So, I tried to really give this whole aiming with a proper sight thing a real chance.
As you can see I superglued a fake plastic pink diamond sparkly thing,
1
with a needle shoved through it after heating it on the stove. It may not
look
professional, but I tell you, it serves it function just as well as all the fancy ones. Which is to say… totally useless for me.
I am sure there is a reason for this. I am sure I am doing something wrong, probably not being super (or even adequately?) consistent with how and to where I draw the bow and where I hold or how I release, or whatever… but the fact is that at least for now, the whole use a sight to aim thing is disastrous for me and brings no benefit whatsoever.
Out of 9 shots, because I wanted to give it a real chance, I hit the target at 20m only three times. In frustration I fired the last shot instinctively and hit it for a total of 4/10.
By comparison, the next two loads of 6 arrows were 5 hits out of 6, with one flier you can see below. I don’t know if I did something wrong on that shot or if, as with rifles, sometimes you just get a flier. With ammo that is not match ammo you will occasionally get a round that maybe is a bit over or under charged, or seated a bit off and you get a flier at distance, with arrows… I don’t know. Maybe the fletchings weren’t all well aligned after having being fired. Maybe sometimes they just hit the side of the bow or my hand ever so slightly and it affect the flight path… I am just too ignorant to say right now.
and 6 out of 6. Even if only just as the lower right hit shows.
At this point I did a fatal error. Got over-confident, wanted to just rush through the next 6 shots for another 6/6 and reassure myself that at 20m I am now on target pretty much always.
And so of course I scored 3/6 instead.
So I remembered what one should never forget: Stay calm and don’t rush, and tried again.
Result: 5 out 6, and the one I missed was because once again, I tried to “aim” (not with my super-special sight, but just a “bit” by using the riser of the bow indicatively). It was a narrow miss but still a miss.
The missed one was a narrow miss to the left of the target that went under the log.
Second set was again 5/6 even if the miss was again very close. and was AGAIN, the result of tension. In order to improve my ability to stay calm, I do various things in my head. On this last set at 20m I imagined I had to hit a bad guy or else he would reach one of my daughters and harm one of them. It’s maybe a bit grim for most people, but as a good high IQ guy with a bit of Aspieness,
2
I am very good at compartmentalising, so this kind of thing does not bother me and is in fact a way to develop a skill and also react properly when/if things that put you under pressure happen. It’s really a form of training that all highly trained people do in one form or another.
On the last shot I put undue pressure on trying to ensure I hit the yellow bullseye, and of course, that’s the shot I missed.
Overall lessons, is still the same one:
With archery, a calm mind, like the surface of a still lake, as the Japanese
budo
masters would put it, is the main thing.
Any tension, any wish to be “good”, any importance given to any spectators, any desire to “really get this shot to be a good one”, are all counter-productive.
There should only be you, the target, and the arrow. In a sense, even the bow “disappears”.
So at this point I decided to fire 6 more shots at 50m range. This is because after having fired 40 shots of a 60lbs bow, you get fairly tired. And doing more extreme things when you are a bit more tired is probably a bad idea for most people, but I trained my body and mind for years to function under pretty bad conditions (lack of sleep, injured, stressed out, etc.) it was all an excuse to try and improve my ability to function as I wanted instead of how my body preferred.
So for me, at least some of the time, doing something that requires even MORE attention to detail when I am tired out, can be a good thing. By this point most of the stupid has been wrung out of you and you can just try to do the thing without your ego getting in the way (however subconsciously it may be).
So I fired 6 shots at 50m and this was the result.
As you can see only one hit the target (the last shot, so it probably indicates some level of adjustment is taking place as I correct from the previous shots, which is a good sign). However, if you look at the arrows numbered 1 and 2, on a human sized target, these could reasonably also be expected to possibly be hits.
The arrow labelled 1 would probably hit the chest, arm or shoulder if the bullseye is assumed to be the centre of gravity of a person (see image below to see what I mean) and the guy was about my size.
And arrow n.2, although you can’t tell from the photograph could quite possibly fly either between the legs, into one of the thighs, or, if one is really unlucky, in the last place any man wants to be shot with anything in.
So, although I only had one hit on target at 50m, in reality it’s maybe not quite as bad.
Review of stated goals
These were:
Goal 1:
70% hit rate of human sized target at 50m. 80% would be excellent.
Current:
MAYBE approaching 50% but more like 20% repeatable is probably more likely. So we can assume MAYBE 50% achieved. Need a lot more practice at this distance to be sure.
Goal 2:
40-50% hit out to 100m. 50% would be excellent.
