Welcome to left-brained hell!

Modern architecture, designed by le Corbusier, in Chandigarh, one of several planned cities in India.

I remember reading about Brasília when I was a boy. Brasília is Brazil’s capital. It was designed from scratch as a “new, planned city”, just like several others around the world. By many accounts, the city is ugly and boring. The feature montage I borrowed is misleading; take a closer look at those rows of monolithic slabs. Much of the city looks like that, or worse. A few key buildings in the central district have sculptural qualities, but most buildings throughout the city, including and especially apartment blocks and office buildings, are featureless boxes, hardly surprising given that the chief architect was the communist Oscar Niemeyer, who cited as his inspiration the French modernist architect Le Corbusier, notorious for his featureless monoliths.

Modern art, the inspiration for modern architecture. Composition II in Red, Blue, and Yellow, 1930, by Piet Mondrian. Post-modern art goes further; instead of being meaningless, it destroys existing meaning.

The city planners intentionally designed the city into different functional segments, instead of mixing activities as crowd-developed cities do. So, for example, if you’re in the hotel district as a visitor, you get to look at more hotels. The city was designed for driving, not walking, so pedestrians reportedly end up risking their lives dashing across thoroughfares and freeways. Between lack of pedestrian traffic and single-use zoning, there’s reportedly no significant night-life, which seems odd for a Latin-American country.

The overall plan of the city is the shape of an airplane. I don’t know how good the overland transportation facilities are, but due to some unusual geography, Brazil tends not to have extensive railroad networks. My guess is the city was designed to be served mostly by air traffic, and will be severely impacted when air traffic declines with rising fuel prices and aging air fleets.

Normal cities aren’t really “unplanned”; they ARE planned, by the conscious and unconscious choices of MANY people instead of by the conscious, excessively conceptual choices of just a few people. When an entrepreneur decides where to put his business, he thinks about what kinds of people doing what kinds of activities would be interested in his business. So, for example, an entrepreneur would put a hotel near business activities, entertainment and recreational facilities, and restaurants, instead of clustering all the hotels together.

So when a community is said to be “planned”, what that really means is that the planning has been centralized instead of dispersed. Here’s a recent story about a planned community, only they’re calling it a “smart city”:

Bill Gates buys big chunk of land in Arizona to build ‘smart city’

PHOENIX – One of Bill Gates’ investment firms has spent $80 million to kickstart the development of a brand-new community in the far West Valley. … “Belmont will create a forward-thinking community with a communication and infrastructure spine that embraces cutting-edge technology, designed around high-speed digital networks, data centers, new manufacturing technologies and distribution models, autonomous vehicles and autonomous logistics hubs,” Belmont Partners said in a news release. Bianca Buono , KPNX 11:04 AM. MST November 13, 2017

My take:

  • The USA is already over-built. We don’t need any more infrastructure; we can’t even keep what’s already built in working order!
  • American demographics are increasingly 3rd world. We’re running out of engineers but we have plenty of unskilled people and chronically unemployed people. Is that who’s going to live in Bill’s model city? What are they going to do with their high-tech toys?
  • We’re undoubtedly on the wrong side of the peak resource curve. Why would anyone build a resource-intensive new city extremely dependent on air-conditioning and piped-in water? Where’s the water going to come from, and will it be a depleting resource? Wouldn’t it make more sense to re-engineer existing cities for resource efficiency?

My prediction: the planned city, if it’s ever built, will end up being a costly sink-hole for money and resources, and an ugly, unpleasant place to live.

  • I wouldn’t invest.
  • I wouldn’t live there.
  • I wouldn’t even be curious to visit, unless to document the fiasco for posterity.
  • For long-term viability, I’d find somewhere with arable land, nearby economic production (hard to find in western countries anymore), and several lines of transportation including rail.

Bill Gates is very intelligent, probably genius. He’s skilled at math and science. My guess though is that he has an extreme “left-brain” cognitive profile: he thinks excessively in terms of pre-existing concepts, and isn’t very creative. His company’s consumer products are a reflection of that bias in his thinking.

It might be genetic, or it might be the result of living in a culture that is itself getting excessively “left-brained”. Keep reading my website for insights that are a little more cognitively-balanced.

Facing a life-threatening condition without despair

The problem is never the problem; the problem is your reaction to the problem.

If we had a big party just before we expired, with friends and family, all smiles and laughter to the end, and went out with a song in our hearts, then even death wouldn’t seem particularly tragic. It would just seem like the end of a mundane process.

It IS just the end of a process.

Death is not a problem; the problem is suffering as a result of pain and fear.

It’s not the end of any thing. As far as we’re aware, nothing comes into existence, nothing goes out of existence, things just change form. There is no self; it’s just a purposeful illusion that helps us to maintain biological integrity. When our life’s work is finished, nothing that’s real disappears!

तत् त्वम सि — Thou art that
You are the Kosmos looking back on itself. Not just part of it; you are the whole thing experiencing itself. Your sense of separateness is an illusion caused by thoughts localized around lots of different perspectives that don’t communicate directly.

There is no separate “self”; it’s an illusion. You needn’t fear losing something that doesn’t exist.

We are Awareness experiencing streams of sensory input. Sensory experiences come in and out of Awareness. But our true nature, Awareness, exists outside time and has no moving parts to wear out!

What happens is that we fall in love with individual streams of sensory input, start identifying with them, and develop an “ego”. The ego is a purposeful illusion, that helps us maintain biological boundaries and give us an incentive to fight for survival as long as possible. That part is good.

The only bad part is identifying with something that never did have any tangible existence, and then worrying about something going away, that never actually existed.

Ultimately, it’s all good. Suffering implies enjoyment. Death implies birth. Sickness implies health. We tend to think of all these conditions as “opposites”, but they are necessarily two sides of the same coin; only in your imagination, within conceptual boundaries that exist only in your mind, can you have one without the other. It’s mind-boggling, but if we never experienced suffering, we wouldn’t recognize bliss. As any artist can tell you, there’s no foreground without a background!

Without suffering there is no compassion. There wouldn’t even be love, because love implies feelings like care & loss that wouldn’t exist if there was no need for care and no possibility of loss.

Mindfulness of suffering reminds me to be compassionate to everyone, including even people I don’t like. I remember that they suffer too, and that their behaviors that cause me to suffer are a result of trying to avoid suffering themselves.

Without suffering, there would also be no compassion; we’d all be completely selfish. Some would argue “no loss”. Are they so sure about that? Would our experiences be that much less rich for not ever having experienced compassion?

What about courage? Is that worth experiencing?

If you can experience life from something closer to a God’s-eye point of view, you embrace it all, even the suffering. You kiss the wheel of Samsara, the cycle of birth, suffering and enjoyment, and death. Samsara is nothing more or less than the other side of Nirvana. Their dual nature is an illusion of your mind, which separates things out with conceptual boundaries that exist only in your mind so that it can process reality in workable chunks.

Ask for help handling pain

Pain is our friend; its purpose is to alert us to harm that needs our attention. If it’s chronic and associated with a condition you already know about, then it’s no longer needed. You can ask your doctor for help to at least take the edge off it.

Handle pain by handling suffering

I am myself in chronic pain. I don’t take any pain medications because I don’t feel any need. Maybe someday I will, but not today.

