Category Archives: politics

What to do

Posted on by
29

In the previous article I explained what the Western “democratic governments” have in store for their population in case of a major disaster. The worldview behind their planning can best be described as “pragmatic materialism”, which BTW is how Satanists would describe themselves if asked. However, I can easily anticipate readers’ questions: if shit does indeed hit the fan that hard, what, if anything, can we do?

Well, I’ve been studying disasters and the answer doesn’t conform to this “pragmatic materialist” paradigm, to put it mildly.

The “conventional wisdom”, if you listen to the American “prepper” community, is that one needs to stock up on food, water purifying equipment, guns and ammo, and in case of a disaster, defend one’s property against intruders. Essentially, they sort people into three major groups: the hapless unprepared victims, the predatory criminals and the prepared homeowners. When I listen to their theories, I try to envision the world they are describing, and my conclusion is that there are unlikely to be any survivors.

Let’s say the supply of food, water and electricity is disrupted. There is no rule of law. Follow the Maslow hierarchy of needs combined with the game theory in order to figure out what’s going to happen. The most prized assets will be the off-grid farms that have private water sources and can grow food. Also, those places will have food and medicine caches. The most desirable assets will be taken over by the most powerful forces, those most likely to resort to murder and robbery. They will take over the farms, kill the owners, and allow everything to go to ruin because they don’t know shit about farming. So, the theory that the ones best prepared for a post-civilization life will survive is very implausible; a much more likely scenario is that they will be the prime targets of undisciplined, panic-driven violence, which will further disrupt the supply of resources. Once the predators run out of food, they will resort to predatory cannibalism, because humans will be the most abundant remaining source of protein. After that, everybody dies. The scenario is very similar to that of the extinction of the dinosaurs: in the initial chaos, the carnivores and the vultures wipe out the remaining herbivores, and then they die off as this short-term food buffer is exhausted.

However, regardless of what the Americans might believe in their satanic worldview, my study of limited disasters shows a different pattern. You see, when shit hits the fan, the course of action that is most likely to result in survival is not self-centered predation, but cooperation. You don’t try to hog resources, because you understand that you are always going to lack something someone else has. Eventually, the resources are going to run out. The sociopaths do exist, but they are immediately treated as a foreign entity and killed off. The non-sociopathic armed gangs will trade protection for food, essentially becoming the paramilitary force that will guard the farms against attackers. The farmers will accept this as preferable to being killed, and will become the new serfs. The armed forces will become the new lords of the realm, and will form a hierarchy among themselves, resulting in new feudalism. How do I know this? Because that is what happens every time there is a major civilization-ending crisis. The armed thugs divide the food-production resources (farmland with serfs) among themselves. The serfs get to survive, the armed “knights” and “lords” survive. The sophisticated intellectual part of the civilization is wiped out. Nothing unrelated to food production and fighting has great chances for survival. In essence, civilization is reduced to a territory under control of a mafia gang: people get to mind their own business and have some semblance of normal life, but the price of this is paying for protection by the well armed militia. The territory is divided into areas controlled by different militias, which wage turf wars, until at some point they decide to merge, and then you get a state with “police forces”, and you even get “democracy” where you are periodically asked to choose which gang gets its turn in exploiting you for resources. As the baseline of violence is reduced and commerce is established between territories, there is need for high-level products and technology, which gives birth to sophisticated trades, and later to science and technology. The more connected the world, the more abstract structures it can support, until you get the global civilization that veers so far into the abstract it ends up destroying itself, and you get a reset into barbarism, feudalism etc., ad nauseam. That’s history of civilization for you.

