Parents as Stars, Children as Supports

I don’t mind the woman being a realistic bitch. I don’t mind the man being an unrealistic cuck. I don’t even mind the art standards of western webcomics and all the words words words words words.

What really grinds my gears is the portrayal of the kid.

I absolutely refuse to believe any kid would respond to that sequence of events in that way. They’re not that stupid. Or more importantly, unlike ~mature~ adults, they call shit as they see it. The stated intent was obviously not fulfilled. There’s innate physical truths which are immediately observable and understood by instinct, stronger than any understanding by words: if you assume a specific physical stance and are moving forward and then, for no discernible physical reason, start going in reverse, then obviously something is wrong.

At “best” the kid’s response would be “oh… okay”. Wouldn’t be uncommon for questions to start appearing. If it was a ballsier kid they’d just voice their disappointment. But a “Wow! You got serious game dad!“? I’d be really worried.

There’s screwing with visual beauty standards ala “tumblr art”, and then there’s… whatever this is. I want to say “logical beauty standards” but it’s not really logic. There’s a natural order to the world that’s understood innately by everyone and this screws with it at a primal level. I don’t even like kids, but they act a certain way and can see certain things, a way which is useful to everyone else in its own right.

And this comic says that unique insight of kids is “Hey everyone, my shit doesn’t stink!“.

I’ve heard the idea before, but it didn’t really hit until seeing this “comic” that this parent generation is the first one where baby pictures are more important than the actual baby. All the kindergarteners holding up signs about abortion or trump or immigration were just whatever to me, I suppose, because in their minds they’re just holding up the sign mommy told them to. But a comic depicting “the whole situation” with no direction or prepping beforehand… maybe I’m just stupid. But better late than never.

And something I’ll never do is making children the supporting cast for their parents. If I made something where a bunch of adult women drooled over my dick, either 1) it would be taken as an obvious joke, except for the part where I’m a pervert, or 2) it would be taken seriously and I’d be delusional, as well as a pervert. I wouldn’t be able to do that with less-than-adult women. People take children seriously. As they should.

But not seriously enough, it seems.

If you had asked her if she wanted to raise a transvestite she’d have said no– she wants a child free of stereotypes– because there are stereotypes of boys and girls but not of boys who dress like girls. That mixed logic reveals the true intent of her “gender-neutral” project. It isn’t for the kid, it is for her. If it wasn’t for her, you wouldn’t have heard about it. Wasn’t the whole point not to call attention to the gender? Oh, I had it backwards, the whole point was entirely to focus on the gender. Sigh. The main character in this story is herself. The kid is supporting cast. He is not a person, he is a blog topic.

“”Did you see that wonderful melodrama, Stella Dallas with Barbara Stanwyck? She has a daughter who wants to marry into the upper class, but she is an embarrassment to her daughter. So, the mother – on purpose – played an extremely vulgar, promiscuous mother in front of her daughter’s lover, so that the daughter could drop her, without guilt. The daughter could be furious with her and marry the rich guy. That’s a more difficult sacrifice. It’s not “I will make a big sacrifice and remain deep in their heart.” No, in making the sacrifice, you risk your reputation itself. Is this an extreme case? No, I think every good parent should do this.” […]

She is doing the exact opposite: sacrificing her child’s reputation, subjecting him to potential ridicule and god knows what else, not for his benefit but in order to promote her own identity. It’s not the gender neutrality that’s going to mess this kid up, though it might; but being raised by parents who are using their kid as something other than an end in himself. As was said in a movie I hope has no parallel here: this isn’t going to have a happy ending.

A self-aggrandizement parent comic for self-aggrandizing parents.


Purpose and Loyalty (Mankind)

Thomas Hobbes wrote that when men live without fear of a common power, they live in a state of “warre.” In warre, every man is against every other man.

Hobbes’ idea of warre is interesting on a theoretical level, but his warre of all against all is not the state of nature for men. It’s natural for a man to look after his own interests, but those interests drive men together – quickly. A loner has no one to ask for help, no one to watch his back, no one to guard him when he sleeps. Men have a greater chance of survival together than they do apart. Men have always hunted and fought in small teams. The natural state of warre is ongoing conflicts between small gangs of men.

– Jack Donovan, The Way of Men

All the stories are always about one or a handful of central characters in relation to a team. The team can have a uniform distribution of importance or be structured in a tall hierarchy, be fighting dragons or simply going through high school, but in the end the story treats them all as one cohesive unit. They are all knowns – hair color, personality, endurance to stress – even if it is true they aren’t exactly the best. Everything else in the world is just that: everything else. Sometimes, they have no faces. Sometimes, they have no names. In the end, what is important is that they are not treated as part of the group. They are treated instead as walking questionnaires, or theoretical scenarios. This is why the introduction of a new character is always a significant event, it makes clear the differentiation between the “us” and the “them”. Everyone who is not on the team is not, as the messier conventional use of language likes to call it, “a person”.

Today, nobody has a team.

It is why we always have to talk about “team building”, and how in “the workplace” it’s “now” the standard that we work in “small groups”. We all work in small groups, we always do. But we don’t recognize this anymore because outside of the fact that we are working with 3-10 other people, none of the other factors apply. More likely than not, you’re never going to see them again – there’s a bajillion of us running around doing these same things, why talk with these guys and get to know them in particular? What’s the chance that they are actually different? More likely than not, you’re never going to have to complete any task like this ever again. This is accentuated by the school bell schedule nature of our society: 9-3 if you’re 10 years old, 8-4 if you’re 30 years old. Every hour you switch to something completely different, every three or so hours you get a break, and every year, all the stuff you’ve done is wiped and for naught. So why bother getting really good at anything?

There’s no I in team. So, why does it matter?

It was once true that if less than every last member succeeded in fulfilling his part correctly, it was almost certain death. Imagine you and your team of prehistoric men are going hunting and the target is a large mammal. A single one of failed to do his job correctly. You’re all now injured, if not some of you gravely so. The only-bruised of you can go out hunting in a couple of days. The cuts and concussions can go back out in a week or two. Any bones broken and your hunting ability is reduced forever, and with it your physical ability to do anything from simply guard at night to even picking fruit. And all of you – with whatever women and children you have – need to eat. Every day. If more than a couple of you were injured past a certain point, it would spell certain death for your group. You had to get it right. Somone got it right. They identified people and understood them accurately, that is to say, put them in their place. Women do this. Children don’t do that. Those unable to hunt, create something which makes our lives easier. Don’t associate with those people who look like that and are from over there. Eat these berries not those, circle the predator don’t run at it.

Today, there is no certain death because food and medicine are plentiful and everywhere. There is also no way to communicate the idea that death is a risk to someone else. If someone fails, you can’t kick them out. You can’t insult them. You can’t beat them up or break whatever bauble was the cause of their distraction and failure. Because that’s “unreasonable”. Because focusing (getting mad) and correcting issues (getting rid of leechers and obstacles) are “counterproductive”.

As if the bush beating we do can anywhere near compare the creation of all we know today from fires and bone clubs in damp caves.

When I finished my exam middle of the day Wednesday, I had the pleasant surprise of one of my friends introducing to me an idea from one of his friends: we can build a steam engine. Pretty simple stuff, boil water to push a piston and convert that into mechanical energy. It’s a little more difficult to build and calculate, but at least it’s something. It’s not like the wood sanding I was assigned to do at the university-sponsored plane building team, it wasn’t something completely unaccomplishable by my means like the Jeep engine block deconstruction, and it certainly wasn’t just sitting around studying. I had forgotten we had a machine shop at our disposal on campus (technically we have to hope there’s a machine we want to use open, but it’s basically free access to >$10,000 machines) so that solved a lot of the problems, and outside of that he simple materials can be obtained for a paltry cost. It was actually something I could do that would be cool. Both of them were animated about it, so I felt relieved I’d met more than one person who wanted to do something.

And then, I proceeded for the next day and a half going back to doing nothing but sleeping and playing video games. Because why not? Granted, I probably would have spent an hour or two extra on both of those things anyways because I was burned out, but I went the whole way simply because I could. There’s somebody that’s going to do something for me now. If I don’t do something, they’ll take care of it, and by extension if I don’t do anything, they’ll take care of everything. I didn’t think this consciously, but it’s effectively what crossed my mind. In terms of the goal, there is no difference between apathy, stupidity, and evility. This hilariously got turned around yesterday when I went to Communication discussion and attempted to find out what everyone had been doing for our presentation over the past week, and discovered that 3 of the 5 had done absolutely nothing. I really couldn’t get mad at them. Though I had yet to meet up and we had yet to start up anything on the steam engine, it was what I had literally just been doing before I went off to that class. For the steam engine, I was not one of the leaders, so what did I care? For the Communication presentation, they were not one of the leaders, so what did they care? (Today was when we were supposed to meet for just an initial overview of the engine. I went, no one showed up.)

