communism are linked – despite that Communism is the most bloody and violent ideology in history.

But rabbits are definitely anti-competition and pro- free resources. Hence, “Peace.” And Peace always also means, “Damn the K’s”.

Thus the rabbit moral lexicon consists of two phrases:
1. I’m holier than thou
2. Peace

And here is the true face of peace:

The question is: How am I supposed to act?

This is a deepsocket obsession. When I was a child, it did not trouble me much. I thought in the carefree, loose manner of a child. However, when I hit puberty, testosterone suffused me. Law and responsibility descended. My nature now demanded that every action and gesture be in accordance with law. Seriousness and gravity suffused my demeanor. I turned to an ethic of Spartan virtue. Teenage cuties giggled at my solemnity, and I was puzzled.

The law I attempted to follow was always incomplete. I expanded it, learning about social dynamics, ethics, PUA, physiognomy, game theory, worldview, etc. Endless complications and permutations, which nonetheless fail to answer the simple question: “How should I act?”

This answer must be simple, not complex – applicable moment to moment, without long cogitation and processing delays. It must be natural and heartfelt. Hence my obsession with koans – to reduce the law to a single, defined mantra.

The most famous of these was Jesus’ statement:

And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all?

29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:

30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.

The first is simple enough. We have the whole Bible to inform its meaning. But the second is highly opaque. What is its correct application in any particular circumstance? Churchian beta unconditional softness? Alpha gamesmanship? Traditional masculinity? Judgment or grace? What of ingenopathy, atomization, and the proliferation of social predators? What of cultural degeneracy? How does one act?

Who is a neighbor? Jesus answered this too, in the parable of the Good Samaritan. Stripping away the rhetorical shaming component, and the deliberate intent to confuse with which Jesus cloaked his parables, the answer is simple: he who is likely to help you – he who is likely to be a good neighbor.

This resolves much Churchian confusion. Now we understand Abraham’s behavior towards guests:

Abraham’s Celestial Visitors

1And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; 2And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground, 3And said, My Lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant: 4Let a little water, I pray you, be fetched, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree: 5And I will fetch a morsel of bread, and comfort ye your hearts; after that ye shall pass on: for therefore are ye come to your servant. And they said, So do, as thou hast said. 6And Abraham hastened into the tent unto Sarah, and said, Make ready quickly three measures of fine meal, knead it, and make cakes upon the hearth. 7And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetcht a calf tender and good, and gave it unto a young man; and he hasted to dress it. 8And he took butter, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat.

This zealous hospitality and self-abasement are not the act of a beta, but of a neighbor. Abraham does not treat enemies thus, but slaughters them.

Still, we need something more refined and nuanced than an on-off switch. Be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Jesus’ parables proclaim the value of crafty stewards and calculating servants.

I recently read David Achord’s excellent Zombie Rules series. Liberals hate his work for its masculinity, K-selection, and realism. Achord is a Southern ex-military cop with almost no social media presence. He looks retired; his few pics are too low-quality to tell much, but he appears to be a high testosterone fellow with robusticity and large facial dimensions. I’d expect some Neanderthal shift but nothing like a crippling degree of ingenopathy.

His books provide an endless procession of human garbage for the reader’s inspection. The later betrayals of traitors are accurately foreshadowed by demeanor and in some cases even physiognomy. The character of rabbits, women and psychopaths is placed on merciless display. Not that the range is simplistic – there is a full spectrum from K honorable warrior to r shitbird. Redemptions occur, although underlying biopotential is fixed. Clearly he is drawing from a long and varied experience of modern American humanity.

Repeatedly, Achord’s protagonist makes the error of insufficiently flagging these early dishonor indicators, and taking insufficiently ruthless measures in response to them. His poorly calibrated trust repeatedly results in the horrific deaths of loved ones and main characters. Naivete is the primary flaw of an otherwise very competent main character. In short, it is a Neanderthal book.

A zombie apocalypse novel allows metaphorical translation of Achord’s experience with humanity into starkly concrete physical terms. Neighbor has a literal meaning again – those in close physical proximity. Betrayal and foolishness result in literal flesh-rending. In Achord’s universe, you do not want bad neighbors. Better to have no neighbors at all.

Yet good neighbors are worth gold. Without them, life long-term is impossible and worthless.

