Tuesday, January 30, 2018

David Brooks Wants to Replace You

It seemed like there was a brief glimpse of hope there! Like when the African rapists used condoms and Pope Benedict XVI said that was a good sign because it showed they had some morals. The media widely interpreted that as the Pope being pro-condom. And so here we had a little optimism that David Brooks was learning, but alas, 'twas but a moment.

Turns out Brooks wants to replace America with not-America because not-America is more American than America.

The East Germans of the 21st Century
That’s because when you wade into the evidence you find that the case for restricting immigration is pathetically weak. The only people who have less actual data on their side are the people who deny climate change.
But if you believe in climate change you would be for zero population growth, hence zero immigration...We can forgive Brooks on this one since we know Progressives use environmental policy for political aims, they don't actually care about CO2 emissions or development.

Brooks quickly takes a dark turn:
You don’t have to rely on pointy-headed academics. Get in your car. If you start in rural New England and drive down into Appalachia or across into the Upper Midwest you will be driving through county after county with few immigrants. These rural places are often 95 percent white. These places lack the diversity restrictionists say is straining the social fabric.

Are these counties marked by high social cohesion, economic dynamism, surging wages and healthy family values? No. Quite the opposite. They are often marked by economic stagnation, social isolation, family breakdown and high opioid addiction. Charles Murray wrote a whole book, “Coming Apart,” on the social breakdown among working-class whites, many of whom live in these low immigrant areas.
That escalated quickly.
One of Murray’s points is that “the feasibility of the American project has historically been based on industriousness, honesty, marriage and religiosity.” It is a blunt fact of life that, these days, immigrants show more of these virtues than the native-born. It’s not genetic. The process of immigration demands and nurtures these virtues.
Whoa whoa whoa whoa there Mr. Brooks. Uh, there's uh, a certain ethnic group that uh, immigrated here, and uh, well they've been at war with these American virtues for about 100 years...
Over all, America is suffering from a loss of dynamism. New business formation is down. Interstate mobility is down. Americans switch jobs less frequently and more Americans go through the day without ever leaving the house.
This sounds pretty serious Mr. Brooks. Maybe we should focus on the problems eating away at the very core of America? Nah, fuck em!

Cutting to the punch:
Progressives say Republicans oppose immigration because of bigotry. But it’s not that simple. It’s more accurate to say restrictionists are stuck in a mono-cultural system that undermines their own values: industry, faithfulness and self-discipline. Of course they react with defensive animosity to the immigrants who out-hustle and out-build them. You’d react negatively, too, if confronted with people who are better versions of what you wish you were yourself.
Mr. Brooks finds a grain of truth in there: the current model of development forces intelligent people out of rural areas. And it becomes a self-reinforcing cycle in many places because the morons left behind don't understand basic things like how to run a small town government. In some of these towns, the government is the largest employer. Policy is designed to protect government jobs, taxes go up to pay their bloated salaries, benefits and pensions.

Fertility rates also play a role. Many of these areas are depopulated. Nothing will bring them back. Economics is involved too. What happens to the mining town when the mine closes, or the factory town when the factory closes and moves down South or overseas? These town were built on economics and they died because of it. If you look at the long history of those towns, you see stagnation, a burst of activity, and a return to stagnation. Those places have reverted to their natural state. Free trade's wholesale destruction of the manufacturing sector plays a role, but many of the rural areas in the north were first hit by factories moving south.

Everywhere, there is deep cultural rot. One doesn't fix a broken home by importing an intact home. There are real problems in America and the evidence from Richwine and your own common sense tells you immigrants are assimilating just fine into degenerate lifestyles that breaks down largely as it does among the native population. The bulk of immigrants will assimilate into the most dysfunctional native subcultures, accelerating social decline. Economic and political decline proceed in slow motion until they reach a tipping point.

Taking a big step back, the real reason why Mr. Brooks and others in power want immigration is because as soon as the doors are closed, the economy will crumble. Much of the economy's growth comes from housing demand and strains on public services. Once immigration ends, that demand evaporates and even reverses if there are deportations. Fertility rates collapse below replacement. The lack of growth and debt burden immediately move from a problem to a crisis. Uber and Amazon can thrive in deflation because they can earn money as incomes fall. Companies such as Facebook decline rapidly along with national wealth. As in Japan, the economy can "grow" even as GDP falls, per capita income can rise, standards of living can improve. Debt will spiral out of control unless cuts are made to entitlements, welfare and defense spending.