Of course, we are talking about a civilization-ending event, not a species-ending one, but the irony is, in a species-ending event, the best you can do is try to preserve your spiritual integrity by cooperating with others from the position of kindness, trading for resources, offering services in exchange for resources, being helpful and protective, and simply continuing to do the best you can until everybody eventually dies. This would be very hard for the materialists, who believe this life to be all there is, but for the religious and spiritually inclined people it would be quite easy: in fact, it would be just another day in life, where you’re supposed to do the best you can in the available circumstances, and thus show God that you’re a worthy person who will remain faithful even in the darkest of times. You see, for the best people life isn’t about surviving, or having your family survive. It’s about being faithful to God by doing the best you can until the very end. And that is what you should do when shit hits the fan. Be the best version of yourself you can be, and you will leave this world as a winner. Choose to desperately fight for scraps, trying to survive at all cost, and you will lose everything, and still die.

Zombie apocalypse

Posted on by
Reply

In the recent years it became popular for governments to train against the “zombie apocalypse” scenario, where hordes of the living dead threaten the living, who must quarantine and defend themselves at all cost. The zombies are, of course, completely dehumanized, depersonalized enemies; generic targets nobody feels any compunction in destroying. What you might not understand in this picture, is that they mean you.

In a major disaster scenario, regardless of the actual cause which might vary between disease, nuclear war or a volcanic super-eruption, people will be divided in two groups. There will be those who have underground bunkers with abundant storage of food, water, filtered air, medical supplies, and armed guards, and there will be you. You will live your normal daily lives, going to work, having a home with no more than a few cans of food storage, drinking tap water with no water reserves other than the tank for flushing your toilet, no energy reserves because you use gas and electricity from the grid, and no cash reserves because you live from pay check to pay check, and, in the majority of cases, you are in debt anyway.

In case of any serious disaster, you are the living dead. Your process of dying starts once the utilities of civilization, which you take for granted, stop. At this point, your death is a matter of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs: is the air safe to breathe? Is the water available and safe to drink? Is there food? Is there warmth? Are there men with guns and clubs who want to take your stuff? Can you detect and avoid radiation? Do you have antibiotics with which to treat minor wounds? Do you need medication in order to function?

If you need medication, you will quickly run out. You will have to drink contaminated water and likely get diarrhoea. Food is not your most pressing concern, because you will most likely be injured during the disaster, and you will be in some state of shock, with open wounds that will get infected. You will be either irradiated, infected by disease, inhale volcanic ash, or simply lost and without any idea what to do, surrounded by other injured, shocked, lost people. In a state of shock, you will initially do all the wrong things – get out and watch the nuclear blast, drink some water of unknown state of contamination because you’re thirsty, act as if things are normal for far too long. However, that would only matter in a limited disaster scenario. In case of anything serious, it’s not a matter of what you need to avoid in order to survive, but a matter of conditions that need to be met in order for you to survive. You need to have an underground bunker with non-perishable supplies, huge tanks of pure water, air filtration, medical supplies, and safety. If you don’t have those, you are at this point the living dead. Your process of dying already started, and you are doomed; you just don’t know it yet. Not knowing that you’re doomed, you will attempt to survive. You will seek access of supplies and shelter. You will be ready to use force if you are denied, because you will desperately need things. Those who have things will have a choice: give you things and thus decrease their own already slim chances of riding through the disaster, or defend against you, the living dead. You doomed yourself by not being prepared, by believing in the fiction of perpetually available tap water and electricity if only you pay your bills, and now you are a factor of the chain reaction of doom: in order to live one more day, you need to eat somebody else’s food, drink somebody else’s water, and use up somebody else’s antibiotics, taking them down with you in your hopeless downward spiral.

