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.

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!

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.

 

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.

Is Ammon Bundy in danger?

That’s not a rhetorical question; I don’t know. I don’t even know the precise circumstances that lead up to the Bundys’ arrests and incarceration. The media has been sparse with coverage and specific details, which is one red flag. Private accounts on social media give wildly different accounts, but here’s the thing: one side has gone over-the-top with politically-motivated accusations that, as Stefan Molyneux would say, do not constitute an argument. Calling the Bundys “ecoterrorists” is a sign that one side does not have an argument. That’s another red flag.

Yet another is when people cite factors like their race, occupation as cattlemen, or use of BLM resources as reasons to execute them. Wanting someone dead because of a vaguely-defined belief about state control of the means of production is not a rational, reasonable, or ethical position to take. The social and legal orders in the western countries are breaking down fast, putting the legitimacy of this whole process into question.

When I heard that Ammon Bundy was in a jail in my quadrant of the country, I decided to “adopt” him as a humanitarian measure. The question is not what he did or didn’t do; the question was whether he might get “made an example of” out of proportion to anything he might have done, sacrificing his rights for the sake of a political agenda. To put this into perspective, he hasn’t killed or raped anybody, but he’s gotten harsher treatment than a great many defendants in high-profile cases who have.

I’ll explain more about the back-story another time; right now he, his brothers, his dad, and some friends need help.

Again, details are sparse, and all of them come from hearsay. All I know is what Ammon’s wife Lisa wrote me via social media, and what I read from his friends’ postings. They’re doing the best they can, but they don’t know what to do, and don’t have a lot of experience or resources available.

He’s been transferred to a prison in southern Nevada to face charges in Nevada over his first standoff with the feds.

From what I gather, he fell asleep on a shirt, probably having used it as a makeshift pillow, and a prison guard noticed. Reportedly, he got a beating that dislocated his shoulder.

Also, reportedly, he is spending a lot of time in solitary confinement, and is the target of a lot of harassment, such as daily strip searches.

His access to his commissary account has been taken away, as a result of which he can not buy paper, envelops, or stamps. He is probably incommunicado, at least most of the time. This is a dangerous situation.

Yet another red flag is that he’s not listed in the system set up for prison contacts, despite plenty of time to have gotten him into the system. I believe he is probably being held at Nevada Southern Detention Center in Pahrump, Nevada.

After his friends staged a demonstration around the prison, they said that prison visits were canceled for ALL prisoners, which might be a scheme to create resentment among the other prisoners against him.

I don’t know what to do either, but I’m taking some obvious steps. I have a letter ready to send him, which hopefully will lift his spirits and reassure him that he’s not forgotten. It will also let the prison staff know that there are people on the outside who care about him. I will also write letters to various prison bureaucrats and government officials. I realize that this is unlikely to have much effect, but I’d rather do something than nothing.

I’m spreading the word via this posting, but unfortunately since this is a new blog, I don’t have a lot of subscribers yet, so I need help. The more people who know, the higher the probability of finding someone who has a good idea what to do.

If you can help, contact @KalkinTrivedi on Twitter.

No jobs? Low pay? Here is one reason why…

May 2nd, 2017
Sierra Vista woman finds note from ‘Chinese prisoner’ in Walmart purse

For various reasons including their own well-being, prisoners probably should be kept busy, but only under the conditions that they are guilty of a real crime, and that there is no punishment if they don’t work. According to the note, the prisoners get beatings. All transactions have to be by mutual consent, otherwise, there is a perverse incentive to abuse the captive party, potentially to the point of using entrapment or even bogus charges to round up more slaves, as the Soviet Union was doing, and has actually happened in my US state.

The most common form of slavery is where offers of employment come with a requirement for the prospective slave to repay transportation, housing, and food costs, then trapping them in a situation where they can’t possibly “repay” because their nominal “wages” are too low compared to the costs unilaterally imposed on them. But even older forms exist, without bothering with any pretext of fair exchange, where someone is a slave because their parents were slaves, or because a third-party sold them.

