How To Protect Your Brain & Organization From Manipulators

Executing spies is not the only method to protect your brain (even if desirable). I received an interesting request today from one of Alvarism’s many readers who is concerned with counterintelligence operations:

I’m really enjoying your great blogs! You have such talent for uncovering vital hidden information.

Which is why I’m asking for your help now in finding links to [redacted] group strategy techniques that was discovered and circulated by [redacted], some time ago.

I’m pretty sure it was a video explaining a meeting strategy that showed how to manage and dilute any opposition…

If you can remember anything like this I’d really appreciate if you could let me know so I may share it with some dear friends who are worried about what’s happening in their [organization].

Counter-Subversion is a Significant Aspect of Alvarism

In psychological operations (psyops) and subversion, nobody is invulnerable, most people are unwitting putty in the hands of forces unseen, and a few are hard targets. I am a hard target. There are private reasons for that from my childhood, career, and love life, which are out of scope here.

I don’t need to rewrite these articles, the authors did a fine job:

The Strategy of Subversive Conflict by Adam Elkus

Preventing the State’s Infiltration of Social Movements by Indubio Pro Reo

Reo approaches this from an anarchist’s perspective. In truth, the methods he refers to are used much more by nonprofits, NGOs, and non-state actors to disrupt and weaken their opponents. States use the methods to be sure, but subversion is not exclusive to governmental authorities.

Read those articles if you want to learn some basics. Three things the authors do not discuss can also protect you from psyops: religion, romance, and virtue.

Proper Religion Protects You from Psyops

I say proper, because much of religious practice is improper. It does not serve the conscious intention of its practitioner. It serves their unconscious deficiencies.

The godless are the most vulnerable. In the third Alvarism book (unpublished), religion is detailed. For now, suffice to say that the godless desperately pursue religious needs in ways that are haphazard, chaotic, and ineffective. They are not just tearing down established religious traditions, they are replacing them with new and deranged ones, while claiming to be atheist or agnostic.

In reality, they worship entertainers, politicians, and journalists like religious people worship divinity. They chase ghosts, vampires, Harry Potter magic, aliens, orcs, dwarves, elves, fairies, drugs, alcohol, sex, vices – anything to fill the void of wonder and meaning in their lives. And while they play the part of a wind-up robot aimlessly crashing into every object on the floor, life passes them by and each crash leaves them more desperate to find enduring connection and meaning.

But many religious people also play the part of wind-up robot. Cult- and magic-thinking corrupts their religious practice. They use their religion as a godless person uses a psychologist. They say and do absurd things that violate harmonious, productive, and constructive life. The spiritual meaning and connection they find is twisted, which is obvious from the ensuing poverty, chaos, dissociation, and isolation. The only difference between them and the godless is that they are honest enough to admit they have a religion.

Then there are those with a proper religious practice. They consciously choose their faith, and it is a good choice, with strong capability for inspiration, harmony, and productivity. It enhances their life and protects their minds from those who would play on their ego, their vices, their temptations, and their ignorance. It solidifies their priority of virtue, inspiring them to improve themselves morally with each experience in life.

Suggesting how to improve religious devotion is beyond the scope of this article. But if your religious practice seems more like the prior than the latter, it needs some adaptation if you want to become resilient to psyops. Turning a person’s ego and visions against themselves is an easy thing to do when the person has improper religion.

Proper Romance (and Chastity) Protects You from Subversion

In the process of a failed attempt to collect on me, a spy tried numerous times to get me drunk, and even offered prostitution. Of course, a supposed “friend” offering these vices to a vulnerable target would easily succeed. He got very frustrated that he couldn’t play on any vices to manipulate me.

The sexual and family motives (for those with children and spouses) are strong vulnerabilities. Presuming that you are not living vicariously through your children, or lover, and that you respect yourself, and that they enhance your life as companions without eroding your life like a parasite, you are in a good position to control your primal drives.

A person is vulnerable, who is sexually anxious, or has dysfunctional relations with their family, spouse, and children (which can easily occur with white picket fences, smiles, flower beds, dogs, and idyllic veneer). Promiscuous people are particularly vulnerable. Read Aristotle’s treatment of friendship and pleasure in Ethics, and the book of Corinthians in the Bible to harden yourself against relational aggression, and some forms of psychological aggression.