Suffering is not the same thing as pain; suffering is more like mental anguish. If you can reduce suffering, your tolerance of pain increases. This isn’t my opinion; it’s an experimentally-derived empirical fact. If people are in a good mood, their tolerance of pain is much higher than if they’re already miserable. This is how my own pain is quite tolerable to me. I am content, and happy most of the time.

You can reduce suffering by dissociating from the body. Sri Ramana Maharshi maintained peace of mind through the process of cancer. He would look at his aching arm, where the tumor was, and calmly remark “poor arm”. I do the same thing with my chronic pain. “My body is in pain. I’m OK. I enjoy life. I have work yet to accomplish (finishing raising a young daughter!), and I am grateful for the time I have left to work on it”.

  • Happiness solves all problems. Keep your spirits as high as you can.
  • Start noticing blessings. What you are grateful for, contributes to your happiness. What you take for granted, doesn’t.
  • Spend time with family and friends, doing things you enjoy, up to your ability. It doesn’t have to be expensive or extravagant. Just a phone call will raise your spirits. If that isn’t possible, recall warm, happy memories. Think loving thoughts of them, and they will ease your own mind.
  • Mindfulness training can help reduce anxiety caused by over-thinking things you have no control over.
  • Exercise if you’re up to it, and just time outdoors, at least 10 minutes twice a day, can help keep your spirits up.

You are a part of the team that’s fighting for your life. Your immune system is working hard to destroy disease and heal your body. Enjoy the comfort of rest and relaxation when you need them. This fight is part of your divine purpose.

This post is dedicated with love to my wife, who has been living with stage 4 cancer for about 5 years now, and with the warm hand of friendship across the aether that connects us to Justin Raimondo who has been diagnosed with late-stage adeenocaricinoma cancer. Justin is the editor of Antiwar.com. He has dedicated his life to the causes of peace and freedom.

Learn more:

What self-driving cars mean for your future…

Revised destination: officeCar computer announcing over-ride of destination, Minority Report

The movie Minority Report isn’t really about mutants who have nightmares about future events; it’s about predictive AI (artificial intelligence). My guess is that the mutants are a way of making the AI seem sexier than something intangible that’s hard to visualize. Or, maybe the author didn’t want to tip you off any more than necessary to prime you for your future. Unlike in the movie, it won’t go away after being abused.

“Fully Self-Driving Cars Are Here” – Waymo To Begin Testing Driver-Free Autonomous Taxis In Phoenix

For most of civilized history, personal mobility has been a luxury. Most people never strayed far from where they were born, and travel was an ordeal. The whole concept of owning a car and driving wherever you want within a huge territory would have seemed like an impossible luxury.

For most of civilized history, you needed permission to travel from one place to another. In some empires, like Old China or the Inca Empire, most people were not allowed to travel except between home and work; in other words, you couldn’t just ask and get permission; the answer was a standing “NO!”. Nowadays, although there are some registration requirements left, more in some countries than others, you don’t need to ask permission up-front to travel or change residences.

Nowadays, most middle-people in the “western” countries take that level of personal mobility for granted. Now I have some bad news: it’s going away.

  • In the relatively near future, the cost of transportation will be relatively high compared to now.
  • Owning cars will be a luxury.
  • Positive and negative incentives will motivate people to give up owning a personal car.
  • Car transportation will be a rented service. You’ll call up a car you don’t own, it will take you to your destination, then drive itself away to the next customer.
  • As you lose control over your own vehicle—which is already starting—someone else will have the authority to over-ride your travel plans. This is already starting. Eventually you will be able to travel only with permission, just like in the old days.
  • Your transportation habits will be monitored. This has already started; chips in your car and your cell phone are already informing on you.
  • Once enough people go along with the plan more-or-less willingly, it will start being imposed and enforced through regulations and taxes.
  • Anyone whose job is primarily driving will probably lose it.

Personally, I accept loss of ownership of means of travel. What bugs me is loss of freedom of movement. My guess is that most of the time, we’ll get implicit permission to move around where we want to go, but live under the threat of having it taken away if we step out of line. And our smart gizmos will constantly be watching us.

How do I know this? I’m tuned in to the right channels and can read between the lines.

It will take some intelligence to come up with counter-strategies to go about our business, tip off the AI as little as possible, and make the best of our remaining choices. Subscribe and pick my brains.

Current state of financial system explained

This is X22 interviewing Jim Rickards. It’s a year old but still relevant, and in fact covers some important topics. Rickards’ claim to fame is that he was legal counsel for Long Term Capital Management when the hedge fund went bankrupt. As a result, he has a deeper understanding than most of the vulnerabilities of financial markets.

In the interview, he mentions some financial crises that didn’t crash the markets. The markets dropped a little, but recovered quickly. That’s only because of market interventions by central banks and their banking partners. Arguably, each of those market interventions made the whole system more fragile by creating moral hazard for taking on too much risk. Eventually something is going to happen that will overwhelm efforts to intervene.

What we don’t know is when it will happen. We don’t even quite know exactly what will happen, though we can make an intelligent guess of a rough approximation. The right way to approach those unknowns is to make yourself less fragile against known hazards of

  • default: someone owes you money and doesn’t pay you back. That somebody could even be a bank or a broker.
  • falling asset prices: the market price of assets you own falls, but any debt you have will still be worth the same! You might end up owing more than you own.
  • price inflation: the buying power of your money is falling. Sometimes quite rapidly.

The way to deal with the hazards of a doomed financial system is to keep some of your net worth in precious metal, because it has ZERO counterparty risk (assuming it’s physical coins or bars that you have in your own possession, not an intangible promise), some in ready physical cash in as safe a place as you can keep it away from hazards like fires, floods, pests that chew paper, and theft, and whatever you need for routine transactions in the safest place you can put it–probably an “insured” account at a bank. Check your bank’s credit rating. It’s no guarantee that your bank won’t fail, but at least you can do due diligence to make sure that yours isn’t the first domino to fall!

Someone complained in the comments under this video that Jim Rickards carries the party line about Russia invading the Crimea (for those who aren’t aware, Russia did not invade the Crimea. They have treaty rights to it, and the locals even voted to remain under Russian rule, partly because there are many local Russians, but also because they don’t want to be part of the heavily-indebted and hopelessly corrupt Ukraine). Unfortunately, someone as well-connected as Mr. Rickards is under intense pressure to tow the party line. You burn bridges by speaking truth to power. We’re just lucky that someone as well-connected as he is, is willing to talk to the serfs like us. Most people at his station in life would dole out bad advice through one of their hirelings.

The knockout game is back.

The “knockout game” is back. That’s when young hoodlums make a game out of sucker-punching an unsuspecting victim, trying to knock him or her out with one blow. They do it to score admiration from their peers. If you’ve seen crime-surveillance video of one of these attacks, you might notice other hoodlums standing nearby watching the action. Sometimes they rob the incapacitated victim, or pose with the victim for selfies!

At least one case I have heard of resulted in the death of the victim.

Both men and women have been attacked, and even the elderly.

I expect attacks like these to get worse as social breakdown continues.

Take action:

  • If you haven’t had self-defense training and in particular situational-awareness training, get some.
  • You can find low-cost, online classes in basic self-defense, through venues like Udemy.com. Something is better than nothing. They can teach you enough to save your life.
  • If you have the resources, consider serious, in-person self-defense training.
  • Encourage your loved ones to do the same. Warn them about the danger.