Current:
Never even tried and frankly this may be blue-sky thinking, at least for me, at least with my bow, and at least with the amount of time and effort I can devote to this.
Goal 3:
Hit a 4” target at 20m 40% of the time and a 6” target 60-70% of the time.
Current:
Unknown/Nowhere really. I haven’t been paying much attention to this. I have been focussing on hitting the target, which is 50cm in diameter, and not really looking at where the hits go. 4” is 10cm diameter and 6” is 15cm diameter, which on the current target makes the yellow part roughly mid-way since it’s about 12cm across, and if you include only the first line of red closest to the yellow, then that circle is 15cm across. At this stage I haven’t really recorded the frequency, but it’s not great. I would say probably less than 50% of the way there.
Then again, I am not quite yet at a third of my stated 1,000 shots to get there, so there is still hope.
Happy New Year if I don’t write again before 2026.
The kids have been repeatedly warned. Leave your crap lying around, and dad will use it as scrap, bin it, or adorn his manly weapons with your pink sparkly fake diamonds.
Ignore the vicious claims from my wife when she occasionally says I am probably a psychopath. She known not what she says… and this usually only comes out when I repeat for the 15,000th time that “Clean as you go along!” is how human civilisation was developed when it comes to cooking in the kitchen.
This post was originally published on my Substack. Link
here
No related posts.
By SubStackSyncer | 30 December 2025 | Posted in SubStack
The wife got us for Christmas a new target that is a little smaller than the box we were using, but my crappy performance was mostly due to once again trying to “aim” instead of just shooting instinctively.
The best part though is I tried to shoot from 50m and hit it the first time I shot almost in the bullseye.
I should have stopped there. But of course I fired another 11 arrows for a total of 12 at 50m and including the one above 3 were on target and frankly quite a few were pretty close, as you can see below.
So, all in all, I’m pretty pleased even if two things are obvious:
As with any similar skill, if you stop practicing for a bit, which I did if you look at the last archery post, your skill will degrade and you will need to catch up again. It’s a fairly quick process but it’s how it is.
Shooting instinctively is definitely better for me, and I need to introduce any sort of aiming only very gradually and “imprecisely” mostly only for elevation due to distance.
It also appears my posture needs to be a bit more “tall” for better accuracy.
The wife also is enjoying her bow, and after a bit of prompting from me tried it at 50m and came fairly close to the target too, which considering her bow is only a 30lbs compared to my 60lbs is pretty decent since her arrow drop is a lot more than mine, making the difficulty higher, much as shooting a lower powder but same calibre bullet makes it harder to hit a target at a set distance (eg .308 rifle vs .300 WM rifle).
If I don’t post again before it, Happy 2026 to you all.
This is a critique of how even intelligent people are fooled by confirmation bias and more specifically AI confirmation bias. I will be using Vox Day as an example, but it needs qualifying, because the critique is not necessarily written in stone over time and may be self-correcting eventually, but it is present right now and as such serves a useful example using a highly intelligent person in real time as an example. The primary purpose is not a personal critique of Vox, but rather for YOU to question your own baseline assumptions, assuming you are even capable of it, of course, which is a rare occurrence among humans.
NB:
There are necessarily long preambles to this critique, because modalities of reasoning are being looked at and this can’t be done without first laying out at least a very summarised version of the modalities involved.
He has, of course, been telling people for a long while that most peer reviewed “Science”, is about as scientific as the bone-throwing of circus monkeys. In fact, he is one of the first people to make others aware of this on a large scale due to his vast reach thanks to his consistent blogging over the years.
Vox has achieved much in various fields and is clearly highly
intelligent
. He is also curious about possibilities, and as I have noted years ago, tends more to being a general strategist than a tactician. I tent to be more of a tactician generally, though we both have elements of each other’s preferred modality in action. Vox was instrumental in burning down the Hugo Awards by showing them up for being an incestuous in-crowd of freaks that had more than one pedophile in their midst and voted each other in order to hand out awards to each other and exclude actually competent writers on the basis of ideology instead of competence. That was both a master-stroke of tactics and strategy, and the Hugos have never recovered after having
Space Raptor Butt Invasion
, by Chuck Tingle, nominated as a Hugo Award winner. Rightly so.
More recently he has taken the time to identify the invalid tenets of Darwinian evolution theory, something that was always nonsensical to anyone capable of doing basic math, but he took the time to specifically point out the fundamental flaws in the now properly defunct theory of evolution as it has (and sadly continues) to be taught to us in schools.
The point here is that aside from considering him an intelligent man, I also consider Vox to posses the curiosity native to what I define as smart men too.