There are good reasons why a majority of both men and women cannot attain successful relationships, and lasting marriages. It is better to avoid those people who will create more problems than they solve in close quarters. When psyops and manipulation by people outside of the family emerge, improper family and romance becomes an enormous vulnerability to the target’s efficacy.

Experts Will Not Protect You

While I do suggest reading the links and researching even more concepts in subversion, it’s not enough. Relational and psychological aggression is much like physical aggression. We “drill” our soldiers because “classes” are not enough. You can teach a person how to defend themselves in a class. They won’t learn. They need to get punched in the face to learn. They need to bleed.

They need to experience the anxiety control response hundreds of times. Only then, will they master controlled aggression and the split-second muscle memory required to defend themselves when attacked. American Football is a great sport to drill controlled aggression at a young age. Every warrior should play full-contact sports as a child.

Defense against relational and psychological aggression require practice as well. Have you ever had a person tell you how to feel, or what attitude you should have about a particular experience? They mean well. An untrained person has all sorts of reactions in their mind, anxieties, emotions. I have none. I immediately perceive how the person is trying to manipulate the way I think about the world and myself. I filter it through my knowledge of propaganda and fallacy. I take only hard evidence, and correctly formed logical statements that they present to me. I process it immediately for its universal value. I rarely let the person know what I took and what I discarded.

How can a man of great achievement detect a woman who is trying to use him for ulterior motives? One strategy would be to present himself without wealth. That would be ineffective. Their reaction at the sight of wealth is useful to observe as well.

But the most useful observation for that particular inquiry is not so overt. The best thing to do is to inspire situations in which the woman’s virtues of patience, zeal, and frugality are challenged. If she generally feels entitled to something-for-nothing, she uses people and takes more than she gives.

If she asks people to do things that she could do herself, she’s a user. If she refuses to do simple things, because “she doesn’t like it,” or “it’s not who she is,” she will be telling your children the same thing when she is supposed to be helping to raise them. Alternatively, she’ll do the mundane things as a mother, but she will be miserable in the process and spread her misery to the entire household. Passive aggression will follow. And from the low-virtue woman, conflict and misery will spread. She will gaslight aggression from the husband. Then he will wonder if he is the bad guy.

A woman of sufficient patience, zeal, and frugality, will silently and quietly do what is called for in any scenario, solve more problems than she creates, and be eager to take personal responsibility rather than run from it. She does not demand decision making, spending, or disposal power over anything without responsibility and justification that she is best equipped to exercise it. Power without justification is tyranny. People who want money and creature comforts without contributing great value of their own are social tyrants. Social tyrants generally have very few skills, shallow knowledge, and nothing of much value to offer, because they have spent their time consuming the value of others, instead of producing for the benefit of others.

Be True to Yourself, Practice the Seven Virtues

These indirect assessments may seem complex – and they are. With practice they occur as subconsciously as a warrior defending himself reflexively from physical attacks. If you or your organization are infiltrated by subversive elements, the best way to protect everyone is very simple. Be true. If your organization is stable and virtuous, it can be rattled, but it will stand strongly.

A man who is a true gentleman, cannot be manipulated by a corrupt woman. If a shrew tries to drag him down, she grows weary because she can’t get under his skin. If a promiscuous woman tries to turn his sexual drive against himself, she cannot, because his honor is more valuable than cheap thrills.

A man who has nothing to hide, can be spied upon, and the spies will acquire nothing useful with which to blackmail him.

Virtue is the strongest armor against the throngs of twisted people who wittingly or unwittingly employ relational and psychological aggression. And all subversion at its core, uses those types of aggression.

The authors of the articles I linked focus on the mechanics and techniques of subversion. We cannot study human beings as mechanistic animals, absent values. Yes, it is helpful to understand tactics of subversion. No, it is not the best defense.

If you notice social or organizational dysfunction, help strengthen each other in virtue, and render the manipulators powerless. Make yourself a hard target. In organizations and business, put people in leadership who are hard targets. An organization with low-virtue leaders is very vulnerable.

