Archive

Archive for April, 2021

Younger Generations in West Losing Touch with Physical Reality: 1

April 23, 2021 21 comments

Regular readers of my blog know that I have written numerous post in past couple of years about how various factions, institutions and entire countries in west seem to have lost touch with physical and material reality. What makes this progressive loss touch with of reality in west especially interesting is that most of people outside its borders haven’t lost touch with reality- and this says a lot about the rapidly and terminally declining influence of western countries. Which brings me to the next and inevitable question- will this loss of touch with reality continue to its inevitable conclusion or will it stabilize and perhaps even reverse itself. While anything is possible on a long enough time-span, it appears unlikely that any significant deviation from current path of self-abasement will occur in near future.

But why am I so pessimistic about the ability of younger generations in west to correct the loss of their touch with physical reality in near future? Well.. there are many reasons for my skepticism and here are some examples of why I think that they might be (in many cases) even more detached from reality than previous generations. Of course, I also recognize that sooner or later a significant minority of this generation will almost certainly go against the current trend of pretending that physical reality does not exist or matter. However, I don’t think that their numbers or influence will be sufficient, barring some violent revolution, to affect the current course of events. Here are a few examples of why I maintain that belief..

Some of you might have wondered about why so many, especially in younger age groups, seem to believe that widespread use of electric and truly self-driving automobiles is inevitable in near future. If you ever go to message boards of sites frequented by autistic programmer-types such as ycombinator, slashdot, arstechnica etc, you will see tons of people who firmly believe that widespread adoption of electric cars and truly self-driving automobiles are around the corner. Fun fact- these people were saying the same things a decade ago. So why didn’t things change to any worthwhile extent over that decade? Some of you might say that the share price of Tesla suggests that I am wrong. Well.. what percentage of automobiles sold today are electric or truly self-driving? And do you really think that this state of affairs will change over next two decades- if ever?

To understand what I am talking about, let me ask you a simple question- why does a new technology replace an older one? Why were steam engines the dominant mode of traction for trains (all over the world) until after WW2 and why was the switch to electric and diesel so quick after 1950? Why did turbojets and turbofans rapidly become the main power-plant of airliners after the early-1960s? Why did the adoption of personal computers explode after mid-1980s? Why did smartphones displace older types of cellphones so quickly after 2008? Conversely, why do we still use Ibuprofen and Naproxen to treat inflammation and fever- even though they are over 50 years old? Why does the toilet look and work almost identically to one from almost 100 years ago? Or why does your refrigerator function and even look very similar to one from over 50 years ago?

It all comes down to a simple question- Does the “new” technology work significantly better than “older” technology and cost about the same or less. Steam engines were dominant until after WW2 because they were relatively inexpensive to build, reliable, easy to fix and had amazing torque. Diesel locomotives became competitive with steam in terms of cost and reliability once the diesel-electric transmission was refined by late-1940s. Once that occurred, replacing steam with diesel locomotives became a no-brainer as they had good horsepower, decent torque and required much less maintenance. Similarly, using electric locomotives on main routes became far more viable once an increase in widespread electrification of many countries occurred in aftermath of WW2.

Turbojets and then Turbofans became dominant power-plant of large airliners as it was much easier to build and maintain such engines with power outputs high enough to propel airliners capable of carrying over 100 people. This is also why turboprops are nowadays restricted to smaller airliners (cost-effective) or military transports (slower but rugged). Also, there are mechanical reasons why piston aeroengines making over 4,000 hp (or equivalent thrust) were never built in any significant numbers. Similarly personal computers boomed after mid-1980s once they became relatively affordable and able to do useful things such as help compose documents, spreadsheets or play games. Similarly smartphones displaced older types of cellphones after 2008, because they opened up entire categories of new possibilities for what users could do with a handheld device.

Did you notice a pattern? If not, let me spell it out for you- Newer technologies displace older ones when they can do stuff better or cheaper or, ideally, both. This is why, for example, LCD/LED TVs replaced CRTs so quickly after 2005. Or why power plants using natural gas exploded in popularity compared to coal-powered ones in past two decades. Hint: it was the cost of building, maintenance and fuel, and not lower CO2 emissions, which made natural gas the fuel of choice for generating electricity in north america within past two decades. That is also why coal-powered power plants will maintain their dominant position in countries such as China, India and many others without ready and reliable access to natural gas. This is also why we use older drugs such as Ibuprofen and Naproxen over more newer drugs or why toilets and refrigerators haven’t changed much in over 50 years.

But what does any of this have to do with the loss of touch with physical reality exhibited by, what appears to be a majority of, younger generations in west? Well.. because almost nobody is asking questions such as what are the theoretical and practical limits to rechargeable battery technology, where they are going to get all that lithium for so many batteries or rare-earth elements for modern brushless electric motors. Very few of them seem to be concerned by issues such as the problems inherent in removing automobile wrecks containing damaged lithium batteries off the road or the logistics chain problems involved in building, maintaining and repairing electric cars on the same scale as ICE-powered ones.

Even fewer seem to understand the problems caused by such decisions to the entire chain of crude oil refining which is necessary for supplying starting chemicals for everything from plastics and agricultural chemicals to drugs and specialty chemicals for a gazillion different industrial processes. And best of luck trying to run military vehicles, airplanes and container ships on lithium batteries. To put it bluntly, trying to stop production and use of of ICE-powered cars is a suicide move for any country larger than a city-state or micro-country. And here is what makes this even more interesting.. a majority of younger generations in China, India, Russia, Japan etc have a far better appreciation of these issues than their equivalents in the west. This is not to imply that China or India will ignore electric-powered automobiles. In fact, they will likely adopt them at decent percentages in future for specialized uses.

