Movies for Men: Part I

Movies/TV have in many ways become the ‘total art’ that Wagner aspired to. The latest Star Wars, Avatar or Avengers movie is the final product of a veritable nation of entrepreneurs, capitalists, visionaries, writers, actors, costume designers, musicians, technicians, grip men, caterers, stunt men, props workers…. it’s really quite incredible when you think about it. And starts anew with the next project.

Sadly though, the overall religion that drives these productions (other than just making money) is of course, progressive universalism  served with an echo catalyst, to say the least.  That said, human nature being what it is, we see still see some virtuous themes emerge, sometimes explicitly in the movie as a whole, and sometimes a sub-theme in an otherwise pozzed film.

If I were writing this in a better age I’d likely A- be writing this on paper instead of typing on a computer, and B- discussing ‘books for young boys’ as one used to. And heck, I’ll likely do that still in the near future (the discussion, not the paper bit. The modern world doth hath its technological advantages despite social decay). But for today, I wanted to have a look at movies portraying manly virtues, brotherhood, sacrifice, courage etc. to inspire young men (and men of all ages really).

Basically, through the mire of filth and chaos that modern day Gomorrah on the West Coast belches out almost weekly, what are some standouts one can recommend to say a younger brother or nephew or son?  Recall: every boy (and man) needs heroes, real AND fictional. Any ‘taking back’ of society will require strong confident young men, and said men need role models, which is to say, stories of camaraderie, hero’s journeys, flawed men overcoming their limitations on the way to greatness, and above all: mannerbund.  I fear we will be facing some dark times in the not too distant future, and tales to help inspire us are necessary.

The Enemy groks this, hence his near total control of the means of communication and creation of new stories. Nevertheless, the Light shines through the morass, and here I dare say are some I enjoyed. Mind you, some are very flawed but have great moments that warrant inclusion, and after all a discerning eye is part and parcel of living in this mad time, taking the good and resisting the bad.  I’ve aimed for a mix of old and new., and included a scene or two to illustrate for most:
Zulu: British Empire at one of its finest hours. The movie was the inspiration for the Helm’s Deep battle in LotR as Peter Jackson was a fan since childhood. Surprisingly, for being over 54 years old, it still holds up. The Battle of Rorke’s Drift, the finest of British stiff upper lips, the clear contrast of civilization and barabarianism, and yet at the same time the grudging respect of soldiers on the battle field.

Knockaround Guys: Some big city younger generations mafia boys go to a small town. Altogether, a completely forgotten movie and not that good. It’s on the list here though due to the friendship between Vin and main character. Vin is basically the hardest of hard men as illustrated when he fights the local town tough man at a bar (a man incidentally who was ‘protecting’ the women of the town, i.e. the pack), illustrating that most primal of dominance hierarchies: I can put you down.  It’s also instinctively understood by every man in that scene, what the stakes are, what’s going on. But where the movie really steps up is his willingness to give his life for his friend, the loyalty there. Despite being rough men, flawed men, they’re loyal, and that elevates them.

The Right Stuff:  Based off the excellent Tom Wolfe book, which frankly should be mandatory reading for any male teen. It encompasses the beginning of the US space program with Project Mercury, juxtaposed against the switch from the ‘elite’ being test pilots to being astronauts. (with incumbent women problem as always).  But what it’s REALLY about is men, status, and great acts. (It also has a hilarious scene with pathetic publicity seeking politician LBJ up against a man willing to defend his wife.)
Heck I’m just going to put a quote from the book here and let it stand on its own:
“In this fraternity…the world was divided into those that had it and those who did not. This quality, this it, was never named, however, nor was it talked about in any way. As to just what this ineffable quality was…well, it obviously involved bravery. But it was not bravery in the simple sense of being willing to risk your life. The idea seemed to be that any fool could do that…No, the idea here (in the all enclosing fraternity) seemed to be that a man should have the ability to go up in a hurtling piece of machinery and put his hide on the line and then have the moxie, the reflexes, the experience, the coolness, to pull it back in the last yawning moment-and then to go up again the next day, and the next day, and every next day, even if the series should be infinite-and, ultimately, in its best expression, do so in a cause that means something to thousands, to a people, to a nation, to humanity, to God. Nor was there a test to show whether or not a pilot had this righteous quality. There was instead, a seemingly infinite series of tests. A career in flying was like climbing one of those ancient Babylonian pyramids made up of a dizzy progression of steps and ledges, a ziggurat, a pyramid extraordinarily high and steep; and the idea was to prove at every foot of the way up that pyramid that you were one of the elected and anointed ones who had the right stuff and could move higher and higher and even-ultimately, God willing, one day-that you might be able to join that special few at the very top, that elite who had the capacity to bring tears to men’s eyes, the very Brotherhood of the right stuff indeed.”

Casablanca: Yet another oldie but goldie that holds up well. Sure, a somewhat romantic take on the Great Conflict, but let’s not go there, and instead focus on the human element. We have cynical Rick, whose long lost love reenters his life, and then sacrifices his potential relationship with her for the Greater Good.  It’s also Rick as MAN, not boy, the kind of man women respect and love. Back when males on the screen were actual authority figures and not objects of ridicule.

Karate Kid: A Classic hero’s journey. New kid in town Daniel Larusso gets into fight with local mannerbund/gang Cobra Kai and golden boy Johnny.  Notice how the movie doesn’t shy away from the conflict: Daniel suffers, struggles, fights, gets the girl, earns self respect, and under tutelage of his teacher fights the bad guys ultimately earning Johnny’s respect.  The movie has several classic ‘hidden teaching through grinding’ scenes which have become staples of contemporary culture, but my favorites are how Daniel takes his problems with Johnny to his mentor figure, Miyagi, who then enters the Cobra Kai Dojo and confronts their sensei man to man.  There’s an important lesson here about how men deal with their issues: head on, and by the rules. Notice even Cobra Kai sensei (despite later dodgy behavior in the tournament), tells his boys to back off Daniel until said tournament. And after a severely injured Daniel is told to quit, he refuses, because that’s where self-respect comes, a necessary prerequisite before OTHERS respect you.  And he earns it in the field of battle, eyeball to eyeball with a fearsome opponent who brings out the best in him.  Incidentally, over thirty years later a sequel youtube series has come out, and against ALL odds it’s actually really good (and fairly red-pilled to boot) touching on themes of bullying, fatherhood, honor and being a man. Seriously, watch it, i has no right being as good as it is. #teammiguel

Lawrence of Arabia: somewhat fictionalized portrayal of British desert warrior helping Arab tribes fight against the Ottomans in WW1. Beautiful movie, a bit slowpaced perhaps for nowadays so best to reserve a rainy interruption free afternoon. But great scenes like this and this make it well worth the effort.

Rush:  Another ‘should be obligatory’, and as a more recent film, easier to take down (pacing, technical production, modern feel). A movie exemplifying a rivalry amongst men, each coming from different backgrounds and world views. Bringing out the best in them, above and beyond the call of duty. The end monologue by the hyper disciplined and analytical Lauda, recalling the carefree joyous wild Hunt, is spectacular and earned.

Chariots of Fire: Another movie exemplifying the best of British Empire and height of ‘amateur sport’ in Olympics, the ideal of sport not as professional career but as an elevated calling. You have a rivalry between pious Liddell capable of borderline miracles from within, and complex outsider Abrahams. And it has one of my favorite speeches of all time, the Grandmaster Caius contemplating the losses of the First World War.

American Sniper: Clint delivers, surprisingly blunt truths about the way the world. works.  Cooper plays the main character as an authentic, straightforward unapologetic alpha.  Note his approach of his future wife which would make Heartiste proud.

The Grey: one of the best portrayals of someone dying on film I’ve seen. Liam Neeson’s character doesn’t pull punches or lie, just bluntly tells him in his last moments to focus on who he loves. All the material belongings, all our accomplishments, all gone. In our last moments, we won’t care about our LED tv… we’ll care about those we loved and are leaving behind. The movie borders on themes of nihilism and existentialism, but really it’s about men struggling against the wild and a vicious nature (in this case, the ruthless cold and hungry wolves) that is intent on taking them down.  But they’re going to fight, and that’s what defines us.

Lawless:  Set during prohibition in the moonshine business in Virginia, a movie that’s really about family, clans and local loyalties. Tom Hardy plays a fierce (and slightly comedic at times) role, a force of nature, as head of the family fighting a turf war against authorities and incoming bootleggers.

High Noon: (interestingly, in ‘real time’ i.e. a minute on screen is a minute of time) a criminal is coming back to town intent on revenger. The Marshall is encouraged to leave town with his new wife, but his old school sense of honor and duty intervene. He asks the townspeople for help but they all turn him down with varying excuses. The movie is a dire comment on what happens when men abandon their responsbility. In this case, the townspeople were lucky that Kane stuck to his principles. What happens when the Kanes of the world are not to be found? Who will restrain the Frank’s then?

Jaws: three men on a boat, against a Shark. Simple, straight and to the point.  The classic Indianapolis speech.

Master and Commander:  Classic film of reactionary men’s man Aubrey and Romantic scientist Stephen.  The ‘men must be governed’ scene is amazing.  The ship’s only doctor conducts self-surgery (without anaesthetic). The leader’s speech. Even young teens that our society treats as entitle teenagers, partake and battle and the consequences thereof.

Elite Squad: A Brazilian movie that doesn’t shy away from tough questions on the drug war. And by that I don’t mean usual left-wing ‘drug guys are poor people’ crap. The movie unambiguously attacks the active role the consumers play in it, and the sequel delves more heavily into the corrupt political system as a whole. The drug war is not cut and dry, and as one of Handle’s best posts puts it, until we find a way to control the high crime/violent portion of our population, it serves a role in allowing the police to do their jobs.

School Ties: A bit of stereotypical “wasps are evil, look how hard us jooz had it!” movie by the prog machine. But that aside, it’s very well done, young men, code of honor, how to act honorably. A jew from the wrong side of town joins an elite prep school, makes friends, but when they found out he’s jewish the obvious happens. (well, obvious for Hollywood movie at any rate). But how does he act? He acts like a man. And that’s what matters.  At the end, during an important test, a cheater (Damon) breaks the code of honor. Of course, today’s hyper competitive ‘win at any cost’ world (as exemplified by soccer players) scoffs at this as naive. But it was at one point the bedrock of anglo-saxon/European/Christian values that allowed Mannerbunds to flourish and built the Western World.  Ultimately, the decision comes down to class, the same class that had ostracized the main character. And despite their deciding to throw him to lions, he complies, and goes to headmaster to confess for a crime he did not commit. Good stuff.

Conan the Barbarian: With directed by right-wing nut John Milius (fun fact: inspiration for Walter in Big Lebowski), with screenplay co-written by Oliver Stone, based on Howard’s Hyborian stories. I mean really. From the classic Genghis quote, to Riddle of Steel, to Thulsa Doom, the Poledouris soundtrack (arguably one of the greatest of modern cinema) what a movie. Howard’s original work is a more faithful reproduction of how Europe was conquered by the Aryans (sorry, Indo-Europeans) than anything anthropology managed to come up with in last 80 years.

Dredd:  Seriously, if you have a single NRX leaning bone in your body, watch this. Dystopian urban wasteland future. Concrete jungles out of control. Drugs. Violence. Crime. And those willing to fight (in explicitly fascist manner) for Order amongst the Chaos. It’s shocking this got made in today’s environment. I’d only be more shocked if they did a faithful representation of Warhammer 40k without some mixed race gender ambiguous protagonist. A man can dream.

Last of the Mohicans: During early to middle period of British Empire, fighting against French in the New World, with shades of the to come anglo-american struggle. What’s noteworthy is the men of all kinds in this movie, despite the sides they’re on, act with clear motivations. The Huron council scene, despite a bit of ‘muh environmentalism’, is really about leaders (#patriarchy), deciding what is best for their people given a problem. I’m actually sympathetic to Magua there, truth be told. And of course, Duncan is a bad ass (spoilers: he purposefully mistranslates Long Carabine’s request, so sacrifice himself instead. Stiff Upper Lip and all that). And of course, the last ten minutes with “Promontory” playing are simply sublime.

Three O’Clock High: Mostly forgotten teen movie, but basics about facing your own problems. Jerry is basically a weakling journalist in school, and accidentally insults new student and bully Buddy, leading him to be challenged to a fight.  Jerry does pretty much everything to avoid the fight, from paying the jock to defend him, to trying to get Buddy expelled, to helping Buddy cheat in a test. Finally, paying off Buddy in a pivotal scene makes Jerry examine who he is (“you’re the biggest pussy I ever met in my life. You didn’t even try. How does that feel?”), and man the f up.  Wish fulfillment perhaps, but a story about being brave. Even if the film ended (arguably more realistically) with Buddy getting the crap kicked out of him, he’d have his self-respect, and that’s a lot more valuable than not being punched in the face.  There’s no hypothetical ‘tomorrow’ where you THEN decide to start defending yourself. You live this life once: what kind of man will you be?

Batman Begins: The first installment in Nolan’s trilogy, sets up basic cause of a man equipped with lethal skills and motivation (revenge) subsuming those for a greater social good. Civilization is nothing if not the quest to take man’s destructive impulses and channeling them towards God, family and community.

Dark Knight: It may surprise some but it’s actually been nearly a decade since this came out. The movie juxtaposes a vigilante trying his best to fight against chaos and disorder for what he considers good, and basically a walking personification of chaos and evil.  In these times of sugarcoating, coming up against the inexorably fact that there IS evil in the world and that it requires hard men to stop it is a truth that must be acknowledged.

Apollo 13: A movie depicting what basically built the Western World: serious, technically proficient well trained white men working in groups for a common purpose. No sense of shame or guilt or affirmative action or any other bs: competence and working together above all, cuz theres a clock and we have serious technical obstacles in our path. I don’t know what the future holds for us, but I do know if we are to recover our civilization, it will require regaining that spirit on a massive scale.

On the Waterfront: By Kazan (who famously name prog/commies when US was trying to stop them, alas too late), excellent look at corrupt mob-run unions on the docks, and one man who eventually through guilt in his actions and a talking-to from priest stands up against them. He ultimately pays a high cost but earns the respect of his peers, who stand with him. Truly an excellent film of faith and character in the face of adversity and evil.  It includes one of the most famous monologues of all time, when Terry is confronted by his fallen brother Charlie, on the role of family and duty.

Predator: Come on, if this movie had any more testosterone it’d run on meat not film and would deadlift between showings.  The reason it’s on this list, beyond being a damn fine action flick, is the unapologetically male 80s in your face action hero.  Good stuff.

Crimson Tide: Interesting movie about men on a submarine faced with prospect of nuclear war. The lines of duty and chain of command lead to an entertaining (if a touch Hollywood) film.

In Bruges: hilarious off-kilter comedy with razor sharp dialogue. What really elevates it is the quite serious underlying narrative, of a man who committed an unspeakable act (killed an innocent child), and what the consequences are for that internal and external.  Ralph Fiennes plays one of the best ‘villains’ I’ve seen on screen.

Braveheart: self-explanatory. Yes it’s a romanticized if not Hollywoodized version of history. So what? It presents masculine heroic figures willing to lay down their lives for a cause.  It doesn’t shy away from the brutality of that time either.  There are sincere conversations about the nature of leadership, and Longshanks’s brutal but effective rule.  And the art of power.

Dunkirk: Well done war movie with nary a woman in sight. Just the brutality of war and men doing what they must for their fellow brothers in arms and their people. (And I’m someone who thinks the Brits were on the ‘wrong’ side!)

