Bitcoin

In the event of war or societal collapse, bank accounts get frozen, and gold gets seized from vaults. You can last longer by hiding classic cars inside barns and putting Mont Blanc fountain pens and Rolex watches under your bed, but ultimately the ideal asset to have is always going to be a key in your head that unlocks noise, noise which can be stored in all electronic memory and in the cloud. To seize your cryptocurrency, government would have to prove that you have a key in your head, and that the key unlocks X piece of random noise which can be used to retrieve Y piece of cryptocurrency; something which can only really be done using prolonged torture, unfeasible

The maths behind cryptography and the potential of anonymous transactions and cryptocurrency was worked out in the 1970s, and in the ensuring decades became well-known in science fiction, especially among libertarians and anarchocapitalists, which is is why you can see videos of Milton Friedman discussing the idea. The innovation of Bitcoin was that it used a pubic ledger rather than having to rely on a trusted third party (a crypto-bank), which people were expecting to be necessary

It is and has always been taken for granted by people in the industry that cryptocurrency will take over the world. The problem with Bitcoin is that you are betting on that particular incarnation of cryptocurrency to be the one which will take over the world. The public-ledger system create big problems with scalability, problems which might not be solved, and if solved may be solved on another cryptocurrency. If it’s bitcoin which solves those technical problems than it’s bitcoin which takes over the world, and a fraction of a bitcoin becomes worth a fortune. If it’s another cryptocurrency which solves the problems, then people will switch to that, and bitcoin will drop to zero. So to bet on bitcoin is to make a technical bet on that particular incarnation of cryptocurrency solving the scalability problem. In the long run expect to either gain everything or lose everything

Advertisements

Galatians 3:28

Evangelical protestant pastors will often mutate their religion leftwards in order to appeal to the university-educated crowd. If someone points out that there are intrinsic physical differences between race or genders, they will bring up Galatians 3:28 as a rebuttal:

“In Christ, there is neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, slave or free — we are all one in Him”

The fact that there are “no genders in Christ” is totally in line with protestant evangelicalism, since they are fine with men wear skinny jeans and their women wear suit jackets, so that it is hard to tell who is who. The blurring and merging of the genders is considered well in line with social progress/divine providence, so their interpretation of Galatians 3:28 fits in with what they are doing

The standard rightwing rebuttal to Galatians 3:28 being brought up by Pastor Tom is something like “Galatians 3:28 would only make sense if it refers to spiritual equality, to the equal ability of these groups to receive salvation, which is obvious from context, and from the fact that we already know from the scientific method about all these race and gender differences…” (at which point, shortly after the stunned silence, he gets accused of violent feeling-rape and removed from the church for heresy)

Since other denominations such as Orthodoxy have a long history of enforcing gender roles, and are not yet putting tight trousers on the men and suit jackets on the women, then they can’t logically use Galatians 3:28 to claim race doesn’t exist without also disproving the concept of gender, as “male or female” is placed right next to “Jew or Greek”. If you see it happen, then a bait-and-switch is being pulled, using a verse about spiritual equality to make an argument for earthly equality, and hoping you won’t notice

Duvets and blankets

One of the unnoticed declines of society happened in the 1960s as people switched from flat sheets and blankets to duvets, to the extent that many people have now grown up taking duvets for granted, having never used a flat sheet combined with wool blanket

 

Hence asthma, since people do not change duvet covers as much as they used to change flat sheets

 

You can theoretically change a duvet cover as much as you like, and optionally dry-clean the interior, but in practice almost no one does this as much as they should, because it is tricky and annoying to have to put a duvet back in its cover, and expensive and time-consuming to dry clean the interior, so people put off washing them

 

With a flat sheet and blanket, you only need to really wash and change the flat sheets, since they are the parts touching your body. The flat sheet can be immediately thrown into the washing machine at 30C and hung to dry. The blanket, being wool, is naturally antibacterial and rarely needs to be washed, but if necessary can be machined washed on cold on a gentle cycle with a special wool detergent and hung to dry, which is much easier than dry-cleaning a duvet. But what is most important is changing the part which is touching your skin, and changing a flat cotton sheet is much easier than changing a duvet cover, so you are much more likely to do it as much as you are supposed to

 

Also, the light airy fluffiness of a duvet is actually cheap thrill. Once the thrill is over, it will feel better to have a thinner but warmer and heavier wool-blanket flat-sheet combination, and is also more practical if you prefer to read books or use laptops while lieing down

The decline of art

The timbre of female pop singers hijack your ability to detect that a woman in heat. Estrogen spike in a girl produces the “growl” effect. See Lana Del Rey, Adele, Rihanna, Sia, and all the others; but the best example I have heard recently is the song “Havana”. You hear something and think it sounds beautiful, but actually it’s just your sex instinct being hijacked

It is the equivalent of the Victorians and their physical art. Art peaked in the 18th century. The Victorians replaced the ideal man as a focal point (healthy) with naked women. But what they saw as beautiful art was actually just hijacking the sex instinct of the Victorians, producing small pulses of lust, like modern pop music does, which the Victorians interpreted as beauty

Art Renewal Academy grossly incorrect to place the peak of Art with “Nymphs and Satyr” by Bouguereau 1873, probably does not realize that most of his emotional appreciation of that painting is because the nymphs are young naked girls. We should place peak art at everyone’s favourite racist painting: Wanderer above the Sea of Fog, 1818. 1818 was shortly after the Anglo world started going downhill, and even at the time, Casper David Friedrich was considered dated, already left behind by social progress, but that painting is the best representation there is of the world that had began to fall

Without a king and inquisition, art goes downhill in a race to appeal to the crowd, replacing healthy ideals with lust, tricking even us sometimes, and tricking the mob. Leftists (i.e. subversive brahmin unchecked by the torture chambers of an inquisition) then jump on board to increase their own status at the expense of desecrating the ideal

How to avoid Facebook zucc (straight from the Russians)

The Facebook sock-account/alt-right community is still pretty decent. While you can just join their groups and mass-add these guys on your normie, this is inadvisable if you have a good career.