If you can get to the end purpose just hitchhiking on the back of someone capable enough, someone who will not (for whatever reason) throw you off for being unproductive, isn’t that enough? If in the end everyone only really remembers the starring actor, why bother to do anything except get out of that one man’s way when he tells you to stand aside? If success is essentially binary with a seemingly infinitely long plateau of diminishing returns for effort, is there any point in chipping in some of your own energy? This is the state of all purpose today in postscarcity. There is no point in doing anything but eating, shitting, sleeping, and masturbating, because “everything will be taken care of.” Except the actual men and women, who are nowhere to be seen.

As is also true when none of the actors show up to the play, the show does not go on. Or perhaps it’s closer to everyone showed up to cast for the star, and no one accepted the support roles. Better yet, everyone showed up to be an extra because they’d get to talk about it on facebook and twitter and get several thousand likes for no real work or skill,

And no one wanted to lead the rest.

Thomas Hobbes’ state of nature of every man against every other man perhaps would be what happens in a scarce world, but in a nonscarce one it’s the exact opposite: every man couldn’t give less of a shit about every other man. Why wage war against that other guy over there? Isn’t that going to cost a lot of energy and time? Don’t risk it, just go back to smoking weed and drinking alcohol and wanking off. He’s not worth it. Nothing is worth it. Or, everything is worth it. What does it matter how words are used, take it easy dude. Chill out. We don’t need leaders, we are all our own leaders. We’ll form groups every so often, sure, but hey, it’s just work. It’s not life. It’s not who we are. Social rules, roles, and scripts are for people of previous generations, unenlightened and people who haven’t woken up. Calm down. Everything is going to be okay.

And then these same people turn around and wonder why this culture has motivation and self-esteem problems.

In one line, this following picture is why people today join groups and are part of movements:


Being goal-driven is great and all, but we are not free to choose. “We”. As in, we the bipedal apes reading English from this blog on the internet from a computer in the year 2012. Fundamentally, human beings are engines. Men are a means to labor, they are labor machines; women are a means to reproduction, they are baby machines. We are pieces on a board, and we were assigned certain attributes when we arrived into existence. One of these attributes is a goal, a “meaning to life”. That goal is reproduction. Civilization – everything from its material to its social structure to its social rules (laws and culture) and its philosophy – exists because our ancestors found all across the world that those things were a decent overall plan to have more offspring. But today in this “postindustrial” society where everything is taken care of, that is no longer a goal. Instead we measure in terms of data, profit, or material wealth. By optimizing for these items and paving over our tendencies, strengths, and ultimately needs and desires, we make for things which are not us to replace us in pursuit of those goals. It is why we don’t see receptionists as human, why there is a universal hate for HR and PR more than any particular group’s despisal of some specific race or sexual orientation. It is why no matter how hard ideological groups try, they can never match the solidarity of armies. It’s because those things are not human. We have lost a sense of us, and thus increasingly everyone is becoming part of them.

We are progressing ourselves into obsolescence and into extinction. “We”. As in the small groups of 3~10, the most efficient unit size of our kind.

The team is the true individual unit. Alternatively,

No one exists without and outside of their team.

This is a true statement. There is a balance somewhere between the need for group action because several minds are better than one mind, and between the need to keep others out for the sake of efficiency  at achieving objectives and unit cohesion. The “team” size happens to be it. They were right about humans being social animals – but they were wrong about how social. Anyone without their head up their ass will admit they don’t really know more than 150 people, and will readily agree that any team over 20 is due for some cuts because coordination to action is simply more efficient with less people. This is hardly a rigorous logical proof, but evolution and the laws of physics weren’t shown via mathematical derivations. They were observed, and time after time it was correct. It is a law given to us by birth that we cannot simply all “rise up as one” if “we” are 300 million people. Indeed, the physical action of rising up as one is seen nowhere except at graduations and in the military when an officer is on deck. For graduations, it is a one time action. For the military, even they don’t have it down completely.

A team can rise as one – consistently. It is on this level where people can truly know others as humans, where history’s every last detail sticks and is learned. Everything from their thought patterns to their favorite food, from their sleeping habits to their maximum and total energy output is a known. Here there are no “I don’t know, maybe Y would do X”, it’s either “Yeah, X was Y’s doing” or “It is impossible for Y to have done X”. There exists confidence in one’s reading of another’s abilities, their probable actions, and most importantly, confidence that what needs to get done will get done (this confidence exists neither at the individual nor societal level). There are deviations and vices on account of single men that are mitigated, or optimally negated, on the level of the team. In a high stakes situation – of great success or great failure in one stroke – where one person making a single mistake could cost the entire thing, a team can cover for those faults and get that one person back up to speed faster than most would think realistically possible. In any situation where one person attempting to achieve a goal only has so many hours and so much knowledge and so much stress, a team can reduce the costs and multiply the total action by specializing roles and keeping morale high.

Because this increased level of power is so pronounced, people are inclined to invest more energy and time into it. Not just any team, just that one they happened to be in that one time and are still in today. They don’t simply join random teams for whatever objectives, because objectives change and every time it or the group changes, it’s a blank slate all over again. Their team, however, already has all the history and background built up. Their team is simply more efficient. Both individuals and large groups reliably lose to well-coordinated small groups in any given situation and any given goal, because

The team is the only structure where honor is king. By extension,

The team is the only structure where discipline is produced.

Something culture doesn’t value today is a low turnover rate. It was the original, the tradition, but we have abandoned it for the pursuit of using a certain word that starts with the letter P more. Today, corporations and governments measure their turnover rates in months and years. In so and so many months and years, this percentage of our employees will be completely different. I am unsure how it operates in third world countries, but in second world countries like America, these turnover rates are high not because people are getting shot or getting so sick because they can’t work, it’s because people don’t care. There’s more money elsewhere, I’m going there instead.  There’s a nice mall or nice weather somewhere else, bye bye Company, it was nice being here for 2 years and knowing only two people out of the thousand people in the building.

There is one type of group that still operates with low turnover rates in mind, and they have amazing capabilities. Rather than measuring turnover in months and years, they measure it in terms of generations. How many generations has your family been part of this brotherhood? It is the organized criminals. The mafias, the triads, the yakuza, all of these groups have and rely on low turnover rates. Indeed, any group which has this succeeds enormously. The monarchs of the past had loyal servants and an orderly culture. Can the leaders of countries today boast the same thing? People of the same guild or the same town used to be ready to take up arms to defend a financial partner or a community member. How common is that in “The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave”?

It is this deferral and loyalty at this most basic level which serves as the foundation for every social standard. Today, we have an amalgam of various bitchers about identity (LGBT) or privilege (feminism) or oppression (NAACP) or hate speech (SPLC, ADL), but it’s important to note that none of these are freestanding structures. They are supported by the rest of us, treating these mother fuckers like a good old friend who’s simply pointing out something we did incorrectly on a sleep deprived day. Imagine, instead, that society had nothing but this kind of people. Victim/Slave mentality everywhere. Every large scale interaction would look like Congress. Every small scale interaction would look like Customer Service. Nothing would get done. Everyone would complain. Civilization would collapse back to the stone age.

We’re not there yet. This blog still exists, and we can still talk shit. But the all-inclusive politically correct wave of the void has been at work before we were born. It has already wiped out the legacies of those who came before us, and we have lost all but the most fragile seeds of the idea that it is axiomatic and vital that we be part of something greater, and is still us. It has become a nihilistic binary between absolute independence, each human with infinite rights and deserving of all things good by the fact of their existence, and absolute dependence, each human part of some uncaring greater whole whether that be God, Earth, the Universe, or some “Noble Cause”. These beliefs of imbeciles are the norm today, because “everything is taken care of”. Because no stories are needed, no stories are being written. Thus no characters, no script, thus no cast, no actors.

“We” need to start a story if we want to exist. There will certainly be ones like us after the long goodbye, but they aren’t us. We want to exist now, and we are a story. So:

How does one start a story?

Ultimatums and Decrees (Sorcerer Of Certainty)

I’ve written a few posts singing the praises of anger. To me it the advantages it endows are abundantly clear; as the fundamental problem of all problems are distractions and confusions from the correct method, and anger gives effortless elimination of things which don’t matter relative to your desire, it can be said that anger is a fundamental solution. I do not think it is optimal, but its benefits should not be ignored simply because it may not be the best solution. Often, to solve any problem you need a number of different skills and resources each used correctly in harmony. Anger is one of those resources.

