What Narcissism Looks Like

As you well know, dear reader, "narcissism" is just the "N word" that jaded women use to describe their ex. Or really, just any man that doesn't cater to their feelings. It's a very feminine word.

It's quite the interesting phenomenon the way that words can catch on in the social realm.

Seriously, have you ever met a woman in the last 5 years who doesn't have that word on speed dial in her vocabulary?

It's gotten so popular that now you even see men using it. Sure, they're typically beta males, but still. 

I think the word does have meaning. I think the word does have relevance within the field of psychology. But when words take flight from their nest, they tend to evolve into something else.

Narcissism is a self-centered personality style characterized as having an excessive preoccupation with oneself and one's own needs, often at the expense of others.

As I said in my previous post on the subject, pretty much everyone is a narcissist to some degree. Those who scream "narcissist" the loudest are those who exhibit the highest levels of narcissism.

Digressing.

I recently watched a 3-episode documentary titled A Killer Story:

If you plan on watching it, I wouldn't recommend reading any further.

Unlike Amy Bradley Is Missing, which I thought was a lame attempt at entertainment (Amy obviously jumped off the ship), A Killer Story is actually pretty good.

I don't want to bore you with a review, you could easily just watch the series yourself. But to outline the plot, if you don't want to watch the trailer I posted above, a woman was convicted in the early 00s of killing her ex-husband and his wife.

The story is rather strange, because the killing was pretty much a professional-style execution. The ex-wife was a middle-aged accountant that lived like 600 miles away in a different state (Colorado). There was no evidence she was in the state (Kansas), no DNA at the scene, she didn't own any weapons, etc, etc. All the evidence was basically circumstantial based on her being crazy and making threats.

A couple who were aware of the story believed that she was innocent and devoted their entire lives to proving it. They were the ones who contacted the journalist responsible for making the documentary. They sent him over 3,000 emails before he ever responded to them. They were obsessed, to say the least. 

Ten years later she gets a new trial. The trial ends up in a hung jury and a mistrial is declared.

As I stated, there was very little evidence to convict her. It seemed pretty realistic, based on the evidence in the documentary, that a conviction wasn't going to be easy. The previous trial was 7 guilty vs 5 not guilty. The case was 20 years old. There wasn't any new evidence. It was going to be a tough conviction.

Here's where the plot twist comes in, and the point of this paper. 

As I said, it would seem like it was going to be a tough conviction. But on the day of the retrial, which was like 20 years after the original conviction, the accused killer (Dana Chandler) fired her attorneys and decided to represent herself.

She obviously thought she was smarter than everyone else in the room, which is one of the so-called traits of narcissism. Since she was acting as her own attorney, she took the stand and was subjected to cross examination. She had never taken the stand in the other two trials, which is common for murder cases (the burden of guilt is upon the state to prove). The DA caught her in lies, and the jury convicted her of murder in less than 3 hours.

It was hard to come away from the show thinking she actually did the murders. She doesn't fit the criteria of a hitman. But maybe she did. Or maybe she hired someone. Who knows? Regardless, she will spend the rest of her life in prison because she made the decision to represent herself, and I'd be willing to bet that she has no regrets about doing it. She turned her back on the jury after they read the verdict. I'm sure she blames them, instead of realizing how ignorant her decision was.

Sticktoitivness

The recipe for greatness isn't a big secret. 

Everyone seems to have this idea that if they read this book, or do this person's regimen, or have this guru's mindset, that they can achieve anything. I suppose some of that is true. I don't think those things will hurt you, or decrease your chance of success. 

First of all, if you want to be "great" (keep in mind that to some degree "greatness" is a subjective concept), you have to have above average ability in whatever thing your trying to be great at.

Greatness can be summed up formulaically as follows:

determination + ability + 10 years = the potential for success

The acquisition of knowledge on anything is irrelevant if it's unapplicable. I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone say "I read this book and I've learned so much from it," only to leave me wanting to ask: "Oh really. Prove it."

In fact, I recall once talking with someone who said, "There is no amount of money I would trade for what I learned reading Rich Dad, Poor Dad." And yet, this person doesn't own one piece of real estate and doesn't have 2 pennies to rub together. How was that book so valuable?

Another great example is the 48 Laws of Power. This is a book I've read more than once. I think it's a great book to read. Not necessarily from a practical standpoint, just from an entertaining standpoint. But if you have this idea that you're going to read that book an suddenly become this powerful person, you're either a sociopath or naive.

Are there concepts in books that are worth knowing? Absolutely. 

But if you don't have the ability or personality to apply what you're "learning" in those books, then it's useless. An overwhelming amount of one's knowledge is completely useless.

The amount of effort it would take to apply the "laws of power" to your life is a daunting task that would essentially require an entire personality makeover. You literally wouldn't be the same person, unless you were already a power-hungry sociopath who just didn't have the skillset to accomplish the power that you were after.

If you want to be great at anything worth being great at, the first thing you need to do is have the personality trait of sticktoitivness to devote yourself to that which you want to be great at for at least 10 years. Hardcore determination will override some deficiencies in ability, to the point that you can probably get good enough to be satisfied with your results.

Reading books, or acquiring information, could aid you on that journey, but it's not a shortcut for success. 

People love to recite cliches. One is "knowledge is power." 

Certainly knowing is half the battle, but the true relevance of knowledge comes from experience.

Remembering the Manosphere

Remember a decade ago, when the "manosphere" was a thing, back before censorship became a bigger thing?

I stumbled onto the "manosphere" when there became somewhat of merger between identity politics and masculinity. "Merger" might not be the right word, but lets just say that those teaching the art of game to systemically emasculated males understood why they had a voice. In a healthy society, men wouldn't have to be taught how to deal with women.

I'm sure there were several different manosphere personalities, the only one I followed was Chateau Heartiste. He had a sound understanding of women, but more importantly (at least to me), he understood the societal causes from an identarian perspective. 

I'm not sure if he coined the phrase or not, but that was the first place I saw diversity + proximity = war. 

Sometime around 2019 he was scrubbed from the internet, just like every other pro-White dissident was. I'm not sure exactly why, but it probably had to do with his atheistic view of Saint Floyd. Actually, it was probably because he was showing white males how to be White Men. 

It's hard to believe it's already been 7 years since he hasn't been around. Does anyone know if he has a voice anywhere? It seems like a few years ago he was posting on Gab. 

There was so much talent and energy back in those days. I used to look forward to drinking my coffee and reading Heartiste and AA, now both are MIA.

Is the manosphere still a thing?

Maybe I'll do manly writing. You know, to help the youth. And show respect for those that paved the way.

Unlike sin, there is no original thought. We are all parrots. 

It's not what you know, but who you believe. You can trust me.

A billion hearts, one beat.

