The Last Boy Scout: On Taking a Positive Turn

In some sense, this is an update to my Addicted to Distraction post at The Mitrailleuse. Let me just note what worked: On a few individual days since, I’ve got up and read the local paper for local stories of interest like the weather and school sports, gone to work and completely ignored the swirling events of the “news” for an entire day, got a lot of work done, and felt very content and satisfied heading home in the evening.

Other days, I reverted to my old habits to an extent–spent breaks and lunch hours reading blogs and web pages and posting tweets. Listened to the “news” on the radio on the way to work. Read entire articles about the war, or whatever it is, in Yemen and the one in Syria and the one, apparently in Kenya. Am I the better for this?

No.

During those evenings there has been more anxiety, less energy, and, strangely, even more tweet reading and “reacting.” It’s not really that anything is so bad about what my friends are saying and posting; in fact, given the quality of the blogs and Twitter accounts I follow, the content is well written and on point about the problems of our age, and what ought to be done about them…yet I can feel a certain negativity, even despair, being driven right into my soul by all of this. There is such a thing as pessimism porn, and though I don’t see it as the main thrust of the Reactosphere or the Dark Enlightenment, he who hath eyes to see knows it’s there. Even someone as level and grounded as Malcolm Pollock indulges in it when discussing the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton:

Mind you, I might be coming round to Hillary’s camp myself. As I mentioned in a comment last month, “there are times — and they are more frequent now — when I think that the only way to move beyond this tottering wreck, and begin to build whatever we can upon its rubble, is to help it fall, as quickly as possible.” If that’s the goal, then Hillary’s the gal.

Of course he’s not the first person to express similar sentiments about Mrs. Clinton. Over a year ago, Jack Donovan made the point that Hillary would at least wake up the remaining non-feminized men to the fact that:

President Hillary Clinton will reveal to American men that America is no longer a nation that elevates rugged cowboys and pioneers. That’s the bad, old America. The new America wants its men emasculated, weak, and completely controlled by a corporate-owned state that’s far more concerned with the wants of acquisitive career gals. Who better than Hillary Clinton to put the “nanny” in “nanny state?”

The Hillary Clinton Presidency will drive home the fact that America isn’t “our” country anymore.

We just live here.

Look, I like to do this as much as anybody. Sometimes I indulge in a bit of fantasy myself, imagining that Washington DC has been put to the torch. The cleansing fire will consume that foul nest of corruption and sodomy and finally, finally we can start over and build something clean and decent on the ashes.

But, no.

026

We may get Hillary for President, we may get more regulation of “greenhouse gases” and subsidies for bird-killing wind farms, more subsidies for sodomites in the schools, more “diversity” training and generally, more Prog bullshit thrown in our faces in the coming years, but I. WILL. NOT. DESPAIR. Nor will I “root” for massive destruction of the West in the interest of cleansing.

Beside this list, we may get cheap space travel, cheaper energy, quantum computing, genetically tailored treatments for illness. I have a 10-year-old son, who I’m training to be a Dangerous Child. I can’t change the world, really, I can only change myself, and I can prepare him for whatever may come in his life.

There are, no doubt, some great, horrible, terrible, wonderful things to come in the next years and decades. I choose to meet them with a song in my heart and on my lips. Certainly not “Don’t Worry, Be Happy,” but one much older and deeper and substantial, something that will be with us as long as we’re human:

Freude, schöner Götterfunken

Tochter aus Elysium,

Wir betreten feuertrunken,

Himmlische, dein Heiligtum!

Deine Zauber binden wieder

Was die Mode streng geteilt;

Alle Menschen werden Brüder,

Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

And if that could be created by a Man, I think I can do things more joyfully even in our own Strange Days.

Future References

It’s a bit disconcerting, but also enjoyable and encouraging, when I have a post idea in mind and before I find the time to execute it…someone else does it, or something similar.

Examples:

I haven’t seen a lot of material in the NRx blogs about guns, and how they’re going to be the difference-maker down the road, when the (hopefully Velvet) Great Divorce happens, in the U.S. The disarmed states, like the U.K., will have to work out their problems a different way. But in America, hundreds of millions of private firearms are a backstop, as it were. There’s a point where even the most modest middle-of-the-roader who owns a rifle will say, “This far, and no farther.” Unfortunately, when it’s rather late and the smoke from the burning cities is wafting over his suburban roof; but still.

