Archive

Posts Tagged ‘destruction’

Some More Thoughts on Upcoming and Intentional Demise of Tumblr

December 16, 2018 10 comments

In the previous post on this topic, I mentioned that Tumblr had been going downhill for at least four years before the recent idiotic decision by its “credentialed” leadershit. To put it another way, the fact that Tumblr had not yet become another Friendster, MySpace or Google+ was by itself somewhat of a minor miracle. And let us be honest about something else.. Yahoo did try destroy it- mostly via benign neglect (like Flickr) but by also being actively hostile towards its users. As I mentioned in the previous post, the Tumblr of 2018 is a paraplegic wheelchair-bound shadow of its vigorous former self from 2013. In my opinion, it was nostalgia for this pre-Yahoo era Tumblr which allowed it retained enough users to be remain alive. I also said something about how this action will further worsen public perception of internet monopolies and oligopolies- and why this matters now in ways that it did not as late as 2015.

But before we go there, let us talk about some recent news that supports my theory about what caused Verizon leadershit to make that decision. It seems that Verizon critters are in the mist of another mass layoff to ostensibly ‘keep the corporation profitable’. Now this excuse might be accepted by uncritical worshipers of corporatism (perhaps MikeCA), but let us get real. A large corporation which is part of a very small and closed oligopoly in addition to “providing” something as important as telecommunications in a large country should be quite profitable under normal conditions. But in spite of considerable crapification of their level of customer service and many previous rounds of layoffs, their leadershit seems to think otherwise. Also, it turns out that their recent $ 9 billion media and internet acquisition is now officially considered to be almost worthless. So, why wasn’t it obvious when they bought Yahoo in 2017?

Did I mention that those who made these bad decisions were, and are being, paid tens to hundreds of millions of dollars. But it all “legal”.. right? Then again, slavery was legal in USA till 1865 and treating blacks as third-class humans was law of the land till 1965. As I have also mentioned in many previous posts, this level of poor judgment and decision-making by CEO and leadershit of corporations in USA is normal- and they are always richly rewarded for making bad decisions. And this is not surprising in a country where leadershit of political parties don’t face any consequences for their failures, fuckups and incompetence. Let me remind you that a person who lost as many elections as Nancy Pelosi will still be speaker of house come January 2019. I could go on about others such as Chuck Schumer, Joe Biden and others- but you get the point.

Let us now get back to the topic of Tumblr and its imminent demise. As I hinted in the previous post, public opinion about internet monopolies and oligopolies has changed a lot within the past 3-4 years. Barely two years ago expressing your doubts about the intent of IT corporations or their business model would have got you severely down-voted and banned from forums such as ycombinator. But within the last year, you can see a ton of such alleged negativity on that forum- which is even more peculiar once you know that it largely populated by losers who will grovel and kiss corporate ass at every single opportunity. The very fact that so many people on the official forum of enthusiastic pederasts for Silly Valley corporations are expressing serious doubts about the system tells you how far public perception of that sector has fallen.

And the general public image and perception of IT and Tech monopolies has worsened far more outside the Bay Area. Whether it is the spyware like nature of Windoze 10, propensity to delete user files while “updating” or the tendency of its “cloud-based” Office365 to lock out users for hours– it clear that a rapidly increasing number of people have unfavorable opinions about IT monopolies and oligopolies. But.. you might say.. MicroSoft’s fuckups and predatory behavior should not be used as a benchmark for other IT corporations such as Apple or Google. Well.. let us talk about them. As many of you might have heard, Apple (nowadays) seems unable to design and make decent keyboards for their laptops. Nor does it care about putting proper vent filters in their desktops and laptops. Did I mention the generally decreasing quality of their devices or their attempts to extract the maximum repair fees from their users?

I could write a few more posts about the other fuckups made Apple since Steve Jobs died in 2011, but let us move on to Google and other IT companies which are more service based- starting with ‘do no evil’ Google. Since there is a lot of material to cover, we have to begin with something familiar- gmail. As many of you its web and app interfaces has been a ever-changing shit-show for the past 3-4 years. For example, their most recent Android version of Gmail has some serious design issues. Did I mention that complaint was about the Android version of their Gmail app? Moving on, they have recently managed to make the web interface of gmail even crappier and slower than it was- which is quite an achievement, if you think about it. They have also made almost every new version of Google Maps suck harder than the last since 2013.

Their flagship search engine is now a shadow of what it was as recently as 2012. And I am not even talking about all the issues related to deranking articles which express non-mainstream views. Did I also mention that Google news has gotten progressively worse and corporate echo-chambery in past three years? Then there is issue of Google demonetizing YouTube videos based on the political views of its leadershit who live in the Bay Area. And that is just a sampling of the many more self-inflicted problems of YouTube. At this stage, I am experiencing Google fuckup fatigue so let us move on to the FakeBook.. I mean FaceBook ecosystem. To say that its ecosystem of social media (remember FB also owns Instagram, SnapChat, WhatsApp etc) is criminally abusive to its users would be an understatement. Here is a very short list and here is another. If you wait a couple of weeks more, there will likely be a couple more new scandals.

