Pragmatically Distributed

Metternich, Volume III page 460, Metternich to the Emperor Alexander, Troppau, December 15, 1820.

Religion, morality, legislation, economy, politics, administration, all have become common and accessible to everyone. Knowledge seems to come by inspiration ; experience has no value for the presumptuous man ; faith is nothing to him ; he substitutes for it a pretended individual conviction, and to arrive at this conviction dispenses with all inquiry and with all study ; for these means appear too trivial to a mind which believes itself strong enough to embrace at one glance all questions and all facts. Laws have no value for him, because he has not contributed to make them, and it would be beneath a man of his parts to recognise the limits traced by rude and ignorant generations. Power resides in himself; why should he submit himself to that which was only useful for the man deprived of light and knowledge ? That which, according to him, was required in an age of weakness cannot be suitable in an age of reason and vigour, amounting to universal perfection, which the German innovators designate by the idea, absurd in itself, of the Emancipation of the People ! Morality itself he does not attack openly, for without it he could not be sure for a single instant of his own existence ; but he interprets its essence after his own fashion, and allows every other person to do so likewise, provided that other person neither kills nor robs him.

In thus tracing the character of the presumptuous man, we believe we have traced that of the society of the day, composed of like elements, if the denomination of society is applicable to an order of things which only tends in principle towards individualising all the elements of which society is composed. Presumption makes every man the guide of his own belief, the arbiter of laws according to which he is pleased to govern himself, or to allow some one else to govern him and his neighbours ; it makes him, in short, the sole judge of his own faith, his own actions, and the principles according to which he guides them.

Is it necessary to give a proof of this last fact ? We think we have furnished it in remarking that one of the sentiments most natural to man, that of nationality, is erased from the Liberal catechism, and that where the word is still employed, it is used by the heads of the party as a pretext to enchain Governments, or as a lever to bring about destruction. The real aim of the idealists of the party is religious and political fusion, and this being analysed is nothing else but creating in favour of each individual an existence entirely independent of all authority, or of any other will than his own, an idea absurd and contrary to the nature of man, and incompatible with the needs of human society.

Perhaps the most interesting thing of all about the Progressive stance on diversity is that no one has a plausible explanation for why white Progressives decided to support racial diversity, except from what Metternich explains to Tsar Alexander I in his 1820 letter, an explanation that is best called “radical autonomy” even though Metternich never uses those exact words.

Nothing else, except radical autonomy, makes sense comprehensively in terms of what they have to gain that would outweigh the substantial downsides to the policy – and that is without mentioning the not so minor detail that Metternich in 1820 was able to anticipate Liberalism would eventually result in racial diversity, an era when it was still politically controversial to allow wealthy white men to vote.

Other explanations fall apart as explanations rather easily.

“Virtue signaling” is a 100% wrong answer because it is responding to the wrong question: Elite have ALWAYS signaled virtue throughout all of recorded history, and even before then.

Egyptian Pharaohs built pyramids to signal how virtuous they were to other elites.

The question is not why Progressives are signaling virtue.

Elites have ALWAYS signaled virtue, and elites always will signal virtue.

The question is why Progressives chose diversity as a virtue.

And the only explanation for it is radical autonomy because radical autonomy does not actually have an ultimate objective of racial diversity.

Radical autonomy, in the context of Metternich’s letter is not diversity. Instead, it is the removal of all legal, moral, and even all biological and scientific constraints and consequences in the world that hinder in any way the expression of the will.

Continue reading “Why Metternich in His 1820 Letter to Tsar Alexander I Was Able to Predict the Liberal Principle of Radical Autonomy Would Lead to Racial Diversity”

Not that there is any serious question about this, but Trump benefited from the debate because he frowned during Biden’s disastrous performance.

Trump’s frown was not just any frown. It was not a frown that expressed mere disapproval of Biden’s answers; to the degree Biden’s answers were coherent at all.

No.

Trump’s frown was disapproval at the existence of Joe Biden.

Which means that Trump’s frown represented the sentiments of the entire country towards Joe Biden’s debate performance.

Indeed, it was a frown that expressed the sentiments of the entire planet, a frown that belongs on Mount Rushmore for all eternity.

With that frown alone Trump expressed everything that needed to be said (without speaking) about why Joe Biden must be voted out.