I'll leave you with Heartiste's 16 Commandments of Poon:

I. Never say ‘I Love You’ first

Women want to feel like they have to overcome obstacles to win a man’s heart. They crave the challenge of capturing the interest of a man who has other women competing for his attention, and eventually prevailing over his grudging reluctance to award his committed exclusivity. The man who gives his emotional world away too easily robs women of the satisfaction of earning his love. Though you may be in love with her, don’t say it before she has said it. Show compassionate restraint for her need to struggle toward yin fulfillment. Inspire her to take the leap for you, and she’ll return the favor a thousandfold.

II. Make her jealous

Flirt with other women in front of her. Do not dissuade other women from flirting with you. Women will never admit this but jealousy excites them. The thought of you turning on another woman will arouse her sexually. No girl wants a man that no other woman wants. The partner who harnesses the gale storm of jealousy controls the direction of the relationship.

III. You shall make your mission, not your woman, your priority

Forget all those romantic cliches of the leading man proclaiming his undying love for the woman who completes him. Despite whatever protestations to the contrary, women do not want to be “The One” or the center of a man’s existence. They in fact want to subordinate themselves to a worthy man’s life purpose, to help him achieve that purpose with their feminine support, and to follow the path he lays out. You must respect a woman’s integrity and not lie to her that she is “your everything”. She is not your everything, and if she is, she will soon not be anymore.

IV. Don’t play by her rules

If you allow a woman to make the rules she will resent you with a seething contempt even a rapist cannot inspire. The strongest woman and the most strident feminist wants to be led by, and to submit to, a more powerful man. Polarity is the core of a healthy loving relationship. She does not want the prerogative to walk all over you with her capricious demands and mercurial moods. Her emotions are a hurricane, her soul a saboteur. Think of yourself as a bulwark against her tempest. When she grasps for a pillar to steady herself against the whipping winds or yearns for an authority figure to foil her worst instincts, it is you who has to be there… strong, solid, unshakeable and immovable.

V. Adhere to the golden ratio

Give your woman 2/3 of everything she gives you. For every three calls or texts, give her two back. Three declarations of love earn two in return. Three gifts; two nights out. Give her two displays of affection and stop until she has answered with three more. When she speaks, you reply with fewer words. When she emotes, you emote less. The idea behind the golden ratio is twofold — it establishes your greater value by making her chase you, and it demonstrates that you have the self-restraint to avoid getting swept up in her personal dramas. Refraining from reciprocating everything she does for you in equal measure instills in her the proper attitude of belief in your higher status. In her deepest loins it is what she truly wants.

VI. Keep her guessing

True to their inscrutable natures, women ask questions they don’t really want direct answers to. Woe be the man who plays it straight — his fate is the suffering of the beta. Evade, tease, obfuscate. She thrives when she has to imagine what you’re thinking about her, and withers when she knows exactly how you feel. A woman may want financial and family security, but she does not want passion security. In the same manner, when she has displeased you, punish swiftly, but when she has done you right, reward slowly. Reward her good behavior intermittently and unpredictably and she will never tire of working hard to please you.

VII. Always keep two in the kitty

Never allow yourself to be a “kept man”. A man with options is a man without need. It builds confidence and encourages boldness with women if there is another woman, a safety net, to catch you in case you slip and risk a breakup, divorce, or a lost prospect, leading to loneliness and a grinding dry spell. A woman knows once she has slept with a man she has abdicated a measure of her power; when she has fallen in love with him she has surrendered nearly all of it. But love is ephemeral and with time she may rediscover her power and threaten to leave you. It is her final trump card. Withdrawing all her love and all her body in an instant will rend your soul if you are faced with contemplating the empty abyss alone. Knowing there is another you can turn to for affection will fortify your will and satisfy your manhood.

VIII. Say you’re sorry only when absolutely necessary

Do not say you’re sorry for every wrong thing you do. It is a posture of submission that no man should reflexively adopt, no matter how alpha he is. Apologizing increases the demand for more apologies. She will come to expect your contrition, like a cat expects its meal at a set time each day. And then your value will lower in her eyes. Instead, if you have done something wrong, you should acknowledge your guilt in a glancing way without resorting to the actual words “I’m sorry.” Pull the Bill Clinton maneuver and say “Mistakes were made” or tell her you “feel bad” about what you did. You are granted two freebie “I’m sorry”s for the life of your relationship; use them wisely.

IX. Connect with her emotions

Set yourself apart from other men and connect with a woman’s emotional landscape. Her mind is an alien world that requires deft navigation to reach your rendevous. Frolic in the surf of emotions rather than the arid desert of logic. Be playful. Employ all your senses. Describe in lush detail scenarios to set her heart afire. Give your feelings freedom to roam. ROAM. Yes, that is a good word. You’re not on a linear path with her. You are ROAMING all over, taking her on an adventure. In this world, there is no need to finish thoughts or draw conclusions. There is only need to EXPERIENCE. You’re grabbing her hand and running with her down an infinite, labyrinthine alleyway with no end, laughing and letting your fingers glide on the cobblestone walls along the way.

X. Ignore her beauty

The man who trains his mind to subdue the reward centers of his brain when reflecting upon a beautiful female face will magically transform his interactions with women. His apprehension and self-consciousness will melt away, paving the path for more honest and self-possessed interactions with the objects of his desire. This is one reason why the greatest lotharios drown in more love than they can handle — through positive experiences with so many beautiful women they lose their awe of beauty and, in turn, their powerlessness under its spell. It will help you acquire the right frame of mind to stop using the words hot, cute, gorgeous, or beautiful to describe girls who turn you on. Instead, say to yourself “she’s interesting” or “she might be worth getting to know”. Never compliment a girl on her looks, especially not a girl you aren’t fucking. Turn off that part of your brain that wants to put them on pedestals. Further advanced training to reach this state of unawed Zen transcendence is to sleep with many MANY attractive women (try to avoid sleeping with a lot of ugly women if you don’t want to regress). Soon, a Jedi lover you will be.

XI.  Be irrationally self-confident

No matter what your station in life, stride through the world without apology or excuse. It does not matter if objectively you are not the best man a woman can get; what matters is that you think and act like you are. Women have a dog’s instinct for uncovering weakness in men; don’t make it easy for them. Self-confidence, warranted or not, triggers submissive emotional responses in women. Irrational self-confidence will get you more pussy than rational defeatism.

XII.  Maximize your strengths, minimize your weaknesses

In the betterment of ourselves as men we attract women into our orbit. To accomplish this gravitational pull as painlessly and efficiently as possible, you must identify your natural talents and shortcomings and parcel your efforts accordingly. If you are a gifted jokester, don’t waste time and energy trying to raise your status in philosophical debate. If you write well but dance poorly, don’t kill yourself trying to expand your manly influence on the dancefloor. Your goal should be to attract women effortlessly, so play to your strengths no matter what they are; there is a groupie for every male endeavor. Except World of Warcraft.

XIII. Err on the side of too much boldness, rather than too little

Touching a woman inappropriately on the first date will get you further with her than not touching her at all. Don’t let a woman’s faux indignation at your boldness sway you; they secretly love it when a man aggressively pursues what he wants and makes his sexual intentions known. You don’t have to be an asshole, but if you have no choice, being an inconsiderate asshole beats being a polite beta, every time.