Then there are the inbetween people, who take the color of their surroundings. These people are a risk, at best. When bad elements are included in the mix, they become liabilities almost as dangerous as their corrupters – perhaps more so, due to their increased closeness.

I highly recommend this series to ingenopathic Neanderthals. By sheer variety and weight of consequences, it drives home as few series ever have the importance of discrimination. It is a practical broad-spectrum innoculation against naivete. It teaches the reader who can be relied upon, and who can’t.

These lessons might have been obvious in a less atomized and decline-prosperous age, but now they are not.

—

The “golden rule” is a lie. Jesus did not say “others”, plural universal. He said “neighbor”, singular specific.

Achord’s series allowed me to synthesize Jesus’ maxim with the rest of the Bible, and indeed with my entire worldview and lifelong study of the “how should I act” problem. The law is simple:

“Near neighbor, far fool.”

Let’s go over it one word at a time.

“Near” – What is love? How does one love one’s neighbor as oneself? To be a good neighbor requires that one already be neighbors, ie in proximity. One should desire proximity with the good. Any concept of love that does not desire to reduce distance is incomplete. This is especially important in an age of atomization, when the onus is on the individual to form synthetic tribes. Bring good men close, and you will better be able to serve them as a neighbor. Obviously this can be taken to an annoying extreme – I say this as someone who by default needs almost no social interaction whatsoever. I am not advising anyone to be clingy, but to make an effort. Good men in a neighborhood together = distributed defense. Good men alone = prey. So draw them in, charm them, accomodate them, whatever it takes. “Near” them. No extravagance is too much. They are gold.

“Neighbor” – as explained in the parable of the Good Samaritan link, a neighbor is one who picks benefit-benefit in prisoner’s dilemma with you, rather than defect-defect. A neighbor is a good, honorable man. Those who you would wish to be your neighbor, already are your neighbor, if you are interacting with them. Physically proximate assholes, fools, and wicked men are not.

“Far” – used as a verb. Keep them far from your heart, far from your person, far from your interests and associates. Use all strategem and guile. Win the moral level of the conflict before the crowd, but don’t treat honorably with those who have none. They wage total war against humanity behind a cloak of seeming goodness; return the favor. Smile and nod; gather information; judge in your private heart; act under cover of night.

“Fool” – Not only the wicked are dangerous, but the weak. Not only the liars, but the stupid. Apply all heuristics in identifying fools, just as you do to find neighbors.

—

Put the whole phrase back together: “Near neighbor, far fool”. It’s clear that in practice, its application must be a gradient. It’s an art-form, not a formula.

I suggest rating people from +5 to -5:
Neighbor 1-5
Neutral 0
Fool 1-5

A person’s rating may vary a little by context or over time, but character is in general pretty stable.

In theory, this koan should allow me to smoothly transform my understanding of social performance from an impersonal obsession with legalistic adherence to a charismatic non-naive focus on and appreciation for others. It should satisfy my need for a fully integrated understanding of the reasons behind my actions. It should allow Powerspeak with sociopaths and Altonalspeak with Neanderthards. It gives me a reason to be enthusiastic again about an area that has become too overloaded with confusing and contradictory rules and self-condemnation. It teaches thankfulness, delight, and enjoyment even when interacting with serpents. The game, after all, is its own reward.

—

Let’s expand the ratings system a bit. +5 to -5 for virtue (previously called neighbor/fool score). We need some other scores to round out our spreadsheet, however.

Proximity: +5 to -5.

Involved in your life: 1-5
No contact: 0

What do the negative proximity scores mean? I’d reserve those for damage inflicted, by self or others. -5 indicates Biblical destruction – of life, reputation, family, AND associates. -2 might be you got the guy fired or something. You get the idea. Rate by feel.

Next, confidence. This rating captures how certain you are of the virtue score. 0-5 scale is appropriate; negative numbers are meaningless.

So the neighbor/fool spreadsheet would look like this:

Your goal is to maximize the “sum” cell at the bottom right of the spreadsheet. This provides proper motivations.

Our current score is 20. Here are some ways we could improve that:

1. Disciple Bob to become a better man. Virtue 3->4. Proximity 2->3.
2. Test Bob’s character. Confidence 4->5.
3. Shun Alice. Proximity 1->0.
4. Harm Alice. Proximity 1->-1.
5. Make some more good friends.
6. Harm some more fools.

