With commentary by secret billionaire financier Kensuimo. If you play the waveform of the audio file backwards at 666 Hz and view it through the decoder ring you’ll be able to hear his voice, but if you have the decoder ring you already knew that.

Here’s the picture I promised at around 41 minutes.


Update: prefc reveals the TRUTH BEHIND TRUTH.

That’s right, the philosopher’s stone is made from human coofs in mass numbers.

Update 2: Triangle man shares stock secrets that THEY don’t want you to know about. Wall Street hates this guy!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Akira analysis

Akira is a Jacob and Esau story.

As far as I can tell it’s a portrait of Judaism and Christendom from the Japanese perspective with that particular Japanese fatalism mixed in. In broad strokes, here’s the plot:

  • Jacob and Esau start off as friends in a hard, degenerating world.
  • Esau is chad supreme, Jacob is loyal but has a pretty bad inferiority complex.
  • Then Jacob has a near-death experience with a demigod and accidentally starts on a path toward becoming a god.
  • His brain starts to develop new powers at an accelerated rate and he breaks out from Esau’s chadly shadow.
  • He fights a few demigods and overpowers them easily, so he goes looking for the big baddie God to fight him. I.e. Akira.
  • Then it turns out God died years ago, so Jacob is already the most powerful being around.
  • The consolidation of his power continues accelerating until his body starts uncontrollably absorbing all physical reality around him.
  • (Meanwhile Esau has become decidedly antisemitic.)
  • Jacob gets in a fight with the entire world, basically wins, and then breaks away to form a new universe where he’s God. Millions die in the process (behelit alert, especially the death of Tetsuo’s poor abused girlfriend/innocence).
  • This leaves Esau behind in a tattered world, but he’s too sunny and optimistic by temperament to be too broken up about it.

Please note DNA symbolism at 13 minutes and “I am Tetsuo” quote at 18:30:

There’s a double meaning to this quote. The first is a play on Yahweh (“I am myself”), indicating that Tetsuo has become God, i.e. sufficient unto himself to exist. The other meaning is that Tetsuo has finally grown up from under his big brother’s influence and become his own person, fully individuated and no longer dependent on or obsessed with Kaneda. Basically, he’s come to terms with his own history.

The appearance of telekinetic powers, etc. probably refers to the medieval Jewish eugenics program. Just a sudden massive expansion of brainpower. I’m biased toward this interpretation by the name “Akira” being the title (Google says Akira means “bright, intelligent”), so I think power and brains are being treated as interchangeable. For a summary of research into Jewish intelligence, see this video from approximately 8 minutes to 28 minutes:

Kaneda is actually a very funny, bumbling character with absurdly good fortune on his side. I think the best expression of his character is when he accidentally survives a satellite laser and decides this is a great time to hit Tetsuo with a big rock, fails, and accidentally survives another satellite laser.

“I’m fighting a god and my laser gun stopped working…better hit him with a rock instead.” I freakin’ love this guy.

Posted in Uncategorized | 16 Comments

Coronavirus anecdata

So far I’m aware of four positive tests:

1. A kid at my sister’s daycare.
2. A tradesman at a customer.
3. A tradesman at a former customer.
4. An engineer at corporate HQ for a huge company in the area.

Case #2 was on a respirator and dialysis because the medications were destroying his kidneys. He died this morning. These are all second-order connections, so square the Dunbar number and figure I have 15,750 of those, four of whom had positive tests (1/3937 or 0.025%), one of whom has died. Considering these are lagging indicators and things started really shutting down around Friday, I figure we’ll hit the peak around next Friday. (That’s presuming Trump doesn’t do something really stupid like overturning all of the state-level executive orders to make line go up.)

Worth mentioning.

Update: My sister reports one of her college friends died. He was 30 and healthy, the guy from my customer was reportedly 40ish.

Update 2: Somebody at my company’s HQ got it. Our leadership has been absolutely hilarious throughout this pandemic. I really couldn’t parody how badly they’ve handled it, although as always I’m impressed with the giant testicles of the woman writing their narratives. So I’m actually more forgiving of Trump’s ineptitude than you might guess from my criticism (I’ve seen worse).

Posted in Uncategorized | 55 Comments

Dopamine detox vid and thoughts

Good shit here. This is red pill 101.

