Thoughts on Pathetic Attacks by SJWs on the Legacy of HP Lovecraft

Over the past few years, a minority of pathetic and unaccomplished SJWs have been pushing the grift of “cancelling” people who might have said something which could be construed to even vaguely offensive. As many of you know, this bullshit “cancelling” has now created an increasingly nasty public backlash which will soon overwhelm and destroy these SJWs and their livelihoods. While I could write an entire series about the patheticness and hypocrisy of SJW idiots pushing this bullshit, this post concentrates on one of the more ignored aspects of their persona aka their lack of personal achievement or ability.

Some of you have read a short story or two by HP Lovecraft. In not, you have almost certainly seen a movie or TV show inspired by his work. Here are some examples: The Thing (1982), Alien (1979) and rest of series, Prometheus (2012) based on At the Mountains of Madness; Hellraiser (1987) and Hellraiser 2 (1988) take their main elements from a number of his books, In The Mouth of Madness (1994) is also based on a number of his books as is Event Horizon (1997). But Lovecraft’s influence on popular culture goes beyond far beyond adaptations and obviously inspired works. Entire new categories of horror, movie tropes and ideas in popular culture which came out of his work.

Lovecraft was the first to write at any length about the idea of non-humanoid aliens visiting earth in past to seed it with life or influence evolution. Technology-based devices which could transport you across space and time and into alien bodies.. ya, he wrote stories around those ideas before others. Isolated and inbred people who become monstrously evil creatures.. well, Lovecraft was the major inventor of that trope. Archaeologists discovering lost cities on earth which reveal remains of humanoid aliens.. he wrote about that too. Incredibly powerful and immortal extraterrestrial entities of poorly defined form.. ya, that too. Extremely ancient archaeological ruins as evidence of alien visitation.. you those too.

His stories treat continental drift on earth as fact, mention aliens using nuclear power to run their civilizations and vehicles and all this before 1940. Wonder where Stephen King gor the idea for cosmic monsters such as ‘It’? ya.. you guessed right.My point is that a lot of what we think of topics and tropes found in post-WW2 science fiction and horror stories can be traced to a guy who died in 1937 when he was just 46 years old. And all of this brings us to why his name has become controversial in the past decade. As it turns out, a guy born in 1890 USA to a old WASP family in New England had racist views about the world! Isn’t that surprising *sarcasm intended*. Isn’t it odd that he was not ‘liberal’ *more sarcasm*.

Here is the thing.. HP Lovecraft held many racist and conservative views, especially when he was younger. It did not help that he was notoriously aspy and meticulously wrote them out for future generations of SJWs to peruse while acting shocked. Having said that, Lovecraft was a far more complicated person than he is often accused of being. For example- he held anti-Semitic views, but ended up marrying a Jewish woman. He started life as a conservative, but ended up being a supporter of new-deal socialism. He looked down on non-western people, but many of his stories are set in the Middle-East, South Pacific islands and other non-western cultures. It is also clear that he had read and had some familiarity with non-western lore.

In spite of his racism, the non-western and non-white characters in his book are almost never stupid or intrinsically evil. If anything, he hated poor white people more than black or colored ones. To put it another way, Lovecraft was not the race-obsessed guy that many SJWs want to imagine. Oh ya.. and he was grew up during the most xenophobic decades in USA (1910s-1930s). The only reason we know about his racist beliefs, as opposed to the millions of others who also lived in USA during those decades, is because he was honest about said beliefs and wrote them down. Also, he was never in a position of power to enforce his beliefs.

Compare that to president Wilson (from the same era) who publicly supported the KKK and re-segregated the federal government. Or what about all those white mayors or governors who upheld racial segregation, residential redlining and tons of other racist policies? He also did not own slaves unlike many of the early presidents, including a few on our currency notes. My point is that while Lovecraft’s racism did influence his worldview and some of his stories, it had zero effect on the lives of contemporaneous black and non-white people around him.

So why do SJWs, none of whom display even a fraction of Lovecraft’s talent, keep writing large amounts of bullshit about how he should be “cancelled”. Maybe.. because they don’t have the talent to write anything as innovative and consequential in the history of american literature and popular culture as him. And here is a long-ish documentary on YouTube about HP Lovecraft that tells you a lot more about the man than some sad-sack SJW ever will..

What do you think? Comments?

NSFW Links: Apr 9, 2021

These links are NSFW. Will post something more intellectual tomorrow.

Amateur BJs with Eye Contact: Mar 31, 2021 – Amateur cuties giving head with eye contact.

Amateur POV BJs: Mar 31, 2021 – Amateur cuties licking the glans.

Enjoy!

Multi-Party ‘Democracies’ are Fundamentally Flawed and Unworkable

As regular readers know, I have a history of writing about controversial ideas. Consider this as the latest one in that direction. Before we move on to the topic of this post, let me tell you a bit about how I first had this idea. It, years ago, when I tried to understand the reason behind why certain states in India have done so much better than others, even when those in former group had higher levels of systemic corruption than the later. Then after a pause of years, it resurfaced while I was watching vlogs about people living in Japan. More specifically, it came from an odd difference between Japan vs west European countries including Germany.

If you have watched even episodes of Japanology, Japanology plus and other personal vlogs about living in Japan, you start seeing something peculiar in the background. See.. unlike even west European countries (to say nothing about USA) everything in that country is well-maintained, works very well and is orderly. But even more impressive is the fact that average quality of life for people in that country is incredibly good. It goes from high quality and inexpensive food, well-maintained vending machines, excellent convenience stores to well-maintained apartments of various sizes which are affordable to people with even entry-level jobs, public transit that works incredibly well, a medical system which is both very good and affordable. In short, the system in that country is made to work for the majority.