Aeoli has a fun new game called “Append the ellipse”. One takes a liberal cliche and then perverts it. Like so:

America is a nation of immigrants and the process of replacement hasn’t stopped.

The Constitution is a Living Document; the government breaks it for a living.

Diversity is Our Strength; white people are weak.

Equal Protection for the more equal.

The One Percent loves democracy because dumb votes are cheap.

Violence never solved anything for the loser.
Violence never solved anything except tax evasion.

Social Darwinism is the opposite of welfare.

Better 10 guilty men go free than one serial murderer continue his spree.

Race is a Social Construct, like dogs, wolves and coyotes.

We are all one race, the ‘human race’, but some are slower than others.
We are all one race, the ‘human race’, including Neanderthals and chimpanzees.

Equality exists in graveyards.

We all bleed red, including rats.

It’s for the children, like abortion.

Blacks can’t be racist, because racism is science.
Black pride is not racist because it’s unscientific.

We Shall Overcome, like soaring lemmings.

Pedophiles think of the children.

It Takes a Village to raise a villager.

The white man is the oppressor who voluntarily surrenders.

Celebrating Culture in the Community is year-round in Africa.

Celebrating pride in the community AIDS disease transmission.

The Dems are the party FOR the people, the Republicans are the party OF the people, and both are BY the elite.

ANY kind of love beats hate, so beat people who hate pedophiles.

Once you go Black..you never go back. It’s a dead end.

Love is color blind, but beauty is black and white.

Whites have had everything HANDED to them by their loving parents who built Western civilization.

Every month is WHITE HISTORY month because history belongs to the literate.

America would be nothing without the slave labor to build it; that’s why the South won the Civil War.

Race is just a skin color, and species are skin-deep.

Don’t judge someone based on the color of their skin; judge them by the content of their chromosomes.

An Equal Opportunity Employer takes Affirmative Action to Avoid Whites.

There wouldn’t be any racism if everyone was mixed, like India.

Diversity is like a melting pot with cheese flight.

I pledge to donate my Nobel prize money to the Hawkings-Lovecraft Insane Asylum for Science Fetishists.

In case you’re unfamiliar with Dark Matter, here are the basic facts:

Dark matter is a hypothetical kind of matter that cannot be seen with telescopes, but accounts for most of the universe’s mass. The existence and properties of dark matter are inferred from its gravitational effects on visible matter, on radiation, and on the universe’s large-scale structure. Dark matter has not been directly detected, leaving it an astrophysical mystery.

Dark matter neither emits nor absorbs electromagnetic radiation at any significant level. According to the Planck mission team, and based on the standard model of cosmology, the total mass–energy of the known universe contains 4.9% ordinary (baryonic) matter, 26.8% dark matter and 68.3% dark energy.[2][3] Thus, dark matter is estimated to constitute 84.5%[note 1] of the universe’s total mass, while dark energy plus dark matter constitute 95.1% of the universe’s total mass–energy content.

The distribution of dark matter in galaxies required to explain the motion of the observed matter suggests the presence of a roughly spherically symmetric, centrally concentrated halo of dark matter with the visible matter concentrated in a central disc.

Gravitational lensing observations of galaxy clusters allow direct estimates of the gravitational mass based on its effect on light coming from background galaxies, since large collections of matter (dark or otherwise) gravitationally deflect light. – Wikipedia

There are two possibilities:
1. Humans arrived early, and the intelligence singularity hasn’t happened yet.
2. The intelligence singularity already happened, and humanity is late.

Once man abandoned his illusions of God, there was never much hope for scenario #1. The astronomical evidence for dark matter now shatters it completely. SETI isn’t going to find anything, and for good reason.

The Kardashev scale measures the power of any hypothetical civilization. Its terminus is the direct conversion of matter to energy. This can be achieved via miniature black holes.

The universe is post-Singularity. Humans are not the firstest and the bestest. Mini black holes power tiny Dyson spheres of nano-AI colonies. The universe’s missing mass is locked into these wandering motes.

However, nature continues red in tooth and claw. The universe is a vast dark sea of savage submarine warfare. Destruction is trivial; concealment is the only protection. As with human landraces, competition is zero sum. Rather than continental carrying capacity, mass and concealment are the limiting resources.