Watch: Stalin Slaughters Millions for Socialist Utopia

“Now I can’t even walk. God is my only hope.” These are the words of a woman in this documentary. Others speak of the starvation, murder, cannibalism, theft, arson, and government massacres and imprisonment. To many readers of Economic Sovereignty, chapter four introduces new aspects of history that their teachers neglected. Dekulakization was the way Russian socialists destroyed the upper middle class – with starvation, killing, imprisonment, and total ostracism.

Because there is no term to describe the oppression of the upper middle class in order to solidify an aristocracy while compressing all others into an impressionable mass of serfs – I invented the term vorardennes.

In this documentary, vorardennes is shown in its violent form. Democratic socialists attain the same result with gradual and “peaceful” usurpation of ownership through tax and regulatory policies. The horrific conditions of collapsed social democracies in Latin America and Europe are the undeniable outcomes of that gradual usurpation.

A friend of mine recently presented a notion that abortion was the most evil offense a nation could tolerate. The notion comes from how we treat the weak and vulnerable, speaking to our character, and also a particular conception of life and death.

I’ve seen and experienced a lot of dire suffering. I have reached the third stage of starvation. I’ve seen torturous deaths. I’ve seen rapid, violent, and comparatively merciful deaths. If I was personally given a choice to die in the womb rather than be subject to the kind of torture Stalin spread across Russia, I’d take death in the womb. It’s not to downplay the horrors of abortion, but rather, to appropriately grade mercy and severity in life and death.

Perhaps the testimony of these people in the documentary are more instructive than anything I could share about my experience with starvation. Mine occurred in a twisted phantasmagoria of absurdity – in a land of plenty, paying loser doctors piles of cash to torture me with their malfeasance, while people with petty gripes and complaints about their privileged and shallow lives passed me by on the streets, and while lying Democrat politicians brainwashed the population into thinking “health insurance coverage for all” is equivalent to “healthcare for all.” I was a living testament to the ignorance of such presumptions.

Stalin’s slaughter was a veritable hell on earth, of torture and inhumanity that is nearly incomprehensible to the sheltered and luxuriating modern citizen, whose petty gripes are a testament to how little suffering they have ever truly experienced. The sensation of this suffering cannot really be conveyed with words.

But experience with great suffering leads to discernment between merciful and merciless living and death. My conception of life and death is from the stoic (and ancient Christian) philosophy. I believe that life should be lived for meaning, and that what we do in life echoes in eternity, for better or worse.

The epicurean conception which is popular with modern irreligious people, Leonardo da Vinci, and liberal Christians is that life is to be lived for experiences and consumption – obtaining as much happiness as a person can gorge upon. They don’t like talking about death in general, or spending too much time contemplating those who have passed. Life is for the living, to the epicurean.

A consequence of that philosophy is that the younger a person dies, the greater the tragedy. It’s a good litmus test as to whether or not a person has been indoctrinated unwittingly with the epicurean conception of life and death.

In the stoic conception, the greatest tragedy is to die between the ages of 14 and 60. In Latin, the phrase is Quem di diligunt, adolescens moritur, or “Whom the gods love dies young.”

A person who has suffered and struggled much, only to have life end with his major opportunities and struggles unvindicated is the greatest tragedy to a person who believes that life must be meaningfully lived for triumph over conflict and adversity. A person who has been spared the outrages of adult life, lived meaningfully to bring joy and hope to others, and for the faithful, they join the heavens in a better place.

Whether stoic or epicurean, no such beautiful conceptions of life and death existed in Stalin’s ideology. Dialectical materialism was the communist religion. And it certainly showed, in the way they treated people like objects of utility. This documentary speaks of a critical event in history, that all should take as a warning of what misery can come from those who promise to use absolute power for “the greater good.”

The White Nationalism Diversion Pt 3: The Real Story of Brenton Tarrant

Brenton Tarrant, The Self-Proclaimed Ethno-Nationalist Eco-Fascist Who Killed 50 Muslims in Two New Zealand Mosques from 1:40 – 2:20 PM on Friday, March 15, 2019

I reviewed the regionally-illegal video and manifesto of this terrorist. Followers of Alvarism who have met us face-to-face, or are willing to do so, can request a copy of the material. You cannot obtain the hard evidence from social media. Facebook, Twitter, and the other technocrats decided that you are too immature and stupid to have access to such knowledge. They censored the content, and they punished profiles that distributed it. Aren’t we so lucky to enjoy such benevolent technocratic nannies, as grown adults?