And all of this adds up in public perception. In fact one of the most poorly covered issue concerning the IT industry concerns how many people have started to hate that industry and those who work in it. Then again, covering such negative news is bad for the career of emerging as well as established presstitutes. And don’t even get me started about all the security issues and dangers that come with more people using the Internet of Shit.. I mean Internet of Things. To make a long story short, the general public increasingly sees tech companies and their employees as unaccountable tyrants and their flunkies respectively. Sure.. not all Nazis were truly despicable people and more than a few joined the party to further their careers- but the association stuck when the tides turned against them.

The upcoming and intentional demise of Tumblr is therefore another (and pretty large) nail in the coffin of the image of IT corporations. As I mentioned in some previous posts, the change of public opinion for or against an idea (or cause) does not proceed linearly. Instead, it appears to first have little traction and then things start accelerating suddenly. Think about how fast the sexual revolution occurred, how quickly laws changed to allow gay marriage or how marijuana legalization went from a pipe dream to what appears to be an inevitability. Alternatively let me remind you how quickly Trump’s bid for presidency went from a joke to a sad reality. A lot of the heavy users of Tumblr, who also posted NSFW content, are also far more willing to defend what they consider to be their rights than what many normies imagine.

To summarize, the short-sighted idiocy of Verizon’s leadershit has just sped up the process of open public disenchantment with unaccountable, centralized and oligopolic internet platforms. The real question now is what form this increasing public disenchantment with IT companies will take, specifically collective actions within bounds of current setup or beyond it. Who knows..

What do you think? Comments?

More Thoughts on the Upcoming and Intentional Demise of Tumblr

December 8, 2018 8 comments

In the previous post about this topic, I wrote that the apparently suicidal behavior by current leadershit of Tumblr is actually the default as far as corporations in USA (and the few other decaying anglo-saxon countries) are concerned. This type of behavior also has a lot to do with the culture in those countries as well as a number of changes (such as laws and regulations rewarding financialization and oligoppolization) that have occurred since the late 1970s. To be clear, I am not implying that other countries are free of parasites, conmen and sociopaths in suits. It is just that the general and corporate cultures in those countries does a far better job of keeping these creatures under check. But now let us get back to the ongoing implosion of Tumblr.

As I hinted in the previous post, all those “changes” which Tumblr’s “credentialed” leadershit wanted were guaranteed to drive away its most heavy users as well as piss off many others who would not have cared otherwise. Turns out, that is exactly what is happening. For starters, it’s “AI” filters cannot tell the difference between porn and popular cartoons. I am sure that some of you have read about other examples of their “AI” filter being unable to distinguish between porn and what is clearly not porn. Consequently many people, including SJWs who might have cheered on the ban of porn, find themselves in the same situation as those they were trying to look down upon. In the near future, I plan to write a post on SJWs and other types of corporate cucks.

But perhaps the biggest hole in their “plans” was the belief that Tumblr would be viable without porn. See.. it is my opinion that they pretended to believe that only a quarter of their users were searching for porn. Except that this is another example of solipsistic bullshit pushed by allegedly “objective” data scientists. As some of you know, scientists in the west are now a more pathetic group than even meth-addicted streetwalkers who will suck your cock for a couple of twenty-dollar bills. They will concoct “data”. “experiments” and “studies” to support whatever batshit insane belief those who pay them want to hear. In this case, they conveniently overlooked two issues. First, the heaviest and most prolific users were there for porn. Secondly, many of those who logged on for other reasons also consumed a pretty significant amount of porn.

There is also something else about Tumblr that many of you might not know. You see.. the golden age and peak of Tumblr (and porn content on it) was between 2009 and 2013. That is right, Tumblr has been going downhill ever since it was purchased by Yahoo in 2013 who hilariously promised to not to screw it up. And guess what.. they started doing that within a year. Before Yahoo started screwing things up, Tumblr only removed porn that was clearly problematic- specifically if it contained sexual acts involving pre-pubescent children. You really had to try to get your Tumble account suspended or tagged as NSFW. But after Yahoo took over in 2013, they started doing that to pretty much anybody who was reported by moral busybodies. While a percentage of the heavy users kept creating new accounts and reposting, most never came back.

This is the reason that ImageFap and other similar sites (often hosted from or based on central and eastern Europe) gained such a huge amount of content between 2013 and 2015. Anyway, the result of this slow-motion porn purge was that most of the porn you could find on Tumblr after 2015 was either heavily recycled or SJW-friendly. In other words, Tumblr was slowly dying as a platform even before the greedy idiots at Verizon made their decision. In fact, most of the new porn content I have collected for the past two years comes from sites that are not Tumblr- which is huge change from the golden years of Tumblr. In my opinion, this change is good because a decentralized network of distribution is far more resilient (if a bit cumbersome) than a centralized one. But let us get back to the fate of Tumblr.