 

 

 

Flynn…Mueller…Russiagate Hoax…Gülen terrorist network: Sibel Edmonds connects the dots!

There is a lot of back-story here. Here is my executive summary for those of you who need it:

 

  • There is a gigantic black-ops network operating primarily in Central Asia, but ultimately worldwide.
  • It doesn’t have an official name but is variously known as Gülen Movement, Hizmet Hareketi, or Cemaat.
  • They operate under the cover of a network of “moderate” Islamic schools which they use for recruiting. It’s a model similar to Muslim Brotherhood but Turkish not Arab.
  • The CIA hires it to attack Russia’s “weak underbelly” along its border with central Asia.
  • Sibel Edmonds stumbled onto it during her work at the FBI, but when she tried to blow the whistle on it, she got fired and hit with a gag order! She has hinted that it has operations in the USA involving US politicians, but she can’t tell us the details. This is at the heart of what is popularly known as “the Swamp”.
  • Retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn got involved when the Flynn Intel Group was hired to investigate Gülen. This isn’t a secret and he did not hide his activities; Flynn openly published an editorial on the topic.
  • The Deep State struck back with an “investigation” designed to harass him and force him to resign, and a media smear campaign.
  • Harassment under the cover of an “investigation” has caused a financial burden not to mention a great deal of stress to Michael Flynn and his family.
  • Edmonds has discovered conflicts-of-interest that require Robert Mueller to immediately resign as special counsel on the so-called “investigation”.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. The connection to Russia is that Gülen is used to harass them in a part of the world that is rich in mineral resources. The whole Russiagate thing is nonsense which is why the “investigation” hasn’t come up with any credible evidence of wrongdoing. That’s not its purpose; it’s real purpose is harassment and a pretext for a soft or possibly even hard coup. None of this is in our national interests; it funds corruption and terrorism.

SPREAD THE WORD. MAKE THIS GO VIRAL. MAINSTREAM MEDIA WON’T COVER THE REAL STORY BECAUSE THEY’RE ON-CONTRACT WITH THE DEEP STATE.

Subscribe to Newsbud and support independent media!

Help out Michael Flynn and his family under the duress of legal harassment.


Background reading:

Yes, they really want to abolish marriage & family. Here’s why.

I recently spotted a post about Israeli politician Merav Michaeli and her advocacy of forcibly abolishing marriage and family.

Equality, by the way, is a bad meme. Evolution towards higher and higher levels of biology requires distinguishing between failure and success.

I’d like to respond to the numerous astonished and scandalized reactions to her proposals.

  • This isn’t a joke. She’s serious.
  • She and her feminist lobby have made some progress towards their goals. Israel now has mandatory schooling for 3 year olds, and the law is scheduled to be enforced nationwide this year and the next. They’ve got more agenda items in progress. The point of mandatory “schooling” for 3 year olds is to shift child-rearing from parents, and particularly mothers, to the state. Ms. Michaeli is on-record for advocating that child-rearing be a government function.
  • This is nothing new. She’s not the first to advocate abolishing marriage and family, and her predecessors go back hundreds if not thousands of years. Plato at least advocated abolishing marriage and family among the ruling class.
  • It’s been tried on an experimental basis. In the early Soviet Union, some peasant families were forcibly dissolved, the members being sent to different collectives.
  • In Israel, the experiment was performed on a basis that was voluntary at least among adults in the Kibbutzim (Israeli communes). Children, however, didn’t have a choice to grow up in one. The collective child-rearing practices of the Kibbutzim mostly died out in the 1980s.
  • Ms. Michaeli and her feminist organizations are openly lobbying to turn the whole country into one big Kibbutz, with no right to opt out.
  • Ms. Michaeli is not the first or only politician who favors abolition of family and marriage; she’s just one of the few who openly admits it. They exist in other countries too.
  • Outside of Israel, politicians like Ms. Michaeli are still in hiding. However, they’re already lobbying, and they’re getting help from the Hollywood and public schooling indoctrination machines.

Here are some notes on her TEDx speech:

I want all secular states to totally eliminate all registration and regulation of marriage. I want to cancel the very concept of marriage.

It’s all about her. Why should the rest of the 6.5 billion people on the planet care about what SHE wants?!

“Simone de Beauvoire”

Why should a woman who was sexually repulsed by and sexually jealous of men, whose only relationship with a man (ironically, a marxist gigolo at that) was one of a platonic room-mate, decide what’s good for women who want to have relationships with men?

More generally, why have so many women thrown their lots in with the lesbian mafia?

De Beauvoire was, by the way, as radical as Ms. Michaeli. She was adamant that women shouldn’t be permitted to marry or raise children even if they wanted to.

“…HIS children…”

She keeps saying that over and over. HIS children (not “ours” or even “mine”). She seems to be repulsed by the whole concept of motherhood. I’ve witnessed this phenomenon among some other feminists too.

“Unpaid work”

She means “untaxed productivity”. When women work at home, or on a subsistence farm which is the case in many parts of the world, their transactions aren’t easily taxable. Getting women into wage-paying transactions was the real reason that governments began subsidizing and promoting feminists. It was (and remains) an economic scheme, not really a philosophical or ideological idea motivated by some sense of what really is for the better.

The real motivation for abolishing marriage and family is the same that farmers have for separating hens and roosters, cows and bulls, and artificially raising chicks and calves instead of letting their parents raise them. We are human livestock.

It just so happens though that there is some small fraction of the population that are keen on the idea because of their own personal psychology or sexuality (among other things, they’re losing their parenting instincts just like highly domesticated animals do), and willing to promote it.

…We have cut the links between child and parent, and between man and man, and between man and woman. No one dares trust a wife or a child or a friend any longer. But in the future there will be no wives and no friends. Children will be taken from their mothers at birth, as one takes eggs from a hen. The sex instinct will be eradicated. Procreation will be an annual formality like the renewal of a ration card. We shall abolish the orgasm. Our neurologists are at work upon it now. There will be no loyalty, except loyalty towards the Party. There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother. There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy. There will be no art, no literature, no science. When we are omnipotent we shall have no more need of science. There will be no distinction between beauty and ugliness. There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — for ever.’

George Orwell, 1984

The world that Merav Michaeli and her allies are creating will be an ugly and unhappy one. Even for the “farmers”, that is members of the ruling class, since they have nannies to raise their children and so are already imposing the bad idea on themselves.

I don’t have a solution, just a warning. My only suggestion is to resist.

This is a contrary indicator

At the risk of being Captain Obvious:

Morgan Stanley: “Client Cash Is At Its Lowest Level” As Institutions Dump Stocks To Retail

—Zero Hedge

Two bad signs. Lack of ready cash means investors might be forced to sell securities to raise cash. It also means excessive optimism. Institutions selling and retail investors buying means that securities are flowing from stronger hands to weaker hands.

I’m not claiming that the stock market is either about to crash, or to enter a bear market. It might, or might not. I suspect it’s more likely to than not, but there’s always something I don’t know. I wouldn’t know if the Federal Reserve were about to inject a lot of liquidity into the market, for instance. By the way, the graphic of a chart that I used as a feature image for the article is purely symbolic and doesn’t refer to anything specific! As of this writing, nothing has crashed (yet).

But I do know there are other ways to invest, and there are smart ways to manage risk. I’ll go over them in a report I’m working on for subscribers. I hope I finish it before anything does happen!