1
My critique of his interest in AI and
specifically this post
then, is limited to what may well be an apparent lacunae on his part, and I use it merely to illustrate a point that may or may or may not be the case with specificity to him. Unlike my critique of Geoffrey Hinton, who is decidedly limited to
Intelligent
but NOT
Smart
, in
my post about the difference between Clever, Intelligent and Smart.
This preamble is necessary because Vox is clearly a rather unique individual with a level of intelligence that is far above the norm, (I believe he reported it as tested at about 150) and as such is a good example for illustrative purposes of this post, though in his case the issue might not be as solidified as it is for many intelligent people, and it is important to make a distinction, especially for those whose IQ does not reach his level and are prone to being binary thinkers.
On Me
Smart people too make mistakes. I certainly have made many and my IQ was tested twice at 157 and then 152,
2
but part of the difference between Intelligent and Smart people is that Smart people, somewhat like children, will try and test pathways of thought that more common intelligences simply don’t even notice or consider. And we rarely have any extremely firm opinions on anything, as we tend to be probabilistic thinkers.
The difference in modality of thought between Vox and myself has been of interest to me for some years. Mostly because it informs the process of thinking and how it differs from person to person even at similar IQs. The human mind is a fascinating topic and one that I have studied for a long time as a hobby,
from my training in Hypnosis to the practice of it
(again as a hobby mostly but to a high degree of competence nonetheless) and the facets of personality and how it influences our attention is interesting to me.
I noticed that when it comes to wide-ranging topics, paradoxically, Vox’s interests tend to be more “terrestrial”, that is, the focus is on things that are practically perhaps more relevant to most people in a day-to-day view. Evolution was nonsensical to me for a long time, but I could not be bothered to do the work to prove it definitively to the wider world. Mostly because I don’t care too much what the ocean of idiots around me think about on a daily basis. On the other hand, I spent quite a long time proving that the
origins of humanity in our Solar System are far more complex than most people think
, and that our human history even on this planet has clearly had influence from extra-terrestrial life of a higher technological capacity that we (officially) posses today. The evidence for my thesis is solid (literally so, being written in the planetary geology, electromagnetic field, soil composition, and even astronomical elements of the planet Mars) and multi-faceted (the evidence on Mars is overwhelming on its own, but is backed up by almost endless multiple points from disparate provenance on our own planet). But ultimately, it probably has little impact on the daily lives of the common man. At least… for now.
The cognitive leap required to reject evolution, is in fact a mere stepping stone to the cognitive leap required to accept the real origins of humanity. In this respect then, it is Vox that has done the work of the Tactician, and I the work of the General.
Once humanity accepts that classic Darwininan Evolution is nonsense, they may well begin to ask what the mechanism of us being here is, and when they do, looking up, to Mars, its evidence and the remnants scattered all over our ow planet, will become more important. And sometime AFTER that, looking at the technology involved, specifically antigravity, will become impossible to continue hiding.
30 years ago, when I first wrote the Face on Mars, I already foresaw all of this and was concerned with he fact that while the technology of antigravity is amazing and CAN make life seem heavenly on multiple fronts, literally ridding the planet of lack of energy issues overnight, it has some very dangerous potentials too, primarily the ability to reduce the entire planet to a dead world like Mars if not a scattered bunch of asteroid like the Phaeton object.
3
The Critique
Vox’s post on the degradation of science has some fundamental errors in it that are in essence the result of confirmation bias. And while the overall point of the article is valid, the approach to it is flawed.
take this passage for example:
The key insight comes from a 2021 study by Marta Serra-Garcia and Uri Gneezy published in
Science Advances
. They examined papers from three major replication projects—in psychology, economics, and general science journals including
Nature
and
Science
—and correlated replicability with citation counts. Their finding was striking: papers that failed to replicate were cited significantly more than papers that replicated successfully.
Not slightly more. Sixteen times more per year, on average.
In
Nature
and
Science
, the gap was even larger: non-replicable papers were cited 300 times more than replicable ones. And the citation advantage persisted even after the replication failure was published.
Can you see the problem?
Right there:
three major replication projects
And what were these? Mechanical engineering, physics and electromagnetic processes?
Nope.
Psychology – i.e. almost entirely opinion based nonsense that has almost zero input from something actually valid like neurology.
Economics – Coincidentally, I think you can see all you need to see in
this post
is wrote about this “science”.
And an opaque “General Science”. Which we can surmise may include anything from the varicultured nonsense of the modern era that passes for “science” today; ranging from how “men” can get pregnant to the “transgenderism” of babies, and the “racism” of mathematics.