XIV. Fuck her good

Fuck her like it’s your last fuck. And hers. Fuck her so good, so hard, so wantonly, so profligately that she is left a quivering, sparking mass of shaking flesh and sex fluids. Drain her of everything, then drain her some more. Kiss her all over, make love to her all night, and hold her close in the morning. Own her body, own her gratitude, own her love. If you don’t know how, learn to give her squirting orgasms.

XV. Maintain your state control

You are an oak tree. You will not be manipulated by crying, yelling, lying, head games, sexual withdrawal, jealousy ploys, pity plays, shit tests, hot/cold/hot/cold, disappearing acts, or guilt trips. She will rain and thunder all around you and you will shelter her until her storm passes. She will not drag you into her chaos or uproot you. When you have mastery over yourself, you will have mastery over her.

XVI.  Never be afraid to lose her

You must not fear. Fear is the love-killer. Fear is the ego-triumph that brings abject loneliness. You will face your fear. You will permit it to pass over and through you. And when your ego-fear is gone you will turn and face your lover, and only your heart will remain. You will walk away from her when she has violated your integrity, and you will let her walk when her heart is closed to you. She who can destroy you, controls you. Don’t give her that power over yourself. Love yourself before you love her.

***

The closer you follow the letter of these commandments, the easier you will find and keep real, true unconditional love and happiness in your life.

Best,

Your Lord and King

Time as a Commodity

We've all heard it said that, "time is the most valuable commodity there is."

But have you ever had a lot of time on your hands? It's weird how time is so valuable, but when faced with excess time our nature is to find some escape from that time.

I wonder if people really value time, or if they just fear death.

For the most part, I think philosophy is goofy, but if you were to cite the philosopher's take on time, they would associate it with "being," and conclude that time finds its meaning in death. 

I've always found it interesting how the "big brain" philosophers hang their hat on making simple concepts complex. Of course the essence of time is understood by death. 

The more interesting part is that time is the only commodity that matters to the human conscious, yet too much of it leads to boredom, then ultimately to nihilism. 

What becomes of boredom? Why don't we bathe it, in an uninebriated state, incapable of escaping pure bliss?

Humans weren't created to think, we were created to survive. Once we evolve into a cognitive species, we will quickly think our way into extinction. We are witnessing this phenomenon.

There is an old parable that says the first man to develop the ability of reason went down to the river and killed himself. I assume he wanted to end his suffering before it began.

Is the glass half full, or half empty?

God bless. 

Individuality is a Lonely Path

Most people assume they're unique, but they're not.

Many years ago I wrote a poem titled The Liberal, that I often think about when I think about human uniqueness:

Same old regurgitated nonsense.

Stop assuming you're unique.

I've met you a thousand times, 

only a different name and physique.

There is no such thing as a "unique" conformist. They're all the same. They dress the same. They say the same things. They believe the same stuff. 

I'm not here to say that I'm different, or unique. In fact, I think when people say that they're different, they're actually just lonely, or have believed some manipulator's lies. If they were to socialize much they would quickly realize they're just like everyone else. Even if they have blue hair and nose ring.

I watched a movie last night about this eccentric Jew. The movie was stupid, but it was based on a true story and I was bored, so I watched it, which probably says more about me than the movie.

The premise of the movie is that this loser chronicles his miserable life biographically via comic books. It's honestly not worth watching, but if you're going to spend 2 hours doing something you might as well try to take something from the experience.

Early on in the movie his black co-worker quotes a stanza from the poem The Eagle and the Mole.

Avoid the reeking herd,

Shun the polluted flock,

Live like that stoic bird,

The eagle of the rock.

The idea is to reject the herd, and either stoically perch yourself above the crowd with ambition, or be like the mole and remain humble and out of sight. Either path is one of individuality, which is just another way of saying isolation. 

Individuality is always a lonely path because people are sheeple. 

Most of us aren't as pathetic as the movie's main character Harvey Pekar, who literally married a woman the first week he met her cause he was so lonely. People who can't be by themselves are people who don't like themselves. So, as the miserable Pekar does, he seeks company. Not as a way of making his life better, but to unburden his misery onto others. These kinds of people are pathetic human beings.

If you ever meet someone who can't be by themselves for an extended period of time, stay away from them.

Harvey Pekar

Escapism Enables Indifference

The collective conscious has concluded that the opposite of love isn't hate, it's indifference.

I use the phrase "collective conscious" from the philosophy that original thought is extinct. We could debate if it ever existed, but we will save that discussion for another day.

The essence of life is time. We all have an allotted amount of time, in which we have the free will to choose how it's spent. Historically speaking, that would basically be used almost entirely in some form of survival. In the modern world, it's spent escaping nihilism.

We do the best we can to become "comfortably numb."

As time goes on, one can't help but ponder their existence. 

We are stuck asking the question, "What's this Life for?"

At some point time becomes synonymous with boredom. When that occurs we begin to stare into the abyss. After staring into the abyss long enough, the abyss begins to stare back. 

That abyss is a mirror named Karma for which one cannot unsee.

The Evolution of White Genocide!

Long time readers of My Cousin the Carp are well aware of The White Genocide Question. It is a subject that I have extensively posted about since the blog's inception, way back in 2014. Therefore, I took considerable interest when I stumbled upon an article today on my newsfeed from the Guardian titled: US to bar some South Africans over claims of anti-white discrimination. What I found even more interesting was the subtitle of the article, which reads: "Announcement of visa restrictions follows Trump’s false claims of ‘white genocide’ taking place in South Africa."

I don't know anything about the Guardian. I certainly don't have them bookmarked. Any publications who feel the need to insert their opinion into the "news" doesn't adhere to journalism ethics, so essentially they're equivalent to a tabloid.

That being said, their arbitrary stance on the validity of "white genocide" is irrelevant. What matters is that the Trump administration has inserted the "white genocide" talking point into the mainstream, to the degree that even tabloid trash like the Guardian are forced to address it.

Sure, braindead conformists will nod along in agreement with the "false" claims of white genocide, but those same people will also nod along to anything.

I forget his name, but a famous painter once said something like, "how fortunate for governments that its people do not think."

What the masses "think" are determined by those who battle over control of the information systems. The fact that anti-White publications are using pro-White talking points lets everyone know who is winning that battle.

Imagine it's 2014 and you're reading the following article by an anti-White "news" source:

The US has announced visa restrictions on some South Africans as Donald Trump’s administration continues to claim that South Africa’s government racially discriminates against white minority Afrikaners.

The announcement did not specify individuals who were barred from the US. Trump has spent his second term falsely claiming there is a “white genocide” in South Africa and railing against its affirmative action policies.

Since the start of last year, the US has cut aid to South Africa, barred it from this year’s G20 summit in Miami and set up a refugee programme for Afrikaners and other South African racial minorities. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has been dismantling refugee and asylum programmes for people fleeing war and persecution.