In a globalized economy, everybody in the world competes with everybody else in the world. Specifically, that means that if slavery exists anywhere in the world, then everyone else doing or willing to do the same jobs is competing with slave labor.

Slavery is fairly common worldwide. It is so common that it might be easier to document where it doesn’t occur than where it does. It even occurs in most of the “western” countries as the result of immigrants bringing their chattel with them!

Price competition effectively means that if one major market participant is selling slave-produced goods, then every market participant is faced with the prospect of either selling slave-produced goods, or going out of business. There is also the problem that with complex international supply chains, it would be hard to know if upstream goods were slave produced, assuming the merchant even wanted to know, which more likely than not, they don’t.

The globalists have done nothing to resolve the problem that they exacerbated when they offshored production, which is hardly surprising given that many if not most of them have ancestors who were human traffickers, merchants in slave-produced goods, or investors in slave plantations. These are the same people who harass other people about their “white privilege” over the descendants of their ancestors’ slaves, and who also stir up resentment against rivals who made their money fair-and-square, as “greedy capitalists”.

Contrary to popular opinion, Socialism is part of the problem, not the solution. You can’t simply legislate that a supposedly benevolent government is going to take care of everybody; that has never happened and never will. Instead, structural inefficiencies in the Socialist western countries result in ever more imported slave-produced goods, and ever more temptation to pretend not to notice.

“Better not be using slaves to make these cheap goods we’re buying from you.”
“Oh, no, we’d never do that.”
“OK, then, we’re good!”

The problem seems to be getting worse, not better.

I don’t have a solution. Just don’t contribute to the problem. Live simply. Avoid buying goods from merchants known to buy from slavers, or items that are commonly made by slaves, like hand-woven “oriental rugs”. The counter-argument that someone who has no qualms at all about buying slave-produced merchandise once told me is that if you don’t buy slave-produced goods, the slaves get no food and shelter at all. There’s probably a sliver of truth to that, although I would guess that in the balance, feeding the monster is worse than starving it. The person who gave me that excuse is a shady and rather mercenary character.

I also suggest aggressively defending your own freedom before you lose it. The world is full of people motivated to take it away from you. And contrary to American political propaganda, you don’t “fight” for freedom (war slavery), you avoid getting trapped in it through poverty and cancerous government.

Long-range forecast: colder

May 1st, 2017
It’s COLD where I live. About 10F/5.6C degrees below average, which for a relatively stable climate is a lot. Before the commies appropriated it, May Day used to be the celebration of warmer weather come mid-Spring.

Much of central Europe and North America are getting crop damage from late frosts.

One data point does not make a trend, but the current cold weather at higher latitudes and elevations was predicted by numerous scientists in central and eastern Europe, based on the fact that a Grand Solar Minimum has begun.

You can read about it here.

http://principia-scientific.org/modern-solar-grand-maximum-ends-little-ice-age-cooling-coming/

The most important result will be reduced food supplies. Snow hitting the southern wheat belt just flattened the soft red winter wheat crop in Kansas.

Wheat Soars Most On Record After Freak Snowstorm Blankets Midwest

According to a buddy of mine who grew up as a wheat farmer in Kansas, the damaged wheat plants will probably tiller out and make some smaller heads on shorter stalks. But the yield will be significantly reduced. That’s why wheat futures just shot up.

The effect of grand solar minima is not the same everywhere. The temperature decrease will be most noticeable above 45 degrees latitude (much of Europe!). Many parts of the world will turn drier, but a few, like mine, turn wetter. An overall colder and drier climate is harder to grow crops in.

I can’t grow a significant amount of food in my back-yard, but I do grow what I can so that I have fresh, viable seed on-hand that could be planted on more abundant ground elsewhere. This spring is so cold that I suspect that in future summers, it will be too cold for warm-season crops like corn and tomatoes to thrive. For that reason, I’m already switching to crops that have wide tolerances especially at the low end of the temperature scale.