Another mistake made by the myopic “credentialed” leadershit concerns their apparent belief that enough users will stay with Tumblr because creating an alternative platform would be difficult and expensive. As it turns out, that is not the case today. To understand what I am talking about, let us rewind to the state of the internet and its infrastructure about a decade. Long story short, a decade ago it appeared as if the USA and some parts of western Europe had an apparent monopoly on the IT infrastructure necessary for reliable hosting and other services. Fast forward today and that is no longer the case. While some of the more unique arrangements for cloud services and hosting are still a bit easier to get in USA, the rest of the world has caught on and in many cases exceed what the IT infrastructure in USA can deliver.

To put it another way, the successors to Tumblr will be transnational and likely have a significant peer-to-peer networking component. Furthermore, the software design and functionality necessary to make something like Tumblr work and scale is now well understood and has been successfully reverse engineered (including in open source) for a few years. Also, unlike FaceBook most people on Tumblr were interested in connecting to others based on their shared interests and beliefs rather than family or real-life connections. But perhaps the most important reason that Tumblr is going to go down the drain is because it has broken the trust of its users- who are somewhat different from the average users of most social media platforms. In the next post on this topic, I will talk about Tumblr is just the latest example of internet and technology companies losing popular goodwill by being too greedy, too stupid or willing to satisfy ideological nutters.

what do you think? Comments?

Initial Thoughts on the Upcoming and Intentional Demise of Tumblr

December 4, 2018 18 comments

As many of you might have heard by now, Tumblr has decided to ban all “adult” content on its platform starting December 17th of this year. I am sure that all of you, on first hearing about this yesterday, must have said something along the lines of “why would anybody use Tumblr if it had no adult content”? And that is a very valid question, because most people correctly see Tumblr as a vast curated and user-updated repository of pictoral pornography. Of course, some idiots in the dying corporate media want to pretend that this will have no long-term effects on the viability of that platform or its brand. Some others see it as another example of insidious censorship (which it kinda is), Apple removing its App from their store over concerns about “child pornography” or one more unfortunate consequence of Verizon purchasing that brand some time ago.

While each of these conventional narratives about the decision contains some elements of truth, they cannot see the overall picture- much like the protagonists of that story about six blind men and an elephant. Yesterday, a couple of acquaintances on Twitter wondered if management knew that banning “adult” content from Tumblr would destroy that business and brand in very short order. After all, which sane person would like to destroy a functional business.. right? Some of you might counter this by saying that Tumblr has never made profit for its owners. But if you use that metric- neither has Gmail, Google Maps, WhatsApp, Android, Uber, Lyft, SpaceX, Tesla and most Silly Valley corporations “valued” over a billion. Over past two decades, the ability of any large american business to stay solvent has been slowly divorced from its ability to make a profit.

So how do large american corporations make any profit at all? Well.. that depends on what you define as profit, but if you use its most commonly understood definition, they do so through a number of means all of which have absolutely nothing to do with providing a good product or service. Furthermore, the only groups that all american business consistently make profit for is their upper management, lenders and financial intermediaries (often the same or related). But don’t corporations such as Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook etc make real money and profit? Sure.. they do by being either a government-favored monopoly or part of an oligopoly. And that is true for other corporations such as Ford, GM, ‘insert any large defense contractor’ right down to your local medical clinic, hospital and “health insurance provider”.

But what does any of this have to do with the apparently suicidal decision by people currently at the helm of Tumblr? As you will soon see.. a lot. Let me start by asking a somewhat rhetorical question? Why does it seem that I am running down american (and more generally, anglo-saxon) corporations? Don’t corporations in other parts of the world also make huge mistakes? Aren’t they also staffed with greedy morons? Well.. yes, USA (and the anglo-saxon world) most certainly do not have a monopoly on greedy assholes and grave-robbers. The difference lies in how the rest of system in those countries handles them. Confused? Let me explain with a simple example. Ever wondered how far a CEO who ran an OK business into the ground would be allowed to go in an east-asian country versus USA? Consider the case of somebody like Marissa Mayer.

In case you are wondering, she was the CEO of Yahoo from 2012-2017 before that brand (and its acquisitions such at Tumblr) was sold to Verizon last year. While I am not saying that she is brain-damaged, it is clear that her initial success at Google came from being at the right place at the right time. In other words, any other moderately intelligent person in her position would have also won that lottery. The rest of her “achievements” look like the type of resume-padding you see from ivy-leaguers. It also helped that she was a woman at a time when corporate boards wanted a few token women for the purposes of showing ‘diversity”. To be quite blunt, her real skills were kissing ass, being a woman in addition to acting super busy and competent. And that is how she landed her first big solo gig as the CEO of Yahoo in 2012. When she had left Yahoo in 2017 after running it (further) into the ground, she collected about 260 million.

To be fair, Yahoo had been on a steadily downward trajectory since the mid-2000s. While the simple-minded might blame the rise of Google for Yahoo’s slow implosion, the reality is vastly different. Yahoo.. you see.. was not really in competition with Google for search engine market as early as 1999. Instead, it had diversified into personalized services (such as news, sports, social media and yes.. what we today know as ‘cloud’ storage) pretty early on. But the people who ran it before her were equally incompetent and short-sighted. They did have not a unified strategy and ignored user and employee feedback about designing their platforms and services. That is why for example, they let Flickr slowly fail when they could have made into FaceBook before it even existed. I could go on about their other failures, but that would take a book.