The original purpose was to create and illustrate a direct response to what seemed to be a straightforward simplistic claim by the convention: “being mad is bad, being rational is good.” This is a false statement first and foremost because it is a false dichotomy – one is generally infinitely more rational while emotional than not (I do not treat the average female’s toying with emotions as the real thing). Do you make better decisions when everything is on the line and you need to make the correct choice, or do you make better decisions when you can really afford to just stay in bed all day and not do anything? Emotions simulate the former situation. We experience reality through models, and when are models are there but reality is not, we treat reality the same way. If I act in my everyday life with the belief that everything could be fucked up by a disgraceful and dishonorable person if I don’t pay attention, I will act with the same precision that everyone else would use only in the most dire of situations. This makes me more efficient in two ways; one because I am more precise more of the time, and two because I have practice and they do not.

I was responding to the wrong thing. I missed the fundamental problem and solved something else.

The thing they don’t like is what anger entails: an ultimatum.

You are not allowed to be absolutely sure about anything.

Being able to lay down any definitions – whether they are accurate with reality is, again, not relevant at this time – is the greatest sin in this equalitist culture. You can never be “serious”. It is a feminine world; you can never believe in something until you consult with the committee of everybody. Which makes decisions based on…. the decisions of everybody… who each look to… everybody. Everybody is equal, and everybody is shit. Of course as reality and time waits for no one and things actually need to get done, inevitably decisions are going to be made. However, where a man outside of this culture would simply decide what he wanted and dealt with whatever came afterwards, those in this culture decide what they want and then bitch about whatever comes in their way.

“Confidence” is fine because you are “open to criticism”, which is simply a phrase for “You’re going to believe what I believe”. Look at any situation where people have disagreement, discuss, and then still end in disagreement. The person in question will first think “Finally, a dumbass who is willing to change his ways”, then if they failed in their task and then proceed to change their painting to instead say “Wow what a fucking waste of my time, closed minded asshole”. It’s as if they think reality is like school, where they are the teacher and everybody in the world are their students, just waiting to have information dumped on them. If the students are disobedient or insubordinate, one word or one pink slip sends them away, and suddenly you don’t have to deal with them anymore. Unless they come back and shoot up your school. In which case, it’s still somebody else dealing with the problem for you. This is still true on the other side of the analogy; if you are the average facebook user and you tell someone off, every last one of your friends will also tell the guy off for you. Or you can tell on them – “report” – to the admins, and they’ll ban them for you. And you can be all smug about how you didn’t have to do anything and the evil people got justice served to them, because everybody else is smug about it too.

“Arrogance” however is not acceptable, because you can’t do what everybody doesn’t like. In the frame of individual action, there is no meaningful difference between confidence and arrogance. Its difference arises from social disapproval. Leftists will call Obama confident; non-leftists will call Obama arrogant. The broader case was illustrated in the previous example; someone will be “confident” until they are confident that the other option is correct, at which point they become “arrogant” because they “don’t” listen. “Don’t” is a rather important term. If someone “didn’t” listen, it does not reflect on whether or not they are currently listening. These equalitists do not particularly care whether or not you did listen, but whether or not you are listening. If you listen/listened and change/changed your ways, you go from arrogant to confident. They claim to want you to just open your mind this once and make a decision afterwards, but they never actually want you to make a decision, because they could end up being wrong and if you tell them they’re wrong, well, that’s the apocalypse. This is all assuming the definition of “listening” as “agreeing”. To put it nicely, it is not a very accurate synonymism. To put it bluntly, it’s fucking stupid.

That’s what this whole anti-definitional culture is. Fucking stupid. It’s an extension of the nihilist “There is only one truth, and that truth is: there are no truths”, which has a patent obvious error that it actually posits a truth. It’s very appealing to the retarded masses though because it fits in exactly with their “freedom” idea and the “American dream” that “you can be anything you want”. Don’t make assumptions. Don’t judge me. You don’t know who I am. I’m still discovering myself. I’m finding my passion/calling. You don’t know that. You can’t know what the future is. How could you possibly say that tomorrow, or maybe the day afterwards, there won’t be a knight in shining armor coming to pick me up in his sports car and ride us off into the 50 Shades Of Sunset?

I’ll be that these protests are just about the usual crap. Government is not providing enough handouts to the people and is only helping rich people.

You don’t know that! You always label people! You have no idea what their values are! You’re just assuming that!


My assumptions are right about you. I also assume the sky is blue; I am right about that too.

It matters not how much time I take. Whether it be five seconds from one instance to five years and a significant fraction of my life, this culture is against claiming any ground.

#1 Temper NA

I’m sorry that I’m confident about my reads on how good players are and what they can do. Oh wait. No I’m not.

It is definitionally impossible to be incorrect when you are correct; don’t let anyone fucking bullshit your way out of direct contradictions or you’ll never be able to start a train of thought. Homosexuals are NOT normal. Feminists are NOT feminine. Spending more money does NOT get you out of debt. Fucking up a country’s economy will NOT achieve peace. A culture centered around hype and procedurally manufacturing the next big thing over and over again does NOT create unique individuals each with self initiative for their own passions. Note that I don’t particularly care whether I make statements which are politically correct. This is because being correct has nothing to do with being politically correct. I am smarter than a fifth grader. I’m not about to question my level of intelligence with such a low bar.

I treat everything else in reality the same way. I know something, and I will act on it. If I don’t, I will learn something once, then I will act on it until I make a mistake, at which point I correct my error and continue to proceed.

Not abiding by this and not putting authority before reason turns your entire world into a high school girl gossip circle where at every turn you are looking for approval. There is no right or wrong there, no correct or incorrect. There is only what the group says. In this communistic attempt to get rid of and overthrow the king, the result is that everyone is slaves to the halation and the winds of time and change. This “enlightenment” has lowered us back to being animals. Do the great men focus all their energies on obtaining the latest designer clothes? Do those who succeed in creating history-changing inventions go for the most hypes shoes?  Phones, movies, concerts, “The Game”, this is the kind of shit the people cement as the foundations of their identity.

This “SWAG” is for sewer peons. Kings have something else, called “CLASS”.

CLASS is dictated by someone specific. SomeONE did something a particular way, and everyone else started doing it either because that guy did it or because he told people to do it. It does not matter that “You’re just following someone else” because in the end you are either following someone else or you are leading yourself, and when you are clear about which category you’re in for which action, you are much more likely to be respectful and mindful of each and have less of this imbecile “every child has his own potential” to “I’m fucking unique because I fucking bought the fucking iPhone5” spoon-fed society.

I hate the standard Plato Allegory of the Cave / Matrix thing because that’s really not the problem we have these day. The problem is not that people don’t want to be told they’re wrong, the problem is that people don’t want to think that they even might be wrong. Spoiled so far is this civilization from our parent generations and reality, it has been able to believe that it is possible to exist throughout all of reality questioning everything, except questioning themselves on whether or not it’s possible for them to be wrong. The concept of fallibility itself is incomprehensible to the entitled solipsist bitchism of today.

It is an inevitable result if you never lay down the law. Which law does NOT matter. Some feminists talk about how it is men who start wars, men who kill and murder, men who rape and men who thieve, therefore if we have women running the world all children will be loved and educated everybody will be fed and the world will be at peace. A fucking fantasy, because the average American teenager is basically free – they have cars, credit cards, aren’t under the dominion of their parents or anyone else for that matter – and the American teenage girl says not how to organize society for a better future, but how it’s fucking embaressing that she got a 16gb white iPhone instead of a 32gb black iPhone. Say that’s just a bad apple all you fucking want, it’s the fucking norm and the norm is normal. Saying the magazines on the cashier rack at the supermarket don’t matter and nobody actually reads them is a LIE because nothing is sold and widely circulated unless it is bought. IT IS TRUTH that most women are fucking retarded, and IT IS TRUTH that most people will vote for the worst possible reasons.

This is what your free world looks like. Welcome To America.

Was this how people acted in the unenlightened, old-fashioned, bigoted, racist, sexist, and intolerant recent past?

The thought that it could be better and it just needs change is inherently an exclusive one; you must necessarily send into oblivion those aspects which you think must not exist in whatever niche. This is a decision, an ultimatum for the near or forseeable future so long as you can maintain its existence, one which necessarily limits your options. Opportunity cost is a truth of reality, and those who acknowledge it and treat it as a solid concept progress towards their goals linearly, rather than in the haphazard and lost manner of those who think that they could do everything if just “given” the “chance”.

Men are not created equal. Women and men are not created equal. We were not born with absolute powers (“rights”).


Well? What is it?

I… I want to ask you something about Honda. How did you feel about her?

Why do you ask?

Sh… She asked, me to…

How do I feel about her? Oh, geez.

