Trump Is A 1990s Moderate Democrat

CNN showed a video of Donald Trump advocating for the impeachment of George W. Bush, who started an illegal forever war that has cost thousands of American lives and trillions of dollars and stole a tremendous chunk of our freedom. Because "orange man bad", the Left has forgotten just how bad Bush was, and that Donald Trump is a moderate Democrat. There are videos floating around comparing speeches given by President Trump and Bill Clinton that are remarkably similar with the one difference that Clinton received a standing ovation from both parties and Trump is considered a Nazi for advocating the exact same policies. Trump is in no way far right, he's not even conservative, he is center left before the left went so far to the left that now Bernie Sanders - who vacationed in the Soviet Union and was kicked out of an honest to Lenin communist village for being too lazy - isn't far enough left for AOC and the Gang of Four.

America 2024 (Preview)

In 2016 I worked on my magnum opus "What is at Stake in the Next Election", outlining why Donald Trump was the only sane candidate to vote for in the 2016 election. It is a 23 page long treatise with 31 citations that I wrote during a 60-hour marathon of campaigning. I am fairly confident that Donald Trump will be re-elected in 2020, mainly because all of the Democrat candidates are absolute shit who are much weaker than Clinton and belong to a party that Clinton left flat broke. Trump has the incumbent advantage and is sitting on the best economy of the past 30 years, all of which adds up to a near guaranteed re-election.

The main question is, what happens after the Trump era ends? The last time a party won three elections in a row was George H. W. Bush in 1989 (and he would have won again in 1992 had it not been for that guy with the ears who siphoned votes away and allowed Clinton to squeak ahead). How do we guarantee a future Trumpian victory in 2024 and ensure the survival of America as a free nation, with intact first and second amendment rights that are not protected anywhere else in the world? I don't have all the answers, but I can lay out a very simple sketch for now. During Trump's second term I will lay out more details as they are filled in with more data.

In order to reach a solution we must first understand the problem. Here is that problem.

If Trump wins 2020 the Democrats split into two parties: the corporate neo-libs like Pelosi and Clinton, and the socialists like the Gang of Four. Even if "demographics is destiny", if the Dems split into two parties it doesn't matter if they have 60% of the electorate covered, they'll still not be able to come together and agree on who to elect, and future Trumpian and even post-Trumpian America Firsters (which we will need) will be able to win electoral victories even while losing the popular vote.

Trump filling so many judicial seats is one of the key steps, as judges have been writing laws by hallucinating rights into the Constitution for two generations now. Trump is setting a bulwark against leftism that should last a good 30 years. The other key steps are to build the wall and enact voter ID laws, which Trump should be able to do if the GOP wins 2020 as well and then they can just use the nuclear option to ram everything through.

If demographics is destiny then the good news is that conservative whites have twice as many children as any other group except people from shithole countries Dems flood America with to gain voters. If the wall is built, illegals are deported, and voter ID laws are passed then that drys up the pool of leftist voters. Socialists already in America have fewer kids, or abort all their kids (abortion's silver lining is that leftists are the ones getting by far the most abortions, so they're removing themselves from the voter base), so they are voluntarily decreasing their own population. This will take a while, which is why stacking the courts is crucial, as it buys time for conservative kids to grow up.

If Trump can win in 2020, and he can complete his agenda, and the GOP can find another Trumpian (or better) candidate who can win in 2024 then that gives us the chance to wait for our natural army to grow. Then we will reverse Khrushchev's threat against the left when he banged his shoe at the UN building and shouted "We will bury you!" It is humanity that will bury the left, and this religion of Satan that began with the Russian Revolution will finally die.

Progressivism is Regression and Social Justice is Injustice

We had already achieved full equality and unity in the late 1990s so people got bored and started inventing new problems and began dividing people up into smaller and more exclusive groups and bitching about stupid fucking shit.

Diversity is Worthless

Diversity is weakness, it's self-defeating and self-contradictory, and outside of a few extremely white leftist pockets in the West, nobody gives a fucking shit about diversity. Most countries around the world are ethnically, culturally, and linguistically homogeneous, including nearly all the great powers that have ever existed.

Pants Are Defective

Pants today are defective. I just tried on a new pair of pants I bought, same length same waist as I've worn for the past 20 years, and they were impossible to put on. Now, I have gained 15 pounds since then, it's true, but my old pants from just a few years ago still fit, so I haven't gotten so fat that I need to get a bigger size. Instead manufacturer's are designing pants differently so that they don't fit normally, as they were intended to.

Maybe you have noticed this disturbing trend too. Here's how pants are supposed to work. The waist is the thinnest part of the torso. It's where you can tie a belt or sash or even have clothes that just can't fall off because the body gets wider below the waist so the clothes can't fall through the rest of the body.

But manufacturers have decided that clothes that actually fit properly are passé, gauche even. Not only have they replaced all the metal parts with plastic, but they've changed the shape so that it's impossible to wear them without looking stupid.

Pants today are designed for kids who expose their asses. If you've been to public school in the past 20 years or if you live in one of the more blighted areas you know what I'm talking about. As such pants don't fit properly.

If you want to wear pants as they are designed, if you're male, then they ride on your hips (which don't lie). As such you have to cram your entire package into a space that's two sizes too small.

If you try to wear your pants a little higher so the seam doesn't try to split your balls apart you have to strap your dick to one of your legs or there's nowhere else to put it.



Here's another problem with pants. This is more on the side of the user, not the designer. It has to do with how people wear pants defectively, in particular, fat people.

Fat people wear pants way far down below their guts, so low that even without bending over you can see six inches of ass crack. They wear pants below their assholes and their guts hang down over the front. This allows them to buy pants that are 11 sizes too small, because the area right below the ass is much thinner than around the gut. There have been fat people who have 60+ inch waists buying pants with 30 inch waists because they wear them so low. Normally they would need to wear suspenders, because even belts can't fit on someone that fat, but today fat people are in denial about being fat, so they wear ridiculously small clothing all the while thinking "Who am I going to believe, my tiny pants or the lying scale?"



Don't even get me started on what women are wearing today. I remember the 80s and 90s, even the early 2000s (oughties?). Women were able to wear normal-looking pants (and, for a time, even baggy pants were in fashion for women too) and still look attractive. But today they wear these sheer, painted-on stocking looking things that's all ass crack and camel toe 24/7. You can't look away, even if you're full monk mode. They draw your eyes like a magnet. It's degeneracy, plain and simple. You can be sexy without looking even more indecent than a streetwalker.

You know my ancestors never wore pants. They were smart, and they ruled the world for 1000 years. This problem wouldn't exist if we didn't adopt the fashion of a northern barbarian tribe of horse riders. That's why pants were invented, to allow for better horse riding. I think it's stupid. We have cars today, we don't need to spread our legs that far when we travel. I think it's high time we brought togas back, and I'm not talking sheets like in Animal House, I'm talking the real thing. Our eyes, balls, and our children will thank us if we return to the fashion of ancient Rome.

Circumcision Is Barbarism

This ties in somewhat with the anti-porn people from last month. Circumcision is barbarism that was invented by sick assholes who thought it would eliminate masturbation. This is because half of the skin of the penis is removed that conveniently contains most of the nerve endings. The most sensitive part of a circumcised penis is the scar tissue. There were never any health benefits, real or imagined, the entire purpose from the very beginning was to eliminate sexual pleasure.





"I'm glad I was circumcised."

Bullshit. You were minutes old when you were circumcised, you never experienced being uncircumcised, therefore you cannot possibly say you prefer one state over the other because you've never experienced the other state.

This isn't like saying "I'm glad I wasn't shot." You don't need to be shot to know that not being shot is preferable to being shot. You don't need to have plague to know that not having plague is better than having plague.

That's a huge problem I have with spiritualists, who think we come to Earth to experience suffering, because you don't know anything until you experience it. Bullshit. I don't need to experience getting shot to know I don't want to get shot. I can see from the experiences of others that I don't want to get shot, I don't need to personally experience it. The spiritualist world view turns the universe into a cosmic form of Jackass, where we incarnate to do dumb shit and get killed because omnipotent spirits are bored masochists. Apparently, according to the spiritualists, the most enjoyable thing anyone can possibly do is get sick and die before the age of five, because that's the life of half of all the humans have ever lived. HALF OF EVERYONE WHO EVER LIVED, 50 BILLION PEOPLE, DIED BEFORE AGE FIVE. I refuse to believe in a world view where omnipotent spirits find that to be the most useful way to spend their time.