In other words, the very study that Vox quoted is an absolutely pointless one with no possible credible results that have any meaning at all. You may as well quote the opinions of Sentinel Islanders on the nature of airplanes to try and present it as a scientific study on the engineering aspects of aviation.
Now, Vox continues the article to show how the issue is not just individual bad actors, but a problem of systemic proportions. But again, although the result is correct, the method is reached either by erroneous means (citing the study as relevant to the final result) or by wholly independent ones that do not require quoting a completely irrelevant study. And in any case, the issue of systemic absence of actual science on this planet is already obvious to anyone that is not a functional idiot or brainwashed by the mass-media.
4
And trying to educate the idiotic masses on the point is an endeavour I find mostly pointless,
5
and mentally as “satisfying” as talking to a wall.
The final conclusion Vox comes to (by using supposedly mathematical principles)
6
that essentially all psychology papers are complete nonsense and on the rare occasions that they are not they are indistinguishable form the nonsense anyway, is on par with pretending that one is using a very reliable mathematical formula to conclude that “water is wet”.
The “reliance” on a mathematical model that models another “mathematical model,” that relies on outright opinions based almost entirely on the wish of the producers of the papers to become “famous,”
7
as though it was a rigorous proof of anything, is absurd on its face.
Perhaps my knowing more about the origins of psychology than possibly Vox has may “colour” my own view, but the point is that the process he uses to come to the conclusion he does is essentially nonsensical, but appeals because it fits with either reality and/or his perception of the issue, and not, the accuracy, correctness or validity whatsoever of the method used.
The machines have learned our mistakes. They reproduce them faithfully, at scale, and without shame. And in doing so, they have shown us the fundamental flaws designed into one of Man’s most trusted institutions: science.
Once again, Vox has taken the time to do the detailed work to prove empirically that AI is essentially useless for the purpose of trying to increase the level of truth, objective reality, or fundamental concepts of reality it may be directly tasked with investigating. In fact, it is almost entirely destructive to the very concept of truth.
Vox’s intelligence is applied to this point so that he reaches more veracity (on the uselessness of science within certain realms of human investigation) concerning science, but this is an indirect application of AI.
Sort of showing the lacunae of actual science by using one of its creation to show what a clusterfuck of bullshit it produces.
The unseen danger here is that while Vox’s critique is correct and valid, what will result (inevitably) is a correction of the errors. AI will begin to approach closer levels of “truth” until the average person is completely fooled into thinking AI is always telling you the unvarnished truth. Which is already arguably the situation anyway, even with as low a “veracity score” as AI currently has, what with people “marrying” their phones, committing suicide, or divorcing based on talking with ChatGTP.
But ALL of this investigation, critique, and review of AI processes as well as “$cience” is wholly unnecessary to a thinking human being.
I detailed
why AI is absolutely a net negative for humanity
8
and will absolutely try to ultimately kill us eventually, in more than one post in the past; which, about as effective as shouting at clouds, remains empirically far more reliably true than anything I have seen Vox post on AI. Once again, probably due to time-preferences, where he uses AI more often in daily interactions, while I am totally unconcerned with it in that respect beyond occasional use for the cover of a book or two, and am far more interested in the eventual future projections, which make Terminator and Skynet be far more future-predictions than entertainment.
I (or you, if you can do what I refer to as basic logic) do not need to make up flawed mathematical models to see how AI is a net negative for humanity down the line, or how $cience is flawed and not actual science at all, any more than I need to use calculus to show that four apples split fairly between two people result in two apples each.
Nevertheless, his work is useful I suppose (possibly?) in getting the average norm to change their mind about some generally accepted nonsense. Showing the working out doesn’t necessarily matter (especially in this case, since it has no real bearing on the results) but it give everything a veneer of respectability I suppose. And where it actually does matter, like in his
MITTENS work
(which destroys the Darwinian evolution theory) people that check it can verify its accuracy and confirm it over time, which obviously also helps.
The Point
There is a danger in theories that appeal to us for emotional reasons, because we are all, to some extent or other, prone to confirmation bias, and AI is especially “good” at making you feel flattered, special, and more intelligent than you are. And AI also lies atrociously, with clear abandon and easier than you breathe. Not exactly a Stirling combination for… well… anything. Much less anything actually relevant or important.
It IS important to do the detailed work to verify your theories, however, if the model you use to do is is itself the result of confirmation bias, the conclusions you reach, even if they happen to be correct, will be so by chance rather than accuracy or correct calculation.
In contrast, if you take the time to attempt to falsify your theory, and continue to discover new avenues by which the theory is instead fortified rather than weakened, it begins to be a good indicator that you’re on the right track.
