So I watched this whole black and white documentary on training G.I.s for using the Colt 1911 in WW2. Here is a clip of it.
It really is quite good.
Modern gun guys will probably make fun of it, or say it’s bad in many respects, but the reality is most of those guys have no clue about training people in anything, much less firearm use where you get to have each guy get a chance to shoot a grand total of about two magazines’ worth of ammo, that is, less than 20 rounds each. When many of the guys never fired a handgun before.
The point shooting advice of keeping the gun in line with the locked arm and using the shoulder to point the whole arm at the target is an effective way of getting a brand new gun virgin to have some chance of actually hitting what he’s going for.
If you notice the tracer rounds used, most of the guys are really doing quite well shooting out to 50, 25 and 15 yards. In fact I would say most of them do better than your average guy you see at the range who is not a regular but rather an occasional shooter.
The full video is here and I have to say I even got into the VoiceOver and generic attitude of the video. It’s quite entertaining really.
Here is one scenario no one thought about (and I don’t think it’s all that likely at all, but it’s good to keep options open when things are uncertain).
Remember how some said Putin too was just part of the whole Satanic control both teams to always win the game?
Well… what if, the whole Israel thing is a distraction to get Ukraine to kind of lose and disappear as an actual country, and then Israel is to be attacked by almost the entire Muslim world, just so Israeli Jews can go: “We need help, we’ll go to Ukraine!” And Putin, being all anti-Nazi, as he has been, can hardly refuse to let the poor, new holocaust victims settle in now totally de-nazified Ukraine. And all of a sudden the Jews now have their Greater Israel, just as they sort of told us they wanted. And access to the entire “financial aid” of the West, who will be compelled to finance the poor, starving, war refugees with their small hats. And Russia too will finance them, because hey, poor Jews. And besides, those evil Muslims destroyed Israel, so we can now continue the endless war against them, gotta keep those war profiteering things and dead white boys going somehow.
Few activities generate as many cretins with “tough man” bullshit syndrome as:
Martial Arts
Pick-Up-Artists
Guns (by people who have never actually been in a gunfight, nor worked with a gun especially, but not limited to them.)
On my piece on the Colt 1911 allow me to introduce you to the illiterate retard, Thomas Ramsey of [email protected] those of you who agree with him, feel free to write to him and join a mutual admiration society. Those who do not agree with him, you may be entertained by the Kurganing about to take place below his now immortalised comments.
Using the same kind of analysis we had on my post of the fed-commenter on the video about Bombard’s body language reading, we will now dissect this living specimens of Professor Cipolla’s undying truth about the human condition.
Thomas never learnt to read for comprehension. This is clear. Thomas is probably one of those people that can’t form abstract thoughts nor imagine what he would feel like if he had not had breakfast this morning. Google that sort of thing, you will find some fun facts about IQ and how people think. Especially if you look at 4 Chan sites.
Was it hard to understand what I wrote Thomas? Did it hurt your brain and make you drool extra or bite your tongue as you scrolled your finger painfully on the screen to keep your place?
First of all, let us some hard data that incontrovertibly makes it clear that the most important aspect of an actual gunfight is… drum roll… shot placement!
Which also, incidentally, shows that basically people who shoot 9mm DO in fact spray and pray, and as a result miss more than people who use a revolver in .44 magnum or .357 magnum, who get far more consistent results of one shot stops.
So, there is that. Secondly, Thomas there, Tommy, I’m gonna call you Tommy, since you have the brain of a small, excitable child, who thinks Hollywood is reality. Thomas also thinks that if you are capable of doing double taps with a pretty near-certainty of death for the assailants at the usual handgun ranges at which firefights happen, even if there were more than three assailants, the remaining ones would just stand about and carry on returning fire.
Especially since in 99.99% of cases, as I explained in the original post I would have got the drop on them, since I was “part of the scenery” and not in any way obviously with the client team. He also assumes that Hollywood shootouts in the style of Heat (the film) are how things work out in the real world. It’s not.
The reasoning I had was very simple. With my 6 shot revolver in .357 magnum, the most likely scenario would be the first shot would immediately drop one guy, then depending on number of people, the next four shots would likely drop two more at least, which left me one shot as I then looked for cover. Total time to shoot those five shots would be about 2 seconds at most, or there about, even if the targets were pretty spaced out. That’s enough to pretty much dominate the environment of a gunfight. Especially since the first guy dropping was pretty much guaranteed as I would have surprise.
But, all that aside, and going back to the original post, I thought it was fairly obvious even to lost tribes in the Amazon, that the point of the post was not that the 1851 Navy is THE “operator” weapon of choice, or that the Colt 1911 is, but merely that I liked them.
What part of this sentence hurt you and made you shied away from it in fear Thomas?
Coming from a family of hunters and familiar with pretty much all aspects of shooting, meant that in general I would subjugate my personal preferences to functionality.
Aside from the fact you obviously did not understand my role, the situation, the parameters, or the work I used to do, despite my detailing it quite clearly, you obviously also missed the fact that I specifically stated that my personal preference in a context where I expect actual trouble are irrelevant. Meaning quite clearly I would use whatever tool was deemed best for the job. People who read English at a basic level understood this. You did not. That tells us quite a bit bout you Thomas. And your inadequacies. And possibly your genetic make-up as far as IQ goes.
Thomas then goes on to show that once more, he did not understand at all, anything I wrote. The scenario of “high as a kite” was not ever really a factor. We worked for extremely wealthy individuals, the shadiest of whom had rivals of an equally wealthy, or close to it, lifestyle. The attempts we did have were from well-organised criminals with a plan, although, ultimately not as organised as we were when I was in the team, since the only time one of our clients got hit (no bodies, just common robbery of a lot of cash) was the one time I was not on the team and they went and did their own thing under-staffed. The other times, guess who warned everyone of an impending attack? Yup. Me. And frankly, a high-on-drugs thing was not really much of an occurrence anywhere in South Africa in the mid 1990s. If it had been, he would have simply got Swiss-cheesed by the combined firepower of everything from our team to most bystanders since the incidence of armed citizens stopping armed criminals in SA was one of the highest in the world.
But all that aside, yes a Central Nervous System hit under duress is precisely what I trained for. And yes, I have had occasion to react under high stress situations enough times to know that in such cases, my movement only becomes absolutely more accurate than even when I am NOT under stress. Nor can I put that down to training alone, although training helps. I just seem to have been wired that way from birth. And I really don’t care what you believe Thomas. Because you are a nobody, with no real world experience nor any inkling of my actual life or abilities or realities I lived through. You’re a plastic cut-out of a loudmouth idiot who is (as usual) blathering on about things he has zero practical experience or knowledge of, and tries to pass off his YouTube/Hollywood/James Patterson fiction as though it were real life experience. It isn’t Thomas. It’s just you bullshitting yourself first and foremost, and then trying to gaslight everyone around you too, into thinking you know something about anything. You don’t. You’re too stupid to read a few paragraphs and comprehend them, so what are the chances you actually know anything about real world gunfights?
And goys, goys, remember! Seals don’t go around carrying 1911s! Yeah man, because Thomas here is JUST like an OPERATOR MAN. Like in the war! That’s how he lives in the mean streets man!
And of course, Navy Seals DID use Colt 1911s up until 1986, when the US Military mostly switched to the 9mm Beretta.
Not that that is any kind of point. The reality is that at least until the Zombie Apocalypse, Thomas is about as likely to use, or need to use his firearm, as an Eskimo is to use a ballista. But you can bet your last doughnut that Thomas will tell you all about how the latest ballista is far superior to the one used by the Romans, because OPERATOR REASONS.
And his fluid pressure drop comment… Where do I begin? No Thomas. There are PLENTY of faster ways for a person to be incapacitated a lot faster than bleeding out. Massive trauma to pretty much any part of your body tends to shut down main systems. A broken neck or spine will immediately make you into a rag doll or at least a partial rag doll that falls to the ground. And again, the resulting shock from that is enough to get most people out of the fight long enough you can pepper them with more shots at will even if it was “just” their legs they can’t use anymore. A shot to the face, even one that doesn’t immediately kill you, from a .357 magnum with Cor-Bons or hydro-shock, which is what I carried, is also not going to let you just carry on firing away with abandon while retaining your composure. You’d be lucky to survive it, but you can bet you’d be thinking about God, your mommy and possibly emptying your bladder as you prayed while trying to keep your eyeball/teeth/brain, from leaking out your new and improved ear-hole. Assuming you’d even be conscious, of course.
Do you see how tiring these retards are?
They can’t read.
They can’t understand basic concepts.
They watch some tiktok video and think they now have the combined expertise on firearms of a seasoned special ops soldier, and a master gunsmith.
And then they open their stupid mouths and spread their idiocy into the world.
To what end? None. None that is useful or good anyway, because their only aim is to feel IMPORTANT. Precisely in direct proportion to their absolute worthlessness as a human being.
Which explains why they are so loud and insistent.
