Fine shared lie
Headline in UK Telegraph: Bennett believes Britain should appease Putin. [Bennett is apparently some sort of politician; doesn't really matter.]

Classic example of a Shared Lie. Everyone accepts a shared lie as absolute fact, and then everyone has Robust Debates about whether we should respond to the "fact" with $999,999,999.9 trillion of wasted money and lives or only $999,999,999.8 trillion of wasted money and lives.

Everyone agrees that RussiaAggression started WW3. Everyone agrees that Nudelman Pyatt War Partners LLC set up the coup in Ukraine as a Time-reversed Response to future RussiaAggression against Ukraine. The coup wasn't a war-starting action because RussiaAggression had already started the war in the future. Similar to the way modern carbon emissions cause all warming episodes in the history of the world.

Thus everyone also agrees that RussiaAggression started WW1 and WW2, and RussiaAggression attacked France in 1812. Germany and Japan and France were just innocent pacifist victims minding their own business and knitting delicate stockings, when RussiaAggression aggressively aggressed them into huge world aggression wars of aggression RussiaAggression aggression aggression.

These truths are self-evident, like gravity.

Well then, was this unfortunate Bennett disagreeing with gravity? Was she unfurling Neville's umbrella? Of course not. Inconceivable. She was only saying that UK/US/EU might spend a minute or two talking with RussiaAggression before we bomb RussiaAggression down to bedrock for starting all wars in history including the Big Bang.

And this, of course, is also inconceivable. You can't insert irrelevant subjects like negotiation in a Robust Debate. If you're going to participate, you must propose MORE bombs and bullets and troops than the last speaker, and then the next speaker must propose MORE bombs and bullets and troops than you did. Robust Debates are auctions to bid up the cost of the war, and thus bid up the budget of the Defense Department and the profits of the Defense Contractors and the share value of NudelmanPyatt War Partners LLC.

Labels: Shared Lie

  ¶ 5:05 PM

  Hard to make metaphors for infinite lunacy
Stupidly watched a few minutes of replays from the latest "debate". This is crazy beyond crazy beyond crazy.

As always in a "debate", the participants are not arguing two sides, they're bidding up the strength of one side. "Debates" are auctions. In this auction, each bidder takes a turn at bidding up the need to impeach Trump. Why do they want to impeach Trump? Because he was pretending to "investigate" an ordinary bit of corruption. Who caused this unremarkable bit of standard DC corruption? Biden.

Hmm. I guess this Biden fellow must be out of politics, safely insulated from the discussion of his corruption.

No! Wait! Biden is right there on stage along with the bidders! He's joining in the bidding!

Best analogy for this craziness: A jury trial with the defendant serving in the jury. The defendant turns the trial around to convict the cops for arresting him.

Labels: infinite infinite infinite infinite infinite infinite infinite INFINITE INFINITE INFINITE INFINITE INFINITE INFINITE INFINITE lunacy

  ¶ 2:24 AM

  From an extremely different era 8
Spiked UK continues carrying the torch, comparing today's totally synchronized world tyranny with the '30s. I've made the same comparison often. In the '30s, and even during WW2 with strict official censorship, a much wider range of opinions was available on major media, and varying opinions were treated objectively.

The FCC's Fairness Doctrine made diversity MANDATORY in radio. A station that carried editorial material for one side had to carry the other side as well.

Here's an example that recently appeared on American Radio History. A 1933 brochure from WHB in KC, touting both jazz and Father Coughlin, without tinfoiling either one. Coughlin lost his popularity later because FDR was ACTUALLY IMPROVING THINGS, not because he was censored. No politician in US or UK can possibly be guilty of IMPROVING THINGS now. All politicians eagerly bid up the holocaust killcount in "Debates" that are really auctions. And FDR was ACTUALLY IMPROVING THINGS because counterforces were allowed to exist, and allowed to run candidates. Negative feedback is necessary for life. Positive feedback is death.

Newspapers didn't have a Fairness Doctrine, but they had real competition in most places. Every town with more than 400 people had one paper, and towns above 2000 had two papers. Each paper was openly and proudly labeled with its partisan preference, so you knew what you were buying. Consistent brands, no Gotchas. After 1960 all papers converged to Deepstate.

Labels: Alternate universe, Equipoise, Pluponents

  ¶ 5:19 AM

  Wrong question
There's a new and pointless "debate" about eugenics, apparently started by Universal Idiot Dawkins.

Pointless because the "debate" is happening in Sorosian countries where the governments have already decided the question. At the leading edge of Sorosia, in places like California and Belgium and UK, eugenics is solidly allowed and moving fast toward required.

The non-Soros countries, led by Russia, are moving fast in the other direction.