But it doesn’t stop there. In spite of having the highest median age of any major developed country, they can build infrastructure projects on time and budget with minimal inconvenience to people. They were, for example, able to repair all the damage caused by the great Tōhoku earthquake of 2011 far more quickly than western countries faced with smaller disasters. All of this got me thinking- why is Japan as a nation able to keep making things work nicely and get big things done even though it has technically been in a recession for over twenty years. There are those who might chalk this to Japanese exceptionalism or some other moronic stereotype invented why the west. But as it turns out, Japan is far from the exception.

Jut look at how fast East-Asian countries such as China, Taiwan, South Korea, Vietnam etc have come from a few decades ago. China has been the world’s largest economy (in real terms) for almost a decade now, South Korea has also done exceptionally well, same with Taiwan. Even the quality of life in countries such as Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia etc has improved a lot over past few decades. More impressively, the improvement in quality of life for average people in those countries is far more widespread than western countries since 1980. Heck.. even the government of DPRK has more interest in improving the life of people in that country than current western governments have in doing the same for their own.

So what is the common thread running through these successful East-Asian countries? Well.. a person from west might say it is race- however this belief is a consequence of their own ignorance about that part of the world. A far better explanation comes down to the fact that these countries, even the ones which are nominally democracies, are effectively single-party systems. And yes.. the way the Chinese system functions in real-life is far closer to a one-party democracy than a despotic totalitarian system. Here is why.. unlike traditional despotic systems- incompetent people are either not allowed to rise to positions of authority or removed from them once their incompetence becomes obvious. In case you wondering.. this is what voting in democracies is supposed to achieve.

And then there is the issue of corporate capture of governments. See.. unlike multi-party ‘democracies’, countries that are effectively single-party systems are basically immune to capture by corporate interests. That is why countries such as Japan and China can pursue policies to maintain low rents and prices for housing, build good infrastructure on time and budget, ensure maximal levels of employment for their populations etc. This is also why Japan can prioritize the ability of their people to buy high quality and relatively inexpensive food, maintain long-term employment at decent jobs, maintain infrastructure etc even if it means accepting lower rates of profit for corporations. Ironically USA was rather close to a one-party system (in form, if not name) between 1933 and 1973- now widely seen as its golden age.

In summary, one-party systems with some democratic feedback turn out to be far superior to multi-party democracies in real life. A large part of their superiority comes down to the fact that single-party systems with democratic feedback allow long-term thinking and planning to occur. Moreover they are far more resistant to corporate capture and all of the subsequent negative effects than multi-party ‘democracies’. In fact, I would go so far as to say that multi-party ‘democracies’ are only accountable to large corporations and plutocrats. And ya.. almost every single Indian state which has done well compared to the median was effectively a single-party system for decades. Competent governance by people with long-term goals matters far more than levels of systemic corruption.

What do you think? Comments?

Neoliberalism Deliberately Wastes the Best Years of a Person’s Life

While trying to write a post about why generation categories such as Gen X, Millennials and Gen Z is utter bullshit clickbait invented by MSM hacks, I noticed an interesting trend. People born before the early-1970s in West had access to things such as long-term careers and jobs in addition to reasonably priced higher education, houses and cars. But people just born a few years afterwards (late 1970s-and afterwards) did not get to experience many of these things as adults or just had a fleeting acquaintances with them. So what caused this massive shift in quality of life between those born at beginning at 1970s and towards end of that decade.

Here is a clue- add 20 to their birth years. Those born before early-1970s reached adulthood before 1992. Those born in late-1970s and afterwards reached that point in late-1990s and beyond. But why does this matter? Well.. unrestrained neoliberalism (including “free trade”, “outsourcing”, “privatization” and large-scale financialization became the dominant ideology of western countries. And yes.. it has something to do with end of the cold war in 1991. But what does any of this have to neoliberalism deliberately wasting the best years of a person’s life. Surely such an impact cannot be deliberate.. or can it?

Let me start by telling you a story about changes in the likelihood of academics having children over the years. See.. as late as the mid-1990s, most newly minted PhDs from even supposedly ‘average’ universities used to get decent jobs in universities, institutes and corporations without too much effort. They also ended up marrying and having kids before they got too old to have them without medical intervention. The same used to be true for doctors, other medical professionals and professionals in general. I distinctly remember that those about 5-7 years older than myself somehow ended up in at least semi-stable jobs and careers which turned out to be OK. However very few of my age, or even a couple of years older, have been able to achieve that and this gulf is very obvious.

But how does this have any connection with neoliberalism? Well.. let me ask you a simple question- what is the defining characteristic of neoliberalism as far as education, jobs and lifestyle is concerned? What about intense meaningless “competition” based on bullshit proxy measures of performance for a few extra crumbs. And here is how this translates into real life. Until the early 1990s, it was normal for somebody with 2-3 publications during their science PhD to get a decent and stable job in a large corporation immediately after graduation. Even somebody with 3-4 publications could get a single decent postdoc which would lead to a tenure-track in a university or otherwise stable position in some institute. Let me repeat that this was the norm, not the exception.