As mentioned en passant on a previous post on the infiltrators, a lot of so-called “red-pilled” or MRA (Men’s Rights Activists), or PUA or MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way [incels for short]), or general inches and embittered “men”, make the mistake of assuming I am “one of them” or at least “nominally” on their side.
And ALL the embittered, acidic feminists, as well as the generally brainwashed females of planet Earth assume I am just a misogynist, EEEEBIL (yes with a B, because they are retards after all) woman-hater, patriarchal, oppressor of women everywhere.
And of course, before we delve into this topic at all, let us say a prayer of thanks to the Saintly Professor Cipolla and his first Law of Human Stupidity:
1. Always and inevitably, each of us underestimates the number of stupid individuals in the world
That there are stupid people in the world is well known. But Cipolla was convinced that we underestimated their number and influence in our lives and in society. He stated that “any numerical estimate would prove to be an underestimate”.
It’s enough thinking, for example, of those people we classified as intelligent but who suddenly begin to behave in a foolish and obtuse manner. Or it’s enough going out to the street to see how many people insist on hindering us, for no apparent reason other than stupidity.
Ave professor, Ave.
Armed with his fundamental concept, let us then proceed to discuss in a little more detail my actual take on women.
Very simply put, it is simply Catholic. As we give respect and reverence to Holy Mary, mother of our Lord and Saviour, without any shame or discomfort as experienced by Protestants, who seem to think to do so is somehow “worship” or “unmanly”, so Mary reflects the natural positive aspects of womanhood in general.
The demonic secularisation of Christianity, also known primarily as Protestantism, has caused incalculable damage to humanity over the last 500 years, culminating (and not yet at the apex) in today’s absolutely insane ideology of madness, where even something as absolutely obvious as the sex of a man or woman is “questioned” by the freaks trying to groom children into their disgusting sexual deviancy.
Since time immemorial, however, every sane and normal human being, yes, even the stupid ones, was perfectly aware that men and women are different on every level. Not just physiologically, but also and inevitably psychologically, because after all, form does follow function and mentality follows both form and function. Their different bodies mean also different ways of being, thinking and experiencing reality. The physical structures of a woman’s brain are also physically different from those of a man, and obviously, this too influences their thinking process.
In broad terms (and it bores me to death to have to explain BASIC statistics to retards, so do catch up if you don’t understand what that three word sentence means) we can say that women:
Are less Logical
Are more prone to being emotional
Respond more to Rhetoric than Dialectic
Have shifting hormonal patterns that greatly influence their moods
Are more nurturing and less combative
Tend to nag and complain instead of resolving issues (because it irritates the men into doing whatever it is… eventually)
Tend to want to be “listened to” more than “fixing” the issue
Are more verbal than men
Are absolutely more solipsistic than men
Have a completely different concept of things like Honour, Courage, Friendship, Loyalty, and so on than men do
These are simply observable facts. It really doesn’t matter if you agree or not, if you like it or not, if you understand it or not. the Universe, (and me) really don’t care if you can’t grasp the basic reality placed in front of your nose.
But does the above mean I see women as “useless” or less worthy of men, or that they are somehow inferior?
The ultimate answer is simply: No.
Are women less able than men? Sure, in a BUNCH of things. Pretty much anything requiring physical strength, iron-clad logic (especially under duress) or non-solipsistic abstract thought, they are at a massive disadvantage.
BUT.
And it’s an important but, a feminine woman makes life worth living for a man. Her loving tenderness, her animalistic instinct (acted on in the positive) will produce a sensation of care, love and attention to detail that a man simply would not even think of, but is absolutely able to appreciate and enjoy. The devotion of a woman in love with a man can be insane to the point of self-immolation in a way that goes beyond the rational and conscious self-sacrifice that a man may (and should for the right woman) have towards his woman. They are able to suffer day-to-day grinds that are as detrimental to a man as attempting to be a coal miner would be to a woman. A perfect example I recall that explain this is the one of a Southern Belle recounting the time her husband went to do a shopping trip in a supermarket for the first time. And consider these two had been married a long time and have grandchildren. She said when her husband came home with the shopping, he dropped the bags off then immediately went to his wife and thanked her profusely and hugged and her and told her how much he appreciates and loves her for doing all the shopping for all the years they were together. I laughed when she told the story, and she was of good humour telling it. And it absolutely represents the natural instincts of a man and a woman. A woman actually (probably? Almost?) enjoys going shopping. Especially if not rushed and able to buy what she wants without worrying too much about budgeting (but, conversely, they are also good at budgeting if they are provided parameters). While a man is just as likely to prefer being in a trench in a bloody war than traipse at funeral speed through endless shelves of despair and soul-crushing routine.
Her caring and listening to every little issue her little children tell her about is a necessary and important part of their feeling loved and cared for. Of course, a father too should never ignore his children, but let’s say that my enthusiasm for their showing me their scribbles “art” wanes somewhat at the 14th example. On the other hand, when it will be time to teach them to drive, or handle a firearm, or discuss the Illiad, or the principles of astronomy, or how a star works, and so on, they will find it difficult to have a more enthusiastic teacher than their father. And this balance, this being present in both the day-to-day minutiae, as well as the life-defining aspects, balanced between both father and mother is pivotal in having healthy childhood. It is indispensable. And yes, it is true that statistically, single mothers turn out far worse prospects for their children than single fathers, because an objective understanding of the Universe is gained primarily from the father, and not having a good grasp of that invariably leads you to bad choices in life. But the absence of motherly love can also result in an austere, somewhat desertic, self-evaluation that is not healthy, especially if that man or woman in turn goes on to become a parent.
Just like I do not think less of a man that has no warrior instinct, because he has the soul of a painter, of maybe of a farmer, I do not think less of women for their different skills and abilities. I cannot give birth to a child, nor would I ever want to, and I am infinitely grateful that women can and do this.
In short, when it comes to dealing with the world, it is just, proper and normal that the man leads in this. And leads absolutely in extreme situations. The reason is obvious: A man (if he is worthy of the name) is more objective, is more logical, is instinctively designed to put his family first and himself last in situations of extreme danger or even death. And in general, being non-solipsistic is better able to plan ahead and for the future of his family, children and wife, without being as easily swayed by temporary set-backs, difficulty or hardship.
And it is also just and proper that, generally speaking, if a woman wants a specific set of plates or layout of a room, (as long as certain basic practicalities are not ignored) or detail of their home life to be just so, that she should feel free to have it her way. The exception, of course, is any specifically male space the man has in the house, and/or, the in any way messing with his tools/weapons/workshop/study/books.
Similarly, a child is far more appreciative of the general attentiveness his mother gives to things like the clothes they wear, the school lunches she prepares for them, and so on. While a man’s general attitude is more akin to: Is it snowing? Here is a huge weatherproof jacket, boots and gloves and a hat. So what if it’s bright yellow, the boots are pink and the hat green with a pom-pom? Packed lunch? What, you can’t catch something and cook it over an open flame? What do they even teach you at kindergarten anyway?
The balance between a man and a woman is delicate, but not so delicate as you may think. It is increasingly difficult in the modern era mostly because of the degrees of lies that women have had inculcated in their heads (it’s easier to fool a woman with nonsense aimed at her solipsistic nature inspiring a victim complex, since it uses her own biological weaknesses against her). And of course, men have been lied to as well, using the same “chink in their armour” of “well, just man up”, which in a way is true, however, actually manning up, would probably look more like an armed rebellion that hangs all politicians from the nearest lampposts, rather than a peaceful demonstration about men’s rights that achieves precisely nothing. Instead they try and convince men to just shut up and take whatever new emasculating, humiliation ritual they come up with while convincing women that they are poor, oppressed victims of sexist men.
It’s all lie. Men’s natural instinct is to protect and take care of women’s primary needs. And women’s natural instinct is to nurture, feed and take care of her man’s secondary needs of comfort, peace and tenderness.
A very feminine woman and a very masculine man will feel a natural attraction to one another, but if you think the modern world is in any way conducive to their finding peaceful bliss right off the bat, you’re dreaming. The path to that has to be consciously chosen by both. Held to firmly by the man and eventually understood and appreciated by the woman too. In fact, the natural dynamic between the manly man and the womanly woman, was always a spark-filled dynamic since ancient times. The stories could as easily result in tragedy as in heroic bliss. Perhaps more often tragic in fact, if the ancient poems and legends are to be believed. Even so, the risk, for those men willing to take it, always seems worthwhile to them, it’s just that in modern times, the “crazy” of the feminine woman has risen exponentially and has far more paths to lead down nefarious ends. Which means the man must have all the more resolve, calm and steadiness in all things. A man’s strength lies in his willingness and ability to simply walk away if a when a woman is unwilling to listen to reason. Not as a ploy, not in anger, not as some kind of “game” theory. But simply, as just the truth of life. Hard as it may be; painful as it may be; if and when you have determined what is the ultimate truth of a situation, you are best served by taking the objective course of action that follows from it. Because in the end, that is the path you will be most able to live with in your own dark moments. The Ancients Greeks at Delphi said:
“Man, know thyself.” And they were right. I would add, “And act accordingly.”
