I shouldn’t publish headlines like that. I’m in no way suicidal. And I don’t want to be “suicided.”
Although I will say. This might be too doxy, but I’ll say it because I just asked the robot and this could have happened in any number of places: I got stung by a scorpion last week. And I asked people: “are these deadly?” The answer, unanimously, was “probably not but it’s possible.” And my answer was “yeah, okay. It doesn’t really matter.”
People tell me not to write about myself but I don’t know what else to write about because all of this other stuff seems so totally meaningless. NB4, “oh, so you’re the only thing that matters???” no, retard, but I’m not going to write about my friends and family. And in general, that is the only thing I think matters. No me personally, but my personal life. And yours. Everyone’s. Unless it is someone I hate, in which case they don’t matter and I hope they die.
In general, there has been a personal and professional reckoning, where I have concluded that politics are completely without meaning. In short, “meaning” as a concept can only be personal, and personal meaning can exist or not under any political system. The danger we face now of course is an existential danger to humanity itself, where there exists a threat to completely erase humanity as a concept, replacing humans with cyborgs or whatever. Generally, this seems unlikely to actually occur. But it is a thing that people are finally talking about. I’ve been talking about it since before the Daily Stormer existed, before I was ever a “neo-Nazi white supremacist” or whatever stupid meme. I read and watched what these people were saying about transforming into a “post-human” form, and it just seemed obvious that this would be the goal of anyone with money. What else would they do with money, when they do not believe in God and the dream of eternal life is within reach?
Unlike myself, the sort who gets stung by a scorpion and says “yeah it doesn’t really make much difference if it kills me, I’m cool either way,” most people are very attached to life.
Nick Fuentes is out of the media now. People I know who don’t really even care that much about politics were contacting me like, “yo, what’s going on, why are they astroturfing this guy like this, what are they trying to do?” and I was like “um, this is, um, eh, it’s just, you know, kind of a boring story, really.” But the thing got too weird and so the media eventually dropped it. It’s possible he’s gone forever now, at least gone from that level of exposure, because he was just so unprepared to play that role. Being very quick on your feet when talking does not mean you’re able to formulate ideas, and telling him to go out and say everyone is a Russian agent and the FBI is totally telling the truth about Charlie Kirk, without giving in a definite script, turned out to be a complete disaster and basically everyone was disgusted by the whole charade. It’s possible that they will still use him as this kind of official opposition figure, I don’t know. They’re unlikely to find anyone more stable. One of their other guys recently released tapes of him having gay sex with men from Grinder. (I’m not going to tell that story, I’m sure anyone can look it up. Basically, an FBI antisemite guy released gay sex tapes because I guess he was being blackmailed. He also smokes meth, so maybe he just thought he was being blackmailed.)
But they’re not going to get me. Even all the people who hate me know I be like
If you find yourself in a situation where antisemitism has become so mainstream that you need a controlled opposition antisemite to be plastered everywhere, Fuentes is the best you’re going to do. I would argue that the mistake was putting him on the Charlie Kirk case. It’s confusing what exactly they were even thinking. It could have been a pressure test, to see how capable he was of forwarding an extremely unpopular narrative, to see how moldable his followers were. But again, they don’t have some list of people lining up to take his place. The fact that you’re going to put yourself in the “public antisemite” space basically means you are insane, either driven by pure antisocial desires or some terrible sense of justice. If it is the former, it’s only a matter of time before you end up burning yourself. Virtually all of these people that I’ve seen have ended up in some kind of homosexual scandal. For Matt Heimbach, it was a sex scandal with his mother-in-law. Cudos to him for keeping it hetero. I guess.
The Fuentes debacle was extremely disheartening. I had known he was working with the feds for some years now, but to see the card played like that was obscene. It should have been heartening that no amount of force was enough to get anyone to take it seriously. I guess.
Whatever. I do feel like most of what I did was a waste. I put so much time and effort into Fuentes. People who know know, I’m not interested in explaining it to people who don’t know. Getting stabbed in the back because he’s a pussy who can’t do a bit of time and a queen who cares about money (for reasons other than “because women like money”) was whatever. It was more just a forced reckoning with how hopeless things actually are.
The good part is, I realized that what I do feel meant something was the extent to which I was able to help boys and young men (or older men, in some situations), and the fact I was able to bring some laughter into people’s lives. So with that understanding, an understanding of what I did that actually meant something (or that I believe meant something – it’s the same thing), I can move forward.
