Author Archive

There are Two Pathways for Trump’s Presidency to Implode in Real-Life

September 18, 2018 3 comments

As longtime readers might know, I have written more than a few posts about Trump in the past. To quickly summarize, my early and consistent predictions that Trump would win the Republican nomination and Presidency came true. I then went on to predict that his presidency would be a shit-show of epic proportions, which was rather easy, including the parts of his agenda (or lack thereof) that would start the process of sinking his presidency. My predictions that neither the “Russia-gate” non-scandal nor constant personal attacks against him by establishment politicians and corporate media would affect his favorability ratings among republican voters, have held out.

To put it another way, I have been correct about a lot of things concerning this particular topic. And that brings me to the subject of this post. Long story short, I now see two distinct and likely pathways for the Trump presidency to implode or become impotent (metaphorically) for the remainder of his term. But before we go there, let us talk about what will not bring him down. Far too many idiots are hoping for some Deus ex machina -type plot device to save the “good people of USA and its alleged democratic system from that bad man”. You might recall that the 2016 HRC campaign tried a similar approach and it failed in a spectacular fashion.

So let us start by first disabusing ourselves of the myth that american presidents, throughout history, have been good human beings or anything even remotely close. It is telling that most american presidents can be put into four categories: slave-owners, fat corrupt losers, hardcore racists and jingoistic warmongers. Of course, this has not stopped the political establishment and most americans of below-average intelligence from trying to portray these creatures as “heroes”. Heck, as we speak, the establishment is busy trying to rehabilitate the legacy of a president as brain-damaged and disastrous as G. W. Bush.

By the standards set by his 44 predecessors, Trump is not even an especially bad president. His biggest flaw, as far as the establishment is concerned, is that he is does not have the ability to lie to any useful degree while simultaneously doing horrible things. Most people who are not partisan democrats can, of course, see this and is the reason why personal attacks by corporate media, entertainment celebrities and establishment types had essentially no effect on his popularity- which was always rather low. That is also why the “Russia Gate” scandal is not sticking to him in spite of the unceasing efforts by those types of people.

So what could cause his presidency to crash and burn or lose so much public support that it will functionally impotent? Well.. there are two types of scenarios under which that could occur.

1] A prolonged trade war with the rest of the world, but especially China, would be extremely disastrous for his presidency. As many of you know, Trump seems to be obsessed with balance of trade with other countries. It is also one of the very few issues where his actions as president are somewhat consistent with what he said during his presidential campaign. So what is the problem with trying to “negotiate” better trade agreements with other countries? Isn’t USA the biggest global market or something like that? Aren’t some countries pretending to compromise?

Sadly (or not), USA is in no position to win a trade war- especially with China. For starters, most of the manufacturing capacity within USA left it for places like Mexico and China, a long time ago. More importantly, the supply chains for many products necessary to keep USA running are now almost entirely outside USA. The USA does not manufacturer much nowadays other than raw materials and agricultural products, some high-end CPUs and electronics, shiny but worthless weapons systems and various forms of entertainment. Don’t believe me? Just look around you and try finding value added products that are mostly made in USA.

But.. but.. who other than USA will buy Chinese products? What about everybody else in the whole fucking world! In case you haven’t noticed, most of the industrialized and industrializing world is as dependent on Chinese manufacturing as USA. The global penetration of a wide range of Chinese products, from smartphones and computers to construction equipment, textiles and chemicals, is so thorough that even large countries such as India are now approaching the levels of dependency of USA on Chinese manufacturing. Let us also not forget their internal market which has grown by leaps and bounds within last two decades.

And there is more! The Chinese government, unlike its american counterpart, has an extremely high level of control over ostensible private corporations and financial institutions within that country. They can disrupt important supply chains, screw with local operations of american corporations and target specific industries in USA with a degree of precision which their american counterparts cannot even imagine. The ability of USA to do the same to China is extremely limited and with the recent drama surrounding ZTE, you can rest assured that China is going to start pumping out its own high-end CPUs and other specialized chips within the next 2-4 years.

It certainly does not help that Trump’s outdated beliefs have simultaneously antagonized the other big trading partners of USA. Related to this has been the growing american tendency to use its legacy power in global banking to “punish” countries from Russia and Iran to China. While this trend, at least in its modern incarnation, started under Clinton- both Obama and Trump have pushed the use of such measures to the extent that other large countries simply use alternative financial networks. In a previous era (perhaps as late as 2008), such measures might have been somewhat effective because USA was the largest economy- in real terms.

To make a long story short, any prolonged trade war will result in the american dollar (and connected banking system) having an increasingly smaller part to play in international trade. As things stand today, USA is neither the world’s largest economy in real terms nor the biggest manufacturer of anything that people actually need. China, other Asian countries and rest of world on the other hand will just increasingly trade via alternate currencies and banking networks. Trump’ stupidity is only speeding up this inevitable process. And we are not even talking about the havoc that China could play on market values of american corporations. Also, no other country on earth today has capability to manufacture things on a large-scale like China.

