This Week in Reaction (2016/11/20)

The Election of Donald J. Trump as the cause for much celebration this week. Let’s call it Tap Dancing on Graves. William Scott takes an opportunity: The Left has fallen… And it can’t get up. It will, of course, get up… eventually. Giovanni Dannato declares A Season For Gloating. Unorthodoxy takes scalpel and bone saw in hand for Election 2016 Post-Mortem I. On why Cathedral Media got so much wrong:

I submit that in 2016, the information stopped flowing. The Cathedral is no longer a central node in the network, it is a local node in the Left network.

New local nodes on the Right now serve as focal points for the Right.

If this is true, the Cathedral wasn’t lying. The lügenpresse wasn’t lying. It was blinded. They didn’t know. They didn’t know there was a large pool of Trump support because this information did not flow into the Cathedral central nodes. They didn’t know there was an untapped pool of white voters for the GOP because the information didn’t flow. This is the exact opposite case with the dissident Right, which allows information to fully flow from all other nodes. Or, a less optimistic model, the dissident Right can’t yet shut off the flow from leftist nodes because their signals are way stronger. The dissident Right hears leftists arguments all the time. For the time being it is also more realistic though: it knows there is a large and growing pool of Democrat voters, that is one of the central organizing pieces of information, what pulls many people out of Cathedral-controlled Outer Party and into the dissident Right.


Pat Buchanan says Time for a Trump Doctrine.

Mark Citadel takes a look at Trump Viewed From The Right.

For the Reactionary, elections don’t change fundamentals, only superficialities and the slope of trajectories. Broadly, Occidental society continues to deteriorate, but the victory of Donald Trump serves our cause in many ways, and I argued for those during the course of the campaign. We should have both a spring in our step and a crestfallen mist in our eye, because while the everyman deservedly basks in the glow of an unexpected triumph, we know that there are still dark times ahead, just over the horizon line, times which most will not see coming, especially if a familiar complacency sets in, but times which we will be positioned to capitalize on.

No stranger to the podium, Citadel takes home an Editors’ Choice ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention

Antidem thinks that “Trump represents breathing room” for the Real Right.

Let’s see… what else was going on?

Butch has up a handy video on the Three Estates of the Realm.

Nick Land draws a line in the Left-Right sand at Wagner’s Law:

Nothing that falls short of a serious assault upon the real process formalized by Wagner’s Law merits the label ‘right-wing’. Conservatism, for instance, is merely decelerated leftism. Wilkinson is positively enthused by that. The Outer Right is everything that definitely isn’t.

This is going to need some digestion. He also linked to this: Donald Trump and the Failure of Mainstream Social Science, which was pretty good.

John A. Wheeler at Princeton University in 1967

John A. Wheeler at Princeton University in 1967

[M]any social scientists have quite openly voiced surprise and perplexity at both the Trump and Brexit events, often supporting their statements with proclamations of immorality directed at the voters. There’s something disturbingly unscientific about this, in my opinion. Imagine a group of physicists responding to an event they are unable to explain by morally condemning electrons? This would never happen, of course, because it is accepted in the physical sciences that models are tentative, and that they must be adjusted when they make incorrect predictions.

Social scientists, on the other hand, are Puritan divines, and adjusting models is heresy.

Nick Land also provides an I told ya so. Is 2016 1989? Or 1517? Filed under Gawd I’m Glad I Didn’t Catch That Episode of SNL: Shrink-Wrapped Schadenfreude.

Spandrell is enjoying seeing his enemies driven before him, &c., and advises: Keep up the pressure:

I thought [of] a new slogan to say to these people.

Check Your Signaling.

Yes, Shlomo. You lost your bets because you were busy signaling. Every time you say something stupid we’ll be there to tell you: Check your signaling. Because we know. We know you’re full of shit. And the thing is, we know you know it too. You’re a smart guy. You just need somebody to remind you. To shame you on your fawning to the elite. To shame you on your greedy status-seeking. To shame you on your signaling.