It is a shame, because most journalists and elected officials have butchered the story beyond redemption.

Here are the facts:

  • In Tarrant’s own words, Muslims are not his main target. That makes his mosque shooting spree a target of opportunity.
  • The traitors as he defines them – capitalists, wealthy westerners, and ethnic apostates – are his main enemies
  • He says overpopulation and the destruction of the earth are being perpetrated by capitalists and ethnicities with inflated birth rates
  • Democratic socialists, abortion advocates, Hollywood childfree and suburban dysfunction storytellers, and environmentalists share Tarrant’s views on environmentalism, except that they are unwilling to hold ethnic groups accountable for cultural trends that yield overpopulation
  • Tarrant said that although he had bombs and other options, he chose guns because of how controversial they have become
  • He said that he wants increased gun control to instigate great conflict between gun-grabbing government officials and gun owners

Isn’t it amazing that the democratic socialist leader of New Zealand gave Tarrant exactly what he wanted, yet she pretends to be heroic? That might be the reason why she made it a serious crime to even possess his manifesto. We certainly can’t tolerate the incontrovertible proof of reciprocity between totalitarians and democratic socialists, in a society that lives more in their imagination than the real world!

The joke is on her. Only 500 of 1,250,000 guns have been turned in, and those who refuse are boldly disavowing the sincerity of her gun grab. People are risking five years in jail by not turning in their guns.

According to some leftists in academia, the Hollywood clique, and leftwing punditry, the rhetoric of immigration control advocates, including Trump, fueled Tarrant’s slaughter.

In truth, Tarrant wrongly saw Trump as a symbol of white identity. He missed the part of Trump’s career in which minorities voted for him more than other Republicans, and the sheer number of minorities to whom Trump has contributed upward mobility. Tarrant emphatically rejected Trump’s leadership and policies…which is another thing he shares in common with Democrats, communists, and democratic socialists:

He mocked conservatives:

He spends pages rebuking conservatives. He says “Conservatism is dead. Thank God. Now let us bury it and move on to something of worth.” This is consistent with fascism.

As radical revolutionaries who wish to rapidly impose policy, and experiment with society to move it “forward” for “progress” – fascists are leftists. Hitler’s eugenics programs (race hygiene), the holocaust, the Hitler Youth, and many other programs were all left wing policies – rapid experimentation for the sake of “progress.”

Yet the fascists wrap their “progress” experiments in pageantry of tradition and visions of historical grandeur, often using the sense of origin from right wing thinking to provide a sense of unity and purpose. The synthesis of traditional invocation, and aggressive “change” for the sake of “progress” makes their leftist and rightist tendencies into enigmatic centrism.

He understood the enigmatic centrism:

That concept is more deeply described in part 2 of this series.

Tarrant is not a Christian, although some have portrayed him as a crusader and white traditional conservative. He mentions Christianity twice in his manifesto. He invokes a speech by Pope Urban II that initiated the first crusade – a retaliation against Muslims who invaded Jewish and Christian lands. He also says:

When asked about a religion, a response of “I don’t know” makes a person agnostic. Again this is a consistent position for fascists. They realize that the traditional religion of their ethnicity has cultural power, but they also realize that many of the traditions impede their policies.

This is why Hitler and the Nazis oppressed the Christian churches of Germany, splintering them into the “Confessing Church,” that refused to cooperate, and the “Positive Christianity” churches, that were not Christian in any authentic sense. The Nazis slaughtered authentic Christians of the Confessing Church alongside Jews. Tarrant’s response was perfectly coherent and consistent with fascist doctrine. I expect Tarrant to remain ambiguous about his religious affiliation, until he sees utility in being definitive.

Why Did He Attack?

Tarrant blamed Islamic population jihad, Islamist terrorism, and French voters who elected soft-on-crime politicians for the motivation of his murders. That means the people who speak truth about Islamic terrorism, those who are willing to enforce the law against Islamic riots and violence, and those willing to enforce immigration law would have prevented this massacre if they had power instead of the permissive and pandering leftists.

