Kratman vs. Lind

Edit: Kratman weighed in and busted some major delusions in a comment below. I left a reply and apology down there, which you can read if you’re some sorta creepy voyeur for feelz.

Aside from this preface, the post has not been altered.

There has been a great deal of tension recently between Vox Popoli commenters represented by intellectual heavyweights William S. Lind and Tom Kratman. Lind never comments at VP, but Kratman does occasionally, and always with such technique and aggression as to outclass the rest of the commentariat. He’s sharp (probably has a neurotypical IQ in the 160 range) and he has an obsession with war and a burr in his saddle. Contrarily, Lind is a live-and-let-live type, prefers strategy to tactics, and is a genius in the older tradition of an intuitive originator of paradigm-shifting ideas. This is not to say he’s ignorant of details like the ballistic ranges offered by various tank models, nor is Kratman ignorant of strategy. Much the contrary. The contrast between them is in cognitive style: Kratman memorizes and applies the encyclopedias of war, whereas Lind writes them.

Lind represents the Anglo conservative contingent such as it still exists, with whom I find sympathy. He promotes purely defensive war according to 4GW principles, strong borders, and long-term economic outlook. His general advice for the Big Stupid is similar to mine: find like-minded sane and productive people, stake out some borders, and let the unproductive SJWs eat each other as they starve. Eventually, they will band together for some good, old-fashioned aggro, partially because they hate superior and non-aggressive people, but mostly because they are incapable of growing food, mining taconite, clearing the paper jam in the copy machine. The proper response to this is to encourage a “don’t touch, hot!” sensibility among the aggression-inclined and production-impaired, according to 4GW theory. These are parasites on existing civilizations, and their large numbers are unsustainable without a heavy admixture of neaderthal genes and middle-class sensibilities to be ruthlessly exploited. For training manuals on Lind’s methods, read his Castalia House offerings: Victoria (a novel), On War, and The Four Generations of Modern War.

Kratman represents the very best of the neoconservative contingent, whose arguments are compelling, practical, and ultimately flawed and self-destructive. For instance, he argues that torture can be a useful source of intelligence when it’s done correctly. I couldn’t agree more. But I still consider it immoral (see the thread), whereas Kratman is a utilitarian at heart. In the end, the problem with utilitarians is that they elevate their emotions to the status of morals (psychological unrest being the definition of economic utility), and then proceed to act out their neuroses in spectacular fashion. We can see this in the structure of his ongoing Carrera series, the first of which I’ve recently picked up.

A Desert Called Peace starts with an emotionally intense Space 9/11, wherein the protagonist’s wife and children are killed. (The protagonist is the author- portrayed in a highly self-flattering light, but my observation indicates it is also pretty accurate.) The protagonist boo-hoos for a little while, and then decides to co-opt the resources of his host country- Space Mexico- to build an army and single-handedly destroy Space Islam. The rest is mostly military logistics porn and reads like an Xcel spreadsheet, though admittedly Kratman makes it a fairly interesting one. There is also an interlude every now and then taking the perspective of one of Carrera/Kratman’s pawns for eventual religious genocide, a poor, indeterminately brown Space peasant recruited as cannon fodder. The series looks to be shaping up as a battle plan cum training manual for Kratman’s 9/11 revenge fantasies.

If you hadn’t guessed by now, Kratman is an American Ashkenazi. Remember when I said “utilitarian” and “neuroses”? Let’s talk about that. He seems to have zero concept for people who aren’t poor, brown farmers, corrupt bureaucrats/politicians, or trust-fund kids. There is not a single rich person in this book who doesn’t have a trust fund, including Carrera/Kratman, although Carrera/Kratman does distance himself from these (ran away to the military, actually) and is disowned by his dysfunctional, trust fund-supported family (surprise!). His fiction reads a lot like nonfiction, and vice versa (Lt. Reilly is Lt. Kratman, in case you hadn’t figured it out). He seems to have led an extraordinary life; all evidence points to an underappreciated soldier with a Spartan’s heart and Rommel’s brain. (The mutation accumulation of the last five hundred years seems to have skipped over this particular Jewish group.)