In the end, if a man is simply coherent, consistent and true to himself, I guarantee a woman that fits with him exists in the world, and his chances of getting with her and eventually finding a lasting happiness with her are far better than if he simply tries to modify himself to try to fit with what he perceives is “expected” of him.
Fuck what the “world” wants. Let the world worry about how to fit to truth, justice and beauty instead, while you hold to those things and navigate life by them.
Remember, as Catholicism clearly states, we live in the world, but do not be of it. As a man, it is your duty to live, aspire to, and inspire in others, the virtues of life. Truth, Justice, Honour, Courage, Beauty.
Hold that line, friend.
Hold that line as surely and as absolutely as your Spartan ancestors held theirs, at Thermopylae. And let your stance reflect, and reverberate, and shape history, and inspire men for thousands of years to come, no matter what the specific fate of your individual life might be.
Coincidentally to my own piece on the lefty rapist types that are frenzy-whipped by the shrews in their life, Vox posted the response of a CEO of a comics publishing house to the suggestions that Chuck Dixon, an iconic comic book creator, should be deplatformed for… reasons. I have no idea. I don’t care at all. I read plenty of comic books as a teenager and earlier and the ones I liked best would probably get people jail time today.
Jonah Hex was my favourite one of the I think they are silver age comics we used to have hundreds of before my dad got rid of them all after we left home. It’s why I don’t feel bad he helped me buy this farm. If he hadn’t chucked those out I probably would have been okay getting it on my own. Maybe ten years ago.
Interestingly, DC also made a roleplaying game that my brother and I briefly owned and it had little cards for each of the DC heroes, that included a motivation for each one of them. Jonah Hex’s was correct: Seeking Justice. It’s why that character resonated with me so much. I think if I were reduced to a cardboard cutout that would be my primary motivation too. And as it was a Western, Jonah blasted a few bad guys per episode. The themes were quite adult and the writer of the stories was brilliant. Jonah Hex was discontinued and then they kind of did to him in real life what happens to him in the comic book. In a future he gets wormholes into, Jonah finds out his own body was embalmed as a circus attraction. Well, the subsequent restart attempts and the film made were kinda that. Whoever wrote those stories and film should be horse-whipped.
Aaaaanny way, I digress, the point is the CEO of the publishing house producing the latest Chuck Dixon comic told the entire woke world to go pound sand. And then cry a bit and pound it a bit more.
Good. And so should say all of us to every insane, retarded, Satanic, nonsense that is currently being peddled by the perennially offended. Common sense needs to prevail and courtesy and good manners be reserved for those who deserve it and earn it.
To the screeching “social justice”, cultural marxist, types trying to convince your three year old son that he can become a girl or that your three year old daughter can become a boy, we should have a resounding: “Fuck right off, groomer!” ringing in their ears until they disappear back into whatever festering hellhole they climbed out of.
And it should be loud and clear and backed up by legislation, and penalties, and consequences. These toxic excuses for “equality” in the name of “respect” and “fairness for all” are really evil. There is no other word for it. they intend to do harm and they do. The last thing they do is respect anyone, or try to be fair. They, in fact, are the very worst little tyrants, and everyone normal has had enough. So it’s time to put the mentally ill, the unbalanced, the insane, and the intentionally evil child predators back into proper health care, be that a mental institution, a home for the criminally insane, or being noted as a potentially unstable person that an eye should be kept on, for their own safety and that of others.
While I think this advice may well be positively life-changing, especially for younger men, but men in general, let’s first point out some things that should be obvious to all, but probably aren’t, so bear with me with the disclaimers for a second.
This advice is primarily for men. It certainly does not apply to women in anything to the same degree, and there are lots of reasons for this but let’s look at the main 2.
Women are solipsistic by nature, so they hardly ever take on board criticism, valid or invalid.
The social interactions relating to men are critical from both men and women, while the social interactions for women tend to be politely suggestive from men, or typically, completely positive gaslighting from other women. See this humours clip to understand.
As a result, the advice provided here applies to women only rarely.
2. General common sense (which is exceedingly rare) should prevail. Some criticisms are obviously valid, but these tend to be of the extreme nature pretty much everyone is already aware of, including the perpetrator (don’t rob little old ladies, don’t do drugs, steal, etc. etc. etc.) the advice here is primarily related to more general and widespread life choices, your career, job, relationship/s (of various types) and so on.
3. I am not your dad. Ultimately you make your own choices and suffer their consequences or gain from their benefits. Ultimately, all responsibility for your actions rests with you. This is ALWAYS the case. Always.
Ok, now that we got that out the way, let’s get into the meat of this.
For the most part, men, and moreso the younger ones, have been thoroughly dipped in absolute bullshit narratives from birth.
Now, don’t go feeling particularly special, everyone on this planet has been lied to massively from birth, about pretty much everything, and the only way you may begin to see some truth here and there is by studying history. Not the prescribed narrative you have been told to believe in primary school, and later all higher education, but rather the real history, as documented at the time. Do your own investigations into things that interest you. One down side of realising you have been lied to is that as soon as enough people begin to figure out the truth about a few things, like say:
And many, many, many other topics, you invariably get the screeching harpies of complete bafflegarble idiocy, lies, and outright intimidation based on getting you cancelled, fired, and demonised or even physically assaulted and killed. We are referring of course, to absolutely dishonest things like:
Antifa in any form
Social Justice being about any kind of Justice
BLM in any form relating to any kind of Justice
Feminism being a good thing
Flat Earth
Equality being real
Diversity being a strength
The immigration of “poor war victims” instead of fighting age males by the millions from cultures that are incompatible with the civilised west
All cultures and all religions being equivalent in morals, ethics, and civilising value
And on, and on, and on, of course.
On top of that, men have now been percolating in the nonsensical invention of radical feminists and cultural marxists: “toxic masculinity”.
Should you be a normal man, interested in, for example, hunting or exploring remote areas; learning to use weapons or practicing martial arts; studying historical conflicts, human biodiversity and different cultures; noticing the differences between men and women, and cultures and cultures, religions and religions, chastising weak, cowardly, lying men, and teaching your sons honour, courage, and anything from handling woodworking tools to shooting a rifle, you are most likely going to be labelled as some kind of violent monster that hates women, homosexuals, likes to torture animals for fun and is a sociopath. It is, of course, complete nonsense, and accusations that only radicalised feminists, virulently and toxically homosexual men, child predators, and completely dishonest people would throw at you. But then, their numbers are on the rise lately.
So, let me explain to you, my brothers in arms, first of all WHY your critics are complete fucking idiots to begin with, meaning they absolutely must be not only ignored, but actively shunned and distanced from all aspects of your life, and secondly I will explain WHO your critics tend to be in the vast majority of cases, which will make the need from keeping them out of your life even more obvious.
Why are they wrong?
The reasons are almost infinite, but as a general rule:
1. They are Historically Ignorant
Now, you may think this has nothing to do with their criticising your “toxic masculinity” or your choice of weird “career” or of becoming a farmer in remote forests far from large cities, and building your own home starting out with only basic tools (but think about things first, eh?), or your personal relationship with your girlfriend, and so on. But it does.
The recent somewhat humorous meme about men thinking about Ancient Rome on a daily basis is essentially true.
Consider:
EVERYTHING you see around you that can be considered a positive factor of civilisation, was essentially created by men willing and able to do violence to defend, protect, and remove enemies in the way of building those very things you appreciate today.
Indoor Plumbing: Romans.
System of laws that are still in use today all over the world in diluted and worsened forms: Romans.
Roads: Romans
Astonishing works of architecture never before seen: Romans (and Greeks)
The longest and most functional of human empires in all of human history: Rome. The only other system of “empire” that lasted longer and is still functional —as a remnant— is the real Catholic Church (today remaining true and correct as it has for 2000 years only in actual Catholics (Sedevacantists)). And guess where the Catholic Church sprang forth to conquer the world with its truth, beauty and goodness? Rome.
Literally, everything you see would not have happened without the Romans civilising pretty much the then known world. Yes by brute force. Yes by imposing rules and laws on the conquered people, yet letting them have autonomy in their own affairs. And whether you like it or not, the fact is that Rome, by civilising most of humanity at the time, opened the door for the next step, which was the even greater civilising effect of Christianity, which, let’s be clear, is and always was, and always will be, Catholicism. All other pretend versions of “Christianity” including the Novus Ordo fake “Catholic Church” are at best Churchianity and in many cases, actually Satanic inversions.
But even if you step away from Rome, understand that every city you have ever seen or lived in was created by men. Men who fought, and died, against other men, the elements, wild beasts, disease, famine, and natural disasters, in order to impose systems of law, order, food production, animal husbandry, mining, smelting, forging, building, and improving. All while they also did artwork, created places of worship, contemplated the infinite and the divine, raised children, protected their families, and led them to what was best for them, often regardless of personal sacrifice.