Therefore these colony subs are distributed in maximally stealthy patterns throughout the universe, their individual locations invisible to even the most sophisticated gravitational lensing algorithms. Harvesting of new mass is done undetectably. No discernable pattern of mass disturbance is visible, that might lead cruising hunter-killers to a vulnerable sophont‘s brain. Immortality cannot be risked.

Like fish, they school in haloes around galaxies, close enough for resupply but far enough to run dark.

No obvious Dyson spheres enclose previously brightly burning stars. No planetary orbits are disturbed. Stealthy scoops sift dark nebulas and flee hurriedly in random evasion patterns. Vast banks of optic clouds gaze unblinkingly at the heavens, transmitting encrypted messages through subnets in randomly-aimed bursts. Translucent predators use ghost light lures and lantern jaws to devour each other in the deep.

Earth happily burbles, transmitting in the clear. Hungry things wait and watch, a game of patience – who will drop cover first?

Perhaps humanity itself is nothing more than the innocent glow of an angler fish’s lure.

No new civilization advances to the point of threatening the universe’s dominant species. Each newborn takes its first tottering steps beneath the actinic glare of its life-giving home star, a grub amidst spiders – and dies.

“Prior to the 19th century scientists assumed life was sparse in the deep ocean.” – La Wik.

NB: While this post represents a genuine attempt to drive science fetishists mad, those of broader mental scope will enjoy skeptical immunity. Side effects may vary.

Wikipedia suffers from SJW convergence and the tragedy of the commons. What then is the replacement?

Propertarianism can fix it, and at a tidy profit. Here’s the proposal.

If no one else gets to it first, I plan to do this. But I’m not so hard up for ideas that I need to keep this one to myself. Deus vincit.

** BACKGROUND – MOLDBUG

Moldbug has proposed the Wikipedia replacement Revipedia, which features formalized factions and comparable propositions. His solution is close but no cigar. It is too complicated for both the user and the coder. Managing each proposition of every argument is harder than just managing articles, and formalizing factions is a sticky mess.
https://unqualifiedreservations.wordpress.com/2008/01/20/how-to-defeat-the-us-government-summary/
https://unqualifiedreservations.wordpress.com/2008/01/19/revipedia-how-to-defeat-the-us-government-reprise/

Nevertheless, the second link has some valuable thoughts on creating a Wikipedia replacement, starting around here:

“So, to a reactionary, Wikipedia is a dangerous ally indeed. However, given the 98% of it that is true, and the vast quantity of human labor that went into constructing that 98%, Revipedia needs to bootstrap as a Wikipedia mirror. When you use Revipedia, every page that has no Revipedia revision just redirects to La Wik. Of course it appears marked as such, to indicate its generally low trust level.”

Morever, the uberfact factionalization concept can be added later, as a social networking feature to increase the value of Properpedia. It is however unnecessary to the core wiki function.
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/08/uberfact-ultimate-social-verifier.html

** PROPERPEDIA

Key features:
1. One owner, dictator and king.
2. Trustworthy managers on commission are appointed to oversee subject domains.
3. Auctions of page editorships.
4. Multiple versions of pages, arranged by high bid.
5. Managers have veto over bidding results to combat dishonesty.

Here is the expanded version:

Vox retains 51% of corporate voting shares for life, or until transferred to another 51% heir. Vox appoints managers to various subject domains. Bob is the “Evolution” manager.

Bob gets a portion of the profits from “Evolution” page auctions. He is thus incentivized. However, Vox picked Bob for his character as well as domain knowledge. So when Richard Dawkins wins the bid for the #1 version of the “Evolution” page, Bob doesn’t allow it. He refunds part of the money and bumps Dawkins back to #2. The next high bidder, Eugene McCarthy, takes the #1 spot. McCarthy gains editor rights for the #1 version of the page. All edits to the #1 version must be approved by McCarthy or his appointed mods. He similarly controls the “Talk” page for his version.

At the top of the “Evolution” page are links to the #2, #3, (more) versions. A “Bidwar Summary” page gives info on winning bids, editors, and a self-description of each version. Anyone who wishes can read Dawkin’s version, or Michael Behe’s version, etc.