Circumcision is just the opposite of this. We can learn from the experiences of others, from the men with sexual dysfunction as a result of circumcision, and from the experiences of intact men, that not being circumcised is not equivalent to getting shot or getting the plague, that there is the possibility (and I believe definite reality) that not being circumcised is preferable to being circumcised. And it pisses me off that I'll never get to experience that. It pisses me off, supremely, that I had an important organ removed without my consent shortly after birth. That strikes me as an unforgivable form of child abuse.

C. S. Lewis said something like this in his book on the non-problem of evil. Some people say "It would be better for me if I had never existed." To which he replied, "In what sense 'for me'? How would I, if I did not exist, profit from not existing?" The statement is meaningless, since if you don't exist then there's no you to benefit from not existing. The statement is nothing but a string of words put together that does not refer to a real subject, like a square circle or a rock so heavy God cannot lift it. These strings of words do not constitute valid statements since the words nullify each other.

The Protestants Invented Witch Trials

The Catholic church a thousand years ago said that witches do not exist, that people who believe that they are witches are delusional, and that since witches and witchcraft does not exist, you cannot prosecute someone as a witch, hold witch trials, burn people at the stake as witches, because it is impossible to commit a crime that does not exist.

Then, Martin Luther nailed his feces to the door of a church and decided to create a perversion of Christianity based on ignorance and the inversion of Christ's actual teachings, and in so doing brought belief in witches into the world. Protestants burned witches out of the same love of ignorance that fuels ISIS (and to steal the land and other property from unpopular people through trumped up charges).

The End of Porn Month 2019

November is anti-porn month, so I decided to write about porn all month long for 7 reasons:

1. To boost traffic to the site (it's worked).

2. The anti-porn people are obnoxious. They are just as bad, if not worse, than the vegans. How do you know if someone is a vegan? They never shut up about it, that's how. They're always so smug and self righteous, as all stupid people who have a little bit of knowledge think they are.

3. The anti-porn people are creepy and they are clearly a cult, and I've written about cults before.

4. The anti-porn people are hypocrites who only focus on men using porn and don't care one tiny iota about women using porn.

5. The anti-porn people fundamentally confuse cause and effect. Feminism and increasing numbers of women in the workforce is destroying relationships between men and women, and since everyone needs an outlet for the sex drive that is what is driving men toward porn. Porn is the symptom of the destroyed relationship between men and women, it is not the cause of the destroyed relationship between men and women. Restore traditional gender roles and 99% of porn eliminates itself.

6. The anti-porn people may be wrong. They present no data, only doctrine. At least show me the studies that demonstrate that the brain can be rewired to such a dramatic extent as the anti-porn people allege. If that was possible I would think it would have huge implications elsewhere in the world. Instead of traditional schooling, for example, we could just use some sort of knowledge porn to make children smarter, condensing 12 years of schooling into a single year. We could have war porn to make super soldiers, surgery porn to make perfect surgeons, pilot porn to make perfect pilots incapable of human error. We could have prison porn to rehabilitate gangsters, thieves, and murderers. We could rewire the brain using therapy porn to get cripples to walk again. The possibilities are endless.

And instead of trying to save humanity through exploring these techniques, the anti-porn people want to end the experiment into rewiring the brain, just like the anti-drug people don't want us to experiment with extremely safe substances like psilocybin and marijuana, but do want to keep extremely dangerous substances like tobacco and alcohol perfectly legal.

7. Even if the anti-porn people are right about #6, how is that necessarily bad? How is it bad removing men with an addictive personality from the gene pool? I would think that keeping certain weak and pathetic men from breeding would be better for the species.

This was certainly an interesting topic, and because I've been very busy I've in no way exhausted everything there is to say about porn, so you can expect more in the future, along with more usual subjects.

Porn Is Free Speech

"We either all hang together or we all hang separately."
- Ben Franklin

Ben Franklin, who had sex with like five or six thousand women in his lifetime, was absolutely right when he said that.

Franklin was also quite familiar with porn, which existed in the 18th century, by the way. Since the photograph hadn't been invented yet, maybe, people had to use drawings, but what was acceptable for mainstream publication were very different than what they ware today. Porn could be printed in newspapers and no one gave a flying crap about that at the time. Many of these porn drawings depicted old Ben and his innumerable dalliances with everything that moved. One such image (that I unfortunately cannot find online) depicts Ben in standard porn pose, holding a woman sideways with one leg over his shoulder, and penetrating her with his massive cock. You could buy this on any street corner in Philadelphia.

"The things I do for my country."
- Also Ben Franklin, referring to seducing French aristocrats' wives and mistresses to secure the alliance that won the Revolutionary War

I'll discuss more on the history of porn later in the month, and the much freer attitude toward porn the founders had, and how radical leftists in the late 19th century invented the idea that masturbation was unhealthy as a means of controlling men, but for now let us focus on Franklin's first quote.

If the British attack each colony individually then they can defeat the colonies individually with their superior numbers, weapons, and training. However, if the colonies join together they can become a much more powerful force than the British would be willing to muster, and this new United States could win its independence. Only then, when the common enemy is defeated, should all the ancillary disputes colonies be debated.

Unity is strength. It's written into the motto of the United States: E Pluribus Unum, "Out of many, one." It's the rally cry behind Gengis Khan's rise to power, that a single arrow can be broken, but a bundle of arrows tied together cannot. It's what Maximus told his fellow gladiators, "Whatever comes through that door, we stand a better chance of surviving if we fight it together." Unity is strength, because many people can be in more places, fight more enemies, come up with more ideas, and accomplish more work than any single individual can.

Conquerors throughout history have employed the tactic of divide and rule to break any unity, because an individual can be dominated a lot more easily than a group. Napoleon famously brought his army to bear against a divided enemy, defeating each individual group in turn, and in so doing defeating a much larger enemy by creating several smaller enemies to fight one at a time.



This is a tactic we see being used in politics all the time. The elite have got us divided by race, sex, and all sorts of other bullshit to keep us fighting each other so we don't band together and overthrow them. I've spoken to people at length about this during the last election, people on the "left" and never-trumpers on the "right" and they all said "NO! Orange man bad! REEEEEEEEE!!!!!!! He will nut inside us!"

Now, after that rather long introduction, let's get on to the meat of the issue.



Paypal has banned Pornhub, which, according to this chart, is the 38th biggest website, and the second biggest porn site on the planet, so it's a pretty big deal (Paypal is number 68 on the same chart). Of course the anti-porn people are braying loudly over this, offering up ululations to their deified egos. Conservatives similarly chant "Good, get rid of the degeneracy!" and then go back home and beat off to men piledriving each other because they're all so deeply in the closet that they're in Narnia. Meanwhile the leftists can't decide whether porn makes women into livestock (they don't give a wet bucket of shit about men, who are just prop cocks), and the ones who call it "sex work" and praise it like certain ancient peoples praised temple prostitutes.

Of course all of these same people who cheer the deplatforming of their enemies hiss and complain when they are the ones who are being censored and deplatformed. As Styx alludes to in the above video, the vast majority of the anti-censorship people are hypocrites (just as I said a decade ago about the anti-war people).

It shouldn't matter whether it is the almighty government or "muh private corporation", it's about one thing and one thing alone: control. Authoritarians love to control people, and controlling access to private economic transactions and free speech (as well as the right to self defense, which they hate as well) is the ultimate form of control. You don't need to round people up in a concentration camp like the three million people China has incarcerated, or shoot people in the heads, like China does with its mobile execution vans. All you have to do is take away a person's right to earn money and that person will simply starve to death, or else turn to a life of crime, giving you a pretext for imprisonment.