And this is where the difference in how corporations in various countries handle incompetent leadership matters. See.. in USA (and other anglo-saxon countries) CEOs, senior board members, top management etc who make bad decisions make tons of money regardless of whether they succeed or fail in their mission- usually the later. They then go on to other still healthy corporations, do the same shit and make even more money. The rest of the system stands by (and often rewards) them as they keep on destroying more healthy corporations and tens of thousands more jobs. This is allowed to happen because the allegedly elected governments in these countries (and senior bureaucracy) are themselves on the payroll of these parasites.

In contrast to that, east-asian systems while famously tolerant of corruption and personal quirks do hold even the most senior corporate people accountable for their failures and incompetence. And while they almost never openly fire or humiliate failed corporate leaders, they do make sure that such people cannot cause more damage. That is why for example, the quality of Japanese and Korean automobiles rarely suffer more than the occasional downward hiccup. That is also why the quality and availability of many other things, from supermarkets and restaurants to medical care and affordable housing, is usually higher in East-Asian and West-European countries than USA. To reiterate- the quality of people is not better in those countries. However their governance systems are significantly better at protecting people from parasitic corporate-types.

Which brings us back to the subject of this post. Did you realize that the title contains the word ‘intentional’ in addition to upcoming. Wonder why? Well.. have you considered the possibility that the current management of Tumblr is counting on its recent “rule changes” to destroy it? But why would they do such an apparently stupid thing? Here is a hint: they can make a lot though performance bonuses if they manage to “sell” the ruins of Tumblr to some private equity firm or some other shysters for further strip-mining. Given that Tumblr is not making them a large profit right now, or in the near future, it makes more sense to destroy it such that its ruins can be later sold to another group of con-artists. There is of course the other possibility, namely that they do not care and believe in their own bullshit. Remember, these are the same self-delusional types who knew that HRC would defeat Trump in 2016. Or maybe, both possibilities are at play..

In the next post on this topic, I will talk about the effect of this decision on current Tumblr users, general availability of pictoral pornography on internet and rapidly worsening public perception of large internet monopolies and oligopolies.

What do you think? Comments?

Some Thoughts on the Best Way to Destroy Pathological Ideologies: 4

August 1, 2018 11 comments

In the previous post of this series, I made the point that pathological ideologies and their willing vectors never give up doing what they are doing unless the vast majority of them they are dead. I had made a similar point in a short series written almost five years ago (link 1, link 2). My point was that genocides committed during course of WW2 required a significant minority of people to be enthusiastic followers of whichever ideology they claimed to believe or practise.

With that in mind, let us consider a few thought experiments to understand the necessity of vectors for success or failure of pathological ideologies. On another note, please read the entirety of this post before commenting on it..

Thought Experiment # 1: Consider the artificially caused Irish Famine of 1845-1849. More specifically, let us consider whether the vast majority of deaths during those years were caused by a genuine lack of food or a system of governance which saw and treated most of the Irish as little better than stray animals. There are many villains in this story, some more well-known that others. Nowadays, many people rightly blame the laws passed by the British government in decades prior to that incident as well as their lack of response in response to human suffering. But were they the only villains, and more importantly- who enforced their laws in Ireland?

Well.. the unpleasant part of that famine and many others in the same era was the role played by local landed gentry and law enforcement personal in enforcing laws and regulations which caused the famine. Holding only the British government responsible for that famine gives a pass to all the Irish landlords, merchants, petty bureaucrats and law-enforcement types who made tons of money during the famine while their country men and women were starving around them. The Irish famine would not have been possible without the active and enthusiastic collaboration of many local CONservative-minded rich and petit bourgeois types who worked hard to make it so.

Now comes the ‘thought experiment’ part.. Imagine that the willing collaborators and their families kept on dying of an untreatable disease with extremely high mortality- which for an odd reason affected them almost exclusively. Imagine that the disease in question killed off over 50% of the collaborators and their families within a year. Now ask yourself, how long could the British government of that era keep on replacing all their faithful dead servants, if the new ones kept experiencing the same high rates of mortality? And why would even the most greedy and sociopathic types want to accept a job that came with almost certain death within a year.

Thought Experiment # 2: Consider Late Victorian Holocausts, especially in India. These are a series of famines which killed anywhere between 30-60 million people in the second half of the 19th century- and does not include tens of millions who died in similar artificial famines in the same countries between 1775-1850. These numbers, among many others, provide an interesting counterpoint to claims about death by famine under state communism in the first half (or so) of 20th century. If you believe that state communism caused the Ukrainian famine of 1930s and Chinese famine of early 1960s, one also has to accept that capitalism caused an equivalent of deaths in the 19th century.