2] Let us, now, talk about the consequences of new wars. As many of you know, Saudi Barbaria and that Zionist state want Uncle Sam to fight full-scale wars against Iran and Syria. Of course, they don’t care about consequences and outcomes of such wars or the monetary costs of these misadventures- or maybe, they have not thought through these issues carefully. Regardless, both potential conflicts are highly problematic- albeit for different reasons. Iran is far larger, much more united and way more populous than Iraq. Imagine invading a country that makes most of its own weapons, is about 1/5 th the size of USA and about 1/4 th the population. Did I mention that they fought a pretty long war with heavy casualties for eight years?

But.. but.. wouldn’t “superior” american airpower decimate their air-force or something like that? Well.. have a look at the location of that country and the major route for global oil transport. Do you really think that USA can keep the strait of Hormuz open- even if they had three aircraft carrier groups stationed next to that bottleneck? Did I mention they have tons of good anti-ship missiles, not to mention other means of disrupting oil transport directly. Then there is the issue of what their less-official forces might do with missiles to oil storage hubs on coast of Saudi Arabia and other gulf countries. Remember that they do not have to be especially effective to disrupt global flow of oil and send prices through the roof. Who wants to pay 300-400$ per barrel of oil?

Moving on to the situation in Syria- do you really think that any open military confrontation between Russia and USA over that country is going to end well? If you do, please get your head examined. The simple fact, is that, in 2018 nobody within Russia is seriously looking for some worthless “compromise” with USA. They have watched USA arm its east-European neighbors, try to annex Crimea via Ukraine, promote Islamic terrorism in their country and in general- try to destroy them by any means. To put it bluntly, any open armed confrontation between USA and Russia in Syria won’t remain restricted to that region. You do know that Russia has thousands of deliverable nuclear weapons, right? These conflicts have a tendency to escalate in ways one might not expect.. or want.

Which brings me to the situation with DPRK, or more precisely the hilarious lies that are being constantly regurgitated by state department about Kim Jong-un promising to unilaterally denuclearize after his first summit with Trump. First of all, he never promised anything along those lines. Secondly, the guy (and his close counsel) are very smart people who are fully aware that any agreement with USA is not worth the paper it was written on- unless you have ability to reliably nuke large cities on mainland USA. So ya, they are not giving up their nukes or ICBMs. Sure.. they might do some more meaningless confidence-building measures that look good on paper or video- but that is as far they will go. And guess what, South Korea is fine with that.

To summarize, Trump faces the prospect of a humiliating defeat in any trade war with rest of the world- but especially China. He is up against someone with far more capabilities than him, and they know it. They also know how to squeeze the proverbial balls of american corporations in ways that Trump cannot even imagine. As you might know, continued republican support for Trump has always been linked to not touching their corporate masters or interfering with their scams. Few republicans would be able to support Trump if a trade war with China cuts into the market valuations and profit margins of their corporate masters.

Similarly, starting any new war with Iran, Russia or DPRK would be most problematic for Trump. But I don’t think he understands that especially given the influence Of Saudi and other gulf state money and AIPAC in USA. In the best case scenario, it would fuck up oil supply and prices to levels beyonf ability of current system to adapt. Worst case scenario, we will find out how effective Russian or DPRK nukes are under real-life conditions. I am guessing that is not something any of us want to find out.. right?

What do you think? Comments?

Why Escorts are Always a Better Deal than Relationships or Marriage: 1

September 16, 2018 38 comments

As long-time readers of this blog will recall, some of my oldest posts have been about how to use escorts (link 1, link 2, link 3, link 4), how I started using escorts (link 5) and why escorts are a better deal that ‘real’ women (link 6, link 7 and link 8 and link 9). Then I did not write on that subject for a few years, though I did answer those who asked me about that issue. Some might wonder as to why I did not keep you guys updated about my continuing exploits with escorts over the last few years. Well.. it is kinda like why people who frequent restaurants (and are not food critics or social media whores) don’t keep on writing about the joys of eating in them.

One can say the sky is blue and ice is cold only so many times before it becomes repetitive and boring- like those endless superhero movie sequels. I am not in the business of making money by selling a lifestyle, seminars, books, supplements etc. My personal choice to use escorts and encourage their use by others is something I believe in as a matter of principle. Having said that, I thought it would be a good idea to write something new on the subject, especially as it relates to the effects of using escorts for a decade and half, by now. You do remember that I first started using them when I was in my early 20s, right?