The entire workforce of the United States Federal Government needs to be fired; everyone from the NHS, the FDA, the FBI, the CIA/NSA intelligence agencies, to the CDC, the Department of Labor, and beyond.

In order to fire them all they must first be converted to at-will employees under a revived spoils system.

The only exception to this policy should be members of the military, and even in that case firing 10% to 20% of its leadership and a pinch of its lower ranks would arguably do more good than harm.

100% of everyone else not part of the military needs to be removed from their positions immediately by the next Republican President and replaced with partisan Republican operatives.

There are two primary justifications for firing the FedGov workforce.

First, because they are led by experts.

Second, because their leadership of “experts” is devoted to the false secular religion of expertise because, in our era of Progressive material reductionist dictatorship, being an “expert” means one is a “scientist” and scientists, as dictators, decide policy.

While it may seem on paper to be a wise idea to give political power to scientific experts, in reality it is expertise itself that leads to the extreme governmental malfunction of Progressivism because the word “expert” is a euphemism for “single issue psychopath.”

This central principle of the expert classes – which is obsessing about a single, specialized, issue – is scientifically incompatible with good governmental decision making EVEN IF the “experts” are 100% correct about their science.

Continue reading “Game Theory on Why Progressive Bureaugarki’s Rule of the Experts Fails – Even if the Experts are Right”

Given that the conviction of Trump in the sham New York trial has had little to no negative impact on his 2024 polls (presumably convicting a politician over paying for a non-disclosure agreement to coverup an affair failed to impress the electorate since half the Congress could be prosecuted for the same “crime”) Trump would be best served by taking steps to minimize whatever effect this has had on independents and then regaining momentum with independents at the GOP convention.

This can be achieved by shopping for a friendly judge at the state and federal level by challenging different aspects of the charges in different lawsuits in order to fish for a judge who would be willing to throw paperwork hurdles in the New York legal process.

For example, Trump’s lawyers could sue about the outcome in a lawsuit centered around statute of limitations issues, then create a different lawsuit based on the fact no underlying crime was identified by the prosecution. The point would not be to win each case but to create more and more cases hoping at least one would eventually get a judge who would create legal obstacles for the prosecution’s case.

The GOP convention would be a perfect opportunity to regain the momentum from the New York trial by reaching out to independents on the issue of transsexual experimentation on children.

The issue of transgender experimentation on children splits the Democrats with their (electorally tiny) transgender activists against the far, far, larger suburban women’s vote.

If Trump were to announce at the convention that he would as President ban all transgender treatments (both hormonal and surgical) for those under 18 on grounds of the numerous side effects such as skeletal deformation and increased cancer risk he would cause a media frenzy to protect the transgender agenda, but the Progressive defense of sexual experimentation on children would create a backlash with suburban women and independents.

This would help Trump further take the initiative against Biden as the Fall campaign heats up and regain whatever (small) suburban and independent votes he lost from the conviction.

With Trump’s swing state polling still looking strong in the Rust Belt his campaign’s internal pollsters would be wise to test survey what happens to Trump’s numbers in Virginia if Governor Glenn Youngkin is Trump’s running mate, and what his numbers are if Youngkin is not the running mate.

In Presidential elections, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan are normally Democrat leaning states.

But since Trump has been consistently ahead of Biden in at least two of those three states the time has come to contemplate further widening the field of competitive states to “reach” states that would only come into play if there is a national trend against Biden.

Two of those reach states are Virginia and Minnesota.

Given the fact the Rust Belt is leaning towards Trump it is reasonable to assume that Biden is no more than 5 points ahead in Virginia, probably less.

If this trend holds going into election day then I would expect Trump to be within 3 points of winning the state. It is at this point, in a close Virginia contest, where Youngkin would be invaluable as a running mate because if Virginia is within 1 to 3 points it is plausible that adding him to the ticket would either get Trump the extra numbers he needs win the state (and make it almost impossible for Biden to win the Electoral College) or Youngkin would make it so close that Biden would have to divert resources from Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan to salvage Virginia, thus making it more likely Trump will crush Biden in at least two of the three Rust Belt states.

Youngkin would also make it more likely for Trump to win enough suburbanites outside Virginia to win the election: For example, a 1 to 3 point improvement in the Philadelphia suburbs with Youngkin on the ticket would probably be enough for Trump to carry Pennsylvania.