But this post is not about whether capitalism caused these famines (it most certainly did) or whether racism played a major role in how events unfolded (shockers.. it did), but about who was responsible for causing the tens of millions of deaths. Once again, we can certainly blame the British government of that era, but doing so tells us only a small part of how things went down. Here is why.. you see, there were never more than 100 k British stationed in any part or the whole of India at any time from 1775-1947. In fact, there were less than 30 k people from the British Isles in India in most years. So, how can you entirely blame such large-scale events on presence of an absolute minority who never accounted for more than 1 in 500 individuals?

And once again, the answer to this apparent ‘mystery’ is that British had a huge number of local collaborators who were willing and enthusiastic about working for a system which was responsible for the death of millions of people who looked like them. Today, we often forget that policies which caused these famines also made many Indian merchant families rich beyond your wildest imaginations. Many Indians still do not want to face the unpleasant fact that the Indian army, police, local administrators etc which carried out the genocidal mandates for British colonial types were almost exclusively local and Indian. In other words, it was basically what happened during the great Irish famine but on a much larger scale and over multiple time periods.

Now let us perform a similar ‘though experiment’. Imagine a situation where willing Indian collaborators and their families kept on dying of untreatable disease with rates of mortality such that entire batches or recruits for various colonial institutions dropped dead within a year. Now ask yourself again, how long could the British government of that era keep on replacing faithful dead servants, if the new ones kept experiencing the same greatly enhanced rates of mortality? Also, would it be possible for them to be able to continue recruitment if the recruits knew they would be dead within a year? And would they be able to govern India without local collaborators?

The point I am trying to make in both thought experiments is that external state sponsored events such the Great Irish famine and large Indian famines were only possible only because a small but significant minority of local people were willing and enthusiastic about working for obviously pathological ideologies. Furthermore, timely removal of this small but significant minority from the realms of living would have effectively terminated those mass tragedies and prevented the untimely deaths of many millions of innocent people. The real question then is, what level of excessive mortality among a behavioral minority who are enthusiastic participants in a genocide is acceptable in order to prevent deaths of many times that number of innocent people.

In the next part of this series, I will use some more thought experiments to explain this concept in more detail.

What do you think? Comments?

Some Thoughts on the Best Way to Destroy Pathological Ideologies: 3

July 25, 2018 12 comments

In the previous post of this series, I pointed out that WW1 (and WW2) led to a marked reduction in the number of mediocre men in Europe who were willing or able to support the ideology of race-based colonialism. FYI- I am not implying that remainder of population in those countries experienced enlightenment and became liberal after 1945. It just so happened that the survivors finally realized they were just disposable tools who did not benefit from sustaining and working for the ideology in question which hen lost it critical mass of followers.

Also said something about discussing the effect of WW2 on continued viability of ideologies such as German Nazism, Japanese Nationalism and associated belief systems such as Eugenics. Well.. I am going to do that now. But before we go there, let us talk about how all or any of this relates to the world we live in right now. So let us start by asking ourselves with a few questions about why things in the world around us are the way they are.

Why did all the non-violent movements which began in response to the global financial crisis of 2008 (Occupy Wallstreet etc) not translate into anything beyond spicy memes and memorable slogans? Why have large public demonstrations against extra-judicial murder of black men by police in USA not reduced their incidence? Why does the debt load of students attending universities in USA keep on climbing every single year to even more ridiculous levels? Why do costs of mediocre healthcare in USA keep on rising every year?

Why do elected officials, bureaucrats and the ‘system’ in general act is if they can get way with anything they want? Why do working conditions for the average person keep on getting worse with each passing year? Why do large corporations feel so confident in their ability to abuse their customers without any real consequences? Why does the militarization of “law enforcement” apparatus in USA continue unabated? Why do petty bureaucrats, alt-right supporters and SJWs think they can harass and abuse others at will?

The very simplistic answer to those questions is that all those people, groups and entities firmly believe that they can get away with whatever they want because they will no repercussions or accountability for their actions. A significantly longer answer starts with acknowledging something that most people are unwilling to, namely that you cannot convert assholes, parasites and viruses into someone who is not noxious. People who build their existence around being an asshole, parasite, virus or an ardent supporter of noxious ideologies are never going to have an epiphany or willing give up being abusers.

Nazism did not decline into insignificance and become disreputable because its supporters saw the light of reason. Nazism became a disreputable and insignificant ideology because most of its ardent supporters were killed on the eastern front in WW2 or died in soviet ‘labor’ camps after WW2. Oh.. and most women in the eastern part of Germany were raped by Russian soldiers after WW2. To put it another way, even marginal supporters of Nazism had to pay a very heavy price for their previous support of that ideology.

Lets just say that it took a lot of effort to make sure that Nazism became a highly disreputable and marginal ideology. And you know something else.. there was realistically no other way to reach that endpoint. Do you really think that ardent believers in Nazism would have changed their ways if they had just been exposed to another viewpoint, received a better education, read more books or witnessed non-violent demonstrations against that ideology? Do you think they would have changed their viewpoints if they had interacted with more Jews or Russians?