Maintaining their wealth and power is the only goal of the current crop of elites. They do not care for anyone in the country, not even their own base. (Notice the Democrats now fracturing as Latinos learn they were only a bargaining chip.) It used to be that poor rural whites were the bargaining chip, and so urban Democrats feigned sympathy to advance socialism. They were the cudgel used against the bad whites from places like California who wanted more capitalism. Now the populations have changed. The poor whites are bad whites, they can go die now. The new face of socialism is here.

If I had to bet, I'd wager someone figures out a way to sell socialism to bad whites (drop the cultural stuff, overtly pro-gun, silent on religion maybe). Or flipped, the GOP offers something like full socialism and attracts enough Hispanics to win a landslide, and then sets about looting the financial and technology sector. Or think about how inflation is needed to balance America's books. The sectors that benefit most from uncontrolled inflation are hard assets like energy, agriculture, deeply indebted sectors such as utilities and industrials. It's not hard to imagine how that might play out politically, the sides are already aligned against each other. That supposed right-wingers [or should I type (((right-wingers)))] are viciously attacking their own side suggests a tipping point is approaching.

Wednesday, January 24, 2018

Choose Your Censor

Don't like the freewheeling USA? You can already live under German censorship rules! Just change your Twitter settings.

An Inside Look At The Accounts Twitter Has Censored In Countries Around The World

Tuesday, January 23, 2018

Of Wingnats and Niggerfaggots

Ricky Vaughn coined the term Wingnats (wigger nationalists) to troll the WN 1.0 crowd

Response:
Ricky Vaughn Is A Niggerfaggot Who Has No Place On TRS - Sperg Warning


Is there no end to the madness? Actually there is, read the whole thread as it turns into Nazi bashing.

False Narratives Collapse Instantly

We knew the 1 percent are Democrats, but now the average progressive knows too.
Me in November: Eliminate SALT Deductions
If you have low time preference though, you eliminate SALT completely without batting an eye. The net present value is highly positive. In the short-run, there could be pain at the ballot box for House and Senate Republicans in blue states. However, there is also immediate pain for Democrats at the state and local level because they'll have to reform or cut taxes if they want to ease the higher tax burden.

CA and NY today: Our view: Don't rush New York tax changes
The state Department of Taxation and Finance has come out with a preliminary report on potential options. The report itself, at 37 pages long, is a great illustration of just of how complicated such an undertaking will be. In the introduction, policymakers are cautioned that there needs to be "extensive analysis" conducted and that actions should come from "an intensive and measured process."

That all makes sense, and we applaud the governor for putting forth the directive that this be examined.

At the same time, we're also terrified that the result could be changes that might alleviate a problem for some New Yorkers — those who have itemized deductions on their federal tax returns totaling more than the increased standard deduction — and create new state-oriented problems for a much larger portion of the taxpaying population.
Cuomo: Change way NY collects taxes to counter GOP tax law
Cuomo proposed as part of his 2018 state budget Tuesday to essentially do away with the state income tax on the wages earned by New Yorkers and replace it with an equivalent tax on employers. So instead of taxing wage earners, the state would tax employers on the wages they pay to their workers.

Employers could then deduct the state tax on their federal income tax returns because the GOP tax law does not limit employer deductions.

"Instead of charging a tax rate on the income of employees, we charge it on wages paid by employers," he said during a conference call with reporters Wednesday.
Wealthy exodus to escape new tax rules worries California Democrats
The Republican-backed federal tax bill flipped the tables on a never-ending question for California politicians: Will high taxes lead the state’s wealthiest residents to flee the Golden State for the comparable tax havens of Florida, Nevada and Texas?

Republicans reliably raise that alarm when Democrats advocate for tax increases, like the 2012 and 2016 ballot initiatives that levied a new income tax on very high-earning residents.

But now, with the federal tax bill cutting off deductions that benefited well-off Californians, the state’s Democrats suddenly are singing the GOP song about a potential millionaire exodus.

Wednesday, January 17, 2018

No Shit

Frenemies on the Right
The tenets of National Socialism and the role of the word “nahtsee” in your rhetorical strategy are two distinctly different things. (This, by the way, is a Moldbuggian axiom: an ideology’s label and its structure must be treated separately.) Even if you don’t want a NatSoc metapolitical strategy or social policy, nothing is forcing you to go out there and nazi-bash, disavow, distance, or otherwise punch the people leftists identify as being to the right of you, politically.
If the right opened a restaurant, the left might say everything tasted like shit. They might say it was actual shit. If someone on the right proposed to serve actual shit, then it doesn't surprise that others said, "Get that shit out of here." Not because they give a shit what leftists think, but because they don't like shit.