It has been a pretty long time since I first went down that path, and have no regrets whatsoever about taking it. Everything I wrote on this blog, years ago, was correct to a degree that continues to surprise me even today. My insights on, for example, how relationships and marriage are a shitty deal for most men turned out to be better projections of the evolution of relationship between the sexes in western countries since that time. I also was correct in pointing out that ‘game’ and ‘seduction’ were inherently flawed belief systems, since they did not address the fundamental dysfunction which resides at the heart of this problem.

The core dysfunction of all relationship issues between men and women in allegedly developed countries comes down to a gross misalignment of checks and incentives. To put it bluntly, there are no consequences for a woman if she decides to do anything from divorce her husband out of the blue, dump her boyfriend for no good reason, give sexual favors to advance her career and call it sexual assault later, basically force her male child to grow up as a tyranny and pretty much anything else along those lines. Contrast this to the public outrage and pillorying faced by a guy who attempts the male equivalent of those actions and behavior.

And let us not kid ourselves.. whatever is left of MRA-ism, conventional MGTOW-ism, most ‘game’ and ‘seduction’ communities is a big fucking joke as are attempts to restore masculinity by alt-right idiots. Pretty much every supposedly “masculine” community is filled with captain save-a-hoes, delusional incels, shlubby white guys who end with Asian chicks, “reformed” players and other virtue pimps- not to mention all those greedy losers who want to sell you everything from bitcoin schemes, dietary supplements, books on positive thing and “perseverance porn”. In other words, there is not much real help from conventional sources for the average guy who wants to have sex with at least semi-attractive girl who can get him consistently hard.

There are a few good sources for advice on what to do once in a relationship, but they are not terribly helpful if you don’t have one in the first place. Sure.. you could try Tinder or some other dating/hook-up site/app and meet a few girls. Maybe you could even end up having have occasional sex or short-term relationships with some of them. But we keep coming back to the same problem, namely that most men can’t get a better deal than some sad relationship with a treacherous woman they can barely tolerate or a series of uncertain and irregular sexual encounters with women they would rather not be seen with. The key words here are “most men”.

Which brings me the reason I started writing about using escorts in the first place. To quickly summarize: life is too short to endure a series of shitty relationships or quasi-relationships with women who don’t care about you and are nowhere as good-looking as you would like, in the hopes that you will one day have a pleasant relationship with some woman who is reasonably ok-looking and not likely to screw you over or financially exploit you for rest of life. I say.. just cut the middleman and make it explicitly transactional. Sure, you are not going to find a soul-mate that way- but how many people around you have found one, and not for the lack of trying!

To those who object to the financial exchange inherent in such interactions- it is way cheaper than divorce, child-support, alimony not to mention the costs of shitty dates and vacations. Face it- unless you are a famous, handsome, physically buff or financially successful guy, you are not getting it for free with anyone beyond an average-looking chick. And if you are fine with an average looker, that is your choice. I am just pointing out that there are far better options, if you are willing to think and act outside the prison of conventional feminized social conditioning.

In upcoming posts of this new series, I will explore (in some detail) about how using escorts for a pretty long time has changed the way I see women and the world in general. Yes, it does change your world view to the point where normie relationships usually appear sad, pathetic and meaningless. But it does more than that, you see. It changes your perspective on society, humanity and what you believe is possible or worthwhile in areas that are not even remotely connected to sex. It provides you the ultimate outsider perspective on human beings a species.

To be clear, I am not suggesting that you do it for reasons not connected to having sex with semi-attractive (or better) women.. but ya, it does change how you see the world in ways most of you would not ever imagine.

What do you think? Comments?

Public Trust in Medical Profession, Especially in USA, Will Keep Dropping

September 14, 2018 6 comments

Long time readers, of this blog, know that I am highly skeptical and downright critical of anything pushed under the name of “science”, “scientific consensus” or “objective experts”. A good part of my skepticism and distrust on these issues comes down to the fact that I have a PhD in a STEM discipline, and have witnessed too many examples of people getting famous through what later turned out to be shitty or deceptive research. Furthermore, I have been around long enough to see multiple 2-4 year cycles of some new technology being hyped to the moon and beyond before being exposed as a very modest improvement over the previous status quo, at best!

Readers might also know that I have quite critical of what passes for research and standards of knowledge in medicine. In the past, I have also written a bit about why public trust in the medical profession (especially in USA) has taken a real beating since the mid-1990s. To summarize what I have said before: there are a number of interacting factors behind the significant and continuous drop in public perception of physicians (and surgeons) over previous two decades. Some of these are unrelated to the practice of medicine, per se.

For example, currently available drugs and medical technology is not that efficacious for treating chronic diseases in aging populations (USA in 2018) compared to acute and sub-acute conditions in younger populations (USA between 1950s and 1990s). Similarly, factors unrelated to practise of medicine such as financialism and managerialism in pharma sector has (permanently) ruined its ability to produce truly innovative drugs since mid-2000s. Not to mention the fact that most biomedical research published in top peer-reviewed journals, nowadays, suffers from poor reproducibility or is of dubious value- to put it charitably.