The point I am trying to make is that supporters of ideologies which attract members through the promise of a license to inflict pain and death on innocent people cannot be reasoned or bargained with. The ultra-nationalists who flourished in Japan between 1919-1945 did have genuine grievances with international system of that era. They were also correct about Japan being short-changed after WW1. The Nazis too rose to public popularity based on genuine grievances such the highly unfair nature of Versailles treaty and the Great Depression which started in 1929.

But that does not excuse what Nazis did to millions of Eastern Europeans and Jews or Japanese did to millions more in China and Korea. But more importantly, a large part of the mass appeal of both ideologies was that they provided an opportunity and excuse for mediocre CONservative men in both countries to torture and kill millions in other countries. Let us not pretend that the vast majority of ardent supporters of Nazism and Japanese nationalism actually cared about the ideology they allegedly believed in, other than as justification for torture and murder.

Ideology, you see, is simply a self-justification for behavior. You cannot, therefore, destroy a noxious ideology by exposing its internal contradictions, hilarious irrationality and general emptiness. Ardent supporters of noxious ideologies use them as mental crutches to justify what they want to do while still being able to claim to themselves that they are “good”, “moral” and “law-abiding” persons. Noxious ideologies can only be destroyed once most of their ardent supporters are dead and the rest discredited as losers in conflicts.

In the next part, I will write more on how the mental crutch provided by ideologies such as Nazism and Japanese nationalism allowed its supporters to perform truly horrible acts in the 20th century. I will also compare that to how belief in race-based colonialism was used by mediocre CONservative men from European countries to justify equally horrific acts in the 19th century.

What do you think? Comments?

Some Thoughts on the Best Way to Destroy Pathological Ideologies: 2

July 21, 2018 11 comments

In the previous post of this series, I made a point that two of most widespread and noxious ideologies of 20th century (race-based colonialism and nationalism) became functionally extinct in Europe largely because most of their “footsoldiers” died in a series of armed conflicts during first half of that century. To put it more bluntly- tens of millions of mediocre white (and Japanese) men, who would have otherwise been staunch supporters and defenders of both ideologies, got killed or physically and mentally fucked up by wars between 1914 and 1945.

You might also recall that I said something about why the mindset of those killed, maimed or mentally scarred had a large influence on the course of global history after 1945. So what was the mindset and worldview of these mediocre white men who became functionally extinct in Europe after 1945? A good place to start is the world in which they grew up. To make a long story short, the vast majority of these mediocre and reactionary men came from either an agricultural or working class background. This does not mean that they were all retarded.. just that they came from an environment where thinking objectively was not encouraged.

But that, by itself, is not enough to understand the unusually high prevalence of reactionary CONservatism among this group. For that, one has to first appreciate how a series of large socio-economic changes in late 19th century Europe affected an already CONservative rural agricultural class. Large-scale industrialization of Europe, contrary to what some of you might believe, did not start till 1860s. Even more importantly, certain ideas such as standardized compulsory basic schooling and nationalism did not become a big thing till the 1880s. You will see why those two things matter, later in the post.

Those dates are, however, important because the era between 1850 and 1900 was the true peak of European colonialism. After 1900, differences in relative abilities between colonizers and colonized started decreasing to the point where Europeans had to flee from even their last African colonies by mid-1960s. To put it another way, it was possible for a large number of the mediocre white men born between.. say.. 1850 and 1900 to actually believe that they were the “chosen people”. These simpletons also believed that staunchly supporting and serving their hyper-greedy national elite (who were happy to indulge racism of lower classes) was a winning strategy.

And for a few decades, it all seemed to work. But the world around does not stand still, and some now powerful countries which did not have large colonial possessions started resenting others which had entered the colonialism game many decades before them. The older models of governance in many of these countries were also not scaling well to the era of industrialization and resultant socio-economic changes. Development of weapon and logistics-related technology since the last large intra-European wars was, however, the biggest wild card.

While every large European power at that time was arming and rearming itself to the teeth, they all pretended that long drawn out wars were not feasible. Luckily, for the rest of humanity, it was feasible and all major powers experienced millions of ‘untimely’ deaths among men of prime working age and many millions more were made invalid for life. And we have not even started talking about associated civilian deaths and all those millions who died during 1918-1919 because of the great influenza pandemic that followed WW1.

While most belligerent countries lost between 2-5% of their population due to WW1, those losses was heavily concentrated among men of ages between 18-35. I have seen some studies which show that, in some countries like France and Germany, almost 50% of men in that age group were either dead or disabled by early 1919. Entire villages and towns in UK lost most of their young men, and entire cohorts of men who went to public school and oxbridge in UK were no longer alive by end of WW1. And we have not even touched on the massive demographic effects of the Russian civil war between 1917-1922.

Some might see it as a tragedy.. I prefer to see the partial extinction of a whole category of reactionary and CONservative minded men in and immediately after WW1 in a more positive light. Let us face it.. WW1 did remove a ton of mediocre and reactionary men who happened to be big supporters and cheerleaders of race-based colonialism from the reproductive pool. The aftermath of WW1 also exposed how full of shit the elites of those countries were. To make a long story short, the government of most countries involved in WW1 went to considerable lengths to avoid paying proper pensions and compensation to relatives of the dead and disabled.