Or consider the type of people who ended up in medical school, dentistry, law school etc. Until the early-1900s having a decent GPA, OK scores in entrance exams and a genuine interest in the subject was enough to get into those programs. Sure.. the top 10 or top 20 schools might be more “competitive” but that was it. Since then, people who who even apply for such programs require ever more curated resumes showing tons of “volunteer” and other self-promotion bullshit, exceptional GPAs obtained via grade inflation and other degrees. Today it is not uncommon for people to have masters and PhD degrees before they are admitted in medical school. But does this improve their ability to practice medicine? I don’t think so.

But all of this metric-driven bullshit fake “competition” does do a lot of harm to people who participate in these games. Today it is almost unheard of even “ambitious” young academics to have a semi-stable job and career before they are 40. Most tenured female academics are childless. The same is true for many younger female doctors because they too don’t have anything approaching a stable career well into their late-30s. Those who go into industry do no better since the jobs which are available are quite unstable and everybody knows it. And it isn’t the case that men are doing any better.

The median age for getting your first independent government research grant as an academic is now in the mid-40s. And all of this only applies if you are lucky enough to get a tenure track position. It is also no secret that those who go into industry understand that their jobs are very unstable and rearrange their life accordingly. Even doctors making a decent amount of money are frequently paying their student loans almost a decade after graduating medical school. The same is true for most people who went to law school or obtained other supposedly professional degrees. This problem crosses many fields and areas of economy.

Now let me ask another question- has any of this fake neoliberalism-inspired “competition” resulted in the production of more competent scientists, academics, doctors, dentists, lawyers or other professionals? On the contrary, most peer-reviewed research is not reproducible because it is either fake or based on cherry-picking results. We also haven’t seen a single large fundamental technological breakthrough with positive real-world impact in past twenty years. The lesser we talk about the quality of contemporary universities and academia, the better. The quality of medicine, as measured by effects on lifespan or health-life expectancy, has stagnated or become worse in past two decades.

The same is true of fields such as law where all the extra work has not made things better- even for those who charge all those billable hours. In other words, all of this talk about “competition”, “meritocracy”. “hard work” etc making things better or more efficient is smoke and mirrors. What this neoliberal bullshit has achieved is a large reduction in rates of stable couple formation, fewer or no kids and people working hard on stuff that is useless or worse. My point is that by deliberately Wasting the best years of a person’s life, they have created entire generation of deeply unhappy and mentally-fucked up people. On the bright side, they won’t have enough children to sustain this charade for much longer.

What do you think? Comments?

The Main Reason Why CGI-Heavy Movies are Highly Unmemorable

Almost a decade ago, I had written a couple of posts about how the rapidly decreasing cost of photo-realistic CGI was changing the production of even low-budget films and TV shows. As it often turns out, I was right and the last decade has seen a huge increase in the use of various types of CGI- especially in low-budget films and TV shows. However this huge increase in use of CGI has gone hand-in-hand a highly problematic trend. The vast majority of movies and TV shows produced in past decade (actually more like 15 years) have been very unmemorable.

To some extent, this is caused by studios milking their “intellectual properties” beyond a point of return (X-Men, Star Wars, Marvel Franchise etc). However even novel “properties” such as ‘Black Panther’ or less-milked one such as ‘Aladdin’, ‘The Lion King’ etc don’t have the long legs unlike similar ones in past. Let me explain this with a couple of examples. See.. the original Star Wars or first Jurassic Park movie created a huge franchise. Moreover anybody who has seen them can easily remember and retell the overall story arc a couple of decades after having last watched it. The Same applies for first Matrix movie, Back to the Future etc. Now try doing the the same for most top 10 movies for each year in the past decade or more.

How many fondly remember the Avatar, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, 2012, Up, The Twilight Saga: New Moon or Avengers: Endgame, The Lion King, Spider-Man: Far From Home, Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker or Aladdin. Now compare the general apathy for financially successful films from past decade to the cultural impact of far less financially successful ones from past such as Porky’s, Revenge of Nerds, American Pie or even The Breakfast Club. How come low-budget sex comedies from 1980s and 1990s have had a far bigger cultural impact than carefully designed movies costing 200 million bucks a piece? Heck, the original Austin Powers movie has had a far bigger cultural impact than Avatar.

Well.. here is one possible explanation. Let me ask you something.. how many of you have seen a real life tights-clad “Superhero”, Godzilla, King-Kong, Dinosaur, Zombie, Goblin, Elf, Hobbit, Wizard or any of the stuff which studios spent tens of millions on when making those movies. How many of you have seen real-life examples of people doing what they do in those “Superhero” movies? Have you seen multiple buildings destroyed close up? Are you starting to see what I am getting at? Now contrast this to the fact that we all have seen and interacted with tons of people who are thin, fat, hot, ugly, nice and assholes.

All entertainment (oral stories, written literature, movies, TV shows, video games etc) require people to partially suspend their belief in reality. However, the ability of entertainment to connect with their audience requires that they are well-grounded in relatable reality at some level. The first nine seasons of ‘The Simpsons’ connected so well with their audience because the motivations and behavior of characters were grounded in relatable reality. Of course, you can go to the other extreme and have something which is almost unmoored from reality such as ‘Phineas and Ferb’, ‘Family Guy’, ‘Animaniacs’ etc. But there is a very good reason why almost all of the unrealistic stuff has historically been either cartoons, puppets or farce.

Until the early 2000s, the relatively high cost and poor realism of CGI forced movie directors, producers and editors to restrict their use and focus on story and character development. In such movies, CGI played a supporting role to the core of the story. That is why the original Jaws, Star Wars, Jurassic Park type movies feel far more real than their later sequels. They were centered around relatable human characters rather than special effects and characters without any analogue in real-life. The thing is.. over the long-term, people will only care about and remember stuff which has some connection to their reality, even if it is in the form of a parody or farce. The rest is just easily forgotten spectacle.