Warning for November 4th, 2017

These handbills, and a similar version, are all over riot-prone neighborhoods of Seattle. I ran into them coming back from lunch to pick up my wife.

Newsweek calls reports of the events a “right-conspiracy theory” (sic). If they mention them at all after they happen, they’ll be construed as “peaceful protests” even if they turn into riots as is likely given that Antifa has been caught distributing information about makeshift weapons, and some members caught on camera showing off firearms.

Here is a list of cities where events are planned.

The posters and the organizational website explicitly state that regime-change is planned. There might actually be one, but it won’t be events in the street that overthrow the current administration; it would more likely be a high-level coup, and it will take a while to materialize. Roger Stone is on record in several broadcasts saying that a plan is afoot for staging a coup via a phoney indictment from Robert Mueller (in order to set the president up for an impeachment), and Stephen Bannon was recently quoted as saying that he estimates the president has about a 30% chance of finishing his term.

The purpose of having Antifa AND OTHER GROUPS on the streets is to create the illusion that the coup is actually a popular revolution. This is standard operating procedure for staging what are popularly known as COLOR REVOLUTIONS.

Stay away. Mixing it up with Antifa and its allies won’t help the president, the country, or anybody else; it will only get spun by the media to create sympathy for the RIOTERS.

If you live in one of the cities where events are planned, plan any and all travel to avoid likely locations for riots. Warn your family and friends. The news media is covering up and misleading.

STAY SAFE. KEEP YOUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS SAFE.

No good jobs, no good help

Most of you are younger than I am, so you might not have as much personal experience watching job opportunities dry up over time. I think most people are vaguely aware of the trend though, because I’ve seen internet “memes” like “Old Economy Steve/Steven”, which typically claim that the late baby boomers had an easy…

Thank you for your interest. This content is for Standard subscribers only.
Log In If you are not a member, you can subscribe here

Breaking…mass shooting in Las Vegas

UPDATE

Shooter named as Steven Paddock. Had multiple shooting tripods set up. His companion has been captured or at least located.

UPDATE

Fire department scanner:

25 transported & 1 DOA

16 transported & 1 DOA

50 transported & 20 DOA

UPDATE

Reports of casualties at the Tropicana.

UPDATE

Suspicious events elsewhere in the city and more reports of multiple shooters. Possibly evidence of an organized attack.

Multiple shooters. You can hear it clearly multiple streams of fire (or echoes, but most people seem to think it’s multiple shooters, 2 or 3) in the videos shot from cell phones. Fully automatic weapons, aimed at crowds attending an outdoor concert at the Mandalay hotel on the strip.

Multiple casualties. “People being hauled off in backs of pickup trucks”. “Girl shot in head”.

My sad condolences for the grievously wounded and family-and-friends of victims.

I’ve been dreading this. No reports of who did this or what the motive was as of this writing, but things like this didn’t used to happen. We’re clearly in a social breakdown situation, even while the economy is relatively intact. Too much social tension and animosity. Too many loose cannons. And they inspire each other.

It’s going to get worse. Stay safe!

Harpy attack! Here’s what to do…

NB, foul language in the video! (there’s also one naughty word in my commentary below)

This video isn’t new but it’s recently been circulating among some of the people I follow on Twitter. The young woman in the video is apparently triggered by white males. “White” has become the trendy whipping boy but male is probably the key factor.

I ran into that kind of behavior in college even though that was a while ago. It wasn’t as common then as it is now, was tolerated more than condoned, and like most people I foolishly assumed that it would burn itself out, rather than turn into the conflagration it is now.

Actually, it goes back long before then. Misandric fixation has apparently always existed.

Contrary to what we might nowadays suppose to be the case, misandric fixation is not necessarily the result of subjection to ideological indoctrination. Historical cases reveal that the condition can take hold without the subject having been influenced by either Marxist or eugenics ideologies. Indoctrination can, obviously, exacerbate certain vulnerabilities in the subject – weaknesses of character which were pre-existent; yet indoctrination is not a necessary prerequisite to the misandric fixation condition.

Some things that changed over the years is that I grew up in the tail end of expectations of public behavior that no longer exist, and there were also taboos against talking about fringe elements, so these kinds of incidents got scrubbed from public awareness. There were no guerrilla youtube videos then either. You only knew about these incidents if one of them happened to you. As a result they came as nasty surprises.

A typical incident when I went to college was when I was working in the university cafeteria, and a woman dressed like a stereotypical terrorist came to order an espresso. As I was making it, she launched into a monolog about all the things she thought was wrong with me.

Her comments were extremely personal; she was talking about me as if she had know me for years, but we’d never met before. She was ripping into me with completely made-up accusations and insults right off the top of her head, one after another, on and on. She was calm but “creepy”.

Without knowing her life story, I could take a guess: it’s a mental illness such as “malignant paranoia”. Those are the ones who accuse other people of their own dark and hostile thoughts.

There were a few similar incidents, often involving minor contentions. One of them walked up to me out of the blue while I was using a public phone, and demanded that I end my call and turn the phone over to her. I had just started using it, and she hadn’t been waiting. I finished my call, and she launched into a barrage of insults. Another guess: narcissistic personality disorder, or something similar. Those are the ones who are self-obsessed to the point of not caring about anyone else’s rights or feelings.

In both of these incidents, what seemed to trigger the confrontation was running into a man and not wanting him to exist.

There were a lot of other incidents that were briefer and less dramatic. Middle fingers and a few foul words in passing, that sort of thing. Typically there was no warning and no provocation on my part that I could discern, or it didn’t make sense, like getting angry after I just did her a favor (that she interpreted in some twisted way to imagine malicious motives), just a sudden hostile confrontation, leaving me upset and wondering what I’d done wrong.

If I had to guess, there are some commonalities:

  1. failure to ever come to terms with their sexual orientation and, by extension, their feelings about men as sexual rivals.
  2. subclinical mental illnesses such as personality disorders. These are rarely professionally-diagnosed or treated, hence the expression “sub-clinical”.
  3. the politicization of their thought processes and feelings. In the old days, these women would have been isolated by high cost of travel and communication, but nowadays, they can easily find each other, convince themselves that they’re “normal” by way of “social proof”, and synergistically feed off each other.

The young man whose voice we can hear in the video is trying to reason with her. There’s no point; anything he says will actually make her dig in her heels all the deeper just because he’s saying it. Here are some tips for when you run into one of these:

  • Don’t take it personally. It’s not you, it’s something going on in her own head.
  • Don’t feel bad for not being approved of, and don’t grovel for approval. She has no incentive to give you any; on the contrary, the more you react, the more she’ll zoom in on whatever she figures out gets your goat. Remember, she wants you to feel bad (notice how the young woman in the video is grinning with delight as she hurls insults), so don’t give her any feedback that will tip her off.
  • No point getting angry either.
  • Disengage as soon as the behavior starts. There’s no point; you can’t help her, and you have better things to do with your life.
  • Say as little as possible to end the conversation. Be aware that this type often craves a good fight, might start following you to taunt you more, & might even try to stage an incident. Disengage and get out of the situation.
  • If you run into one of these at a business, take your business elsewhere, and write the management a polite letter regarding what happened. Keep calm, don’t exaggerate, and keep it objective. Don’t sound like you’re complaining, sound like you’re trying to alert a responsible person that there’s a problem he or she needs to know about.
  • Colleges are full of these, and often they get themselves into “gate-keeping” roles; beware! These are a good reason why it’s a bad idea for young men and especially white males to go to college anymore.
  • If you run into one of these in a workplace situation, document every incident, tell trusted 3rd parties who might later be witnesses if you need them, and get ready for the possibility of legal action. Bear in mind that she is likely to bring it against you, despite being the guilty party. And, using “pussy power”, she might very well get away with it! You might need to look for another job, but jobs are scarce, and these creatures are ubiquitous, so you might have to stand and fight a battle of law and persuasion. Be prepared to do so.