The point I am trying to make is that WW1 resulted in death of a large percentage of most ardent supporters of race-based colonialism and disillusioned others who escaped with just a permanent disability or poverty. Did I mention that nationalism boosted by then new universal primary education was the ‘opium’ of these masses. While a reduction in support of race-based colonialism is not immediately obvious, the number of men who entered colonial services of European countries (or supported politicians who championed the ‘old ways’) took a terminal dive after WW1. Of course, it would take WW2 to finish the all that good work started by WW1.

In the next post of this series, I will talk about how WW2 put the proverbial headstone on grave of race-based colonialism and destroyed public support for militant nationalism and associated ideologies.

What do you think? Comments?

Some Thoughts on the Best Way to Destroy Pathological Ideologies: 1

July 15, 2018 32 comments

While I considered writing a short click-baity post about the latest misadventures of Elon Musk or something about the silliness of establishment’s latest bout of hyperventilation about Trump, Putin and Russia, I thought it would be better to complete something I have meaning to post for sometime. This post, is the first in a series, of what it actually takes to destroy a pathological ideology so thoroughly that it can never be resurrected. To be clear, I am not suggesting a course of action- just point out the obvious based on a historical analysis.

Some of the ideas put forth in this post, and series, have part of an older series (link 1, link 2). I have also written a few standalone posts (link 3, link 4, link 5) which touch on some concepts I am going to discuss in some detail. In case you are wondering, the gist of all those linked older posts is that willing and enthusiastic followers of a malicious ideology are the true agents of evil perpetrated by that ideology. Let me remind you that there is little to no evidence that most so-called tyrants and ideologues personally killed even a few people. Instead, every single death attributed to them was due to their followers doing the actually dirty work for them.

With that in mind, let us talk about factors responsible for extinction of two major and particularly noxious ideologies that were once widespread in the 20th century. The first ideology is best described as race-based white colonialism of non-white countries (especially in Asia and Africa). The second is militant and race-based nationalism of the type which dominated Germany and Japan during the 1930-1945 time-span. Most people living in countries where these ideologies were once dominant will today, at least in public, take great effort to disavow them. However, their ancestors once were ardent supporters of, and proud foot-soldiers for, these ideologies.

So.. how did we get from a world where people in the west were vocal and open about their “god-given right” to rob, abuse and murder non-whites to one where even an attempt to praise colonialism can get you fired from your job. How did we get from a world where ‘the west’ could occupy any non-white country it chose to one where a small Asian country like Vietnam could beat both France and USA (after WW2) and haunt their national psyches. Why was post-WW2 decolonization of the African continent so rapid? Why are people in Germany and Japan today so unwilling to praise anything or anybody connected to the period between 1930 and 1945?

The very brief, and polite answer, to those questions is that a number of “occurrences” in the first half of 20th century greatly reduced the number of vectors for ideologies such as race-based colonialism and militant nationalism. The long-form answer starts with acknowledging that many common people, in countries where those ideologies were once dominant, were willing and highly enthusiastic supporters of those ideologies. For example.. a lot of people (especially young men of limited means) in countries such as UK and France once were true believers in race-based colonialism. Similarly, many in 1930-1945 era Germany and Japan were enthusiastic believers in the noxious militant nationalistic ideologies which they came to repudiate- after 1945.

To understand what I am talking about, let us compare the noxious ideologies of past to similar ones prevalent in present-day USA. As the more perceptive of you might have noticed, there is no shortage of american idiots of a reactionary mindset and mediocre cognitive capabilities who will support tons of stupid and dangerous things which do not benefit them such as involvement endless wars in foreign countries, support for outrageous levels of military spending, opposition to public spending on healthcare because if might benefit the “coloreds” etc. To be fair- people who think like this are now a minority, but a significant minority nonetheless.

And this brings us to the obvious question- why are European and Japanese equivalents of these CONservative idiots far less numerous? The simple answer is that many of them died in WW1, inter-war conflicts and WW2. The ones who survived those “occurrences” were seen by the rest of their society as losers who should not be emulated. The more complex version of this story is that WW1, inter-war conflicts in Europe and WW2 resulted in disproportional deaths of young white men of reactionary mindset and mediocre cognitive ability regardless of whether the belligerent nations recruited for their armed forces through patriotism or conscription.

The sheer number of deaths and disabilities due to those wars, Influenza pandemic of 1918 and all those Nazis who died in Russian prison camps after WW2 removed tens of millions of useful idiots who would have otherwise helped further causes such as race-based colonialism and militant nationalism. The low number of deaths due to those wars in USA (because it joined both almost 3 years after had started) is, sadly, why reactionary CONservative thinking persists in USA. Large scale excessive deaths among useful reactionary drones is, historically speaking, the only way to effect lasting social change including getting rid of pathological ideologies.

In the next part of this series, I will write in more detail about how demographic changes due to WW1 and WW2 started changing the worldview of people in those countries. More specifically, I will talk about the mindset of those who got killed, maimed or mentally scarred in those wars (and their aftermath) in comparison to those who survived. Will also cast some light on the severity of demographic profile shifts in main belligerent countries after both wars.