Rocky: Underdog beaten down by life with wasted opportunities and bad choices, gets one miraculous shot at making something of himself and above all proving himself.  (He also did the 4am wakeup a few decades before Jocko.)

Unforgiven: In many ways the ‘anti-western’, Clint’s big goodbye to the genre. Having played the ‘man with no name’ for countless films, here we see a broken, bitter older man who has ‘become a name’. The legend that the young believe in is contrasted with hard reality of life & death, and what it is to take a life, the burden. “It’s a hell of a thing to kill a man…. take away all he’s got… and all he’s ever gonna have.”   It’s a slow burn the film, culminating in the grand finale when we finally see the ‘old’ Clint come out, the violent gunslinger.

Gran Torino:  on the surface an ‘immigrant’ story but really about the ‘old’ America of long-forgotten manly virtues confronted by reality of pansy new generation.  Notice how the black men in this scene respect Walter in a way they don’t the ‘wanna-be fresh’ young white boy, because they see a real man there.  The importance of ‘male-only’ spaces for mannerbund bonding is made clear, the shit-talking, the verbal games. Work spaces were like this until modern feminism destroyed it.  It may be alarming to us how younger generations have literally no framework  of how to behave.  And the rest of the world thinks the West has gone soft, and they are right for the most part, but the Roman Empire was divided and nearly destroyed for 70 years in the 3rd century crisis, and yet it resurged. I think there’s some fight in us still.

Passion of the Christ: Even for non-religious people it’s a spectacularly well done film. The scenes of Satan attempting to tempt the Christ , the representation of the Adversary as ambiguously sexual to unnerve, the indictment of the democratic masses and mob rule, the scenes depicting His mirth as Chesterton put it, the brutality of the scourging and crucifixion, the love and suffering of Mary. And of course, the glorious eucatastrophe: the Resurrection. To an atheist, a great film. To a religious person… sublime.

Goldeneye: one of the better Bond films. Men being men (and women drawn to that). Code of honor. Having a villain that was a trusted friend, the theme of betrayal. Pretty fun stuff.  Even female M was great with a strong Thatcher vibe.



Red Pill Comedy

In medieval courts there was a tradition that the “fool” was the only one allowed to speak truth to power. We see this in Shakespeare, where the buffoonish character often speaks hard truths to the protagonist or even the powerful king. In our theocratic prog era, that role has fallen to comedians.

Now, rest assured, there are some truths that are hard to hear for the religious fanatic, but cloaked in a veneer of comedy it is surprising how much they are willing to swallow. Sure, often many boxes need to be checked; it’s easier to hear red pill men-women relations coming from a pregnant minority woman on stage, much like it’s easier to hear hard truths about lower-class blacks coming from a ‘straight talking’ black comedian.

Comedy often relies on taboo, with laughter a response that we are ‘in the circle of trust’ as it were.  And I imagine the larger the taboo, the more comedic skill (timing, pacing, approach of subject, overall schtick, etc.) is required.  Interestingly, virtually all the comedians are very much ‘prog’ through and through, and yet…. Witness for instance one of the all-time most popular mainstream comedians Louis CK joke in his SNL monologue of all places about child molestation.  

I’d thought I’d list a few examples of “red pill comedy” that one can quite easily recommend to prog friends, in the hopes certain forbidden thoughts may appear. Maybe full conversion won’t occur, not all of us can (or want to) read a few hundred pages worth of Moldbug. But certainly it’s been very surprising to me how even the most prog of friends (young women even) can imbibe the darkest and deepest red hue of pills.  And moreover… it’s fun.

  • Red Pill for the modern young women on the reality of dating, sex and family.  Ali Wong discusses going after her now husband after finding out he was high status (HBS), and the need to not be perceived as ‘easy’ to the one she ACTUALLY wants.  The whole special is riddled with red pills on modern women, on ‘proposals’ aka the women initiating the lockdown because ‘shes too old’, as well the desirability of the domestic home wife’s life with a good man.
  • Red Pill for the modern hedonistic “Girl” life of hedonism and vapidity. Tina Fey destroys the cliche, from “you are unpaid prostitute? you are lower than dog”, to the inherent oblivious 1st world privilege of these women who deem themselves ‘oppressed’, to at the end the real comment: they are stuck in a state of perpetual adolescence and immaturity (“24? wtf is wrong with you?!”). A thorough indictment of not just the show Girls, but the entire culture that it portrays and led to it.
  • Red Pill on the bottom half of the black community, the N problem, from Chris Rock, but really also applicable to white ‘trash’, northern working class broken English, Rust Belt Whites in US, etc. Any high crime, broken family, high time-preference barbarians that ultimately have been created by our society (PROG) breaking down traditional mores to control and civilize.  My favorite part is about 2mins in, when he discusses the incumbent responsibilities we have in a civilized society, and the breaking of social trust on the part of lower class: “wanting credit for what you’re SUPPOSED to do”.
  • Red Pill on marriage, men’s incentives in a long-term relationship, the unfairness of modern judicial system with regards to divorces, and male sexuality. Bill Burr touching on Kobe’s wife taking him for half his money (despite never ‘hitting a layup’), and the ‘epidemic of gold digging whores’ and how the modern system (PROG) won’t address it. “I’m talking about whores people!”  I particularly like his comparison of the greatness of Schwarzenegger, his own mediocre achievements, and how if a ‘great man’ like that is taken down, then how is this a trivial issue? Even some quite Jim-like comments here on “no excuses for hitting a woman? really?”
  • Red Pill on dysgenics trends in the modern era, from a combination of feminism (education as higher status for females than motherhood) and economics, In Idiocracy. Likely one of the most important problems facing the world today, with no clear solution other than outright genetic engineering or a total revamp (… reaction?) of our social norms and yes, legal norms.
  • Red Pill on dysgenics yet again, from Joe Rogan, touching quite explicitly in perhaps ‘pot head’ logic but nonetheless putting his finger on the precise problem: the modern world is not created by the average, but the high intellects and their inventions.
  • Red Pill on the inadequacy of modern corporate office to human flourishing and satisfaction. We are not robots.  In Office Space (from Mike Judge, one of the few right-wingers in Hollywood also responsible for Idiocracy) we even see Peter’s dilemma contrasted with his macho blue collar neighbor, and the ending (spoiler alert) involves Peter ditching the white collar lifestyle for an outdoor “manly” job in building and construction, involving actual ‘real’ tangible labor that is inherently more rewarding to his (and most men’s) psychology.
  • Red Pill in meta fashion, implicitly critiquing 1st world vapid superficial lifestyle and culture. Not for everyone, and full of irony (and frankly Bo is very much Prog) but he vociferously critiques the ‘pop earnestness’ bs of modern culture, which makes light of real human values:  “if you search for moral wisdom in Katy Perry’s lyrics… kill yourself.”  Modern unreal ‘romantic’ expectations of real relationships: “if you want love, lower your expectations a few, because Prince Charming  would never settle for you; if you want love, just pick a guy and love him.”  The modern commercialization of ‘country’ music which has become formulaic: “a bud light with the logo facing out… I own a private ranch that I rarely use.”Particularly “you don’t know what land you’re in… you’re in the land of pandering.” and “I walk and talk like a field hand, but the boots I’m wearing cost three grand, I write songs about riding tractors… from the comfort of a private jet. Bo is basically a prog who went through an Irony black hole singularity and came out the other end appreciating real values and earnestness in many ways and questioning many sacred prog values (while still of course being a prog).  Here’s him on modern pop songs that infect our youth and ‘modern love’: “though meaning might be missing we need to know the lyrics after just one listen.”  And he’s surprisingly realistic about fame. 


What Trump should do

Steve Bannon calls you up. He says he’s been reading some Moldbug, and he’s NRx now (always has been?). He says after the latest debacle, he wants your advice as to a strategic plan.

Strat Aim 1: secure power. Without power this is all irrelevant and any policy advice is dumb. That means A- avoiding impeachment, and B- winning reelection eventually. Both mean fighting the media. “B” also requires some  strategic electoral thinking/policies.  Then (or rather simultaneously as these are not necessarily sequential), secure a deep state (security/army/justice). And with power secure:

Strat Aim 2:  attack the Cathedral in all forms, but especially Academia, the brain.   All our policy prescriptions need to be guided by this understanding.

Per Sean Gabb“We face a ruling class, confident in its ideology, entrenched in all the governing institutions, unwavering in the advancement of its agenda. (…) The chief purpose is to destroy the present ruling class.  Moving as fast as we can, we must abolish as much as we can of its institutional means of action and support.”  Sean has his own prescription for the UK. I side with Foseti in thinking he ‘gets’ some of it, but is perhaps a touch naive and optimistic in other regards (immigration) and possibility of change via democratic election. But then again, Trump/Brexit happened, so who knows.

Regardless, Bannon’s waiting. Here’s my advice:

1- Abolish White House Press Corps.

One of the advantages of (and this will be a reoccurring theme here) of an enemy that’s gone full retard is that you might as well go all out against them. They going to Hitler you anyways, earn some of it at least.  Most Americans have a sentimental attachment to the ideal of a ‘free press’ at the same time they do not trust the media. So we use this to our advantage.

Announce that henceforth, media will be yes of course allowed to report on the presidency, but no longer as ‘cosy’ insiders. While an official press corps made sense during the age of newspapers and to some extent television, the advent of the internet has created the ability for the President to communicate directly with the people. Presidents have done this before, to great effect.  And while Trump’s team has been far more inimical of the press (leading to arguably the only genuinely humorous prog take on the Administration thus far) it’s simply not going far enough.

I propose on a weekly basis (or when necessary) the President address the nation via livestream on the White House website. The country can upvote in a reddit-like system the questions during the week that he’ll have to answer (with some moderation to  avoid trolling), and he can of course discuss topics he views as important. Make it a Sunday night ritual, or Tuesday. Doesn’t matter, but it will become a regular part of the people’s schedule to see the President (or VP, or spokesman) directly address the people without news media in the middle.

Now, the press is of course free to broadcast that signal on TV, etc., and to comment on it. But without the advantage of ‘status’ derived from being in the White House, having the badge, traveling on Air Force One, etc. a reporter is no different than a blogger in his pajamas.  Sure they’ll still have status as members of their respective organizations, but a big blow to status will have been struck.

You’ll find that Putin does something similar, explicitly populist, and IT WORKS.  It positions him as allied with the people against ‘the establishment’, even while he de facto runs the place.  And maintains the illusion  (and don’t kid yourself, it’s alway an illusion) that ‘the people’ have a voice.

There is NO benefit to be derived from placing oneself in this sort of situation.  Why would the ‘most powerful man in the world’ subject himself to his opponent’s framing and attack with the world watching? What did Bush get from that other than humiliation? Colbert, a high-ranking member of priestly cast, destroys the supposedly powerful man in the room, and the Cathedral rejoices. Why?

No. It must stop. The howls of outrage from media will of course sound hollow to the average American people, most of whom are approaching exhaustion with the media. “wait, they’re mad cuz they can’t go to WH? I can’t go to WH. why are they special?” Rex The Tex has already laid the groundwork, and frankly middle America doesn’t care.   And progs already think Trump is Hitler, so what difference does it make? Perhaps a few ‘moderates’ are lost but the removal of some Cathedral power, even if small, is easily worth the cost.  And it can be trivially done as it involves no legislation; it is simply an arrangement that will be undone by a few words from the President.

2-Leave Entitlements alone (for now) but attack SJW programs

This is right out of Gabb’s book. The easiest route for Left to attack you is to portray you as the usual “cutting welfare to the poor to fund tax cuts for rich people.” What gave Trump power and broke the ‘blue wall’ in Midwest was a combination of Left going full retard SJW alienating working-class whites, and Trump seizing the low-hanging fruit on immigration and protectionism. Whether these policies are ‘economically rational’ is irrelevant, that entitlements can’t go on forever and will eventually be tackled is irrelevant.

The goal is to secure power, and you don’t do that attacking Medicare/Social Security UNTIL YOU HAVE SECURED POWER. Of course once power is secured, we can argue till the cows come home bout our ‘tots fave social security reform’ but without power there’s no point to doing so.

HOWEVER, you CAN attack (and Trump likely via Bannon has suggested steps in this direction) government programs that quite literally fund the enemy. Even National Cuckview gets it.

Once again, to repeat Gabb: “The chief purpose of what I suggest is not to save money for the taxpayers, or to free them from a bureaucratic tyranny. Though libertarians will think these desirable ends, and though they will undoubtedly prove beneficial after a few initial difficulties, they do not commend themselves equally to all sections of our movement, some of which will think more about the difficulties than the benefits. The chief purpose is to destroy the present ruling class.  Moving as fast as we can, we must abolish as much as we can of its institutional means of action and support.”

Most voters are innumerative, they quite simply do not understand the difference between one million, one billion, one trillion. Saving a few hundred million abolishing NPR is to them no different a headline than cutting trillions NPV from Medicare future deficits. They don’t know the difference other than that Medicare affects them (or Dad/Mom/Grandpa…), but NPR are a bunch of liberal pussies who live in DC/NY and f them. The administration doesn’t get brownie points for ‘doing the right thing.’ Bush tried privatizing Social Security and got destroyed in 2006 (along with Iraq war blowback), destroying and political capital he had from 2004 reelection. Then he doubled down with an idiotic virtue-signalling Dreamer amensty that we were (temporarily) saved from by the thinnest of margins.

The goal with abolishing NPR, Foreign Aid, UN funding, NEA, AmeriCorps, the Freedomcorps, the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, the Legal Services Corporation, the Title X Family Planning Program, NEH, etc. is to destroy what are basically boot camps for the Left.  The beautiful thing is that once accomplished, and I mean destroyed not just defunded, those  employees will get new jobs elsewhere, the social networks broken up, and it’s much harder to restart said programs. Bureaucratic inertia works both ways: once vanquished root and branch it’s much harder to build-up again.

Teach for America can stay 😀

Politically, the most beautiful part of this attack is it will push the Left into further hysteria. Expect NYT headlines about how some transexual Brooklyn reporter losing his opportunity to gallivant on government dime in Southeast-Asia helping teach amused locals environmentally sustainable agriculture. Expect white-male union workers in Michigan to be told how important it is they fund said reporter. Expect a lot more votes in 2 and 4 years.

On Obamacare, it’s even easier. Pass a radical full repeal and replace bill. Let Dems filibuster it. Pass it again next year. Let them filibuster it again. Push for a ‘real filibuster’, involving sleeping bags, no bathroom breaks, a full media circus. Let Dems campaign on preserving a system that is unpopular with higher premiums every year. The political goal is attained. Reforming healthcare along obvious lines can wait until we have full power.

3-Pass a few obvious ‘populist’ but generally good policies

(Trigger Warning: this is the part where I delve a bit more into actual policy and strategy.)

A- First, pass tax reform that is de facto protectionist. Cutting payroll/corporate taxes by raising VAT (or equivalent) taxes is economically similar to raising tariffs and (take that globalists) WTO friendly. The House Border Adjustment Tax is actually not too dissimilar, though likely due to complicated reasons (payroll exemption) will cause WTO challenge. But then again, a WTO challenge may be welcome if it allows us to position as anti-globalist and pro-manufacturing, pushing Dems to oppose the policy and be de facto free-trade, and basically handing us the Great Lake states and thus the Presidency for another four years.