Related update: Retconning History
As I mentioned below, there’s a growing myth in 21st Century America that white Southerners sympathized with Hitler. In reality, the South was most anti-Nazi part of the country.

Southerners were the most pro-England / anti-Germany with 76% agreeing that helping England win was more important than staying out of the war, while only 55% of Midwesterners prioritized England winning.

Another update:

Monday, January 15, 2018

Christian Persecution in USA

Iowa lawsuit pits gay rights against religious freedom
A student member of Business Leaders in Christ, Marcus Miller, filed a complaint with the university last February after the group denied his request to serve as its vice president. Miller's request was rejected after he disclosed he was gay.

The group says it denied Miller's request because he rejected its religious beliefs and would not follow them.

Miller did not respond to messages seeking comment about the lawsuit. He has since started his own university-recognized, Jesus-centered student organization, Love Works, to advocate for justice on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual issues.
As predicted by Pope Benedict XVI, the Church will become smaller and more fundamentalist. This is how it happens.
The group's loss of registration as an on-campus student organization means it can no longer reserve campus meeting space, participate in student recruitment fairs, access funds from student activity fees or use university-wide communication services.
If they were future business leaders, they'd market themselves as "the only real Christian group at the University of Iowa."

Tuesday, January 09, 2018

David Brooks Is Learning

If you wonder why I so often post David Brooks opinion pieces, it's because I expected something like this would eventually show up.

The Decline of Anti-Trumpism
It’s almost as if there are two White Houses. There’s the Potemkin White House, which we tend to focus on: Trump berserk in front of the TV, the lawyers working the Russian investigation and the press operation. Then there is the Invisible White House that you never hear about, which is getting more effective at managing around the distracted boss.

I sometimes wonder if the Invisible White House has learned to use the Potemkin White House to deke us while it changes the country.

I mention these inconvenient observations because the anti-Trump movement, of which I’m a proud member, seems to be getting dumber.
I think this is what everyone on the dissident Right has believed since Trump assumed office. There's a dog and pony show for the media. Everything important end up on page B27 instead of A1. When you have an extreme opposition bent on #Resistance, creating a false Narrative is very useful. Being helpful, the Cathedral created the false Narrative for free.
Wolff doesn’t pretend to adhere to normal journalistic standards. He happily admits that he’s just tossing out rumors that are too good to check. As Charlie Warzel wrote on BuzzFeed, “For Wolff’s book, the truth seems almost a secondary concern to what really matters: engagement.”

The ultimate test of the lowbrow is not whether it challenges you, teaches you or captures the contours of reality; it’s whether you feel an urge to share it on social media.

In every war, nations come to resemble their enemies, so I suppose it’s normal that the anti-Trump movement would come to resemble the pro-Trump movement. But it’s not good. I’ve noticed a lot of young people look at the monotonous daily hysteria of we anti-Trumpers and they find it silly.
The difference being the pro-Trump movement is self aware and laughing its ass off. The anti-Trump movement is tilting at windmills.

The next step will be for David Brooks to realize that everything he hates about Trump and the pro-Trump movement was created as a response to "low brow" leftism and that the demographic trends he cheers on accelerates the process. The Idiocracy arrives through the Democrat party and the Left in modern America, not the Right. It only appears the opposite because the intellectual Right held out against "low brow" politics for 40 years. Brooks is mad/sad that the Right ditched "high brow" for victory. He still doesn't acknowledge why that was necessary. He'll never acknowledge that the paper he writes for is the engine of "low brow" leftism, the core of the increasingly "low brow" Cathedral. That's too much of a black pill. But one day he might wade into the comment section and decide the Times' audience "has changed" too.

Steven Pinker Needs a Time Machine

Steven Pinker wants the university to address truths like black crime rates and differences between the sexes. He says this will eliminate the "red pill" since there's no hidden truth, and it will also allow the Left to address these truths with new arguments. If someone is "red pilled" they can hear some counter arguments from the Left, instead of only getting more information from the Right.