Having said that, some reasons are quite specific to the practice of medicine- especially in USA. And that is what I intend to focus on, in this particular post. But let me first talk a bit about conventional “explanations” for decline in public trust of the medical profession. These typically range from “dumb patients are looking up things on the internet”, “everyone thinks we are too greedy” to “I, alone, know the truth”. These so-called explanations are however nothing beyond reactive ad-hominem insults, for reasons that will soon become obvious.

So let us begin by talking about one of the most overlooked reason why public trust in that profession has gone down over time. And I bet many of you did not even consider this issue..

1] In a previous era (upto early 1990s), most people who went to medical school were clever nerds who wanted an upper-middle class lifestyle and some social respect. More importantly, they came from a far wider range of social classes than today. It was, for example, quite common to see people who grew up in working class or average middle-class families to get into medical school and become doctors. Some accuse the older system of favoring a certain gender or race, and there is some truth to that- but because that is how everything else was during that era.

Somewhere in the 1990s, that changed.. a lot. Now it was no longer sufficient to be a fairly clever nerd. Now you had to be a self-promoter with a pretty big ego. Not sure what I am talking about? Well.. ask anybody in the know if you can get into medical school today without having done some sort of “volunteering to help the poor”, “extracurricular activities” or anything else which showed your “leadership potential”? But isn’t that a good thing, you might ask. Isn’t it good to have some “life experience”? Shouldn’t future physicians have a “more well-rounded personality”?

Well.. maybe in theory. In reality, only kids whose parents are already upper-middle class have the financial wherewithal to fund their kids useless volunteering work among some community, start some worthless and dishonest shell charity or get their into some unpaid internship through their own personal connections. This leaders to selecting people with an extra-large ego, penchant for bullshit and tendency for virtue signalling. In other words, you are now selecting dishonest and extra-shifty assholes instead of plain assholes.

This is why other well-educated and financially well off people are the most distrustful of medical profession. I mean.. they have grown up around those getting accepted in medical schools since mid-1990s and often know them in social settings. The fact that social and economic peers of physicians usually have the lowest opinion about their professional competence tells you a lot about the type of person graduating from medical schools since mid-1990s, especially in USA. And yes.. this is far less pronounced in west-european countries where medical schools still prefer the clever status-seeking plain nerd over an egoistical, bullshit-spewing fake persona.

But people will, you see, tolerate vain egoistical assholes- if they can deliver. And that brings us to the second problem.

2] Consider for a moment, how revolutionary the progress of medical science was between mid-1930s (introduction of sulfonamides) to the late-1980s (ability to cure almost any infectious disease, perform any surgery safely, a host of non-invasive imaging technologies and advanced life-support technology in ICU units). Since then, the pace of progress has been rather slow- to put it mildly. Sure.. there have advances related to better use of existing drugs and technology and a few major ones for uncommon diseases. But the ability to successfully treat common chronic diseases from osteoarthritis and chronic renal failure to Alzheimers and most forms of solid cancers is not significantly better than what it was in early 1990s.

Sure.. newer drugs are less toxic and our use of existing drugs and other treatment modalities has gotten better- but face it, we are as close to curing Alzheimers , Parkinsons, Type 2 Diabetes, most metastasized cancers and many other chronic illnesses as we were in the 1990s. To put it another way, we still suck at treating most chronic illnesses- which becomes a big issue since populations in developed countries are significantly older than they were in the 1960s and 70s. But why is that such a problem? After all, physicians are only human.. right?

Well.. it would not have been much of a problem if the “healthcare” system in USA resembled that of any other country in western Europe. But it doesn’t. More specifically, an important justification for the relatively high payscales of physicians in USA has been the implicit promise that they are the “best in the world” and “they will find a cure for X disease”. As many of you might have figured out by now, the lack of progress in those areas for almost three decades has pretty much demolished that justification. Even worse, the average life-expectancy in most European countries is 2-3 years longer than in USA.

But it gets worse..

3] Another way to justify the high pay of physicians in USA and cost of “healthcare” has been the obsession with endless tests, new drugs, new gizmos and pretty much anything which creates the appearance of doing something extra. As some of you might be aware, endless testing, use of the newest drugs and gizmos in the american system has not improved the outcome of treatment as measured by changes in life-expectancy. Indeed, in many chronic diseases such as most common cancers, there is evidence that the incidence of false positives in many early diagnostic tests lead to aggressive treatment which does not improve overall prognosis while costing a lot more than a conservative approach to diagnosing and treating such illness.