My preferred way to do this would be to first pass the Corporate Income tax reform with BAT.  Wait for WTO backlash, ideally timed into Mid-terms.  Then push for payroll tax repeal and replace with VAT plus small universal benefit.  This would be the equivalent of a tariff, it’s more economically efficient, it actually is progressive, it removes the clear tax-entitlement link that has doomed Social Security reform for decades (though once again this is just an ancillary benefit), and you create a new flat benefit for all that you can push as thin end of wedge to maybe one day replace entire welfare state (but more importantly the social worker class) with.  Average american worker receiving larger chunk of paycheck, AND a lump sum (small at first) payment to compensate for yearly VAT, will absolutely support you. And it further splits the business lobby. Populist and efficient.

The Personal Income Tax? Leave alone. Do NOT pass massive tax cut for wealthy. Some mild ‘remove deductions and cut/simplify marginal tax’ reform is fine, but really no big giveaway to the rich.  (Perhaps remove deductibility of muni/state bonds, to further punish Blue States) This removes one large plank from opposition’s toolkit. Focus has to be (until we secure total power) on politics, not long-term economics.

B- Pass obvious Infrastructure Bills. The main reason Obama’s infrastructure bill failed was because it was not really an infrastructure bill, most of the stimulus went to his base, i.e. white-collar government workers in teacher’s unions, civil service, social workers, etc. What we’re going for are stuff you can point to and say “We built that”.  I’m talking full 3rd world dictator unveiling ceremonies.

Luckily, we already have a list of some projects that mostly make economic sense, are tangible, and ready to go.  The Treasury has compiled one, and a leaked private consultant another.  Lots of overlap. My take: throw out any environmental ones, any high-speed rail liberal nonsense, and anything too exclusively in Blue States. This is politics. FDR knew that and used the WPA as a political weapon, explicitly rewarding supporters in key districts.  Regardless, here’s my proposed very preliminary list, with a focus on ‘hard tangible’ projects with an eye on politics:
Soo Locks Modernization MI
I-10 FL, AL, MI, LA, TX, NM, AZ, CA
I-70 Missouri
I-70 East CO, corridor
I-25 CO improvements
I-93 Rebuild, NH
I-95 Repairs NC
I-95 15 Bridges (PA)
I395/I95 Reconstuction FL
NextGen Air Traffic (National)
Positive Train Control (National)
Chicago Create (not due to state, but due to bottleneck for freight) IL
New Orleans Gateway LA
Mississippi River Crossing TE, AR
Mississippi River Shipping dredging, LA
IHNC Lock Replacement, LA
Upper Mississippi Locks 20-25, MO
Brent Spence Bridge OH, KY
Savannah Harbor Expansion GA
Houston-Galveston Grade Crossing TX
I-11 Corridor AZ, NE
Fargo-Moorhead Flood Control MN, ND
Jacksonville Harbor Dredging FL
Corpus Christi Ship Channel
Locks and Dams on 52 and 53 on Ohio River
Project Clean Lake, OH
South Carolina Dams repair, SC
Hydroelectric Plants operated by US ACoE, new turbines, reforms
Atlantic Coast Pipeline VA, NC
Gordie Howe International Bridge, MI
Kansas City Airport Terminal, MO
ST. Louis Airport, MO
Port Newark Container Terminal Improvements, NJ
Howard Street Tunnel, MD
Illinois River Locks, IL/MO/IA
Chickamauga Lock, TN
Upper Ohio Navigation Improvements, PA
Monongahela Locks and Dam, PA

By far the biggest focus should be on expanding the St. Lawrence Seaway and locks, in a push to shore up manufacturing in Great Lake States. This had a been looked into by Army Corps of Engineering, and while supported in the past a more recent cucktastic review found the ‘environmental’ impact prohibitive, which is a sad indictment on our political governance problems.

The beautiful part is if the Dems try and block any of this you have something to radically campaign against them on.  Publish the list of projects, shore up local support, turn this into a freagin circus, use the bully pulpit of the Presidency, Tweet. Go for the jugular.

Once total power is attained down the line we can move onto larger projects that are at the moment not politically possible.

C- Raise capital requirements on Banks in exchange for cutting regulations. This one is really a de facto reform of Dodd-Frank, and of course the prog media will come after you as ‘cutting regulations on Goldman Sachs’, so framing and message is VERY important. The go-to here is Financial Choice Act (FCA) pushed by Rep. Hensarling, and main adviser should be John Cochrane: He is a former Chicago professor, and a Hoover Fellow, and Cato adjunct scholar.  He discusses the FCA here: and here: .

“The core of the choice act is simple. Large banks must fund
themselves with more capital and less debt. It strives for a very
simple measure of capital adequacy in place of complex Basel rules, by
using a simple leverage ratio. And it has a clever carrot in place of
the stick: Banks with enough capital are exempt from a swath of
Dodd-Frank regulation.”

Due to the outsized importance of Wall Street in the economy (and politics), this reform would do far more than most tax cuts. And the plain fact is most regulations on Wall Street do NOT cut odds of a crisis, and in fact bizarrely favors larger banks better capable of handling higher fixed-cost. However, the media will attack any attempt to rationalize regulation. So the delivery of the message must be explicitly anti-Wall Street and populist, all while the reform will benefit the sector in the long-run.  It’s a tricky play, but the negative effects of Dodd-Frank are so high that the benefit via S&P rally are worth it.  One could argue a large part of ‘Trump rally’ has been driven by expectations of this in combination of tax cuts.

(There are other Cochrane ideas I’m partial to, such as issuing perpetuals or ultra-long treasury debt rather than our current longest maturity 30y bonds, worth reading. The floating rate debt thing is insane, but the perpetual is reasonable)

4-Merit-based immigration reform plus wall plus E-Verify

There’s no need to send the Gestapo to kick out millions of illegal aliens, as much fun as that’d be. First, build a wall or fence, they work pretty much everywhere. Then implement a solid National ID system (E-Verify is fine if mandated nationally), which also would benefit overall governance. Lastly, pass obvious points-based immigration reform along Canadian or Australian merit-lines. No need to ban non-whites explicitly when many Americans still cling to ‘egalitarian’ ideals. Do so implicitly via harsh points system that you can keep nebulous to accomplish your goals, similar to how otherwise PC whites will just so happen to pick lily white neighborhoods to live in.   You know, cuz of the ‘schools’.

Once again, if we ever get total power we can implement a more honest and forthright race-based system if appropriate, with some room at top for high talent foreigners. Think Singapore, only way bigger. But for now that is not attainable explicitly, so go for the easy win.  And it goes without saying, we abolish ‘Diversity Lottery’, which is an easy win in Middle America.



The above are all relatively politically possible at the moment, no pie-in-the-sky schemes. I’ve kept some out (like having to support Israel to keep at least some ((())) on your side for time being) because they’re already being done and fairly obvious. But it’s my firm belief that a Trump Administration that:
– Abolished WH Press Corps
– Abolished SJW Cathedral programs
– Left Entitlements/Income tax alone (for now)
– Passed Corporate Tax Reform with focus on Border Adjustment Tax
– Abolished Payroll Tax funded by VAT + Rebate/UBI
– Passed blue-collar swing-state focused Infrastructure Bill
– Raised Capital Requirements for Investment Banks in exchange for Dodd-Frank reform
– Passed Immigration reform on points system, with National ID and Wall

Would march to victory. Every item is a faction or general vote winner, particularly among key ‘populist’ midwest voters crucial to winning the WH in last year and keeping it in four. Every item is likely to push Progs into uncomfortably unpopular positions. Let the Dems run on pro-DCMedia, pro-payroll tax, lower bank capital standards, anti-infrastructure, pro-muslim immgration in four years.  Good luck with that. 

And once you’ve taken an even larger Senate majority in two years as the cycle favors Republicans, and you’ve won reelection in 2020, then you go after the big fish:
– Abolish non-STEM funding for colleges
– Declare foundations (including endowments) with over 100mio to lose non-profit status, much as Henry VIII attacked monasteries for wealth and more importantly for being rival centers of independent political power
– Nationalize or regulate as utilities Social Media: Facebook, Instagram, Twitter…
– End cable bundling via regulation to end subsidization of prog channels by (usually conservative) sports viewers
– Pull out of UN, ideally on some Israeli bill pretext to split the Chosen vote
– Throughout 8 years, purge Military Officer class and Justice department of progs, building up increasing cadre of pro-regime supporters in those two key departments.
– Have Ivanka, Eric, Don Jr. all win safe Rep or Senate seats and set them up to run in 8 years to continue legacy. Crush the enemy, and never let up.
Unite the clans: UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, US (aka Five Eyes ) customs/immigration union, as precursor to long-term political union.

That would be my advice. Mostly wishful thinking and indulgence.  That’s how we avoid debacles like Healthcare bill. That’s how the Administration can push for increasing power, governance, and attacking enemy prog tribe. And that’s our best hope of victory along current short-term political lines.

Needless to say, it won’t happen. So keep hitting the gym, become worthy, and wait. Win small victories when possible. Stay out of limelight.

….but one can dream.

PS:  As the great John Boyd said: People, Ideas, Things, in that order!  In that vein, some silly suggestions:
Office of Management and BudgetDominic Cummings
National Science FoundationStephen Hsu
President’s Science AdviserGreg Cochran
I will state that I’m quite pleasantly shocked at the quality of some appointees thus far, from Bannon to Anton to McMaster. There may be some sliver of hope.



Conversation with a Scientist

I had the privilege of having a long conversation with one of my favorite bloggers. Honestly, if you’re not reading his blog you really ought to. Heck, I’d advise going back to his first blog post ever and reading ALL of them (as well as ctrl-f on his comments in the comments section for some laughs, he has a special sort of ‘no nonsense’ approach to silliness that even I’ve been on the other end of).  I wrote the below outline of our 3 hour convo.While the conversation was initially private, I chose to ask his permission to share it, which he kindly granted.  He’s spectacularly well read and insightful, and I urged him at the end to write more, we need more ‘no bs’ scientists out there.

Any errors/lack of clarity are my own.


– Advance has to be paid back before new one, else can’t be same book again

-A lot what they said in the book came true

– Neanderthal interbreeding (Y chromosomes (mitochondrial DNA))  given as reason it was not possible against their theory, but that’s just one gene


– Used to be they had to “believe”, now they just don’t know, never been in a book they read so they’re just ignorant and slowly rediscovering things

– Default to expert fails: Anthropologist knows no genetics of any kind, they could be dumb, some are liars (Lewontin), others like Gould were stupid

– Bellesiles (Arming America), Bancroft Prize rescinded, was caught because his records were made public (quoted sources that had been burned and destroyed), misquoted sources explicitly

Niall Ferguson is a nut

– Deirdre McCloskey didn’t know ‘regression to the mean’, many economists don’t know

– People knew cousin marriage was bad (any cattle breeder knew), but not why

– Holiness spirals (Salem)


– Male Obligate Homosexuality in Sheep (~8%)

Pat Moore discovered Kaposi’s Sarcoma viral link in his wife’s lab at night basically alone

– Differential, look at samples and see what is in one and not another

– Has trouble getting funding (not sure why), later found a rarer cancer (found new virus)

– Some hardcore evolutionary types agree with plausibility of viral theory

– Some people looking at Sheep (not heritable is the conclusion), looking at amygdala, but not really viruses

– In humans, potential side effects (depression, lisp maybe)

Robert Nozick thought of it, discussed with David Haig

– To discover, he’d look at discordant twin pairs (one gay, one not) and see what’s the difference, microdissection, differences in the brain.  Narcolepsy is a good example, only 30k cells in the hypothalamus that go awry. 99% of people with narcolepsy have a specific autoimmune disorder, likely triggered by virus that causes it to zap specific part of brain responsible for keeping you awake

– Diabetes similar phenomenon, autoimmune disorder destroys insulin producing cells in Pancreas

– Cuba had 40x less, common sense quarantines, shutting down bathhouses

– Blood banks in SF in 80s wouldn’t discriminate against homosexuals, were sued into oblivion killing thousands of people with contaminated blood


– some strains of corn or horse can ‘nick’, with hybrid vigor

– (not always vigor, sometimes makes it worse)

– some weak evidence for half Japanese half white with high iq in Hawaii

– only example he knows, all others basically irrelevant, no vigor, just avg of two parental groups. But could be selection bias in Hawaii, more research needed


– diseases take different paths in races: Tuberculosis

– Higher immune response in Africans than non-Africans

– knowledge of ‘prohibited’ subjects ironically so prohibited people don’t know it’s prohibited and end up rediscovering it

– people will likely rediscover things and say they knew all along and write over the decades in which they were vociferously saying it was not so (see Indo-Europeans)


– not all countries can follow import people model per Singapore, cuz people end up not having kids there and it relies on breeding from abroad

– Solution: if we can make women want to bound their feet via cultural status, we can make kids popular again and having kids high status so smart women will want to do so


– Life extension

Parabiosis (Peter Thiel), probably works, idea showed up in the 20s, mentioned in Brave New World. Example of ‘lost knowledge’

– I asked him about Aubrey de Grey, he doesn’t know much bout him

– What can we learn about evolutionary theory of senescence (lots of ‘simple’ explanations are probably not true), Michael Rose, bred fruit flies to live 4x longer; won’t solve aging issue but gives us areas to explore

– If you don’t die of old age, youd probably die around 1200 years via accident statistically

– Steve Jobs was ‘a loon’

– his type of pancreatic cancer was type that we could cure, but he spent 9months on holistic nonsense, only then going to mainstream science; he probably had 60-70% chance if he’d not messed around with holistic stuff and gone straight to mainstream science


– we’ve made great progress on some cancers (childhood leukemia), others not so much: pancreatic cancer (probably better odds getting shot in head than that)

– All these supposed reasons ‘progress isn’t possible’, but it is with correct approach

– examples: ulcers, decades of no progress cuz incentives don’t align (existing drugs didn’t help but made lots of $), then found pathology, etc.

– everyone thinking the ‘same’ like Harvard, doesn’t help (Barry Marshall said if he’d gone to Harvard he’d have ‘known’ ulcers were caused by stress, but he was from Perth, and thus wasn’t afraid to challenge ‘known’ facts that turned out to be bs)


– Chickens are getting Fatter, experimental animals (even odder as it’s quite controlled), could be virus or something we don’t know, more research necessary


St Lawrence Seaway expansion to Panamax (80k tons?), cooperate with Canada, benefits Great Lake States, widening it, canals, locks, etc., would be particularly good for Trump Administration politically due to geographic benefit to Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, even Minnesota (my input: Also Bayonne Bridge, Charleston Harbor, etc)

NAWAPA water from Canada to Southwest US; (desalination has energy limits can only get cheaper by factor of 2 so energy is limiting factor), incredible benefits. Canadian opposition an issue (he joked, saying “they don’t have nukes, what do we care what they think” heh)

– Build “Solar Panel – Iondrive” device capable of replicating itself, takes materials from asteroid, builds more of itself , lots of tech right now make this easier (3d fabricators), can be built light on asteroids/space (no gravity) so can replicate pretty fast, start with Earth crossing asteroids, suppose each can do one thing that’s slightly useful (refine metals), we can get them to point where they eat most of asteroid belt in a exponential manner quite quickly, you can then tap most of the sun’s energy quite quickly, could terraform Venus. Could do it on Moon or Sahara, but better in space cuz can be done very LIGHT. Billions of times more controllable energy than available on Earth, we are very close to it (can you make a chip in a vacuum, can you separate rock into separate components), likely take 10-20b USD having bunch of engineers having fun going at it, ultimately bigger than Manhattan project in impact

– Terraforming Venus seems easier than Mars (low gravity is a big prob for health), zero g is bad for you, not sure bout how bad low g is; Venus you use sun shades can solve slow rotation/sun exposure problem (I suggested chucking an asteroid at it to speed up rotation, his counter was it’d take millennia to cool down from that impact.)