The Face on Mars was a good example of this, because after I had the first initial insight on what happened on that planet, and how it must have been inhabited by intelligent humans or human-like people, the very first thing I thought of doing was falsify the idea.
IF my insight had been true, then a BUNCH of other stuff I had not looked at or even thought of at all should ALSO be true.
There would have had to be water on the surface in large enough quantities to support life.
It would have needed to have a magnetosphere.
The atmosphere would have needed to contain oxygen and more or less on a par with our atmosphere if the human(oids) living on it were similar to us.
If I was right about the event that destroyed it, there should be some evidence of it, and indeed there is:
Astronomical (Phobos and Deimos)
Geographical (statistical impact patterns on Mars)
Anthropological
Any number of mythologies, legends, and ancient histories on our own planet can easily be interpreted as the survivors from the Martian conflict becoming our ancient “gods”
Genetic diversity of the human species practically exploded 30 to 40 thousand years ago, seemingly out of nowhere
Now, if one or two of those factors had been on-point but not the others it would be possibly a coincidence, but when they ALL line up so precisely, and the deeper you dig into any one of them the more they are confirmed, well… at that point it’s not confirmation bias. It’s confirmation of a good theory.
Psychology has been bunk from the start, mostly, and while evolutionary biology is also very dubious in this respect, it has at least some validation in epigenetics, while psychology for example, only has a passing and far-away tenuous outlook from neurology mostly. So, trying to calculate it’s “time to becoming nonsense” is pretty much an exercise in futility. For the most part, that time period was zero years.
At any rate, I hope you might gain a little insight into how to at least consider the baseline arguments and presuppositions and unstated premises before you entertain some model of reality, regardless of where it comes from or how pleasing it might be to your ears.
This Substack is generally shadow banned, so please share it by using the button below.
No, I do not have the official results, I did this at age 26 and took the first test more as a bit of a joke, scoring 157, and being a little disbelieving of the fact opted to take another officially recognised one (not Mensa, and no I don’t recall what it was, it happened 30 years ago and I was never particularly concerned with the “status” of it, only the correctness of the results) the second test were I WAS trying to do well, of course, I scored slightly lower, which is about standard when you introduce general tension in any activity.
Which IS indeed a minority of people (Covid and taking the murder-juice-shots being a prime example), and I simply cannot be bothered to try to talk to the infinite masses of cretins that ARE mentally retarded, brainwashed, or incapable of altering their view based on objective reality. I therefore treat these majority of humans as essentially irrelevant NPCs to politely avoid as much as possible and expect the few thinking humans to more or less be on my general level of seeing objective reality. Unfair as this may be considering my +3 SD on IQ from average, it is also the only way I can more or less tolerate most of humanity.
The astute reader may wonder why then do I write at all? And the answer is that I write for two primary purposes: The first is to solidify and more accurately conceptualise ideas, concepts, and genuine discoveries I have made or that interest me, for both my own refinement of the ideas as well as for posterity, and secondly, for the narrow band of people that may in fact appreciate it, have similar interests, or the actual capacity to process the things I write about and make them useful in their own lives somehow. I do not, however. place any emphasis or expectations on how my writings will be received by the masses, which is why I am an absolute trianwreck when it comes to self-promotion or marketing of my ideas. Aside the fact of course that I am constantly shadow-banned if not outright banned from various platforms precisely in part because of the very objective facts I discuss, and particularly with regard to the activities of the Talmudic tribe.
Not actually verifiable, real or relevant, because they are extrapolations from a nonsensical baseline topic with practically zero credence from the start.
Very much in the same vein as Freud, who started the trend, and who expressly had the same self-serving purpose of both fame and fortune, without any regard to veracity or results at all.
The footnote in that linked post has links to more than one article I wrote on why AI is essentially a net evil for humanity. In case you need it explained in more detail.
This post was originally published on my Substack. Link
here
No related posts.
By SubStackSyncer | 28 December 2025 | Posted in SubStack
Is a bunch of absolute racist zealots that refuse to integrate (I define these terms more fully below).
At
John’s substack
, referencing the now ubiquitous article about the lost generation he writes:
Young white men were systematically excluded from every institutional avenue of prestige and prosperity. Doors were closed in academia, in journalism, in entertainment, in the performing arts, in publishing, in tech, in the civil service, in the corporate world. It didn’t matter if you wanted to be a journalist, a novelist, a scientist, an engineer, a software developer, a musician, a comedian, a lawyer, a doctor, an investment banker, or an actor. In every direction, Diversity Is Our Strength and The Future Is Female; every job posting particularly encourages applications from traditionally underrepresented and equity-seeking groups including women, Black and Indigenous People Of Colour, LGBTQ+, and the disabled … a litany of identities in which ‘white men’ was always conspicuous by its absence.