I am working on the TV show. I’m a little bit worried about money. I’ve burned through a lot of money keeping the site online over the last year, while people rightfully weren’t really donating because I wasn’t really posting. I’m concerned that the money won’t really be there for the show. But we’ll see.
Anyway, the main point here was just to confirm I’m not dead.
I am pushing ahead with the TV show. At least then if I do finally have some kind of total psychological breakdown, it will be on the public record, you know?
Looking at my life, it is incredible what I’ve been able to hold together. I think I’ve probably made it past the point where I would fall apart. But if I do, I see no better place to do it than on an internet TV show. At least I can confirm it won’t be anything gay or otherwise deeply sick. It would just be the exhausted collapse of a man ridiculous enough to have imagined that he could do something good.
Wait, no. That’s too heavy, self-congratulatory, masturbatory.
Let me try again.
It would just be the retarded end of a retard.
That fits better.
But yes. I am going to clean myself up. And I’m going to do a TV show. This will occur. Of the things I did that I think may have mattered, it is going to focus on the humor part, rather than the helping young men part. It’s going to be primarily an artistic project, rather than a political one. I really like a lot of stuff that is happening with AI, and I see a way to use it in an interesting way. I will try to make it pay for itself. If it doesn’t, then I’ll just say that it wasn’t meant to be.
The target launch date is probably still about the same: late first, early second quarter.
In terms of those essays I was supposed to publish two weeks ago… I have them. They’re really done. I just haven’t been able to bring myself to care enough to give them a final pass and publish them. But yes, to the extent that I am interested in politics at all at this point, I am interested in the psy-op that is the “alternative media” landscape, and as this will be the topic of my TV show, it makes sense to publish some preliminary written works on the topic.
The Real Issue: My Conversion to Communism
I guess it’s probably more important to explain my conversion to communism.
Of course, I haven’t actually converted to communism. Communism is an ideology. Bertrand Russell actually very causally classified it as a religion. I am against all ideologies. Furthermore, I am a religious Christian, and communism, as an ideology (or a religion) is anti-Christian, even though it does tend to uphold all of the social norms of Christianity (the major exception being abortion; I’m sure there are other exceptions, though none major I can think of).
Ideology is an insane replacement of philosophy. I suppose that what I would say specifically is that my understanding of Christian philosophy has caused me to align more with economic policies supported by socialists, as I have come to realize that it is simply an absolute fact that money corrupts everything it touches. The top leaders in the Gulf States are drinking alcohol, engaged casually in homosexuality, and so on. The new leader in Syria, whatever he’s calling himself now, certainly changed his tune when the option for wealth appeared to him. At least you can say the Gulf leaders were born into sickening wealth, but this Syria guy was a
It seems like this pretty much always happens. Maybe it didn’t used to happen, before the industrial revolution, when the power that wealth gave you was always limited, but now that the power that wealth brings is unlimited, it seems that there is no one too pure to not get sucked into it, which simply means that those with the gold make the rules. And frankly, the Jews control the wealth, due to their control of the banks, and this means they can control everyone.
I hate to say it, but if I hadn’t been forced into exile, it’s probable I would have been myself corrupted. Why wouldn’t I have been? I mean I like to think I wouldn’t have been, because I like to think I am who I believe I am, but everyone believes all sorts of things about themselves, and most of the time these things are not true, so it would seem ridiculous for me to believe that I am the singular exception.
I suppose my exile allows me to believe that I am the exception. So I might as well just take the win. Regardless, even if I and some small percentage of people are willing to stand on moral principle, due to insanity or a fear of God (most likely a mix of both), and perhaps some desire for legacy, the majority are not, and so you can only trust people who are locked into an incentive structure.
Presidents Putin and Xi are good men. They behave as very good men, using their power as leaders to work for the benefit of their people. It is worthy of note however that the incentive structures they operate within are such as they benefit personally from behaving in a way that benefits their people. This is in stark contrast to the incentive system in democracies, where any individual working in the system maximizes personal benefit by acting against the interests of the population, and in the interests of donors.