You don’t think you’ve done anything wrong to her?

Wrong? Did I? It’s what she wanted, right? It’s not like I extorted her into doing anything.

B…but you were blackmailing her… with the m-movies.

What? She even told you about that? Shit.

I… I know everything that happened.

Well. I do it because I can, right? Is that a bad thing? If Honda doesn’t like it, she has to do something about it. After all, she’s in her situation because of choices she made. Of course, it’s not like there aren’t people whose decisions are made entirely by others, but those are very special cases, you understand. For everyone else, we have a series of options, and we choose out of them. Are you following me? If you can’t solve it on your own, you can ask someone else for help. But if there’ no one to ask, then it’s your fault for making those life choices.

But… you still… you still did some things that were wrong.

Hey, you shouldn’t speak like that. Even if you happen to be correct.

It’s a common habit in all kinds of worthless people to look for fault in others rather than oneself, whenever something goes wrong. The first thing that Honda should do, is to think of how to correct the things she did wrong, isn’t it? From there, she can come to me, and think of ways that I can correct myself. I’m an educator, you know? I think this is much more useful than any school lecture. But it’s up to you to get something out of it.

What? Are you one of those kids who says garbage like “Adults don’t understand me”, or “Nobody knows what it’s like to be me”? You can’t turn out to be so spoiled and rotten. If you think they don’t understand, then you have to give the effort to make them understand. Like what I just told you. You can’t just abandon the effort to explain, and blame the other person for not understanding, can you?

Here’s another thing. People who talk about “finding themselves” are also worthless. They’re just avoiding their current state, and finding escape in a nonexistent pretense. All there is, is what you want to do in your future, where you want to go, and what to do in order to achieve that, right? Right? What kind of you needs to be found? All the things that you’ve done are the sum of what makes you yourself. And if you can’t recognize your current state, then that’s a problem isn’t it?

If you’ve only done so much in your life and that’s all you can come up with, well, it just goes to show there’s no cure for stupidity.

– Honda’s teacher lecturing Kirie, Bokurano

You are nothing until you act, and action requires certainty.

Fiat was once treated as a power of the gods, now it’s treated as shit tier obviousness because everything has become simplified and computerized. But reality always collects debts people owe to it, and this civilization is continually paying at least minimal interest on its existence by ignoring the laws of biology and physics. Because reason is placed before authority and committee before decision, nothing is done anymore and anything aspired to is chaotic – a revolution, or a zombie apocalypse. Meanwhile, Fortuna retakes her place as master and because we refuse to realize we are not actually gods, we start “wondering” about why everything falls apart when we try and touch it. The names used in each particular instance doesn’t really matter, the universal rule is that no serious obstacle is taken seriously: Oh, politicians are just stupid. Muslims are just different. Those feminists are just extreme. Etc. etc. etc.

When you plant yourself and your flag down somewhere, anywhere, you suddenly need to defend it. You are now bound. No longer are things random and equal, it is possible to have selected something which has great pros in some directions and great cons in others. You can now gain and lose in a meaningful manner, and keep things with a sense of permanency and security. You begin to develop power, the ability to obtain what you want, and learn through the successes and failures of your endeavors. But this only happens once you have declared something as a truth.

Nothing exists before that. When you declare something as truth, you are literally creating a world.

Do you want to be right?

Do you want to become a god?

You know something when you are satisfied with what you know,
You believe something when you are satisfied with how you believe,
You have trust when you are satisfied with your pattern predictions,
You are saved when you are satisfied with doing no more,

You are always where you want to be,
And you are never where you cannot be.

Red Pills (vs Ockham’s Razor)

I cannot take “the red pill”, and I will not dispense “the red pill”.

The term originated in The Matrix, where it was given as a choice to discover a way out of (title), a vast fake virtual reality system designed by machines to have dominion over men. People who are told about it laugh it off, and some even defend the system’s legitimacy. Many activists use this metaphor for their many ideas because it is easy and hip to talk about their pet idea as something which will overthrow “the” system and grant freedom and greatness to all who desire it.

The fact that it is given to somebody who is currently in The Matrix means, clearly, that it cannot work on someone who has never been in The Matrix.

English was not my first language. I spoke Cantonese everywhere straight through second grade, spoke Cantonese and English interchangeably in third, and had occasions through fifth grade where I’d want to communicate to someone but ended up saying it in chinese and then have to repeat myself, embarrassingly, in English. I’d say random things without thinking. Once I called for a teacher by saying “Mommy”. I asked a friend while in line for the water fountain, “Why is that girl so fat?”. A teacher once said that someone was transferring over and they had a disability and asked for all of us to not talk about it, and I talked about it. I didn’t like the music the others liked. Couldn’t watch the shows; didn’t have cable TV. Didn’t join any clubs, parents wanted me to go to class and come home. No allowance. Some of this may seem smart in retrospect, but at the time they prevented me from seeing any of my fellow students as friends.

And thus, I have never had anything to relate to, “fake”, “meaningless”, “real” or otherwise. No identity, no world. Just wandering. (Up until recently, but the principle discussed still holds.) People have told me things, and I have gone “oh okay” or “no I don’t think so”. No real emotional attachment. I’d be disappointed sometimes when I found out I was wrong and would have to correct a larger-than-usual amount of things, maybe frustrated at myself for not seeing it until that point in time, but that was that.

I deal with things mainly in this “cold” and “calculating” way, but it seems a non-insignificant portion of people like to deal with it in “red pills”. We need to FIGHT the system, they say. It is OPPRESSIVE they say. OVERTHROW it,  WAKE UP and SPREAD THE TRUTH and whatever. I do not know how it is for those who have grown up in a Matrix-like environment, but I see little point in emphasizing things in such a manner. When you are discussing with someone your or their ideas, show the facts, point out what you disagree with, learn what you can, say thank you and be done with it. Repeat, if they would like. But none of this online hundred comments on forums, blogs, and videos doing back-and-forthing motivated by this obvious desire to beat the other guy into submission. They think they’re engaging in some kind of battle where each commands their divine entity “ideas” to fight the other, but it’s really just people yelling at each other.

If anything, red pilling seems to reliably screw up higher probabilities of low gains in favor lower probabilities of high gains. Those who actually just talk about why they think what they think are very stable, even if they just end up repeating themselves and their posts or lectures are like doing another math problem in the same lesson of the textbook. If their ideas spread, it is because the ideas are actually applicable and appealing to many people. Contrast this to the red pill method, which explicitly aims to change as many minds as fast as it cans, and in any way it can. It is the viral marketing and almost literal selling of ideas – you too can have enlightenment, if you can admit “to yourself” for a moment that all you’ve ever known is a lie.

It is said that for every YouTube and Yahoo there are a hundred other different guys who tried the venture capital route and didn’t make it. I believe this is true for the red pilling of ideas. Tons of people talking about their crazy idea out there. Why do you believe you’re going to be The One, again?

There’s also the problem of creating enemies. “Self-Help” style doesn’t really do much. “Red Pilling” is, quite literally, picking a fight. It explains to a large degree why many ideas and communities even exist (the manosphere can be seen as a reaction to the red pilling of feminism, resurgent belief in race to red pilling of equalitism, etc.).

I have taken the red pill red pills more times than I can count, but it has not really worked out for me. Everything from atheism to anarchism, insert random conspiracy theory here to environmentalism has used this formula and each time I end up bored and feeling I have wasted more time than necessary. Yes, the things I learned in there are definitely things I wouldn’t have found from the mainstream. No, it did not need to be packaged with the encouragement to throw myself into the time and energy hole that is arguing with people who don’t care and aren’t interested. If anything I want to get away as far as possible from people who just randomly start talking to me about how this or that is true, because I quickly realize that these guys are pretty crazy. Most people who I’ve met who explore ideas agree. It seems to follow a pattern:

[The Red Pill of some idea] was important once, because it was new and, relative to my worldview at the time, significantly different. I went ahead and read up on older literature, followed up on more modern speakers and writers. Sometimes, I even began participating in it myself. But before too long it seems, it was gone again. It was just something else I had experienced. I might have thought of it as interesting, other times I ended up disagreeing and disgusted. It may even truly have been a red pill for me, and I changed my beliefs and way of life since learning what they had to say. But, since I did not become an activist, do not particularly talk about it except maybe as a memory which seems to fade into oblivion and back again every so often, I did not become part of the Movement. On a whim, I might go back and read up on some of the new things my old favorite blogger started writing about, or my old favorite YouTuber started making videos about. But all in all, it was simply something else that came to pass. I took what I needed, ignored what I didn’t, and moved on.

So, in the interests of actually discussing truth, not making a bajillion enemies, nor being a casualty statistic shoved back into oblivion after being a posterboy for some thing, I’m not doing it.