One of them are potatoes that I am breeding for frost-tolerance. Potatoes are commonly grown as a summer crop at high latitudes, because they are quick to mature, and don’t mind cool summers. But normally they have no frost tolerance at all. Not surprising because, ironically, potatoes are actually native to the tropics. They come from the tropical Andes, below the frost zones of the high elevations. Some wild potatoes grow up higher, into the frost-zones, and these, when crossed to their domesticated cousins, can be bred into potatoes with frost resistance.

Not much; they only tolerate brief radiation frosts at night, but that’s enough to significantly reduce the risk of crop losses to spring or summer frosts.

I switched from warmer-growing Legumes to fava beans, which grow cooler than most “beans”.

More important than raising food is storing food. You can’t grow crops fast enough not to starve if you don’t have any food in storage.

Recommended reading:

I’m only endorsing the author’s statement of the problem, not his suggested political agendas. Politics is the problem, not the solution. The correct solution is to see to your own security; the government will not save you.

May Day! May Day!

May Day rally poster

One of my adult sons got caught in a demonstration while trying to get to work the Saturday before May Day. He has to put in a lot of late nights and weekends, but the demonstrators have the day off. There was no immediate threat; he was just delayed getting to work. The demonstrations and riots are happening fairly regularly now, not just on special occasions.

My take is that George Soros still has plenty of money, and he still hates President Trump. The riots aren’t going away any time soon.

ZeroHedge has a post by Mac Slavo about Antifa’s recent activities.

Accompanying the article is a photo of a man getting punched by an Antifa member. The man getting punched is wearing an American flag cape. I don’t know what it’s made from, but it is unwise to wear capes, or any costume at all, to a rumble, or something that might turn into a rumble. You don’t want a prop that someone could grab you by, especially if one end is attached to your throat. That’s a possible way of getting strangled.

I advise against participating in public demonstrations, counter-demonstrations, or rallies, because I don’t want you getting hurt. Demonstrations are pointless; they’re not effective ways of changing policies. It might seem as though they’re sometimes successful, but what’s really going on is that someone has ordered changes from behind the scenes, then funded a rent-a-mob to create the illusion that the changes are the result of popular demand. If the rent-a-mob turns violent, so much the better to “respond to” as a pretext for radical change. But the point is that the demonstration or riot didn’t really initiate the change; the real action was taking place behind the scenes and involved big money.

That said, if you’re going to express an opinion in public that might attract violent protesters or counter-protesters, at least be prepared for trouble.

  • Do not provoke or initiate! (the biased news media will still claim you started it with your “violent rhetoric”, but don’t make it easy for them)
  • Defend, but do not escalate!
  • Don’t wear loose clothing—including t-shirts!around your throat.
  • Maintain a high degree of situational awareness.
  • Don’t get cocky.
  • Keep in mind some rioters have guns. Is your life insurance paid up?
  • Respect the police! Let the other side bring the wrath of hell down on their heads instead of yours.

Here are some tips about surviving street fights from Brett McCay.

 

Trigglypuff vs ISIS: which side to take in the Clash of Civilizations

Here is a story I heard when I was a boy:

One Saturday morning, a young Meyer Lansky’s parents gave him money to take to synagogue. He took the money, but instead of heading to synagogue, he headed to a back-alley where he knew that gambling was going on. There he learned an important lesson about playing other people’s games that I will share with you.

He imagined that he was going to win some more money. Instead, he promptly lost it all!

But rather than getting too upset over it, Lansky decided to keep watching other boys play. He started noticing a pattern: often things would start out with the gamblers winning a few games, but then “luck” would turn against them, and they’d keep losing until they lost all their money.

Oddly enough, it’s the losses that trigger “gambler’s fever”: the gamblers convince themselves that they need to keep playing to “win it all back again”.

The gamblers assume that’s even a possibility. They get so wrapped up in greed and the excitement of the game that they fail to notice the pattern of early wins followed by losses, or to think about what might be causing that pattern to exist. It’s obviously not random, nor is it caused by the skill of the players, since they can’t control it.

I’ll have to bring this story up again in another context, because it teaches us something about investing money. In that context, the “House” is the investment bank that’s underwriting securitized “assets”. But the story also teaches us something about the winners and losers of history.