– Grab giant Antartcia iceberg and tow it up to ‘dry’ place like Australia for water

– Environmental movement not as strong as used to be, low interest rates allow good environment to fund this; Obama ‘stimulus’ they hired wrong people, because blue collar stuff involved white men, and Obama stimulus wanted women or service jobs (teachers, govt jobs). Trump different political  base.


– Jewish high iq probably also accidentally selected for ‘depression’ genes, anxiety, etc.

– Jews were already leftwing, Moldbug is wrong (he really doesn’t like Moldbug!), look at role in Russian empire or Europe

– Jews think of whites as their ‘ancient foe’ but don’t think that of Chinese

USS Liberty was absolutely a purposeful Israeli attack on US ship, only case he knows of repeated day-time ‘accidental’ attacks. Article in Chicago Tribune of retired army guys who saw classified info, and they said they heard transmissions from Israeli airforce being told to attack US ships. They wanted to kill everyone so there’d be no witnesses. Then later lied to say it was an ‘accident’ despite it happening over and over again. 6th Fleet was going to be scrambled, but McNamara ordered not to cuz LBJ ordered not to, because he didn’t want to piss off “the Jews”. What was the purpose of the attack on the Liberty? To pretend it was Egypt attacking and get US on Israel’s side. Likely some general didn’t realize in fog of war how easily Israel was winning and lost his nerve and ordered it, as well as good opportunity to cement American support and finish off residual “Arab” lobby in USG.

– Nixon supporting Israel in ’73 was to get Jewish support for Cold War and tie their support to Vietnam war, etc. You don’t need all the Jews, but you need ‘some of them’.

– White subordination to Jews, can change, it changed over past 100 years, it can change again. Israel will likely ‘push its luck’ and p.o. Trump, see below.


Stauffenberg was a ‘fine man’, a ‘good guy’

– Canaris’s widow had a pension from Dulles, Canaris likely a spy possibly an ‘official’ one

– German diplomat straight up told Molotov they’d invade, Molotov didn’t believe him

– Stalin made a lot of errors (shooting senior officers), keeping troops at front, he was ‘screwed up’, use of biplanes, etc. to be fair a lot of it was easier in hindsight, at time people were not sure what would work and slowly testing out new war theories, Germans were just better at it than most (combined arms, use of tanks, submarines). Sometimes it’s not a conspiracy, it’s just mistakes/stupidity

Tularemia was likely used at Stalingrad

– Chaff made sense but both sides didn’t want to ‘tip off’ other side to it; British should have used it earlier.  Germans likely should have used nerve gas when attacking Moscow.

– If US had landed in France in 42 they’d have lost, the Brits were right to not land then, even ’44 wasn’t that clearly an obvious victory beforehand. Germans were tough.

– Why Germans lost to USSR in East: Germans didn’t ‘try as hard’. 2nd shifts, maximum effort, female labor force, etc. they thought it’d be easier than it was until too late in the game. Kept domestic consumption too high early in war thinking of morale, didn’t need that, people didn’t dissent in 1944 when things were worse. He discussed Adam Tooze’s Wages of Destruction discussion of the problem with natural resources that were shut off by blockade, making it hard to convert conquests in Europe to full potential. Also, some stupidity (treatment of PoW, or Polish, or Jews). Compare pre-war industrial production of USSR to Germany in 1939 to 1942, incredible despite USSR territorial/population losses. Motivation was stronger in USSR. Logistics also an issue (rail gauge), Russian supply shape was far better. Also 1941 worst winter since…. 1812, so some bad luck. Russia also had all the oil they needed, Germans constantly worried bout it (like Japanese).

– Japanese torpedoes didn’t use compressed air, used compressed oxygen, so less bubbles, twice as far and twice the speed, US would get hit and not know where from. An ‘almost’ super weapon (like the 88 AA gun used as anti-tank gun). Germans with a torpedo like that might have significantly changed Atlantic War

– I suggested The Foresight War to him, he seemed keen


– Robert McNamara was not smart, “low” (relative to other Whiz kids) iq score

– Creighton Abrams was good, excellent commander

– Vietnam war wasn’t strange, it was America at the time that was strange

White Rajah of Sarawak as example of solid (brutal) colonial governance, would likely make short work of insurgencies if such a man were possible in today’s political environment.


– Trump is good at PR, impressive that he ran against both parties, the press and billionaires

– Money in elections is not too important , only people with vested interest in saying it does (pollsters, campaign managers, etc.) say it does

– Even though Hillary was National Merit Finalist, she didn’t make any sense. That’s the problem, people who are smart but not ‘clever’. There are different levels of ‘smart’ also.

– Thiel (and minions) highly involved in transition

– List for public appointments, he is on it a ‘potential’, someone put him on it but he has no idea who i.e. he didn’t ‘sign up’ as it were

– Trump is right now probably the most pro-Israeli president US has ever had; prediction: it won’t last. We’ll do something in the Middle East, and Israel will do something to piss us off, and Trump will not stand for it. They (Israel/Jews) go out of their way to piss off people who are their friends.


– Sardinians changed the least, mostly 90% of ancient Europeans i.e. non-IE

– most of Europe looked like that until…. IE moved in and conquered

– 1920s book The Aryans, V Gordon Childe, with little of modern tech was able to reasonably well predict Indo-European migration, etc. but everyone got very upset so he stopped talking about it. An example of ‘lost knowledge’ later reacquired with new tech (genetics)

– they wanted to rule where you could make more in taxes than where cost; Germany due to logistics and tech at time was not very economically productive. What could you extract from Germany? Not grain… maybe men, but if you can’t get stuff out of the place then you can’t get taxes so not worth it. Interior areas of Europe were not worth it. Interior Poland or Bohemia for instance. While Black Sea edges did make more sense.

– They also changed mind after losing 3 legions because general culture had shifted; before they’d had big losses but come back and still won, but something had changed from ‘never quit’ to ‘meh’.

– Much easier to transport over sea than land. De facto simpler to ship from Egypt to Rome than go 70 miles in a wagon from Rome.

– People inside lost their military qualities, they got shorter and less healthy, place more Malthusian. A lot of methods of production were not advanced too fast.   Economy changed in strange ways (100ad is the max, then shrinking especially after 180 into 3rd Century Crisis). Used to have more integrated economy with shipping, later localities more self-sufficient. Thinks it’s (story of Fall of Rome) solveable though with evidence/data available.
– Lenin was smarter than Warren Harding, but Harding was the far better leader. Smarts is not enough or even necessary sometimes.

– He’s corresponded with Steve Pinker, he knows ‘whatsup’, but plays it smart given environment.

Lee Kuan Yew, great respect for him, only world leader he criticizes for not being as logical as he could have been, becasue most other world leaders are just stupid

Vela incident was South African nuke test probably in cooperation with Israel, he knows the specific process South Africans used for building bomb, also that something funny was picked up in ionosphere from Puerto Rico’s Arecibo, and also satellite data, and submarine noise. USG basically covered it up to not have to recognize likely Israeli nukes

– Importance of logistics: during Crimean war, due to naval control Brits and French could put more troops in Crimea than Russians could

John Derbyshire Story

– Iraq War, GC tells JD dumbest thing, and JD eventually came around 2 years later and agreed. Initially 40% of National Review didn’t agree with the war, but eventually they all came around to ‘party line’

– Inverse Weathervanes (wrong on everything)

– James Fallows who works at Atlantic and is wrong on everything (Military Reform, talking about Gary Hart), then Japan economics, etc.
– Bill Kristol

– Asians on paper high IQ, but not many interesting ideas. He’s not sure why. Jokes that he has more interesting ideas than all Japan put together. “a very interesting and important question” but does not know why. They wait for Whites to invent something, then they improve it. Also, not sure about efficiency of writing system or reading as a hobby in the East versus West.

– On personal level, he was very sick in 2015, mostly better/recovered now.

– If rich/smart people want him to speak or ‘consult’, he’s open to it potentially.  (If I were a multi-millionaire or billionaire I would ABSOLUTELY jump at this)

Case Study: Soccer

(or, “when autism strikes”)

It seems that many of us when finding something to “fix” go straight for society at large, governments, economies, etc. This strikes me as entering a gym and immediately putting three plates on each side of your bench. Particularly with politics aka hard mode.  I thought for a fun change I’d try my hand at fixing something that doesn’t arouse as much passion: soccer.  To be clear, the main goal here is not to tackle the rather hilarious corporate governance issues at FIFA (like their burgeoning film enterprises), but rather the rules of the sport as such.

Assume FIFA grants you supreme power to remake the rules of the sport, and that all the respective associations will obey your word as law. Basically you are granted the ball of Fnargl.  Let’s further assume your goal is to improve the overall aesthetic of the sport, its efficiency and aggregate enjoyment of players and spectators. What changes to the rules do you make?

Some conservatives may consider the very proposition sacrilegious, as if the rules of the game were handed down from the Mount by the Lord Himself.  Which is of course nonsense, the rules having changed plenty of the years. It’s also ludicrous to suppose the rules we currently have, the result of path dependence, historical chance and politics, are the absolute perfection of rules and therefore any change is negative. Clearly absurd.  The most recent rule changes include changes in the offside rule in 1990 to give advantage to the attacker, the backpass rule in 1992 and the recent implementation of goal-line technology at the last World Cup.

There is something though to a reticence with altering fundamental aspects of the game. Superficial changes are likely ok, but the more serious the change the more we ought to think about leaving it alone unless we have an excellent reason for doing otherwise. If not out of some Burkean sensibility for tradition (and epistemological humility) at least out of an understanding that the game is wildly successful (most popular sport on the planet). In tinkering with fundamentals we may destroy that which makes it so and end up causing more harm than good. Primum non nocere.

And keep in mind throughout the sport’s relative simplicity is part of its appeal.  Any kids with something kickable and somewhere to try to get it to are in some way playing a version of soccer; a huge advantage relative to say ice hockey, basketball and others which require more specialized equipment and so on.

As such, here are some of what I consider higher marginal return changes; small changes with a big bang for the buck that should be obviously done.

END CONTINUOUS TIME:  One of the interesting aspects of soccer is that the clock runs continuously, unlike say basketball where every play is stopped the clock is stopped. This is a fundamental part of what makes the last few minutes of a basketball game usually the most exciting part as the clock enters play. American Football plays under a hybrid rule where the clock is strategically stopped at times according to certain plays/specifications and time management becomes an important part of play.

Soccer also has time management as a part of play but unfortunately the continuous time clock creates perverse incentives.  Virtually every soccer game in which one team is ahead on the scoreboard sees said team plagued by injuries during the final fifteen minutes of play in an almost comedic manner.  Players fall down at the slightest contact (and sometimes without any, simulating cramps), are taken off the pitch and immediately spring back up as if by divine intervention.  Many fans and casual spectators are rightly turned off by such behavior, but few see that outrage at a result is all for nought if we do not attempt to fix the real cause: the incentive structure.

Changing the clock from continuous time to in-play time similar to basketball immediately removes the incentive to waste time while the ball is stopped. One can of course strategically attempt to control the ball in play to waste time, but that is part of the game and valid.  Falling down though would cause a whistle and a stop to the clock, thus granting no advantage whatsoever (other than arguably time for the team to catch its breath, but then again time for the other team to do the same, so little marginal benefit).

The implementation is quite easy: have a time-keeper or 4th referee manage the clock stopping at every foul / ball out of play and starting again at every resumption of play. We have a clear model to copy in basketball (and American Football). Of course, to keep play time roughly the same (on average roughly 55-65 mins for most major leagues) instead of a continuous 90 minute clock we’d have a 30 (or 32 or what have you) min “in play” clock.  Games would last roughly as long, little would change in terms of the sport and one of the perverse incentives for off-putting behavior would be removed.

There is one valid objection to the rule change, which is that it opens up the possibility of someone on a breakaway being prevented from scoring due to time running out in the play. In current soccer the referee generally (but not always) waits for a position in which no immediate goal scoring opportunity is available to blow the whistle. This is valid objection, that the fixed end to the game might ruin last play goals, is easily addressed in several possible ways.

You could:
A- have the time running out simply grant the referee discretion to end the game at the nearest possible “no threat” moment as currently done
or if something more objective is preferable
B- have the game end at the next out of bounds after the time runs out (effectively ending the game if the winning team has possession as they kick it out of bounds, but giving the losing team a chance if they have possession of still trying to score until ball goes out of play)

My preference is for the latter, more objective, less discretion to be blamed on the ref, and everyone knows exactly when the game will end. I’m not the first to make this observation.

There is another objection though to “real-time” dealing not so much with the game itself (where I believe it is unassailably superior to the current continuous time) but rather the danger of the inherent commercialization of the sport on TV leading to advertising breaks. This is certainly a possible danger, but note that that there is little need for both to be linked. The non-break play of soccer is a part of the sport, and allowing for 5 minute breaks at 15 minute intervals constitutes a far change to the sport than simply changing how the clock counts down the (roughly) same amount of play.  European soccer is an enormous moneymaker already to all concerned so I see little to fear in terms of letting in advertising breaks, something that would clearly be resisted by most concerned.

ONLY CAPTAIN MAY DISPUTE WITH REFEREE: Once again, another low-hanging fruit. There are few spectacles more revolting than seeing a referee mobbed following a penalty call or red card by players screaming in his face sometimes even engaging physically pushing/pulling and surrounding him in an attempt to intimidate.  The situation has gotten so out of hand leagues have started fining players and teams in sporadic manner for doing so excessively. The problem though is that enforcement is lax and arbitrary, a recipe for disaster

Rugby of course, with some of the toughest human beings alive as players (occasionally transcending gender), deals with the matter in a quite simple manner: only the captain may dispute a call with a referee. Period. Implementing the rule is trivially easy and when everyone knows what will happen everyone tends to obey and the game works better in general.  (One could draw parallels to British Imperialism in India/Egypt…).

SIN BIN: This one has been gaining traction of late.  The yellow/red card system is simply too inefficient. Noted legal scholar Epstein wrote an opinion piece in which one of his two major proposed reforms touched precisely on this. I could scarce do better than quoting him at length:

“The current penalty system has many internal defects. The first is that the differential impact of the free kick and the yellow card is just too great, relative to the seriousness of the two offenses. Remember that the yellow card counts as a 50% down payment against expulsion. The time-honored formula is two yellows equal one red card, which equals one automatic expulsion. The yellow card in one game often carries over to the next, so that playing a star with a yellow card in the next game risk expulsion. Why carry over infractions from one game to a second? And why treat an expulsion that occurs in the 10th minute equal to one that occurs in the 70th?

To remove these bizarre incentives, soccer should follow the ice hockey approach to penalties, after correcting for the difference in team size (six players for hockey vs. 11 for soccer) and game length (60 minutes for ice hockey vs. 90 minutes for soccer).

Here is how it works. In hockey a minor infraction sidelines the player for two minutes for an instant short-term advantage that doesn’t come with a yellow card. If there is a second infraction by a team, part of it is served concurrently with the previous penalty until the first player returns to the ice. If the other team commits a minor penalty when it is ahead, its player goes off the ice as well. In hockey there can be periods of play where the teams are six to five, six to four, five to five, five to four, even four to four. Obviously the first situation is the most common, and that advantage ends once a goal is scored. (…)

To make this system work for soccer takes only two small modifications. The first is that minor penalties should carry a three-minute penalty, not a two-minute penalty. Major penalties that carry a five-minute penalty in hockey could carry seven minutes and 30 seconds in soccer. Today’s red card expulsions could require a team to play 15 minutes short-handed until a new player is bought in. Since a soccer team is larger to begin with, all penalties should run concurrently until a team has three players in the penalty box.