Eugenics is just one of many symptoms of Sorositis. Arguing against it is like trying to affect the natural weather cycle by restricting CO2. Wrong end of the process.

The question under "debate" is:

How many oddballs should we kill?

= = = = =

As always, "Robust Debates" are auctions where both "sides" bid up the kill count.

The religious "side" says we should only kill some oddballs as a first step. The Dawkins "side" says we should kill more than all oddballs immediately.

Here's the real question:

Do we want civilization or not?

= = = = =

Civilization, as defined by God, makes places for all sorts of productive talents and tastes and tendencies, but punishes or eliminates people who persistently attack and kill others.

Eugenics is NOT about eliminating killers. The backers of eugenics are EXPLICITLY against punishing professional criminals.

How do we make civilization? How do we make places where many types of non-destructive people can be useful? First we need to have lots of PLACES. Separate places. Modularity. Sovereign countries, semi-sovereign provinces and cities, separated neighborhoods, businesses that can operate solely in separated neighborhoods without predation from globalized monsters.

The non-Soros side of the world is moving toward sovereignty at all levels, and trying to block globalized monsters.

Labels: Jail mode, Natural law = Sharia law, Natural law = Soviet law, skill-estate

  ¶ 11:23 PM

  Illuminating
An illuminating comparison with modern shit. In late '43, in the middle of a REAL war that was NECESSARY and not obviously successful, CBS announced that it would try to mute the opinions of its commentators.

Other networks responded fiercely, partly from a normal competitive drive and partly from honest passion.

Billboard asked various executives and commentators to respond, and printed their responses in this issue and this issue. The responses are on page 8 of both PDFs.

I won't bother to show or quote any single item because the full picture is vital. You can see the functioning of an UNOWNED CONVERSATION, a REAL DEBATE between OPPOSING opinions. Our modern Owned CONversations and Robust Debates are one-directional PLUPONENT AUCTIONS to increase the purity of Sorosian orthodoxy and the torture and punishment of heretics.

I've listened to a lot of WW2 radio news, and my impression is that CBS was consistently the MOST open to real variance of opinion, despite its announcement in '43. CBS did the best job of showing its work, letting the listener in on the mechanics of newsgathering and writing.

Labels: Alternate universe, Pluponents

  ¶ 12:13 AM

  Silicon Kansas
One of Berenson's commenters asks how we refute the "But Science Says" crap.

Well, there's no rebutting in a modern Robust Debate. Robust Debates are always auctions to bid up the killcount. This has been going on for a long time.

But if we imagine a real debate where arguments can be answered by arguments, and people are attempting to learn from discussion:

The rebuttal is super-simple. Any idea or proposal that pops up out of nowhere and claims to solve a problem is NOT SCIENCE. The lockdown DID NOT COME from public health professionals. It came from China where it was used for a POLITICAL purpose, and it is a classic tactic of WAR, not HEALTH. A state of siege is fully familiar to soldiers and military historians. It's an efficient way to kill a territory or city without wasting bullets and bombs.

Real science, especially the ACTIVE side of science, has NOTHING TO DO with ideas or theories or models. Public health belongs to the active side of science, which means it's ENGINEERING.

Previous generations understood that real science proceeds by gradual trial and error. I think Silicon Valley has twisted and flipped our understanding. We've been conditioned to think that anything NEW and UNPRECEDENTED and DESTRUCTIVE is science, and anything OLD and BORING and PRODUCTIVE is denialism.

Terms like Creative Destruction and Innovative Disruption are the weapons of this flip. Both are simply false. Destruction is destruction, whether you call it creative or not. Disruption is disruption, whether you call it innovative or not.

The states dominated by Silicon Valley are the hardest and most murderous holocausters.

The test case for this correlation is Kansas. The other plains states carried on the 'frontier spirit', which means simply MYOB. Modularity. Let people do what they want in their own bodies or houses or fences, until they try to rob you or kill you. From Wyoming to Texas, most of them held back the holocaust. Kansas clamped down early and long.

Kansas started out with more NYC globalism than the others, as I've described often. The Eastern founders were EXACT ANCESTORS of today's Silicon Valley types. Vegan sexless IPO scammers, genocidal pacifists. The NYC spirit waned as real agriculture came to dominate, but the recent growth in Kansas has been in the new** hi-tech corridor from Manhattan to Lawrence to Overland Park. The current governpersonindividual is clearly all Silicon Valley, all Woke.

** Not coincidentally, the same as the old NYC corridor. The NYC colonizers came up the Mississippi, then west on the Missouri, then west on the Kaw until the steamboats ran aground, depositing settlements along the Kaw. The western end of navigation was the junction of Wildcat and Kaw, which is where the original townsite of Polistra was placed.

Labels: Carver, Constants and Variables

  ¶ 10:29 AM