Tarrant is a true and pure fascist in the most academic sense. He was even knowledgeable enough to understand that modern China is fascist.

Tarrant Knows Fascism & China, Better than all but the Most Erudite at our Military Academies

It seems that Tarrant understands geopolitics better than those who whitewash modern China. No matter how propagandists try to spin China as “diverse” by pointing to varied sports, arts, foods, and labor markets – modern China is not diverse. Han Chinese comprise 92% of the population and 70% of them speak Mandarin.

By contrast, the USA has only 57% white non-Hispanic, non-Arab, non-Jewish citizens. There are one-billion more Han Chinese in China than there are ethnically white people in the USA!

A similar distortion would exist if in some alternate universe, the USA was comprised of 92% white people. Then they would say that the USA is incredibly diverse because those white people in the south cook grits, play football, and choose French architecture, while those in the Northeast have hot dog chains, play hockey, and choose Germanic and British architecture.

With China’s utter racial, social, and political homogeneity in mind, it is an ethno-nationalist state, controlling its workers for the Chinese government’s interests, and employing “State Capitalism” (zwangswirtschaft) for its own productivity and long-term civilization goals. It declares autonomous regions to manage what divergent cultures exist under its sovereignty.

Opting for ethno-nationalist socialism, China gave up the communist international socialist “workers of the world unite” theme decades ago. They allow Christianity, only in a form that is perverted by their state bureaucrats, and monitored publicly. Imagine if the USA had a Christian authority that dictated the legal philosophical doctrines of atheists, secular humanists, and agnostics. China imposes that ethnic conformity as Tarrant desires.

If a journalist wondered how Tarrant’s idealization of China is consistent with ethno-nationalist fascism, they should be humbled that he understands that aspect of the world more accurately than they do.

In his own words:

Regrettably, many educators have failed to convey accurate understanding of fascism prior to Tarrant’s horrific act, which was elaborated in part two of this series. Many journalists called his manifesto a confused and rambling pile of nonsense.

It’s a terrible mischaracterization. He explicitly mentioned his fascist influencers. His manifesto outlined every single tenet of ethno-nationalism. He knew exactly what he wanted politically. He described it articulately. He even made a graphic that highlighted the features of ethno-nationalism:

Obama’s anti-colonialism was well documented in Dinesh D’Souza’s Obama’s America 2016. Tarrant shared these anti-colonial views with Obama. He shares them with democratic socialists and progressives. The colonists are imperial oppressors, and the indigenous people are poor victims, so their narrative goes.

Additionally, lebensreform, wandervogel, and other naturalistic and environmental ideology are shared between ethno-nationalists and democratic socialists. Blut und boden is exclusive to ethno-nationalists.

Responsible marketplace,” also known as zwangswirtschaft is shared between ethno-nationalists and democratic socialists. They also call it “compassionate economy,” indicative planning, the welfare state, and dirigisme. It’s expressed through regulatory monstrosities, trade unions, “workers’ rights,” industrial boards, and erosion of economic freedom in the name of “the greater good.”

Tarrant understood fascism’s socialist origins very well:

I wonder why the politicians, professors, and journalists kept this information from us, don’t you?

Moreover, Tarrant speaks of the protection of heritage, culture, and social engineering. That is shared between ethno-nationalists and democratic socialists. The democratic socialists who dominate academia, journalism, and entertainment actively destroy, ostracize, bury, whitewash, and supplant culture they deem inferior with their “progress,” and “change.” Their sophistication in forging the visions, values, attitudes, and stories of the population is a level of social engineering that dwarfs anything totalitarians have been able to achieve, save Russia, some nations in Dar al Islam, and China at the cost of over 100 million slaughtered citizens.

Ethnic autonomy is something exclusive to ethno-nationalists. The democratic socialists also exploit divisions of class (economics), race, gender, sexuality, religion, and ideology, but they advocate syncretic multiculturalism, using the identity pride of minorities as a Trojan horse for their platform.

A person who votes based on their identity, and resultant fear and pride, is not primarily critical of the actual policies they advocate. In that way, the democratic socialists and ethno-nationalists exploit fear and pride of identity, but from different narratives. The number of advocates of white ethnic autonomy in the world are infinitesimal compared to Latino, Islamic, Russian, and Chinese proponents of ethnic autonomy.