Someone else’s take on the post-employment economy

I’m not the only one who thinks you and your kids need to be prepared for a future that will be harsh and brutally-competitive. Here’s a documentary worth watching: Obsolete, on Amazon Video http://amzn.to/2kFn0qL If you have Amazon Prime, which is how I stumbled onto it, you can probably watch it for free. As of…

Thank you for your interest. This content is for Standard subscribers only.
Log In If you are not a member, you can subscribe here

Will unemployment levels really get THIS high?

The news is full of scary stories and dire warnings. Some scientists claim that carbon dioxide emissions will turn the earth into a Venus-like inferno. There is evidence of comets and asteroids hitting the earth in the past, and every once in a while you read about another one getting really close. News articles warn that sooner or later a super-volcano like Yellowstone or Campi Flegrei will erupt, or a massive earthquake will hit one or more of the big urban centers on the west coast of the United States.

How are you supposed to respond to a warning about a problem that will happen some time in the indefinite future, described in very general terms?

The answer is that you don’t do anything about problems you can’t do anything about, and you do what you can to mitigate risks that you can do something about. You have some emergency supplies, you strap book-cases and other heavy furnishings with a high center of gravity to the wall, and then you go about life again.

There are some problems that we know approximately when they will strike, but nobody does anything about them, because they’re in the future, and a little too abstract for most people to be able to run an accurate simulation of what s likely to happen.

I wrote this article as a chapter in a book about a problem I anticipated decades ago, because I was part of the bleeding edge of the trend. Unfortunately at the time, I failed to come up with a good counterstrategy, because I was distracted by more immediate needs. Since then, the problem has transformed from a hypothetical risk to a clear and present danger, so lately I’ve been giving it more of my attention and problem-solving skill.

The mainstream media has been covering up some of the evidence, like rising real unemployment rates. Instead they report the official BLS unemployment statistics, which stop counting unemployed people as “unemployed” once they’ve been unemployed long enough, based on the rationale that they’ve “left the workforce”.

Presumably some of those people want to work; the most common problem is probably that they don’t have marketable skill sets, and don’t know where to get them or can’t afford the training. If someone wants to work, and can’t find a job, that’s a problem worth knowing about. Even worse is that the number of people who can’t find jobs is accumulating and has been for a long time. You can see it in the “Labor Force Participation Rate”, which is more-or-less the inverse of the unemployment rate, or in other words, the employment rate is trending DOWN:

Headlines from news specifically covering economic trends and forecasting shows that the rising unemployment rate is concentrated among young adults. They’re either not finding jobs at all, or are relatively under-employed compared to their potential. They’re not getting experience that will help them get or stay employed.

News headlines:

7 Out Of 10 Millennials Are “Disengaged” From Meaningful Employment
posted by “Tyler Durden”, Aug 31, 2016 6:35 PM, at Zero Hedge

Millennial College Graduates: Young, Educated, Jobless
“This spring, an estimated 2.8 million university graduates will enter the U.S. workforce with bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees just as America’s unemployment rate hits its lowest level in nearly seven years. Cause for celebration, right? Not so fast.

The millennial generation is still lagging in the workplace, just as it did last year. It makes up about 40 percent of the unemployed in the U.S., says Anthony Carnevale, a director and research professor for Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce.”
Newsweek,
By Leah McGrath Goodman On 5/27/15 at 6:22 AM

“Now hiring class of 2016.”
Sign in front of a strip club in Harrison, Michigan

Americans have a tendency to maintain an optimistic sense of what is “normal”. If things go wrong, they expect things to eventually “get back to normal”. This is analogous to the situation of people sitting around the tables at a nightclub, sipping their drinks, while the room is filling up with smoke, because they have unreasonable expectations that their experiences should always be “normal”. This is a failure to notice or adapt to change. That’s how species end up going extinct.

To put this into perspective, unemployment is not the employer’s problem. No employer has a self-interested motive in hiring people because they need jobs; employers only hire when they can make enough additional profit from someone else’s labor to offset the cost. In fact, any relatively compassionate employer would go bankrupt trying to compete without making an effort to trim labor costs as much as the competition.

So employers are always trying to CUT labor costs, or in other words, they’re always looking for ways to REDUCE their hiring, even if they’re hiring at the moment.

Potential employers currrently have at least two alternatives to hiring you:

Labor costs tend to be cheaper in countries whose national currency is not a major global trading currency. The reasons are complicated to explain, so I’ll skip them, but you can empirically derive that it’s true just by noticing the differences in pay-scales between India and the USA. The bottom line is that your employer wants to fire you and replace you with someone in India, China, or wherever else they can find a cheaper replacement for you.

Another option your employer has is to fire you and hire a machine in your place. Computing systems and robotics are replacing humans for many tasks. The conventional wisdom is that “new technology creates more jobs in the long run”. There might be some truth to that, but I wouldn’t count on it being an invariate law of economics. The only thing that’s consistent is change! The problem at the moment is that technology is accumulating faster than people can be retrained for new jobs. They can’t even predict where the new jobs will be or how long they will last accurately enough to avoid jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.

The government is even less of a friend than a private employer. The government’s goal is to maximize tax receipts. Some people assume that if more people have jobs, then the government’s take of taxes is greater, because more people would be paying income tax.

It’s true that most of the US federal government’s income comes from taxes related to wages, but in most comparable economies, income tax is a smaller percentage of total tax revenues. The US federal government could easily shift the tax burden.

According to the Tax Foundation, about 45% of adult Americans don’t pay income tax per se (but many of those do pay social security tax and medicare tax). And, because of progressive tax rates, high wage earners end up paying a disproportionate share of income tax–over half.

As a result, the federal government’s tax haul from low wage-earners is relatively negligible. Profits retained by keeping headcount low, particularly for low-wage earners, can generate more corporate tax receipts. The federal government therefor has no incentive to protect lower-paying jobs; instead, it has a perverse incentive to encourage more automation and offshoring.

In fact, it’s quite likely that the US government is INTENTIONALLY pursuing policies that increase unemployment, because they have incentives to do so:

  • Profits retained by companies are likely to end up as taxable corporate income.
  • The standard of living of unemployed people goes DOWN, thereby reducing the rate of resource depletion.
  • Dependent people have an incentive to obey their governments

Now to put the problem into a historical perspective: until the Industrial Revolution, most people in Europe worked for members of the nobility as peasants or servants, or for the church, or were skilled laborers who worked for themselves. More to the point, nobody worked for private corporations until such things existed.

There was a time before the concept of private corporate employment. Given pace at which the economy is changing, it’s reasonable to conjecture that private corporate employment will dwindle down to a relatively minor source of employment opportunities.

We may very well be on the cusp of a post-employment economy.

I’m not the only one who thinks so.