Pinker is addressing a non-existent audience though. He's trying to be a moderate in a time without a mainstream center. Steven Pinker needs to build a time machine and go back to 1994 before the Bell Curve was published at the very least (25 years ago). The Left is too far gone now. Acknowledging the truth destroys the moral basis of their political agenda. He can't argue the truth, which is that the worst elements of the Alt-Right, the simplistic thinkers who draw bigoted conclusions (in the sense of being closed minded) from limited data, are on par with most of the university and media. The best of the Alt-Right and dissident Right are making arguments on par with the best the Cathedral has to offer. He can't admit that and remain in "polite" university society.

To be a moderate on topics such as race is to destroy the Left as it exists today. Affirmative action is probably net racist against whites and males (you'd have to go back 40 or 50 years to find something as egregious as Google's discriminatory and hostile workplace, and I'm not even sure a similarly clear cut case exists), most institutional racism works against whites and Asians in the education system, the data suggests cops are more likely to shoot at a white suspect. The Left could pursue its current agenda acknowledging these realities, but it lacks a moral component. They could add one, such as charity, but then I can make a charitable argument for working on space colonization "for the good of mankind." The debate shifts greatly in favor of right-wingers. The moral debate moves in the direction of Christianity and decency. If gays aren't being systematically oppressed, the ones doing Pride marches and pushing the teaching of homosexuality are behaving very badly.

The Left also loses a compelling case for community. There's an explicit relationship formed if X owes Y, but if X doesn't owe Y, then X and Y bargain as equals, and if X gets a better offer from Z, then so be it. The Left doesn't offer anything to the other side today. There is no leftist version of the cuckservative. If the Left loses its moral ground, it immediately becomes the immoral actor, the cheater. It needs to make a radical move rightward (towards the center) if it wants to bargain on level ground.

The Left jumped the shark once racism became objectively untrue. "Racists" know "racism" is untrue because they know what is in their heart, but when there isn't data to prove it across society, it is possible for the Left to smear all white males as "racists" and "sexists." When the truth comes out, people are instantly "red pilled" because the Cathedral looks suspiciously anti-white and is clearly telling lies. Totalitarian behavior is logical because it is their only path forward if the idea of secession/decentralization is verboten. Pinker hasn't thought this through to the end, or he knows that forcing the left to open up even a little bit will instantly go from a trickle to a flood, and a moral and cultural revolution against the Left will erupt.

Thursday, January 04, 2018

The Economy Sucks

1. Presidents don't affect the economy that much. Certainly not in the first year.

2. When there is a big effect (like Obama in 2009 or Reagan in 1981), it is because the market has already turned. In some sense you could say the election of a radically different president is itself a sign of the change in society/market has started.

3. The major shift in consumer confidence is a result of Independents becoming more confident. Republicans and Democrats flipped in their optimism/pessimism. Counterpoint: there's some evidence Democrats are becoming more confident.

4. The prior posts of economic charts show there isn't much of a recovery outside of housing and auto sales. Real GDP growth is slower than it was a few years ago. Lending is slowing.

5. Consumer confidence and unemployment are lagging indicators.

6. Manufacturing PMIs are high. The ISM manufacturing survey hit 59.7 in December. This is a leading indicator. Industrial production is still below the 2007 peak.

7. There's no inflation (because no lending, no money supply growth). The only place where we see rampant money creation is in cryptocurrencies. "The People's bailout."

8. Commodities prices started ramping up in early 2016 because China flooded its economy with cash, not because the market anticipated a Trump win.

9. Without credit/money supply inflation, interest rates and growth have an upper limit because of outstanding debt.

10. Since 2008, every time the economy has heated up and interest rates/inflation are expected to rise, they reverse and hit a new "all-time" low. (peaks in 2011, 2014, and if we repeat, 2017/8)

11. Bonus: the Federal Reserve has started reversing QE. We know QE failed to do what the Fed wanted. Ending might boost the economy: St. Louis Fed: Good Case for QE Being Detrimental. Or it might sink it.

Wednesday, January 03, 2018

Treasuries Held by Fed


Zoomed in:

Mortgage Securities Held By Federal Reserve

Industrial Production

Student Loan Growth

Trade Weighted U.S. Dollar

Lending at Commercial Banks

Housing Starts

New Home Sales

Light Vehicle Sales

Real GDP Growth since 2008 Crisis

After the rebound.

Credit Risk in the Economy

America, the Barbarian

Over at Imperial Energy: How Darwin Thought and Some Tough Questions for Neoreactionaries.