“The South African people are being failed by a government that is destroying its economy through an obsessive pursuit of racial grievance against the Afrikaner minority,” the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, said in a post on X.

 Stop White Genocide!

Philosophy is Goofy

Philosophy is the idea that man can come up with questions that via his own reasoning he can answer. 

The following is an official definition.

The study of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning.

The problem with philosophy is we assume that because we can ask the question, that we can also answer it.

Take Hume for example: 

If God wills to prevent evil but cannot, then He is not omnipotent.  If He can prevent evil but does not, then he is not good. In either case he is not God.

While there will certainly be those who read Hume's philosophical statement and find it to be accurate, or even genius, it is actually rather short-sighted and ignorant. 

Asking unknowable questions that you've determined the binary set of answers to is silly at best. Hume wasn't a philosopher, he was someone with a God complex and a lot of time to think. Give an 80 IQ hillbilly enough time to think and even he could come up with some profound questions. 

The problem with most people in the intellectual realm is that they believe that they can conceptualize all the answers. That if they're somehow able to ask the question, they are also able to answer it.

The Bible illustrates this well with pottery:

Romans 9:20-21 "Shall what is formed say to Him who formed it, 'Why did You make me like this?' Does not the potter have the right to make from the same lump of clay one vessel for special occasions and another for common use?"

Imagine molding some clay into a bowl, and after a period of time that clay thinks it is smarter than the potter because it is a bowl?

Philosophy is merely the thoughts of bored men.

Everything is Luck. Are you Lucky?

I'm convinced that everything is luck. That doesn't mean that I believe in atheism, but all things competition essentially comes down to some form of luck, regardless of skill level.

The thing mathematicians get wrong in the realm of statistical probabilities is the variable of time.

Take poker for instance. Theory says that if you get your chips in with a statistical advantage, eventually over a period of time you'll be ahead. But how much time? Math in infinite, a person's time is finite.

So, lets say it takes the math 1000 years to work itself out, and you only play poker for 15 years. Lets say that you consistently get your chips in the pot at a collective 60% expected win rate, but you only win 35% of the time. You're just left to assume that all those times you're getting your money in "good" that the math is going to eventually work itself out. But it's almost guaranteed that it won't. 

Critics might say, "the best poker players in the world are basically just math nerds, if what you're saying is true, how do they consistently win?" Simple. They're consistently lucky. If all poker players were using math engines to make their decisions, every poker player would still have different outcomes. Some would be winners. Most would be losers. The math only works when time is excluded as the primary variable, which is impossible for humans. Thus, luck is the primary variable in math-based poker theory.

You might say, "Ok, what about a skill-based game like chess?" There is a ton of luck in chess, regardless of skill level. That's not to say that a casual player is going to beat Magnus, but let's say that a random person gets online to play chess. They were up all night drinking and it's their first game of the day. They haven't played in a while, and their game is rusty. They haven't done any tactics or other warm up exercises to refresh their brain. Their rating is 1600. They hit "play" and are matched up with a 1450 player who is on an 8 game winning streak and has been playing solid chess. The game is relatively equal through the opening, and neither player is playing based on memorized theory at this point. In other words, they are just "playing chess." A critical moment arises in the game, and the 1450 player has to make the perfect move, and he intuitively finds it, not because he has visualized the position, but because he is playing good chess and basically just "gets lucky" and makes the right move. The 1600 player has to find the perfect move to counter the 1450 player's move and he doesn't find it. The 1450 player wins the game. Was it because the 1450 player is better, or because he got lucky?

Oh, so you want an example that's not based on competition? Ok, how about this: As I type this I have these annoying gnats flying around my computer screen. Every time I sit down at my computer they appear out of nowhere to annoy the crap out of me. The more I swat at them, the more elusive they become. I called my buddy who is doing the exact same thing; he is sitting at his computer desk typing. He doesn't have any gnats harassing him, nor does he ever. "You probably have a dirty house or something," he says. But I don't. I just have these annoying gnats that love to annoy me when I'm sitting at my computer desk typing.

I could go on to give countless examples. But I want to clarify that belief in luck doesn't nullify providence. In fact, it validates it.

God's grace sits atop the hierarchy of luck. 

Conor McGregor is Finished!

I'm not a big fan of kicking someone when they're down. Although, I'm not sure how "down" someone is if they just made $30 million in a minute, even if it did result in a torn up knee in the first seconds of the fight.

I don't know Conor's financial situation, but I assume he didn't come back for the money. I haven't heard any speculation that he came back for the money. He came back for the glory, competition and his legacy.

Last year I predicted that Conor McGregor would never win another UFC fight. I don't think that was any kind of bold prediction, but I'd up the bet if I was a gambling man.

It's interesting the way that fame and fortune will change a person. Conor had it all, and for some reason he just wasn't content with riding off in the sunset and enjoying the fruits of his labor.

The majority of people don't understand how tough it is to deal with boredom. Money can provide distractions until it doesn't. People will say things like, "If I had money and didn't have to work, I'd do this, that and the other," and they would, until they did all those things, then they'd get bored and come face-to-face with the devil on his playground, just like Conor did:

I was so sharp and so ready for this fight I cannot believe what has happened. The talk of me being off while walking in to the fight is nonsense. I was calm, ready, and confident. I am in shock what has taken place. The devil is literally staring at me right in front of my face…

— Conor McGregor (@TheNotoriousMMA) July 12, 2026

When a man comes face-to-face with the devil is the moment free will sets in. You have the choice to accept or reject temptation. When you're a millionaire with nothing but time, this can be almost impossible. This is why the Bible refers to money as the "root of all evil."

Conor is finished as a fighter. I think everyone knows that. But now he is in the biggest fight of his life. The fight for his soul. Dostoevsky once said in the Brothers Karamazov that God and the devil are fighting and the battlefield is the heart of man.

Again, I assume Conor's motivation for his comeback wasn't money. But perhaps $30 million takes the sting off defeat. But, I would guess that even if it does, being content with the payday will only be temporary. Conor claims he is a man of God now. I think he knows without the armor of God that he is merely Satan's servant. 

Ephesians 6:10-18 Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; and your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God: praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;

God bless Conor McGregor.

Allow My Distractions to Distract You

 A wise man once said, "One's quality of life is co-dependent upon the quality of their distractions."

Those of you who are familiar with my TV viewing habits, know that I adhere to what I like to call the "Reality TV trinity," which is First 48, Jeopardy and UFC. Excluding those, I rarely use TV as a distraction. But, there are always exceptions, and last night I watched a true crime documentary and a movie, back-to-back, which is almost unheard of for me. Not so much because I'm so anti-TV, but mostly because my ADHD won't allow it.

First up was this rather disturbing documentary on Netflix titled Maternal Instincts:

If you've ever wondered about psychopathy, the woman in this show highlights it to a T. She is a sick, sick individual. She is such a compulsive liar that she comes to believe that she can murder a woman, cut her baby out of her stomach, and pass it off as her own. It's a bizarre story that epitomizes "truth is sometimes stranger than fiction." 