Literally pretty much EVERYTHING you see around you was invented, created, improved and built by men. While there are certainly exceptions and some women here and there have contributed positive things to civilisation, you will find even the best among them were aware of the fact that it was essentially men who had the objective perspectives of logic, reason, and factual appreciation of reality to make the necessary choices and actions that improved life for all. Florence Nightingale and her statements concerning women in general comes to mind.
So, when so random effeminate male, or bitter, entitled, spoilt, pointless female criticises you, realise, that in the first place, they literally know NOTHING of how the world came to be so pleasant and easy that they can sit on their ever-expanding arse and pontificate about thing that they never had the intellect to even understand, never mind philosophise about or create.
They are cargo-cultists. What is a cargo cultist? It originates from groups of tribes in the Pacific Islands that assumed that cargo (material goods, shipping containers full of new and wonderful stuff they had never seen before) would come if they pleased the gods in various rituals. In modern usage, this means something slightly different. The retards criticising you and your life choices are generally morons that haven’t got a clue about how to perform the most basic of tasks, like changing a car tire, or knowing what a spark plug is, and so on. They take all of these things for granted, as if moving vehicles (with their spark plugs, and tires and rotary wings and so on, and on, and on) are just a normal fact of nature. Apples grow on trees, and international flights and iPads just sprout naturally from the ground. And female Grrrrll power makes them work even better.
This complete ignorance and detachment from history translates into a complete detachment from reality. The same retards are bound to think that a woman can compete in sports at the same level of a man, that mutilating your genitals changes your sex, that shoving people from different cultures, religions and backgrounds together by force results in anything other than eventual war between them, and so on and so forth. So, their opinions, are invariably completely ignorant and detached from reality. And have as much value, generally speaking, as the farts of drug-addled gnats.
2. They are Stupid
You can’t get away from it. They are simply not very intelligent. They are unable to observe reality and make effective, logical, reasoned, conclusions that match reality. Ignorance, even engrained through indoctrination, can be remedied, albeit far less easily than most people assume, but the absolute absence of historical context, constant lies spread by all mass media in its multitude of forms and so on, can make the best of us ignorant.
That, however, is less excusable when you become old enough to make your way in the world. If you have any kind of functioning brain, you should be able to notice reality around you; and where it is intentionally being subverted and lied about to you in a consistent and ridiculous manner. In short, only a complete fucking idiot believes that a man can become a woman by genital mutilation, or vice versa, or that wanting to rape little children is just “another form of sexuality”, or that men and women are equal (or that any two human beings are, for that matter, including twins). Now, it is fair to say that one can be confused about a great many things, and not necessarily be an idiot, and I will give a few brief examples below to give a general sense, but anyone of middle age that still believes the absurd versions of the narrative described immediately above, is, without question, a moron. And why on Earth would you ever take life advice from a moron?
If you are confused about a topic, study it. Look into it. On the surface, feminism sounds like a good thing, right? I mean, I thought so too at about age 13, way back in say 1982 or so. Because, on the surface, what did we initially get told feminism was about? Well, equality before the law. And who would want to argue that, right? I mean would you not want everyone to be treated the same before the law? Sounds good right? Except it’s not.
And let’s leave aside for a moment the reality of who the luminaries of feminism were, and what they actually wanted to achieve and what their motives were. Let’s just skip right over that little portal to Hell and instead just focus on the supposedly “good” aspects of it, like that whole “equality before the law” thing.
It’s actually fucking evil, and a perversion of justice. Roman Law (the original one, from Ancient Rome, now very diluted) knew this. Anglo-Saxon law, and eventually American “law”, being a gradual and increasing descent into hell, have steadily moved away from the fact that the law, if it is to be just, should NOT apply equally to everyone. Is it fair to judge someone that has an IQ of 75 by the same standards as someone that has an IQ of 150? Is it fair to judge someone that is biologically less emotionally stable because of how hormones work in their body than someone who is biologically more stable hormonally? If you are honest, while you may well (and justifiably) become fearful at the prospect of just how do you act fairly to everyone, the reality is that each individual circumstance, as much as possible, should be somewhat allowed for.
Personally, for example, I have no real problem with women generally receiving lighter sentences for most violent crimes against adults. Take the example of say Charlize Theron. Her mother shot and killed her father supposedly because of the physical abuse she was subjected to by her husband, and imminent threat in that specific instance. Was it all real? I have no clue. Apparently she was found not guilty of murder because the situation was clearly one of self-defence. And if so, good for her. It seems a pretty clear cut case, and I have zero problem with the lady in question being perfectly free. But even if there was some question of it, in general, I too would tend to favour the woman’s account of things. It is —for the very same reasons that women did not build empires— generally, not usual for a woman to resort to deadly force as a “go to” response. Of course exceptions exist, the specific of each case need to be looked at etc etc. But as a general rule, what I am saying is that, while we know that women receive much lighter sentences than men for violent crimes, I don’t really have a problem with it. The exception for me is when women harm children, particularly their own. In those instances, the penalty, as far as I am concerned, should absolutely be equal, and when they kill children, the penalty should absolutely be death.
Why don’t I have problem with the lighter sentences for women? For the same reason I don’t have a problem with lighter sentences for children. On average, they are less emotionally capable than adult males.
Or to put it bluntly: Should a woman (in general, on average) receive a lighter sentence for, say, a shooting that results in a death?
Yes. I think in general that is probably ok. Why? Because in general, women will also have less access to legally owned firearms. The training that I personally would like to have in place for people to own firearms would be far above present requirements. (Note I said training, not bureaucracy and paperwork). BUT, if and when that training is done and regularly kept up with, I literally would have zero problem with people (citizens of the country only, regardless of country) going about and being armed in their day to day life. Despite anti-gun people screaming till they are blue in the face, the statistics on this are absolutely clear. Where concealed carry of firearms is legal, violent crime drops dramatically. It’s not what they tell you or want you to know, but historical statistics on this are unequivocal.
Despite the fact that the rules as I would like them are NOT in place anywhere, it remains the case that in those societies where being armed is permissible, most women choose to not go through the process. And many are indeed, scared of guns in se. As they might be of a chainsaw too. And that’s perfectly normal. I also strongly agree with men using chainsaws and not women, unless absolutely necessary. None of this is rocket science, but can you see how that translates in making all the rules the same for everyone, unjust? Roman law applies principle as a generality, but looks at each individual case on its own merits, and because of it, is an eminently better legal system than any of the ones currently in place in the English speaking world for sure, and probably the rest of the planet too. So, once again, an echo of Rome, but also, of the inability of the ignorant giving you crappy advice to think things through based on what’s in front of their own eyes at any given point.
The same idiocy applies to pretty much all of their assumed ideas about life, the Universe and everything. Because in the main, whatever idiotic idea they think they have, is not even theirs. These people have never had an original thought in their entire existence. They merely absorbed whatever “fashionable” nonsense they have been instructed to believe. And it is so with literally everything in their stupid lives.
Fifteen years ago, Russell Brand was supposedly this sexy, intellectual “naughty boy” that any woman would (should?) have been grateful to be bedded by, him being constantly described in the press as a “Lothario”. Now he is supposedly a perverse sexual predator that has been hiding his vile practices for years. The reality is that Russell Brand always was a complete fake with respect to being any kind of “intellectual”, he was an entirely manufactured “sensation”, and above all, as I stated way back then, in my opinion, always was a creep, and I am also certain he was sexually inept on every level. I would have bet money on it then and I would do so now too.
But the same cretinous people that used to “love him” then, will “hate him” now. And not because they finally see through anything at all. Because they never do, and never did before. They simply follow the narrative they are imbibed with. These are not the behaviours of people you can respect for their intelligence, insightful nature, or valid powers of observation. So why on Earth would you listen to their criticisms of you and your life choices?
And those two are main and general points that apply to over 95% of the morons that spew they idiotic opinions out of their drooling mouths, which is enough to discredit all of their opinions, pretty much, but please keep in mind there are many, many, more valid reasons, that can also apply generally, or more specifically, and it would take a book or ten to list them all in detail. I list only a few here for ease of use:
An inability to understand percentages, probabilities, and statistics in general.
As a result of their innumeracy, a complete inability to evaluate a scientific paper, a news report, or really any bit of information, including self-observed ones, for objective factual value. In short, they are completely unable to even be aware if a scientific methodology as applied to a study is valid or not. Never mind analyse the results of the study with a critical eye founded in statistical knowledge.
An inability to spot obvious logical fallacies.
An inability to follow, much less produce, a valid logical syllogism.
An inability to foresee obvious problems with a theoretical concept or idea. Even after the problems start showing up en masse.
An inability to select for logic over emotions.
A complete inability to design, perform, execute and review an actual scientific experiment of any kind. And the total lack of imagination to even consider doing so.
So, yeah. They are ignorant and they are stupid. Really that is all you need to know to realise you can and should ignore their bullshit ideas about you and/or your loved ones.
Who are these Critics?
1. Human Wreckage
Ever notice who the biggest critics are?
I have.
You will never receive as much criticisms from the human equivalent of flotsam.