Remember, liberals get the bullet too. No matter how far left you are (or how far right, when the pendulum inevitably swings in the opposite direction), you are never far enough. You are never pure enough. Any group, Antifa, the MRA, Alt-Right, they always enter purity spirals and eat themselves. They always crucify members who are not pure enough, and hate these not pure enough even more than they hate their supposed enemies. We are seeing in this election a growing number of people who think Bernie Sanders, an avowed socialist who used to vacation in the Soviet Union and has lived in an actual communist village, is not far left enough.

And now we have a handful of big tech oligarchs, rich beyond the dreams of avarice, who are controlling what we can think, and say, and do, who can have a job, why can buy and sell goods and services. We have an authoritarian control grid whose power will soon be so great that it can never be challenged. And the only way to defeat them is together. Any attack on the free speech of anyone must be treated as an attack against everyone, whether you like the person or not. It doesn't matter if the elite are trying to censor Alex Jones, porn, Dave Rubin, Hasan Piker, that Nazi guy they made a movie about, anyone you don't like, if we don't stand together against censorship and deplatforming we will all surely hang separately. A tech oligarch or government powerful enough to give you everything you want is also powerful enough to take from you everything you have when, not if, when the pendulum of society inevitably swings in the opposite direction. The proper thing to do is to allow the free and open exchange of ideas, not to censor anyone. Let people reach their own conclusions. Try to be more persuasive and win people over to your side. Working together is the only way we can continue to live in a free and open society.

Martin Goldberg on Porn

Because I'm not bored as hell by the topic of porn just yet, here's the first of two videos from Martin Goldberg, Mr. Economic Invincibility himself. This one deals with porn directly. Here he presents a rational, balanced perspective and actually brings up one of the few good points on the subject, that porn can be an excuse for some men to not take risks with women.

He also brings up what he admits is a weaker argument, that porn may be better than anything you can expect in real life.

Now, I don't usually speak from experience, because I tend to lean on the more theoretical side, but given the subject and the wonder and mystery any potential readers may have, from what I've seen in my day, I honestly never thought the chicks in porn videos looked all that great (and the amateurs are just that, regular off the street people who you do see every day, if you run in those circles of chicks who have lots of tattoos and daddy issues). Furthermore, speaking, as it were, about what people seem to be referring to almost exclusively, of the whole dick entering various parts of a woman type videos, it always seemed laughably stupid and awkward to me, like the stupidest possible ways of having sex just to make sure everything is on camera. That just never did anything for me.

Also, and he doesn't bring it up in the video but other people have brought it up, the whole serial escalation argument. You first see a picture of a tit, then you get bored of tits (as if that was even possible) so now you have to start watching like finger bang videos, then get bored of that and you have to start watching bukkake, then you get bored of that and have to start watching real videos of real life rape, and then you're bored of that and have to go out and commit rape yourself, then it escalates even further and all of a sudden you're Jeffrey Dahmer. All I have to say is fuck off, escalation. You can smoke a whole forest of weed and never have the desire to go to crack, and then from crack to meth, and then from meth you're hanging yourself in your closet like Robin Williams. Escalation is bullshit, weed is not a gateway drug, and Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself.

The Cult of Anti-Porn

It's November, so now I have to watch all the quasi-religious freaks try to look special by denouncing porn.

Let me start out by saying that this has nothing to do with my or your opinion of porn, this is just how utterly creepy the anti-porn people are and how they all say the exact same thing, like none of them have ever had an original thought.

I've been writing The Urban Mystic since February 2006, 13 years, and have never once talked about porn, that I know of. It just never crossed my mind. I never saw it as anything compelling to write about. But what I have written about a lot is cults, and these anti-porn male feminists are a cult, and just like Scientology, Mormonism, Jehova's Witnessism, Islam, Neo-Nazism, "We Wuz Kangz", they're all fucking insane.

And let me just expand on that last bit, while I have explained before in great detail why Mormonism is a cult, and is decidedly anti-Christian, and is demonstrably false, I still think that most Mormons are good people, which is something that I cannot say about other cults. Even though Mormonism is a cult, and most Mormons are crazy and wrong, it is a cult that by and large makes people more friendly.

So, after almost a decade and a half, here is a very, very brief introduction on the cult of anti-porn.

The anti-porn people miss the fundamental reality that they are confusing cause and effect.

Porn is not a cause, porn is an effect.

The cause is feminism destroying healthy relationships between men and women. I'll get into that in more detail later in the month, but for now just run with it and see where it leads.

Without a woman with which to fulfill his biological imperative, a man is going to execute that base level programming alone. Plain and simple. Unless you're one of those 1 in a million who is able to become a monk and sublimate sexual energy, you absolutely will not and cannot (and should not) overrule three billion years of evolutionary hardwiring.

It's not some Jewish conspiracy to eliminate white people. White people are the army that keeps Jews from being exterminated, it profits them not to eliminate their defenders when half the world's Jews won't even touch a gun. That's the problem I have with the Neo-Nazis who try to say everything bad that exists is the deliberate action of the Jews to exterminate white people, is that it's self-contradictory. If the Jews, who supposedly run the world, are so smart to create this global conspiracy to wipe out whites and replace them with blacks and Arabs, then surely those same Jews would be smart enough to realize that blacks and Arabs would do what they've always done, which is turn Jews into third-class dhimmi serfs should white people stop defending their Jewish overlords. Any Jewish conspiracy to eliminate white people would really be cutting off their rather prominent noses to spite their face. It makes no sense.

Most porn today is actually produced by amateurs, people who are exhibitionists, but even the corporate stuff is war profiteering. A gulf exists between men and women that was created by anti-male laws and social customs that have been created over the past 50 years, and pornographers are just taking advantage of that situation. Just as someone selling toilet paper for a million dollars a sheet in Venezuela didn't create the shitty economy in the country, the pornographers didn't create the anti-male climate we are living in, they are just taking advantage of it.

Eliminate feminism and porn vanishes all on its own as the market naturally dries up.

The anti-porn people also are hypocrites, in that they focus exclusively on getting men to stop using porn and don't give a toss about the billions of dollars women spend each year on porn. The most profitable franchise of the past decade has been a pornographic rape fantasy for women. But the anti-porn people be like "Women can hump pillows all they want as long as men don't let one single sperm come in contact with the air!" They are holding men and women to different standards.

They also think that 100% of all porn contains dicks. They think 100% of all porn is videos of men fucking women, with dicks front and center. Wasn't it just last year, or maybe even earlier this year, where the most common search results of major porn sites was released for every state? What did those results reveal? First of all, that women watch porn too, and second, that the number one search for both men and women in all 50 states was "lesbian". Most people watch porn that has no men in it, therefore the whole argument that you're cucking yourself for watching porn goes out the window if you're only looking at women.

Is Playboy not porn? Is pictures of naked women not porn? Are cam girls stripping and masturbating for money and attention not porn? The anti-porn people seem to have a paraphilia for videos of dicks, so much so that they hallucinate the existence of dicks where dicks do not exist. Either that or they are really afraid of their own latent homoerotic desires.

The anti-porn people are young, impressionable, dick-obsessed, male feminists who are living in a utopian delusion who seek to score with women and gain status among men by showing off how they manifest superpowers while calling other men out as being lesser beings in a quasi-moralistic crusade that is pure hypocrisy, plain and simple.

The Non-Problem of Porn

It's November, so the anti-porn cultists are coming out of their basements, with those disgusting, stained mattresses they live on because of all the nocturnal emissions they have from never getting it off, and they have to bray in the streets about how they stopped nutting for fifteen hours and have now become motherfucking immortal and can now see through time and fly.



Here is the only honest video on the subject ever created, not surprisingly by Styx.

A Very Brief Introduction to Political Groups

We hear a lot about the "political spectrum" and different groups like the alt-right, Antifa, and good old fashioned conservatives and liberals, but what does all that really mean, really? Using a decade and a half of first-hand experience in "the biz" I break it all down for you in the most urban way possible.

Mainstream Republicans want to bend over before leftists and accept the throbbing cock of defeat in order to look like nice people. Love me, Daddy.

Conservatives want you to die in the gutter for not pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps while they smoke cigars on a golf course and drive around in gas guzzling cars to show off how much money they can waste.

Liberals want you to live in the gutter in a deluxe cardboard box with free heroin and designated shitting streets while they party on Epstein's rape island.