It's easy to watch this kind of stuff and be like, "How in the hell could someone fall for this crap?" But when you watch the show, you can definitely empathize with the fella who got gaslighted by the psychopath. I mean, who thinks someone is going to lie about being pregnant, fake the pregnancy for 10 months, then go kill someone and cut out their baby to save face?

If you have an hour and a half of free time, access to Netflix and like true crime documentaries, then this is a highly recommended distraction for you.

Up next is a movie. 

Now, look, I don't really watch movies at all. Particularly comedy/romance type flicks, but Midnight in Paris is actually worth wasting an hour and a half on if you're just looking to be distracted.

I came across this movie while reading an article about Gertrude Stein, whom I was unfamiliar with. Stein was portrayed in the movie as an eccentric art critic/collector and writer in 1920's Paris. She rubbed shoulders with the likes of Hemmingway, Picasso, Fitzgerald and others.

The movie itself was rather interesting, and quite enjoyable if I'm being honest. The main character, Owen Wilson, is a writer struggling with the golden age fallacy (thinking a different era is better than the current one), and every night at midnight he would travel back to 1920s Paris and interact with many of the greats of the era. 

Wilson is initially is picked up by F. Scott Fitzgerald and his wife Zelda. They go to a bar and he is introduced to Ernest Hemmingway. Eventually, he meets Stein, and she and Hemmingway reviewed the manuscript for Wilson's book. He also had a brief romance with Picasso's fictitious mistress, Adrian, who ultimately enabled him to see the flaw in his golden age fallacy when they travel back to the late 1800s and she refuses to return to the 1920s after they go to the Moulin Rouge and they meet Toulouse-Lautrec, Gauguin and Degas, even though all three of them agree that the Renaissance age is the best era. 

All-in-all, an excellent distraction that doesn't even require a streaming subscription, as it can be seen for free on Tubi. And, it's only an hour and a half long, so if you have ADHD like me, and hate movies that are longer than 2 hours, this is a good one for you.

Who is Israel?

Everyone agrees that the Bible was written to Israelites. Therefore, "Who is Israel?" is a rather important question. Let's talk about it. 

I grew up a "John 3:16" Christian. What I mean by that, is that I cherry-picked a handful of Bible verses and that was the constitution of my religious faith. I never understood any Biblical theology.

The Bible says a lot of things. The Bible says a lot of contrary things. There is no other book that is open to interpretation the way that the Bible is. You can talk theology with 10 different people and get 10 different interpretations of scripture. Furthermore, there are like 100 different translations of the Bible.

That being said, once I stepped back and looked at the Bible for what it was (a will of covenants), it all made perfect sense. I credit the Holy Spirit with this profound personal revelation.

The Bible is the will (a testament is a will) of God. 

The Bible is a book of covenants (conditional and unconditional).

The Bible is written to, for, by and about a specific group of people. God chose Abraham, his son Isaac and his grandson Jacob. Jacob (later named Israel) had 12 sons, who became the 12 tribes of Israel for which God made his covenants with. This bloodline is who God, through the prophets, wrote the old testament too.

God divorced His bride Israel in the old testament due to their disobedience. 

Jeremiah 3:8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also. 

The new testament is commentary on the fulfillment of old testament prophesy. Most people believe that the new testament is somehow about everyone because of the word "gentiles." The new testament is all about God's remarriage to his bride.

Yes, God made a new covenant, but it was still with the same people. The new covenant places salvation on grace by faith instead of circumcision or the law.  

Jeremiah 31:31 The days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah.

Gentiles just means "nations." By the time of the new testament, the nations of Israel had been scattered abroad for hundreds of years, due to a series of expulsions out of Jerusalem. Only a small remnant eventually returned. The remaining 10 "lost" tribes of Israel migrated and became the sons and daughters of Europe. These are the nations or "gentiles" that the new testament refers too. They are still the offspring of Abraham.

The question becomes, are these people those who we call "Jews" and live in modern day Israel?

No. Ashkenazi Jews (the majority of American and Israeli Jews) are Turkish Khazars who converted to Judaism and migrated to Eastern Europe in 12th and 13th century AD. They are not ancient Israelites. 

Jesus himself spoke about this implicitly: 

Revelations 2:9 I know your works, tribulation, and poverty (but you are rich); and I know the blasphemy of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.

Ashkenazi Jews have not fulfilled any of God's promises to Abraham's seed. They haven't blessed the world. They haven't become a multitude of nations. They don't have an abundance of lands. They are the imposters for which the risen Christ spoke about in scripture.

I understand how to most Christians it doesn't really matter who are the "real" Jews and who are the "fake" ones. They are content with being "spiritual" Israel. And, I suppose in theory, that's good enough. There are many components at play when it comes to salvation. Grace is certainly atop the hierarchal ladder in my humble opinion. But if God's chosen (the sons and daughters of Europe) knew who they were, the world would be a much different place.

God is sovereign, not politically incorrect. 

Jesus Christ is the kinsman redeemer. God came in the form of a sinless man to die on the cross for the sins of His people, so that he could be risen from the dead and remarry his bride, Israel.

All glory to God!

Only N-Words Use the N-Word

When I was growing up, I had never heard the word "narcissist." Nowadays, I've never met a woman who doesn't use that word redundantly. 

After 4 failed marriages, Jennifer Lopez claims that she has a "PhD in narcissists."

Jennifer Lopez has apparently known some narcissists in her life.

Without naming names, the "Let’s Get Loud" singer joked that she could "give a Ted Talk on human behavior, emotional intelligence and dysfunctional relationships," cracking up as she said the last part.

"PhD in narcissists," she added with a laugh.

Lopez, who finalized her divorce with Ben Affleck last year, has been married four times.

Have you ever heard of that saying, "Is it everyone else, or is it you?" 

After 4 failed marriages, none lasting more than 10 years, it seems highly unlikely that on 4 different occasions "n words" would manipulate a strong, independent, wealthy woman like Lopez.

I mean, lets be honest here, if you listen to the female ramblings of the status quo you would be led to believe the "n words" are the kryptonite of feminism.

Feminism is the rebellion of the patriarchy. It essentially allows every woman to validate her emotions and slap her father in the face with her inhibitions without repercussion. And when things don't work out, blame "n words."

I'm old enough to remember when J-Lo "dated" Puff Daddy.

Personally, I never thought she was all that attractive. All of her sex appeal came from "Hollywood" subliminally promoting her to the blacks because she had a big booty. All of J-Lo's self-worth comes from her SMV, and now that she's old nobody cares anymore. So her femininity is now reduced to her feelings, which comes out in name calling.

If you're interested in how social engineering works, go ask any woman about her ex and see what she says. At least 90% will refer to him as the "n word," as if she has zero culpability with regards to accountability. Why? Because she understands that feminism > diversity. 