Note that if several players are off the field, the game opens up, thereby increasing scoring changes. Players also have to learn to confront novel tactical situations and to shift positions on the field. Coaches have to plan for more permutations to cover the eventuality of nine vs. nine players. Imagine how to defend in an 11 vs. eight situation.”

MORE REFS: This is another one that has been toyed with, and in fact many junior level leagues without the use of assistant referees use a two-ref on pitch system.  For serious collegiate level play and above (pro) though it seems quite an easy fix to simply increase the number of referees in play. By way of comparison, basketball, with a fraction-sized play field, has a crew chief and two referees for a total three officials. The NFL has 7 man crews plus “replay assistants” in the booth. Baseball from four to six. Rugby uses three (one ref two assistants) but also extensive use of replays (which we will deal with later).

Given all the complaints regarding the quality of refereeing in soccer, one quick fix would be to have two refs on the pitch in addition to the two linesmen.  For professional play or tournaments we could go even farther and have four linesmen as well as two referees (one in each half, one given seniority for final call in case of disagreement), as well as replay booth.  A referee is therefore statistically more likely to be close to play, cardio plays less of a factor, multiple fields of vision, and so on.

The “cost” issue may be relevant for lower leagues, in which case the system as is may be fine, but certainly professional leagues would benefit from this relatively easy fix.

CHANGE PENALTY RULE:  We’ve all seen games altered by a stupid play on edge of the box with little goal threat in which a foul or accidental handball causes a penalty (roughly 85% certainty of goal) and changes a game. The idea of the penalty is sound: to prevent the use of fouls from stopping a goal scoring situation. The gross implementation though via a large penalty box and most any foul occurring within though is highly problematic.

The best way to fix this is to only grant penalties when ref determines situation was a “goal scoring threat” or “imminent threat thereof” or “purposeful foul”.  Some may decry the room for discretion while missing that said discretion already occurs in many aspects of play (what card to hand out, ruling “gray area” fouls like pushing, pulling, etc). The goal would be to end idiotic penalties from say a ball on the edge of the box on the side with no immediate threat to goal hitting a defenders hand by accident, or a trip foul there with little in the way of immediate goal threat. The latter is particularly egregious as it has turned a very high percentage of attacks on goal into a game of “fall down in the box”.

Instead, grant an indirect free kick from the spot. Still dangerous and thus the defender does not have an incentive to commit the foul, but not an 85% goal which encourages the striker to fall (sometimes in a comical (but effective) manner).  In fact, the rules ALREADY allow for indirect free kicks from inside box, all we are doing is raising the bar for a penalty shot to require immediate threat of goal.  Indirect free kicks from inside the box are also interesting tactical situations.

CHANGE OFFSIDE RULE:  There are few aspects of the game more frustrating than the constant interruption at the point of most excitement (goal threatening position or goal) by an offside ruling; in particular given how often it can be incorrect with game altering consequences. Some non-fans may argue for simply scratching the rule altogether. While I have my sympathies for such a view, the fact of the matter is the offside rule does have its place in encouraging good play.  That said there is scope for some changes in how the rule is implemented.

The main problem with the offside rule in soccer is the moving back line, making enforcement quite arbitrary at times.  This problem is avoided in hockey by use of a fixed offside line. Hypothetically in soccer this would create an attacking zone in which there are no offsides, but entrance of which is only permitted after the ball. This very much removes referee interference, allows for free play in the attacking zone worry-free about some bureaucratic implementation of offside rule, and preserves the fast break element of the game that offside rule fans are such fans of.  Interestingly, the MLS precursor, NASL, had a 35 yard offside line as an experiment approved by FIFA. This was eventually repealed due to worries that it would turn the game into an athletic competition (sprinting in fast breaks) rather than technical skills. Which given the high important of physical training/nutrition/steroids in the game over past 40 years has become an irrelevant complaint.

INSTANT REPLAY: This is the big one. Other than the goal line technology that FIFA finally relented on, a limited amount of instant replay flags for the coaches seems an obvious next step.  Purists decry it as making everyone question every play and instantly look for the replay.  Which is of course silly; everyone ALREADY questions every play and looks to linesman for offside and the ref for a call of a foul, any foul. Instant replay is a last-step safe measure allowing a coach to question potentially game changing situations like a questionable offside or penalty or this crap.  Use the example already established in sports from US football to tennis: allow each side a limited number of flags to ask for replay, maybe two per half or per game. In US football the replay can be used quite rapidly in a matter of less than 30 seconds, which is often how long a “complain to ref about questionable call” huddle lasts anyways.

The above all seem to me to be relatively easy and straightforward reforms that could be trivially implemented to dramatically “improve” soccer as a game. The excitement would remain but the inefficiencies inherent in it as a sport would be dealt with through a combination of superior social tech, logistics, and some actual tech.

Much like naive Republicans hankering for a Fair Tax though, the meta-issue is of course dominant. There will be no above reform until the governance issue is sorted out. IFAB is a mess and FIFA, well, the less said the better. Compare with the NFL, where for better or worse the team owners have delegated authority to a commissioner representing them and the league (technically a trade association). Not ideal, and certainly with its fair share of stupidity but certainly capable of rational decisions on a sporadic basis.

So all the above is just an autistic “what if I had ultimate power” wish-list.  Though certainly a smaller waste of a time, effort and money than the Republican Party and the “conservative movement“.

When Progs Attack: Fall of the Portuguese Empire edition

“History doesn’t repeat itself, but it does rhyme.” – (Dubiously) attributed to Mark Twain

“Then I might be tone deaf cuz the more history I read the more it seems like the same f tune played over and over and over again.” – Magus Janus


Little Portugual used to have an empire.  At one point it was quite large including the now 5th largest country on the planet, Brazil, which explains why it’s one of the few exceptions to an all Spanish speaking Latin America.  How it acquired said large landmass is an interesting tale involving colorful personalities and a megalomaniacal geographic ignorance. The loss of the Brazilian part of the empire came about due to a series of events beginning with one of the more bizarre happenings in modern history, when the entire Portuguese court was evacuated from Napoleon’s invading armies in 1807 leading to the colony becoming the metropolis of the Empire.

After the end of the Napoleonic wars the Portuguese threw a hissy fit combining a desire for constitutional monarchy with a return to the subordination of Brazil to the status of colony rather than equal to Portugal.  The state of affairs was further complicated by a dynastic dispute and foreign interventionism from that so dependable meddlesome power on the side of the proto-progressives (the prog good guys) against the absolutists (our good guys).  Seriously, even this douchebag was in on it, on the wrong side as usual. Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.  During all this nonsense Brazil became independent and following a brief bit of remarkable stability it went down the path of progress and never had problems again.  (If you believe that I have some property with a great view in Rio to sell you.)

But that’s a story for another day.  Portugal continued limping along the 19th century as a bit player in the world’s longest continuing alliance, sort of like the waterboy to the star quarterback.  Mox is usually pretty cool helping you move out in a pinch as discussed above, but he can also be a bit of a dick sometimes.  And we get some charming terrorism of the 19th century variety, culminating in the terrorists winning (Southpark understands this of course).

But, just when things start going down the oh-so-predictable path we get that usual Iberian/Latin habit of a military man imposing order on the chaos.  Carmona joins the long list honorable men who had the will to take action when duty called, alongside the Chilean, the Brazilian, the Spaniard and others.  Where Carmona truly surprises is in his choice of the main hero of our story, Salazar, as finance minister and eventual de facto ruler of the new order in a peaceful transition managed very well by both men.  One is reminded of the Five Good Emperor’s avoidance of internecine struggles and peaceful common sense successions (that is until Dumbledore appoints a rapper as Augustus, with predictable results)


Salazar is a fascinating historical figure.  Particularly because we see that despite being on the “wrong side of history” we see many prog historians express admiration for his character and achievements; heck even a lifelong commie and enemy did as well.  My nigga ruled from 1932-1968!  For comparison’s sake in the same period the oh so stable Anglos saw 9 PMs in 10 premierships (Churchill pulling a Big Steve) and the Italians something like 20 (seriously and made all the more impressive with Il Dulce’s sucking up 11 of those years).  Political stability is important in that from it follows (usually) institutional stability, necessary for long-term economics calculation and investment.

So to the indisputable facts:
1- Salazar was never caught with his hand in the cookie jar and was never corrupt.  That’s quite something; I mean I personally don’t care if a leader of a nation enriches himself reasonably as long as he does well by the country.  Formalizing this is of course preferable as the Singaporeans do, for if a CEO is paid millions if not tens of millions then surely the “worth” of a proper ruler is in the hundreds of millions if not billions (or tens of billions for larger nations). The prog “outrage” at a political figure making money strikes me as nothing more than political posturing and hypocrisy… the US having at this point come up with the celebrity “lecture circuit” and post-office “consultant” crap to enrich politically connected figures after their term of office and sometimes during.  That said, Salazar does fit in startling genuine fashion the more traditional puritanical “public service” category having by all accounts lived in a very modest if not spartan manner and dying with little in assets to his name.

2- When he rose to power in late 1920s early 1930s Portugal had been racked by years of chronic instability and default, with little credibility abroad, a high public debt, and an impoverished people illiterate people.  Salazar managed to strictly maintain a balanced budget throughout the Great Depression and WW2 as well as maintain current account balanced if not in surplus, ultimately paying down ALL of Portuguese floating external debt.  Heck the Portuguese economy managed to grow at roughly 3% per annum throughout the 30s, which prompted that holy pulpit Time Magazine to remark:

“”it is impossible to deny that the economic improvement recorded in Portugal since 1928 is not only without parallel anywhere else in the world, but is an achievement for which history can show but few precedents””.  

Not to be outdone, Life Magazine:

“”The Dictator has built the Nation. Most that has been built in Portugal can be credited to Dr. Salazar… he has balanced the budget, built roads and schools, torn down slums, cut the death rate and enormously raised Portugal self-esteem. Unambitious Salazar took the dictatorship by army request and holds it by popular will. The Salazar dictatorship is easygoing and paternalistic, with wide freedom of speech allowed to his enemies… Friends of democracy may deplore Salazar the dictator but they cannot deny that under the republic Portugal made an unholy mess of itself and Salazar pulled it out.””
3- Economic performance really took off in the post-war period.  While the economy had been arguably overregulated in the name of political control and social stability in the first half of Salazar’s reign and thus limiting growth (plus, you know, Great Depression, tariff wars and WW2 putting a bit of a damper on trade and investment), the rising class of technocrats pushed for economic liberalization on top of the already attained sovereign credibility.  The reforms implemented throughout the late 50s and early 60s sparked the “Portuguese miracle”.  Portuguese GDP per capita as a % of Western European GDP per capita went from 35% when Salazar took office to 42% by the end of the war to 58% before the progs overthrew the regime in 1973 while managing an incredible industrial modernization and urbanization with social stability.  Those with an axe to grind attempt cliche leftwing descriptions of the Portuguese economy as still having a large poor population at that time.

This is of course true but fails to ask the more important questions: what % were poor when the regime took over and what % were still poor (on absolute basis) when it was finished? What was the trend? How did the regime compare to a benchmark of other European countries? What was the trend in gdp per capita? In social indicators like total population, infant mortality, literacy, life expectancy, etc.  Because to ask those questions would bring uncomfortable (to the prog) answers: on virtually any metric one can think of and ESPECIALLY so by usual Iberian/Latin historical standards the Estado Novo was a riveting success.

4- La Wik’s description of the regime perhaps says it better than I can:

“Opposed to communism, socialism, anarchism, liberalism and anti-colonialism,[a] the regime was corporatist, conservative, and nationalist in nature, defending Portugal as Catholic. Its policy envisaged the perpetuation of Portugal as a pluricontinental nation under the doctrine of lusotropicalism, with Angola, Mozambique, and other Portuguese territories as extensions of Portugal itself, and it being a source of civilization and stability to the overseas societies in the African and Asian possessions.”

This was my reaction on reading said beauty and that I expect of most NRx minded readers.  I’d recommend reading the link in its entirety as it is surprisingly fair for what was effectively an approximation of modern cameralism with a stable CEO.  (Beware of the usual prog sneaky attacks such as comparing an “Absolute” metric (illiteracy) with other Europeans to show Portugal’s relative backwardness when the important one is the change in said metric during the life of the regime. If you take a shtty company and turn its relative performance around you should be judged on what it was when you took over versus what it is when you left it and hypothetically against peer performance.  NOT on a “where was it absolutely” when you left it.   But I digress).

The basic gist is one of a paternalistic socially conservative regime.  It may be hard for our prog dominated world to understand that there were alternate paths to the seemingly unstoppable prog wave.  The motto in that Lusitanian Norman Rockwell’s painting is God, Country and Family, as a riposte to the slogan of the bad guys (Trigger warning: vomit inducing prog smugness of the ‘put my fist through the screen and root for Team Meteor‘ variety).  Though his regime would eventually fall to the forces of darkness when his liberalizing successor took over, Salazar held the line culturally for 4 decades.

5- He skillfully managed foreign policy through one of the most trying periods in European history.  Portugal lent tacit support to good guys over the bad guys in the Spanish Civil War, and later signed basically a neutrality pact that played a not insignificant role in keeping Spain out of the war, (something the UK in a one of their rare fits of rationality actually realized and didn’t press them on.)  Hundreds of thousands of refugees escaped the Great European Civil War via Portugal, including tens of thousands of Jooz (though that hasn’t stopped them complaining of course), all while Portugal maintained a careful balance.  Seeing the fate of those that got involved this may have been Salazar’s ultimate accomplishment.  Now, a good argument could be made that he should have joined the anti-communist front, but since the end result was communist victory and Portuguese intervention would hardly have changed it then he can hardly be blamed for prudentially guiding his country through it unscathed.

6- “All of the above are fine and whatnot, but he was a DICTATOR! MUH FREEEEEDOM!” yelps the leftist. Okay, well, let’s tackle that.  Irene Pimentel, Portuguese prog historian supreme of the PIDE years, has dug through archives, records, interviewed former operators (and those arrested/tortured), etc.  In her estimation roughly 400 prisoners were detained a year from ’45 through ’74 by the Portuguese secret police for a total of about 12000 prisoners (that’s roughly half the amount the US covered up that Stalin had had killed in ONE MONTH) detained during the post war period.  But what horrific fate awaited those “detained” for political purposes to support this evil totalitarian regime? The overwhelming majority (95%) were kept for under 2 years, and the small percentage kept longer were usually hardcore communist party members or repeat offenders.  Not exactly Ivan Denisovich territory.

Then again, who cares about those detained, the prog may counter.  Get to the nitty gritty, how many comrades did the evil fascist secret police kill during those thirty years?  First, replies the reactionary, some perspective.  Stalin, say 15 mio.  Pol Pot (later in time) 1.5 mio or thereabouts. Mao of course leads the pack at 35 mio+. Ah, but those are much larger countries or you know, really dedicated Asians. What about more culturally similar communists?  Well, the Spanish “republicans” only took down about 50k in just a few years, though they surely get points for targeting priests and nuns.  And Castro we get from 10k to 30k depending on calculations, mostly frontloaded around the Revolution, retaliations and cementing power until everyone got the message.

So enough perspective.  How many did PIDE kill in Portugal during its thirty year reign of white terror?


Stop laughing. No seriously, stop, you’re making the lefties uncomfortable.