LOLbertarians want the same thing as liberals but with legal weed and naked fat guy dancers.

AnCaps (sometimes called "libertarians") want you to die, but not in the gutter because that's private property. Fuck you.

AnComs (sometimes called "Antifa") want to throw piss bottles at you and LARP at being revolutionaries but will scatter to the winds if you fight back.

White (German) Supremeists (sometimes called "black pill") don't care what you do, but they want all white people to move to Montana and secede from the United States to make white people even more powerless and irrelevant because they're fucking retarded. They worship Adolf Hitler, who murdered more white people than anyone else in history. They also what to replace Christianity with either German paganism or state atheism.

Black Supremeists want to turn America into Detroit and make white people pay reparations and become slaves because "We wuz kangz and shiet!"

"Democratic" Socialists want free shit provided for by printing money because they're all trust fund babies who don't know how economics works.They also think the Nordic countries are socialist because they can't tell the difference between socialism and hyper-capitalism coupled with a welfare state.

Progressives have NO endgame. They constantly move the goalposts because they need a reason to be offended all the time.

Donald Trump is the Greatest President in 50 Years

Donald Trump is not only the best president since JFK, he's the only good president since JFK. This is just a preview of a longer piece to come called "All The Presidents' Sins", but here's a very brief rundown of how the nine presidents since Kennedy were all worthless scumbags who did everything in their power to destroy America. Virtually everything good in the past five decades happened in spite of the nine bad presidents we've been forced to endure, not because of them.

Lyndon Johnson stonewalled every civil rights initiative while he was in the Senate because he was a virulent racist, then when he became president championed those causes to trick blacks into voting for Democrats.

Richard Nixon was great for the environment but he gave formal recognition to Mao's China, the most brutal regime in the history of the planet.

Gerald Ford did jack shit. You could replace him with a turnip and have the same effect.

Jimmy Carter, to his credit, put solar panels on the White House, but he was weak and feckless and allowed the Iranians to hold Americans hostage for 444 days.

Ronald Reagan, the darling of the right, was okay at best. He flooded California with illegals, giving the left 55 guaranteed electoral votes in every subsequent election.

Bush 1 was a warmongering piece of shit who flooded the US with coke when he was the head of the CIA, creating the crack epidemic while waging proxy wars of terrorism in Latin America.

Bill Clinton admitted Communist China to the World Trade Organization and sold our industrial capacity to the Chinazis, destroying the middle class for 2 decades and started more foreign wars than any two presidents combined.

Bush 2 is another warmongering shitbag like his father, who got us entangled in a forever war in Iraq and Afghanistan when he had the chance to kill Bin Laden in December 2001 and end the war and decided to let the terror leader go free.

Obama literally spent more money than the previous 43 presidents combined and did everything in his power to destroy race relations in America. His Supreme Court handed down more unconstitutional decisions than any other in history.

Was Thanos Right?

If you look at history you start to get the "evil" idea that Thanos was right. Every time the population is halved, or at least a significant part of it is eliminated, the standard of living of the survivors increases.

The Black Death (which was not bubonic plague, it was a hemorrhagic disease, which plague is not*) turned Europe from a continent where lords owned the people as slaves to one where workers had the power to demand improved standards of living and allowed for the creation, for the first time ever, of a middle class. Social mobility was created. Had millions of people not died and the social order of the world not been overturned those opportunities would never have arisen.

After 100 million people died in the Second World War America, as the only industrial nation that was not destroyed, saw the greatest boom economy in human history. For the first time ever a man with no education, no training, and no connections could demand, and get, a job that could support a wife, three kids, two cars, a house, a month of vacation, and retire in 30 years and live off a full pension. It was the first time ever that young adults could venture off on their own and not have to live in multi-generational families just to make ends meet (something still tragically seen as normal in our crippled economy). Had millions of people not died and nations not bombed to oblivion that opportunity would have never arisen.

Even in the Soviet Union, with that man-made catastrophe rent by Stalin that saw the murder of 20 million people, actually dramatically improved the lives of the survivors. An entire nation of peasant slaves was turned into an industrial super power with a standard of living half that of the United States in only 70 years. The survivors did have their lives improved. That would never have happened under the Tsar where everyone lived as chattel in an agrarian shithole.

History seems to attest to the fact that there really is a finite amount of resources, and if you eliminate half the people everyone not only gets double the share, but those double shares are worth even more.

"But why not just double the resources?"

Because things that are not earned have no value. Low IQ people take resources given to them by guilty Westerners and use those resources to quadruple their populations. Doubling the resources just exacerbates the problem by incentivizing bad behavior.

Everyone wanted silver, which was rare and highly valued. Wars were waged over silver. But when Spain discovered Potosi, the largest silver deposits in the world, and the supply of silver increased dramatically, all of a sudden silver became worthless because everyone had it and the Spanish economy collapsed.

Everyone wants to be a trillionaire, but when Zimbabwe made everyone a trillionaire the money became worthless. If everyone has a trillion dollars then no one will work, no one will pave roads, or build houses, or bake bread, or raise chickens. Why work when you're rich? But then, since no one is working, all those ordinary goods become extremely valuable and money becomes worthless.

Increasing the supply of a given resource devalues it. Increasing the supply of food, for example, would cause the excess food to rot and be wasted, or would incentivize people to have more kids who would demand more food, which would require resources to be doubled again to meet the new demand.

Any perceived increase in standard of living brought on by increasing resources is an illusion predicated on credit. Extraction of ground water and phosphate have allowed for an increase of food production which has allowed 6 billion extra people to be born in excess of the carrying capacity of the planet. The problem is ground water and phosphate take thousands, if not tens of thousands, of years to become replenished. Meanwhile they are exhausted in generations. Saudi Arabia totally depleted its ground water supply in a couple decades. There are places in America where the ground has subsided 70 feet or more because of the extraction of aquifers that took millennia to fill up. Whole "guano islands" were mined below the waves to extract phosphate for fertilizer and for making explosives and have been depleted in the past century.

It's a simple calculus: extraction of these resources allows for the increase of the population because most people have no concept of a future beyond their own death (or maybe the deaths of their children), an increase in population leads to an escalating pace of resource extraction beyond the point where those resources are being replenished, which leads to a population crash.

Now, it's true that places like Japan and Europe, especially Eastern Europe, have seen declining populations, but Africa's population is exploding. Within the next 50 years 1 in 3 people on the planet will be African if this trend continues. Sustainable agriculture can only support 2 billion people, and there will be at least 4 billion Africans who will not work, who will not invent new particle physics, who will not build rockets to colonize Mars. 4 billion more mouths to be fed by an increasingly smaller pool of Western workers who are being replaced in their home countries.

The long-term survival of the human species requires colonization of other planets. That cannot happen if dumb Westerners keep giving aid to countries in Africa and across the third world where people breed like crazy. There is a finite supply of resources, and those resources must be apportioned toward advancing the survival of the human species over the long-term, not increasing the population dramatically in the here and now.

The long-term survival of the human species requires the immediate end of foreign aid across the board.

“But wouldn't the population just grow back if half of it is eliminated?”

No, not if you eliminate the half that breeds beyond the replacement level.

You're committing the fallacy of assuming humans are fungible, like bacteria. If you eliminate half of a colony of bacteria the colony will just continue to grow until all the resources are consumed. If you double the resources for the colony to grow on the colony will continue to grow until all the resources are consumed.

If you double the resources on Earth some humans will continue to breed until all the resources are consumed. If you remove the half that is breeding beyond replacement level then those resources can be recycled, as they always have been.

Resources are recycled. There are water cycles, phosphate cycles, nitrogen cycles, carbon cycles. Humans use resources, die, and the dead bodies decompose and return the elements to the Earth to be reused. If population is kept stable, at the carrying capacity, then resources can be recycled endlessly. The world will not become overrun with Japanese people, ever. Japanese people are not exhausting resources to fuel their bottomless thirst for expansion, like in China or Saudi Arabia, or Chad. If the wasteful half is eliminated, or simply not allowed to expand, then the stable, sustainable half can reuse the world's resources endlessly until the Sun dies.