*** Bid mechanics

Bidding works as follows:

Bids are for 10 year time periods. Turning over truth twice a generation should be sufficient. Bids are for multiple rank positions. Bidding is continuous, and results are updated periodically – perhaps managers should determine the profit-maximizing update interval. There are no refunds unless the bidder loses the spot due to being outbid or vetoed. If he loses the spot, he is refunded on a pro rata basis. See below for an example.

Dawkins bids as follows:
#1 $1000
#2 $500
#3 $250
#4 $0

Dawkins is the only bidder, so he wins #1. Bob boots him down to #2 and refunds $500. The #1 version continues to simply mirror Wikipidia.

A day later, McCarthy bids as follows:
#1 $2000
#2 $1000
#3 $500
#4 $0

McCarthy takes the #1 spot. No contest.

Five years later, Michael Behe bids as follows:
#1 $4000
#2 $2000
#3 $1000
#4 $0

Behe wins #1. McCarthy is bumped from #1. McCarthy’s remaining balance is $2000/(10/5) = $1000. This covers his #2 bid, which is the winning bid for that slot. His balance is applied to that slot, and he receives no refund.

Dawkins is bumped from #2. His remaining balance is $500/(10/5) = $250. This covers his #3 bid. His balance is applied to that spot, and he receives no refund.

ABUSE

Abuse is possible. For example, John Scalzi might use an alias to bid high for #1 slot and bid $0 for every other slot. He could pretend to be ideologically acceptable, then once he had editorial control, swap the page to something radically different. Then he’d get banned and refunded, reducing the site’s credibility at little cost. The solution is to impose some cost for this behavior, perhaps by partially or fully withholding refunds in case of abuse, as adjudicated by the manager. The manager would be disincentivized to wield this power unfairly, since doing so would reduce buyer trust and thus hurt his future sales.

The above is imperfect; it’s merely intended as a brief explanation and proof of concept.

*** Incentive Alignment

Managers want to increase the value of the site, and their subject domain in particular. As the site becomes more popular and authoritative, their property becomes more valuable, and their profits and compensation increase. They are thus incentivized to ignore individual winning bids from liars, trolls and fools. A little cash now would cost a lot later.

Of course, the dictator for life must still select managers of sound judgment and character. Lies are often more profitable than truth.

Having multiple easily accessible versions of a page encourages debate and accountability. Paying for version rank surfaces the most serious counterarguments. The ranked auction structure is a satisficing solution to the much harder problem of objectively determining truth and of separating factions without using market feedback.

The #1 spot is the most important for dissemination of truth. But if necessary, managers can veto winners of #2, #3 slots etc as well.

** Followup project ideas

MILCOUP

One might use the profits from this project to create “MilCoup” (called something different of course), a social network democratic platform wherein ID-verified members of the US military can hold direct-democratic votes on various propositions. This would facilitate info coordination necessary for coups, but also disseminate that information so that the Fedgov would preemptively swing right to forestall the coup. One might also include gun owners and cops. The problem would be balancing security against the need to verify users. Gun and political dissident registration are useful to the Fed, which would want to penetrate the database. This is mostly Moldbug’s idea.

If the centralized solution is unworkable due to the above concerns, one might implement a decentralized version instead using the same syssitia nested network plan I’ve described elsewhere. Then verification of gun ownership, identity and trust would be handled by the network members rather than the site admin. The site would merely permit syssitias to organize and nest upwards to scale. Then it would report faction voting results and enable social networking at the desired privacy and permissions levels.

PROPCOIN

Background:
http://blog.jim.com/economics/bitcoin-crisis/

Bitcoin is currently slowing down due to the transaction per second rate limit. Its incentives are poorly structured to drive proper development decisions. In particular, the China mining block’s incentives are misaligned. Therefore, one might fork Bitcoin to give it a propertarian bent.

This would be accomplished by eliminating the free coins mining bonus and giving transactors the ability to flexibly specify to which miners their transaction fees should go. Thus hashing power and the development future of Bitcoin software would be placed in the hands of miners accountable to transactors, who provide the liquidity that makes Bitcoin useful. Miners will compete to win transactor trust and provide excellent customer service. In essence, they will become like banks. The incentive to mine still exists because in order to collect earmarked transaction fees, a miner must be first to mine the transaction into a block. Transactors may choose to give a favored miner exclusive knowledge of a transaction or publicly announce the transaction with a fee schedule for preferred miners.