Getting linked by both Jack Donovan and then Rational Male, both people I highly respect, had me considering changing things up. The amount of pageviews I used to get in two weeks, now in a single day? WOO TIME TO GET FAMOUS POST MORE USE BUZZWORDS GET VIEWS But nope. Can’t do it, and don’t want to do it. My favorite people, both online and offline, didn’t get to where they were by stuffing me full of pastel colored drugs. Imitate the masters; gonna take a long and steady road instead.

I’m all for intensity and doing things balls to the wall, but this red pilling position is a death trap that is as-if designed specifically for my type.

I’m not gonna nail myself to selling some idea. Jesus Christ how horrifying.

Happy 200th post, blog!

(Note to future self: Original “planned” post literally took all day. Couldn’t finish, too much of a headache. Then rewrote in 90 mins because da razor be 2 stronk herp derp derp. See if you can find which parts are copypasta’d.)

The Machinery of Order

I’ve been out playing a videogame the past few days, and Saint’s Row: The Third has got to be the most fun game I’ve ever played. I’d definitely recommend it to anyone who asks. I got the game packed with all of its DLC for 25 (normal cost: 100) on Steam’s summer sale; it’s still at that cost for the next 24 hours or so, and 50% off until the 22nd. Just the game itself costs 13 (normal: 50).

It may be the best game I’ve ever played. It doesn’t take the title for sexiest models or greatest storyline (TERA; Muv-Luv Alternative). Many things, like the income system and the general open world gangster setting have been observed in other places (Assassin’s Creed; GTA). However, the writing was what put the piece together. The humor was really what kept me going – I never really cared for driving across the map to do a car theft just to drive it back to the other side of the map. Weaving around or evading cops was pretty fun, but it wasn’t anywhere near… good. I’ve had chuckles or moments of excitement and tension in a game before, but it was during Saint’s Row: The Third that I had my first time laughing out loud and excited at doing what I was doing.

It was the superior writing that illustrated to me the other most important reason why I found the game fun:

I was guided through the whole thing, and while I wasn’t guided I didn’t know what was going on.

I’ve finished the main storyline, and I still don’t know where things are. I’ve used maybe half the guns available to me and don’t know how to operate the other ones. I’ve stolen cement mixers, motorcycles, and schoolbusses, but I still haven’t found a stationary lamborghini or a truck head to make my own. I’ve touched watercraft a grand total of twice and both times for missions, and I’ve used airplanes once because I wondered if there were any. I was at the last mission when I figured out there was a bonus for doing nutshots, and only shortly before that did I figure out that using the phone menu to call certain “homies” would summon them to fight alongside you.

A while ago I pondered the reason why I stopped playing Skyrim. I thought it either had something to do with the fact that I took on too many quests at the same time, or with me looking up stuff on the wiki. At the time I took the former more seriously, but didn’t revisit it when I got bored of the game. Having too many things to do affects your ability for purposive action in a fairly obvious manner: it’s the definition of a dilemma if we throw bad consequences in, and the definition of paralysis if we don’t. The second one, however, has more value than I understood then: the ability to know where things are before you’ve looked for them with no linked consequences though (i.e. paying for maps in-game, or doing favors for an NPC who then shows you how to do this or that) warps your mind. The more you can obtain advantages in something without putting in resources (all-encompassing for risk, time, capital, etc.) relative to that, obviously you’d care less about it. If you learned a whole course online and not from the professor you were enrolled with, you wouldn’t give him an ovation in the last lecture. If you had an innate talent for something, you wouldn’t feel as attached to the skill as the guy who worked his ass off to get to the same level. For many activities this caveat can be overlooked, since we actually seem to be fine with not caring about our jobs or classes, and we actually do need to build a base understanding of many things that have a very low probability of intriguing people. In a game however, you are only doing one thing – playing the game (If you were only looking up, say, shooting techniques and not running techniques, it would be different.).

These two are part of a larger principle.

I’ve quoted John Titor on how knowledge is a function of time and situation – I already do not believe that information is strictly good. It was clear to me that there are better and worse situations for any given piece of information. But now, I am taking it to zero and infinity: Some knowledge must always be known, and some knowledge must never be known. A rather awkward wording since “always” and “never” would be read as time adjectives, but the structure at least mystically captures my intent. If it is true that knowledge is a function of time and situation, then it is clear that it is at least possible for some things to never be good.

However the devs ended up balancing the economics and the damage and the sizing and all the factors of Saint’s Row: The Third, the important thing was that it kept me on rails. The fact that it is open world and you can mostly do what you what mostly how you want as long as you aren’t in missions is tangential to why the game is amazing. It is quite possible for a story to be mind blowing and intense without giving you any options at all – it’s called a book, or a movie. And there are many of them which are better than supposed open-world games. In Skyrim, I played it for the main storylines. I didn’t enjoy sorting through what I could carry around. I gave up on alchemy early on. Smithing was only so I could have cool stuff to use so I wouldn’t die during those main missions. Dragons were okay, but not why I played the game. In Just Cause 2, the only thing that kept me going was new trinkets. The story wasn’t too good, and I started loathing the game after a while because you can’t ever outdo the AI. There were no big interesting things to do. It was always an, oh, I can do anything I want to…. but I don’t want to do anything. The average free-to-play MMORPG these days is also, by definition, open-world. But you aren’t seeing any of them at the top of any charts, and rather than playing one of them, it’d probably be better for you to watch Fight Club again.

The best open-world videogames are those which show why these characters are the main characters, and why these storylines are main storylines. It isn’t just because they have screentime dedicated to them (an absolute value). It’s because they have more screentime dedicated to them (a relative value). It’s because you give them the screentime, and you know why you are giving them more screentime. This I contend is the reason why truly free and true sandbox games are never super big hits and never really remembered. The Sims allows you to create your own character and build your own house, but it gets repetitive real quick because it’s only about the next gimmick. Cities XL allows you to build your city however you want. With some rules of course: if you put your residential right next to heavy industry and have shops nowhere to be found, people aren’t going to come to your city. But even with these rules, there’s nothing to create. It wasn’t a creative act – after the first few placements, things I did were not positive anymore, but rather anti-negative. I was no longer building, but fixing. I need to build more of this, or more of that. No real sight of the big picture, the only thing seen is what to do on the margin. The world becomes the margin and only the margin – and because what that margin is about changes on a moment to moment basis, because there is no unifying purpose or whole, life itself becomes halation.

It isn’t just the “getting more stuff”, or “go to work make a family grow old with your love” that’s halation. If you live in the margin, all of it is halation. You can’t escape it. The margin is the halation.

“All this choice made it possible for me to do better but I felt worse.”

“There’s no question that some choice is better than none but it doesn’t follow from that that more choice is better than some choice.”

“The value of choice depends on our ability to perceive differences between the options.”

It may be a useful perspective to see differing people and professions as simply the training and experience which allows us to make choices. Ignore the non-person logistical details of muscle memory, jargon, capital, and business connections. If we just look at the person logistics, the mental logistics, this is all there is:

The ability to perceive differences is what differs one mind from another.

Everything else – religion, culture, discipline, language – is a tool for that, because differentiating is what allows us to act in reality. What is creativity, experience, or leadership, but the ability to decide on the better one where it counts, to perceive differences and thus live in a world that others don’t even know exists? This is the reason division of labor exists in any group – because better decisions are made by those who can perceive the relevant differences. Those “professionals” are used as such not because they have a higher probability of making the right decision, but because it significantly lowers the probability of horrible effects from coming into existence.

I was an anarchocapitalist for a long time, and the most asked question (aside from “who will build the roads”) was “should everyone really have access to nuclear weapons”? I always had some long answer about how everything would be decided by the free market, how nukes would be expensive and they’d probably have some really stringent contracts and controls. Kind of bullshitty, really. It’s not really access for everyone then is it? Should everyone be able to have a nuke, yes or no? Most people answer no, but they don’t have a principled answer because they live inside halation. “No because people could get killed” means nothing, because it’s really easy to point out where murder is the best possible option (read: good). And then they run through random topics like headless chickens, talking about capital punishment and the prison system, whatever. The answer is no because people don’t know how the fuck to use a nuke.

The same concept applies everywhere because in 99% of possible human activity, you don’t know what to do.