Something you need to know about the pundit class is that they can’t really predict the future. First of all, they’re not the geniuses they make themselves out to be; they’re paid talking-heads who spout whatever nonsense their bosses tell them to. Nassim Taleb calls them “Intellectual Yet Idiots”. Their bosses aren’t geniuses either; they’re billionaires who have geniuses working for them behind the scenes trying to make their ideas work. The “Machiavellian trait”, which refers to a habit of concealing true goals and motives behind elaborate deceptions, is often mistaken for genius by people who don’t realize what’s really going on. But even if they were geniuses, the natural unfolding of events is chaotic in the sense that small changes propagate into big differences in outcomes.

The way that the winners of history work around that problem is by recruiting huge numbers of dupes to unwittingly work towards the same goal. That reduces the effects of chaos through having billions of butterflies all trying to start the same hurricane!

The way that the winners of history recruit their dupes is by:

  • Coming up with a narrative.
  • Create a “counter-narrative” that leads to the same outcome as the narrative, in order to create the illusion of choice.
  • On the rare occasions someone is smart enough to come up with a real alternative narrative that reaches a possible tipping point, capture it through bribes, threats, assassinations, and/or sabotage.
  • Have pseudo-intellectuals on your payroll “predict” the official narrative and the counter-narrative in journals popular among influencers such as college instructors and media pundits.
  • Commission books and movie and television scripts where the narrative shows up in the story-line in a slightly disguised, but “isomorphic”, form. A good example of this would be the original book and play “War of the Worlds”, which was designed to prime US and British audiences for WW2. The blood-drinking “Martians” were intended to trigger associations to WW1 posters depicting Germans as vampires. Later, once the target audience has internalized the narrative, it can show up in popular media without needing any disguise.
  • Stage some events that seem to provide evidence of the narrative unfolding.
  • Flood the news-stream with the narrative and the counter-narrative. Most people will now accept politicians acting on the narrative, even though it is completely artificial.
  • Dupes will even start contributing to the narrative by acting in ways consistent with the narrative. For example, if the narrative is “Clash of Civilizations”, some Muslims will start cooperating by actually staging suicide bombings without even being paid. Of course, spontaneous suicide bombings are more unpredictable than the staged ones, but this isn’t necessarily that much of a problem if you’re not concerned about collateral damage.
Audiences already primed to believe the official narrative will interpret staged events as evidence.

An example of this phenomenon on a smaller scale was when black ops personnel from various parts of the former British Empire were caught staging terrorist attacks in Iraq, in order to manifest the predicted Sunni-Shi’a civil war. The point was not to predict a civil war in order to prevent it, but rather, to intentionally create a self-fulfilling prophesy, and help it along a little with the false-flag operations.

Winners of history don’t commit to either side of the controlled conflicts that they set up. The point of controlled conflicts is not that one side or the other wins, but that a 3rd party “with no skin in the game” (as Taleb would say) wins.  They do favor one side or the other just because of asymmetric costs and benefits, but even if a miracle should happen and the “post-Christian, Modernist/Postmodernist Snowflake” side wins, we’d still end up kissing their asses just like our ancestors have been for the last few centuries, until they figure out a more effective way to rid themselves of us. What I’m saying is that no amount of ass-kissing will make them love you. ISIS doesn’t love you either. The only way to win this game is not to play by the rule-book someone else handed you.

Now let me explain one more phenomenon. Machiavellian personality types routinely conceal their motives, attitudes, and goals behind benevolent-sounding pretexts. When a politician states a position on any given “issue”, you can reasonably suspect that their “position” is a matter of opportunism, not a deeply-held conviction.

It’s important that you understand my meaning here. I am NOT talking about when the politician’s “real position” is the opposite of what they claim it is. That only happens when the costs and benefits are consistently one-sided, like when a greedy kleptocrat hides behind Socialist public positions. I’m saying that, more commonly, they don’t have any fixed position at all; how they respond in any particular case depends on context and opportunities.