Which at long last sets the stage for the Fall of the Portuguese Empire.  The Eye of Sauron had set its eyes on bigger game first of course: its age old enemy, which had basically brought said disaster on itself.  Salazar though was made of sterner stuff and the old man would go down fighting before surrendering an empire outposts of which existed before the settlement of the future United States.  So Sauron did what he always does:  boycott, embargo, war and Cathedral intellectual penetration.  The startling fact is that the former three mostly failed while the Portuguese had resolve (much as with South Africa).  It was only when the prog infection spread that Portugal gave up a Colonial War it had effectively won, coincidentally concurrently happening in the US.

The Portuguese (Third) Empire in the post war period consisted mostly of Portuguese Guinea, Portuguese Angola and Portuguese Mozambique.  Technically some small Indian enclaves and outposts like Goa (a Portuguese colony for almost 500 years) were also still around and kicking but their fate was quite farcical and mostly forgotten by anyone with white skin.  Seriously any international conflict with only double digit casualties is best written off as “well that was remarkably silly.”  Macau (which yours truly visited pre-handout) was also around but pretty much useless and handed over peacefully by the post ’75 leftist regime, which worked out pretty well for them all things considered.  Chinese fascism > European progs.  Someone should make a t-shirt of that.

But it’s in fair Africa where we lay our scene.  The progs declared war on the Portuguese Empire (and others) in 1960.  War broke out in Angola in ’61, Guinea in ’63 and  Mozambique in ’64.  Presumably it took time for carrier pigeons to reach different areas to tell them the prog world rulers had determined they should be set free.  Due to the clusterf- that are African independence movements we’ll break the wars up:

Angola- The Angolan Communist Party (PCA) merged with the Party of the United Struggle of Africans in Angola (PLUA), and then with the Movement for the National Independence of Angola (MINA) and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Angola (FDLA).   Presumably initially called the PCAPLUAMINAFDLA, they settled on MPLA, the People’s Movement for the Liberation of Angola.  Among the founders were:
1- Viriato Cruz, a poet Maoist who was exiled after infighting to China where he was apparently starved to death (seriously)
2- Mario Pinto Andrade, a poet who studied Philosophy at Lisbon and Sociology at Sorbonne (color me shocked) and after infighting was exiled from Angola and died in London
3- Agostinho Neto, a poet (wtf is it with poets!?) the infighting winner who therefore has his birthday as a public holiday, National Heroes Day.  A Marxist Leninist, he was the first president of super happy free Angola, had an unclaimed bastard child in Bulgaria he never recognized, was buddies with Che, had Cuban funding and support (though not direct USG aid, the US backing FNLA instead, though Cathedral soft support of the headline variety is arguably more valuable), Lenin Peace Prize winner in 1977, and killed about 10-18k members of the Fractionist movement after an attempted coup against him in ’77.  Oh and his poems are national anthems, obviously.  Cathedral connection extraordinaire: late Brown University professor and “father of modern african literature” Chinua Achebe wrote a laudatory poem about him.  Seriously.

The war began in earnest in ’61 with a worldwide drop in cotton and coffee prices.  The Portuguese cut back wages (free markets and all that) and the Angolans (becoming accustomed to booming population and rising gdp per capita courtesy of Western institutions and governance) proceed to rationally air their grievances.  lol.  They commence a campaign of widespread violence against Portuguese settlers, industrialists, traders and farmers including a particularly nasty episode when the Union of the People’s of Northern Angola (UPA) led by Holden Roberto (on the USNSC payroll since mid 50s.  Seriously) killed 1000 white civilians and 6000 black civilians including women and children subjected to mass rape.  Most of the blacks killed were Ovimbundu, whereas Holden’s militia members were Bakongo, and though to Western eyes they all pretty much look the same (black) they REALLY f hate each other with ideological differences serving more as an excuse to settle very old grudges and get your dick wet.  Roberto would mostly operate out of the Kongo region and Zaire during the war (and ensuing post independence civil war) and basically fight the Portuguese and more importantly his internal black rivals.  Oh, and guess who educated this mass murdering rapist “freedom fighter”?  Well, here’s the money quote from Stanford’s Fearon and Laitin (2005):

“the Portuguese reluctantly allowed
Protestant missionaries to work in the colonies. The three leading insurgents
in Angola were all educated by these Protestant missionaries: Roberto
(Baptists), Neto (Methodists), and Savimbi (Congregationalists). Van der
Waals suggests that the ideology of liberation was fostered not only by
communists and Afro-Asian nationalists, but by Protestant missionaries as
well (van der Waals 1993, pp. 30, 43). ”

You can’t make this sht up my NRx brethren.  Van der Waals btw was a South African brigadier General who wrote a not too shabby book on the war, though colored with some progressive sentiment.

The borders with neighboring Zaire and later Zambia provided safe havens for the rebels, and UN protection of international boundaries and squeals of outrage at transgressions by the Portuguese (though never by the insurgents) effectively gave the insurgents a free home base.  Rather similar to Red USG issues when fighting N Vietnam facing issues with “neutral” Laos and Cambodia (and when fighting N Korea and dealing with explicit Chinese intervention for that matter), though curiously enough not an issue when fighting the Germans in WW2.  Imagine the USG fighting the Germans in France and Italy and Africa but never bombing or invading Germany itself and you’re imagining a very different world, something Francis Parker Yockey would point out in exasperated fashion. But I digress.

War between the Portuguese and the UN backed forces and between different factions of those forces (presaging the two decade long civil war that would ravage the country) continued.  Roberto, after turning UPA into FNLA, would actually get funding from the joooooooooz against Portugal, and a splinter group from FNLA would found UNITA (these acronyms I swear), spreading the war to Southeast Angola.  The Portuguese response to the UPA massacres was devastating, and led by the likes of Fernando Robles and his “special hunter units” (seriously) enacting some Lex Talionis UPA/FNLA were expelled from the Bakongo region of Angola and sought refuge in Kinshasa and the Congo.

The Portuguese meanwhile pursued a policy of increasing Africanization, not too dissimilar from Nixon’s  plan to end Vietnam War.  The % of Africans serving the Portuguese colonial army in the war rose sharply from 20% to close to 50% by the 1970s, and Portuguese casualties in Angola were minimal:  less than 3k over the 14 years.  Specialized all-black native “Flechas” units (arrow) wrought havoc on the MPLA in the Eastern Front via local knowledge (and incidentally were the inspiration for the infamous Selous Scouts of Rhodesia) and ruthlessness augmented by foreign black “leais” (Zambian refugees) and “fieis” (Zairean) loyal to Portuguese forces, and South African raids in Moxico ravaged many guerrilla training bases (The Lusitanians would affectionately refer to the Boer as “primos”, the “cousins”).  By 1974, on the eve of the Carnation Revolution the war had been all but won with the vast majority of Angola pacified, the opposition heavily splintered and beset by infighting (Revolta Activa a new group led by poet Mario Andrade left MPLA in 1974 and fought for foreign commie funding in the Chinese and Soviet courts), and the remaining MPLA mostly reduced to escaping with Neto to the Republic of Congo.

It was by all accounts the most successful of the three counter-insurgent campaigns by the Portuguese.  In fact by the 1970s the colony was booming with heavy building of roads, schools, trade with Portugal flourishing and increased investment (particularly oil-driven in the Kabinda enclave) among the increased security outlook.  Angola’s future seemed very bright indeed.

Mozambique- The Mozambiquean war is a little easier to understand if only due to lacking a veritable salad soup of infighting acronyms.  The Marxist-Leninist Liberation Front of Mozambique (FRELIMO) were the main insurgent movement, and commenced the war in earnest in 1964.  FRELIMO Dramatis Personae included:
1- Eduardo Mondlane, attended Oberlin college of Lena Dunham fake-rape fame, degrees in sociology and anthropology (shocking!), worked as a researcher in the UN (double shock!), married a white chick from Indiana, taught at Syracuse Univesity and set up their East African studies department (electrifying!), and with funding from Scandinavian countries (damnit Sweden, wtf) China, Soviet Union and Julius “wreck my country” Nyerere set up and was elected first president of FRELIMO. Died in a book bombing.
2- Uria Simango, poet (damnit not again), vice president and cofounder, lost power struggle to Machel and was exiled, returned after happy happy glorious independence to start a party to contest the election (lol) only to be arrested, tortured and executed in late 70s.
3- Samora Machel, cofounder, no education past lower school at a Mission, won the power struggle for supreme power, wrecked country with one-party state and ensuing civil war, died in plane crash under dubious circumstances.

FRELIMO gradually escalated activities throughout late 60s, particularly among the more sparsely populated Cabo Delgado region bordering Tanzania, where it used the old guerrilla “border hopping” hit-and-run technique.  FRELIMO would pressure tribal leaders, the majority of which were content with Portuguese rule, to join the insurgency “or else”, a fate over 2k would face. Soon over 1/7th of the population in 1/5th of area of Mozambique were under Frelimo control with the insurgents numbering about 8k fighters.  The southern regions meanwhile remained under Portuguese control and over half of Portuguese troops were located in concentric defensive rings and bases in the Western Tete district protecting the Cahora Bassa dam. The dam, constructed from 1969-1974 was (and still is) the largest hydroelectric system in Southern Africa, so of course the nationalist insurgents repeatedly attempted to attack construction workers and blow it up… for the good of the country and all that.  Oh, and of course the UN condemned the building of the damn in UN resolution 2873 in 1971.  Apparently opening up 8 million acres of land to agriculture and providing 4 millions kilowatts of electrical power to Southern Africa are absolutely evil if done by the wrong white people.

Things came to a head in the awesomely named Gordian Knot operation of 1970 (back when military operations still had real names and not PC bs) by the equally awesome named Kaulza de Arriaga all but wiped out FRELIMO’s ability to operate.  Kaulza was a fascinating hard-right figure; a mathematics and engineering major from Porto University (Portugal’s best) he traveled to the US to consult with Westmoreland and US experts on counterinsurgency warfare and was a member of the Portuguese Institute of Higher Military Studies, which sounds, well, awesome.  His elite paratroopers outfit were crucial in preventing a palace coup against Salazar in 1961 by Botelho Moniz sponsored by the US (in part due to Salazar’s intransigence vis a vis JFK in relinquishing the colonies to “independence” aka the State/Blue Empire).  Kaulza definitely represented the right-wing faction of the Salazar regime.  Upon arrival in the theatre in 1970 he backed the use of helicopter gunships to support ground operations in search-and-destroy missions as well as asking for increased funding and troops for Gordian Knot.

The main purpose of the operation was to, as its name implies, sever FRELIMO’s frustrating ability to use international niceties and double standards to attack the Portuguese while being supplied from Tanzania and having a ready escape route.  La Wik’s description is fairly spot on:

The objectives of the campaign were to seal off the infiltration routes across the Tanzanian border and to destroy permanent guerrilla bases. “Gordian Knot” was a seven-month campaign employing ultimately thirty-five thousand men, and was almost successful. The brunt of the effort was in the Cabo Delgado district, in the northernmost area of Mozambique, on the border with guerrilla sympathizer Tanzania. Tactics consisted of lightning quick airborne assaults on small camps. Continual artillery and aviation bombardment rained down on larger sites while bulldozer guided, motorized armies converged. These tactics were effective and Arriaga pursued the guerrillas relentlessly; however, the exertions of “Gordian Knot” could not be continued indefinitely.

The Portuguese had excellent coordination between light bombers, helicopters and reinforced ground patrols. They utilised American tactics of quick airborne (helibourne) assaults supported by heavy aerial bombardments of FRELIMO camps by the Portuguese Air Force (Força Aérea Portuguesa or FAP) to surround and eliminate the guerrillas. These bombardments were accompanied by the use of heavy artillery. The Portuguese also used cavalry units to cover the flanks of patrols and where the terrain was too difficult to motor transport, and units of captured or deserted guerrillas to penetrate their former bases.”

The operation was by any military estimate a success, killing over eliminating close to 3k FRELIMO fighters at the cost of 130 Portuguese troops.  In said document Kaulza in his own words lays out the objectives and accomplishments of the campaign and subsequent operations in the region:

Counter-Insurgency in Mozambique
According to the doctrine I established as Professor at the Portuguese Institute of Higher Military Studies, counter insurgency in Mozambique has the following objectives:
a- Elimination of “liberated areas”, as was the case in Operation Gordian Knot adn those immediately previous and subsequent to it
b- Security and defense of important and sensitive areas such as Cabora-Bassa
c- Development of territory and promotion of security for the population, especially in the fields of education, healthcare (…)
d- Combat those who aimed to increase the insurgency and stop the development of the territory and the security of the population
What followed
A- Operation Gordian Knot was executed with the total elimination of FRELIMO bases and “liberated areas”
B- Cabora Bassa was defended with 100% success
C- Construction of over one thousand villages with schools, health centers, farms and civic centers etc.
D- Initiated Operation Frontier, the construction of modern villages along the Rovuma river on the frontier with Tanzania
E- Strongly increased access to schooling and university for Africans
F- Development of efficient system of General Sanitation Assistance
G- Nomination of several Presidents of the African Chamber
H- Establishment of a Provincial Legislative Assembly in Lourenco Marques composed of 50% whites and 50% blacks
I- Improvement and construction of thousands of kilometers of roads, hundreds of landing strips and small airports and several ports
J- Augmented system of Population Self-Defense in which weapons were supplied to native forces that would rid themselves of subversive groups
K- Establishment of Special Paratrooper Group (special forces) constituted of African volunteers from diverse ethnicities and tribes, highly trained in combat and amenable to the population
CONCLUSION: The attempted subversion by the USSR and China and their groups, particularly FRELIMO, was a failure. FRELIMO faced an imminent total collapse after Operation Gordian Knot and was equally situated when the 25th of April (Carnation Revolution) movment occurred.  The Counter-Insurgency operations realized by Portugal based on mixed white and black populations was a total success.

Frelimo, facing a total inability to effect a victory by purely military means, turned to explicitly terroristic actions, as per Henrikssen 1983:
 “The mine is a weapon of the semi-skilled and as such fitted into Frelimo’s reliance on village youth to conduct its campaign. Its effectiveness was great, however. Two out of every three troops, or 70 percent, struck down by the guerrillas were mine victims.”
By 1973 the UN supported FRELIMO was laying mines in civilians areas with casualties in the thousands, the purpose being to strike terror into the hearts of neutral civilians and to turn the domestic political tide against the Portuguese, though this proved far more unsuccessful domestically than it would internationally.

Just as the victory in Vietnam would be betrayed by political events driven by the media, in 1973 the Cathedral octopus struck hard against the Portuguese military efforts in Mozambique.  Some soldiers, mostly black, in the Portuguese army on a routine search mission in a FRELIMO infiltrated village in Dec 1972 killed around 150-300 civilians in what appeared to be a classic case of war frustration retaliation to an ambush they’d suffered that had killed 6 of their own.  The “Wiriyamu Massacre”(dwarfed by equivalent actions by FRELIMO throughout its existence) was divulged by a Cambridge (check) educated anti-colonial (check) Vatican II supporting (triple check) anti celibacy (and in fact later married) enthusiast priest Adrian Hastings.  Hastings relayed the information to uber-prog Louis Heren, at The Times, and later would speak at the UN on it.  The revelation, coming within a few years of My Lai,  was timed perfectly one week before Caetano (Salazar’s succesor) visited England in commemoration of the 600th anniversary of the Anglo-Portuguese Alliance.  It shocked the “respectable international community” and corroded Portuguese educated opinion on the war.  Heren incidentally is a BINGO if I ever saw one of prog checklist:  anti-Thatcher, supportive of commie spy Anthony Blunt, accompanied MLK on his ‘freedom’ rides, friends with LBJ, etc.