*The disease that killed most of the people in the Americas when the Spanish arrived is called "Cocoliztli". It has the same symptoms as the Black Death: high fever, profuse bleeding, large dark spots - especially around the neck and genitals, bloody diarrhea, bloody vomiting, severe body pains, delusions, discoloration and necrosis of the skin. Death was usually in 3-5 days after onset of symptoms, an extremely short amount of time. We don't know the incubation/latency period is, there are very few diseases that kill that quickly. People with Ebola usually linger for 21 days or so. Cholera can kill quicker, but that's from fluid loss.

Coupled with the fact that the disease is spread primarily from person to person, and was devastating in areas that were virtually rodent free while sparing other areas that were teaming with rats, indicates that some unknown viral hemorrhagic fever was the worst killer of humans of all time. It wiped out 75% of Eurasia and 90% of North and South America. We are all the survivors of some extremely virulent disease that nearly brought humanity to extinction within a span of 300 years.

Nothing Happened Before the Big Bang, Inflation Is Not Past Eternal, And All Systems of Knowledge Are Incomplete

There's been a recent push to change the definition of "big bang", just as with changing the definition of countless other words to suit the will of dialectical materialism. This past month I've come across a new video† by a very popular youtube channel and an article on a popular website talk about "what happened before the big bang" and "why the big bang wasn't the start of everything".

Just as "nothing" no longer means absolutely nothing, it means "the ground state of the quantum vacuum", now the "big bang" isn't what it always has meant, when time, space, matter, and energy all came into existence from absolutely nothing, now it means "inflation", which happened 10^-32 seconds AFTER what was previously defined as the big bang. This is a devious little reach around to claim that "stuff happened before the big bang", just like calling "the ground state of the quantum vacuum" "nothing" allows you to say that ""science" (dialectical materialism) can explain how the universe was created from nothing without God."

Eternal inflation, the idea that the inflation that sped up the expansion of the early universe didnt' stop, it still continues in other regions of space beyond our cosmic horizon, spawning new bubble universes forever, was the first to go. Some thought inflation was eternal into the past too, but in 2003 Vilenkin and Alan Guth ran the calculations on Hubble's Constant and found that it doesn't work. Inflation may continue forever into the future, but it had to have a beginning in the past.

Next came the big bounce, the idea that after a long time, a trillion years or so, expansion slows and stops, eventually reversing until everything flys back into a single point called the Big Crunch. Then the shock of impact of everything on everything starts a new Big Bang, and the cycle continues forever. Unfortunately, disorder increases with time, so each new universe must be more disordered than the one that birthed it. If the cycle had been going on forever disorder would be infinite and the universe would be completely featureless. Since there's stuff in the universe the cycles couldn't have gone on forever. Some people then suggested that the universe just gets bigger with each bounce, so the disorder spreads out more so no one notices it (like in the M-Brane ekpyrotic model and possibly whatever the hell Penrose's new idea is - no one seems to understand his Aeons of time model, within the physics community or anywhere). But if the whole thing is getting bigger it had to start somewhere really really small, maximally small, and that means a finite beginning.

There's also an idea from the 1930s called the cosmic egg or primeval atom, where yes, there was a Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago, but the thing that banged was an uber-dense subatomic thing that existed forever until it got tired of existing as a tiny little particle and exploded. However, Vilenkin and a graduate student Audrey Mithani showed that quantum instability would have led to the egg's collapse after a finite time. The crack (the Big Bang) had to happen before the egg collapsed into oblivion so it couldn't have existed forever, even if it existed for a really, really long time before the Big Bang.

Here are several prior pieces I've written on why inflation cannot be past eternal:

Balking Hawking Part 1

Balking Hawking Part 2

Georg Cantor's Infinities (Part Two)

Balking Someone

Balking Hawking Part 3: In The Beginning

Make no mistake, when people say "science says" they mean "dialectical materialism says". Science does not say anything, science does not prove anything, individual scientists may say things, but science is not a catalogue of facts, science is a process.

I've made a video many years ago back when I used to make videos called "First Principle Anecdota"* that everything you know, and every conceivable system for attaining knowledge (that is, all forms of epistemology) necessarily relies on what are called "axioms" or "first principles", which are assumptions which must be taken as given but can never be proven true. At its base you can NEVER know anything about the world with absolute certainty. Everything must be based on things which you assume to be true but can never prove. Based on those assumptions you can create a system to demonstrate facts with arbitrary certainty, but the certainty of those facts is always arbitrary and is based entirely on your assumptions.

I've probably talked to hundreds of people about this and no one seems to get it. Not the "praise science" crowd who believe in dialectical materialism. It's like people can get arbitrarily smart, but their smartness is always asymptotic to the level of intelligence needed to realize that all knowledge is built upon unprovable assumptions.

Ordinary people, who are just smart enough to be dangerous, are easy to trick by these linguistic gymnastics like redefining words. You redefine "big bang" and "nothing" and get disaffected teenagers into becoming atheists. That's how they get you. Meanwhile the geniuses (technically the plural is genii), the real hard-nosed intellectual atheists who really look into the subjects like Anthony Flew, turn to belief in God because they realize that the universe and life are far too complex to be explainable by any series of coincidences.

I said a few years ago, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, "How do you change a cow into a horse? You redefine the word "horse" to include cows."

That's really what we've been seeing this past decade go into overdrive as the Fabian socialists who run the West have taken to redefining words as a form of mind control and behavior modification.


----------------------------------------
*By the way, my videos tend to have very specific titles, and if you search that in quotes mine will appear as the first result. I know Google has algoreithms that skew results to be more in line with previous searches, but I've never searched for that video before, so it's as close to neutral as you can get.


†That video that claimed inflation is the big bang is predicated on a lie. Most people do not watch videos to the end, and at the very end they admitted that inflation does not explain the initial state of the universe (what has always been referred to as the big bang). The video admitted at the very end that everything was a lie knowing almost no one will watch to the end.

This is just like how the New York Times will deliberately publish articles with provocative titles and then in paragraph 6 they will give the truth knowing no one will read that far into the article. An article may be titled "Trump Hates Brown People" and the article may have nothing to do with Trump except at the very end there might be a quote from some race baiter which says "Ralph Sharpman said in interview that "Trump hates brown people."" The NYT will run with that quote, and put it in quotations, but not tell you it's a quote from someone else or tell you the article is about Ralph Sharpman until the very end.

This is how they can technically not be lying outright but still be lying by saying something true in a misleading way. It's lying because it omits the context of the original statement.

Invasion of the Puss-Covered Kudzu

I saw the 1978 version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers last night. Here's what Wikipedia has to say:

"It initially received varied reviews from critics, though its critical reception has significantly improved in subsequent years, receiving a 95% on Rotten Tomatoes, and also being hailed as one of the greatest remakes ever as well as one of the best science-fiction horror films of all time."

Here's what I have to say:

It's shit. Absolute total shit. Despite having at least 3 A-listers on board, it was one of the worst movies I have ever seen. The acting was worse than some school plays I've seen, with some of the top actors of all time phoning in some of the absolute worst performances in the entire history of cinema.

Absolutely zero money was spent on wardrobe, as everyone wore the exact same outfit (as if they were me) over the course of about a week, with at least two or maybe three of the characters wearing the exact same coat, as if they were on sale at K Mart or something at the time.

The last third of the movie was shot in near total darkness from some of the worst angles I have ever seen. The sound quality was shit, the dialogue was shit, the effects were sub-par for movies made during that era, and there's a scene where a dog with a man's face appears out of butt fuck nowhere, for no other reason than to scare the humans and out them in front of the aliens, and then disappears with no explanation and is never spoken of again.

Now the two worst aspects. First, the movie breaks its own rules. When you have a movie where something impossible happens, like alien plants invade and duplicate people or zombies come back to life, you have to establish the rules early on and stick with them to the very end. It's already been established two things: 1. the aliens just float in from space and 2. it takes hours for a person to be duplicated. If we take 1 at face value then why do the aliens need to establish a base in San Francisco and then have pods trucked out to everywhere else? Couldn't they just waft in anywhere and everywhere on the planet simultaneously? This does not make sense. This is a major plot hole. The other major plot hole is 2, it takes hours for a person to be duplicated. For 3/4 of the movie this is a major plot point, because three times people have fallen asleep and we watch the pod grow a duplicate very slowly, slow enough that the person can be woken up and the duplicate will die. Yet somehow, for "drama" or lack of time or whatever, near the very end when Brooke Adams' character falls asleep for like a second, despite there being no pods in the vicinity, she crumbles to dust and a new perfectly formed duplicate appears naked in the bushes instantly to scare Donald Sutherland. This is the second major plot hole, and taken together they absolutely ruin this movie.