Totalitarian vs. Progressive Drug Intervention

Substance abuse policy is a complex topic. A person would need to review the history of eugenics, fascism, communism, the Opium Wars, the US War on Drugs, Prohibition, and the teetotalers. Suffice it to say, the ethno-nationalists confront addiction with prison and execution. But so do international socialist totalitarians (communists).

The democratic socialists prefer to treat substance abuse as a disease and approach the addicts with medical treatment. The democratic socialist (progressive) paradigm for addiction and mental defectives has led to mass killings. Their policy was deinstitutionalization – reduction of long-term psychiatric stay in favor of sending the patients to local clinics and residential neighborhoods with a pile of pills in their hand.

Indeed, guns are not responsible for the killing, but the leftist psychiatric experiment is responsible for half of all mass killings, and ten percent of homicides. The deinstitutionalization policies of leftists enabled one-percent of the population (psychiatric wards), to contribute ten-times its share to murder, and fifty-times its share to mass killings.

Also, half of all police suspect killings result from deinstitutionalization – because when the patient becomes violent they do not respond to police commands. The idiotic medical and laissez faire approach to substance abuse has destroyed cities run by the US Democratic Party:

The fascists simply want to eliminate or jail these people instead, which is a horrific concept, considering that many can live peaceful, happy, and productive lives with proper stewardship. The fascists turn a blind eye to the suffering of the mental patients, while the democratic socialists turn a blind eye to the innocent victims they create by setting the mental patients loose.

When the Mass Killer is More Knowledgeable than the Officials We Elect

It seems that self-educated Tarrant, the white nationalist terrorist, understood fascism (ethno-nationalism) more than most journalists, politicians, and educators. Isn’t it outrageous that the people we elect, who are supposed to be erudite in governance, history, and political science, are complete buffoons on the most critical matters? That glowing “elites” who attended Ivy League colleges, are bested in knowledge by the crystallized intelligence of a mass killer?

In the next part of this series, we will review how totalitarians like Brenton Tarrant reciprocate power with progressives and democratic socialists.

New Zealand’s Prime Minister’s gun control, thought control, and criminalizing knowledge, should give any thinking person a clue as to the wickedness of the ones who feign benevolence and peaceful methods.

Any self-respecting person who values their liberty would be so outraged as to kick them all out of office as soon as possible. I certainly hope that Kiwis respect themselves enough to replace every leftist official who handled this massacre like manipulative, heartless, rote opportunists.

Man Self-Immolates at White House, Media Buries & Spins the Story

You would think a man burning himself to death at the footsteps of The White House in protest of President Trump would be a big story. Who is the guy? Why did he do it? What were his beliefs? Where did he get the idea? Who has done things like this in the past?

The man’s name is Arnav Gupta. An awful woman with no morals captured the suicide on her phone as she laughed, dehumanized, and trivialized the plight of this tragic man. It’s an item for the media to bury because wealthy, well-educated, intelligent, artistic, globally-minded, anti-white, brown-skinned Green Party, Democrat-favoring democratic socialists are not supposed to do such violent things. How could they conceive of such violence when they are busy bringing equality and rainbows to the world?

NewsGuard “trusted” sources like CBS, NBC, New York Post, Business Insider, and The New York Times currently fill the first page of results for a search of “Arnav Gupta.” The articles are a carbon-copy of misleading nonsense, answering none of the important questions.

Their narrative presents Arnav Gupta as a crazy person who just haphazardly set himself on fire in a location that has no meaning at all. They inspire this misconception with the phrase, “his family put out a missing person report and the police said that they were concerned about his physical and emotional welfare.” The reader is left to speculate upon their half-truths.

Luckily, alternative journalists investigated the event before the deceivers expurgated public information. provided personal information, and TMZ provided info from the cops indicating that they believe he was on synthetic marijuana laced with PCP during the self-immolation, due to the way he reacted to being on fire.