It can’t hurt. Our cause I mean.

Alf has a beautiful bit of fractal art to go with his thoughts on Organisms, superorganisms. Also, it’s getting to be Zwarte Piet Season over there—a joyous time of year when all the Dutch can outdo each other in cultural self-hatred. (All except Alf of course.) Another such time is Holland’s election season, and Alf offers Holland in bird’s view.

Carlos Esteban raises his nose and says, “¿Hueles eso, muchacho?” In the stench of globalist fears, Esteban smells victory.

Jon Frost has some plans for Donald J. Trump’s First 100 Days, with whcih I have more sympathy than some might imagine. I think “criminalize factory farming” is probably going a bit too far, but certainly humane practices can be improved there. Getting rid of the illegals alone should help in that regard. This one is straight out of the Menciian Playbook:

3) Revoke White House press credentials, and replace them with the most open and transparent administration in American history

This was good, and also blessedly un-election related… Neocolonial’s notes on Eucivic Morality. I’ve never heard this put quite so well before:

Dyscivic moralities develop in two directions. The first is the tendency towards individualism; the collapse of the group for which the survival strategy is optimised to a size of 1. The second is the tendency towards universalism; the subduction of the group boundary such that the circle of concern tends towards infinity.

Neocolonial earns an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Silver Circle Award☀ for his systematic, and seminal efforts here.

Over at Sydney Trads, Alistair Hermann delivers a gem: Tremors in the Overton. He begins with a valuable primer on Joseph P. Overton himself and the ideas behind his eponymous “Window of Discourse”, and then goes on to explain how Trump and others successfully violated the principle. Perhaps “Overton Bubble” a more appropriate name.

Ashley Greene, in red.

Ashley Greene, in red.

Trump actively marginalised only two groups of people. The first was criminal illegal immigrants. The second was journalists. Now consider this from the perspective of someone trapped inside the Overton Bubble. Under the constraints of respectable thought, it is improper to criticise a victim class like ‘illegal immigrants’ even if those criticism is limited to those who have committed crimes beyond their violation of sovereignty. Under the unwritten guidelines of respectable thought, anyone who has the audacity to publicly criticise the criminal subset of a victim class, inherently must be criticising the complete set. So a continued criticism of criminal illegal immigrants translates inside the bubble to criticism of illegal immigrants, to criticism of all immigrants—‘huge swaths of the American Public’. Furthermore, Trump had the audacity to continually criticise journalists and the media in general. So not only did bubble think expand Trump’s criticism of criminal illegal immigrants to all immigrants, he made those attacks personal to the journalists and media reporting on them. Journalists felt personally under threat, demeaned, stripped of respectability. These two assaults combined to prevent any semblance of the reality outside their bubble from breaking in.

Much more there. Excellent piece and an ☀☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Award☀☀ winner.

It is not clear from the context just how autobiographical this piece from Shylock Holmes is: The purgatory of eternal twilight. But it’s a brief, enjoyable read.

Atavisionary shares some thoughts on Calvin Cycle 2.0. Pretty sciency.

Michael Rothblatt has a Linkfest: Sodomite Edition. And this one was Linkfest: Neocameralism Edition.

Over at Neo-Ciceronian Times, Titus Cincinnatus has a brilliant new coinage: Monergocapitalism and the Diminution of the Human Spirit. And presents much food for thought along the way…

Mankind has always had technology and methods of organising his life, and had even had fitful starts at systematic science. However, it is only since the late 18th century (i.e. coinciding with the full efflorescence of “Enlightenment” thought) that human industry and life began to be dominated by “technique” in such a way that “progress” became formalised as a social aim and the function of economic competition became enshrined as the single acceptable driving force in society, with all others such as religion and morality being shunted to the side as “not useful.” Both man and machines were subordinated to the drive for economic improvement and advancement.