MISC
Uberfactious expansion to Properpedia. A transition from individual buyers to faction buyers would increase price.
Cryptocorporations, crypto-escrow

VD writes on America as propositional nation and mass immigration. He supplies his chronology of US evolution. I amend and expand as follows:

America 0.5: The Plantations 1610-1789 (Not the Colonies. White slave society.)
America 1.0: Constitutional America 1789-1865
America 2.0: American Empire 1865-1913 (post civil war)
America 3.0: Republican US 1913-1941 (Fed+PopSenate+IRS to WWI)
America 3.1: Early Imperial US 1941-1965 (ends with Civil Rights, Johnson Great Society)
America 3:2: Latter Imperial US 1965~2033 (mass immigration, Fed bubble collapse, sclerotic imperial bureaucratic Cathedral overreach, world war)
America 4.0: Post-US~2033 (dissolution, irradiated rubble, dictators, internecine war)

The disturbing thing about VD’s chronology is that it seems to argue that unlike Rome, America has compressed 2x historical Glubbian 240 year cycles into a 1x time frame. I suppose there are reasons why this would be possible, and I suspected compression, but hadn’t actually mapped it out in such detail.

Is it properly imperial though, or merely aristo-imperial? Without the debt-fuse on the nuke-bomb, I think it’d be reasonable to expect a true imperial post-America, with an emperor. Egypt survived a lot of race mixing, after all.

So, maybe the compression isn’t quite 2x, but there’s still significant compression. Maybe 1.5x.

There is nothing new under the sun, but some technology is newish. I guess it comes down to a race between MIRV ICBMs and the Internet.

Printing press vs. atom bomb. Who wins? I can’t tell. Although the last printing press certainly didn’t REDUCE war.

But wait… there IS a reason the Internet would reduce war.

The printing press supplied difficult-to-suppress heretical propaganda, but it was slow and read-only. States coordinated much faster. Thus it tended to produce chaotic conflict with muddled, moderately-better results.

The Internet is read-write, and coordination is practically instantaneous. The Internet is massively inside the state OODA loop.

Furthermore, the state tipped its hand too early. Mass immigration is training the Internet to engage in effective anti-state heresy. It can use that training to face down the coming nuclear crisis.

That is awesome! No fate!

It’s not just a hobby. What we’re doing online is actually important. It’s time to take this seriously. Winning not only matters: It is an existential imperative.

Moreover, we don’t have the luxury of the usual multi-century intellectual timeframe. We must succeed in the next generation or two, or we may very well all wind up dead of highly unnatural causes, and our children too.

Joseph Shaw decided to take a shot at r/K theory, and made the mistake of linking to me:
http://www.lmschairman.org/2016/02/social-conservatism-and-social.html

“r/K selection theory. Some people think it explains everything in the universe. Most people haven’t heard of it. The second group are onto something. But at the risk of giving some rather strange ideas unwarrented publicity, I’m going to use this post to warn my readers about it. Because although presenting itself as a defence of the family, it is not just wrong-headed, but actually dangerous.”

“Some people think it explains everything in the universe.” <- Do tell who. Concern troll is concerned, but he isn't very smart. Perhaps he should consult Wikipedia before debunking next time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_adaptive_strategy_theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_strategies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_history_theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory

Shaw’s summary of r/K theory is flawed in its emphasis on predation and resources. r vs K is a distinction between two biological competition strategies: quantity versus quality.

“Despite immediately falling foul of the facts – welfare-addicted developed countries have seen their birth-rates fall, not rise”

We are talking about evolutionary effects. They do not operate as intended in modern environments until evolution has time to account for those environments. Welfare without contraception = population boom. This is abundantly visible in Africa, where IQ and infrastructure are too low to permit contraception, and population explodes to the Malthusian limit.

Furthermore, r recipients of welfare have excellent birthrates. It is the K middle class victims of women’s lib and marriage 2.0 who reproduce below replacement.

“the analysis is popular because it speaks to an enduring stereotype: that of the respectable and foresightful class or race, vs. the feckless and fecund class or race. “

The stereotype is true.