And the second worst aspect is the script. This is some of the absolute worst writing I have ever seen. Okay, so we begin the movie, the beginning, the very beginning, where the aliens invade. Maybe two characters are very partially introduced, and then in the next scene hundreds of people have already been replaced. It's like the whole first act was cut out. Brooke Adams (I don't remember any of the characters names except Donald Sutherland was Matthew because they said his name seven, eight thousand times) goes to Donald Sutherland and says "My boyfriend has been replaced, his personality is totally different!" Let's not introduce the character and spend 20 minutes getting to know him so we the audience can be sure he's different, let's introduce him out of nowhere already replaced and just take it as given he's different. The same thing happens with everyone. Characters are not introduced until after they are replaced and we're supposed to take as given that they are different. There's zero chance of getting into the movie because the entire first third, where the world and the characters are introduced, was omitted for whatever reason. It wasn't run time, because the movie was almost 2 hours long and they had time enough to repeat several plot points three times, just so we would get it.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers 1978 shouldn't have been released to theaters, it shouldn't even even have been released straight to video, it should have been released straight into the garbage.

Let's Go Die at Area 51!

Some two million idiots have pledged to "Storm Area 51" because "They can't stop all of us." These idiots think they can run to the base, confident in the belief that the base's defenders will run out of bullets (and napalm) before all their ranks are devastated.

Storming Area 51 is a logistics nightmare. Even reaching it is something that's very difficult, and almost impossible on foot. The nearest civilian rest stop is 86 miles from the base. Even running at 200% capacity it may be able to supply a couple thousand people. As for Area 51 itself, the distance from the gate to the buildings themselves is 28 miles of some of the harshest desert on the planet. You would have to be in peak physical condition (and not the people who signed up to storm the base) just to make it there on foot. The world record for marathon, which is less than the distance that needs to be crossed than the perimeter around Area 51, is just over 2 hours. Imagine doing that in 110 degree heat on blinding white salt flats with no shade. The elements themselves will defeat 90% of the people attempting this stunt, and, given the lack of medical facilities in the area, several thousand will probably die from heat stroke even just camping out in the desert.

Assuming even 10% of the people stupid enough to go manage to cross the desert, Area 51 sits on a US Air Force base. The Air Force has napalm, and they're not afraid to use it, at least in built-up civilian areas in Iraq.

This is Napalm. Water cannot put it out. Yes, they can stop all of you.

Napalm aside, those signs all over the desert warning of the use of lethal force are not jokes. People have been shot, to death, trying to access Area 51. Even if 10% of the keyboard warriors decide not to sleep late and actually storm Area 51, and if 10% of them are surprisingly fit enough to make it the nearly 100 miles through the desert to the base, that means 20,000 people will be on the receiving end of, at the very least, rubber bullets, active denial weapons (which will stop you in your tracks unless you are very stoned on PCP or something), tear gas, and other rather cool non-lethal weapons.

This is Active Denial. It will stop you.

There are also legal ramifications in attempting to storm Area 51, as this Internet lawyer can explain. Even if you are not killed, pelted with rubber bullets, or sent to the hospital for dehydration, you will be sent to jail and fined perhaps half your monthly welfare check.



One can only pray to our Lord Thanos (the best alien, by the way) that at the very least 10% of these idiots do decide to go through with this jackassery so that the universe can become more balanced, as all things should be, through their removal from the gene pool. Best case scenario ALL of them decide to go and balance the universe.

A man can dream, can't he?

How to Overcome Nihilism

"Black people invented John Malkovich" - Economic Invincibility

Nihilism is the disease of the modern age. The structure of society feeds nihilism and depression. There's not much we can do at first as individuals to change society, but we can make changes in our own lives and in the lives of the people we care about that will improve our quality of life tremendously. And, at the end of the day, that will make all the difference.

Nihilism is Garbage

Friedrich Nietzsche: The Anti-Nihilist.
"I am Superman. Look at my muscles."

Nihilism is garbage. If you are a nihilist you are a nobody, a non-entity, a loser, and a defeatist.

I am intimately familiar with suffering. Injuries, disease, constant pain, years of unemployment and a string of dead-end jobs that offer no fulfillment. I know it all, and I'll admit to becoming a little bitter over the years, though I do think it has helped me advance philosophically.

People like to blame God, or speculate on how a life full of suffering is devoid of all meaning. The modern world feeds this mentality. It is designed from on high to make us feel inadequate. Anti-social media want us to feel like all of our frienimies are doing so much better than us when they are often just as miserable. Advertising wants us to be miserable so that we buy more crap we don't need or want. The media live off of suffering: "If it bleeds, it leads." Add to this the armies of Internet "black pills" and doomsayers who sell ebooks and subscriptions to even more doom online, and you have a recipe for nihilism, which Friedrich Nietzsche and personal experience in the world will tell you is currently the dominant philosophy of the West. Once we got rid of Christianity, when we killed God, we now find ourselves in this nightmare world where life is devoid of meaning.

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we, murderers of all murderers, console ourselves? That which was the holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet possessed has bled to death under our knives. Who will wipe this blood off us? With what water could we purify ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we need to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we not ourselves become gods simply to be worthy of it? There has never been a greater deed; and whosoever shall be born after us - for the sake of this deed he shall be part of a higher history than all history hitherto."

From Nietzsche's The Gay Science

Nietzsche recognized that with the advent of the nihilism brought on by the new scientific materialism of modernity (and the full-on celebration of meaninglessness that has come about in post-modernism), we would face an existential crisis. The idea of God is so central to giving meaning to our lives that without it we are no better than ants, toiling day and night for jobs we hate just to keep our heads above water while we fill the pockets of Mammon worshipers who have managed to take the reigns of civilization, all without meaning or purpose.



God is dead, and we have killed him, and we are woefully incapable of filling the void in our current condition. It is one thing to feel at conflict with society and man's laws, but it is quite another to feel at conflict with the Source of all life and morality itself. Eliminating God leads to the enshrinement of the State, as the vacant throne of the Absolute cannot remain vacant in the mind of man for long. Whether the natural sciences or the all-powerful State, something man-made must take the role left vacant by the crucifixion of God. This has led to the worst totalitarianism, as, while God's laws are immutable, there is no limit to His mercy. However, the State has no mercy; it has no room for forgiveness of 'sins' against political correctness, as the State recognizes no authority outside itself. This is why the authoritarian Godless State has led to the worst atrocities in history: the murder of hundreds of millions with industrial sterility and efficiency.

When you no longer believe in God then you will believe in anything, and everything becomes permissible. If God is not your master than you are a slave to your senses. You are like the addict, the drunkard who cannot control how he drinks, but is controlled by his drinking. When you are free to do anything then you lose all of your freedom, because you are no longer in control of your body, but your body is in control of you. And when your body controls you then you are open to being controlled by the powers that be to fuel their endless lust for more power.

The reverse of nihilism, of "If it bleeds, it leads," is the philosophy of Major Dutch Schaefer: "If it bleeds, we can kill it."



The movie Predator shows us that no matter how powerful the adversary, no matter how hopeless the situation, our enemies are no less mortal than we are, and our troubles can be overcome. We just have to become the best possible version of ourselves. We have to become better than we thought we could be. Dutch didn't win because he was stronger than the Predator, or because he was necessarily smarter either. The Predators are thousands of years ahead of humans, having fully developed interstellar travel, cloaking devices, universal translators, and super medicine that allows for rapid healing of what would otherwise be incapacitating wounds. Dutch was able to win because he was able to exploit the weaknesses of his opponent to his advantage. He may not be smarter, but he can think on his feet and is more adaptable.