There are some people better than others, at any given point in time. Yes, you could learn. Yes, you too could gain some of the abilities the pros at whatever field have. But right now, you don’t know. Right now you don’t have the skills, the perception reservoir. Do you disrespect a 70 year old kung fu master now, because you can beat him up and eventually you might be able to learn everything he has to say? Do you look down on doctors’ advice, because if you spent enough time on Google and Wikipedia, you too could make an informed decision? Do you ignore the captain and flight attendants’ advice or orders because you might eventually go to flight school and learn all the things there are to learn about safe conduct aboard airplanes? Would you just ride alongside in a cycling race, even though your failure to understand peloton mechanics could do anything from ruining the race or ruining the lives of more superior competitors? It doesn’t matter what you could eventually do if you spent however much time on it, and this concept will still apply even when humanity gains immortality. One can not act now with the power he will have later.

It is a fact of life that you will have situations where your best course of action is defer agency to do as you’re told. Better people do not see more options. They see less. It is the people who don’t know any better who see everything at the same time, not knowing what to do or how to act. The best person for the job in any given field is the one that sees the fewest and most correct options. Not so obvious is that the fundamentals of anything are the most difficult. It is obvious, however, that the best people in their fields are the professionals, or the pros.

The best people at social organization, i.e. those who are best at understanding and managing the condition of man both in themselves and in others, are the aristocrats.

Just as the pros should make decisions because they are the best at finances or engineering or art or whatever, the best at politics should rule in politics. Aristocracy – rule by the elite. And of course, there is a best of the best.

He’s called the monarch.

Note that any reactions about slavery or feudalism or imperialism or things like that are all simply uses magic words. I have not mentioned any specific political policies (outside of the nukes thing). What I have done is go through the logic and ended up here. Another common reaction I saw when I argued anarchocapitalism was that it was simply a world of chaos, and that eventually, gangs would form and some dictator would be on top – and we need a state to counter that. This is more correct and desirable than they think.

Equalitists bitch that we are oppressed right now, but really, right now is about as close to what they want as reality can get it. You have all your choices of salad dressings, bread, lettuce, apples, and cakes at the supermarket. All your life choices and change you could make whenever you want just by going back to college. All the women in the world are now open to you through a massive array of online dating sites. Co-ed dorms. Co-sex bathrooms. Co-sex workplaces. The more equal we get the less happy about that we get. People are confused about why things aren’t getting better, and think that if only things would get better, they’d get better. Really. They don’t realize that the problem IS the confusion.

What we have right now is an extremely high amount of chaos. Professors aren’t taken seriously in their lectures, and less important fields are now on equal ground as more important fields, political leaders are seen ss more electable if they are more like the common man. The hundred million choices at the electronics stores. Cultural relativism. Philosophical relativism. Identity relativism. Everything might as well be fucking equal now even if it isn’t yet; getting things more equal will not change anything because all it does is dissolve MORE things into the halation. Marriage, religion, tradition, and politics have already gone to shit. You name it, it can go to shit too.

Gangs form in chaos because they are better at the unifier than most people. They are better at providing happiness all things given than others are, and they are upheld as leaders. If this is not true, the gangs fall apart because the group is not as good as another group. Small groups of superior skill will always form, and power relations will always be established because they are symbiotic. Dictators are simply whoever happens to be the best of the best at the given point in time. Those who do not survive a reasonable test of time are brought down and remembered as tyrants. Those who do survive and prove themselves to be that much better at the unifier than everyone else for a long period of time are remembered as heroes.

You have people who you defer to in your lives. You do. Maybe you don’t know their names, maybe it’s Wikipedia. But you defer to some human agency, in some factor. You defer to them not in the same way you’d defer to an opponent or an enemy, not in a purely responsive manner, but in a submissive manner. Maybe it’s not even an entity, but some idea. The philosophy you subscribe to, no matter how much you’ve made it yours, was contributed to by someone else. You did not choose everything in your life. Someone else makes choices for you in some way, and you like it. If you don’t like the choice, you at least like that you don’t have to make the choices that led to that choice. If your mother made you or bought you all your meals and you liked that better than having to drive out to wherever, buy stuff and come back to prepare everything yourself, you deferred to your mother and she had power over you. We are not free agents. We are parts of greater wholes, whether we are the monarch who makes the political decisions for a nation or we are a child who decides what dolls she wants to play with. The monarch respects and follows the advice of his advisors or mentors. The child does her chores and eats her vegetables.

If the monarch does not defer and does not make good decisions, he will be overthrown. If his advisors plan behind his back and work against him, they will be executed. If the child does not defer and chooses bad things, she will not have a fun childhood. If her parents are too controlling, they will not have a good time as elderlies. All optimal relationships are symbiotic. If the quote “A man who doesn’t spend time with his family can never be a real man,” seemed familiar, that’s because it was from The Godfather.

We are all children who no know nothing in some aspect of reality; players who need game world designers.

I loved Saint’s Row: The Third because the devs were masters. I’d join the Saints if I were in Steelport because they are the best, not just because they have the aesthetics and style, but because they are the most powerful, morally correct, and funny of all the groups. The open world game structure is great, but as Just Cause 2 showed, without a great plot the freedom means nothing. Who cares if the mechanics are amazing, if the game moderators are always there to screw things up? Why does it matter that the items look good, if they’re in a game where the market is inflated by farmers and nobody at the studio has a fix for it? I’d rather read a book, oppressive as the storyline is, than deal with that. Similarly, there are many, if not most, things in life where it really would be better for society and individual health if people didn’t need to choose things. Yes, we all know how good freedom can be. But it is not the only thing that is required.

Order (aka happiness) is the general unifying principle of human activity. Not freedom (aka equality).

And Order is created through Authority.

The Unifier: Jack Donovan’s “The Way of Men”

There’s this picture of me, before I started preschool, that I’ll remember for the rest of my life.

I don’t particularly remember what occasion it was, probably Halloween or something, but I was over at a guy friend’s house and we were on a couch with a girl inbetween us, waiting to get a picture taken. We were only introduced because all of our moms were friends, but that didn’t really matter. The guy was my best friend and I treated him like a brother; the girl was a friend too and I treated her like I treated my sister. For whatever reason though, the girl latched onto the guy and they were moving away from me. I was used to taking pictures stock-still, but if both of the other people in the picture with me were going to be playing over at one end of the couch, I should join in too right? Basic stuff, even kids understand this.

But for whatever reason… I was rejected. Either one of them or both of them wouldn’t let me join in. So, I moved to the other side of the couch, and pouted, like all kids do when they don’t get what they want in public… except this time, everybody was content with it. Happy with it, even. All the grown-up women were laughing, my sister was laughing, and the guy and girl who I thought were my best friends were also laughing. All laughter, all happiness, a bright light flashed, and I was the only one alone unhappy, and now more importantly, confused.

The guy and girl didn’t get together. The girl’s mother was actually really strict. Before middle school, the guy’s parents divorced, and he moved away. We’re all around 20 now, and though I’m Facebook friends with the guy, I can’t say I know him at all. He’s a completely different person – that of itself doesn’t mean much, but he’s changed from that open and spontaneous “friends forever” boy I loved, the guy who seemed to be happy to triumph in getting the girl and showing it off for everyone to see… to someone dark, brooding, with no big dreams, no passionate and silly relations, no personality on the street where every stranger would look on and think, “I’d like to find out personally what that man’s all about”.

He had lost “it”.

Just like everyone else.

I have a need to derive things from the ground up. I have this need everywhere I go, in everything I do. It is inescapable, and I do not care to escape it – I encourage it. If this need ever goes unfulfilled, you have yourself a >99% certainty I will be bored of it within three months and 100% certainty I’ll not care about it at all within a year.

I need to derive things from ground up.

I need to understand every single link, every single reason anything is true, from a point which is “natural”. It could be calculus, where the idea being shown is the truth of the Epsilon-Delta definition. It could be a movement, where the idea being shown is how you should personally be involved in the political change of something. It could be just a motivational message, where the idea being shown is why you should believe in yourself and your ability to succeed at anything you put your mind to. In all of human life every activity starts with an understanding of something, which leads to either more understanding or a course of action. And for me, understanding needs to be absolutely sure all the way to “Ground”.

“Ground”, or the natural state, is where we are comfortable naming our knowledge as axioms or assumptions. We all know of math classes in school or university where, rather than actually following the professor who gives “useless” rigorous proofs in class, many of us simply memorize how the method works and that’s good enough. We know that there is a more grounded understanding than ours, but we are satisfied with our Ground. Even better examples are Biology and Psychology, famously known as “memorization” classes, but the Ground idea exists everywhere. It’s why the classic philosophy question of how to answer a kid who asks why the sky is blue, then why does the air diffract light in that way, and then ad infinitum , seems so silly to us. Some of us are fine with just accepting that the sky is blue; that is our Ground. Others of us are fine with accepting that air happens to reflect light in such a way, that light operates with such and such wave properties, that the sun creates light in such a way; that is their Ground. Some of us don’t feel that’s enough, and search for even more Grounded answers – that would be the people at CERN and NIF.