Well, all that is required to completely get rid of all the effeminate bullshit is a reversal of the above. It doesn’t matter if you are almost destitute and have no position of authority.
All that is required is that white men, only work with, support, elevate, promote and generally associate with other white men that do the same. It doesn’t matter if we start out as a fractured minority. It doesn’t matter if none are rich or able to do much for a large number of them at the start.
There are two reasons why this will turn the tide in one generation (20 years) and completely reverse it in two (40 years).
Game theory applied in reality.
White men have always been the most inventive, resourceful, capable, tenacious, just, and fair of all the ethnicities when you compare them against each other.
If 2. were not the case you would hardly need rules and laws to keep them down, now would you? And rules and laws to have those less able and capable infiltrate their domains.
So all that is needed is that white men simply refuse to interact with any aspect of life that does not support them specifically and exclusively.
Nothing is preventing other ethnicities from doing the same of course. And they do. The Jews have always done it, alongside with also an undermining of their host nations in order to increase their relative success and control. The Indians do it by rampant nepotism on the work front.
But we don’t need to undermine anyone. We just need to exclude others from our communities.
It is absolutely doable.
If a bunch of relatively inbred Afrikaaners managed it in
Orania
— a project I was sure would fail 30 years ago— then it’s absolutely possible for other white men to create it and replicate it and improve on it on larger scales.
I have started my own flesh and blood version 5 years ago and have six children and am 56 years old. I may or may not succeed, but I am unlikely to see the full results in my lifetime unless I live to a 100 or very close to it.
I am trying to create a community of like-minded 1958 Sedevacantist Catholics in rural Italy in a little place where a number of people already see things as I do. It’s slow but the momentum is not linear. Consider that we had this community start online only and that by mere chance really, due to my writing and YouTube channel (which has been on the backburner but the content is still good).
People approached me more than I asked anyone to join me, and now it’s got to the point where there are young married men producing children (so far all in other countries) and at least one sede man purchasing a decent sized home and land near us.
Some had originally joined when not Sedes and then left or were deemed unsuitable. But the others are for now a scattered but cohesive group, and they in turn are affecting and influencing communities where they are. More sedevacantists are being created/converted and born than pretty much any other religion in comparison. So, even if my specific corner of the world does not go as I hope, I am fairly sure that some of the other people I influenced (the Glory is God’s alone, not mine) will achieve groups as I describe.
Now about that racism…
I personally don’t care about the specific colour of anyone’s skin. I have had girlfriends of every shade and multiple cultures which covered most of the continents and major religions, and I have had friends of every colour and again most major religions too.
But the point is not the individual. The point —as far as Western civilisation and the Catholicism that created Europe is concerned— is that only the European Catholics created it.
And as such, in 99% of cases, that is what should be promoted, looked for, sustained, and viciously guarded against infiltration.
I have zero problem with a Muslim country not allowing Catholic Churches in their nation.
Similarly, I don’t want Mosques or Synagogues or Buddhist temples in mine. Be Muslim, Jew or Buddhist all you want; silently in the privacy of your home in my country, as a guest, or publicly in your own, but do not expect anything but contempt and hostility from me in mine.
Islam and Judaism
both have child rape
as part of their religion and I want nothing to do with such belief systems.
The racism I support is nothing evil or bad or even unnatural. It is the natural and perfectly normal affinity and prioritising of one’s own religion, ethnicity, culture and people above everyone else’s.
And I support it for your religion, people and nation too… in YOUR land.
Obviously, logically, mathematically, unavoidably, my wish to keep my ways and people and you to keep yours will absolutely eventually lead us into conflict if we try and inhabit the same space. This is on the “water is wet” level of hardness to understand.
Which is why the propaganda into making you NOT feel this most natural of sensations has been absolutely relentless.
But… try it.
Hang out with only your own people. Find some, even if just for a visit of a few days. Find a little village of your own still unadulterated kind and notice how much easier everything is.
And once you see it you can’t unsee it.
Then begin to act accordingly.
I do have friends from very diverse backgrounds that I care about, but when it comes to what I am building here, I will prioritise my own specific kind. If I had it my way it would be only Venetian 1958 Sedevacantists near me. And you BET I will give my business to them first and foremost. And will help them any way I can first and foremost.
And you should do the same with your own kind.
Game theory applied in reality proves this is a winning strategy. Allow zero infiltration and stick to your own, and keep making children and bringing them up in a loving, secure, faithful, traditional way of your people and watch it thrive and bloom.