The alcoholics. The junkies. The permanently unemployed. The drug addled, pot-smoking, shiftless human shadows that perambulate life in a way that is analogous to the permanently sedated inmates in a mental institute for the criminally insane.
Those who have made a complete shambles of their own lives somehow find it fit to give you advice on how to live yours. The mothers that failed their children at every turn pretend to tell their daughters how to parent. The fathers that failed completely at fatherhood will criticise their sons mercilessly no matter what they achieve.
It is always thus.
These human equivalent of sewer rats, will try to drag everyone down to their level. And this is true across cultures and nations. The ghettos of the Bronx are no different from the council estates of London, or the “case popolari” of Naples. Humans are generally, flawed, weak, greedy, petty-minded, envious creatures, and when one of their numbers tries, or succeeds, in elevating themselves from the surrounding rat-people, these will try to drag him or her back into the sewer.
Because, ultimately, if that man or woman does escape, does become happier, more successful at life, a better parent, a happier wife, a richer son, then it tells the rat-people what useless beings they are in a way that even their unconscious mind finds difficult to avoid. In fact, the usual response, if that happens and they totally fail at dragging the escapee back, is to then try to claim credit for their success.
If it were honest, it would be stated more like: “Oh yes, Johnny only became a successful man because of the alcoholic beatings he received from me, the cocaine fuelled orgies he saw me and his mother partake in during swingers parties, my constant adultery and taking my life’s frustrations out on him. I did all that for him. And the ungrateful little bastard won’t even buy me a new house! After all I did for him!”
So, when you get criticised by someone, look at their own life in that respect.
What kind of marriage did they have?
What kind of children did they raise?
What kind of achievements did they have?
How successful at their chosen life paths have they been?
What are their biggest failures and biggest achievements?
What’s their drug use been like throughout their life?
What has their business or careers achieved?
Did they provide well for their loved ones?
And if all of the above is one train smash after another, why would you care one little bit what they think, or what “advice” they are giving out under the guise of “helping” you?
2. Losers and NPCs
Not quite as toxic as the human wreckage, these are nevertheless people that while perhaps meaning well, (you might want to think so, but never assume it is the case) have an over-inflated sense of their own ability and/or importance. These are people that either have had some disappointment in life, tried and failed at something, or several somethings, or just plodded along without ever achieving too much and resent it. A bit, or a lot.
Please do not mistake these people for the genuine, middle-of-the-road people who simply did the best they could, without lamenting their lot too much and just got on with it, but are not by any means captains of industry, or particularly successful at anything specific. Few things are as under-appreciated as the steady, normal people, who nevertheless kept their family together, fed, and relatively happy. I am not talking about these people. I am talking about the father who was never a good enough football player so he tries to live vicariously through his son and makes him go to training daily when his son would much rather take up woodworking, say. It’s the “I could have been Miss County of Whocaresatall!” And by golly, she is going to dress her 5 year old daughter in the latest fashion accessories.
It’s the parents who, even though they did not divorce, when you announce that you are not going to university, because you really like electronics and have found a job as an apprentice in an electronics repair shop, immediately criticise your choice, because spending 100k on a nose picking degree in business economics gives you the prestige to be a Starbucks barista with a degree! And neither of them knows how to wire a plug, never mind solder a bit of an electronic components.
In RPG game parlance, if you are born into a family of zero-level NPCs whose life revolved around selling clothing made by hand to the local nobility, and you announce that you are off to be a ranger, learning how to hunt in the woods, even as you study magic in the evening, they will naturally tell you you are crazy; you will get eaten by werewolves, orcs will rape you, and giant wasps will paralyse you and lay eggs in your rectum that will eat you from the inside.
And some of that may indeed be a possible outcome. But while no one wants to be raped by orcs and become an incubator for giant wasps, the idea of spending your life as a tailor for the nobility makes being eaten by a werewolf more attractive. Besides, if you are only partially chewed you become a werewolf yourself and while not ideal, eh… at least it won’t be boring!
So, while they may even have your best interests at heart, they simply don’t have any relevant experience really. And, more importantly, they do not have your heart. And heart counts for a lot in life. In fact, as far as I am concerned, without heart, what’s the point?
So, what now young (or not so young) adventurer?
1. Generalities
Of course, the point is not to go off half cocked and oblivious of the dangers, obstacles or other things you may have to face.
By all means, study and research. Figure things out and have backup plan A, B and C. But also…
Don’t over-think it either.
Remember that as Von Clausewitz put it, no plan survives contact with the enemy.
And in life, that “enemy” is reality. And the ability of your plan to deal with it is a direct relationship with how distant the plan is from observable reality and the happenstances along the way. The more able you are to adapt, and yet continue along your chosen path, the more likely your eventual success.
Keep in mind that failure is part of life. Falling down happens. You didn’t learn to walk by not falling down. You learnt to walk by continually getting up again. And the advice you may have got at age 8 or 9 months, when you could not speak and did not understand most of language, was mostly just so much babbling. And so is the mouth noises most of your critics make today.
Notice also, that most of the people who do encourage you, who do say, “You know, I think this and that might be a problem, but man, I think you can do it. And maybe you can figure out how to even avoid this or that, or maybe they are not even things. After all, I didn’t do it that way, so you might be right.” Or who give you constructive criticism designed to help you stay on track and be inspired, are not the losers, not the NPCs and most certainly not the human wreckage. They are people that in whatever capacity have achieved a measure of success. Whether it is financial, emotional, familial, or whatever.
I never had criticism of me and my ways as I did from the losers at life, and I learnt early on to ignore them. There is also a specific type of critic that is externally successful (they may be rich, or apparently want for nothing) but in reality they absolutely resent your own personal freedom. This can be from your own parents too as well as strangers or even billionaires. I have no clue about Elon Musk’s life, and I am picking him as a random example, and possibly totally unfairly so, but let me put it this way, I would not be in the least surprised if Elon would be envious of my life-long freedom of always having been able to tell whoever I want, to fuck right off, if I felt like it. And I would assume that Elon has a lot more to lose than I do, and as a result, paradoxically, is perhaps a lot less free to do that to the extent I can and have done. So, beware of those critics too.
2. Specifics
Most men who grew up in the Western world had half-stunted or actively bad examples of male role models. The easy life made the necessities of manhood less of a requirement and more of a cultural option. One that carried increasingly high levels of discomfort and risk in many cases.
The changing “morality” (increasing degeneracy and destruction of wholesome ethics, honour, and traditions) also meant that your own fathers were under intellectual assault for most of their lives. My own upbringing, in the relatively savage African wilderness was rare for a Westerner to have. The realities of life and death are almost never impressed upon to Western men. Instead, a barrage of absolute nonsense is forced in their heads with a crowbar-like attachment to narratives intentionally designed to destroy the natural, healthy, heterosexual, European male. That is just an objective fact that becomes obvious if you merely pay attention and notice things as the are, and why they are being driven in that direction, and by whom.
So:
1. Study History. Indeed, learn about Rome. And Greece, and the Catholic Church as it really was, and what it really did, not what you have been told about it; look it up. Hundreds of volumes exist of writings by the people that were there in the first couple of hundred years after Jesus. And many more after that. Start at the beginning, not the fake end they tell you is the whole story. It isn’t.
2. Learn Logic, Mathematics, Statistics and Probability. “Oh it’s hard to study…” Suck it up buttercup. Life is hard. Being a man is hard. Being an educated man is even harder. It’s also a requirement. Stop being a pussy. Get on with it.
3. Understand the role of being a man and what it entails. Do NOT attempt to do this without having done one and two above first. You will be led astray by a lot of gay wolves in heterosexual sheep’s clothing. I will be making my subsequent blog post about this very topic. And you have plenty to get on with before then, so get on with it.
4. Understand the role of a woman and what it entails, but above all, understand how a man should relate to a woman and how she should relate to a man. Again, this is a complex topic that has been vilified in every way imaginable for at the very least 70 years. Do not attempt to begin this without first having done the three above points and having read my very next blog post after this one, which will cover this aspect in more detail. Hint: Women are not the enemy.
5. Understand that religion is pivotal. Not optional. This is a massive topic and of course, rivers of ink and blood have been spilt over it, so I am not going to bother doing more than I already have with my two books, the short one, BELIEVE! and the detailed one Reclaiming the Catholic Church. But be aware that atheism leads to mass murder, and so do many fake religions. Churchianity leads to fakeness and gayness (of the butt-sex kind, not the happy kind). False religions lead to dysfunctional societies, not functional, happy, safe ones that are able to deal with reality head on. Catholicism has been vilified and lied to from the start, and had bad men, in it and all around it, throughout it’s existence, and yet, in keeping with our Lord’s promise, it remains active, and has been the most successful method of creating loving, safe, humane societies full of beauty, humanity, justice and happiness. And this despite the constant lies, attacks and since 1958, total inversion of it by the Satanists currently residing in the Vatican. So, at a minimum, read a bit about it. My books of course save you a lot of time and give plenty of references you can verify by yourself, but it doesn’t need to be my books. Just learn the real history of Christianity from the very early days, as written about by the people that were physically there at the time. Then see if you can still refute catholicism as it really is, not as you have been told it is by pedophile Satanists pretending to be Catholic Clergy.