Free Northerner gets into this in the first part of his A Winning Conservative Strategy. It’s a fun ride, considering how the Republican Party could “hit back just as hard.” The question is, do they actually want to “win”? Echo answers hollowly…but for now we focus on this:

The most interesting fact about American politics is how the Republicans totally dominate all levels of violence, yet are always in a perpetual state of losing. The military is primarily Republican, the police are more split but, at least in terms of front-line workers, are generally Republican, and the NRA, while officially non-partisan, is primarily composed of Republicans. The vast majority of people who own and can use a gun are conservative, yet, in the long run, conservatives always lose to their weaker, unarmed brethren.

It is baffling until you realize it is because conservatives refuse to play by the rules the progressives have set. Democrats can steal bags of votes, implement gang-run politicsdestroy crimethinker’s careers, and stage shit-ins (among many other things) with impunity and the Republicans refuse to respond with anything worse than requiring ID to vote (and then getting called evil when doing so).

****

First, some theory. In “To Win a Nuclear War” Michio Kaku outlined the concept of ‘escalation dominance’.

Escalation dominance essentially means the actor controlling the highest level of violence (in the book’s case, nuclear weapons) can control all lower levels of violence by threatening to escalate the conflict to a higher level of violence. By controlling the tempo and threat of escalation, this actor can steer a conflict in such ways as to win lower level conflicts even in areas where he may be weaker.

As I stated above, the military, the police, and the NRA are conservative institutions. Conservatives, and thereby the Republican party, control the highest level of violence in American political disputes.

Using this, the Republicans should be able to control the escalation and tempo of lower-violence political conflicts.

This topic is worth exploring further, and will be explored here in future.


 

Speaking of the future, I’ve had in mind a post on my predictions for the future for a few days, but before I actually began hitting the keys, here’s Outside in on Expected Unknowns. While he doesn’t make predictions, thus does not completely usurp my contemplated scrabblings, he does say something well worth remembering:

The most reliable heuristic: plan for the unknown as such. (More on that to come.)

Good; from me, also.


 

This guy: Wimminz – celebrating skank whores everywhere is the official title – adopts a persona as a 50-something mildly ex-con misogynist U.K. truck driver (and he may well be just that!). Then, when you least expect it, deep no-bullshit pure clarity gobsmacking intelligent sanity leaps out, and you realize you’re dealing with someone:

“The road to hell is paved with good intentions”

Sadly we have also come to a place where the person in place W can all in their defence the fact that none of the decisions A1 to V1 inclusive, when taken individually, which is they way they took them, were perfectly rational and normal and legal and it’s really not my fault so help me out here.

And in truth, it’s hard not to have some sympathy for that argument, or the person who finds themselves in place W, but there is a difference between feeling sympathy, and excusing.

You and you alone must carry the responsibility for being in place W, and all those decisions A1 to V1 inclusive.

———————————————————————-

If “place W” is the cell you spend your last night in before heading out to see madam guillotine in the morning, that text in purple will be applied to you.

If “place W” is a senior position in government or finance or service industry, it won’t.

I have long maintained that if you are hit by a bullet, it makes not the slightest difference to you, or the wound, or anything else practical, if it was a deliberate enemy act or an accidental blue on blue chance in a million.

But there comes a point when it comes to mitigating risk a, so Nukinnd consequences  where you go from “I guess it is *possible* that could happen” to “It’s only a question of time“, and that fact is if you make decisions in succession as described above, A1 to V1 inclusive, then it is only a question of time.

It only becomes I guess it is possible if each subsequent decisions factors in ALL the previous positions and places, and the additional overall command choice is made, is this going to move me nearer to A or to z, if things go wrong?

We are essentially describing the difference between men, and wimminz and niggerz, I’ve talked before about decision trees.

Even if you have NO other information, simply choosing the option that maximises the future possible choices is always the best option, so nuking Milford Haven in September is better than nuking it tomorrow, something may arise in June that makes me want to go there, I can’t imagine what right now, but that’s the whole fucking point innit.

The options in case of course have to be real, not illusory, so giving me the option of passing up on a fuck with the local village bike, and passing up on a fuck with some gorgeous billionairess Ukrainian sex bomb are not the same thing.

Similarly the offer of a fuck now, and a fuck tomorrow, are not the same thing.

Invariably, when hindsight says that, for example, decision H1 was a bad choice, what it really means is that neither were all the options actually considered, nor were all of the options that were considered unweighted, and considered only on their own merits, and not on a perceived end goal.

Ummm-just read the guy’s archives, there is too much half-crazy gold there to summarize.


 

Finally, for now, Septivium begins.

Sebastian Pritchard lays down a program. I imagine that if we can individually hit it at the 50 percent level we’ll be ready to take on The Troubles Ahead, as best we can. I haven’t written much about self-improvement here, but one more Future Reference for the road. (Hat tip Jack Donovan for the link to Pritchard.)