Napoleon as quoted by Metternich, Volume I page 312

He said to me one day in 1810, on the occasion of a long conversation in which he had just given me the history of his life: ‘I have clouded and obstructed my career by placing my relations on thrones. We learn as we go, and I now see that the fundamental principle of ancient monarchies, of keeping the princes of the reigning house in constant and real dependence on the throne, is wise and necessary.’

Metternich, Volume IV page 313

January 10, 1826. — The first need in every country being the clear and precise determination of the line of succession to the throne.

Metternich, Volume IV page 319

June 8, 1826. — The claims of the historian begin with the separation between the periods.

Metternich, Volume I page 87

Had Napoleon confined his plans to the preservation of what the Republic had conquered, he would have greatly increased his popularity; his warlike temperament carried him much further. He was a born conqueror, legislator, and administrator, and he thought he could indulge all three inclinations at once. His undoubted genius furnished him with the means of doing so.

Metternich, Volume I page 78

Raised by the Revolution to the summit of power, Napoleon endeavoured to prop up by monarchical institutions the throne he had made for himself. The destructive parties, having to do with a man equally great as a statesman and as a general, who knew his country and the spirit of the nation better than any who ever guided the destinies of France, were above all anxious to save from the wreck of their works all they could secure from the encroachments of the Imperial power.

Continue reading “The Theory of Balance of Power as Proven by the Course of Time – Part II”

 

Metternich, Volume II page 283

September 24, 1808. — In M. de Talleyrand one cannot but separate the moral man from the political man. He had not been, he could not be, what he is, if he were moral. He is, on the other hand, pre-eminently a politician, and, as a politician, a man of systems. As such he may be useful or dangerous ; at this moment he is useful, and I do not fear to defend this statement, in spite of the powerful arguments contained in your Excellency’s remarks.

Metternich, Volume IV page 10

May 22, 1823. — What a miserable Power is that which is founded on error, is only supported by lies, and has no strength but the weakness of its opponents. This is a portrait of Liberalism.

While we’re on the topic of units of measure how well does Metternich’s contention that the strength of the Left is inversely proportional to the weakness of the Right serve as a point of reference to judge the condition of American Conservatism?

And by “Right” is meant both the inferior reich/ “Dissident Inc” wing as much as the mainstream/”Conservatism Inc” wing; including all of Dissident Inc’s numerous, failed, predecessors that ultimately allowed most of it to be (purposely?) taken over by FBI and CIA informants.

By Metternich’s standard the results make for grim reading – and who would dare say the modern American Right is in strong shape, aside from the always skillful Trump, from whom Dissident Inc has learned little to nothing from?

So grim that – to paraphrase Mikhail Bakunin who is infamously quoted as saying, “If God existed it would be necessary to destroy Him.” – one could truthfully say that it would be necessary to destroy the American Right if it hadn’t already destroyed itself.

This is especially alarming considering Metternich’s reasoning has an uncanny knack for converting easily into mathematical principles that demonstrate wide ranging applications across space and time.

When considering the fiercest policy debates (like the pronoun wars) from this perspective it is not accurate to say the Left is ‘winning’ the pronoun wars on account of their own strength.

It is more true to say the Left is winning the pronoun wars because the Right is too weak to successfully defend pronouns.

Judging the pronoun wars using this criteria is rich with negative implications for the quality of people calling themselves American “Conservatives.”

Continue reading “The Theory of Balance of Power as Proven by the Course of Time – Part I”

After Trump’s brilliant strategic move to minimize the Democrat’s advantage on abortion, Trump has another opportunity to win votes by supporting a federal ban on transgender treatments (both surgical and hormonal) for minors under the age of 18 and banning transgender men from women’s sports.

This is a perfect opportunity because it divides the Democrat base of the large suburban women’s vote with the, electorally microscopic, transgender vote.

Winning over an extra 1 point of suburban women nationwide could easily tip the election to Trump because of how large it is and how their vote is distributed in strategically important regions of the swing states such as the Philadelphia suburbs.

The Democrats will almost certainly respond by fighting Trump on these two issues to please the small number of transgender voters, while losing ground among the much more important suburban women’s vote who are likely to oppose the transgender position on these two issues.

The result would be to divide the Democrat base much like Trump has divided the Democrat’s blue collar base in the Rust Belt from their Green energy base by pointing out how restricting fracking in Pennsylvania and encouraging electric vehicle adoption in Michigan will harm the working class there to enrich the Green industrial complex.