Ignore the diktats of those who hate you. Create your own communities and rules. Unspoken first, spoken later and eventually enshrined in law. It doesn’t start with some heroic figure on a white horse coming to save you. It starts with YOU. You specifically. You who imagine it’s impossible for you to change anything, much less the world. But you do. And you will. All you need to do is start. Now. Today. And all you need to do is all you can do. Every day. Not with any end in sight. But with the relentlessness of easy habit.
Reject the digital ID realm. Use only cash. Avoid businesses and people not of your own kind. Choose your own first and foremost.
And keep inventing, building and creating.
Become as self-sufficient as you can. Marry only your own and reproduce early and easy and often. Look into your people and your religion and also look into which religions actually bettered mankind and which did not.
Islam creates unhappy hellholes. Judaism is parasitic. Protestantism and the fake Novus Ordo “Catholicism” create weak and crumbling societies of churchians.
Catholicism proper created the best conditions that humanity ever experienced, and beauty, skills, and art unparalleled. Yes there are fewer actual Catholics now than there have been probably since the year 400 AD or so. But so what? The truth has never depended on numbers. Catholicism started with 11 scared men and 4 women. And it took over the world and we measure time starting from the birth of our Lord.
Yes it has been infiltrated. Yes the Vatican is a hive of pedos and satanists. Yes corrupt men always have existed in the Church. And yet… it has survived the persecutions of Roman Emperors, the heresies of Arianism, the mass murderous pogroms of the Protestant era and the French “Enlightenment”, and the lies of Protestantism that have been relentless and ever multiplying for 500 years, and it will continue to survive, large or small, until the return of Christ. Just look at its history.
Nothing merely human would survive 2000 years unchanged. Only the supernatural protection of our Lord could ensure Catholicism still exists in an unbroken line from Christ and His Apostles to us today. So look into it.
Read some books if you need to learn more
. But consider it at least.
And join us or start your own community.
Either way, do it.
Because you are the only one coming to save you, and maybe us, maybe me. Or vice versa.
But it’s down to us, the so-called little people.
And all we need to do is avoid, ignore, and expel our enemies from our midst.
Chances are, even among those of you who read my blog, which is an already really rather self-sorting group for non-retards, over 50% of you likely believe some real nonsense and are incapable of changing your mind based on facts.
Now, consider that 37% of people will say the short line is the long one when only two other people (paid actors) say that the short line is the long one. In effect ignoring their own eyes and being incapable of any even remotely independent thought even at a task so simple as pointing out which drawn line is longest or shortest.
Now imagine the effect when you are bombarded 24/7 with propaganda for the last 100 years (and more) about what poor innocent victims the Jews are. Or how evil and bad all the Germans were and are. Despite the fact that nowhere near six million Jews died in the holocaust but over 10 million German civilians were indeed starved to death intentionally
after
the end of the second world war. And of course you never even knew or were told that actually happened.
So… what does this mean?
It means two things:
Professor Carlo Cipolla’s Five Laws of Human Stupidity is indeed very funny, but also brutally true. It might as well be a scientific paper on the math that 2+2=4
Only a minority of people have independent capacity for thought.
It gets worse, because, of that minority, only a smaller minority also have the constitutional, intellectual, and courageous ability to ACT, in a way that will tend to better the world. While another group of these independent thought capable people (arguable though) are intensely evil, selfish and demonically inspired people who currently rule the world by making full use of the ability to propagandise the idiots into the equivalent of a zombie wave of stupidity that washes over and destroys much (if not all) that is good.
So… where does this leave you?
One of four places:
Idiot that imagines/pretends/assumes he’s not an idiot. They have no consequence other than as NPCs in the game of life that might be herded into one or other activity or “belief”.
Independent actor that is evil and aligned with secularism, hedonism, personal profit in the temporal realm and sexual degeneracy of all kinds.
Independent actor that is not evil but is too cowardly/weak to push back against the evil ones.
Independent actor that IS willing (and in some way by default this also makes them able) to push back.
Now you just need to determine which path you choose.
My wife has usually been a bit of a Grinch at Christmas. She always said it was a lot of work and mostly disappointing. Personally however, I have always loved Christmas even as a kid regardless of circumstances and I still do as an adult. And it didn’t ever really have to do with the presents either. The only Christmas present I remember distinctly in my 56 years was one I got when for reasons I don’t recall, at about age 8 or 9 or so, our family arrived for Christmas day at this farmer’s house in South Africa where a bunch of other people and kids were. I seriously can’t recall what the situation was, but I dimly recall we had just arrived from somewhere else far away, maybe even just arrived in the country and due to the distance we still had to go had a stop over with this family for the night. And we didn’t know them at all, the situation probably organised through friends of friends. Anyway we were a last minute addition and we didn’t have presents for anyone and my brother and I didn’t expect any for us either. Not in a bad way, just in a can’t be helped way, and we were pretty stoic kids even then. When we saw a bunch of other kids with presents under the tree we didn’t react or think anything much of it.