The Cathedral’s propaganda victory in Mozambique would overwhelm the military victory accomplished by the Portuguese forces in the face of a ruthless terrorist campaign at the cost of 3.5k Portuguese soldiers, and was a large contributor to the Carnation Revolution that would lead to the destruction of the Empire.   UK Labor leader and later PM Harold Wilson for instance called the Portuguese regime guilty of “genocide” and “with no parallel since Nazi times” (conveniently forgetting the largest massacre in history, the 30-40 mio casualties Mao had just committed in 1959-1961) due to the revelation of a couple hundred civilians killed.  Kaulza’s one mistake was not realizing that the real war was not against FRELIMO but a much more powerful enemy, the international prog community.

But first, to the last and most troubled of the colonial conflicts:

Guinea- The Marxist African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde (PAIGC) initiated the rebellion in 1963. Among key figures were:
1- Amilcar Cabral, while studying at the University of Lisbon founded student movements opposing the Salazar dictatorship and urging the end of the Empire, founder of PAIGC and helped Neto found MPLA for double points, set up a Sweden supplied/funded roving hospital for wounded rebel PAIGC troops, assassinated by internal rival Inocencio Kani with PIDE help, darling of Western intellectuals for boilerplate Marxist nonsense i.e. “incredible intellectual”
2- Luis Cabral, the above’s brother and successor and first president of independent Guinea, ran country into the ground as single-party state and overthrown in military coup in ’80, known for ordering execution of roughly 7.5k Guinean black troops that had fought for Portuguese after victory in ’75 and buried in mass graves (it is unknown if Harold Wilson commented on this)
3- Joao “Nino” Vieira, member of Papal minority ethnicity (as opposed to Balanta majority in Guinea),  rising military leader during independence, overthrew Cabral in ’80 coup representing “black” interests against the mulatto Cape Verdean led regime of Cabral, became de-facto president for life of Guinea-Bissau until his death in 2009 with a brief 4 year interlude following losing civil war in ’99, hacked to death (seriously) by rivals in 2008.

The costal areas of Guinea had been run by Portugal as trading outposts since the 1450s making it one of Portugal’s oldest colonies.  The interior jungle-ridden tribal areas were only brought under Portuguese de facto control in the 19th century and it was in those areas that the PAIGC focused their efforts, both due to difficulty Portuguese army had in chasing them as well as PAIGC’s ability to use the borders with Guinea-Conakry and Senegal for safe haven, bases and supplies.  Guinea-Conakry was led by Ahmed Toure, first president aka dictator for life and killer of roughly 50k in concentration camps throughout his 26 year regime.  Fun Fact: Toure was friends with Malcolm X and Stokely Carmichae and considered JFK his ally and “only true friend in the outside world”.  Ghana also provided training camps and equipment particularly during the early years of the movement, as it was run by anti-colonial leader and Fidel and MLK buddy Kwame Nkrumah.  Kwame, a philosophy major from Lincoln University in Pennsylvania and Philosophy major from University of Pennsylvania, was the first president aka dictator of Ghana, a post he’d hold until being overthrown in a (shock!) coup in the late 60s after running his country into the ground as yet another failed Marxist experiement.

The foreign funding, jungle territory and easy access to international border safe havens and resupply depots turned Portugues Guinea into what was dubbed somewhat hyperbolically as the “Portuguese Vietnam”. Whereas in Angola and Mozambique the majority of the territory was always in Portuguese hands even during the nadir of the counter-insurgent efforts, in Guinea large swathes of the country were rebel controlled or disputed/threatened.  While the capital and key ports remained in Portuguese hands the rebels ability to operate increased steadily throughout the 60s.

Coinciding with the renewed vigor in the Mozambiquean campaign, 1970 saw the Portuguese launch Operation Mar Verde (Green Sea), which was basically a “f this international borders hypocrisy bs” moment.  200 black guinean soldiers led by Portuguese white officers launched an amphibious covert operation of Israeli-like ballz to destroy PAIGC supply ships and depots, release POWs from torture/starvation/execution from infamous Camp Boiro (and later political prison/mass execution site), and burn down Toure’s summer house cuz, well, f him. The mission was a success in a military sense with one Portuguese white loss and 7 Guinean blacks versus hundreds of rebel scum casualties. Unfortunately the attempted overthrow of Toure failed as he managed to hide (as did Cabral), and exacted domestic revenge in paranoid fashion in an internal purge of roughly 100 high-ranking casualties.

The real cost though came, as in the Angolan and Mozambiquean campaigns, in the international realm.  The real evil behind the conflict passed several resolutions condemning both the invasion and the existence of the Portuguese empire as a “threat to African security” (cue NRx lol) and the Russian branch of global communism dispatched several warships to the region to explicitly protect the PAIGC and prevent a repeat of Portugal actually trying to win the war.  The Soviets increased funding to PAIGC, equipping them with shoulder-fired Strela’s, not too dissimilar as more primitive version of later Stingers of Charlie Wilson fame, limiting Portugal’s ability to use combined arms and air support in counter-insurgent activity.

Unlike the Portuguese de facto military victories in Angola and Mozambique, a decisive military victory in Guinea proved elusive. At the same time PAIGC never presented a tangible military threat to removing Portugal from the region while Portuguese will remained to keep it.  Portuguese casualties  over the 9 year conflict were 2k KIA, about 200 per year, mostly in the late 60s and declining thereafter. Africanization of the Portuguese armed forces in the colonial conflict had proved a success as a large % of native blacks did not want to be ruled by marxist and terroristic guerrilla forces of PAIGC, preferring (rather rationally one must comment) to stick to Portuguese governance.  Of special note were General Spinola’s establishment of all-black counter-insurgent special forces Comandos (led by black Marcelino Matas, one of the most decorated soldiers in Portuguese military history) and Fuzileiros as well as the ruthless Milicianos, who would operate throughout Guinean rivers in amphibious small-troop operations destroying rebel strongholds and supply depots.  The war continued as such in stalemated fashion through to the ’74 Carnation Revolution.

STATE OF AFFAIRS- The state of affairs in 1974 in the colonial war was as follows: total victory in Angola, large though not total victory in Mozambique with guerrilla forces only able to strike sporadically in sparsely populated rural areas, and stalemate in Guinea.  Angola and Mozambique were undergoing an economic boom, with large construction projects, Portuguese investment, constant flow of white settlers to the region and increased commodity exports.  GDP per capita and population were both increasing both for white minority as well as black majority under Portuguese governance. In Guinea the conflict had caused havoc in PAIGC-run areas but the coastal and more populous (and economically important) Portuguese run areas experienced declining infant mortality and increased commodity exports (particularly cashews and peanuts), with total population growing by 20% from ’65 to ’75.

The Portuguese metropole itself was experiencing an economic boom throughout the colonial conflict period.  The liberalizing reforms of late 50s/early 60s had led to dramatic growth, and though the war took up roughly 40% of the government budget Portuguese per capita growth continued steadily, making it easily affordable and sustainable.  Portuguese casualties had dropped remarkably with the success of Africanization in the 70s and the stabilization of the conflict on two fronts (in particular the more contested and larger Mozambiquean front with completion of the Bassa Dam).  Furthermore, the discovery and exploration of large Angolan oil deposits promised a bountiful source of medium and long-term wealth and thus strategic independence.  The Portuguese Empire from a strictly factual standpoint seemed alive, well and prosperous with a bright future for both its white and black inhabitants, in the face of Soviet, US and UN opposition.

Politically though the situation had changed dramatically.  79 year old Salazar had suffered a stroke in ’68 after 36 years of rule, and President Americo Tomas appointed Marcelo Caetano to the role of PM.  Caetano’s power though was not as absolute as Salazar’s had been, with the government being effectively split between the “right” Tomas and the “left” of Caetano.  Caetano was known as a reformist, having been Law professor of Lisbon University and Rector of the school.  When Salazar cracked down on communist student groups the students went on strike during the so-called “Academic Crisis” of ’61/’62 and marches and riots were put down by riot police, prompting the moderate Caetano to resign as Rector in protest.  His rise to power thus prompted much skepticism from the ranks of the military and in particular the more conservative members such as Kaulza, who became a constant source of worries regarding a possible reactionary coup.

Caetano intended to politically liberalize the (incredibly successful and long-lasting) regime.  Among the list of changes he pursued as part of the so-called “Marcelist Spring”:
– Changing the name of the regime from Estado Novo (New State) to the more feel-good Estado Social (Social State)
– Changing the name of the PIDE to DGS (General-Directorate of Security)
– Increased welfare expenditures such as rural pensions to non-contributors, taxing the budget and driving increasing inflation via higher monetary printing to fund it
Allowing first labor (read, communist infiltrated) unions in 40 years
Easing press censorship

And so on.  One unintended beneficial side effect of Caetano’s foray into prog appeasement was a concomitant hardening of the colonial war to appease the right-wing generals angered by his domestic “reforms”.  Kaulza, Spinola and others were given higher funding and freer rein in the conflicts, allowing them to turn the tide in Angola and Mozambique and stabilize Guinea as shown above.  The domestic reforms though proved a disaster, predictably failing to quench the prog thirst for power.  Louis XVI, the UK with the US, Czar Nicholas II, nominally right-wing rulers repeatedly commit the same mistake of attempting to negotiate a “moderate reform” with ruthless Left opposition, only to find themselves overthrown and exiled if lucky, beheaded/shot if not.

What Caetano had done was the equivalent of liberally (heh) spreading gasoline throughout a house. And a house in a neighborhood on fire: worldwide student protests in ’68 mirroring 1848 with France rattled by a Leftist quasi-revolution and De Gaulle briefly fleeing the country; the US undergoing radical student anti-war protests, civil “rights” riots and the Watergate scandal growing in importance in 73-74; explosion of Irish “Troubles” from 70-73, etc. Against this backdrop Caetano would allow the genie of progressivism out of the bottle with greater student freedoms and press freedoms.  The groundwork was set for revolutionary change not due to material conditions but due to  political misgovernance (naivete?) by Caetano, the only question remaining was where the spark would come from to ignite the fire of revolution.

REVOLUTION- The Carnation Revolution is best understood as an in-house palace Left Wing coup against the right-wing Estado Novo regime and Portuguese Empire.  The culprit was the (communist infiltrated) Movement of the Armed Forces (MFA), composed of Left-wing army officers and whose principal agenda included:
– immediate end to the Colonial War i.e. surrender of Portuguese Africa to communist guerrilla forces
– free elections aka socialism
– abolition of secret police PIDE/DGS and their ruthless reign of terror (ELEVEN!)
– a minority in favor of establishment of communist regime in Porgual

The official motto was “Democratization, Decolonization and Development.”  The first two were to be achieved, the latter, well, not so much.

The immediate cause of the revolution was the passage by the Caetano administration of a misguided new military reform law that, in an attempt to lower the costs of military and the prosecution of the war would allow militia forces who completed a brief training program to be commissioned at the same rank as military academy graduates.  That’s what not listening to Severus gets you.  The younger academy graduates were incensed at the dilution of the prestige of their commissions and the political intervention in the running of the military.  In ’74 the coup took place establishing a “National Salvation Junta”during the tumultuous “Revolutionary Course in Process” (PREC) time of ’74-’76 which brought the country to the brink of civil war before the first democratic elections of ’76, won by a “moderate” (not stalinistic communist) left wing general.

The chief plotters:
1- Otelo Carvalho, named after Shakespeare’s Othello with equally disastrous decision-making skills, communist supporter and main strategist of the coup, stopped a counter-revolutionary coup in’75 only to attempt his own radical left failed coup in November ’75 that was in turn ousted by a moderate left counter radical left coup (seriously), ended up leading FP25 terrorist faction in the 80s that bombed police stations and robbed banks Patti Hearst style, ended up as an arms dealer to African nations.  Oh, and in 2011 he stated “If I’d known how the country would turn out I’d never have made the revolution”.
2-Vasco Goncalves, named after heroic Portuguese explorer and empire builder Vasco da Gama and would play key role in bringing down said empire, prime minister during the PREC years his goverment, as La Wik puts it,
“nationalized all Portuguese-owned capital in the banking, insurance, petrochemical, fertilizer, tobacco, cement, and wood pulp sectors of the economy, as well as the Portuguese iron and steel company, major breweries, large shipping lines, most public transport, two of the three principal shipyards, core companies of the Companhia União Fabril (CUF) conglomerate, radio and TV networks (except that of the Roman Catholic Church), and important companies in the glass, mining, fishing, and agricultural sectors. “
He also nationalized vast swathes of the country’s agriculture (2.2 mio acres) with predictable results: collapse in efficiency, failure to modernize, etc.
3-General Antonio Spinola, centrist and elder statesman figure, played a minor role in the Revolution as such but became a key player following Caetano’s insistence that he would only surrender to Spinola made him the public face of the Revolution and first post-coup president of the Junta,  gradually saw the light and attempted to block the MFA’s radical left economic and political program, resigned in late ’74, attempted a counter-coup in ’75 appealing to the “silent majority” (hollah Nixon) but alas failed and was exiled to Spain and Brazil though rehabilitated in his later life due to role he played in the Revolution initially

So that’s the basics.  From still (though not as much) right-wing authoritarian government in early ’74 to moderate junta from April to September, then firm left-wing program until a radical-left communist failed coup in November ’75 followed briefly by a moderate democratic left coup allowing for elections in ’76.  The economy of course tanked, the obvious result of the instability and economically insane program implemented with exploding fiscal and current account deficits.  It would take Portugal until the early ’90s to recover its equivalent % of per capita GDP ranking to rest of Europe, as well as leaving a strong legacy of government control of the economy and indebtedness  that haunts it to this day.

The decolonization program was a disaster.  The colonies were turned over to Marxist terrorists who attempted to outdo one another in terms of economic irrationality, kleptocratic plundering of their nations,  and devastatingly destructive civil wars. Over 1 Mio Portuguese fleed the former colonies in the years following the Carnation Revolution, the so-called “Retornados”

The fate of the colonies briefly:

1- Angola: estimated casualties during 13 year war against Portugal was in the 30-50k range (with 3k Portuguese), the war effectively over by ’74.  Following Portuguese evacuation it erupted in a 26 YEAR (!) clusterfuck of a civil war between UNITA/FNLA and MPLA and virtually every foreign power imaginable (Cuba, South Africa, Soviet Union, China, US, UN) with an estimated over 500k (!) civilian casualties, the displacement of over 1/3 of the population (4.5 MIO people) and the conflict spilling over into the Congo Civil War involving child soldiers, blood diamonds, mass spread of aids and all manner of horror.  Billions spent in aid by the Western powers and the UN in those decades did not stop the nation in 2003 from having 80% of Angolans lacking basic medical care, 30% of children dying before the age of 5 and a national life expectancy lower than 40 (est 2003 gdp per capita, 800 USD, since then catching up a bit with oil and commodity boom to 5k per capita).  Of course this was all worth it for a glorious democracy in which the President  has been in power since 1979.

2- Mozambique: estimated 50k casualties during independence war (which remember had effectively ended by ’74), erupted in a 15 year civil war following Portuguese evacuation between different factions.  Casualties?  1 MILLION including a mass famine, displacement of five million civilians, total destruction of the nation’s economy and infrastructure and mass use of landmines causing problems to this day.  Large scale nationalizations, expropriations, government planning, debt and inflation further wrecked the economy with GDP per capita hit a low of about 100 USD (per year!) in the mid 90s and though to be fair it has since had a glorious recovery to 600 USD in 2013.  Progress!