Supporting Congressional legislation to ban transgender men from women’s sports takes hysterical media attention away from abortion.

So too would a ban on transgender treatment for minors under 18.

The reason for the ban should simply be that even hormonal treatments have severe developmental side effects such as structural deformation of the skeleton and spinal column, neurological underdevelopment, and numerous other side effects.

A cancer risk from hormonal treatments alone is also very probable since IVF treatments that stimulate ovulation have to be careful not to stimulate the ovaries excessively or else there is a marginal increase in the risk of ovarian cancer.

If IVF hormonal treatments, which are done only temporarily, and are performed on adult women can potentially raise cancer risk then the risks are probably orders of magnitude higher for transgender hormonal treatments to children.

The penalties for allowing children to undergo any type of transgender procedure (even if only hormonal) should be revocation of the doctor’s license and prosecution of the doctor for felony medical malpractice, federal child abuse charges filed against the parents, revocation of custody of the child, and unlimited financial liability for any doctors who are sued by their patients for medical side effects as adults.

If doctors are really confident that these procedures are safe then they should have no fear of medical malpractice lawsuits because their treatments should few to no side effects.

House Republicans should threaten to expel MGT from the House if she tries to remove Speaker Johnson with a motion to vacate because if she succeeds it will greatly help the Biden campaign at the expense of Trump.

If Speaker Johnson is toppled then the momentum the Trump campaign has right now would face considerable disruption from MGT shifting the media attention from Biden’s failed job performance and poor poll numbers to the total chaos that will ensue in the House.

Removing Johnson as Speaker would divert away all of the media attention because the House would be a total mess with bills not getting passed, House committees that would otherwise be investigating Biden and his family not able to meet, and months wasted trying to find a new Republican House Speaker who would have to win almost unanimous GOP member approval and who would face exactly the same problems Johnson faces with a tiny House majority and no Republican control of the Senate.

The House Republicans need to force her to back down from her idiotic plan or she will inflict completely unnecessary harm on Trump’s campaign as well as all of the important down ballot races the GOP is competing in by distracting the country for month’s from Biden’s failures to House Republican chaos.

Israel should win the proxy war Iran has been waging for decaudes by emulating Reagan’s winning approach to proxy wars.

Reagan defeated the Soviet Union by stressing out its resources through the Reagan arms buildup and by pressuring the Soviets with increased military support to America’s proxy allies.

The principle in operation here is that proxy wars are inherently resource expensive because they require significant supplies to be distributed.

The Soviets could not afford to both keep up with Reagan’s arms buildup and keep its proxies competitive against NATO alligned proxies.

Iran is even more vulnerable than the Soviets were to collapsing from an inability to keep their proxies well supplied and keep their domestic projects going because they do not have a fraction of the Soviet Union’s resources.

To stress out Iran’s proxy war strategy Israel should destroy the Iranian nuclear program and destroy all of Iran’s oil and gas production capabilities.

Destroying the Iranian nuclear program is a necessity because, after October 7, they should never assume Islamic terrorist nations aren’t crazy enough to use nuclear weapons despite the threat of mutually assured destruction.

Furthermore, even if Iran doesn’t intend to use a nuclear weapon against Israel, the US, or America’s Gulf Arab allies, they will use nuclear weapons as a deterrent to prevent victims of their terrorism from retaliating with conventional weapons against them.

With a nuclear deterrent Iran would be free to launch much more frequent, non-nuclear terrorist attacks and disrupt Middle Eastern cargo shipping more because they would know a nuclear arsenal would deter Israel and the US from retaliating against them.

Iranian oil infrastructure should be destroyed (much like Ukraine is destroying Russian oil infrastructure) so that Iran cannot as easily afford to support their proxy forces.

Destroying Iran’s oil and gas export income completely will be necessary if Israel intends to attack Hezbollah next because Iran will not as easily be able to replace Hezbollah losses when their oil and gas export revenue drops to zero.

Also, the Israeli Navy should sink all Iranian warships operating in the Red Sea that are supporting Houthi attacks on Israeli and other Western cargo ships.

After destroying those Iranian ships Israel should warn that the Red Sea is off limits to the Iranian Navy and any of their ships that approach the Red Sea area will be attacked on sight.