And last but also first: I don’t know about you, but personally, I have always believed it is better for me to make mistakes or bad choices as a result of my own bad decisions than by listening to someone else’s bad advice.
So, go forth man. And conquer life and do the hard things, and do the good things, and ignore the naysayers, the critics, the failures, the alcoholic, drug addled flotsam of life, the NPCs, the envious millionaires and jealous prisoners of their own failures. Build your life, your friends, your family, your community, based on solid foundations, leading a loving wife who respects and cares about you and looks after you as a woman that is happy to be a woman and act as one, even as you take care of her and love her, as a man that is happy to be a man, and acts as one.
In literally anything you do, perseverance, bordering on the fanatical, is far more often a plus than a negative. There are any number of completely unreasonable but rigidly implacable people in positions of authority, power, and overall financial success. It is also true that such people are generally far from happy. Their single-minded obsession tends to darken every other aspect of life, reducing their relationships, enjoyment of life, and so on, to a monochromatic shade with a single note of music to it.
If, however, you are able to keep steadily working towards your goal without losing sight of the important things, your relationships with your loved ones, prioritising things so that you can devote the time and effort required (which at times will stray deeply into the unreasonable portion of life) yet have the mental fortitude to also return to your humanity in a regular fashion, your goals will stand a very good chance of being achieved.
Of course, set-backs, betrayals, accidents of misfortune, and all manner of things, may get in the way, and one too needs to know when to change tactics and sometimes even objective, because as the Japanese say:
Business is War.
And in a way, so is life in general. Thinking with a war-like mindset all the time is not healthy, but thinking with a strategic mindset, where you include the human and humane sides of life, is certainly worthwhile. And always remember people are not machines, but over time, if you hold your hand steady on the tiller, regardless of the tempests you may encounter or the lulls with no wind, in time, you will get to your destination.
Oh I know, protties will ass-u-me that this is just yet another rant against their facile and absurd version of Christianity. But no, it is actually something quite subtle yet very important.
It has taken me about the last two years to really begin to observe the clarity with which the protestantism zeitgeist affects really not just protestants specifically, but in fact, pretty much all of the English-speaking world. Regardless of your religious beliefs, I think if you take the time to read this, and then make some observations, there is a real benefit you might gain from it. Even if you remain a protestant (tragically misguided as that position would be).
In a succinct three sentences, the problem is this:
Protestantism mechanises human beings, and is designed to do so by its ultimate “creator”, reducing the humanity between people and subjugating the individual to ever growing rules, as if he were simply a cog in a machine.
Catholicism (the real one, not the Novus Ordo version, which is just a Satanic perversion of Christianity) on the other hand is religion best suited for human beings, it ennobles, elevates, and improves the condition of the individual at the individual level, and thus of the family, and thus of society at large. Never losing sight that the individual is the key and his or her individuality is a gift and joy when expressed within the protective confines of Catholic dogma.
This assertion, which might at first seem mere opinion, can be verified by you in a number of ways. Most of these are what I would call large scale statistical studies/observations and as such, while individual counter-examples can be found aplenty, they do not in any way invalidate the overall thesis. Here are some of the easiest and most profitable areas you may wish to investigate for yourself:
Marriage – Divorce and Abortion – Family unit Cohesion – Children
While the Novus Ordo Satanic cult has damaged this institution a lot in the intervening nearly 70 years, even today, divorce, even in nominally “Catholic” families is viewed as a great failure and although the stain of scandal is much reduced, there is still a hint of it. This, of course, stems from the concept that marriage should be for life. A stance that the Catholic Church always had, and even the present day Satanic impersonators find difficult to reverse, though they give out annulments like confetti as of late. In fact, until the early 1900s, even amongst protestants, divorce was still quite the stain. It all changed with the introduction of contraception in pill format, invented by a Jew, and readily taken up by Protestantism. Although condoms had existed for a long time, their use was banned by Catholicism, since, as per Catholic dogma, the PRIMARY purpose of marriage, is to raise a family, which means children, which means divorce is out because you should be adult and possessed of reason enough to know this BEFORE you even enter into any kind of sexual liaison with the proposed wife/husband. Meaning you will make your choice based on their suitability for that as your PRIMARY point, and your compatibility in terms of sex, lustful attraction, and so on, only as a distant second, if not third or fourth. The reason being obvious, in that two people actively working towards creating a harmonious environment for their children will both work towards finding a harmonious compatibility of a sexual nature, and, as my pre-Catholic experience tells me, almost any man and any woman can become sexually really quite compatible, when they both aim to do so, even if at first this might not seem the case. The honest wish to have children and raise them together makes it an easy thing to ensure both parties work hard at any apparent incompatibility or lack of symphony in their individual ways. So it all stems from the lack of contraception amongst Catholics, which is a far deeper and fundamental aspect of marriage than most people today, imbibed in the Protestant mindset, even begin to realise. Divorce is the result of placing the lust/attraction/ephemeral traits of the potential partner ahead of the fundamental/primary/lifelong attributes. If your focus is on the ephemerals, these will inevitably change and degrade over time. The fundamental aspects, are far more resilient and knowing this consciously helps you make better choices from the very start. The extreme of this attitude of focusing on the ephemeral instead of the fundamental is, of course, the total inversion of the very essence of marriage, where children are seen as an inconvenience to the extent that we then murder them in the womb. Tearing them literally apart, limb from limb so as to not get in the way of our buying a new iPhone and having sex with whoever we fancy, without any wish to even have a long conversation with them, much less spend a lifetime together. Catholicism has this aspect correct, and protestantism has it completely wrong and inverted. As a result protestant society is no longer family oriented and what children result from the bonobo-like couplings of humans are often urban-feral examples of disrespect, savagery, complete lack of moral character or discipline, and the denizens of broken homes. You can see this in broad terms by simply observing the generic or “average” behaviour of teens in Anglo-Saxon/teutonic countries (which are overwhelmingly protestant) and comparing them to nominally and presently really ex-Catholic countries, like Spain, Portugal, Italy and to a lesser and modified, but still valid extent, South American also ex-Catholic countries. The family unit in such cultures still matters, and children will tend to get corrected sharply and quickly if they behave in unacceptable fashions (much less so now than say 50 years ago, but it still is a much improved situation when compared to the protestant countries).
Anglo-Saxon or (God forbid, American “law”) Vs. Roman law
The British legal system is fundamentally flawed in that it tries to mechanise and compartmentalise human behaviour in a number of pigeon-holes. You kill a person you get punishment X to Z depending on prior case law (that is, whatever happened in the past to some other guy in supposedly similar circumstances will fit here too, regardless of square pegs and round holes). And quite often, even just punishment X regardless, and not even the option of Y or Z.
The American legal system is actually a complete perversion of any hint of justice and merely a façade to keep the average plebeian and brainwashed American mostly quiet, into thinking they have an actual functioning system of law and order, when in truth, all they have is a system designed to keep the oligarchy well and truly above the rest of their society, while they do whatever they please at the expense of the little people.
Roman law, instead is a perfectly humane and human-based legal system, where a general principle applies, but the details to each case are looked at in the specific. So, yes, murder is generally always wrong, but the pre-meditated murder of a little old lady to steal her pension, is quite different from the premeditated murder of a child rapist. And while the Anglo-Saxon system pretends to adhere to this with various degrees of penalties for various degrees of murder, in reality, the practical aspects are that very often people are forced to make a guilty plea in order to avoid prescribed sentences. The Roman system of law, which is rapidly being ousted by the ever-encroaching Americanism spreading like a plague over the planet, is fundamentally different in that it is dependent on human aspects of life that we are all both familiar and subject too. In Italy, still today, construction contracts are only a few pages long, because the so-called spirit of the law, applies and is self-evident to any honest person. By contrast, in UK law, —which remember has a principle of “the reasonable man”— a similar contract, for a similar job, would be at least a couple hundred pages. In America, it is usually a few hundred pages and also references a bunch of other documents which can run to several thousand pages. As in for example, the Federal rules for Acquisition Regulations. Which is a stack of Satanic nonsense compiled into several volumes that sits well above a metre high if you pile them on top of each other.