I have a relationship with dopamine that’s a bit unusual, so I’d like to add a bit of nuance. Like money and status and guns, dopamine is a powerful tool that can be dangerous to your health and soul. The purpose of this tool is to direct your attention toward things that excite you, and habitual behaviors will follow from this attention without thought or effort because habits are triggered by context (or “antecedents”, to use the technical term). Therefore, the proper function of dopamine is to focus your attention to produce action more consistent with your best possible self*.

For example, when people want to create the habit of waking up earlier I’ll often advise them to put their alarm clock next to their video games and a cup of coffee so they can roll out of bed and immediately start playing. This associates rising early with dopamine, which is just classical conditioning. But there are a couple of tricks to doing this correctly:

1. You have to cut out sources of dopamine that aren’t associated with the things you want to focus on. Thinking is preparatory anticipation of possible futures and, by definition, the futures we prepare for are those which excite us. Excitement is dopamine, so if you want to focus your thoughts, you must focus your dopamine first!

2. Extrinsic motivators wear out after a couple of weeks, so they have to be replaced by intrinsic motivators. E.g. “I get up early” becomes “I enjoy having time in the morning to do deep work.” The cheapest and optimal way to convert simple Pavlovian conditioning into motivation is visualization exercises. The fastest is to immerse yourself in and identify with a subculture where the behavior is expected of its members. And probably the deepest for long-term development is to develop expert knowledge of how improvement in the activity is trained, treating it as an applied skill.

3. Push the rewards further into the habit chain as earlier habits become established. For example, if you have a checklist of items A through F (e.g. your morning routine, where A = getting up to turn your alarm off, B = brushing your teeth, etc.), start by rewarding yourself consistently for doing A, then start requiring yourself to do both A and B before getting the reward. Eventually you should be rewarding yourself intermittently at the end of a perfect day.

4. You have to treat the creation of new habits like a big project with lots of one-off tasks that will pop up because you’ll find that relatively small changes create a large number of unexpected conflicts**. You can’t get up at 4 am every day and have a social life, and you can’t have different bedtimes for different days of the week and still get good sleep. People don’t *really* have trouble getting up early in the morning, they have trouble with the prerequisites: getting enough exercise, getting to sleep on time, getting to sleep once they’re in bed, and getting uninterrupted, productive sleep. Those are all problems that will require research, reflection, serious lifestyle changes, and often real compromises or sacrifices (e.g. getting up at 5:30 instead of 4 and cutting out half your social and family commitments to get to bed at 9 or 9:30).

*If you don’t have any concept of your best possible self, I’d advise you to start by structuring your life around getting the best possible sleep every night for the rest of your life. You’d be surprised how well this acts as an overall guiding principle to optimize your other priorities, how easy asking “will this make me sleep better or worse in the future?” makes your everyday decisions, and how much of a difference sleep actually makes for creating your best possible self. Anyway, it’s hard for slow life history people to argue that good sleep is a bad thing, no matter what political or religious background they’re coming from. Scoffing at sleep is a fast life history strategy kind of thing.

**There’s an interesting feature of setting priorities where you’ll find that moving in any arbitrary direction consistently forces you to sort out everything else in your life as you get better. For example, last year I noticed that getting cardio in the morning really helped my sleep later that night, so I set myself a goal to run a 5k in 18 minutes to motivate my running habit. I quickly learned that I’d have to cross-train some mornings to avoid injury, which got me interested in triathlons. When I joined the triathlon club for coaching and motivation I decided to train for an Ironman next September, since that’s the sort of thing you do in a triathlon club. And in the course of training I’ve learned jerking off really extends my recovery time between workouts, and if I can’t keep up with my training plan then my coach will say mean things and tell all the (extremely) attractive girls in the club I’m a no-good quitter. So, somehow, setting good sleep as a high priority eventually required me to cut out all sorts of unhealthy things like porn, jerking off, alcohol, and caffeine and get really disciplined about health, information diet, time management, etc.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

The rhetorical argument for normie supremacism

Get your mortal salience stimuli here.


Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Normie supremacy as neanderthal supremacy

There is an argument within the most autistic subculture on the internet, neanderthal identitarians, about whether neanderthal altruism is good, bad, or merely inappropriate for the modern day.