It is probably true that authoritarian governments attract people who are more driven by principle, whereas democracy governments attract people with no morals at all, along with many actual sadistic sociopaths. I would be shocked to find out that Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping do not behave in their personal lives, when no one is watching, much better than Joe Biden or Donald Trump. And people like Emmanuel Macron and Friedrich Merz are obviously deeply sick. Then you’ve got women running around trying to get everyone killed for sexual reasons. Everything. The question of the extent to which authoritarianism shapes men into better men and the extent to which it attracts better men is ultimately irrelevant, as it is obvious that better men run authoritarian governments. If I had to guess, I would say that at the highest levels, it is genuinely good (authoritarianism) or bad (democracy) people who seek power, while at middle and lower, people are mainly conforming to the culture.
Also, before anyone says “but there are bad authoritarian leaders and good democracy leaders” – yes, I know. I just mentioned that there are many sickos running Islamic countries. However, if you were to break down those incentive structures, you would obviously find more patterns. Most obviously, the US overthrows any Islamic dictator who doesn’t play ball, and it is impossible to be a good leader while serving the US.
It seems it is much harder to find a good man in a democracy than it is to find a bad man in an autocracy, however. Thomas Massie seems like a good man. It’s basically a canard that he supports immigration. He isn’t a purist, but I’ve seen shills defending Israel make this claim. When Fuentes was everywhere, he brought it up every time Massie was mentioned. The claim is that NumbersUSA gives him an “F.” It’s actually a “C-” now.
If you look at the grade card, however, it is actually retarded. The “F” on “border security” is because he voted against the “Big Beautiful Bill.”
That bill allocated $3.4 trillion in money. Border security, broadly, was less than 5%. “You would have to be for open borders not to support the other 95% of this bill, whatever it may be” is not an adult position to take.
To be clear, he is not an absolutist anti-immigration activist like Trump pretended to be. But no one really is. He’s as good on immigration as anyone in Congress. It was only looking into this that I found out how worthless that NumbersUSA site is. What an absolute sham.
Regardless, he’s the closest thing you have to a good man in the US government, by a lot. But how far is he from the levers of powers? Trump/AIPAC might successful primary him. They probably won’t, because Trump wants to attack him for remarrying too soon after his wife died instead of his immigration positions. Trump arguably can’t attack his immigration positions, given that Trump’s own immigration positions are much more extreme than Massie’s.
Marjorie seems to be a good person, despite being a woman. But she literally quit the government because everyone was evil. (NB4 “her personal life” – yeah, dude. she’s a woman.)
Liberal democracy is the transmutation of liberal economic policies into a political system, given that it is a system that is purely about money. We all go along with this stupid charade that we “vote in” politicians, but the actual reality is that the candidate for any relevant state or national office is decided during the primary, where whichever candidate with the most money gets the nomination. You then have two bought and paid-for candidates running against one another. (And in most districts, it doesn’t even matter as the way the maps are drawn, you already know which party is going to win.)
There is zero reason anyone would get involved in politics in a democracy other than to make money (and gain status, but I repeat myself). Maybe some moron thinks they are going to “change things.” I don’t know what kind of ego you would need to have to think that it’s a simple as “no one ever thought of that before.” You would just lose. Or maybe get offered the money and take it. Though a very rare occurrence, both AOC and MTG basically got elected on pure popular support, surprising the establishment. Then AOC sold out and MTG quit.
All the money is corruption money. The salaries of Congress people are basic middle class salaries. Yet these people are virtually all wealthy.
This is a big topic. It is clearly impossible to be in a democracy government and maintain morality, and it is impossible to become wealthy enough to change society through private sector behaviors and maintain morality. This whole idea of the alchemical equation of turning labor into tokens and then running them through machines that multiply them creates infinite corruption, and the only way to control it is through a state apparatus powerful enough to control it. That’s apparently how communism ends up with “the state as God.”
I don’t know what the solution is or think there is a solution. But it is obvious to me now that it is pointless to do anything and not address the issue that a system based around money is not a viable system for humans to live in. People talk about “wealth redistribution” under communism, but every system redistributes wealth. This system certainly does. When you turn everything into fungible tokens that are just floating around, and then you don’t control the flow of those tokens, you cannot have a meritocracy. Instead you end up with a kind of moralocracy where those with the lowest morals gain the most wealth.
That is not absolutely true. Someone can be clever and work an honest job and live a comfortable life, still. But that opportunity is being drained away, as wealth continues to be centralized more and more.
It’s a big issue and I’m still thinking through how to communicate it. Right now, this is already long. This was intended to be a “proof of life” post. I threw in “I converted to communism” because no one but me would think to say something like that.
I’ll come back to this issue soon.