To make matters worse, movies and shows which are almost entirely based in visual spectacle age far more poorly than those that are not. This is why, for example, rewatching the newer batch of Star Wars films feels so bland when compared to original Star Wars trilogy. Heck.. watching them on a 4K TV is closer to watching a splashy but poorly-acted cinema-school productions than something which resembling movies which cost over 100 million, a piece, to produce. I have a feeling that this MBA and financialism-based model of making movies, TV shows and video games is not sustainable – even in the medium term. On the bright side, very few will remember this phase of the entertainment industry in future.

What do you think? Comments?

NSFW Links: Mar 27, 2021

These links are NSFW. Will post something more intellectual tomorrow.

Amateur Beach Cuties: Mar 3, 2021 – Amateur beach cuties wearing waist chains.

Beach Cuties with Piercings: Mar 8, 2021 – Amateur beach cuties with piercings.

2D Spanking Art: Mar 14, 2021 – Colored and captioned toons getting spanked.

Enjoy!

Interesting Blog: Blind Spots

A few weeks ago, I came across a blog called Blind Spots. It is largely about the many blind spots often displayed by supposedly “smart” and “credentialed” people which are caused by worship of ideas, stories, theories, and signalling. Too bad, it only contains a few posts.

Accountancy is the Priesthood of Modern Life

Like the priests and bishops of old, it has become quite standard for the accountants within the finance function to stand at the apex of influence within our organisations and tell the rest of us what and how to think about business. It is routine that the finance function is more influential than and dictates to marketing and other income-generating teams but it is extremely rare to see the inverse. It is even becoming increasingly common for CFOs to hold dominion over cybersecurity and other IT functions when it would be inconceivable to imagine a finance department answering into a computer science-educated Chief Technology Officer.

and

I’ve written before about the blinding effect abstractions can have on us when we drift into thinking the symbols are more real than the things they were created to represent. Money is a representation of value. A scoring system against which we can grade the worth of real life things. Without the resources to buy with it, it is completely worthless. Accountancy-thought, due to the ease with which costs can be counted compared to benefit, or money can be counted compared to the value of real-life stuff, has led us to develop a habit of over-focus on cash to the neglect of the things that cash can buy, which is presumably what we were all in it for in the first place.

Capitalism is Bad for Business

Commerce is roughly as old as recorded history itself. The later-stage first farmers appear to have been the first humans to trade with one another over 5,000 years ago in the fertile crescent region we now know as the Middle East. For as long as we produced surplus to what we needed, we sold that excess in markets. As things developed further, the demand, and therefore supply, evolved for specialists and skilled tradespeople who could work with metals, furs, wood, or pottery. And so the trade in services was also born.

and

In reality, the most far-reaching element of these economic policies was the promotion of shareholder value above everything else in society. When you decide that the most important thing in a society is that people be able to invest in something and sell it for a higher price, it has the effect of turning everything and everyone in that society into a gambling chip: companies, property, even people. We call this effect financialisation. Think of any financial instrument as a gambling chip; it is something you can buy in the hope of either selling it at a higher price or earning a dividend or rent off of without having to work.

What do you think? Comments?

Indulging the Delusions of Mentally Ill People Always Ends Badly: 2

In the previous post of this series, I made the point that indulging delusions of people who are obviously not right in the head is a recipe for disaster. Trying to understand their delusions in order to appear “liberal” only ends up validating them and leads to a constant increase in their demands. This is how, for example, we went from “trans people are vulnerable” to “normalize medical and surgical intervention in vulnerable children” and “trans women are real women”. And as I write in future posts, this is not restricted to performative woke-ism since you can make the exact same case against christian evangelicals and fundamentalist muslims.

But what makes indulging mentally ill people with delusions far more problematic than say the passion of a guy who spends every spare dollar he has on expensive toy train sets or hotrod cars? Or what about a woman who is obsesses with plastic surgery? Isn’t that also a type of borderline mental illness? Well.. yes, many strong obsessions could be classified as borderline mental illness, but almost all of them lack what is (in my opinion) the most important feature of a mental illness. For something to be a mental illness, it has to seriously disrupt or harm the life of that person or those around him or her. Confused? Let me explain..

A guy obsessed with collecting toy train sets or building hotrod cars is not harming their lives or those of other around them. Sure.. their obsession can appear strange to those who are not into that sort of stuff, but it an eccentricity- at most. Similarly, a woman who is obsessed with plastic surgery might harm herself a bit, but it is no worse than cutting, dieting or bulimia. My point is that a lot of what some people might call borderline mental illness is closer to personal eccentricity or personality. They aren’t forcing you to buy toy train sets, start building hotrods or undergo plastic surgery. They might make you roll you eyes once in a while, but that is all.

To illustrate the previous point a bit better, let me give you another example. If you have read this blog long enough, you know that I am into spanking girls and other mild BDSM. So how does this affect the way I interact with women, especially escorts. Well.. my preferences do factor in while searching escort reviews and I am upfront about what I would like. However, I have never forced anyone who is not into that sort of stuff to participate in it. Also, I steer the session into a different direction if the girl is not that much into it. The point is, I understand that others often don’t have the same sexual tastes as myself and have no desire to change it.