See this first for conext: I Am a Barbarian
If Manfold is correct, then does Manifold’s argument stand as either or both an anomaly and refutation of Moldbug’s thesis regarding the Modern Structure and what Trump and Bannon call the “Swamp”? That is, that America is an overly centralised, bureaucratic and bloated, crisis ridden empire whose citizens have become decadent and despondent, while the Ruling Elite have become effete.

So, how do neoreactionaries respond this this question? How do we account for this anomaly?

Is America a barbarian nation?

If so, does this refute or undermine the neoreactionary critique?

The key claims of Manifold that could refute the critique (or not) are (2) and (10) while (4), (5) and (6) are potential underminers.

We disagree with Manifold’s analysis, but it did help us refine our description of the problem of the Modern Structure. However, we will comment on (1) – it is irrelevant. China sees more internal traffic than America during “Golden Week” (Chinese New Year) and China is not a “barbarian nation”.

Of course, neoreactionaries have a decisive argument against (2) – does everyone know what it is?

Stay Foxy people!
"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." America (most of Anglosphere) is a first rate nation because it is a nation of civilized barbarians. It is a nation of people who respect their King, but if he threatens their Rights, they may alternatively: force him to sign a treaty, chop his head off, or tell him to sod off. In most cases, the result of the "revolution" is best described as reform. Monarchy (I'm not a monarchist) isn't a solution to a grand problem, it's a replacement strategy. The barbarians need a civilization strategy to remove or subvert Cathedral-USG. (The chief critique of the Conservatives (cuckservatism) is that they are neither Barbarian nor Civilized. The cucks do not fight like Barbarians (the Alt-Right does), while the cucks also aren't civilized enough to occupy USG (have government careers, take over the Deep State, wield state power for Barbarian aims). Instead of harnessing the tension of the contradictions, they are broken by it. A Midwest small businessman is a perfectly fine politician for a state dominated by Barbarians because he won't bother the Barbarians. Left alone, they will accept their fate or not, as dictated by their own actions. And they will expand outward like the East India Company or Crimson Permanent Assurance or maybe ExxonBlackwater Africa Division. But against a civilized threat he loses because on the one hand he doesn't escalate (as a Barbarian would), but he also can't out "civilize" his enemies.

The American Revolution was wrong, it contained the seeds of its own destruction, and yet it was the American thing to do. America must constantly be reborn because it cannot balance liberty and equality. Barbarians cannot stomach being chained by civilization. We are a frontier nation, we need a frontier. (Space is the place.) We are also reaching the end of the equality line. Liberty cannot survive as the successful hack by European communists reaches its end game. It formalized equality into state policy instead of leaving it as mostly informal (and still very powerful culturally) with the formalized concept of equality under the law. (The average American Revolutionary would look a lot like an SJW, not physically of course.)

USG is therefore the wrong government for America. It has been wrong since at least 1860. From 1860 to about 1945, the increase in centralized power funneled and concentrated American power. It put a man on the Moon. Since then, rising centralization running a foreign ideological system has choked the people, America's greatest asset. America will always be a global superpower because it sits alone on the North America landmass like a stationary bandit, but the people are mobile bandits all over the globe. America is a nation of colonists and capitalists, tax evaders and pirates. (When critics say the Cathedral is importing a new people to replace the Americans, this is a literal description of policy. It is dangerous to be a ruling elite hostile to the Barbarian natives.)

An example from the latest mania. The American government could be unleashing cryptocurrencies on the world because it is one of the few major governments that won't be threatened by it. Cryptocurrencies would put global finance more firmly into the hands of Americans, or at least wrest it from all state control. But because USG centralized monetary control into the Federal Reserve (civilized the credit system?), and because it controls this centralized system, and because crytpocurrencies threaten it, it takes on an adversarial relationship. Barbarians love cryptocurrencies (and wildcat banking). A monarch of the Barbarians would love cryptocurrencies because as the people grow wealthy, so does their monarch. But if the monarch is a predator on his people and cryptocurrencies represent an existential threat (cause he's dangerously close to the "sod off" part of the story), then he's going to crack down. If he realizes his global dollar system is on the verge of collapse and he'll have to enter into a multipolar system with China and Russia, he'd still love cryptos because instead of sharing power, everyone loses power to the Barbarians. And if you're the head of the largest Barbarian nation...

Synthesis

Potpourri

Blog Archive