The government, whom you usually look to for help, will perform triage: who lives, who can be helped, and who dies. In normal circumstances, if you are wounded or sick, you expect to be helped. In these circumstances, those who are sick or wounded are a fatal drain on the resources, and are cut off, sentenced to death. The most likely people to survive are the armed soldiers protecting the underground bunkers. If you are armed and in the position of power, this power will be further cemented; if you are vulnerable, you will not only lose everything, you will be a danger that needs to be guarded against. You, the living dead, will be shot on sight if you try to approach government installations looking for help. You watched disaster recovery videos and you expect there to be distribution centres where you can get food, water and medical assistance, but that expectation is only valid in a limited disaster, where one area is impacted and others are not. When everybody is impacted, aid is no longer provided to those in need, because the resources need to be stretched out for as long as possible, in order to give at least some, the ones most likely to survive, some chance. There is no longer a “government”, only people with guns and food in protected installations, and the hordes of the “living dead” who want to get in. And at this point, they have been training for years to see you as nothing but inhuman targets, in order to be able to kill you without any compassion whatsoever, guarding their bosses, their personal safety, and their stocks of supplies. Have you stopped to consider why “zombies” are depicted as dirty, bloody and wounded? Because that’s what you, the normal people, are expected to look like when shit hits the fan. Read the descriptions of Hiroshima and Nagasaki aftermath; the “living dead” were walking around bloody, dirty, wounded, in shock, dying. You expect your government to be making plans for helping you, if that happens, but you are wrong. They are training their soldiers and personnel to see you as an inhuman threat, to guard against you and to shoot you on sight. What they are planning to do is stay in the position of power, use up all the resources for themselves, and stay safe from you, who paid for all of their power with taxes, and believed in the human rights and democracy bullshit they’ve been selling you.

Land of confusion

Posted on by
Reply

I am apparently now old enough to start my writing with “you young people might not remember this, … “, and there is indeed something I want to bring up to your attention. There was a music video in the 1980’s, a leftist progressive political commentary of the day, where Ronald Reagan was seen as a senile unhinged old man who is out of touch with the realities of the world as the young generation perceives it, and they are worried the crazy old guy is going to destroy their world, either deliberately or, more likely, by accident.

Watch it carefully. Observe how the same pattern repeats today with Trump. The leftists think they are so smart. They think they understand things. They think they are the ones who will take care of the world the best, so we would all be wise to leave it up to them. The right-wing, anti-communist, rabidly pro-American conservative in power will ruin everything. They are concerned. They are scared. Something needs to be done. And it wasn’t just this video, this was the zeitgeist.

Next scene, in real life, this same Ronald Reagan, who was portrayed in this video as a bumbling senile old man completely out of touch with the realities of the world (notice the similarity?) ended the cold war and came to an agreement with Mikhail Gorbachev.

The right-wing politicians who were the targets of the “spitting image” mockery, Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, actually saved the world, and the “progressive” leftists were the ones completely out of touch with the realities of the world.

I am old enough to have followed all this in the newspapers and on TV as it was happening. That’s why I recognized the pattern with Trump so immediately.

The difference is that nobody in the 1980’s even thought of accusing Reagan of being a stooge of the Kremlin, Andropov’s man in the White House. This is what gave Reagan the option of extending a friendly hand to Kremlin and negotiating a peace. This is the thing that actually saved the world.

What we have now is the situation where this option is denied to the President by virtually all political forces. If he attempts to broker a peace, accusations of treachery will be rekindled with increased force. Only conflict is acceptable. Only war is a patriotic option.

Which means America is firmly on the collision course. Everything else is in a state of flux.

The Mueller report

Posted on by
Reply

So, the report being released, what did we learn?

Me, not much, since I already explained the state of affairs much earlier. Others, perhaps, learned what it takes for a free country to turn into a dystopian hellhole – hire Marxists to teach your children at schools and universities. Wait a couple of decades for the kids to grow up and build careers in media and politics. Put trust in media that feeds on scandal in order to attract attention to ads. Have your intelligence agencies control the media in order to propagandise the populace.

If you think anything will change now, I have real estate on the Moon to sell you. You see, they absolved Trump of guilt, but nobody really told the Americans, and the Europeans for that matter, that they have also been fed a diet of lies about Russia for the past few years. The Russians are still vilified, they are still lied about, and they are still under sanctions. Being in favor of war with Russia has been the criterion of political correctness in America, because if you were sane, you were suspected of working for Putin. Which, when you look at it that way, kind of makes sense, since the sane people all over the world assembled around Putin, who is essentially the only leader of a country who will tell you what he thinks and intends to do, and then actually do it. That’s why the Americans see him as a total enigma. Apparently, the truth is currently the best way to conceal, because nobody will be able to see it.