For his new coinage and his on-going efforts for a correct frame of political economy, Cincinnatus wins a coveted ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Silver Circle Award☀.

Finally, this week in Cambria Will Not Yield: The European Story.


This Week in Jim Donald

Jim’s Big Piece this week covers: What the alt right hopes for from Trump.

Of course Trump is not an alt rightist, despite what the left tells themselves. The alt right is just one of the factions of the Trump coalition, and far from being the largest or most influential, though the fact that the alt right is allowed any legitimacy at all horrifies and outrages the left.

But, though just one faction, and far from the largest, Trump has so far shown no inclination to succumb to the pressure to dump parts of the coalition that brought him to power. Many of us expected that he would, and did not much care so long as he builds the wall, but so far, all seems well. He is holding his coalition together. Trump is loyal to those that are loyal to him, and an enemy to his enemies. And if he sliced off one part of his coalition, leftists would demand even more strongly that he slice off another.

And Jim pleads with leftists to Don’t Stop—Scott Alexander’s advice notwithstanding.


This Week in Social Matter

Ryan Landry kicks the week with an overview of Destination Baltimore—a history of political and moral dysfunction. If Baltimores did not exist, the Establishment Left would have to create them.

Anthony DeMarco has his first Solo Climb: Gnon. No. He and I are not having a feud. It’s just a whole lot easier to schedule one guy doing a podcast than two or three.

On Wednesday’s Weimerica Weekly podcast, Landry recounts A Tale of Two Billionaires.

Speaking of the Overton Bubble, E. Antony Gray has some analysis for us on Friday: Ruling Castes And The Terminal Frame, which happens, for example, when the

…open mind has closed, and the sandwich upon which it has closed is Hillary Clinton.

The terminal frame is the edge you won’t cross, as a matter of faith. Everybody has them. It’s just that the Progs have really weird ones…

echo-chamberEach of us has a Terminal Frame, and one of the advantages of a well-formed religious upbringing is that it tends to – though not guaranteed – form this Terminal Frame out of old, good timber; such questions as which pertain to truly immutable and immortal truths are unlikely to be discovered in a political bubble OR in an uncensored forum. Of course, we admit that when what counts for publicly acceptable discourse is full-out lying, free speech at least gives you a chance—as one might see in the /pol/ boards for example—of encountering something solid enough to close your mind on.

And here is the real risk of echo chambers, that is, despite being nothing more than the fashion of a clique, they turn themselves into Terminal Frames. Some look at religions as sort of echo chambers with teeth, but rarely notice their own Terminal Frames (sometimes this frame involves a rejection of Terminal Frames—probably an incurable malady) and so do not notice the things upon which they hang their faith. Why? Because everyone experiences the things they have faith in the same way—not as a matter of belief, but as truth!

A fine bit of Menciian Analysis with a kick start from Chesterton… and an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.

For Saturday’s “Prose & Poetry”, it’s poetry, but quite a few objected to dignifying H. W. Delacroix’s verse by that name: Wageskank.


This Week in 28 Sherman

Over on the home blog, Landry gets an assist from Jim in forumulating a plan to Crush the Universities—or at least force them to survive by their own free market contributions to society. This part is often forgotten:

1. Work on an economic policy that returns some manufacturing here. This could be accomplished with the multinational cash repatriation issue if Trump cuts a deal that returns cash at a lower tax rate but in exchange, they must relocate some jobs here. This hurts the demand for university degrees.

There’s more where that came from. He concludes:

Jim wants to go after the priests. I want to reduce the number attending mass. Why not both?

Landry impresses The Committee to garner an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.

SoBL’s Next Big Idea™ in Entertainment is a Stealth Reboot of Golden Girls Idea. Don’t laugh just yet. (Landry knows way too much about this stuff for my comfort!)

This Week in WW1 Pics: A Highlander Corporal from 1916, beautifully colorized.