Now compare this to the “trans” people and their “cis allies” trying to ‘cancel’ everyone who doesn’t agree with their delusions. And yes.. there is a reason somebody who pretends that chromosomes or genitalia don’t matter is delusional. It is the equivalent of saying that the sky is green because it can appear greenish under very specific and uncommon conditions or that ice is not cold because it warmer than liquid helium. The fact that sky can sometimes appear greenish before tornadoes does not mean that it’s default normal color is anything other blue. Similarly, ice being less colder than liquid helium is irrelevant to our use of ice to, say, cool a drink or it feeling cold to touch. Weasel wording, you see, has no effect on physical reality.

Some of you might say.. it is about their attempts to control others rather than holding onto their delusion of choice- and there is some truth to that. But let me ask you something- why are “trans” people and their “woke” allies so obsessed with something that over 98% of other people see as utterly ridiculous. Why aren’t they obsessed with for example, banning clothing of a certain color or fashion? Why aren’t they devoting their energies towards banning certain cuisines or foods? My point is that their ridiculous demands from other people are specifically aimed at validating their delusions. Their pathetic attempts to control the discourse is as best- secondary or tertiary to validating their delusions.

Which brings me to the topic of Munchausen syndrome and Munchausen by Proxy. In case you don’t know, Muchausen syndrome is a mental illness when someone tries to get attention and sympathy by falsifying, inducing, and/or exaggerating an illness. This includes lying about symptoms, sabotaging medical tests or harming themselves to get the desired symptoms. Munchausen syndrome by proxy (MSBP) is a mental health problem in which a caregiver makes up or causes an illness or injury in a person under his or her care, such as a child, an elderly adult, or a person who has a disability. Now tell me if a lot of “trans” culture and the actions of their “cis ally” enablers don’t remind you of these two mental conditions? And let me remind you that many others have said this exact same thing many years before today.

But why are so many people displaying symptoms of Munchausen syndrome and Munchausen by Proxy in 2021 as compared to .. say.. 2001 and 2011? And why is far more prevalent in certain western countries but not others? Also why is basically absent in all other countries around the world. My theory, which I will explain in the next post, is that this increase has everything to do with certain societies slowly decaying due to the effects of late-capitalism, neoliberalism and financialism. In other words, the rise of this social pathology (and many others) has everything to with the institutions of, and social dysfunction, created by a set of rapidly failing governing ideologies.

What do you think? Comments?

Indulging the Delusions of Mentally Ill People Always Ends Badly: 1

One of the more darkly comic features of our current era is how mass culture in West elevates and celebrates the viewpoints of people suffering from serious mentally illness over those who are normal. And yes.. we all know what ‘normal’ means even if some aren’t willing to admit it. How else do you explain why so many sad morons are willing to go along with the delusional rants of self-important autistic puppets such as Greta Thunberg. This is also the case for many other spokespersons for “environmentalism”- which is basically recycled secular Catholicism. To be fair.. a lot of the so-called Catholic “saints” of previous centuries were not right in the head, so I guess this problem isn’t that especially new.

However, it is far easier to excuse the average person of previous eras for going along with the rants of mentally ill people because the general levels of literacy and education were very low in those times. To put it another way, an illiterate 13th century peasant worshiping some mentally ill person as a “saint” is way more understandable than a university-educated person doing the same in the 21st century. Yet, as we enter the second decade of this century, every passing day seems to bring yet another confirmation that we are in an era where mass culture seems to almost excursively celebrate people who are mentally ill. To be clear, I am not dumping on one side or segment since the majority of famous capitalists and billionaires are just as fucked up in the head as the most ardent environmentalists.

With that out of the way, let us talk about one example of how “mass culture” elevates and celebrates the views of people who are.. well.. not right in the head. Some readers might remember that I have written a few posts about the “trans” ideology (link 1, link 2, link 3 and link 4). And yes.. it is an ideology. While I believe that adults should have the right to request surgical mutilation of their secondary sexual features, even if they are not right in the head, the same cannot be said for children under the age of legal consent- especially if they are being sold a delusion which is totally detached from reality. But why does any of this matter and why is validating the delusions of mentally ill people so incredibly dangerous?

While I will talk about the dangerous effects of believing in “anthropogenic climate change”, “zero carbon energy” and other more mainstream delusions in subsequent posts, this one will focus on the real harm being caused by believing in that ideology- including the now inevitable backlash. But first, let us talk about how incredibly delusional this ideology is and how it has spread. Did you know that within the past two years there have been more than a handful of articles in supposedly respectable medical journals which are trying to say that ‘biological sex is not real’ because of long-known edge examples of abnormalities which occur in less than 1 in 1000 individuals. More than a few medical specialist associations have made similar official statements to help validate that ideology in past 2-3 years. Some might say.. but what harm can come out of these sad attempts by timid people to avoid controversy?

Let me ask you something.. would you keep believing someone who told you that ice was hot or the sky was green, even if you knew that the person was saying it to avoid confrontation with somebody else? Don’t you think that making bullshit statements on one topic affects the credibility of that person on anything else they might say. But why does this matter? Well.. if a credentialed medical person said that ‘biological sex is not real, would you still believe their views on other topics such as treating an illness or the efficacy of vaccinations? Gaining public trust, for people or institutions, always takes much longer time and effort than nuking it. But why does public credibility of professionals and institutions matter? Well.. societies where people have low levels of trust are far less stable and functional than those which do. Even before this latest fiasco, public trust in the medical profession was not especially high.