I represent the minority faction, which claims that the unrequited altruism of neanderthals operating in their genetic niche as geniuses is a special case of cross-group kin selection which is both morally good (without reservation) and the optimal reproductive strategy. I’ll refer to my position as “kithism”, taken from the root word “kith”, because I believe the fundamental disagreement comes from the conflation of kin selection and multi-level selection.

The majority faction can be described as the “treestumpers”, which is an Edenist meme that can be traced back to a video of a homeless guy in Canada who lives in a treestump and sucks dicks to subsidize his meth addiction. Treestumpers believe that altruism should only be practiced as part of a multi-level selection strategy, so that when the greater group fragments into atomized individuals living parasitically off the remaining accomplishments of the former civilization the genius’s altruism becomes inappropriate, an abstract form of cuckoldry. They are therefore predisposed to wait for the mass of parasites to undergo a Malthusian die-off, merely concerning themselves with increasing their own individual fitness in the meantime, so that they will be able to contribute to the next group-selected civilization as it arises.

A third group, probably the smallest, believes the optimal strategy is to form a breakaway nation of neanderthals which only breeds within itself and takes an isolationist foreign policy. I’ll offer a brief criticism of the third group first.

1. There is no reason to believe the neanderthal phenotype breeds true, as the genius phenotype has already been proven not to breed true. What would the ratio of neurotypical children to aspergic children be in this society? What would be done with the former?
2. The ratio of males to females expressing this phenotype is likely four-to-one, which raises serious issues with creating a sustainable breeding population that have not even been raised.
3. It has never been done successfully before. Where are the other neanderthal ethnostates? If they are adaptive, then we ought to be able to point to several that have existed for thousands of years.
4. Isolationism is a ridiculous foreign policy that indicates a negligent disinterest in outside affairs. No nation which is pridefully ignorant of outside nations will ever be able to win a war with them.
This latter group can be most accurately described as “Edenists”, so that’s the label I’ll use.

Ultimately, they are arguing in favor of insularity and purity-spiraling, which is why they do not engage in productive efforts toward their political ends and thus a brief criticism is sufficient.

Both kithists and treestumpers share the belief that the European genetic strategy is predicated on optimally exploiting the production of the genius phenotype. The argument boils down to the question of who needs whom more in the context of this strategy, geniuses or non-genius whites. I claim that geniuses are obligate symbionts and non-geniuses are facultative parasites. Treestumpers claim that geniuses are facultative symbionts and non-geniuses are obligate parasites.

Obligate symbionts are mutualists that tend to have a nutritional function and typically occur in insects that feed on imbalanced diets such as plant saps or cellulose [7]. In contrast, facultative symbionts have a much broader array of effects, ranging from mutualism to manipulation of reproduction [8].

A facultative parasite is an organism that may resort to parasitic activity, but does not absolutely rely on any host for completion of its life cycle.

An obligate parasite or holoparasite is a parasitic organism that cannot complete its life-cycle without exploiting a suitable host.

To reiterate, treestumpers claim the population of white normies are an obligate parasite phenotype dependent on the altruism of the host population of genius phenotypes. Alternatively, they may claim both populations are facultative symbionts or facultative parasites. However, I haven’t seen either argument put forth. Kithists claim the genius population is an obligate symbiont on the normie host population which only successfully reproduces as a group-selected phenotype.

My argument for kithism is fairly straightforward.

1. Geniuses do not reproduce anywhere near replacement levels and therefore cannot survive as a separate breeding population (i.e. not facultative).
2. Genius does not breed true. Two genius parents are unlikely to produce a child who is also a genius.
3. Neurotypical human groups likely existed for a long time before shamans existed, suggesting their relationship with geniuses is facultative. See the neanderthal origin theory and Texas Arcane’s response.

This evolution suggests that white people would be able to return to a more primitive sort of existence, painting their butts blue and running around the forest worshiping cargo planes and so on. Geniuses, however, would be produced at a lower and lower rate until the entire world descended into primitive savagery and there would no longer be any demand for group-selecting high technologies, since no one else would have it either. In this sense geniuses can be thought of as creating the demand for their phenotype by altruistically giving away their inventions.