Finally at 28 Sherman: Fraying in The Core, wherein he takes a very sanguine view of California’s potential secession. Not that it’s really going to happen.


This Week in Kakistocracy

Porter continues to digest the meaning (if any) behind Trump’s election. I will be interesting to see The First Fight Trump decides to pick. Sanctuary cities might make an excellent warm-up.

Next up: “If a lib cries racist in the forest, does it make a sound if no one gives a shit?” Two weeks in now and the Not Giving a Shit seems to be holding in the Trump transition team.

Porter has coverage of potential who-whoms, in the Trump Administration, and the potential merits: There’s a New Mahout in Town


This Week in Evolutionist X

In the Election Aftermath, Evolutionist X goes there: Chimps, Dominance, and the Irony of Riots. Uggh. Not her writing about it I mean, just the ugliness that bubbled up. Fortunately, Mrs. X has some Jane Goodall handy for some perspective.

[Male chimpanzee] Mike’s urge to display in front of these newcomers was so strong that it completely overwhelmed his normal senses. The aggressive instinct is no mere luxury–showing that he is stronger than the other chimps is how Mike keeps his own troop safe.


Well… at least it’s forgivable when chimpanzees do it.

Leaving the election aside (mostly), next she kicks off a series: Why are Mammals Brown? . Part 1 documents the difficulty nature has to go through to produce colors at the blue and violet end of the spectrum. There simply isn’t such mechanism to do so with mammalian hair. Various biological structures thus default to the red and brown end. Part 2 covers other reasons drab ol’ brown and brownish works well for mammals.

Evolutionist X has an Open Thread, Comment of the Week, etc. featuring a discussion on the ways in which the American Empire splits apart. As well as an unexpected death in the family. Keep Mrs. X in your prayers.

And she has the next installment of Exploration Friday: Russia in the New World, pt 3, in which excerpts are liberally borrowed from JOhn Walton Caughey’s History of the Pacific Coast, Chapter XI: “Russian America”.


This Week in West Coast Reactionaries

This was interesting: WCR contributor Ash Davidson kicks off a series on The State of the English Middle Class: An Introduction, a subject on which he appears to have substantial personal knowledge.

On Friday, Alexander tackles the whole Safe Space Submission & the War on Banter, and how mere banter is different the bullying.

We must reject “strength through victimhood” because it is a game we can never win.

Amen to that! A very strong bit of analysis of group dynamics in this ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.


This Week Around The Orthosphere

Dalrock helpfully highlights one of the least plausible oppression stories… in an already implausible pond. Also there a review of Mel Gibson’s Hacksaw Ridge, along with some background on the story.

Some Post-Election thoughts over at Matt Briggs’ place: Riots Are Not Protests. Well, by Formalist standards they are, but by Formalist standards we shouldn’t have two words for the same thing. And in the Official W. M. Briggs Podcast it’s The Demon In Democracy by Legutko, Part I.

Briggs has another installment of Diversity Kills: Air Force Edition.

From New Zealand, Chris Gale has an on-the–shaky-ground Update day three Kaikoura.

Over at The Orthosphere proper, Bertonneau draws up, with remarkable concision, A Basic Paradox.


This Week in Arts & Letters


David Grant has a bit of speculative fiction in the first person: Ghost Story.

More over that over at WCR: Alexander relates the story of Anarchist Alone.

Over at Imaginative Conservative, an affecting bit of poetry from William Bryant:
. And: Where Have All the Great Composers Gone?

Also there: Leaving the Union: Could a State Successfully Secede Today? Secede or die? I know the Official SM Editorial Position is: Save the Empire. But the thought of California seceding is… positively mouthwatering.

Pointing out liberal hypocrisy is like shooting fish in a barrel, but it can be done more or less artfully: Dissent For Me, Not For Thee at City Journal. Also there, from Matthew Hennessey: Mitt Romney, Secretary of State? Stranger things have happened. Like that’s not even a bad thing? (TBH, it isn’t clear that it isn’t.)