This is the philosophy of existentialism. Yes, life is full of suffering, but it is also full of joy, and you're hurting yourself to focus on the suffering while ignoring the joy. There are simple steps to reclaiming your joy and to once again find meaning and purpose in your life. Like everything it all begins with a choice. You have to take control of your own life and reclaim your birthright. You can take your life back because you choose to.

Milton Friedman: Understanding Inflation

Milton Friedman, one of the greatest economists of the 20th century, explains inflation in simple terms that anyone willing can understand.



In case you were wondering the breakdown of Bob Crawford's tax situation, we can use a nifty inflation calculator to find out just how much he's being screwed.

Wages between 1972 and 1978 did not keep up with inflation*, and Mr. Crawford's buying power was lower even though he was making more. His wages did increase from $12,000 a year to $18,000 a year, an increase of $6,000 nominal dollars. However, adjusted for inflation, he was making just under $1,000 less in inflation-adjusted dollars. $12,000 in 1972 would be equivalent to $19,000 in 1978. While his company (which was in bed with the politicians, just as they all are today) did give him more money to make him think he was getting ahead in life, they conveniently gave him less in real terms than he was making before he had gotten the raise. Governments and corporations are demonic bedfellows. And, as if that wasn't enough, he was kicked into a higher tax bracket because his on paper earnings were higher.

Also, $18,000 in 1978 is equal to $70,000 today, and $12,000 in 1972 is equal to $73,000 today. The average wages for tool and die (Bob Crawford's profession) today is $49,000 a year, only 2/3 of what the equivalent job paid in 1972. Nominal wages may have quadrupled, but real wages have been cut nearly in half.

*Wages have not kept up with inflation to this day. In fact one study from the Pew Research Center indicates that real wages have been stagnant for the past 40 years.

The Last Months of Jesus?

Just watched "The Last Days of Jesus" on PBS, a piece of tabloid propaganda by radical Jewish biblical conspiracy theorist Simcha Jacobovici, who sets out in every single thing he creates to "prove" that literally everything about Judaism is true and literally everything about Christianity is fake. He is willing to spin total yarns to "prove" even the most outlandish things to say some Jewish story absolutely happened exactly as it is written, and will go to the same lengths in the opposite direction to paint Jesus as a scheming political opportunist who had children, founded a dynasty in France, died, and rotted in a tomb. It is co-produced by biblical conspiracy theorist James Tabor, who has worked with Jacobovici and naytheist James Cameron before in the past on fantastical tales of biblical revisionism.

The story, like most of the yarns he spins, appears convincing if you don't think about it, but when you apply even the slightest bit of scrutiny it falls apart.

Just one example dismantles the entire central thesis of the program - that Jesus was colluding with Herod Antipas, Pontius Pilate, and Praetoria Prefect Sejanus, in an attempted coup against Tiberius to put Sejanus on the throne of Rome and Herod on the throne of Judea, and to remove Caiaphas from the position as head priest with Jesus taking his place (I kid ye not, that conspiracy theory the central thesis of the program). Allegedly it makes no sense for Jesus to be arrested, tried, and executed in a couple days. That never, ever happened, we are told. It had to take place over six months, because news has to travel across the Mediterranean that Sejaus was executed for treason, which caused Pilate and Antipas to waiver in their scheme. Ten minutes later we are told that Sejanus is arrested, tried for treason, and executed in a single day, as if they hadn't just went to great lengths to explain that these single day show trials never happened and could never happen and that the Gospel accounts had to be wrong.

It also says that the Gospel writers never mentioned Sejanus because "it was extremely dangerous at the time to do so", despite the fact that we know Sejanus existed because at least six contemporaries of the Gospel writers wrote about him. The more likely explanation as to why the Gospel writers don't mention him is because they had no idea who he was because why would they?

The film also includes bull face lies that Jesus was a follower of John the Baptist (he was not), that he took over John the Baptist's movement when John was executed (clearly he did not), that Jesus had no reason to dislike the Pharisees because they all believed in the same things (which they did not), that John the Baptist sprinkled water on people's heads instead of immersing them in water, that first century Jews believed there would be two messiahs* - one a political ruler and one the chief priest.

The film also lies about the Last Supper and even the purpose behind Christianity. They say Jesus wanted us to remember his death, and that this was the foundation of Christianity, when, in truth, it is his resurrection and conquest of death that is the central point of the religion. If Jesus died and rotted in a tomb Christianity would be meaningless and Jesus, who said he would rise again and rise us to eternal life as well, would be a liar. The resurrection IS Christianity. It is the singular event that proves Jesus is who he says he is and that he can free us from sin and death.


*I should point out that the word “messiah” has two different meanings within Judaism, and the producers of this film are suggesting otherwise. The “normal” messiah was any high priest or king who was anointed with holy oil, and even included the gentile Cyrus the Great, who ordered the reconstruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. The Messiah as we know it today, who will appear at the End of Days, descend from the line of David, free the Jews, and preside over the millennial reign was one man who would quite literally appear a the End of Days. There were not going to be two men ruling at the same time, one a priest and one a king, there was just one final liberator of the Jewish people. The confusion arises among people who don't know that the one word can be used in two different ways in two different contexts. The producers of this program are deliberately misleading the public (James Tabor has even written a book offering a different misrepresentation, where Jesus is the king and John the Baptist is the priest!).

Democracy is Moderate Communism

Hans-Hermann Hoppe explains the dangerous conclusion people have drawn from the "Long Peace", the period from the end of the Second World War until today which is characterized as being the longest unbroken stretch of peace in world history, namely that democracy is the cause of that peace. Or, for that matter, that humans are fundamentally more peaceful, or are becoming more peaceful with time, which is the blatant lie perpetuated by Steven Stinker.

Hoppe argues that the Long Peace is nothing more than the Pax Americana. Just as Egypt didn't go to war against Phonecia while they were both Roman colonies, wars in the modern world are kept in check by Team America. As Hoppe says:

"With the end of World War Two, all of Western Europe and Japan and Korea in the Pacific region became part of the United States Empire as is indicated by the presence of United States troops practically everywhere in these countries. Now, what the post-World War Two period of peace then proves is not that democracies do not go to war against each other, but that an imperialist power such as the United States did not let its various colonial parts go to war against each other. You also did not see, by the way, any wars breaking out between all those countries that were dominated by the Soviet Union as the Soviet Empire existed, from which we also do not draw the conclusion that communist dictatorships under Russian control do not against each other, so because of that we have to introduce something like this."

The Reality of Renewables

Physicist David MacKay explains that, while we should do more to increase our usage of renewable energy, at least in the short term it is impossible to get off of fossil fuels as renewable energy really just isn't that efficient. Like I talked about a decade ago (believe it or not) about the myth of corn gasoline and inflating your tires, you would need to devote the land area of a small country to growing biofuels just to replace regular gasoline.

Two Years of Winning

Despite what the nay sayers, doom sayers, fake news, and very fake news will want you to believe, Donald Trump has actually delivered on several of his campaign promises, or, at least he has taken the first step toward delivering on those promises. And while America is not yet great again, we are definitely moving along the right track, and considerable strides have been made in correcting nearly three decades of anti-American policies.

It started with those enemies who opposed Trump. Here was a man who was unbelievably rich, famous the world over, the head of a real estate empire, a reality TV star. A man who has had three beautiful wives, has rose from defeat numerous times, has his name on buildings all over the world, owns solid gold toilets, and has done more to lift New York out of depression and infamy than just about anyone. Like Augustus, he transformed New York from a city of brick to a city of marble when everyone believed it to be a den of drugs and iniquity (along with Ed Koch and Rudy Giuliani). Trump could take anything and turn it into gold.

And then he ran against Clinton, and all of a sudden this 1990s New York liberal became not just an evil right-winger, but "literally Hitler".

His enemies list was tremendous, and it read as a who's who of all the worst people on the planet: Most of the party elite of both political parties (which are nothing more than two of the largest and most influential corporations on the planet), every major media outlet and figure (also corporations), the largest multinational corporations on the planet and their billionaire and trillionaire owners like first generation synth Mark Suckerface, Jeff Bezos, Tim Cook, and that guy from Google with the huge forehead, politicians from the European Union including the oven stuffer and de facto Fourth Reich chancellor Angela Merkin and the communists in France, the leaders of communist China, communists in South and Central America, all of academia (also run by communists), the Bush crime family, the Clinton crime family, the blackshirts known as Antifa, and everyone who believes in "trigger warnings", "safe spaces", and generally ending free speech. It was as if everyone who opposes God and Western Civilization stood up and declared in a single voice that Trump was the antithesis of all that they stood for.