It’s too bad, because even the very best neocon can’t be trusted as an ally in the Big Stupid. Despite the “Old Earth” folks standing in for the melonhead overwatch (showing exceptional insight), he is ultimately a user and an abuser. Despite all the crying fictional Carrera/Kratman does for “every dead soldier”, they are still dead because he decided to spend their lives on his personal revenge fantasy. Could have been an isolationist and left well enough alone, but his neurosis won’t allow it. Other Ashkenazi characteristics on display are information asymmetry, ruthlessness, national rootlessness, and a curious conception of how espirit de corps works. I’ll expand on the latter two.

“National rootlessness” means Kratman has zero respect for national borders or existing civilations, and merely considers which ones are Good (to be lived in and exploited) and which ones are Bad (for The Tribe) and fit to be exterminated/tortured/enslaved according to one’s present feelz. Contrast this with Lind’s Victoria, where we see the people of Maine extricate themselves from federal/world meddling and build a self-sustaining economy. We see this was always the point of Lind’s civil war: prosperity for the nation’s citizens. There is no such sentiment in Carrera. As for espirit de corps, this seems to be a combination of brainwashing and an outlet for the brown young men to act on their natural desires to kill, march in straight lines, and wear uniforms. Edenists may see one or two familiar psycheprints in this description. Lind’s espirit is dependent upon the desire to defend home and hearth, and thereafter let bygones be bygones.

To finish up, I’d like to expand on the area where Kratman’s exposition is quite superior to Lind’s: the melonhead overwatch hypothesis. Lind nods at this obliquely by suggesting that One Worlders oppose national lines in principle, whereas Kratman includes it explicitly in his plot development. This has strategic, operational, and tactical ramifications that really need to be spelled out. Lind’s 4GW absolutely depends on information symmetry, where dissenting opinions, news, and video feeds can be distributed over the internet. And yet, if there really are 200-IQ occultists running the show under the strategic direction of a transdimensional psychic octopus from space, then they may well be capable of overcoming economic and logistical obstacles that we naively presume to have the predictive strength of physical laws. In fact, Kratman may even number among them, considering that the structure of his fictional universe is quite parallel to the Gnostic spiritual conception, as explained by a lady who once tried to convert me to Gnosticism (through some sort of hypnosis; it’s an interesting story I’ll have to tell sometime).

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Kratman vs. Lind

  1. Nit: I believe it’s Space-Panama, not Space-Mexico.

  2. Mycroft Jones says:

    Aeoli, are you defining Gnosticism in its simplest form: the belief that we are spiritual beings having a physical experience, that our true home is some spiritual realm, possibly called Heaven, and our efforts on earth are to return there? I see this Gnostic concept in almost every religion. Genesis 1 is the exact opposite; man was made from the dust of the earth, and the earth was designed and made for man to rule. Like the twin strands of DNA, Earth and Man were made for each other.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      I’m defining it as “this is the way the lady was describing it to me, and afterward a freemason told me it was Gnosticism”.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      To be more explicit, the main idea is that we’re spiritual beings experiencing different levels of enlightenment, the rate of enlightenment is increasing, the current system is dying, and the more enlightened folks are getting siphoned off into some other system.

  3. Heaviside says:

    Well wouldn’t it be just appropriate if there were Judeo-Anglo-American occult(as in secret, but not mystical) groups which believed that they could exert mechanical control over the world in the same way as the manipulating Cartesian instrumentally rational/scientific-technical subject? Rudolf Steiner had a few things to say about this topic. Too bad for them that the progression of World History is not dictated by the finite reason of particular human subjects, but by the infinite Reason, which is sometimes called Providence.

    “Illuminatii” is just code for “the Enlightenment.”