3- Guinea: roughly 5k civilian casualties in the independence war (3k Portuguese).  As discussed following Portuguese evacuation the Guinean president/dictator Cabral exacted retribution on over 7k soldiers who had fought for the enemy and buried them in mass graves.  His successor via coup Vieira (and self dubbed “God’s gift to Guinea”, seriously) would be briefly ousted in a civil war in the late 90s with 500k displaced and 1k casualties, which by African standards is pretty damn good.  The economy of course is a total disaster, GDP per capita currently USD 500 (fun fact, it takes 233 days to start a new business in Guinea, second most in the world! come invest!) and basically started using a French backed-currency to stabilize its economy.  70% of the population lives in extreme poverty, but on the bright side they have very low carbon emissions.  You’re welcome Gaia!

4- East Timor: my bad. We totally skipped little Timor in our above analysis, in truth because well, nothing really happened.  Unlike Indian exclaves they were not invaded during Portuguese rule nor was there a fun commie/UN backed insurgency worthy of mention (no Fretilin doesn’t really count).  If anything the Timorese were happy to have their Portuguese overlords back following Japanese occupation during WW2 that killed over 50k of them. Portugal had ruled the Eastern half of the island for 300 years, and with the exception of a revolt in early 20th century that cost 3k lives well, Timorese history is one of colonial boredom.  Following Portugal’s withdrawal though a brief civil war broke out to spice things up, and the Indonesians invaded 9 days after their declaration of independence.  The death toll was roughly 150k out of 800k, not quite Crimson Cambodian levels but a worthy effort nonetheless. Following acquisition of “Western darling” status the Indonesian withdrew in 1999 and the UN ran it as a colony until granting it “independence” in 2002.  I for one hope after all that excitement and international attention they can get some boredom back, but let’s not hold our breath.

CONCLUSION- Which brings us to the end of this overly long and sad tale.  The main historical lesson to draw from this as a NRx is to never give in to the Left on principle.  As a strategic withdrawal yes there may be times where that is necessary (or geopolitical reality dictating that Goa was untenable), but never, NEVER out of a conviction that “progress” is inevitable or resistance futile. The fall of the Estado Novo regime, largely self-caused though certainly with a prog push, led to millions of casualties in Africa in a totally predictable manner, economic crisis in Portugal, and the end of Portuguese as a unique or sovereign state as it converted into yet another prog suzerainty “social democracy” (and narrowly avoided a worse fate).  The Carnation Revolution also had a direct impact on events in their Iberian neighbors the following year.

Whether Portugal could have continued holding onto its empire in the face of what would be increasing prog resistance is debatable, especially following the end of the Cold War, though certainly possible and especially so if Rhodesia and South Africa survived.  The real problem in my eyes would be how to handle an African demographic explosion, something the progs seem unable to have an answer for.  But that is a topic for another day.

A new world Silo Wool part 3 (spoilers)

“In 2007, the Center for Automation in Nanobiotech (CAN) outlined the hardware and software platforms that would one day allow robots smaller than human cells to make medical diagnoses, conduct repairs, and even self-propagate.
That same year, CBS re-aired a program about the effects of propranolol on sufferers of extreme trauma. A simple pill, it had been discovered, could wipe out the memory of any traumatic event.

At almost the same moment in humanity’s broad history, mankind had discovered the means for bringing about its utter downfall. And the ability to forget it ever happened.”

Excerpt From: Hugh Howey. “First Shift – Legacy.

In Shift, the prequel to Wool, we see the events that led to the creation of the Silos and the apocalyptic wasteland above. At some point in the recognizable near future (2049 to be exact) we see the (new) protagonist Donald meeting with Senator Thurman, basically a symbol for the power behind the throne, the one who gets things done.  The name Thurman of course meaning “protector” or “guardian”, attached to “Thor”, God of thunder but also protector of mankind.  The Senator (as he is often referred to) has a cynical (realistic) view on human nature and a willingness to entertain any means for a particular end. His ultimate goal:  save the species and civilization in the long run.  Certainly a Good.  Perhaps the ultimate one in a non-theological sense.

Here is The Senator talking to Donald about the costs of space travel:

“In fact, why do you think those eggheads are always dreaming of colonizing some other planet? You have any idea what would be involved? It’s ludicrous. Not cost-effective.”

Donald shrugged. He didn’t think it was ludicrous. He twisted the cap back onto his water. “It’s in our nature to dream of open space,” he said. “To find room to spread out in. Isn’t that how we ended up here?”

 “Here? In America?” The Senator laughed. “We didn’t come here and find open space. We got a bunch of people sick, killed them, and made space.” Thurman pointed at the folder. “Which brings me to this. I’ve got something I’d like you to work on.”

What Thurman is working is of course what will eventually become the Silos.  Under the guise of constructing a large “Containment and Disposal Facility” Thurman has gained the funds for a huge construction project that will house the remnants of mankind through the coming time.  He is able to pull this off via his power, connections (military, political and civil), and compartmentalizing the project so only a select few know of its real purpose.  To the rest it is simply a rather wasteful pork project to create some jobs to house nuclear waste.

Years later, the construction project well underway, Donald meets Thurman at a hospital in a Nano tank, a facility where a person enters a large cylindrical container the size of a small room and spends a day in there as the nanobots “fix” their body from all damage.  Effectively, an anti-aging room in many ways, or Aubrey De Grey‘s wet dream.  The nanobots enter the body and are programmed to shut down after a specific period of time after which the body just naturally urinates them.  The person being treated doesn’t feel anything other than a slight metallic taste in their mouths, and, well, effectively living forever.  But to light a candle is to cast a shadow:

“You see, you can’t make something for good without someone else figuring out all the bad it can do.”
Senator Thurman released the invisible pinch and studied the pad of his thumb for a moment. He blew a puff of air across it. “Anything these puppies can stitch, they can unstitch.”
He peered across the pod at Donald. “You know why we went into Iran the first time? It wasn’t about nukes, I’ll tell you that. I crawled through every hole that’s ever been dug in those dunes over there, and those rats had a bigger prize they were chasing than nukes. You see, they’ve figured out how to attack us without being seen, without having to blow themselves up, and with zero repercussions.”
Donald was pretty sure he didn’t have the clearance to hear any of this.

“Well, the Iranians didn’t figure it out for themselves so much as steal what Israel was working on.” He smiled at Donald. “So, of course, we had to start playing catch-up.”
“I don’t understa—”
“These critters in here are programmed for my DNA, Donny. Think about that. Have you ever had your ancestry tested?” He looked Donald up and down like he was surveying a mottled mutt. “What are you, anyway? Scottish?”

 “Maybe Irish, sir. I honestly couldn’t tell you.” He didn’t want to admit that it was unimportant to him; it seemed like a topic Thurman was anything but apathetic about.”

“Well, these buggers can tell. If they ever get them perfected, that is. They could tell you what clan you came from. And that’s what those crazy Iranians are working on: a weapon you can’t see, that you can’t stop, and if it decides you’re Jewish, even a quarter Jew—” Thurman drew his thumb across his own neck.
“I thought we were wrong about that. We never found any NBs in Iran.”
“That’s because they self-destructed. Remotely. Poof.” The old man’s eyes widened.
Donald laughed. “You sound like one of those conspiracy theorists—”
Senator Thurman leaned back and rested his head against the wall. “Donny, the conspiracy theorists sound like us.”

The book’s suspension of disbelief is not that large.  If we accept the premise of the successful development of nanotechnology over the coming decades then something along the lines of what is described is a very credible threat.  An invisible enemy that is almost impossible to combat.  And we eventually find out, and the problem Thurman set out solve, is that the enemy is already amongst us:

“He gave me this to read.”
Helen frowned. “What is that?”
“It’s like an instruction manual for the—well, for the after. I think.”
Helen got up from the recliner and stepped between him and the coffee table. She nudged Karma out of the way, the dog grunting at being disturbed. Sitting down beside him, she put a hand on his back, her eyes shiny with worry.
“Donny, were you drinking on the plane?”
“No.” He pulled away. “Dammit baby, listen to me. It doesn’t matter who has them, it only matters when. Don’t you see? This is the ultimate threat. A world-ender. I’ve been reading about the possibilities on this website—”
“A website,” she said, voice flat with skepticism.
“Yeah. Listen. Remember those treatments the Senator takes? These nanos are like synthetic life. Imagine if someone turned them into a virus that didn’t care about its host, that didn’t need us in order to spread. They could be out there already—” He tapped his chest, glanced around the room suspiciously, took a deep breath. “They could be in every one of us right now, little timer circuits waiting for the right moment—”

“Very bad people are working on this, trying to make this happen.” He reached for his glass. “We can’t sit back and let them strike first. We can’t let them strike first. So we’re gonna do it.” There were ripples in the liquor. His hand was shaking. “God, baby, I’m pretty sure we’re gonna do it before they can—”
“You’re scaring me, honey—”


“I’m starting to think we’re building them, too. Tiny machines, just like the ones in the nanobaths that stitch up people’s skin and joints, only these would tear people down. And they would be able to unstitch anything.”

“I’m telling you they’re real,” he said, unable to stop himself. “They’ll be able to reproduce. They’ll be invisible. There won’t be any warning when they’re set loose, just dust in the breeze, okay? Reproducing and reproducing, this invisible war will wage itself all around us while we’re turned to mush.”

That’s the threat Thurman is up against.  And this is where the NRx analysis comes into play.  Thurman is not constrained by petty simplistic morality.  He has a problem and he has a solution, perhaps the only real one possible.  A final solution if you will.  The problem is a hypothetical attack at any point in the future by an invisible enemy against any people’s not their own.  The tool for that purpose may already be amongst us, invisible nanos in our bodies and air.  Just waiting for a trigger, for someone to give the go-ahead.  And like that we will all be wiped out.  And with no way of realistically stopping it.  And the response by the US (if in time) in retaliating with nanos as well to destroy the enemy would together mean a total end to mankind and its legacy on this planet.  All humans dead with nanobots scouring the Earth replicating and searching for any human DNA to destroy.

Thurman’s plan is to strike first.  But to do so means wiping out the human race. To prevent that Thurman creates the Silos.  He conveniently hosts the DNC on the project grounds, using all his political capital to make it happen.  And then stages a nuclear attack on Atlanta on the horizon to get the carefully chosen delegates and guests to run for cover in the Silos to avoid nuclear fallout.  Following that, the nanoweapon is presumably unleashed on EVERYONE above ground.  The entire human race with the exception of those in the Silos is destroyed.  Those in the Silos are given medication to make them forget the past, except for a few in Silo 1, the command Silos.  Each Silo is made to think that it and only it is all that exists.  The past is erased.  And mankind is, for lack of a better word, rebooted.

“Some of us remember,” the doctor said, “because we know this isn’t a bad thing we’ve done.” He frowned as he helped Troy onto the gurney. He seemed truly sad about Troy’s condition. “We’re doing good work, here,” he said. “We’re saving the world, not ending it. And the medicine only touches our regrets.” He glanced up. “Some of us don’t have any.”
The plan is to have all fifty Silos carefully monitored by IT in each Silo, coordinated with the head Silo, Silo 1.  The population of Silo 1 is limited, a few hundred tops, as its purpose is not as an ark for the future but rather to monitor and guide the other Silos (without their knowledge).  Silo 1 is run as a military facility.  Meanwhile, in the other Silos, population is strictly controlled (due to very real Malthusian conditions) by the mandatory implementation of birth control on all females.  A lottery picks those who will be allowed to breed.  And since the lottery is managed by IT’s systems, you have the perfect conditions to select for whatever genetic characteristics you choose.  The book of course paints this in the obligatory cliche progressive view of “horrible”, but it’s really quite common sense if you are in that situation.  With limited resources population control is a necessity.  And guiding the genetic process allows for the selection of traits most likely to succeed in the world after the Silo.

Because that is Thurman’s ultimate goal.  To save mankind from itself.  The populations will be kept in their respective Silos for 500 years.  Throughout Silo 1 will (secretly) be guiding their evolution and monitoring them, eliminating Silo’s that rebel or present a threat.  The IT of each Silo will manage said Silo, with ultimate authority to manipulate procedural outcomes, unbeknownst to the population at large.  The inhabitants of Silo 1 work in shifts, with cryogenic technology + nanobot recovery allowing them to sleep for years or decades at a time in different Shifts (hence the title of the book).  The nanobot war on the surface will have long since ended and the surface will have been clean for generations at that point.  The immediate area surrounding the Silos is still full of nanobots in a large dome as it were, but this is due to Silo 1 continually releasing new destructive nanos to keep the populations scared of the outside world (through witnessing the deaths of cleaners) and within their respective Silos (and not knowing the past or anything else).  The rest of the planet will be (free of humans) land for survivors to repopulate.

When the 500 years are up Silo 1’s analysts and computers will determine which Silo has “progressed” the most according to their metrics for potential long term survival (presumably involving many factors such as avg iq, cooperation, social trust, empathy, etc.).  That Silo will be released along a long subterranean path to the surface outside the nano-dome (which will gradually dissipate in time), where equipment to begin a new civilization will be available.  Fertilizer, seeds of various kinds, tools, maps, etc.  And above all, the Legacy:  the preserved history of man (that was viewed as advantageous to preserve) that will be carried forth.

The remaining unselected Silos (including Silo 1 and Thurman himself) will be destroyed, having been built with explosives to destroy the top floor and that collapsing all the way to the bottom to wipe it all out.  490k will die, 10k selected to be the future of mankind will live.  Why only allow one Silo to live to colonize the (now new) world?  Because the point was to create one (guided) culture to rule to world.  Starting the world anew with 50 different peoples likely with different loyalties makes no sense and is a recipe for disaster.  And having killed 7 billion people, what’s another 490k to increase odds of success.

Do the math on how quickly (especially with modern technology) 10k people can repopulate the empty planet.  It would take 1-2k years if not less.  A blink of an eye.  Exponential growth is an incredible thing.

From a species’ standpoint, Thurman’s plan is to take a world of mutual hatreds and distrust and now equipped apocalyptic technology, and replace it with one carefully selected biological and cultural people.  It’s possible in time the new rivalries and destructive capabilities will emerge.  But ultimately this is a game of odds.  Thurman’s actions, which if successful really only “cost” us 2k years or so before a new repopulated world emerges, have been to take a world likely to destroy itself and replace it with one less likely to.  The ultimate problem, extinction, requires an Alexandrian solution.

We’ve seen a similar solution in a different medium before, albeit for much lower stakes.  Most readers will of course be horrified by the Wool series’s backdrop and what Thurman did.  Compared to a Total Reboot, what is a Mao or Stalin or a Tamerlane?  Irrelevant.  BUT… if Thurman’s judgement was correct regarding the respective probabilities of survival…. I am hardpressed from a NRx standpoint to fault him for his actions.  The new society will be unified, virile, capable of wondrous feats, with a far brighter future before it than that doomed civilization which it replaced.  Perhaps it will be able to transcend the bounds of Earth before falling to apocalyptic war, diversifying the species’ assets and ensuring our survival and continuation into the far great beyond.

It is the ultimate in whiggish history to assume that somehow things will work out for the best, that the linear progression of history will inevitably be upwards and forwards toward a brighter future.  It takes a Dark Enlightenment to understand that for mankind not all roads lead toward the light; some lead downwards towards darkness, others toward extinction.  And it is incumbent upon those of us who would carry the fire to not shirk from our duty when the time comes, however hard the task may be.

I heartily recommend the Wool series, if only to come face to face with this scenario in a very well created world. Though the ultimate conclusion is rather flawed, the story still holds together quite strongly.  I for one would add it to my recommended NRx-themed literary fictional canon.