It certainly does not help that physicians have been associated with many other bad, but once fashionable, public health ideas in living memory. We all remember how the belief that dietary carbs were good while all fat was bad was the default dietary advice for many decades. Who can forget the ceaseless promotion of aerobic exercise over muscle-strengthening for better cardiovascular and overall health? Or what about the aggressive promotion of extra-low sodium diets based on dubious data? I could write an entire series or book about the bullshit promoted by physicians in USA for last few decades, but we have to move on.

We cannot also forget how drugs of questionable efficacy but high costs have been prescribed since the late-1980s. Just think of how easily doctors prescribed SSRIs to anybody with even mild reactive depression or anything resembling depression (regardless of whether it helped them) or how newer anti-psychotics were prescribed for everything from atypical depression, agitation in patents with senile dementias and children with ADHD- even if made them worse. Or what about prescribing anti-hypertensives without paying much attention to co-morbidities? Or statins for primary prevention of heart attacks in people at low risk at such an event. Once again.. I could go on and on about this sub-topic.

But we have to move on to what I think is the real clincher or proverbial straw..

4] Physicians, for better or worse, are the public face of “healthcare” in USA and everywhere else. To put it another way, most non-physician related problems within a healthcare system will cast an aura over public perception of physicians. So.. for example, surprise costs caused by being treated by out of network doctors will cause hurt their public perception. Similarly, the unwillingness of insurance companies to pay for certain drugs or surgeries will color public perception of them. Long story short, most of the problems caused by the peculiarities of what passes for “healthcare” in USA will hurt public perception of physicians.

And then there is the ghost of 2008, or more specifically what happened to job and income stability for most people in USA after the 2008 global financial crisis. Once again- to make a long story short, physicians were among the few well-known professions which did not suffer significant loss of income or job precariousness since 2008. It is as if the party continued for them- despite their questionable behavior, habit of promising too much, inability to deliver, being wrong on major issues and being associated with other groups than average people hate.

In other words, most people in USA now see physicians in the same light as banksters who totaled the economy in 2008 and got bailed out, corrupt pharma executives who incessantly raise price on old drugs resulting in suffering of patients or middle management in large anonymous corporations who facilitate daily abuse and humiliation of average workers to satisfy their superiors. That is not good company to be seen in.. Anyway, I might edit this post a bit later and insert a few links if necessary.

What do you think? Comments?

Varna and Jati aka ‘Caste’ System Was Hugely Damaging to Indians: 6

September 11, 2018 2 comments

In the previous post of this series, I put forth my hypothesis to explain how vegetarianism got associated with “Hinduism” and the caste system- and also why religious vegetarianism was never able to spread out of India. Long story short, I blame vegetarianism, the ‘jati’ system and many other ills afflicting India even today on the Gupta dynasty and its immediate successors in North India. To be more specific, it is my belief that the Gupta dynasty was responsible for promoting a socio-economic system, which basically froze Indian society into the 5th-6th century AD. But how could they convince so many to go along with such a stupid system?

The answer to that question is quite easy, but requires you to first accept that most human beings (irrespective of race) are quite pathetic creatures. Now, let me explain how the jati system in India got popular by comparing it to something far closer to our era. Have you ever wondered why even poor white people in the “south” of USA were so accepting and supportive of racism against blacks? How did the dumb and half-starved white sharecropper get the idea that he (or she) was somehow intrinsically superior to their black counterparts?

Well.. here is a quote from a speech by MLK Jr on this subject.

If it may be said of the slavery era that the white man took the world and gave the Negro Jesus, then it may be said of the Reconstruction era that the southern aristocracy took the world and gave the poor white man Jim Crow. He gave him Jim Crow. And when his wrinkled stomach cried out for the food that his empty pockets could not provide, he ate Jim Crow, a psychological bird that told him that no matter how bad off he was, at least he was a white man, better than the black man. And he ate Jim Crow.

And when his undernourished children cried out for the necessities that his low wages could not provide, he showed them the Jim Crow signs on the buses and in the stores, on the streets and in the public buildings. And his children, too, learned to feed upon Jim Crow, their last outpost of psychological oblivion. Thus, the threat of the free exercise of the ballot by the Negro and the white masses alike resulted in the establishment of a segregated society.

They segregated southern money from the poor whites; they segregated southern mores from the rich whites; they segregated southern churches from Christianity; they segregated southern minds from honest thinking; and they segregated the Negro from everything.

Now replace the concept of race with jati and you can get a pretty accurate understanding of how the caste system became popular and self-perpetuating. Did I mention that the Gupta dynasty rulers came from a lineage of Jainism-inspired Banias? The formation of many hundreds of castes, each one involved in one particular occupation and being endogamous, allowed society to become fragmented to an extent which makes the situation in the antebellum south look quaint by comparison. And yes.. entire castes of untouchables were the Indian version of blacks in the “old” south. And now you can see why the caste system was so fucked up.