Chris Gale has Half a Kipple: “After”.


This Week… Elsewhere

PA has a suggestion for a freshly minted Trump Administration, and a nice meme graphic to boot, in Hollywood, Pedowood: Taking Down The Coalition Of Creeps.

Trump’s election victory has secured a beachhead in our campaign to break the Left’s stranglehold on the platforms of cultural power: entertainment, education, banking, organized religion. In their present form—as parasites on our civilization’s capital and given the long-standing allegations of pedophilia—those institutions are home to a coalition of creeps who are ripe for taking down.

The very lovely Violett Beane

The very lovely Violett Beane

It doesn’t even seem that hard. He also some derision to pour over Dems’ Phony Newfound Love for the White Working Class

The Anti-Puritan’s Aphorism 23 is a very good one.

Giovanni Dannato has a nice pictorial to go with his imprecations in The Aesthetics of Dominance.

Over at The Mitrailleuse, Moldbug-aware Videshi Sutra takes note of the underappreciated similarities between Trump and Modi.

By way of Free Northerner, an new reactionary blog: Northern Dawn and Stephen Leacock Speaks. (Unfortunately they do not have Follow-by-Email…)

Joseph Ratliff uncovers The Best Place to Hide the Truth…

Filed under Well Good Luck With That: Google Announces Ban on Fake News. Also The Economist finally realizes China is racist.

Over at Faith & Heritage, David Carlton writes approvingly, but not without reservation, of Sports as an Opportunity for Intergenerational Masculine Bonding. Approximately the way it is around our house.

Lawrence Murray had an AMA over at /r/altright/ and brought some of the juicier bits over to his blog. And he offers Notes on Building a Deep State.

If President Trump is to succeed in our favor, he must not merely be an aberration to presentism, but initiate a paradigm shift against time. It’s time to take back the current year. The Trump administration will either erect a deep state that implements lasting nationalism or become a footnote as future leftists undo his work.

Murray sees Civic Nationalism—acceptable in polite society, for now, barely—as practically indistinguishable from ethno-nationalism (which is “Literally Hitler” for Europeans).

Heartiste digs up a dandy Danish study: Whites Are More Empathetic Than NonWhites. This kind of stuff is important ammunition for the kinds of people who don’t believe their eyes—not that it will make them believe their eyes, but it’s good to have on-hand to complete the trifecta: Inductive reasoning alone is enough. If you don’t believe the inductive reasoning, then you should at least believe your eyes and common stereotypes (because common). If you don’t believe your eyes, here are some empirical findings for you to doubt as well. Also at Le Château, a phrase whose time has come: False Rape Culture.


That’s all I got for this week. Slightly shorter than usual. You are welcome. Keep on reactin’! Til next week, NBS… over and out!!

Liked it? Take a second to support Social Matter on Patreon!
View All


  1. Michael Rothblatt November 23, 2016 at 8:16 am

    Thanks Nick!

  2. Thanks Nick!

    Lots of great stuff out this week, it looks like. I greatly appreciated Sydney Trads’ piece about the Overton window. I hadn’t read all the way through Neocolonial’s piece on dyscivic morality, but will have to finish it today. That quote,

    “Dyscivic moralities develop in two directions. The first is the tendency towards individualism; the collapse of the group for which the survival strategy is optimised to a size of 1. The second is the tendency towards universalism; the subduction of the group boundary such that the circle of concern tends towards infinity.”

    I think is an incredibly astute summation of the whole issue of the “Enlightenment” world – the liberals and socialists simply can’t leave traditional society well enough alone, but must constantly move us either radical end of the “individualism — collectivism” spectrum. We can’t be allowed to just stay in the middle where God and nature would have us to remain.