I believe the choice in Ground is only partially arbitrary.

Those who think of classes as “just memorization” never end up actually caring for the subject matter. People who think of activities as nothing more than following the set of instructions they’re told or handed will not think back fondly on those times they spent – they may even think of it as a waste.

However, kids who have all their life seen math as an art, a way to explain and see the world, something they can engage theirselves in and something they can produce real and amazing things out of, have a passion for it most people can’t understand. See this video of Terence Tao. There are three notable figures in it, Mr. Tao himself and two faculty members. You can see very clearly that Tao is in love with math. One of the guys is in love with Tao. And the other guy just doesn’t give a shit and treats it like an interview. You don’t even need to read his body language or need to listen to his tone. The fact that he keeps using vague words like “gifted” and “talented”, these facetious and arbitrary Grounds, shows that his opinion is really just filler and he believes it.

As for people who only follow instructions but think of their activities as more than just being a cog in some machine… look at any brotherhood, ever. Did mafia boys ever think of their job, no matter how small, as just something else to fuck around with while they were on earth? Do battle-hardened soldiers treat their orders like a college freshman treats his math homework?

I accept that different people have different inherent tendencies on where to rest their Ground. Not everybody’s going to like math, or psychology, or whatever subject or hobby here. Few people will care why the sky is blue, how tire spokes hold up the entire weight of bikes and cars, or insert any fact here. I’m an aspiring aerospace engineer whose dream is to get people to space, but I think of the entire world as flat when I go out cycling and I really couldn’t care less about the solar activity going on this second. Ground is as relative as Truth – it depends on your Purpose. My purpose right now involves me getting a degree, so I care more about math than I did in middle school. Currently my purpose does not involve studying solar winds, but it may someday and my Ground will change to force me to pay more attention to the physics of that and its intricacies.

However… I’ve always believed there was a Ground of All Grounds. A more fundamental “theory of everything”. It could be improved of course, as everything can be improved – the Grounding process is called “learning”. But to improve something, it must first be there.

And it was missing.

I think we have more people in society now that describe a feeling of missing something, “There’s just something missing in my life, I don’t know what’s missing”,

but yet they describe something very tangible, very very close to them…

Bicycle Dreams

If I had to pick one point in my life where my life “started”, it was that point where that picture was taken. And if I had to pick one question, one line my life has revolved around, it is “Why do people do what they do?”

“Because they love it”, “Because they have fun”, “Because it makes them happy” has never cut it, and until recently I have always read such lines as lies and all who used them as liars. Happiness, you say? Why are you a snide little bitch when it comes to certain topics then? Why do you blame others when you encounter misfortune? Or perhaps most importantly, how exactly does walking into a large building and giving paper to somebody or showing a plastic rectangle to a machine and then obtaining some machined material make you “happy”? (I just described buying stuff.)

How the questions were linked was uncertain to me, but I felt they should be linked. It just felt like, even though they happened at different times under different circumstances, that the questions belonged with each other. After all, I’m still describing the same person, or the same group of people. If we consider larger scales, we’re also in the same geographical location with the same culture in the same era of time speaking the same language, and we’re all people, not aliens or something.

I’ve been told all my life that those questions are separate, that they shouldn’t be asked with each other because it’s apples to oranges.

As if “fruits”, “stuff to eat”, or “plant reproduction methods” were all invalid categories.

All my life, everything has been sorted into disconnected categories, like subjects in elementary school. Just like how everything was done for an hour, bell, do something else, bell, repeat until 3:15PM, every question posed and every activity done in all spheres of human activity seemed… isolated. Unmeaningful. Not special. Like scrolling through pages and pages of videos or images, on your hard drive or on some site, of 3D or 2D women getting nailed so you can jack off, just to get it over with, just to do it and be in bed for the night. Which one you pick doesn’t exactly matter. Really, the fact that you jack off doesn’t seem to matter much either (after you’re finished). Point seems to be just jack off and get it done with.

Except you’d just rinse and repeat and do the same the next night, so there’s no real point at all.

I’ve searched for a meaning to those categories for as long as I can remember. Any category. Every category. Sorting fruits and vegetables makes sense because historically we’d need to know what to eat and not to eat so we don’t get poisoned. But why does it matter or not we get poisoned? Because we want to live. But… why? The answer to the meaning of life is quite simply to reproduce and to propagate. But even armed with the meaning of life, it felt like I had not reached the Ground of All Grounds. There was no unifying idea.

I’ve tried on many hats.

I’ve been all over the spectrum politically both in breadth and depth, everything from the average vanilla democrat to the social democrat / Marxist to the conservative white nationalist (I’m not white) to the anarchocapitalist.  Politics and economics did seem to give a much better explanation than the non-existence and non-explanation any average person would give. But none of it was based on any personal desire that I could “truly” connect to. Equality, liberty, or even just money – none of these things unified anything outside of a specific bubble. Money famously fails to explain why people choose to start a family. Liberty and Equality are just high minded talking points.

Psychology looked promising because it claimed to explain how people think, but it only talks about people in context of themselves and is riddled with silly assumptions. Sociology isn’t cutting it; it talks too much bullshit, not enough real patterns about real questions, and is completely at the whim of politics. Linguistics, with the powerful Sapir-Whorf, was able to show many differences I had not thought of, but in the end it was only a dry “form defines function” truth and not something which provided any direction.

That’s the other thing, right? You can look back and be like “Oh I did good”, but then there’s also those times where you know you’re going to win – you just pulled something off, something which took great discipline and awareness, a passionate drive and the graces of fortune. But the timing window has closed for all that opposes you. Nothing can stop you anymore. You’re going to win, and the only thing that is left is for the fat lady to sing.


is amazing.

I’ve gotten close to the Ground of All Grounds with my own attempt of unifying Discipline and Motivation, a glimmer of the correct feeling I think I should be getting, but it ultimately fails – as I have always stated it will. I only talk about how to improve individual behavior. I talk about social dynamics only as a side note, as a way to improve something else.

One of the reasons why I’ve been interested in antifeminism and the manosphere is because it’s just like another psychology or socio class to me. I believe that, perhaps here, I will find the unifying idea I’ve been searching for. Many things I’ve learned have indeed explained a lot. Why women fall for bad boys, why there’s sexual harassment suits everywhere, the fact that women are not even socially shamed for lying about an event which would throw a man in an isolated steel cage for over 10% of his entire lifetime and grant her more money than she’d ever know what to do with (I just described false rape accusations). On top of the bad news, I learned many amazing things as well. The logistics of how to approach a woman, how the way we’ve been trained to look at the world is inconsistent with multiple real and otherwise obvious thigns, that you need to actually be an interesting man with an interesting life if you want a woman to be interested, and many other things on what to do. It’s all made a lot of sense. It was definitely something much greater, much more true, much more real, than some political movement or theory in psychology.

I felt I was getting closer but nothing I read and I knew that it was somewhere here, but not even the intro and summary to the manosphere hit it right on the head.

It was here though.

And I’ve found it.

The Unifier is in Jack Donovan’s book “The Way of Men”.

In the 70’s the American Army did a scientific study on soldier psychology. They researched stress levels when fighting aliens and the effectiveness of certain motivations in new recruits by comparing psychological evaluations of soldiers during the two world wars and the early BETA conflicts. They found and interviewed retired veterans from every corner of the globe.

They found some interesting results in the part of the survey asking why front-line soldiers fought.

What do you think the most common reason was?

Well, the obvious answer would be… for the sake of humanity or the Earth – And in the older wars, for the sake of their country I guess…

Wrong. That’s the reason given by soldiers who’ve yet to be sent out or are on their way to the battlefield. Some keep thinking that way even on the battlefield. But it seems that the more unfamiliar they were with real warfare, the more likely they were to give idealistic, political answers, or what their education told them. The families of those being sent out probably want to hear reasons like that in order to help them accept the painful truth.

Then… was the correct answer fighting for their relatives or loved ones?

Unfortunately, no, that’s also one most common before reaching the front lines. It also seems to be the real motivation for many of those being sent out.

In the end, the most common reason was… they fought for their comrades.

Surprisingly, whether they were fighting humans or BETA didn’t change this result. They didn’t want to let their comrades-in-arms die after living through battles with them. That’s why they fought so hard. Far below in second place, was the fear of being killed by the enemy.


That was why the retreating German Army resisted so fiercecly near the end of the German-Soviet war, for instance. The fear of what would happen if the Soviet Army took them prisoner was enough to reinvigorate the German Army, whose equipment and morale were in ruins.

What about you, Captain? What do you fight for?