Headline news:

The End of Employees
By Lauren Weber, Wall Street Jounal
…Never before have American companies tried so hard to employ so few people. The outsourcing wave that moved apparel-making jobs to China and call-center operations to India is now just as likely to happen inside companies across the U.S. and in almost every industry.

Bill Gates: Yes, robots really are about to take your jobs
Brad Reed @bwreedbgr posted March 14th, 2014 at 2:04 PM on BGR tech and entertainment news

Elon Musk: Robots will take your jobs, government will have to pay your wage
Catherine Clifford posted Friday, 4 Nov 2016 | 2:19 PM ET on CNBC

I wouldn’t count on collecting. And it’s not really “wages” if you’re not working. That’s a euphemism for a government welfare program.

Robot Economy Could Cause Up To 75 Percent Unemployment
Max Nisen posted Jan. 28, 2013, 10:42 AM, Business Insider

We are entering a new phase in history – one characterized by the steady and inevitable decline of jobs. Just as the steam engine replaced slave labor in the 19th century, the new intelligent technologies of the IT, biotech, and nanotechnology revolutions are fast replacing mass wage labor in the 21st century. Worldwide unemployment is now at the highest level since the Great Depression of the 1930s. The number of people underemployed or without work is rising sharply as millions of new entrants into the workforce find themselves marginalized by an extraordinary high-technology revolution. Sophisticated computers, robotics, telecommunications, and other cutting-edge technologies are fast replacing human beings in virtually every sector and industry. In the past seven years alone, 14% of all the manufacturing jobs in the world have disappeared, as more and more human labor has been replaced with intelligent, automated technology. Similar technology displacement is occurring in the white collar and service industries.

Many jobs are never coming back. Blue collar workers, secretaries, receptionists, clerical workers, sales clerks, bank tellers, telephone operators, librarians, wholesalers, and middle managers are just a few of the many occupations destined for virtual extinction. While some new jobs are being created, they are, for the most part, either highly conceptual, knowledge-based and boutique, or low paying, and generally temporary in duration. The world is fast polarizing into two potentially irreconcilable forces: on one side, an information elite that controls and manages the high-tech global economy; and on the other, the growing numbers of underemployed or permanently displaced workers, who have few prospects and little hope for meaningful employment in an increasingly automated world.
Jeremy Rifkin, author of The End of Work

Notice Mr. Rifkin’s comment about “boutique” jobs. My guess is that he means they are in specialized niches. That means there won’t be many of them, and they won’t last long. Notice what he didn’t say. He’s not trying to reassure you that all your kids need is to go to college, and they’ll be able to live the “American dream”. That advice was never good, and now it’s obsolete.

Regardless of whether robots, offshoring, and onshoring make it hard for your kids to find jobs after they grow up, the global economy is changing faster than most people will be able to adapt to it.

For one thing, it’s shrinking. We’re running out of natural resources. And, on top of that, as of this writing, the financial system that allocated resources is broken beyond repair. Even if your job weren’t offshored, onshored, or automated, it might cease to exist anyway when your employer goes bankrupt. If the “pie” is shrinking, then most people’s share decreases, and some people don’t get a piece at all.

One way or another, the future is going to be harsh and brutally-competitive.

The problems are all related. One reason for rushing to automate more and more jobs out of existence is to reduce the number of people needed to keep the economy running. My guess is that your descendants are less likely to be targeted for culling if they continue to be indispensable despite the possibly intentional effort to render them superfluous.

Subscribe to get access to premium content with tips and ideas for thriving in a brutally-competitive environment. It’s inexpensive and worth the price, but if you’re not ready to commit just yet, then you owe it to yourself to at least sign up for our FREE newsletter and receive a bonus report.

What’s stealing men’s mojo?

There’s been a lot of bad news for men about plunging testosterone levels. That’s the hormone that makes them manly, and gives them a healthy appetite for sexual activity.


News headlines:

Men’s testosterone levels declined in last 20 years

JANUARY 19, 2007 / 3:32 AM
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – A new study has found a “substantial” drop in U.S. men’s testosterone levels since the 1980s, but the reasons for the decline remain unclear.

Modern life rough on men

August 18th, 2011 07:30 AM ET
(CNN Health) Didn’t men use to be more masculine? …studies show that testosterone levels in men have been on the decline for decades.

Today’s men are not nearly as strong as their dads were, researchers say

By Christopher Ingraham August 15, 2016
Washington Post

Why don’t Japanese men like having sex?

By Gareth May11:41AM GMT 22 Jan 2015
(The Telegraph)

The Japan Family Planning Association interviewed 3,000 subjects about their sex lives (both men and women). The study revealed that nearly 50 per cent of those quizzed didn’t have sex in the month previous to the interview. 48.3 per cent of men had not had sex for a month (an increase in 5 per cent from 2012).
Most startling of all, however, was that 20 per cent of men aged between 25 and 29 – the period of a man’s life usually dedicated to the spreading of wild oats – expressed little interest in sex at all.


There is also the probably related problem of plunging male fertility. The same organs that produce most of a man’s testosterone also produce sperm.

Male Fertility Countdown

Dec 8th 2012
Yet another study suggests sperm numbers are falling in rich countries
(The Economist)


The problem is so bad that that it may very well contribute to the demise of entire countries where birth-rates are already well below replacement level. It’s also causing pathological imbalances between the ying and yang of several cultures.

The problem has actually been going on for a long time, but it’s been getting worse at an accelerating pace in recent generations. My geeky personality is not one to let a problem go unsolved if I can help it, not if it might impact me, my sons, or anyone else I care about. So I decided to collect information, follow leads, and come up with a list of lifestyle changes to reduce exposure to the most common known and suspected endocrine disruptors.

Then I wrote up what I discovered into a report. Enter your name and email address, and an answer for the bot trap, and you’ll receive the report and a subscription to our newsletter. Don’t worry, there’s no catch, and no spam involved; the newsletter is just an occasional summary of recent articles from my online magazine. That way, you don’t have to keep visiting to find interesting articles to read; they’ll come to you by mail. If you decide it’s not for you, you can just unsubscribe.

  • Discover how something you probably do every day might be damaging your man-parts (no, not that…).
  • Learn about the class of endocrine disruptors known as phthalates, and what the biggest source of ingesting them is.
  • Find out what to do about the endocrine disruptors in your food and possibly your drinking water.

Disclaimer: this report is for informational purposes only, and does not constitute medical advice. This report is about lifestyle changes designed to reduce environmental hormone disruption and promote natural hormone production. It’s not about diagnosing or treating any medical condition. Consult with a physician before starting a diet or exercise program.

Your free report should show up within an hour of submitting the form, as an attachment to an email.

Ready or not, here comes Sociofascism

Michael Snyder states the obvious for the benefit of people still in denial:

40 Percent Of Americans Now “Prefer Socialism To Capitalism”

This was inevitable for many reasons. For one thing, the United States already has its productive infrastructure built-up. The powers-that-shouldn’t-be set their livestock loose on the continent and left them relatively alone (except when drafted for seizing land or resources in wars) to build up the infrastructure. Now that it’s built, they want to switch to a combination of Socialism and Fascism (also known as “corporate Socialism”) because that gives them more direct control over people and other resources.

So, the public and private school systems (including college and university) have been set up to indoctrinate for socialism for decades now. Propaganda disguised as commercial entertainment helps too.