For a micro-level example, if I increase the fitness of my extended family then we will outcompete any other extended families that don’t have altruistic geniuses in them, so that all surviving families will have one genius. But then my family may lose to another family with two geniuses in it. This becomes an arms race to increase the prevalence of genius phenotypes in our genepools until we hit an optimized ratio of geniuses-to-normies. It’s possible this equilibrium may be predicted by Hamilton’s rule:

Interacting organisms may have an evolutionary incentive to help each other (or at least to hurt each other less) if they share genes, and the magnitude of this incentive should increase with the degree of relatedness between them; this is the central tenet of William D. Hamilton’s inclusive fitness theory 14– 16 (the term kin selection theory was coined by John Maynard-Smith 11 and is here used as a synonym for ‘inclusive fitness theory’ to comply with its conventional use). This tenet is encapsulated in a very simple form in Hamilton’s rule, which states that a (gene for a) social behavior is favored by natural selection if rb- c > 0, where c is the fitness cost to the individual performing the behavior, b equals the fitness benefit to the recipient(s), and r is the genetic relatedness between them 14, 15.”

However, I avoided calling this “kin-ism” because one of the consequences of geniuses being a phenotype which shapes the cultural environment rather than the genepool directly (i.e. geniuses act on the level of nurture rather than natural selection) is that geniuses will often prefer their culture-shaping work over family connections. This makes them a distinct phenomenon from the “gay uncle” type of kin selection. What is most notable about this difference is that the utility of genius altruism for the genius’s reproductive strategy does not depend on the existence of other altruists in their extended kin. It only depends on the creation of the sort of high-complexity cultural environment which necessitates more altruistic geniuses in order for host populations to engage in group competition.

Going back to the example of my own extended family, let’s assume that my goal is for the world to have more geniuses in it. If, by my altruism, I shape the culture so that only families with two or more geniuses can compete, then even if my own extended family gets wiped out in group competition the genius phenotype still wins. So in purely selfish terms it is always correct for geniuses to act altruistically, even if it is not requited. This is different from the strategy for facultative phenotypes, for whom unrequited altruism just means they’re getting cucked.In that case, where the group is obviously going to lose in group competition due to high defection, it makes the most sense for the individual to invest more in their own reproductive fitness to try to survive the extinction of the greater group.

The central tenet of multilevel (or group) selection theory conveys that selection not only acts on individuals but can act (simultaneously) on multiple levels of biological organization, including cells and/or groups 48. This view suggests that even if behaviors that benefit other individuals are selectively disadvantageous at the level of the individual, they might still evolve if they are advantageous at—and hence selected for on—a higher level of the biological hierarchy (e.g. on the group or colony level) 6, 48. Altruism, for instance, is costly for the altruistic individual, but groups containing a higher proportion of altruistic individuals usually have a competitive advantage over groups that are composed mostly of selfish individuals (e.g. because altruistic groups are more productive or superior in direct confrontations). In such situations, altruism can evolve—driven by a process of selection between groups—even against the background of selection favoring selfishness within each group (e.g. 49, 50).”

If genius is not a special form of altruism as I’ve described above, but rather can be comprehensively explained as generalized mutualism, then the treestumpers are correct.

Posted in Uncategorized | 36 Comments


A tale of two narratives.

Theory 1:


Theory 2:


The evidence:

2020-03-18 15_15_35-Trump sends signed chart showing stock market gains to supporters after he decla

Saving the world from Satan and Oprah was as easy as giving your 401k away to the Jews. Don’t forget to continue buying the dip!

Remember, if the plan isn’t working, that’s just a sign that it’s working perfectly:

2020-03-18 15_30_17-Vox Popoli - Pale Moon

OK Boomer.

I know Q-tards aren’t in the habit of taking good advice but if they were I’d advise them not to falsely accuse a survivor of child rape who is also a charismatic billionaire of raping children. Survivors of child rape really take that stuff kinda seriously and don’t consider it an accusation you throw around like calling someone a butthead at the playground. But I expect they’ll double down instead and try to fight Oprah in the court of public opinion, so I’ll just do me and you just do you, you know?

Alt-Righters really need to be keeping lists of these people so their shitty genetics can be purged from the ethnostate when we win.

Posted in Uncategorized | 19 Comments