Actually, that's not entirely accurate. She doesn't "understand" that, from a rational standpoint. Because if you initiate a discussion about narcissism with her you will quickly find out that her understanding on the subject is simply a combination of her lack of accountability for anything within personal relationship dynamics, and that her feelings are always superior to logical reasoning.

This isn't an attack on women, per se. Although, I could care less about being labeled a misogynist or whatever the popular label is now. It's just to say that women have been given an easy out for their shortcomings. We have seen the same thing with the blacks for 50 years. When things don't workout well, use the "r word." 

Social Engineering 101, my friends.

Stay thirsty. It's hot outside. 

Consumed with Consumerism

Welp, I fully intended on having a very prolific writing year, and, as you can tell, I haven't.

I have drank a lot of beer, though.

As they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Who is "they" anyway? Do you ever notice people always says, "They say...."?

Not to be pretentious (remember, I'm a prolific beer drinker), but digressing...

I find myself drinking primarily out of boredom.

Not to sound pretentious (remember, I'm a prolific beer drinker), but I get bored easily.

It's interesting how people respond to that. They're always like, "Why don't you try to do something to make more money?"

Not to seem pretentious, (remember, I drink cheap beer all day), but making money is kinda boring. 

Money is just a tool; a means to an end. People who spend their whole life essentially chasing a hammer around seems silly. I get it that God wants us to work. At least I think He does. And we obviously have to have some form of sustenance to survive, although there are a lot of homeless/unemployed people who someone seem to survive.

But we aren't talking about making money to survive. We are talking about making money as a cure for boredom.

Most of you would probably say something like, "Well, I'd probably travel, learn an instrument or language and do a lot of fishing." But what happens after you've done all that? I'll tell you what happens, those things become boring and you want to do something else.

Psychology 101 says, "Once you get what you want, you want something else."

Sometimes when I'm bored I scroll social media reels. It's so crazy how many black people like to show people have much cash they have. It's like, "OK, you got some cash. Now what?" Most likely it's not even real, and even if it is, they're probably going to get robbed by some other blacks who want to make social media reels showing everyone how much cash they have. And the cycle will continue.

I suppose the cool thing about being black is that you don't get bored. 

I guess the moral of this post is to say that I'm sorry for being such a prolific beer drinker and not writing more. And that I wish I was black so I could line a couple grand worth of fake 20s up my arm and video it and be like, "Look at me, Whitey. I ain't bored!"

The Holy Spirit Sent You Here!

The Holy Spirit directed me to this beautiful sermon by Pastor Dan Gayman, and he has apparently led you to the same place.

I love how Pastor Gayman reminds us that we are merely dirt without belief in God. 

Jesus is the Son of God, sent to pay for the price of our sins. 

Be humble and repent!

God bless.

Feminism vs Diversity

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/02/anthony-odiong-catholic-priest-sentence

A Roman Catholic priest who was convicted recently of criminal clergy sexual assault in Texas has been sentenced to life imprisonment.

Anthony Odiong, 57, received the punishment from a jury at a state courthouse in Waco on Tuesday after some witnesses described his sexually inappropriate behavior going back more than a decade. Character witnesses on behalf of Odiong, meanwhile, advocated for him to get probation, saying he could follow such an arrangement’s rules – such as living near Waco and not committing additional crimes – despite feloniously breaking his priestly vows of chastity.

Life in prison, plus 20 years, for consensual sex with with female parishioners?

Roman Catholic priest? 

I remember reading a prominent writer who covered the Weinstein case at great length, in which he was claiming that the outcome would have a dramatic impact on the future of male/female relationship dynamics with regard to the law. He was basically saying that if Weinstein was found guilty of using his position of power as an instrument of rape, then that would open the door for anyone to be charged with rape if they were able to claim the male had a position of power over them. 

As with all left-wing, social justice causes, it's a snake that eats its own tail. 

Feminism is about female empowerment, yet these strong females are seduced by men who have power over them because females lack agency and accountability. It's nonsense. 

When leftist talking points are pure propaganda based on lies, its rather obvious that the results are going to be less than utopian. 

The mantra of leftism is "diversity is our strength," which to anyone with at least two brain cells knows is the biggest lie ever told.

And this isn't even addressing the obvious issues of Nigerians acting as Roman Catholic priests in America.

This story has so many tragedies. It's rather symbolic of America as a whole. 

I rarely, if ever, side with diversity. But in this case, I can't help but be sympathetic to the Nigerian male, which after all, that's basically what he is guilty of. 

The American legal system has concluded that feminism > diversity. 

This poor African got a life sentence for doing what poor Africans like to do. If we as Americans have a problem with that, maybe we shouldn't import poor Africans. But instead, the leftists think we can just import blacks from Africa, give them a pair of shoes and teach them how to read, and all of a sudden they're just white people with black skin. 

Diversity isn't just white genocide, it also fails to inform diversity that when they eventually replace whites (the goal of diversity) that they will suffer the same fate as their predecessors. 

Several years ago I remember listening to a podcast and the gentleman doing the show was talking about how the Left uses the Blacks. He said that the Left didn't care about the Blacks at all, and were just using them as a spearhead to prod society and once they got the desired results that they would break the spear off and abandon them. We are witnessing this in the status quo.

All leftist ideology is a lie that is presented to the world by the father of lies.

Your Ego isn't Your Amigo!

My loyal readers (future historians) know that my television watching primarily consists of the reality TV trinity (First 48, Jeopardy, UFC). Observant types will notice the word "primarily," and analytical types will know that there are exceptions to every rule.

I recently watched a pretty good documentary series on Dean Potter called The Dark Wizard:

It's the story of an egotistical, hypercompetitive man who went to war with his ego and ultimately lost. We all lose when we go to war with our ego. Why? Because, as I learned while reading The Power of Now, we are not our egos.

I've always felt that I had greatness in me. To try to explain that in words typed on a keyboard is tough. I suppose if I really did have greatness lurking in my DNA that I would be able to articulate my greatness in anyway: written, typed, spoken or just in accomplishment alone. Greatness isn't something that is projected onto others, it's recognized by others.

So much of "greatness" is the desire for others to see you as you see yourself. Your ego is the manifestation of your self-generated image. It's how you see yourself through the eyes of others.

The way this is reflected is via competition. Nobody who has ever staked claim to greatness ever achieved greatness before their ego did. While the ego is mostly a curse, it is a prerequisite for success.

The thing normies don't understand about greatness is that it's the obsession with being the best, not just being good. Second place is just the first place loser.

This can be witnessed in real time in The Dark Wizard. Dean Potter was exceptional, but after Alex Honnold showed up in the Yosemite valley, he was no longer the best. Furthermore, greatness never hangs its hat on past achievements. Those were just fulfilled expectations. 

Your ego will always tell you that you're the best. Reality always tells you otherwise.

Deny Yourself

Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus said to his disciples, 'If anyone would come after me, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.'

A wise man once said that everyday is a new life to a wise man.