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >Well wouldn’t it be just appropriate if there were Judeo-Anglo-American occult(as in secret, but not mystical) groups which believed that they could exert mechanical control over the world in the same way as the manipulating Cartesian instrumentally rational/scientific-technical subject?

      I was beginning to suspect that M0 was maybe designed by Goethe or something. I guess you’re saying I’m wrong.

      >Rudolf Steiner had a few things to say about this topic. Too bad for them that the progression of World History is not dictated by the finite reason of particular human subjects, but by the infinite Reason, which is sometimes called Providence.

      Because I lack an education, you’ll have to fill in here or give me a linky link. Is the infinite Reason Geist, which is ushering in the end of history stuff?

      >“Illuminatii” is just code for “the Enlightenment.”

      Ja, this was a very recent breakthrough for me. Somehow figured it out while browsing the hmolpedia stuff: http://www.eoht.info/

      • Heaviside says:

        What I meant by that last statement is that people anthropomorphize the effects of the Enlightenment as a concrete organization, and that the idea of a conspiracy which mechanically manipulates world events is only possible in the context of the post-Enlightenment world. I really don’t care whether such a conspiracy actually exists or not, the real problem is that the world may now be in a state where such a thing is conceivable and possible. That means history is over.

  4. Tom Kratman says:

    Ahem.

    I know I’m not going to talk you out of the conceit that Carrera is me. Anyone who wants to believe it can, and there’s not a damned thing I can do about it. I will, however, point out a couple of difficult to reconcile discrepancies: a) I am [at least mostly] sane; he is [mostly] not. b) My family is alive. His was murdered. He was always a borderline maniac, too, and I find delicious the notion that by killing his wife, the enemy also eliminated the one effective control on his baser instincts.

    It’s difficult to say what my IQ is. I find it difficult to credit IQ as a measure, in general. I don’t known if it’s ever accurately measured mine, though your guess is perhaps close to what it has measured.

    I’m a Catholic, and mostly Irish. There’s a chunk of Scot in there, along with an eclectic mix of Ashkenazi Jew, Gypsy, Russian, Magyar, Pole, German, Austrian, and God alone knows what else.

    I’m not a neocon. The con in neocon is short for con man. I am a minarchical conservative timocrat. See The Lotus Eaters, or Starship Troopers, for an explanation.

    I don’t know if I’m exactly utilitarian so much as realistic. Go ahead and refuse to use torture, even with great limits and restraints. Watch a city get nuked or a plague be released. Then watch torture be used, without any restraints or limits. Better then, to have been more realistic about it earlier.

    As a soldier I was much appreciated. I was also much hated. Oh, well.

    Kudos: You did catch, as few have, that Carrera is in many ways the ultimate transnational. His (left wing) parents tried to make him a progressive and only succeeded in destroying his respect for nations, qua nations…until he could create one he could believe in, of course. That aspect of him, in any case, is a big sneer at Tranzis.

    Brainwashing doesn’t work and training really isn’t brainwashing. The key values and outlooks have to be there already or there’s nothing to be done with the prospective troop.

    I really hadn’t sensed any tension. There are areas Lind and I agree; there are areas where I believe he is approximately 100% wrong (OODA for collective ground combat being the biggie; google: indirectly mistaken decision cycles). But, you know, men of good conscience can differ, and one of them, or both of them, can be wrong. He’s, I believe, a patriot, trying his best to help. _That_ I shall not criticize. Ever.

    Enjoy the series, if you carry on with it. And thanks for taking the time for that and for this.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      I tried doing a point-by-point reply, but it was the wrong tool for the job because I made one very large error that led to some minor errors. Here is the issue:

      >I know I’m not going to talk you out of the conceit that Carrera is me. Anyone who wants to believe it can, and there’s not a damned thing I can do about it.

      On the contrary, you’ve already convinced me. I’m psychotic, not unreasonable.