But it gets worse.. much worse. Consider what happens to journalists who write anything that is even mildly critical of trans ideology. A recent example of this is Jesse Singal. The short version of this story is that he once wrote a mildly critical article about the ideology in The Atlantic. Ever since then, he as been the target of continuous harassment and outright slander by trans “activists” and their “allies”. This has reached levels where these so-called “activists” and their “allies” make up totally bullshit lies about him. However, unlike people who point out that Biden is not mentally all there (which is observably correct) and are removed from social media platforms, there are no negative consequences for the losers making up all these lies.

Which brings us how institutions (including corporations) are handling these trans “activists” and their careerist “allies”. You might have seen tons of examples where everybody from ACLU to Amazon are busy telling the public that “trans women are real women” etc. You might also have come across examples of corporations tweeting their support for “womxn”, “latinx” and other totally made-up names that normal cares about or believes. But how did we reach this point? Well.. you are not going to like the answer. See, all of this ridiculous shit with no connection to reality became prevalent because almost nobody wanted to call them out when these cults were in their infancy. At that times, most people (including liberals such as Jesse Singal) went out of their way to try and “understand” people who were clearly not right in the head. They did so because they wanted to prove their “liberal” credentials.

As it turns out, trying to support and “understand” the mindset and actions of people who are clearly not right in the head only ends up validating their delusions and leads to an increase in their demands. That is how we went from “trans people are vulnerable” to “let us normalize medical and surgical intervention in vulnerable children” and “trans women are real women”. To summarize, indulging people who are clearly not right in the head to prove your own “liberal” credentials very often backfires on those who do it. In upcoming parts of this series, I will show you how the same principle applies to a bunch of mental pathologies found in late capitalist societies. And yes.. there is a connection between these cults and late capitalism.

What do you think? Comments?

NSFW Links: Mar 11, 2021

These links are NSFW. Will post something more intellectual tomorrow.

Assorted Spanking Toons: Feb 13, 2021 – Rendered toons of cuties getting spanked.

Busty Topless Beach Cuties : Feb 20, 2021 – Topless busty beach cuties in sarong wraps.

Slim Beach Cuties : Feb 28, 2021 – Slim and wet amateur cuties on the beach.

More Slim Beach Cuties : Feb 28, 2021 – More slim and wet amateur cuties on the beach.

Enjoy!

Why are ‘Celebrities’ so Prone to Social Contagion and Virtue Display?

In the past, I have written about unusually high rates of female celebrities reporting sexual abuse and the high levels of narcissism, attention Whoring and extra-woke SJW-ism among ‘celebrities’ in general. It is no secret that ‘celebrities’ (especially those in the entertainment sector) of western countries exhibit a lot of behaviors that are.. well.. uncommon among the general population of those countries. While I have my own theories about the reasons behind the apparent clustering of odd behavior patterns and life-experiences among those who are ‘celebrities’ or aspiring to be one, that is a topic best discussed in a future post. Maybe we can also discuss why western societies require ‘celebrities’ to an extent not necessary for other cultures and countries. Hint.. it has something to do with social atomization.

Now let us talk about another annoying pattern behavior of ‘celebrities’- namely their high susceptibility to social contagion and virtue display. What makes this behavior even more peculiar is that anybody with more than half-a-brain can see the hilarious fakeness of their behavior. Some of you might remember hearing all those jokes about Hollywood celebrities adopting black children from Africa about 10-15 years ago. Or how the children of actors, musicians and models started coming out gay, lesbian, queer etc at record numbers in past decade. While the rates of alternative sexual orientations do vary across different populations, it is a bit suspicious when those rates are 5-10 times those for rest of population.

With that in mind, let us talk about the latest social contagion spreading among ‘celebrities’. Have a look at the picture below to understand what I am talking about. FYI: I cam across this image on Twatter. While I was initially skeptical about the photo-montage, a little background research shows that it is factually accurate. Here is the one about Megan Fox and her son, Gwen Stefani and her son, Adele and her son and there are many more. So what are your theories about why so many ‘celebrities’ are enthusiastic about screwing over the developing identities of their children? Isn’t it also a bit odd that we almost never saw this sort of stuff before 2015-2016. If this isn’t an example of social contagion, I don’t know what is..

What do you think? Comments?

Interesting YouTube Channel: Voices of the Past

Here is another interesting YouTube channel I came across in the past few months. It almost exclusively contains documentary-style readings of first-hand written accounts by authors in ancient and olden times.In contrast to many other history-oriented channels, it focuses on non-western authors and non-famous western authors whose first-hand accounts are, in my opinion, just as importatant as those written by famous western authors.

Link to YouTube channel: Voices of the Past

Clip #1: How Japan Became a Great Power in Only 40 Years

Clip #2: Japanese Diplomat to US Describes Desperate Last Days Before Pearl Harbor

Would also recommend First Indian Visitor Describes England and European Life, First Chinese Visitor Describes Medieval Europe and Japanese Historian Describes First Contact With Europeans. Many other clips on this channel are also quite good.

What do you think? Comments?

Anyone Else Having a Foreboding of Large-Scale Global Instability?

As many know, I have a strong interest in many areas beyond my professional expertise. One of them is history, specifically as reconstructed from multiple independent and often contrary sources. The context of historical events also matters. It is, for example, hard to understand why WW1 kept going for over four years even though almost every party in that conflict was losing people and material on an industrial scale over that timespan. Hint: it had as much to do with ideology of nationalism, race-based ethnocentric beliefs and mass culture as it to do with the productive capabilities of industrialized countries. My point is that all “official” history is outright bullshit and the past can only be only understood by careful reconstruction of the course of events as seen from multiple viewpoints in the proper context.