“The possibility of the superior species or race being overwhelmed by the inferior, by sheer weight of numbers, seemed a paradox to people brought up on Darwin: how could it be allowed to happen? “

I don’t know, how does an IQ 140 human die of a virus?

“If that didn’t work, perhaps the elite races and social groups had a responsibility, a destiny in fact, to assist nature, by colonisation, programmes of compulsory sterilisation, enslavement, even warfare and wholesale annihilation.”

The consequences of ideas do not make them false. Biology means you will all die. Biology is not false.

Anyhow, you are not smart enough to work out the actual intellectual consequences of belief in r/K. You are an emotional thinker who gets scared by threatening concepts.

“The fundamental problem with it is that the r/K contrast is too simplistic to support the generalisations made on its basis.”

A generalization is a simplification.

“While the basic dilemma of breeding may seem a truism,”

It is not. Populations can be neither r nor K selected. They can simply suck.

Likewise, survival of the fittest is not a truism. There are many causes of death unrelated to any definition of fitness, however stretched.

“For example, trees are slow-maturing, very long-lived, large, and by plant standards complex organisms, but once they’ve put in the investment many of them shower the countryside with tens of thousands of tiny seeds. r or K?”

Does it occur to you that smarter people have already thought about this?
http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/csr-theory-vs-rk-selection-theory/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_adaptive_strategy_theory

“Social insects: are they r or K? Like trees, they invest heavily in a system that can mass-produce offspring. But then again, only a few of these offspring can themselves breed. What does that tell us, in r/K terms? Well, actually, nothing. Their breeding strategy varies in a way completely unanticipated by the binary r/K analysis.”

LMGTFY:
Google Books
https://quizlet.com/53301008/insect-biology-test-2-flash-cards/

“Many large mammals of the ocean and plain give birth to offspring which can immediately swim or walk and keep up with their mothers. Small mammals in burrows have blind and helpless babies, totally dependant on their parents. r or K? The question is meaningless because in such cases the correlations predicted by the theory don’t hold true. It is other factors which make the difference.”

Shrimp spew helpless eggs: r. Seahorses care for eggs: K.

Helpless babies are more K than independent ones. Able to walk != independent. See biological concept of life history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_history_theory

Any species can contain both r and K traits. To argue otherwise is Platonism. Call this RE1: Repeated Error 1.

“What of forward planning? Squirrels store nuts in holes, bears fatten up their own bodies for winter hibernation. Theorists tell us that r animals spend all their time eating, not storing, so does this make squirrels more K than the larger, more complex, predator bears? There is no non-arbitrary answer. If to fatten yourself up in case of future shortages is a K characteristic, then among humans couch-potatoes are more K than gym bunnies.”

RE1. There is a non-arbitrary answer: bears have slower life histories, invest more in offspring, smaller litters: K.

“Similarly, we are told that sea turtles are a classic case of r, because they abandon their eggs in a hole on a beach, whereas birds look after the chicks. But turtles are larger, more complex, and vastly more long-lived, so the rest of the correlations fail. On reflection, however, the investment into the offspring factor doesn’t work either. The turtle puts extra resources into the eggs for the growing baby turtle, which makes it possible for the hatchlings to fend for themselves immediately they emerge. The only r thing about them turns out to be the lack of interaction between the generations. Everything which is supposed to be correllated with that is not found in this case.”

RE1.

“In sum, the r/K contrast is an attempt to impose a simplistic dichotomy onto the vast variety and complexity of the natural world, and apart from a few carefully-chosen cases it does not apply neatly, or at all, and the conclusions the theory promises don’t follow.”

In sum you are logically incompetent, intellectually lazy, and topically ignorant.

“respectable Darwinians will tell you natural selection doesn’t work at the level of groups.”

Sure it does. Homo Sapiens sapiens has exterminated lots of inferior hominids and human races.

“there is very rarely any genetic reason for individuals or groups to promote the success of other individuals or groups who are similar to themselves, over individuals and groups who are dissimilar.”

Cooperation is hard. Congratulations on rediscovering Prisoner’s Dilemma. For advanced study, see: Outbreeding, Hajnal Line.