But why did it fragment Indian society far more than slavery and its aftermath did to USA? Well.. because Hinduism as a religion never had the concept of human equality, either in its old or newer form. More importantly, it had no unified ideology. So the jatis kept on fragmenting further till, as I mentioned in a previous part, you ended up in a situation where even small villages had with multiple jatis who had basically zero informal social interaction with each other. And this went on.. and on.. for many centuries. But it gets worse, much worse.

To better understand what I going to say next, let me ask you a series of questions which might at first seem unrelated to the caste system. Ever wonder why China, and not India, became the preeminent global manufacturing superpower over previous three decades. Also, why was it a big manufacturer and exporter before 1800, in contrast to India which mostly imported either raw goods or a few niche luxury products? How can China reverse engineer and manufacture pretty much anything it wants with such ease and speed while India often struggles to manufacture pretty basic things? But what does this have to do with caste, you may ask..

Well.. let us explore another related phenomenon. Why did India never have guilds of craftsmen like medieval Europe, even though it had way more craftsmen? Why was there never any Indian equivalent of the Freemasons? Why did the social status of skilled craftsmen (masons, weavers, blacksmiths, carpenters) in India never reach anything close to that enjoyed by their medieval European counterparts? Why did Indian craftsmen never seem to innovate or develop better methods unlike the European counterparts? why did Indian craftsmen never get into doing things such as building printing press, typesetting, lens making, quality gunpowder making, quality gunsmithing, building newer designs of sailing ships etc?

In a previous post of this series, I stated that manual labor (even skilled) was looked down in India after jati system became established. But that is, at best, only part of the answer. The jati system, you see, had two even more disastrous effects on the status of manual laborers in India. Firstly the extreme fragmention of Indian society under that system made close co-operation between two (or more jatis) involved in building part of a larger system almost impossible. For example, those who made sails for ships were of a different jati than those involved in making its wooden frame or the rigging. And we have not even got to those who actually crewed those vessels. Adoption of printing press in India probably ran into similar issues, since they ignored it for over 300 years after its introduction.

Under the jati system, everyone was trying to upstage, screw over and sabotage everybody else. But its worse.. if that is even possible! The jati system was heavy on passing down closely guarded skills to your children and tradition. Consequently, even lateral outsiders (similar social status) could not get in a different jati and try to improve or innovate. Also the mindless way these skills were taught ensured that the next generation of craftsmen never did things differently- and most importantly, in a better way. That is why Indian craftsmen never updated their tools, methods or technology until it was too late. Also, in case you did not get it yet, that is also why they did not have anything close to the guild structure found in medieval European societies.

And now let us talk about why the manufacturing sector in India, even today, is weak compared to those in other countries of similar population size such as China. Long story short, the wages of a skilled manual laborer in China are over three times his (or her) Indian equivalent even after accounting for stuff such as exchange rates and purchasing power. But why is it so problematic? Well.. for one, higher wages often attract more competent people who are interested in doing a good job. But there is only one part of the answer. The other, and more important part, is that workers who are well compensated and not constantly disrespected tend to do a far better job, are significantly more productive and willing to accept doing things in a newer or better way.

In the next post on this topic, I will try to explain you how jati system is the main reason behind the well-known predisposition of Indians to betray others of their type while groveling in front, and kissing ass, of outsiders.

What do you think? Comments?

NSFW Links: Sep 11, 2018

September 11, 2018 2 comments

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

Drawings of Caned Cuties: Sep 3, 2018 – Drawings of cuties getting caned.

Drawings of OTK Spanked Cuties: Sep 3, 2018 – Drawings of cuties getting spanked OTK.

Drawings of Spanking Ready Cuties: Sep 3, 2018 – Drawings of cuties ready to get spanked.

Enjoy! Comments?

Categories: Uncategorized

The NRA, in its Current Form, Does Not Have a Promising Future

September 10, 2018 4 comments

I am not the first person to point out that the NRA might not have a promising future. The big difference, however, between almost every article on that subject and this one is that I support the right to bear arms- and not just in some contrived “sportsman” context. For example- it is my opinion that ownership restrictions on short-barreled rifles in the 1934 NFA act and the 1986 FOPA act which banned the civilian ownership of select-fire (automatic) weapons manufactured after that year are classic examples of legislative stupidity.

As many of you also know, I have written more than a few posts in the past stating the reasons behind my belief that ‘gun control’ is a stupid idea with no real upside to the dumbfucks who support it. In other words, I am totally on board with the core purpose of the NRA. So why do I think that the organisation in question does not have a bright or promising future. Well.. there are a few reasons, but let me start by telling you what they are not.

Many coastal LIEbrals, who I hate with the same intensity as CONservatives, want to make themselves believe that younger generations will magically support gun control. Sadly for them, that pattern is somewhat true in less than half a dozen coastal states and even is mostly an urban thing. In other words, this pattern is meaningful only within the small social bubble inhabited by the incestuous “elite” and their professional class cocksuckers.