Trump is very good for the world, because in his own way, he reveals the naked truth. He wants America to be first, and he makes clear what that means: America is going to dictate the terms, and everybody else will accept those terms, or be punished. If America doesn’t win, it means that the terms were not fair and need to be re-negotiated so that this injustice is remedied. Also, apparently it is dangerous for America if China is to control the China sea. This means freedom and democracy have to be brought to that part of the world, so that America controls the China sea. Then all will be well.

We also learned that America is trying to introduce democracy in yet another country, by proclaiming some guy who didn’t even run in the elections to be the legitimate president, and the guy who won the elections to be illegitimate. All the democratic allies of America instantly repeated this phrase in unison. If this teaches you something new about the way America sees democracy and what it means to be America’s ally, it means you haven’t been paying attention for the last few decades, but better now than never, right?

We also learned that the most American of all American presidents since Reagan was attacked in the exact same way Reagan was attacked by the media; both were characterised as stupid and reckless cowboys who were going to cause a nuclear war. It’s interesting how all Republican presidents get to be stupid buffoons, and all Democratic presidents get to be charming and intelligent. At least that’s how the media portrays them. It’s also interesting how when a Republican president tried to spy on the Democrats, it was the biggest scandal of the modern political history, known as Watergate, but when the Democrats paid some nefarious character to fabricate a dossier about Trump which was used as justification by the Democratic president to spy on the Republican presidential campaign, nothing was made of it. In fact, the victim of the scandal is universally portrayed as the villain, and the guy who explained us all the dangers of Iraqi WMD’s was charged with making a very long investigation in order to find out the truth, so that all the fake charges would be given legitimacy during that process, and the President would be reduced to a lame duck that can only quack out more sanctions against Russia, but everybody sees that, in his heart, he only truly quacks for Putin.

As for myself, I will keep watching the Russian media for information, and Western media for clues about the true intent of their puppet masters in Langley.

 

The real issues with INF

Posted on by
4

I’ve been reading this article and I think it misses the point in several ways.

First of all, INF treaty is completely obsolete today: you don’t need ground based intermediary-ranged rockets to threaten targets in Europe. The Russians demonstrated how they can easily do it from the Caspian lake ships, they can do it with the Baltic fleet as well as the flying platforms. So threat level doesn’t necessarily increase with the same weapons mounted on stationary ground launchers.

Second, the weapons themselves don’t define the threat level. The political situation does. So essentially the American program of demonizing, threatening and encircling Russia is what’s increasing the threat level.

Third, and most important, this doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with Europe, it might all be about arming Taiwan with rockets that can reach mainland China with nukes. This way America can create a scenario where it can wipe out China while not using its own ICBMs and risking retaliation in kind. Of course, it would be really crazy to expect China not to retaliate against the actual culprit, but everything America does lately is just that kind of crazy. They piss on people and don’t even have the decency to say it’s raining.

Fourth, if it comes to the point where Europe is threatened by the intermediary nuclear-tipped rockets, it means it’s global nuclear war, and Europe is fucked however you look at it, so again this doesn’t increase the threat level.

Fifth, the intermediary-ranged nukes were never about threatening Europe, they were about shortening the reaction times in a first-strike scenario against Russia. Europe was never a target, it was a missile launching platform pointed at Moscow. So if you want to kill Russia in such a way that it can’t retaliate, you first surround it with anti-missile defenses, so that you can shoot down anything they retaliate with, and then you bring in the short reaction time weapons, such as the nuclear-tipped stealthy cruise missiles which aim at the Russian command posts and nuclear sites. That’s what the Americans seem to be doing, which means they are confident they can take out Russian submarines as well. It is my opinion that they, as always, missed several crucial things that will bite them, but they themselves always act as if nothing can go wrong. They are practically cornering the market of baseless overconfidence at the moment. Almost everything they do is more harmful to them than it is to the intended target, and yet they do it, again and again.