What do you think? Comments?

The Single Biggest Mistake Trump Has Made Since His Inauguration

April 10, 2018 8 comments

Regular readers of this blog might remember that, almost a year ago, I had written a short series about the likelihood of Trump completing his term as President. Some might also remember an even older series about my thoughts on the likely trajectory of a Trump presidency. To make a long story short, I predicted that the Trump presidency would become a giant shit-show because of his excessive and continued dependence on establishment republicans and an obsession with portrayal by corporate media. As some of you might have noticed, many of these predictions came true. Trump, so far, has “governed” like a moderately retarded establishment republican.

The inability of democratic party to translate the general lack of enthusiasm about Trump and Republicans into anything beyond a few electoral successes says volumes about their incompetence and general lack of vision. Then again, they are a bunch of intellectually bankrupt wankers, who cannot talk about anything beyond “Russia”, “Putin” and “Collusion”. These idiots seem to believe that the majority of people in USA who today live in a constantly precarious financial situation actually give a shit about their amateurish theatrical productions.. I mean “investigations”. Ironically, their stupid “investigations” have done more to make Trump look sympathetic to his support base and many others than was otherwise possible.

Having said that, it is now obvious to even his main support base that Trump has screwed up royally. For starters, he been unable to keep any of his major campaign promises (reasonable or ludicrous) to any worthwhile extent. Then there is the whole other issue of how everything he has “achieved” till now is restricted to pro-corporate establishment republican bullshit that many of his strongest supporters hate with a passion. Some of you might say that this turn of events was to be expected since Trump was always a scam artist- and that is partially correct. However, that does not address a far bigger issue- namely, his future.

His single biggest mistake and failure, so far, has been his inability to govern as a successful usurper.

Let me explain that in a bit more detail. Trump, you see, fits into a category of leaders known as Usurpers. While that term is often used to de-legitimize the person targeted with that label, the reality is that usurpers are typically people who start as outsiders or peripheral members of the ruling elite. They then go on attain political power through some combination of dumb luck, political intrigue and general dissatisfaction with status quo. Well known examples of such people through history include Julius Caesar, Augustus, Genghis Khan, Ivan the Terrible, Napoleon, Mussolini, Stalin, Hitler and Mao.

Less well-known examples of usurpers include Caligula, Cesare Borgia, Catherine the Great, Hong Xiuquan and Chiang Kai-shek. So why do some usurpers end up as successful and famous, while others as examples of failure and mockery. The short answer is that it comes down to two things. Firstly, their ability to increase their support base among general population and secondly, their handling of leftover elites and power structures of the previous regime. Every successful, or almost successful, usurper in history was able to extend his or her support base beyond the one which brought them to power. Even people such as Hitler and Stalin had high levels of genuine public support when they were in power.

So how did these successful usurpers increase their levels of public support once they assumed power? The short answer is, by presiding over populist reforms and redistribution of wealth. Perhaps you have heard how Julius Cesar was able to extend his power and increase his popularity by promulgating and implementing a host of populist economic reforms after he first became dictator. Or how Augustus spend a lot of money on construction of public buildings and other stuff that was useful to the non-elites in population as well as creating jobs. Even less savory characters such as Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin and Mao made considerable effort to employ more people and redistribute wealth away from the previous group of elites.

And this brings us the second defining characteristic of all successful usurpers- they destroyed the previous elite class and replaced them with a new one. Of course, not everybody pulled a Stalin and summarily jailed, exiled or killed the previous elites or anybody associated with them. Some like Caesar, Augustus and Hitler gradually pushed all previous elites who did not agree with them out of positions where they could cause problems. Others like Napoleon had the advantage of starting with a clean slate because of preceding events. But make no mistake, every single usurper who succeeded and lived to tell the tale spent a lot of their energies destroying every member of the previous elite class who they did not trust.

Which brings us to Trump or, more precisely, how he has failed so far. To make a long story short, Trump has been unable to do the two most important things any usurper must do in order to succeed in the long-term. As many of you know, Trump has been unable or unwilling to implement genuine populist reforms which would extend this support base. To that end, everything he has done so far has enriched the already wealthy previous group of elites (who hate him anyway) while increasing the impoverishment of his supporters. But it gets worse.. Successful usurpers end up as successful because they do manage to change the status quo in a manner which makes them more popular.

So far, Trump has rubber-stamped every establishment policy and idea- however boneheaded it might have been. I would go so far as to say that most decisions made by him in office are almost identical to those made by Bush43 and Obama44. His most fatal mistake, however, has been his reluctance or inability to get rid of the previous elite class from positions of power. In spite of a higher than usual turnover in senior posts, he has been unable to replace enough rank-and-file type junior elites to actually consolidate his grip on power. It does not help that he has filled his administration with establishment republican types who hate him or people who are so unpopular and out of touch with reality that their unpopularity rubs onto him.

In conclusion, I think that there is very high chance that Trump will be remembered as an unsuccessful and incompetent usurper. The next one, might however, be far more competent.

What do you think? Comments?