Here is what the “trusted” news sources hid from you:

Personal life

  • Gupta was 33 years old when he burned himself alive
  • He was born in New Delhi, raised in wealthy Bethesda Maryland, attended a private prep school in Bethesda (Landon)
  • He graduated from private college – Boston University, which currently costs $70,000/year, $280,000/degree for tuition, room & board, and fees.
  • He majored in International Relations and Affairs
  • In 2013, he visited the Mt. Everest Base Camp in Nepal

Professional life and interests

  • He worked as a personal trainer, a translator for government minority healthcare programs, a high school sports coach, property management, executive assistant, and then education consultant.
  • He volunteered as an “anti-racism activist in a home-school cooperative.”
  • He painted a black panther as a sacrificial creature and mascot of children (obvious sympathy for anti-white, black fascist ethno-nationalism)
  • He painted an ominous colonial man on a cross with an American bald eagle and musket
  • He painted nude women as a feature of Thai festivities
  • He wrote a poem with sexually perverse invocations, odes to Democratic Socialism and Bernie Sanders, characterization of the US Military as holy-warring “crusaders,” mockery of capitalism, mockery of classical literature, and filled with headline-deep cryptic references to pop culture, conspiracy theory, and current events
  • He was a Green Party registered, Democrat-favoring, Trump-hating leftist

Suicidal Protest

  • At 10:10 AM, Wednesday, May 29, 2019, Arnav Gupta posted on his artist twitter account “FEEL THE BURN!!!” (a reference to support for Bernie Sanders and his democratic socialist slogan, and also Gupta’s impending self-immolation)
  • He then dosed synthetic marijuana laced with PCP (as cops suspect) to enable himself to run around while burning himself to death
  • At 12:20 PM he douses himself with accelerant and sets himself on fire in President’s Park on the south side of the White House
  • Police responded at 12:25 PM, extinguished him, and transported him to the hospital
  • At 2:46 PM, Montgomery County Police release a bulletin, expressing concern for Gupta’s “physical and emotional welfare” in response to his family reporting him missing to the police, saying that they last saw him at 9:20 AM at his house
  • He died of his burn injuries later that evening


If you are accustomed to seeing your family every day, would you report them missing to the police when they leave the house in the morning? The sequence of events indicate that his family knew something about his intentions prior to his suicide.

His ode to the black panthers and anti-colonial art indicate a leftwing-indoctrinated racial paranoia and hatred of American history. This narrative playing in his head, indoctrinated by his educators, entertainers, and journalists fed his extremism – a great tragedy.

His schooling and work history suggest he was a “minority” man from wealth, private prep school, private college, and great privilege, who couldn’t seem to find gratifying profession and purpose in life. I say “minority” figuratively because based on his location and affiliations, it’s not likely that white people were a majority in his daily interactions.

His poetic style is common in leftwing culture – syncretism in veneration of axiomatic diversity and “inclusion.” In it, he mixed profanity, Ebonics, and awkward high-level vocabulary pulled from a thesaurus, like the scriptwriters of Keith Olbermann’s leftwing news punditry show.

It may seem odd to political moderates, but in extreme-leftist culture, to be enigmatic and contradictory gives an appearance of intelligence. In reality it is just a substitute for genuine knowledge and articulation. They have no patience to acquire deep knowledge, so they operate on superficial, trendy, and rhetorical information.

Passive Resistance & Self-Immolation

Self-immolation is an item of awe in leftist political history. The popular socialist band Rage Against the Machine made it the cover of their first album. There are hundreds of known cases of self-immolation in (mainly) leftwing political action across the globe. Leftist believers say that it “sends a message” to authority that they can oppress a people, but not defeat their willpower.

High levels of passive aggression use self-harm with the intention of psychologically frustrating a person who cares about the instigator. This infantile psychology does not translate well to political action. Passive resistance is a form of protest, and self-immolation is a very dramatic instance of it. If the level of opposition is organized crime, or terrorist groups weak enough for a state militia to overpower them, then passive resistance can yield results. The KKK is an organization that was effectively faced with passive resistance. Those who harm themselves garner support and outside pressure.

A legitimate military and government does not fall for such tactics. Like a wise person who shows apathy to passive aggression (realizing that the person is manipulating them), a force as powerful as the Chinese military will not respond favorably to self-immolation.

The activists argue that it gives their cause attention and international aid. That is absurd. Only civil war would achieve what the protestors imagine. They can say that they will humiliate a power like China, but at the end of the day, those who cooperate with the Belt and Road Initiative have special interests, and they are not going to give up their own prosperity because a group of dissidents are engaged in self-harm.