Instead of the government directly managing the means of production itself, the government sets up partnerships with cronies in private corporations, which is Fascism, except that unlike classic Fascism, Sociofascism is hostile to small business and private property for the serfs, and it openly embraces big government. The cronies in private corporations affect a superficial “progressive identity”.

Oddly, the powers-that-shouldn’t-be regularly knock over socialist regimes overseas, like in Venezuela. I don’t have any insider insights, but my guess is that there is a rule that Socialism is for developed economies only; in countries with less infrastructure, they want more productivity first. Another issue might simply be that socialist economies are more vulnerable to trade embargoes; Iran, Syria, and Russia have withstood trade sanctions but Venezuela was an easy target. One factor is undoubtedly fear of seizure and nationalization of assets owned by US government cronies. If and when countries like Venezuela are absorbed into a super-state comparable to the EU, things might change, and if they do, the Venezuelans won’t have any choice!

I have no idea how to stop the tide; at this point my options appear to be to swim or drown. I don’t like the idea of throwing in the towel and joining the forces of evil, though the very wealthy, and in particular a lot of software company executives, have done exactly that. Aside from being the path of least resistance, which is how ruthless people end up on top, socialism helps to protect them from up-and-coming competitors.

Even if I were tempted, I don’t profile correctly to get past the gatekeepers. And the parasites have reached the point of saturation anyway.

In the mean time, you and I have a living to make. That will get harder and harder as the economy contracts, and more and more of the remaining jobs are with companies and government agencies that have hiring preferences for someone else.

Here’s what my plan is counting on: Socialism is Socialism, even when it comes packaged as progressive Fascism. It’s inefficient, and fails to adapt to change. Even to the extent that Socialism is imposed on the rest of us in the form of higher taxes and more regulation, the socialists have to tolerate at least a small sector of private businesses to take care of details they can’t. Even the Soviet Union winked at some black market activities. I don’t think it will be necessary to go black market except for a few services like medical—imagine going to see some guy who isn’t a doctor but knows how to set a broken arm, because you don’t rank high enough in the socialized medicine system to get to see a doctor within any kind of reasonable time-frame. Mostly it will be grey-market and tolerated as long as you don’t give someone in the system reason to come after you. Watch your back! Tolerances will be low and gatekeepers on the internet are already watching your every move.

Watch for my mailing list subscription, which is about ready for roll-out, then sign up for my newsletter so you can follow the discussion.

Secure your kids’ unfair advantages NOW!

When the media want to express a potentially controversial opinion, they turn it into a question:

Is having a loving family an unfair advantage?

What the headline editor actually means is

Having a loving family is an unfair advantage.

This is an opinion piece published by ABC in Australia. Australia, like the rest of the Anglosphere, is culturally messed-up. It’s basically about how families should be abolished because they create “unfair” advantages for children growing up in nurturing families, as if it were the fault of good parents that some other parents can’t or don’t provide as many advantages to their own children.

For the record, abolition of the family has been tried several times. The Communists (you know, the biggest all-time mass murderers on the planet, in all of history) intentionally broke up at least some families in several countries, and the Zionists tried it on themselves on their Kibbutzim (agrarian or semi-agrarian collectives in Israel). Kibbutzim still exist, though collective child-rearing was apparently mostly phased out by the late 1980s. It is extremely taboo to criticize Kibbutzim in Israel, but apparently some people who grew up in one didn’t appreciate the “favor” and would rather have had a nice, normal family.

Back to the editorial:

Some still think the traditional family has a lot to answer for, but some plausible arguments remain in favour of it. Joe Gelonesi meets a philosopher with a rescue plan very much in tune with the times.

Beware of media references to anonymous authorities. Beware of people who tell you that they’re trying to save something from itself, especially if its none of their business! That’s typically a pretext for a controversial change, or getting rid of it altogether.

So many disputes in our liberal democratic society hinge on the tension between inequality and fairness: between groups, between sexes, between individuals, and increasingly between families.

The power of the family to tilt equality hasn’t gone unnoticed, and academics and public commentators have been blowing the whistle for some time. Now, philosophers Adam Swift and Harry Brighouse have felt compelled to conduct a cool reassessment.

‘One way philosophers might think about solving the social justice problem would be by simply abolishing the family. If the family is this source of unfairness in society then it looks plausible to think that if we abolished the family there would be a more level playing field.’

The editorial goes on with some kiss-off suggestions for “rescuing” the family as opposed to just abolishing it outright, that entail parents doing less for their own kids, and more for kids collectively, presumably through government institutions.

  • Why should these people get to decide what’s best for the rest of us?! By what right?! Who died and left the philosophers God?!
  • They claim to be motivated by a desire for equality. If that’s even true, which I doubt, so what? Equality isn’t a value. It doesn’t make the world a better place.
  • People aren’t equal, and you can’t make them equal. Whoever has the power to take away from one and give to another is obviously above the peasants who don’t have that power. That’s presumably rather the point!
  • More likely, they want to abolish families for the same reason that farmers don’t usually let their livestock raise their own broods anymore. This is an assault on your personal autonomy. Do not allow this!
  • Aside from thinking of the rest of us as their livestock, the real reason the rich and powerful are open to ideas like these is that they don’t raise their own children anyway; nannies do. It sounds like a good idea to them because it’s similar to something they’re already doing.
  • These philosophers want to take something away from you. The correct response is to defend what’s yours.

What would really happen if these philosophers got their way would be:

  • The wealth gap would INCREASE, not decrease, because you wouldn’t be allowed to make choices for your own benefit.
  • The winners would be cheaters and sociopaths, like in the former Soviet Union where a few high-ranking members of the Communist party ended up as billionaires through mafia activity, and everyone else was a peasant living in squalor.
  • This scheme creates a backwards dependency chain. Quarks do not depend on electrons to maintain their integrity. Electrons do not depend on atoms to maintain their integrity. Atoms do not depend on cells to maintain their integrity. Individuals should not depend on collectives to maintain their integrity; that’s not sustainable. This scheme and others like it are already destroying the integrity of the system.

Obviously, don’t feel guilty giving your children every advantage that you have earned through your own effort!

Coming soon: tips for subscribers from a book about how to help your children, and yourself, survive in the post-employment economy. It’s full of ideas about how to learn marketable skills faster and cheaper than conventional ways.

 

Upgrade your life from Google

Here are some easy ways to protect your privacy and security, by upgrading from Google products and services:

  • Use https://duckduckgo.com for searching. Run it in Tor just to make sure. Duckduckgo is not smart enough to filter based on point-of-view, so it’s not censoring your search results like Google does. You can find banned research papers about taboo topics like gender differences between men and women, or global cooling due to an upcoming grand solar minimum, that you can’t find using Google.
  • Browse using Firefox and Tor. Tor has security features already built in; add features like automatic cookie cleanup & always trying to connect via https; install similar features as plugins to Firefox.
  • POSTSCRIPT: I’ve been using the Brave browser for a few weeks now–it’s SCREAMING fast!!
  • WHY ON EARTH WOULD ANYONE USE GMAIL?! Why not just invite a voyeur to move in with you and follow you around and watch your most intimate moments? Use private email that you pay for, like https://startmail.com. If you seriously can’t afford to pay a small yearly fee, try https://fastmail.com
  • Use https://Zoho.com’s office suite for collaborative projects.