Me?… good question… I think… I fight for my comrades too. I want everyone I’ve fought alongside to live at least a little longer. Not that I don’t want Alternative IV to succeed or humanity to win the war. If I’m ordered to infiltrate a hive, I’ll obey, even if I have no chance of survival.

But, once I’m inside, it would be difficult to fight to the end for that reason alone.

Maybe because I’d start to want something more concrete to fight for…

Maybe because I’d start wanting a reason to believe my death would not be in vain…

– Capt. Isumi to 2nd Lt. Shirogane, “Muv-Luv Alternative

Donovan’s book is relatively simple.

In the first half of the book he discusses the four virtues of men, and in the second half he discusses history and society today. In addition to the standard fare structure, the reading and wording are very accessible, and the ideas have plenty of citations. Some pages feel like they’re missing “something”, until you flip the page and find that the reason why there was a blank area on the previous page was because the last part of the paragraph was moved for a long footnote on the next.

What Donovan fills the simple and generic structure with is what makes “The Way of Men” The Way of Men and The Unifier.

What is masculinity? Ask ten men and you’ll get ten vague, conflicting answers. Unlike any book of its kind, The Way of Men offers a simple, straightforward answer-without getting bogged down in religion, morality, or politics. It’s a guide for understanding who men have been and the challenges men face today. The Way of Men captures the silent, stifling rage of men everywhere who find themselves at odds with the over-regulated, over-civilized, politically correct modern world. If you’ve ever closed your eyes and wished for one day as a lion, this book is for you.

– Book description,

Many people easily Ground at “These men are angry at the world, just men being men”… even men who are angry at the world. I’d seen this book advertised before on several occasions and I didn’t get it for that very reason, that broken-record reason that you hear everyone saying whenever a man does something society doesn’t like. We all know it’s always going to be men too, because if women do something society doesn’t like, it’s because somebody or the system (“The Man”) has wronged them. It’s always men. But we don’t ask why. Even those of us who are unsatisfied with this Ground (mostly men, because obvious reasons) can’t help but be swept along almost all of the time, because there’s not enough to hold onto.

We know that men don’t just do shit because they’re crazy. In this age where everybody goes through almost literally the same experiences from age 6 to 18, it has become harder to imagine the theft or drug dealer or serial killer or activist or literally anybody that isn’t exactly like the sitcoms we see on TV as someone who’s truly alien. We can’t say anymore that these people were raised in the wild, lived without language and human interaction, and then just happened to do this thing. We can’t imagine that the cannibal or homosexual or rapist is just someone from another community, another culture anymore, because we all live in the same culture. We can’t explain it away.

But we do, and that’s why we’re all scared and confused. We hear “This person is just like that because they’re unique”, “Men are just being men”, more of this “just bad apples” isolated incident bullshit every single time, and we know something’s wrong with it. The average 30 year old LA gangster has gone through about the same experiences as the 30 year old prodigy CEO in Europe – people living in those two areas would have been much more different even just one thousand years ago, less than one step in the path of written history. We know that something, somewhere, is going horribly wrong. If that something wrong is in the guy on TV, it’s also in all of us. Or, if it’s the “system” that’s wrong for the guy on TV… that’s the same “system” that’s over our heads as well.

We know enough about Ground, intuitively, that something somewhere is wrong, and that we need to seek the Ground of All Grounds in order to begin to really fight and change anything. Unfortunately, the Ground of All Grounds these days is a fucking commodity. From Vegetarianism to Occupy, from Saving the Planet to 9-11 Truth, every god damn whore and her pimp is selling meaning. A friend of mine is interning for some startup, and he asked me to help him put up an ad for it last night. So I went to the site, and guess what I found the slogan was?

Experience Real Life. Can you imagine? They’re selling you YOUR OWN GOD DAMN LIFE.

If there is one problem about this book, that would be it. It’s sold. It’s another book about not selling out, but it has to be sold. A message in media, criticizing the form it has been delivered in. For anyone who still can see reality, and definitely for any jaded consumer, it is going to be hard to believe yet another manifesto which claims to tackle a large problem in a small amount of space. It has come out in a nonoptimal form in a nonoptimal time.

But really, that’s not the fault of the book. If fault is to be distributed, it should all be to the times.

Problems which are inevitable and a threat to all things good must be solved in some way. Everyone recognizes that those who complain about how violent revolutionaries should instead seek to work within the system to change its direction while people are being murdered for walking across the street have their heads on backwards. There’s a set of priorities we know must be adhered to no matter what. But the moment it’s not so overt anymore, everyone becomes those guys who have their heads on backwards. It’s not okay if just anyone is murdered for walking across the street, but it’s okay if they were all locked up instead. Or no maybe that’s not okay, but it’s okay if people were just separated and different. Or no, that’s not okay either! WE NEED FULL EQUALITY FOR EVERYONE! But you have to do that through the established channels. Otherwise it’s not okay.

All this standardizing based on what’s okay. What’s acceptable. Everything that’s not “don’t do that”.

Not what’s desirable. Not what is worthy of praise. Sure we always get the TED talks and the political campaigns about how this or that should be done, but once you look at the concepts themselves, they’re all just negations of something else. Equality is for ridding the evil differences between people. Education is for saving the children from horrible experiences of never being in debt. Peace is for democratizing a nation and getting rid of those bad fascists and people who disagree with us. Never discussed is what’s honorable. Never is something tried and achieved, suffered and accomplished.

Always this god damn running away.

The Way of Men holds the fucking line.

It states, simple and clearly, that there are four virtues all men everywhere and from all times admire, and should respect, for those ideas are inherent and necessary for the role men play in reality. The virtues are Strength, Courage, Mastery, and Honor. The role all males play that we can never avoid, and should never avoid, is – for lack of a better word – Man. In these gender-free times, the idea that men have to be Men means less and less – and that is not correct. There are certain things men cannot become, without destroying or corroding all that we know and love out of existence. Cultural relativity and all other relativities be damned. There are things that must happen at all times.

Drawing from history, discussing evolutionary psychology, and touching on philosophy, Jack Donovan lays out exactly what it means to be a man and why the meanings make sense. It is not something that can be achieved once and forgotten about; it is a code of conduct, an ideal of perfection, something for which you must strive for at any and all points in time to even be near it. Being a man, Donovan argues, is not something men choose to want. Like the natural tendencies to be intrigued by this or that subject, The Way of Men argues that all men want to be men.

It is this desire, this inherent need, which causes many if not all of the true social problems we have today. Not only are men being forced to not be men, they don’t know what it means to be a man. They know vaguely what’s respectable. They know that this man is fit to be a mentor and that one is just forgettable. But there is no coherency in the mainstream culture about what it means to be a man. A real man does this. A real man does that. But in our hearts we all recognize the same problem as it exists in politics and inspirational talks: everyone’s talking about something to evade. About fixing some problem. Not about accomplishing a dream. Nothing about something to run towards.

Men aren’t the kind of creatures designed to run away.

Donovan builds civilization from chaos in front of your eyes in the second half of this book, and weaves not only sense into why societal things are the way they are and why it seems to be getting worse, but also constructs a cautionary and inspiring tale of how history itself operates – for what is history, but a story of men creating reality?

In and of itself, Jack Donovan doesn’t explain too much in this book. He doesn’t discuss the manosphere’s topics of picking up girls and female psychology in starting divorces. He doesn’t talk about national problems about welfare and healthcare, of war and economics. He doesn’t do the muscle work and elbow grease for explaining every single empire throughout history, why they rose here and fell then. It really doesn’t say too much at all.

But what it does say, unifies everything else. It is a set of ideas which causes all others to adhere and organize in the way they do.

There have been criticisms from the Humanists to people like me – they say I shouldn’t deconstruct things so often. That I should look at things “as a whole”, because there are many things you can’t know about something by studying it alone in a controlled and nonexistent environment. I agree with this criticism fullheartedly, and I turn it back to them and everyone else:

You are ignoring men. It is not Liberty or Equality or Social Welfare which holds civilization up. Men are the glue which holds everything together, and Men are the ones who created it, and Men are the ones who will create civilizations after this one has fallen, and Men will be there again to create it again and again, for the duration of all time.

I recommend this book to anyone and everyone, men and women alike. If the understanding you seek of something has anything to do with “Why do people do what they do”, this book will help you understand it. For women, it can help gain an insight into who men really are, not some vaguely humanized version of the laughingstocks on the glowing screen. Of course, for men, learning who you are is a great reason to read this too. But more importantly, this book also points you in the direction you need to walk, shows you an image of what you want to do, and will need to do, for all things good, holy, and sacred.

“The Way of Men”, by Jack Donovan.

I have added the author’s site to the blogroll on the right.
is the excerpt that got me to buy the book.