(While everyone thinks AntiFa are infiltrating and doxxing us, in practice every case I’ve seen of dox has been one group of white nationalists doxxing another person or group)

The best way to get in is to make a sock. But how do you stop the sock triggering facebook automated antisock defense? Well the Russians make money off producing many thousands of fake people in order to sell five-star reviews to Western businesses, so they’ve worked out various simple rules.

1. No more than three accounts per IP (and perhaps one is safest)
2. Add a phone number (just get cheap pay-as-you-go sims to use for various socks and other stuff)
3. Don’t join any groups, tag, create pages, or comment on people’s posts for a few days or weeks, “warm-in” first with a gradual increase of activity
4. Only add people who will accept, or even better get them to add you. It helps if you have a normie account already on the inside with mutual friends, or a friend on the inside, so you can add the first few people safely, since many pepes will not accept someone without mutuals. Obviously you want alt-right imagery to signal that you are part of the group.
5. Don’t use cheap or free proxies as they are blacklisted by facebook, but you can use high-quality paid proxies which always route through a single location (https://www.myprivateproxy.net/)
6. Use a plausible name
7. Avoid bot-related stuff like commenting on posts of non-friends, or posting URLs

Remember facebook records all the time you spend even simply looking at stuff. So to warm an account, I suggest getting a few people to accept your request then spend your time occasionally browsing, like a real user would do. When you feel ready, perhaps after a week or so, you can start joining groups and adding the many thousands of pseudoanonymous interesting people

While these rules are not comprehensive, they set you up for thinking about how facebook thinks, what it tracks, and how to emulate an authentic user

As for censorship, it’s mostly done by very low-wage workers in the Philippines, with a relatively very small team in the US who handle the verifications/escalations. So you won’t be censored if you use double-talk. They’re not intelligent people. But you will be censored if you use cuss words or literal swastikas since that’s going to be clearly part of their training. I am unsure what their current conventions are with regards to pepes, but I suggest being low-key by only using a pepe hand overlay, or your own WN hand signal, as I’ve seen many pepes zucced in my time but the hand signals are popular and elegant

Why homosexuals should be thrown off rooftops

The reason we need to give fruit the drop is not just to prevent spread of pathogens and prevent indoctrination of children, but because it interferes with normal close male-male bonding as seen with David-and-Jonathan and Sam-and-Frodo. Existence of fruit destroys the ability of men to co-ordinate with and trust eachother, thereby destroys the ability of a civilization to maintain and defend itself.

The same problem crops up with wife-sharing. A cohesive society requires me to trust my friend with my wife. Any possibly that he might think I’m giving him permission to bang her will undermine our ability to form cohesive bonds and trust eachother. So we need to execute any man who purposefully shares his wife, for same essential reasons as we need to drop fruit from high buildings.

Here we have a big mistake of libertarians. People don’t exist in a bubble. A degenerate view of marriage around us and at our children’s schools interferes with our ability to bond between males; and our own view of marriage interferes with their ability to enjoy themselves. So we can not trust eachother, and are automatically in a state of cold war. Ultimately to survive we either have to fight a hot war, or live separately from them

Rape and attempted rape

As any good SJW will tell you, almost all girls are “raped” or “nearly raped” in university, and yet only a tiny fraction of these stories have any evidence or lead to prosecution

The typical rape at university:
1. Man and woman have sex, usually after drinking alcohol
2. Both wake up with a hangover
3. Woman decides that man was so low status that she could not possibly have consented
4. Woman decides after several days, or several weeks, that it must have been rape. Makes a report to the authorities without any physical evidence, and tells all her friends

The typical “attempted rape” at university:
1. Man and woman go to a room alone together, to spend the night
2. Woman enacts a subconcious “fitness test” – a test of token resistance to see if the man has healthy genes that know how to seduce women
3. Man fails the fitness test (usually just through lack of knowledge and experience and a childhood of education in leftism) and goes home early
4. Several days to several weeks later, the woman decides that she could not possibly have consented to such an inferior low-status male entering her house, especially one who failed a basic fitness test. Decides that he attempted to rape her, and makes an evidenceless report to the authorities, and tells all her friends

The irony of the second instance is that once a male is confident enough in his social skills to actually pass a fitness test, he can pretty much force them to have sex in the literal and real sense, holding down their wrists and everything. Once the man is able to pass fitness tests, the girl in hindsight will percieve the man as high-status with competent social skills, power and charm, and will therefore remember the encounter as consentful in hindsight, even if it was not

“For he that has, to him shall be given: and he that has not, from him shall be taken even that which he has.”

The Bible’s solution is to make female consent completely irrelevant, and make consent of the girl’s father all that matters.

A girl’s father isn’t driven by hormones, or subconsious desires to be impregnated by strangers and subconcious fitness tests. He simply wants his daughter to be with a man with a good income and a legal obligation to look after her and the offspring (so that the father doesn’t have to pay to support the grandchildren). So it becomes easy to work out what situations a girl’s father would have consented to, and what he would not