And when Trump adopted a slogan that I had come up with do describe my own ideal presidential platform some years earlier – America First – that just sealed the deal. Sometimes God speaks to you in a still small voice, and at other times he blasts you with a megaphone.

For those who were still unconvinced i spent the better part of 2016 deconstructing Trump's primary opponents, most notably LOLbertarian globalist Gary Johnson and Hitlery Roddamn "Hildabeast" Clinton. Especially the latter. When a political party puts a naked obese man on stage and has him dance at an official function, I think that party is pretty much dead in the water.

This culminated in a 60 hour marathon session, which toward the end began to include hallucinations due to sleep deprivation. During this time I wrote a 5,300 word treatise titled "What is at Stake in the Next Election", a 3,000 word summary, I directly debated maybe 50 people, shitposted on a dozen platforms, and (on The Urban Mystic) reached out to 3,000 people (the equivalent of 3 months of normal traffic). All this was to do my part to convince at least one extra person to vote for Trump. Or, at least to convince opponents that the world was not ending.

Far from it. The truth is we've made tremendous strides and have witnessed what can only be considered miracles. Starting with the election of Donald Trump himself. Billions of dollars were spent trying to keep Trump out of the White House, and looking at all the accomplishments that have strengthened America at the expense of multinational corporations and banks stands as testament it is easy to see why.

In two short years we've seen:

•The start of meaningful prison reform.

Tens of thousands of people stand to benefit from what is appropriately called the "First Step" toward clipping the wings of the for-profit gulag system in America that serves to ruin the lives of ordinary people who have just gotten a bad break, maybe turned to drugs for relief from the pain of a difficult life, and were thrown in a cell where they are forced to become hardened gang members just to survive. Prisons in America turn petty criminals and non-violent offenders into serious criminals. Thousands will be rehabilitated and reintegrated into society and become productive citizens again. Trump is extending Christian mercy to the masses.

•Ending the Korean War

The Korean War began 69 years ago and has still not ended. The war became a stalemate in 1953, it didn't end. In fact, the Korean peninsula stood as the most likely flashpoint for nuclear war (and, by extension, the end of the world). Trump went over there and spoke frankly with Kim Jong Un. He did the one thing none of his predecessors thought to do, negotiate, and he negotiated several monumental steps toward the end of the war. The North Korean nuclear program has been suspended, landmines and other devices of death are being removed from the border, limited movement between the two Koreas has begun. A genuine end to the war is at hand, and the entire world can breathe a lot easier because we have a negotiator in the White House instead of a man who draws meaningless red lines in the sand and then retreats every time someone crosses them.

•Pulling troops out of Syria

Trump is the first president since the end of the Cold War who has not started a new foreign war. Not only that, Trump is the first president since the end of the Cold War to actually work toward ENDING wars his predacessors have started (the Korean War and US involvement in Syria). What does America care about Syria? Assad is a secular, middle of the road guy who protects religious and ethnic minorities in Syria. The "moderate" Islamists Obama wanted to put in power in Syria (and DID put in power in Libya) would have turned the country into yet another Middle East shithole of repression of religion, freedom of speech, and human rights. ISIS has been defeated and Trump can pull the US out of Syria with dignity and allow the Syrian people to live in peace under the stable hand of Assad. All of the allegedly anti-war people who protested under Bush now, not-so-mysteriously worship war and adventurism and Team America policing the world all because Trump opposes pointless wars. "Orange man bad" is the sum total of their thinking. Trump could cure cancer and half the nation would hate him for putting doctors out of business.

•Best economy since 1999

Since the Dot Com crash America's economy has been on the down trend. It is now starting to rise up again. While the stock market is not the economy it is still a useful metric. We've seen the largest growth in the markets of all time. GDP has seen growth in excess of 3.5% and even 4% for several quarters, something that was considered impossible.

•Lowest black unemployment ever

So much for Trump the racist. If it wasn't for "minorities" disaffected by the Democrats failure to lift them out of poverty for decades Trump would not have been elected. Trump got the largest share of minority voters of any Republican ever, and he is paying dividends. Trump is listening to the plight of minority groups, and he is doing everything corrupt courts and legislatures will allow him to do to help the people who elected him.

•Lowest general unemployment since 2000

I can personally attest to this one. Real jobs are starting to replace McJobs, factories are starting to move back to America. America is on track to seeing the lowest unemployment since 1969. Workforce participation is at 63%, just under the 67% from 2000. Trump is creating an economic climate that is encouraging job growth. Wage growth is still stagnant, unfortunately, but Trump is definitely putting people back to work, and that's a good first step.

•Killing the individual mandate

The grossly illegal, immoral, unconstitutional individual mandate of Obamacare was killed by executive fiat during the first days of the Trump presidency. Now healthy individuals who may be strapped for cash in the "new" economy no longer have to buy insurance with a $5,000 deductible that no one who doesn't have Cancer or a catastrophic injury would ever use up. The only point of Obamacare's individual mandate, which illegally forced people to purchase a product from a corporation, was to line the pockets of Obama's billionaire donors and to make him look like the messiah for allegedly helping the poor by gutting the middle class. Trump saved poor and middle class people thousands of dollars every year by not forcing them at gun-point to purchase insurance they cannot use and that many of whom do not need.

•Tax cuts for lower and middle class

Need more proof that Trump loves the poor? He cut taxes. I've explained before, raising taxes doesn't work, and it certainly doesn't harm "the rich" because 1. people only want to increase income tax while rich people don't make their money through income, and 2. rich people always find loopholes so they don't pay taxes anyway. Taxes hurt the poor and middle class, and in cutting taxes Trump has helped put more money into the pockets of millions of ordinary people.

•Two Supreme Court justices, with number 3 on the way

Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh have successfully been added to the bench thanks to the gross meddling of the Democrats that changed the rules of how justices are elected or selected or appointed or whatever. This has opened up the floodgates for Trump to stack the bench and control the judicial climate of America for the next 30 years. With Ruth "The Mummy" Bader Ginsburg ready to keel over any time soon Trump will get a third appointment and steps can then be taken to overturn the cultural decay that legislating from the bench has done over a generation. It will be a return to Constitutional governance.

•Recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital

So much for Trump the anti-Semite, Trump as "literally Hitler" and a Nazi. Presidents of old have vowed to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital, but none of them have had the balls. Either that or, more likely, those promises were lies to win over the hearts of what was at the time America's religious majority. Jerusalem is without question Israel's capital. All the governing bodies have resided in Jerusalem for decades. It is asinine to assert that a nation cannot declare its own capital within the land that it rightfully possesses. It is nothing more than anti-Jewish propaganda by the surrounding Islamist nations and communists within Europe and other tin horn banana republics around the world to blame Israel or the Jews for any of the problems of the Middle East. Trump is quite literally doing God's work. As sane, rational atheist Pat Condell states "All anyone needs to know about the Middle East conflict is that the Jews want peace and the Arabs don't, because the Arabs hate Jews for religious reasons, and they want them dead."

•Killing TPP

NAFTA 2.0, which threatened to kill job growth in America permanently so the modern day robber barons could make money off of literal slave labor in China or Vietnam, was killed definitively by Trump. He has even begun to strike back against the trade imbalances imposed on the US by the likes of China and Mexico with tariffs and a re-negotiated NAFTA that have put real pressure on these mafia states. Trump did not start a trade war, he inherited the trade war that was created after the end of the Cold War when the US decided it no longer needed to compete in the world economy and could let everyone else grow rich off our spoils. And Trump is the first president in the 28 years since the fall of the USSR who has taken a decidedly pro-American stance on world trade.

Trump is far from perfect, and one can conclude that it is only by some miracle that he has accomplished all this despite all the obstacles in the world being thrown at him. It is a good start, and it gives me hope for the future for what Trump can accomplish in the next six years he has in office.