Everyday we surrender to the sins of the flesh. And everyday we seek forgiveness, grace and mercy from our Lord and Savior, the Risen Christ.

God took on the sins of the flesh and defeated death. He died on the cross for His bride, Israel.

Nobody deserves mercy. God is sovereign, and His sheep are ultimately slaves to His grace.

All glory be to God.

We are commanded to deny ourselves and take up our cross. "We" being Israel. The Bible was written to, for, by and about the descendants of Jacob, also known as Israel.

How do Israelites deny themselves?

By loving God with all your heart, and loving your neighbor as yourself.

Matthew 22:37-39 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

And by repenting.

Acts 3:19 Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord

 Lord Christ Jesus, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner!

Our Genius Bequeaths Us

Most people believe they have some sort inner genius in their genes. When you think about it, it really only makes sense. Unless your lineage is entirely made up of evolutionary mediocrity, which is essentially the antithesis of evolution, it would be rational to reason that somewhere in the family tree lies the gene of genius.

With modern innovation, there isn't any need for geniuses anymore. Science and technology have become our two principal geniuses.

We can look at Christopher Langan, who with the world's highest IQ is a modest horse farmer with his "theory of everything" (cognitive-theoretical model of the universe; CTMU) residing as his magnus opus. It's basically useless, and nobody cares about it. Maybe that's because nobody is smart enough to understand it, or maybe its just boring tripe.

Name a modern genius that is relevant? Aside from Langan, who you probably wouldn't have even thought of, give me a couple names. And before you throw it out there, I'm not sure that Musk is actually a genius. He is primarily just a Douglas Adams' protege who thinks we just need to ask the right questions.

The genius is obsolete. Science and technology will always override the genius. What do we even need geniuses for?

If evolutionary theory is accurate, the genius gene will not have any advantage in natural selection.

Considering most of evolutionary theory is pseudoscientific trash, maybe it doesn't matter. But we live in a world where the most genius movie ever made was a satirical comedy titled Idiocracy.

Meanwhile, we stream these "brilliant" movies like, One Battle After Another and are told this is the work of genius. Really? 

What happened to the genius writers? Where did all the genius artists and musicians disappear too?

The genius is always misunderstood. I'm not telling you that the genius has gone extinct, I'm telling you that the genius has gone silent, thus paving the path for extinction.

We judge the tree by the fruit that it bares. The human tree is barren, picked clean by the machine its geniuses created.

Now we wait. 

Yo, Women! This One's for You.

Women don't read this blog. There are many reasons for this, but some obvious ones are that women don't read blogs, and this blog is emotionally apathetic in a toxically masculine kind of way. 

A woman's worldview is centered around her feelings. Feelings are generally irrational. Therefore, we can make a generalized assumption that women have a strong tendency to be irrational. 

From a Christian perspective (this entire blog is written from a Christian perspective), a woman's feelings introduced sin into the world, and thus corrupted mankind in the process. As a result, we all suffer from a woman's irrational decision and blatant disobedience. The echoes of "misogynist!" doesn't change that. 

That doesn't mean all women are bad. Or that even some women are bad. That just means that we are slaves to sin because a woman used her feelings as a moral compass.

I don't hate women. Only a woman would insinuate that. It's like using the "R word" when someone shares a 13/50 meme. Totally feminine. Feminists assume that name-calling will hurt a person's feelings, so they name-call. Feminism is a feelings-based worldview.

I enjoy looking at women. I appreciate the physical beauty of a woman. But, I can relate to Pygmalion. A woman's nature exponentially devalues the essence of femininity. Women don't want to be objectified, yet the subject their feelings onto others in a matter of fact way that forces their value to be externalized.

It's rather interesting that Christianity wouldn't be needed as a religion if Eve hadn't fornicated with the serpent. So when we cite the scriptures, they are precise on the woman question:

1 Timothy 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.

And:

1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Mind you, my female comrades, I am not here to be mean to you. I am trying to steer you towards the truth. Men who are familiar with the desires of women will be seduced by their perceived vulnerability the way Adam was by Eve.

2 Timothy 3:6-7 They are the kind who work their way into people’s homes and win the confidence of vulnerable women who are burdened with the guilt of sin and controlled by various desires.7 (Such women are forever following new teachings, but they are never able to understand the truth.)

Modern women, infatuated with feminism, have replaced God with egalitarianism. In the midst of their secular conversion, they continue to lead unsuspecting men to unrighteousness and sin, as their godmother Eve did in the beginning. 

Genesis 3:1-24 Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, “Has God indeed said, ‘You shall not eat of every tree of the garden’?” And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’ ” Then the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings. And they heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden. Then the LORD God called to Adam and said to him, “Where are you?” So he said, “I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; and I hid myself.” And He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you should not eat?” Then the man said, “The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate.” And the LORD God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?” The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.” So the LORD God said to the serpent: “Because you have done this, You are cursed more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field; On your belly you shall go, And you shall eat dust All the days of your life. And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel.” To the woman He said: “I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; In pain you shall bring forth children; Your desire shall be for your husband, And he shall rule over you.” Then to Adam He said, “Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat of it’: “Cursed is the ground for your sake; In toil you shall eat of it All the days of your life. Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you, And you shall eat the herb of the field. In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread Till you return to the ground, For out of it you were taken; For dust you are, And to dust you shall return.” And Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living. Also for Adam and his wife the LORD God made tunics of skin, and clothed them. Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”— therefore the LORD God sent him out of the garden of Eden to till the ground from which he was taken. So He drove out the man; and He placed cherubim at the east of the garden of Eden, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life.

Feminism was a failure from the beginning. How are we as a society still entertaining such ignorance?  

Yea, About Expectations....

Failed expectations are the root of demoralization. This is true for the group and the individual.

Social engineers are well aware of this. That's why the masses are constantly demoralized.

In the status quo, the PTB are pretty much forced to keep the herd in a state of perpetual demoralization, otherwise the state would constantly be dealing with revolutionaries.

Sure, ICE whistlers technically have the revolutionary spirit, but they're more of the obnoxious Alinsky-style tactical breed than that of a Hofferite true believer. Plus, it's just hard to get onboard with criminals who have devalued what it is to be an American. Without law and order, the United States is just an undefinable land mass of abstractions.

However, according to the Pygmalion Effect, high expectations also lead to improved performance.

Pygmalion was an interesting man. Similar to Narcissus, who fell in love with his own reflection, Pygmalion fell in love with his own sculpture. Oddly, the sculpture was that of a woman, which focused on the external beauty of women, and not the faults that dominate the flawed intrinsic nature of a female.

This is likely the genesis of the blowup doll bride in modernity.

The Bible preaches about "youthful lust":

2 Timothy 2:22 Run from anything that stimulates youthful lust.

Love for ourselves, our creations or women are all the "youthful lust" Paul was writing to Timothy about.

Why does a man's heart forsake his soul? 

Why are a man's desires always sickened with sin?