It is just that no large country outside west will replace ICE-powered automobiles until an option which is cheaper and more rugged/dependable than internal-combustion engines come along. Sure.. they may give lip-service to that idea and sign non-enforceable agreements, but when push comes to shove they are going to keep building ever more internal combustion engine-powered automobiles. However for some “odd” reason, a lot of supposedly “educated” young people in west don’t seem to understand this reality. Even more curiously, they think that the demographically decrepit and technologically stagnant west has any leverage over anything beyond small third-world countries. This belief is even laughable as the ability and infrastructure to make stuff on a large scale has already shifted to countries such as China.

In the next parts of this series. I hope to tackle issues such as the reasons behind younger generation refraining from having kids, acting “woke” and going along with other stupid “intellectual” fads, believing in inevitable major technological breakthroughs which will revolutionize lifestyles when none have occurred for almost 50 years and believing in laughably stupid bullshit such as the viability of peaceful but real political change.

what do you think?

Recent Articles about Critical Race Theory in Educational Institutions

April 15, 2021 10 comments

Over the past few months, readers of this blog might have heard come across the name of a couple of “experts” on racism such as Robin Diangelo and Ibram X. Kendi. However these two are only the proverbial tip of a iceberg of charlatans, all of whom are pushing some version of something known as Critical Race Theory. While examination of the bullshit and lies promoted by that “theory” deserve a series of its own, this post will focus on one small aspect of the damage wrought by the pushers aka promoters of this theory in educational institutions. While I don’t usually post links to outlets/ authors known for their conservative or libertarian views, it seems that nobody else is willing to even give a voice to the dissenting majority.

Link 1: The Woke Meritocracy

Students of color, particularly from immigrant backgrounds, wrote about the psychic suffering that had been inflicted on them by the dominant white culture. They had stories about having to learn to love their curly hair, their “unusual” names—in short, themselves. College applicants—and Americans generally—are increasingly asked to recount how through great difficulty they have succeeded in taking the self as the object of their love, a stage of narcissism that for earlier generations of psychoanalysts appeared not as a challenging achievement too often thwarted by an oppressive culture, but as a falling back into an infantile condition.

Members of less obviously oppressed groups had variant strategies. A number of Asian American students, for example, told me that they had written their admissions essays to demonstrate that they weren’t “like other Asians,” with narratives of how they had to challenge their strict parents and limited cultural horizons to develop passions for, as one wrote, beat-boxing and hip-hop. These are not students’ own stories. Many students in my class received tremendous amounts of help on their admissions essays from dedicated tutors at their high schools as well as private writing coaches. Their letters are a collective output, a kind of shared fantasy of the ruling class.

Link 2: A Professor Pushed Back Against ‘White Fragility’ Training

Nonetheless, a June 18 all-college email noted that the school’s president, Amy Morrison, had “made clear the expectation that all full-time employees attend Friday’s Courageous Conversations” unless they had conflicting teaching responsibilities. Parrett decided to express her qualms about the training during the training itself. What happened over the next nine months was both bizarre and oppressive. Because of a brief disruption that easily could have been brushed aside or handled with a warning not to do it again, LWTech went to war against a tenured faculty member, launching a cartoonishly over-the-top disciplinary process that included the hiring of a private investigator, dozens of interviews, and claims of widespread trauma.

and

In her email to me, Ames doubled down on her claim that Parrett’s behavior in the meeting had been frothingly out of control, writing that Parrett had “started aggressively yelling at folks in the meeting.” At the time, Ames didn’t know I had access to the leaked audio, in which Parrett does occasionally raise her voice to be heard but never comes across as anywhere nearly as aggressive or bullying as Ames described. When I sent Ames the audio file and asked her to point me to where Parrett yelled at anyone, a university spokeswoman who was on the thread jumped in, writing that “The audio speaks for itself but does not reflect Elisa’s visible anger.” Apparently, Parrett was “aggressively yelling at folks in the meeting” but it was the kind of aggressive yelling that doesn’t show up on audio.

Link 3: I Refuse to Stand By While My Students Are Indoctrinated

My school, like so many others, induces students via shame and sophistry to identify primarily with their race before their individual identities are fully formed. Students are pressured to conform their opinions to those broadly associated with their race and gender and to minimize or dismiss individual experiences that don’t match those assumptions. The morally compromised status of “oppressor” is assigned to one group of students based on their immutable characteristics. In the meantime, dependency, resentment and moral superiority are cultivated in students considered “oppressed.” All of this is done in the name of “equity,” but it is the opposite of fair. In reality, all of this reinforces the worst impulses we have as human beings: our tendency toward tribalism and sectarianism that a truly liberal education is meant to transcend.

and

However, when my questions were shared outside this forum, violating the school norm of confidentiality, I was informed by the head of the high school that my philosophical challenges had caused “harm” to students, given that these topics were “life and death matters, about people’s flesh and blood and bone.” I was reprimanded for “acting like an independent agent of a set of principles or ideas or beliefs.” And I was told that by doing so, I failed to serve the “greater good and the higher truth.” He further informed me that I had created “dissonance for vulnerable and unformed thinkers” and “neurological disturbance in students’ beings and systems.” The school’s director of studies added that my remarks could even constitute harassment.

What do you think? Comments?

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

April 11, 2021 19 comments

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

April 9, 2021 6 comments

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!

Categories: Uncategorized

Multi-Party ‘Democracies’ are Fundamentally Flawed and Unworkable

April 7, 2021 13 comments

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

April 2, 2021 14 comments

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?