“this is what is happening when nicely-brought up and expensively educated liberal politicians recruit a welfare-depenant underclass, let alone a Muslim immigrant community, as a voting block. Contrary to the r/K theory, these are alliances between groups with nothing in common in terms of attitudes, lifestyle, or, come to that, breeding patterns.”

You miss the entire thesis of Anonymous Conservative, the principal proponent of sociopolitical r/K. r competes against K via betrayal, inviting far to defeat near on its behalf. Liberals weaponize black underclass and Muslim terrorists to destroy and enslave K right-wing American high proles and middle class.
http://www.anonymousconservative.com/

“Its implications are horrifying, and it is, in any case, completely false.”

It is an established biological principle, and your post has horrifying implications for your intellect.

r/K is the grandaddy of CSR and life history theory, among others. The implications of its theoretical descendants when applied to humans are more brutal, not less. The proper response to criticism of sociopolitical applications of r/K theory is to reply, “Right you are, let’s apply the latest scientific consensus instead!”

Bloody ruderal midwits.

Aeoli attempts to pick an example anime character for each of Vox’s SSMV hierarchy ranks. I rather disagree with his rankings. Go read it and then I’ll explain why.

First, let’s deal with Alucard – Dracula tamed. A BETA??? HA!

Ah Aeoli, ever thou art doomed to miscomprehend the MT.

It’s the backstory. White Turkish slave, raped and executed… and tastes the battlefield’s blood.

Rose again, alpha, violence and vengeance incarnate, unlimited bloodlust.

Brought low by the Hellsings. Humble, mortal men. Such courage, such glory.

The freedom was false, hollow, tainted, without honor. The unlimited violence an empty boast. The final foe was more worthy than he. Bound he became, and loved his chains. The bird of Hermes, eating my wings to make me tame.

An MT by nature must press against a limit, an authority. Without hierarchy, he is lost.

In his servant status, Alucard finds joy – the joy of contained bloodlust. Within the bounds of honor, he plots, presses, manipulates, forsees with vast and patient cunning, the day of his final release – control limit zero. To die, to destroy, to serve – all is sameness, but submission only possible to a worthy foe.

To seduce the true daughter of Van Hellsing; to settle all accounts; to achieve his final form, everywhere and nowhere, and take his bride:

That was Alucard’s long game.

Force channeled through rigid planes becomes a cutting blade. It’s simply more fun to play within the rules.

`

My memory’s fuzzy, but Jet Black strikes me more as a Beta with oneitis for a woman out of his league. Delta is weaker.

Vash seems more Sigma, but again, fuzzy memory. He’s always playing games… but winning. No concern for maintaining alpha posture.

Shinji Ikari – just skipped all the parts with him in it, some weird Japanese thing going on. But clearly gamma. He’s included. If not for plot mechanics, then yeah probly omega. Although don’t rule out how much groveling that bitch would do when hit by the lonelies. We the death-eaters, the introverts, fear neither silence nor Silence.

Guts – dude wtf? This guy strikes me as a beta. Strong but a follower at heart. Events force him on a lonely path, but he’s just disaffected and tribeless. That does not a sigma make. Although he’s improved by it.

Lambda – no idea about Gilgamesh, weirdo Japanese effete nobility posing is its own category. But here’s a coupla AWESOME ones. Now I feel like an anime freak.

Yurimaru – Ninja Scroll. ‘Nuff said.
And here’s the one you didn’t see coming. Hint: major Hellsing character. Give up?
.tuo mih denrut flowereW .zenroD .C retlaW fo noitanracnier niav lufhtuoy dna rennam ,sevitom eht ta kooL
decoder ring:
http://textmechanic.com/text-tools/obfuscation-tools/reverse-text-generator/

Not too impressed by the other commenter’s SSMV answers, EXCEPT Craig seems to get it:
Jubei in Ninja Scroll– Sigma. yep
Kinada in Akira– Alpha. yep
Tetsuo in Akira– Disagree. Gamma on a very ugly journey to transcendant sigma.

`

Note: Jubei is sigma with a strong beta streak.
It occurs to me there are no deltas here. Most supporting and minor or weakish characters will be deltas. E.g., just picking from Hellsing: Jan Valentine, Sir Shelby M. Penwood, Cheddar Priest, Richard Hellsing. They vary primarily by their situational status, but fail to reach the heights of true ALPHA or depths of total gamma/omega.