So why did I say that the NRA does not have a promising future? And why did I use that ‘in its current format’ conditionality? So here is why I said what I did..

1] As some of you might have noticed, a lot of the media outreach effort by the NRA today is about issues not related to defense of the 2nd amendment. For example, they spend too much time and effort on trying to demonize socialism, support “free” enterprise and denigrate populist ideas such as universal health care. Now, I know they are doing that.. *cough* corporate donors. But don’t kid yourself that supporting issues which are against the best interests of vast majority of their current membership and potential future members is a smart idea.

See.. the problem with being associated with bad ideas, bullshit and outright lies is that their stench rubs onto you. That is why, for example, people in 2018 are far more distrustful of the medical profession that they were in the 1980s. That is why Trump beat all establishment republican candidates and then Hillary in the 2016 election season. That is also why the non-stop concerted effort by establishment media to demonize Trump has paradoxically helped him by making him look like a victim. You get my point.. right?

Similarly the NRA, by publicly associating itself with pro-corporate ideologies, is digging itself into a hole. To be clear, this would not have been an issue as late as mid-1990s when most people in USA were doing fine or at least OK. But they haven’t been doing so well since 2001 and most certainly since 2008. There is a reason why the alt-right and many younger conservative-minded people are quite Ok with “socialist” ideas such as universal health care, inexpensive education, job guarantees, universal basic income and restricting corporate power.

My point is that associating yourself with ideas which your most likely followers don’t particularly care about, or actively disagree with, is not a recipe for promoting your main cause. In fact, doing so will certainly hurt the viability of your main cause in years to come- and that is going to be much sooner than you think. And yes.. once again, I know why they do it. I am just saying that they are taking a stupid and unnecessary risk.

2] The other big problem for NRA in the future is that it is still widely, and correctly, perceived as a white gun owners organisation. Once again, being an organisation which drew its membership almost exclusively from whites was a viable strategy till about twenty years ago. But as any person with more than half a brain knows today, that is not a great strategy- either in the USA of 2018 or any time after that. Any organisation which wants to remain relevant even 10-15 years from now better have a realistic strategy to recruit from other ethnic groups.

Of course, the incompetent “marketing consultants” employed by that organisation have managed to find a few non-white faces. Sadly, the losers they have found so far are.. to put it mildly.. laughably bad. People with infomercial level acting skills who can’t even read off their teleprompters and cue cards with conviction are poor brand ambassadors- plain and simple. Sadly, that is only one part of this particular problem.

The other part involves the almost complete unwillingness of this organisation to defend 2nd amendment rights of non-white people, especially those murdered by the police. Once again, I know they are doing that because a non-insignificant part of their core membership and supporters today are from the “law enforcement” agencies. But here is the problem.. it might work right now, but what about 10-15 years from now? The Stasi of former East-Germany also had a lot of power and prestige until that country lasted, but not much afterwards.

The problems I see in the future of that organisation, therefore, largely come down to significant irreconcilability between their current donor and membership cadre and the ones they attract in order to stay relevant in the near future. Frankly, I don’t see them being able to make this transition. Maybe some new moment or organisation, without legacy issues, will be able to exploit this opportunity.

What do you think? Comments?

Varna and Jati aka ‘Caste’ System Was Hugely Damaging to Indians: 5

September 8, 2018 6 comments

In the previous part of this series, I showed you how and why the arranged marriage system in India is not ancient or about anything beyond maintaining the “genetic purity” of each jati or caste. I also pointed out that endogamy among a continuously fragmenting bunch of jatis has produced some of more uglier and defective specimens of humanity- not to mention that the custom of arranged marriage in India has historically been a euphemism for child marriage. But sex and marriage is far from the only thing which the jati system has screwed up. Let us talk about vegetarianism, Indian style, arose in first place and why it persists.

Some readers might remember that I once written a short post about why Indians are more likely to develop metabolic syndrome with its attendant sequelae of Type II diabetes and heart disease. I have also written another post about how this problem is largely self-inflicted. As some might also know, the vast majority of allegedly “educated” Indians like to blame it on “genetic predisposition” because blaming a shortcoming on something which cannot be fixed is a standard Indian way to avoid action (which is also an unfortunate consequence of belief in the jati system). The rabbit hole of problems caused by the jati system is pretty deep, isn’t it?

But wait.. there is another type of bullshit explanation which typical Indians like to use when faced with their self-inflicted shortcomings. To such losers, Indians obsess about vegetarianism because they are “wise” enough to see it is an “ecologically sustainable” lifestyle. Alternatively, they want others to believe that the Indian obsession with vegetarianism is due to their belief in “ahimsa” or interest in “animal welfare”. There are many other bullshit explanations which I have comes across, but we don’t have time to indulge such idiocies. So let us focus on historical records, specifically those written by non-Indians who visited India over the centuries.