These type of questions are never answered in words. Well, they are, but the answers don't generate the knowledge that experience does. One has to experience the desire of "youthful lust" to comprehend it. One has to experience the slavery of sin in order to understand its mastery.

Ode to AA

Failed at my abstinence April attempt. It is what it is. Life is a series of wins and losses. As with the pendulum of power, the winning percentage is always swaying. 

Considering the first paragraph, you probably assume that AA stands for alcoholics anonymous. However, you'd be wrong in that assumption.

AA is the most prolific pro-white blogger in history. He recently shut down his blog. I know at one time his site had a few million unique monthly hits, while essentially being banned from all financial institutions and the internet. That in and of itself speaks volumes.

I read the Stormer daily for years. He had a profound impact on my worldview. He was a brilliant writer. It's unfortunate that we live in a time where those with dissenting views can be de-platformed the way he was. But it also shows how influential his writing was.

I didn't agree with everything he said, but I loved how he merged humor with politics. 

Anyone who sacrifices everything they have for a message they believe in deserves to be remembered in the analogs of history.

Dunbar's Number

The British anthropologist Dunbar presented a theory that associated brain size with average social group size. He developed this theory studying primates, and then transferred his findings to humans. His conclusion is that the sweet spot for human relationships is 150.

This is all pseudoscience, of course. Assuming that there is an evolutionary link, and humans are just upright apes who crawled out the jungles and became homo erectus. Maybe that happened. I doubt it. But whatever.

The Science says it, so it has to be true, right?

Long time readers of My Cousin the Carp, are well aware that the very essence of this blog is not "racism," but rather to poke the bear that is evolution.

And before you start thinking, "Wait a minute, isn't racism a byproduct of evolutionary science?" keep in mind that I never claimed to be a "racist."

I would classify myself as more of an Idiocracist: 

But this isn't about me, this is about you. Nobody cares how I label myself. We don't construct our own image. Your opinion of me likely doesn't match my opinion of myself.

I read this book one time. It was titled the Power of Now. The idea behind the book was that you are not your ego. At least that's what I took from it.

Isn't it weird how you can read hundreds of books and barely recall some of them? Or maybe just recall an idea that the book was attempting to convey?

Honestly, who cares about Dunbar's number? What is the significance of it? How is it relative? I suppose anarchists love that theory. Because it's the theoretical (or is it hypothetical?) number of people within a tribe that eliminates the need for government. 

But there are tons of theories that would answer pretty much every existential question. Do we ever enact them? 

What is the point of evolutionary science anyway?

I'm more interested in emotional self control when I lose at a competitive event.

Evolutionary science says we are hard wired to hate losing.

So if you're not a sore loser, you're just a loser.

Actually, I completely understand our emotions in correlations to self control. What I don't understand is luck.

Explain it to me like I'm 5, because I sure can't explain it to you like you're 50.

God bless.

P.S. Yes, I lost at poker today.

P.S.S. Yes, I'm still sober.

P.S.S.S. Bitcoin is crashing. If you bought BTC back in 2015 when it was $250 like I told you too, you're rich. Don't be stingy about donating a little to me for making you wealthy. 

April Abstinence

Abstinence is the practice of voluntarily not doing something that is wanted or enjoyed.

Why would anyone voluntarily not do something they enjoy doing?

There are lots of quick-witted axioms that come to mind. I think most people understand why people practice abstinence of one form or the other.

For me it comes down to self-control, general health and well being, overall self improvement and morality.

When I pray, I ask God to heal me "mind, body and spirit." When a person takes "eat, drink and be merry" too far, the "mind, body and spirit" become sick. Those things need time to heal. I need time for reflection. This is why God has encouraged me to abstain from the pleasures of this world for the month of April.

In other news, this AI thing is just ridiculous. I can't quite figure out what all the fuss is about. AI is autistic. I mean, have you ever tried to have a conversation with it? 

Just look at the above picture. I asked AI to "create an image of a writer struggling with alcoholism" and that's what it "created."

Why in the world does it have a picture of this man's family facing away from him? Why is he using a typewriter? Why are there cigarette butts on the desk? Why is the book upside down?

I've written about this AI thing many times on this blog over the course of the last 12 years. 

People who worry about AI overtaking humanity haven't really worked through the details in their head. Where is the motivation of the machine? The machine is just a manifestation of it's programmer. It's like a calculator and an encyclopedia were impregnated by an anti-white liberal and produced a child of Satan.

I asked AI to create an image of a hillbilly with a confederate flag on his hat and AI said it was incapable of doing that.

If you're a writer, musician or mathematician, you might have some worries. 

But modern music is just crap. Mostly because it's influenced and/or created by AI. 

Writers are too lazy to write, so they use AI. So it's crap, too (btw, this is one of the only 100% HI blogs still in existence). 

And everything above algebra is crap that was invented by AI to make humans believe that they are intellectually inferior to the machines they created.

So, in conclusion, AI is the autistic love child of an anti-white cyborg.

Quit overthinking the "I have to learn AI because everyone is talking about AI so it must be cool" and just focus on God.

It's good Friday.

And abstinence April.

He is risen!

What Happened to the UFC?

As I said in yesterday's post, my TV consumption consists of the Reality TV trinity: First 48, Jeopardy, and UFC.

Recently the UFC signed a new deal with Paramount +. It got rid of the PPV model, which is a good thing for people who actually spent $100 to watch 5 fights. Although I would speculate that roughly 1 in 10 people who watched the UFC PPV's actually paid for them. According to friends, it was never hard to find a stream online.

However, ever since this new deal (and even before; there was like 6 weeks without any fights) the quality of fights have just been crapola. 

It's easy to play armchair quarterback. Everyone thinks they know more than they do. But some of these fights are atrocious and completely uninteresting.

Just look at the UFC London card from yesterday. Who would pay to watch that card? That MVP fight was horrible. The UFC should cut that guy.

I hated watching MVP even when he was in Bellator. He is such a boring fighter to watch. A lot of people would say "it's his style," but Wonderboy Thompson has the same karate style and his fights are never boring. MVP just sucks to watch.

Who knows, maybe I'm just racist. But did you watch that fight?

I mentioned the new deal with Paramount because I think it was for like $8 billion over a few years. And I wonder if the UFC struck gold with that deal and they just don't really care anymore. They're getting paid, so complacency has set in.

Or maybe the deal was bad and they can't afford to pay the fighters enough to make good fights.

In any event, they really need to step up their game, because these fight cards have been whack.

Everyone had such huge expectations for the White House card, and did you see what it ended up being? 

The main event will be good, but Nickal vs Daukaus? Really?

Maybe I'm just being cynical, but if you have the opportunity to put on a monumental show at the White House, the card should be better than this. 

Be honest, aside from the Gaethje vs Topuria fight (which is going to result in Gaethje going night-night), are you excited about any of those fights? Even the press conference is going to suck.

I mean, sure, I'm going to watch, but will I be counting down the days in excitement? Not a chance.

Maybe there will be some bangers on the prelims.

Cheers!