With that in mind, let us talk about an interesting pattern that keeps popping up throughout history- but especially within the past 150 years. Outbreaks of large scale wars, civil wars, collapse of empires and widespread generalized global instability tend to follow a general pattern. To better understand what I talking about, let us focus on a few events in past 110 years such as WW1, collapse of some old European empires in its aftermath, inter-nation conflict in eastern Europe during 1920s, warlord era in 1912-1949 China, WW2, post-WW2 collapse of European colonialism, collapse of USSR, beginning of collapse for american empire after 2003 etc. Ever wondered if there is a common thread running through all these events other than them occurring within past 100 years?

Well.. there is one. As it turns out, almost nobody was able to predict that these events would occur even 3-5 years before they occurred. But why were so many unable to foresee a course of events which in retrospective seem inevitable? Why were all the “geniuses” and “experts” of that era unable to foresee how disastrous WW1 would turn out? One possible explanation is that too many of these “experts” had such a strong vested interest in the status quo that they were unwilling to consider a world where that would change. But why were the contrarian “experts” of those eras also blind to the actual likelihood of these massive and systemic events. What cause almost all the “smart” people of that era to ignore the obvious?

Here is my hypothesis about why so many were oblivious to the real risk of large systemic events. The short version is that even decaying systems appear far stronger than they turn out to be under real stress. This is why, for example, why the Ottoman Empire, Romanov dynasty and Ottoman empire looked far stronger in 1914 than they turned out to be under real-life adverse conditions. This is also why nobody foresaw the collapse of USSR and all those other communist regimes in Eastern Europe as late as 1986. It is also why the USA of 2003 thought they had the capability to occupy Iraq and subdue all those pesky Arabs in that country. Or why almost nobody imagined that the GFC of 2008 would occur.

Complex systems, especially highly-centralized ones, are always much more fragile than they appear. BTW- China is a significantly more functionally decentralized system than USA or other western countries. And this leads us to the next question- how do we determine which systems are fragile or whether current trends will lead to some “unforeseen” outcome? Let me answer the second question first. See.. to model the effect of any trend, you have to first identify it. For example, the effect of European style nationalism on intra-ethnic conflict were not fully appreciated until after WW1. But could this trend have been identified before 1914?

Well.. yes, because the problematic effects of “modern” nationalism were obvious in Balkans and outlying parts of the Ottoman empire for at least a couple of decades before WW1 started. Similarly, the ability of industrialization to prolong wars and fundamentally change their nature was obvious as far back the american civil war and hard to ignore after the Russo-Japanese war in 1905. The arms race, colonialism race and potential for conflict among European countries were obvious for at least two decades before WW1. So why did even the contrarian “smart” people of that era ignore these obvious trends? The simple answer is that they thought that a system which could handle all these trends and contradictions for a decade or two would be able to keep doing so indefinitely.

This is also why, for example, all of the signs of socio-economic stagnation in USSR and other East-European communist countries which began in early-1970s was ignored and seen as unimportant till it wasn’t. It is also why so many western China “experts” were unable to see the real long-term effects of outsourcing manufacturing on a huge scale to that country. But what does any of this mean for the era we live in today? For starters, we live in an era of multiple systemic trends which will end in disaster- sooner or later. Consider, for example, how USA and the west approach nuclear proliferation. You have to a pretty delusional white ivy-leaguer, if you think that DPRK is going to give up or even slow down its acquisition of nuclear weapons and ICBMs. The same is now almost inevitable for Iran and they too are very likely to go down that particular path in near future.

Then there is the issue of continued and escalating conflicts with Russia on a number of issues ranging from oil and gas pipelines to nuclear weapon deployment and proxy wars. Then there is the trend of China becoming the predominant manufacturing superpower and largest functional economy of our era- without accepting western-style financialism. Did I mention that they also have nukes and ICBMs. We cannot forget that all of this occurring in addition to the slow-motion collapse of american military capabilities and civil society in addition to a profound demographic decline among its European allies. We cannot also forget that the “west” has been in a state of technological stagnation for past twenty years while rest of world has either caught up or moved on. All these systemic trends are adding up rather quickly.

Now add in the massive socio-economic issues caused by the botched handling of COVID-19 pandemic by western countries. Do you really think that public trust in public institutions of those countries has not experienced a serious decline within past year. So you really think all the half-assed and open-ended authoritarian measures instituted by these countries won’t cause serious blow-back and greatly increased levels of political polarization. I just don’t see a way how the combination of multiple and irreconcilable systemic trends exacerbated by more acute trends such as those caused by mismanaging COVID-19 pandemic can lead to anything other that widespread global instability that will upset the rotten status quo.

And yes.. there are other trends and issues such as precarity and childlessness of younger generations in western countries which I have barely touched upon in this post.

What do you think? Comments?

NSFW Links: Feb 27, 2021

These links are NSFW. Will post something more intellectual tomorrow.

3D Spanking Toons: Jan 30, 2021 – Rendered toons of themed cuties getting spanked.

2D Spanking Art: Feb 6, 2021 – Colored and captioned toons getting spanked.

Enjoy!

Public Health “Experts” Have Fucked up Official COVID-19 Messaging

As many of you have realized by now, the official messaging about (and recommendations by) COVID-19 by most public health “experts” has been incredibly bad- and it would still be a big understatement. While some of you might think that their disastrously bad messaging and policies will only cause short-term damage to public trust in medicine, I think otherwise. As you will see in rest of this post, many of the incredibly stupid recommendations and policies which are vociferously promoted by most public health “experts” are going to have some truly awful long-term consequences. Here is just a preliminary list..