And isn’t it sad that we have to rely on the writings of outsiders to understand Indian history because most Indians were unwilling to write down or (more likely) keep transcribing and preserving their own history! Anyway, getting back to historical accounts of India written by outsiders- specifically greco-roman sources around 1st century AD. While I am not going to go into a detailed analysis of each account, there are some overall trends. For example, all accounts agree that Indian kingdoms were large, well populated, quite affluent for their era and involved in extensive trade with the Mediterranean world.

They do talk about a few social classes in Indian society which are not that different from those described in Chanakya’s Arthashastra written a couple of centuries before that time. So far, so good. Now here is the real kicker. Nowhere do they say that Indians ate a diet which was more vegetarian than what contemporary Greeks or Romans ate. And that is not all.. the Arthashastra specifically talks about need for government inspectors and managers for abattoirs in addition to other enterprises such as excise collection, running brothels and building boats. FYI- the two dominant faiths at that time were Buddhism and Hinduism 1.0

The first instance of Vegetarianism being favored in India (at least in the north) can be found in the writings of Chinese monks who traveled to India between 4th and 6th century AD. Faxian in 4th century AD does talk about a general trend towards meat-eating being seen as spiritually unclean while travelling through the early Gupta dynasty era kingdom in North India. It is important to note that the Gupta dynasty was the first major Hindu dynasty in North India since 3rd century BC. But Faxian also describes a peculiar feature of this emergent vegetarianism which would escape most non-indians, including himself. He mentions that people also avoid eating aromatic tubers and roots such as garlic and onions.

In other words, he is talking about a form of Hinduism which borrows very heavily from that other wretched Indian religion aka Jainism. So what is Jainism anyway? Think of it like this.. Jainism is the dogmatic sludge left behind when you remove all the positive and modernistic attributes of Buddhism. Some of you might think that this is an oversimplification and, to some extent, that is true. But there is a very good reason that Buddhism could spread far beyond India and Jainism could not. And yes, I believe that the Hinduism of kings in the Gupta dynasty was very heavily influenced by Jain dogmatism.

But what does any of this have to do with the caste aka jati system. Well.. as it turns out, Faxian and Xuanzang are the first visitors to India to document the existence of untouchable jatis. Not only that, they also document that untouchability was associated with “spiritually unclean” jobs such as processing animals for meat and leather. Now consider that Arthashastra (from an earlier era) treated animal butchery and leather tanning as normal jobs. So how did we get from certain jobs being normal to being considered extra-low status? The conventional answer is that it had something to do with Buddhism. But is that really the case?

How come no other nation or country outside India which adopted Buddhism, or was influenced by it, became vegetarian? Erstwhile Tibet did not, Myanmar did not, Sri Lanka did not, Thailand did not, China did not and Japan did not. Nor did Indonesia, Malaysia and Cambodia. Buddhism also spread to parts of west-central Asia, but it did not change their dietary habits. So how can we blame it for rise of vegetarianism in India? Clearly something else was at play. Also, based on historical accounts, Indian style vegetarianism arose in North India first and at around same time as beginning of Gupta dynasty. Could it be that their religion was a shitty amalgam of Hinduism 1.0 and Jainism or what we today recognize as Hinduism?

But what does any of this have to do with caste or jati?

A whole fucking lot! For starters, contact with or consumption of meat became associated with lower jatis during this period. Coincidentally, that occurred at about the same time as skilled manual labor became associated with lower jatis. But what became associated with higher jatis? Short answer.. sitting on you ass all day, eating lots of carbohydrates and swindling other people while pretending to pious also known as becoming a bania or brahmin. That is why technological innovation in India pretty much died after the 5th-7th century AD. And that is why, even today, skilled manual labor in India is poorly paid and looked down upon.

But what does any of this have to do with Indians going vegetarian? and why couldn’t it spread past India?

The answer to the first part of that question is as follows: Lacking a unified religion which preached at least nominal equality (like Islam or Christianity), status jockeying among jatis lead the “lower” ones to adopt the habits of the ones “above” them. And guess what.. vegetarianism was one of the major habits of the “upper” jatis. But why couldn’t it spread past the borders of India? In my opinon, the most likely reason for that comes down to two inter-related factors. Buddhism was an equalist religion unlike Hinduism and it never lost patronage outside India. Furthermore the trade network of Jainism-influenced banias and influence of neo-puritan brahmins did not extend beyond India.

Well.. that was a bit longer than I expected. In the next part, I will try to show you how the poor social status of skilled craftsmen and the rigidity of jati system made it almost impossible for India to adopt new technologies and innovations, let alone develop them. I will also try to explain you why the jati system was so resilient In India, even though it was totally incapable of spreading beyond its borders.

What do you think? Comments?