  3. Good collection of articles, I read especially many dealing with election results and Trump victory.

    Thank you to those who responded to my comments, if they happen to see this. At this time I have shortage of time, so I likely dont engage in conversations, but I always read the comments. I present some ideas which might serve as fuel for your thoughts and ideas.

    In my previous comment on Descending the Tower -discussions I talked about a metaphorical two hand strategy where the right hand hits and breaks liberal structures, and left hand builds conservative structures. Although this is the first goal, when it is translated into the real world, the picture is more complex.

    Yes, many liberal structures are fairly cleanly separated from conservative structures, and if we would “punch them”, they would fade away. E.g. if we take funding away from radical liberal intellectuals, and use the saved money to fund conservative intellectuals, the overall unemployment doesnt change much, bad influence is removed, and good new intellectual force radiates inluence all over society. With their talent repertoire, radical liberal intellectuals will then perhaps flip burgers at McDonalds, and if they have development potential, they move up from there.

    But many other liberal structures have grown numerous tentacles to healthy parts of society, and grown so much together with them, that it is difficult to separate them. If we “hit” the bad parts, good parts will to varying extent suffer too. If the bad part dies, good part might die too. Also in the present liberal arrangement of society, healthy parts of society have a tendency to spontaneously produce liberalism and/or turn into liberal units.

    In US, manufacturing employs 8,8% of people, and service sector more than 80%. 20% of people could, with all the mass production technologies, easily design, produce and transport all the material things people need or want, housing, food, things, cars, etc. 20% could flood the society with so much material things, that people would drown in them. We have plentiful capacity to poduce more than people mostly need or want, especially when the available time, energy, space, possibilities and money is in the equation.

    There is only certain maximum amount your family uses toothpaste. Your family may want several vases, but they likely dont want all their tables and shelves to be full of vases. You may want two cars, so that each of your familys two driver licence holders has one, but not more to reduce the hustle, parking requirements, maintenance, expenses, etc. associated with them. You may need eyeglassess, but likely you dont want or need more than two or three. Etc. Even if we take account of economic constrains, like when resources are used abundantly in one production area, they are relatively less available in another production area (all production areas cannot be maximized at the same time), we still have the capacity to overproduce fairly universally.

    If all the + 80% of service producers would work at full capacity and all their schedules and service lots were fully booked and used, we would be serviced and pampered to silliness, laziness and inaction.

    So lets imagine realistic entrepreneur Jack, in his personal life and views a fairly conservative family man / father, whose company produces beauty creams and lotions for women. His business employs many people, and Jack feels responsible for them too. Competition in this area is intense. There are many competitors, who have numerous good quality, well marketed, famously trademarked and/or low price alternatives. Jacks business financial pressures are high, situation is tight. Markets are full, women would not consume much more beauty creams and lotions even if they would get additional creams etc. for free.

    So Jack starts to think, what if men would use these creams and lotions too, we could get more profit. As a fairly conservative man he feels a bit uncomfortable thinking about it, but he then invents a soothing narrative around the whole thing. Well, we cuff such labels to the flank of these tubes and bottles, which have pictures of really masculine men, and we market this as something that really masculine and handsome men do. And they would not really care about their beauty, they would make themselves more healthy and vigorous looking, more handsome, thus more masculine looking. And what if it really meant that men care a little bit about their beauty, and invested some time and money to it? It couldnt hurt them much, could it? And if it hurts their masculinity a little bit, where do they need it so much in modern society? And anyway it is a small price to pay for vital and good economy …

    Jack becomes more liberal in his political outlook. He stays fairly conservative man in his personal life, and this hides partly the big magnitude of his change in politics. He starts to support liberal politicians. He starts to turn a blind eye to radical liberals and their politics, and gradually silently mostly approves them. Liberal equality between sexes? Yes. Unisex WCs? Why not. Affirmative action to women? Yes. Choosing ones gender freely in all situations, including in official context? Well, we are a free country, free choice is our tradition. Men and women interchangeable units in society? Well wouldnt it improve our societys functioning reliability, if anybody could replace almost anyone? Etc.