Android sucks. My television’s internet box stopped working after self-upgrading (without asking me). Bricked itself. It’s time to investigate the feasibility of Linux on mobile devices. Then you won’t have to go through Google app store anymore.

You’re on your own against terror & immigrant crime

Don’t beg the one who put the contract on your head to save you.

First let me express my grief for the deaths and grievous injuries of mostly young people at the concert in Manchester, UK. My heart is with their family and friends.

Remembering British victims of terrorism does not imply lack of sympathy for victims of terrorism elsewhere, which I have been and will continue to be vocal about, so please enough of the vindictive accusations and unhelpful virtue-signaling.

Now let me be frank: no amount of expressing your desire that your government “do something” about terrorism and immigrant crime is going to help. The British government is a known sponsor of ISIS/Daesh/Islamic State. This is the worst-kept secret in the world, so I’m not going to attempt to prove it; you either accept the plain fact or not.

Americans see warfare as a finite undertaking, but conflicts of this nature can go on for many years. our jihadist foes see the struggle as one that began centuries ago and that will continue until Judgment Day. Some in the United States warn of an unending war.

Fifteen Years on, Where Are We in the ‘War on Terror’?
Brian Michael Jenkins, RAND Corp (the CIA’s think-tank)

The “war on terror” is an “unending war” because it’s part of a long-term plan to effect dramatic change in our culture, legal system, wealth pyramid, and demographics. It’s scripted history, not a spontaneous event.

Late model Toyotas supplied by US State Dept.

Other known state sponsors of ISIS include Saudi Arabia (where the president of the United States was just paying his respects), Qatar, Israel (where it is openly-admitted they have treated ISIS wounded in their hospitals), Turkey (where their supply lines run), France, and the United States.

Some Brits are calling on the spirit of Margaret Thatcher. The same woman who sent secret messages to her counterparts in the Soviet Union telling them to ignore her public denunciations of the “Evil Empire”, and to maintain their iron grip on eastern Europe. That Margaret Thatcher.

She was also involved in a cover-up of a pedophile ring in her own party. THAT Margaret Thatcher. Corrupt and devious, just like the rest of them.

“Shouldn’t we be supporting ISIS?”

People in Europe and North America need to come to terms with the fact that their ruling classes don’t love them. They love their country estates, the services of their immigrant domestic staff, their jet-set lifestyles, their hookers, catamites, sex-slaves, and blow.

Stop looking to your governments to protect you; they’re the ones you need protection from!

 

 

  • They secretly sponsor ISIS.
  • They snuck ISIS cells into your country, using your own sympathy for “refugees” who aren’t really refugees and aren’t really from Syria.
  • They’re eventually going to use ISIS against YOU.
  • They’re actively supressing dissent against their policies.

You need to take responsibility for your own defense. Be your own hero.

  • Obtain means of self-defense. Use your own good judgment to decide what that means.
  • Get self-defense training, including situational awareness.
  • Avoid discretionary travel through congested, high-visibility areas.
  • Avoid likely targets
  • START HAVING BABIES! How are you going to defend yourselves once you are hopelessly outnumbered?!

Unfortunately guns and ammo are no good against sneak bomb attacks, and they’re restricted in most of Europe and parts of the USA (to the police and military, who won’t defend you). Get gun training where guns are legal, and seek alternatives where they are not. I also suggest getting generic self-defense training. Just learning situational awareness can help especially in cases of one-on-one immigrant crime situations.

The second step is avoiding targeted places and events. Of course if you have to commute to work you can’t avoid buses and subways, but you can make a conscious decision to reduce discretionary travel especially through temptingly congested locations. Want to meet with your friends? Pick a low-key venue and get there on foot or by car.

“I hate Americans. I hate America.”

Avoid big rock concerts. Why would anyone want to see Ariana Grande anyway? She has a potty mouth, says she hates Americans, and licks donuts she hasn’t paid for. As an aside, why doesn’t she just move to Venezuela? Why do America-haters think they can adopt the policies of a 3rd-world hellhole without the country turning into one?

I have a feeling it’s just a matter of time before sporting venues are hit. There’s already been a “credible threat” of an attack on a German soccer stadium. Sorry, but you’d better avoid big sporting events too.

No exotic vacations either, especially not to big cities in Europe and North America. One of the victims of the recent Times Square rampage was a young tourist from overseas.

I am well aware that the probability of dying in a terrorist attack is low. That’s not the point. The point is making a conscious choice to resist victimization. That brings up another sore point: right now our masters are encouraging us to go about as if nothing happened. That’s not resisting; that’s capitulation. Taking matters into your own hands gives you a feeling of control. The whole point of terrorism is to scare the sheep so that their emotions overwhelm their ability to think rationally and creatively.

Aside from safety issues, boycotting big-ticket discretionary spending will also keep more money in your own hands, and out of the hands of big business and big government, who are not your friends.

I’ll miss the sea, but a person needs new experiences. They jar something deep inside, allowing him to grow. Without change something sleeps inside us, and seldom awakens. The sleeper must awaken.

Duke Leo Atreides, Dune

What happens as infrastructure decays

An emergency has been declared on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation. Apparently a train tunnel containing radioactive materials has collapsed.

HANFORD EMERGENCY INFORMATION

Event Summary 5/9/2017

HANFORD SITE ALERT

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Richland Operations Office activated the Hanford Emergency Operations Center at 8:26 a.m., after an alert was declared at the 200 East Area. There are concerns about subsidence in the soil covering railroad tunnels near a former chemical processing facility. The tunnels contain contaminated materials.

Actions taken to protect site employees include:

Facility personnel have been evacuated
As a precaution, workers in potentially affected areas of the Hanford Site have gone indoors
Access to the 200 East Area of the Hanford Site, which is located in the center of the Hanford Site, has been restricted to protect employees

The public can request information regarding the event by calling (509) 376-8116. The media may call (509) 376-3322.

No reports of injuries or fatalities, and I hope that is the case.

Hazardous infrastructure will get MORE hazardous over time, as it decays without enough engineers, or a healthy economy, to maintain it. When Hanford was built, politicians, managers, and engineers used to assume that in the future, people would figure out ways to solve problems & reduce risks. They projected an expending economy and more powerful technology into the future, forever. They didn’t even consider the possibility of temporary peaks followed by declines. 

Someone I used to know used to work at Hanford. I thought of him as a friend, and only later realized that was not really the case.

More often than not, a man’s career is an integral part of his identity, or at least it used to be in those days. Nowadays, a lot of young men don’t have careers and don’t even seem to be interested in having one. Of course, they also don’t have families to support. When he was faced with the prospect of losing that job, he went off the deep end, and blamed me.

I had nothing to do with the situation, other than helping him find another one. The damage was done, and even before those hard feelings, he was holding other things against me I had no idea about. Part of it was my own problem; I had lots of potential but little to show for it. I was deemed unworthy. The coup de grace was him getting caught up in a hostile 3rd party’s elaborate deceptions. And aside from sacrificing me as a friend, he paid a horrible price getting tangled with someone with borderline personality disorder.

Despite how it ended, I count him as a positive influence in my life. Some of his better personality traits are now part of me. Ironically, being told that I wasn’t good enough to be his friend was the shock I needed to motivate me to take my life to the next level. It was an unlikely series of events that could only have happened the way they did. Sometimes dark clouds really do have silver linings.

I’m glad he ended up in a safer and better job.