Work Ethic and Social Dynamics
The protestant work ethic is often touted as a superior thing above those shiftless Catholics. And I myself, having lived mostly in protestant countries and working as a freelancer all of my life, have also, always appreciated the aspect of the “mechanisation” of work-related routines. The interchangeability of personnel, also meant that as long as I outperformed my colleagues, I would always have a job, since I had an almost endless supply of firms that would be only too eager to slot me in, cog-like, in their machinery. And outperforming my colleagues was not hard to do if your slight autism lets you play “by the book” while your Venetian genetics uses all the instinctual genetic humanity involved to produce results the poor binary thinking protestants can’t even imagine, never mind implement. By contrast, working with my countrymen was exasperating, they would almost never respect deadlines and at times even used strong-arm and duplicitous tactics to stay in the game. As in “Eh… you are already neck deep with us, if you try to get rid of us and change supplier you will lose out even more, so… suck it up and wait/pay.” To which my general response was to play along while I set up an alternative, then I would dump the offenders with a claim on them to boot. I had zero interest in wasting my time talking with them about their (or my) dog, children, whatever, that had zero impact on the job. I never particularly enjoyed my job or work, and I tried to avoid the rat race as much as I could, but when I do enter it, I give it my best to perform my job well. My attitude is pretty much samurai/soldier when it comes to work. It may be a necessary evil, but that doesn’t mean I should be half-assed about it. I perform well for whoever hires me, and have always done so, even when the specific people that hired me, or even the company as a whole may have been populated by complete assholes. When/if their evil/retardation/dishonesty/harm-causing behaviour crossed a certain point I simply left. And in a few cases, took corrective action to the point they would fire me. I have never been fired by “surprise”, I always knew it was coming and why, and it was usually because I put them in a position where they either corrected their ways (which, paradoxically would also improve their profit margins) or got rid of me for being a “meddlesome interloper” as they would see it in their corrupt view, instead of an honesty and profit increasing asset, as I would see it, looking merely at the bottom line and not the egos of the people involved.
All of that preamble to say that I too was under the mistaken idea that a Protestant work-ethic was superior. Well… after a couple of years in a decidedly non-protestant operating country, I have to re-evaluate that idea massively. So, here in note form, are the “positives” of the protestant work ethic:
Increase efficiency in the final result overall
Increased efficiency in production/delivery/timeline
Increased efficiency if there is illness/absenteeism
Reduced down time when critical people die/leave
Standardisation of systems and methods across the board
Standardisation even across industries
A supposed “positive” is work-life being very distinct from home-life
Due to the standardisation even average or sub-average people can “perform” “adequately”.
Now, pretty much every one of those points turns into a negative for the Catholic work ethic. Less efficient, and so on. However, two of those points above are a “positive” in the Protestant world, but actually a negative in the Catholic world. So let’s consider what the positives of a Catholic work ethic are:
Personal relationship based results. Loyal customers and well-performing companies are generally given automatic preferential treatment.
Meritocracy based results. Those that perform well can rise to the top because the average is so generally poor on things like delivery timelines.
In general, attention to quality in bespoke items is second to none. Timelines are non-existent, but often quality is unmatched by Protestant systems until those systems are mechanised by sufficiently advanced technology; in some industries this wipes out the Catholic competition, but in others the Catholic version is unlikely to ever be replaced by mere AI and higher technology.
The absence of a neat separation between work and home life seems impractical and intrusive to Protestants, but, if your society is composed of Catholic-observant human beings, then there should be no huge separation. Which is why they take a siesta in the middle of the day and see their families for lunch. The human connection aspect is more important than the chase for profit margins. Seeing your children at lunch-time and taking a break is good for the family and the mental health of all involved. The customer is of course important, but always second-fiddle to my family and my good friends. As it should be. And of course, those good customers that become also friends, eh… you might work through the weekend or at 3 am to help them out. Because they are friends, not because of profit.
The relationships are generally more human-based. In general, if I do work with an Italian firm (after careful selection and experience with them) I am also happy having those guys over for lunch at my house or vice-versa. This has hardly ever been the case with the semi-automatons I worked with (even quite pleasantly) in the Anglo-Saxon world. While I am happy enough having Giovanni the client or sub-contractor over for lunch, the last fucking thing either me or John from the UK want, is to spend any more time in each other’s company after work. And that’s even if I like John and he likes me. John may be a great guy, and he may think the same of me, but John knows, that he will see me at the office, and he will keep well away from my front door. And I will extend the same basic courtesy to him. This is why Anglos will have “team-building” days. The Latins look at that and go, “What is this shit? Are you trying to force us to like each other? That’s not gonna work!” And it doesn’t. I never heard of a Latin firm doing “team-building” days. They do invite and spoil clients to lavish dinners or things like that, but even then, it is only in the last decade or so that this has become more common-place. And generally used to be more of a way to introduce themselves to a client. Hey we build blue widgets and you seem to like blue widgets, can we take you for a nice dinner and chill so you will later come visit our factory and see what you think?
In short then, the protestant work ethic is a better machine. But do you want to spend half your life inside a machine? Or would you rather spend your life surrounded by all the messy inefficiency of humans, but also their beautiful and redeeming human aspects too? I for one was convinced the Protestant way was better. I am misanthropic by nature (and by virtue of my IQ I learned later in life, which makes me feel generally bored or exasperated by average humans for the most part) and have learnt since a young age that I can be fine in quite extended solitude. However, if you develop your charity, humanity, and grace, broadening your perspective of the average human (yes, ok, he may not grasp physics, or astronomy, or respect deadlines, or keep proper accounts, or, or, or… but… he is a great dad, a loyal husband, and will come help you with totally unrelated stuff at 2 am because he’s a good guy) then the Catholic perspective is INFINITELY better, because it allows you to interact with your fellow humans in a much more pleasant way even if you have very little in common with them, and that interaction is not the same as the plastic-world “Have a nice day!” of the USA. It may be a grumpy “Ah, what a shit day, fighting with the wife, screw it!” or it may be “Have a nice day!” but it is intrinsically more human and connected. So yeah, you may not get your work done in the timelines you wanted and if that is all you see, you will eventually move to a 15 minute city merely for the organised functions. Or you know, a prison. Things run on time there too. But if you are interested in the humanity of life, then, you will begin to enjoy the messy side of life, out here in the Catholic “jungle”.
The Subtle Implications of Boxed-in/Binary Thinking
This is the most subtle aspect, but —in my opinion— also the most important. Because Catholicism is true, and founded on God’s Will, it generates a certain “built-in” charity and grace when dealing with the rest of humanity, tempered by a steely resolve to do whatever is necessary to preserve our way of life, our loved ones, and innocents in general. There is a very wide and fluid range of human interactions, which have as wide a capacity for harmony even between very different personalities as possible. Which is not to say that there are not hard lines. There are. But, just as God finds extremely improbable, even miraculous ways to turn even evil to an ultimate good, so too, the average Catholic has a much wider supply of responses to life and other people, all while inhabiting the very clear lines of Catholic dogma. The protestant, not having a culture or tradition, or habit of being imbibed in humanity and its myriad idiosyncrasies, nor viewing them through a theological lens that is also in keeping with both God’s mercy and charity as well as God’s Justice, is far more limited in his response to both situations and people. Things tend to fall into a good or bad category. Permissible or forbidden. Much like the Anglo legal systems, these approaches to life, events, and especially other people, including your children, is very sub-optimal, and over time leads to quite serious perversions of reality and life. Particularly for the raising of children.
My wife at times got upset with me for treating each of our children differently when faced with situations that are apparently, superficially, the same. It took some time for her to begin to appreciate what I explained, that each child is unique, and their internal motivations, drives, and responses are unique and different from each other. It has absolutely nothing to do with any child being more or less like me, or me caring more or less about any one of them over another. I would take a bullet for any of them without hesitation in exactly the same fashion. The point is that you need to adjust the lesson to the individual (again, Roman Law over Anglo “law”).
Having had the benefit of doing and teaching martial arts for some decades, it became very clear that everyone improved faster when the lesson was general for everyone, but the corrections or suggestions were unique to every person in the class. how much more important this is with your own children!
But to a Protestant, this can seem unfair, unbalanced, or being biased or preferential of one person, or group of people, over another. It certainly can appear that way, and be experienced that way by the subject of the treatment, but it is in fact, nothing of the sort. It is the best approximation of actual Justice, since one tries to adapt the situation to the details of the individual or group involved. Anyone that has ever been in serious martial arts, or life and death situations on a regular basis as a pert of their routine, will understand this. Farmers will understand this too. Basically anyone that has to deal with reality in ways that give a serious consequence if you don’t deal with reality but rather your own erroneous perception or idea of it.
This “simplification” of perception, is a real issue and a real problem in the Protestant dominated Zeitgeist (which is pretty much almost completely global by now). And it applies at every level of life, be it the interpretation of natural phenomena (see Rupert Sheldrake’s excellent ideas on even things such as the speed of light on this and other topics), reality in general, theological concepts simplified to the absurd (sola scriptura, sola fides, once saved always saved, all completely unmitigated nonsense any normal child of ten sees for the completely illogical rubbish it is), and really, pretty much all human interactions. Everything from sex (instead of lovemaking) to friendship, becomes transactional and calculated, even if unconsciously, to an extent that damages and degrades the actual humanity between humans. And in fact has steadily done so for five centuries, and taken some nitrous oxide in the last fifty or so.
Conclusions
The afternoon siesta, the inability to use watches or stick to well-balanced “just-in time” delivery schedules, all pale in comparison to the benefits gained by stopping in the middle of your work-day because you saw Paolo and you grab a coffee together, as is, your ability to forgive Giorgio for having done the same thing and coming to pick up your car a day late.