    Now imagine a business in similar market situation which produces masculine products almost exclusively for men, and would like to expand its customer base aggressively to women.

    Then imagine a huge number of these kinds of businesses all over the Western world. You can see where one the most significant pressures towards feminized men and masculinized women -liberalism comes. Similar naturally or fairly naturally arising pressures comes from bureaucracies and other public organizations, radical liberal intellectuals, cities liberalized white underclass and middle class, managerial class, media organizations, NGOs, etc., they just have to varying extent different reasons for their views. Their politics converge, interact, mutually reinforce and combine to liberal politics, where they all can agree on its basic principles. From many to a sickening one.

    Then we increasingly have feminized beauty boy men, who consume a lot of time caring about their looks, splashing their face with beauty creams, plucking their facial hair meticulously, taking revitalizing face therapies, and whatever else it is that these menwomen do. We increasingly have also e.g. unsightly butch

    So what to do with these kind of liberal economic pressures arising from firms and market situation?

    First we must accept, that masculinity has always had and has today price to pay, it was never given and foregone conclusion. E.g. warriors of the past started hardening and training themselves in the childhood, and this continued often to old age. The prices people have to pay for masculinity varies according to a type of society, people, culture, economy, ethnic, national and international competition, and times. One of the prices we in the liberal society have to pay in the beginning (but not later) is that we may lose some economic opportunities, which is the same that we pay something for it. Economy is adaptive, and if it loses some opportunities, it will develop others in their stead. But we also notice that we cannot break liberalism producing economy wholly to pieces with metaphorical one “big hit”, because it would also threaten our societies vital functions.

    Instead I would recommend a policy of thousand surgical hits or cuts to liberal economy. One of the main problems of liberal economy is that it produces too much things and services for people, and then uses desperate, manipulative, coercive and harmful methods to sell those down our throats. We men buy beauty creams only if every authority, power holder, bureaucracy and organization in society has made us, starting from kindergarten and childhood, into feminized and pampered slobs with uniform propaganda, “education” coercion and incentives.

    These expectations, demands and pressures from societies structures is directed too much towards people, so these must be redesigned and redirected with thousand of ways, more away from people. These is too much managers, who design people, social engineer people and whose job is to create new liberal men. Our societies and managers energies must first be directed away from designing uniform, but individually unstable people. Managers could be directed to plan missions to Mars and to the stars. They could be directed to produce competitive and varying evolutionarily developing education system. Intellectuals could be ordered to work some years in businesses before they get tenures, so they receive knowledge of real life, and then ordered to keep contacts to practical life and society, so that they are less likely to produce abstract philosophies, where men are neutral and technical non-human units. Intellectuals could be directed away from designing simple principles foreign to richness of life, according to which society must then be modified. They could then produce theories which as fully as possible take account of the richness and variance of life, and make it flourish, not oppress it. We are surrounded by ugly things. Unseemly cube buildings everywhere. Our modern architecture art buildings are just cubes which have some waves in them. We dont produce anymore such beauty that is found in old churches and old significant building, which have beautiful shapes, art and decorations. We could direct our work to produce more beauty and more variance in our buildings and things, all things. Everybody who is producing and adding beauty is not manipulating or social engineering men, and afterwards stunning beauty has propensity to produce noble thoughts and feelings, including awe. Etc.

    If intellectuals are not redirected from above, lets increasingly replace them.

  4. “we increasingly have feminized beauty boy men, who consume a lot of time caring about their looks, splashing their face with beauty creams, plucking their facial hair meticulously, taking revitalizing face therapies, and whatever else it is that these menwomen do.”

    Part of the problem here is a breakdown of social controls. Well into living memory, a man found using nancy-boy skin creams and whatnot would face swift and certain punishment in the form of a judicious physical beating administered by his peers, and so the idea never even occurred to anybody.

Comments are closed.