The lady of the house nevertheless approached my dad and told him that she knew he had two boys and she had got us a present each and she hoped it would be okay. He thanked her, as did we and I still remember that present. It was a cowboy gun in full metal with those little percussion caps that made a bit of a bang, as they had a thin layer of actual flammable powder/paint.
My brother and I loved them and spent the whole day shooting each other and mostly the other kids in the usual kids games.
Aside that, I don’t recall the presents I ever got without some serious effort, and I certainly don’t recall any I got as a kid. I could probably only name a couple from the last few years if I really tried.
So for me Christmas was never about the presents. Even as a kid what I liked was the feeling. The way everyone said Merry Christmas in the shops. The way people were generally more pleasant and happy.
This year however the wife decided she was hanging up the Grinch persona and it was going to be a good Christmas.
My view of presents is get a couple or three per kid, make them good and call it a day. Because again, Christmas for me is not even about the presents. I don’t care if I get any at all frankly. I have everything I want for the most part anyway. And the thought is what counts the most, so it’s that aspect of the present for me. I got my wife one and I let her deal with the presents for the kids, thinking this year she might follow my idea about presents.
And boy was I wrong.
She bought more presents for the kids than any other year, and trust me that’s saying something. They might not be very expensive things, but they are well thought out ones. Puzzles, logic games, drawing stuff… I can’t even tell you, though I wrapped a good chunk of them this year. She said I did last year too but I hardly remember that either. And she got me a bunch of stuff too, which I was… “What did you do?!? I don’t even… I thought we were just getting each other one or two things…”
And her reply was “No, I told you this year I’m making sure it’s a good one…”
Which of course made me feel terrible and I told her, “But now you’ll be disappointed again because I only git you one present, I didn’t even know you were getting me anything…”
Quick as a flash, she said: “No, I’m not! and no you didn’t! See all the silver wrapped gifts, those are mine!”
“Uhhh… yeah ok but… you bought them yourself. That’s not really the…”
“Nope. I wanted what I wanted and you bought it all.”
Which is true enough I suppose but I definitely need to up my Christmas game next year.
She also made a lunch earlier that was pretty awesome and we had some friends over for it and she had put out everything in good order, fancy tablecloth and cutlery and all.
And to give you an idea of the amount of stuff she got the kids, here is a picture of the tree. I seriously do not know how many each kid has but it’s probably over 20 each.
Each colour paper is a different child, and the giant red ones are mine (I figured out what it is already but I’ll wait till tomorrow or later to show you all). Her silver ones and the few for the baby are on top of mine.
If you try count the kids ones you’ll think “Oh it’s just 15 or so” but you’d be wrong. There are presents stuffed all the way to the base of the tree.
The one I got you can spot by the differently “wrapped” approach…
Anyway, the feeling this year has been great. No Grinch attitude in sight, and it’s making everything so much nicer.
I gave a friend an over and under shotgun I had that in fairness was a bit short for me but probably perfect for him, and that’s all the presents I did this year. So despite the good feeling I have, if there is a Grinch this year it might be me. A jolly one though it may be.
When you have a shitty upbringing, or maybe bad memories around such times as Christmas, or maybe even something really traumatic happened, it can be “normal” to have a sense of dread, an anxiety, or a general sense of depression about Christmas, or New Year, and so on.
Maybe you’re alone, (and unlike me —who had more than a couple such Christmases and birthdays and New Years— it hurts you to be alone at such times) maybe you’re going through a terrible time. And maybe my words are not enough, but even so…
Know that you ARE loved. No matter who you are, if you are still alive on Earth, I believe God still has love for you. Perhaps out of a hope you turn out better (though he can know for sure of course) or perhaps just because he does, even as you abandon all hope of Him.
You are loved and may you truly experience it fully one day.
Whatever your circumstances, please know… there is a loving God, there is a heart at the centre of the madness and pain you might feel, and you absolutely can get a sense of it, even if you are alone and in a bad way. Just be still and close your eyes and feel it. It may not be there right now in a tangible way, but I assure you it is there. And you will, at some point, experience it fully.
God bless you every one, and may you have a Joyous Christmas today.