      Without Carrera being an author-insert, then these implications fall apart:

      1) Heavy Ashkenazi admixture (as opposed to light; high IQ factored heavily in this)
      2) Neocon and “tranzi” (I’ve read Starship Troopers but not Lotus Eaters)
      3) Tension with Lind

      That’s most of the post, but I don’t mind having my ideas debunked. It’s an unfortunate consequence of the way I play the game, which is to take an extremely limited amount of information and try to reconcile it with previously existing theories to construct a new explanatory theory. I understand and accept that this generates an extraordinary number of false positives (AKA delusions), and it’s very helpful to bust these early so they don’t end up bearing weight.

      Even so, I owe you an apology for the mischaracterization. I can’t promise it won’t happen again, because I simply lack the time and wherewithal to think/write in a responsible manner. But if it helps, I felt bad feelz for being wrong, and this will help me somewhat to avoid being wrong in the future.

      Three smaller things I was probably right about:

      1) If you don’t know whether you’re a utilitarian or realistic, then you are probably a utilitarian (and likely both).
      2) IQs higher than 130 behave differently than IQs below 130. I’ve written a large number of words about this and my theories seem to be as close to the truth as anyone.
      3) Brainwashing was a dysphemism for a mechanism I’ve been trying to describe. It would be more correct to call it an emergent, self-reinforcing complex of endocrine release and axon formation and strengthening, but I’m often imprecise in writing because a) it usually doesn’t matter, and b) anyone reading here is probably psychotic enough to grok the semiosis.

      >Enjoy the series, if you carry on with it. And thanks for taking the time for that and for this.

      I don’t understand why you’re thanking me for this, but you’re welcome to it.

  5. Tom Kratman says:

    No apology necessary; it’s a common enough mistake. And it’s not like everything Carrera is wasn’t created (or at least synthecized) by me. But if there’s some of me in there, there’s quite a bit of Big Al the psychopath, or Caesar, or Achilles, too. Achilles and his actions after being robbed of his woman, Briseis, was much of the original inspiration, actually. Indeed, the first version of the series was called “Rage of Achilles.”

    Oh, it’s considerably above 130, but I just doubt its accuracy as a measure. Ashkenazi…oh, I dunno; Mother was as pure Irish as it gets (our people were from Cavan, the population of which in goodly part predates the arrival of the Celts) and bright enough to be offered a free ride to Radcliffe (think: female half of Harvard) out of high school, which she turned down.

    Well…one difference between the utilitarian and the realist – at least in this case – is that the former is trying to create good, and expects to be able to do so, while the latter is trying to avoid evil, but isn’t too sanguine about the odds.

    Why thanks? Well, it wasn’t bad (and please don’t change anything) and there is no such thing as bad publicity.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >Well…one difference between the utilitarian and the realist – at least in this case – is that the former is trying to create good, and expects to be able to do so, while the latter is trying to avoid evil, but isn’t too sanguine about the odds.

      I am compelled to mention that Lind portrays torture favorably in Victoria, which is another serious omission on my part. The good folk of Maine torture some Delta Force guys to get their ranks and service numbers in order to prove Fedgov complicity in an assassination. I’d have thought their training would weed out the fainthearted and sharpen the rest, but then I’ve never been pulled apart on th’ rack.

      • Tom Kratman says:

        I read Victoria, and I remember that part, but I can’t recall if they did it _right_. Right? If you’re going to do something that disgusting, even if your victim is guilty as sin, you owe it to him – and to your own soul – still to get the maximum feasible intelligence for the minimum practical pain and degradation. The humane thing is to start with a tour or the instruments and explanation of everything that’s going to be done. That works almost all the time, and then it becomes a question of matching, verifying, and analyzing, though it is still sometimes necessary to engage in punishing and training.

        As for weeding out; sure, maybe a little. You can delay the time they’ll break, too, maybe. But almost anyone will break. Maybe not Leila Khalid…at least, until you bring in her sons…but she’s a rare one.

    • The humane thing is to start with a tour of the instruments and explanation of everything that’s going to be done.

      A detail Gene Wolfe got right in The Shadow of the Torturer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s