Just as I would rather die fighting to be left OUT of a 15 minute city, in the feral and untamed, wild and unpredictable “jungle” outside of it, so too, I have come to appreciate the humanity of my Catholic ancestors to a huge and fundamentally important degree. I hope you can benefit from these thoughts, and am very open to discussing these points with intellectually aware and honest interlocutors. So, feel free to let me know your views, while keeping in mind the rules.
My friend Tony sent me a link to this article, which is a very decent and short, to the point, article on Catholicism today. He deals well with the whole Sedevacantist and not sedevacantist issue.
In essence, and much more politely, it is not far from what I have been saying for years now.
And in case you are not aware, in summary, my position is this:
ANY clergy of the Novus Orco are NOT Catholics, nor valid clergy at all, and not members of the Church. If ordained before 1958 (or 1964 if one wants to be extremely charitable) they are apostate heretics that have defected from the faith, as per canon 188.4 of the Code of Canon Law of 1917. If they were “ordained” after 1964 at the latest, then they are not validly ordained to begin with and in any case the charge of non-catholic, either because knowingly and intentionally heretic or never-was catholic/Freemason/Satanist, or heathen pretending to be Catholic through INEXCUSABLE ignorance. Which all results in all the same thing: They are ALL, without exception, to be treated as heretics. Should ANY ONE or more of them, confess, publicly, repent and accept the true Catholic position, then, as per Cum Ex Apostolato Officio, they should spend the rest of their days sequestered in a remote monastery in perpetual penance and with authority over precisely no one.
Any layman that subscribes to the Novus Ordo (Orco, I say, ORCO!) in abysmal ignorance and laziness of their own purported religion, is guilty of laziness and ignorance, but is not, in such cases, a heretic and in his or her genuine innocence, remains, in fact, by virtue of their actual ignorance, a member of the Catholic Church. HOWEVER, if you have read this far, that no longer applies to you. If you have heard of the controversy of Vatican II, of sedevacantists now being the only Catholics, and so on, it is incumbent upon you to research and satisfy yourself of what the truth is, and where the actual Catholic Church is. So, while ignorance might be “bliss”, wilful ignorance is not. At best, such people who refuse to educate themselves once the facts are presented before them, are definitely guilty of wilful ignorance, wilful laziness (sloth) and probably a good dose of pride. While these people might still be considered Catholics, they are in definite error and wilfully so, and should be shunned and shamed, as one would a perpetual fornicator, adulterer, habitual drunk, and so on.
Sedevacantists are the only genuine Catholic left.
Disagreements amongst sedevacantists are not “schisms” but merely personal opinions they may hold, of which some will be in error and some will be less so. Humans are always in some degree of error, as we Catholics know, so this is nothing new or a reason for trying to label the other as a “schismatic” or heretic. And generally, the lay-people of Novus Orco “Catholicism” are also merely ignorant and/or lazy, but can be considered Catholics, though in error. There, are however, among them, definite wolves in sheep’s clothing, so SOME of these lay people can in fact be heretics and/or (more likely) Freemason/Satanists intent on leading the masses astray. Case in Point, see the degenerate Milo. Or any of a bunch of Opus Dei funded grifters.
In general terms, the article says the same sort of thing, except that I have two objections, a major and a minor one.
My “major” objection, is one that I well understand can be used by enemies as pointing to my “arrogant self-determining authority” (it is no such thing. I can simply read and do logic, just like insisting that 2+2 is 4 is not arrogant, regardless of how many fools say it is 5) and by idiots to become protestant in their “interpretation” of canon law, (the 2+2 = purple brigade) so one must tread carefully when voicing it, but in essence, it is this:
Whether a Pope is valid or not may not ALWAYS be absolutely and immediately obvious, but, logic, and God, demands that they eventually become so. Because Catholicism is the TRUTH and as such, sooner or later it reveals itself. And when it does, it does so unambiguously. Because the truth, like math, is not subject to opinion. And canon law is, like math, eternal and not subject to opinion, only error by those not adequately possessed of the faculties required to understand it, just as math is not subject to opinion, but only error in the same way.
In this regard then, I object completely to the idea that is initially expressed along the lines of “well, if everyone goes along with it (Bergy the Oleous being Pope) you gotta as well”. I no more need do this than go along with 2+2 being recognised as being 5 by an overwhelming majority.
Truth is not decided by a majority but by the laws of nature, reality, and God. End of.
And a second objection: quoting this or that doctor of the Church is irrelevant in trying to make a definitive argument. It is really merely a distraction. At best it can just be supporting evidence to further elucidate the only thing that matters: dogmatic, canon law.
In this regard then, while I understand, and appreciate the writer’s intent, and it is a very noble and good one, and I do not wish to detract from his fine points, well and succinctly explained, I must point out that, if one is careful, observant, and follows the rules of Roman Law (which are essentially reason and logic turned to the human condition) there is no ambiguity as to whom is or is not a valid Pope, and, as I have detailed in my works, from 28th October 1958, that is, from Roncalli on, we have not had a valid Pope to date.
Given my recent weeks of not being able to do much physical work and even more recent new lung-thing/infection, whatever, I have been working at trying to finish the third book in the Overlords of Mars trilogy.
Which, I am trying to fit into an omnibus edition too, with all three books in one volume, which may however prove impossible as the largest number of pages for that is just over 800 and I am approaching 700 very fast. Then again, the series is really a Quadrilogy, even if the third book does get things sort of to a certain “point”. But… if I can get the fourth book out too, a two-volume omnibus may be it.
At any rate, having to re-read most of the first two books and consult my autistic level notes on the matter, is making me aware that really, I did a pretty good job with this series. One passage, spoken by one of the Russian admirals in book 2, made me quite aware of the rather startling predictive power of my imagination when I let it run loose with few filters.
“They will use American culture” said Zukhov. He pronounced culture in the same way he had said Lord before. “You know what I mean? Bang, bang television,” he made pistols with his hands, “lots of pornography on the internet to keep those who don’t work busy wanking, mobile phones, low-frequency vibration mind-reprogramming over large areas, disease, war, and they will use their all-important god, the dollar, the money, to drive it all. Force people into mental and physical corners until they are beaten into doing what they want of them. Stupid slaves who think they are free.”
Consider the book was published in 2013, however, the ideas for it, including this specific plot-point, which is one of the main threads of the entire series, was originally conceived in the late 1990s. As I may have mentioned elsewhere, in fact, each of the three books originates from a dream I had way back in the early to mid 1990s.
The first book was inspired by a dream I had of some space humans coming to Earth and my initial sensation at meeting the eyes of a very beautiful and blue-eyed woman among them, and feeling sort of like a monkey compared to them, and instead, this beautiful woman telepathically letting me know that no, we could be just as advanced and kind as them. The eyes on the cover of that first book, Inception, are very much like the ones I had dreamt of. And I used them long before I eventually married their owner. The book also has an alternative and more controversial cover here. Although, Amazon redirects me to the Italian site which changes things, so I am not sure which cover you get to see.
The second book, Stasis, also was the result of a dream, that for all intents and purposes could be thought of as a scene with Giona and Lydia close to one of the Martian ruins.
The third book was inspired by a scene that I am not sure if I will be able to incorporate in the third book, but if I can, I will. If you read of a character called Atalla, and a game… then you’ll know I put in there.
Anyway, don’t get too excited, but after a 10 year hiatus, (which I think has given me the time required to make this a better story than it would have been, with a lot more “controversial” but more true to life reality, I am hoping to have this third book done by Christmas.
If my future-guessing on this one is anything close to the one I had in the early 90s, concerning our present day, some 30 years later, we’re all in for a wild ride. More fun if you’re off planet than on it though. As usual!
Paranoia Edition
Here is one scenario no one thought about (and I don’t think it’s all that likely at all, but it’s good to keep options open when things are uncertain).
Remember how some said Putin too was just part of the whole Satanic control both teams to always win the game?
Well… what if, the whole Israel thing is a distraction to get Ukraine to kind of lose and disappear as an actual country, and then Israel is to be attacked by almost the entire Muslim world, just so Israeli Jews can go: “We need help, we’ll go to Ukraine!” And Putin, being all anti-Nazi, as he has been, can hardly refuse to let the poor, new holocaust victims settle in now totally de-nazified Ukraine. And all of a sudden the Jews now have their Greater Israel, just as they sort of told us they wanted. And access to the entire “financial aid” of the West, who will be compelled to finance the poor, starving, war refugees with their small hats. And Russia too will finance them, because hey, poor Jews. And besides, those evil Muslims destroyed Israel, so we can now continue the endless war against them, gotta keep those war profiteering things and dead white boys going somehow.
Hey, don’t panic. I’m just saying.
You might be interested in the following posts:
By G | 14 October 2023 | Posted in Nazi Conspiracies, Russia and GAE, Social Commentary, The Enemy Within, The Jews