Dr. Elizabeth Warren
Machiavellian personality types routinely conceal their motives, attitudes, and goals behind benevolent-sounding pretexts.

If a politician claims to be for or against any given policy, that means nothing at all other than that their polling agency thinks they can win some points with that particular public position. If they can’t win enough points, then they will predictably avoid taking a public position, seed their press conferences with reporters who ask only pre-approved questions, and evade questions if the topic does come up. Inside the privacy of their own minds, their actual response to any given specific case depends on the political costs and benefits. That’s why they speak up loudly on one case, and are quiet about another. There’s no mystery here. Most people either don’t notice the pattern, or if they do, waste their time trying to score points by pointing out the other side’s hypocrisy, as if anyone who matters cares. “Consistency is the hobgobblin of small minds!”

As applied to the “clash of civilizations”, or any other conflict or war, it’s the same thing. As dupes have taken sides, lining up variously as Islamists, anti-Islamists, multiculturalists—whatever, doesn’t matter—all sides are being manipulated by the puppetmasters, and all “positions” or choices lead to the same outcomes: wholesale population replacement in Europe and North America, ethnic and religious cleansing in Syria, partitioning and annexation of Syrian lands, and a puppet government installed in Iran. It doesn’t matter which horse in the game you place your bets on; the game is rigged, and the House wins.

Donald Trump's photo.
Captured opposition. “I am a nationalist AND a globalist.” Total capitulation in 90 days.

When people think that they’re opting out by jumping onto the bandwagon of an “opposition” political party, more likely, they are opting in to controlled opposition. Political parties are not allowed to exist if they represent a real alternative to the narrative: their leaders get assassinated, delegitimatized, bribed, threatened, and/or put in prison. No matter how far they get before being neutered, up to now they have all been either destroyed or captured. Even supposedly “radical” or “outlaw” parties tend to have goals that are functionally identical with those of the mainstream; they are simply framed differently. For example, the only nationalist parties tolerated in Europe are the ones that willingly help the globalists by advocating for programs of assimilation of immigrants. That helps the immigrants get jobs faster, which displaces more native workers, and frees up welfare budgets to accommodate still more immigrants.

There was an old saying in Monte Carlo: “Whether you bet on black or red, White always wins”. “White” referred to the owner of the casino, a man named Blanc (“white” in French).

Now for another story.

A man stumbled out of a gambling den, broke and a bit drunk. He spotted one of his friends standing outside, smoking, and struck up a conversation.

“Ya know, this house is run by crooks,” said his friend. “The games are rigged.”

“Then why do you play?” asked the other gambler.

The friend looked slightly scandalized and said “It’s the only game in town!”

Massacred 69 blue-eyed Norwegians in the name of saving Europe.

Now to answer the question: which side should you be on? YOUR OWN, of course! Stop jumping on other people’s bandwagons. Stop trying to save Trigglypuff from xyrself, or for that matter, from ISIS. Play your own game, and come up with your own narrative that has a happier ending than the one someone else has planned for you.

By all means, recruit others onto YOUR bandwagon, but a tipping-point is not your goal. If you got close without getting quashed, you’d end up being captured. Instead, you’re just trying to survive into the next round, to fight another day.

  • Don’t fall for “let’s you and him fight.”
  • Don’t pick fights with Muslims, or for that matter, Snowflakes, or anyone else. Don’t pick fights.
  • If someone picks a fight with you, defend yourself only proportional to the attack, then de-escalate. Bear in mind that they’re puppets, and the puppetmaster is your real enemy.
  • Play your own game, and recruit others to your side.
  • Focus your attention and resources to figuring out how to survive; ultimately it’s a war of attrition. You win by surviving.

Here is some suggested reading if you want to learn more about this game:

Do you know who ISIS really works for? This is one of the worst-kept secrets on the planet! And pretty obvious if you just think about the logistics of military operations in Iraq. But some folks still don’t know. If you’re one of them, find out. You’re being conned.

Steps to take to protect yourself against increasing social unrest

April 25th, 2017

Up until now, participants in Antifa activities have been armed mostly only with makeshift weapons like bicycle locks and bottles. Their battles with alt-Rightists have been mostly with fists.