1] I am sure that in the past few weeks, most of you have read many articles quoting public health “experts”, including leaky faucet, repeating the same bullshit- namely, that widespread vaccination won’t change their policy recommendations about ineffectual face-mask wearing, useless “social distancing” or other stuff such as reopening schools or public gatherings and events such as indoor restaurants, drinking establishments, music concerts, sporting events etc. And this raises an important question- what is the motivation for most people under 50 to get vaccinated (especially with untested mRNA-based vaccines) if nothing is going to change in the foreseeable future. It is is now common knowledge that COVID-19 infection in people under 50 has an extremely low mortality rate (about 1 in a few thousand).

To make matters worse, this position makes people wonder if other vaccines are effective. By claiming that COVID-19 vaccines are not effective enough to let western societies go back to the way they were before March 2020, these dumbfucks are providing an amazing amount of free ammunition for anti-vaxxers. Think about it.. if the vaccines that are claimed to be 95% effective (which they are not) cannot stop the spread of an infection to the satisfaction of these morons, what is the point of taking any other vaccine? I predict that we will see a huge increase in public skepticism towards vaccination, in general, in aftermath of this pandemic. It does not help that many diseases controlled by widespread childhood vaccination such as measles, chickenpox, rubella, mumps etc are quite rare nowadays and not dangerous to well-nourished children who are under 12 and living in developed countries.

2] Now let us talk about the side-effect profile of vaccines- specifically those based on mRNA (Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna). As I have written in previous posts, the 2nd dose of both vaccines causes moderately severe side-effects resembling influenza which last 2-3 days in about 20-30% of those who take it. While this side-effect profile is acceptable in those above 70, it is not clear how most people under 50 (who are not brainwashed or addicted to virtue display) will accept vaccines if it causes a more severe illness in a higher percentage of them than the infection itself. And it keeps on getting interesting..

Not content to pretend that vaccines won’t change their ineffectual and moronic policies, the idiots have also spend a lot of time pretending that COVID-19 vaccines (specifically mRNA based) are free of serious side-effects. However even a cursory look at data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) of USA and Europe says otherwise. While the rates of vaccine-related death in older people is probably somewhere between 1 in few thousand, it is real and about 100x the rate for other common vaccines such as those for Influenza. They also demonstrate a noticeable tendency to cause otherwise rare side-effects such as idiopathic thrombocytopenia and 3rd trimester miscarriage in otherwise healthy pregnant women. Reports of moderate side effects such as disturbed menstruation patterns, pronged swollen axillary lymph nodes, transient peripheral neuropathy etc are far more common.

3] All this talk about vaccines brings us the issues of “mutants” or “new strains” of COVID-19 whose detection is breathlessly reported every day by the MSM. The morons aka public health “experts” want you to believe that these are unprecedented and will somehow render existing vaccines useless. Of course, as before these idiots betray their lack of understanding of viruses and the human immune system. So let me restate the obvious- the genetic material in all viruses, and living creatures in general, constantly mutates. While this process is slower in significantly faster in RNA-based viruses such as Coronaviruses than organisms which use DNA to store their genetic information (like human beings), it occurs nonetheless.

But here is the funny thing.. Coronaviruses have among the smallest rate of mutations for any major family of RNA viruses. Nor as they have segmented genomes capable of large-scale recombination like Influenza viruses. But what does any of this mean? Well.. for starters, the immune system of all vertebrates has evolved a number of tricks to deal with very similar viruses. These range from producing a mixture of antibodies to a single viral antigen which bind at overlapping sites to immune cell activation directed at multiple overlapping sequences (epitopes) from that antigen. Did I mention that all viruses contain more than one type of antigen.This is why it is possible to develop efficacious vaccines against RNA viruses such as those which cause Polio, Yellow Fever, Measles and many others even though they are more prone to mutations than COVID-19. But you won’t hear this from public health “experts”.

4] We should also talk about how the COVID-19 response has polarized people by politics and ideology. It is no secret that what people believe about the validity of official response to this pandemic is highly dependent on their political leanings and ideology. Currently promoted public health measures seem to have no effect on cumulative rates of hospitalization and death due to COVID-19. If you don’t believe me, just compare Florida with California or Sweden and UK. To make matters more interesting, countries in East, South-East, South Asia and Africa have far lower (20-100 times) rates of hospitalization and death than what one might predict based on their population characteristics. And yes.. this effect is very obvious even after aggressively adjusting for age structure of their populations.

So what is going on? If you asked me.. I would say that those populations very likely have partial cross-immunity (mostly cell-based) from previous infections by other Coronaviruses. And let us clear about something, in countries such as India more than 50% of the urban population now exhibit serological evidence of previous infection by COVID-19 compared to rates of a few percent about 5-6 months ago. The point I am trying to make is all of the much vaunted and promoted public health measures have no worthwhile effect on the spread of COVID-19. But try telling any of this to the credentialed losers and “expert”-worshipers. You know.. the same types of people who have made a secular cult out of mindlessly repeating the rancid farts emanating from the mouths of all these ineffectual “experts”.

It is this cult of worshiping morons that is being everything from their resistance to reopening schools and universities, restaurants and bars etc. These are also the same idiots who pretend that international travel is dangerous in spite of western countries being the most heavily infected in world. We are already seeing a significant minority of this group defecting to the pro-open/normalization side because they are now being personally inconvenienced. Expect a severe electoral backlash against those seen as supporting ineffectual but highly damaging lockdowns and expert-worshipers (aka Democrats) in 2022 and likely 2024.

What do you think? Comments?