Mac Slavo recently reported about discussions on Reddit encouraging Antifa to escalate to weapons, including guns, and combat training.

Here is a screenshot I took of a posting on Facebook by Seattle Antifa:

Some of the postings in that group are so over-the-top that I had to carefully consider whether it might be a parody account. I believe that it is in fact on the up-and-up.

Judging from the behaviors I have seen either on video, or in a few cases, live and in person, my take is that members of Antifa tend to be impulsive. If they bring weapons to a rumble, they’re going to use them. Don’t be the one they use them on. According to their own posts, they are targeting “Nazis” (alt-Right), Libertarians, and even “Liberals” (people who promote tolerance and free speech, which Antifa openly opposes).

Judging from some posts I read this evening, looks like the alt-Right is planning to escalate too.

Once guns come out, the police will be more actively involved, and perhaps even the feds. It appears that many municipal officials (and university administrators) are sympathetic to Antifa, and have standing orders to the police to stand down. But the police tend to respond aggressively whenever they feel threatened, and Antifa is the more likely side to attack them. I do not know how this will play out; I expect it to be chaotic in the sense of being hard to predict the outcome.

A trend continues until it exhausts itself. At the moment, the riots and street confrontations show every sign of escalating rather than abating. Even if you don’t intend to be involved, you might get involved anyway. Here are some dangers to be aware of:

  • Sometimes bystanders stumble onto riots and are attacked by rioters, or get caught in the crossfire between opposing groups.
  • Rioters sometimes attack non-participants just for not being part of their group; they are highly attuned to and hostile towards outsiders.
  • Police escalate quickly if they are attacked. Sometimes bystanders get attacked. The police have also been known to specifically target people holding cameras or cell phones.
  • Media are not a reliable source of information about riots.

The media tends to omit or distort events that do not conform to its narratives. If you are relying on the media for your source of information, you might be tricked into believing that a riot where Molotov cocktails were thrown at innocent bystanders was actually a peaceful demonstration where a young woman handed a cop a Pepsi. In one riot we had years ago, a man was murdered on camera. We can compare what we can see in the video still shot with the official account of events, and see that the official account is almost completely fictional. The US media routinely lies, and withholds information. Just expect that.

Because the media is not accurately reporting on the situation, and in fact I’m only hearing anything substantial from Twitter, I don’t know where all the confrontations and riots have occurred or are likely to occur. Urban areas are more likely to see riots and confrontations than suburban and rural areas, and some specific parts of the country (like the urban west coast) seem to have higher levels of agitation than others (the rural high plains and upper midwest are probably pretty quiet). If you’re in a quiet area, be aware of trouble in other parts of the country while traveling.

Within riot-prone cities, riots tend to be concentrated in specific neighborhoods. In my city, it’s the downtown core, one rough neighborhood, one counter-culture neighborhood, and one neighborhood with a major university. You can reduce your exposure by reducing your travel through those areas—assuming you don’t live in one, in which case you might want to move. Downtown business districts are problematic, since they are targets for rioters to harass people with business to take care of. For the sake of time and convenience, I try to do as much business as possible via the internet anyway.

Certain dates, like May 1st, are more likely to see trouble.

Here are some tips to improve your odds of staying out of harm’s way:

  • Maintain situational awareness at all times.
  • Learn self-defense techniques that include safety habits such as giving blind corners a wide berth when you turn around them, and peering into the back seat of a car before entering the vehicle, to avoid ambushes.
  • Learn some basic riot-evasion techniques.
  • Beware that police often react violently to cameras and cell phones. And don’t mouth off at them about your rights; you’re not in a position to defend them!
  • Talk to your friends and family. Make sure they take their own personal safety seriously. Most of them probably don’t. Show them videos of citizen-reported mob attacks, that aren’t getting reported by the mainstream media.
  • Offer to accompany family and friends for security in situations like “downtown, after business hours”, or “rough neighborhood”. This will help get them into the right frame of mind better than a lecture.