The same kind of leftist empty threats and hypocrisies are currently in play against Georgia for its abortion ban. Companies like Disney threaten business in Georgia, while they do business in China which puts Muslims in concentration camps.

Business and diplomacy is pragmatic. It is not idealistic. Idealism is for the idiot who worships at the altar of a political podium. And those who observe rationally from the outside are not impressed with the liars who speak from both sides of their mouths, boycotting Georgia while pandering to China and Saudi Arabia.

Anyone giving the passive resistance groups monetary support is wasting their money on performance artists. Do those who use passive resistance against a sovereign state and military have any results to show for their tantrums? Besides enriching the most vocal and dramatic performance artists amongst their activists?

The Public Confusion, The Media Coverup

Arnav Gupta is a tragedy, plain and simple. He chose lethal passive resistance to protest Trump. It is the wrong tool for what he intended. And his fellow leftwing activists care so little about him, that they bury his story for fear of copycats, and exposure of the extremism their Green Party and socialist members are inspiring. They don’t want people to start talking about eco-fascism and the deranged political ideology they inspire. They don’t want copycats to make the Democratic Party look more dilettante than they already do after the Mueller Report.

They dishonor his life by expurgating the records of his expressions, and hiding information about him. They dishonor him again by calling him crazy. Arnav Gupta was not crazy. A crazy person is impulsive, does not make plans, and does not contemplate agendas and meaning for their actions. Gupta is quite the opposite of crazy – he contemplated this extreme political agenda more than most of the Democrats who claim to be on his side.

He made a conscious and rational decision to end his life in order to advance his agenda. Granted, his choice of action was a foolish one, but his own leftwing romanticism of passive resistance and self-immolation inspired that error of judgement.

It is the habit of people to call their own extremists “crazy” and their opposition “monsters.” They don’t like admitting that they share culture and politics with an extremist. Better to call them crazy, so they don’t have to face the fact that their ideology has inspired extreme action. But if it is the opposition, it’s very easy for them to simply deem them monsters who need to be controlled by more laws.

Conveniently, those laws are already the ones they want to pass, without their scapegoat boogeyman.

If I could help Arnav Gupta to enact positive civic impact with his tragic sacrifice, I would suggest that leftists reconsider self-immolation. It is not some kind of romantic civil rights martyrdom. Passive resistance in general is a childish and idiotic choice that does not yield results. Disrupt a highway? Anger commuters who have to work for a living. How does the cause gain respect?

As for the Tibetan monks, if they kill themselves instead of the CHICOMs, then they just helped the MSS & PLA remove one less person to oppress and drain their budget. The larger the ranks of the opposition, the bigger the problem for the PRC.

If an authority is doing something bad enough for a protestor to kill themselves, they should be killing the authority instead. The amount of ideological indoctrination required is massive, to inspire a suicidal protest by a wealthy, “minority,” well-educated leftist surrounded by people who agree with his politics.

If they can’t justify a war, then they need to act with rational, peaceful, and intelligent civics. Passive resistance is an adult tantrum writ large. And how awful of the NewsGuard “trusted” websites to dishonor Gupta’s life by burying his story in obscurity and lead people to believe that he was crazy.

Arnav Gupta is no crazier than any soldier who thoroughly contemplated civic values, and risked their life to advance them. I only wish he understood warfare and civics as well as our military officers. He may have then understood the futility and ignorance of his plan. May he rest in peace and inspire others to pursue constructive civic engagement rather than performance art, propaganda, and emotive manipulation.

The White Nationalist Diversion Pt 2: Fascist Falsehoods

What’s worse? The name “fascism,” or the features it brings to society? What if citizens supported those features without naming them “fascist?” Why didn’t our educators teach the truth about fascism?

It boils my blood every time I think of the fact that our compulsory public school system burns up $200,000 tax dollars per student for K-12 education. That “education” is comprised of:

  • One part social engineering
  • One part rote skills required for the mundane and menial tasks of an institutional functionary
  • One part absolute ignorance masked as knowledge

To be fair to America, the mindless functionaries of foreign nations who bend their knees to institutions, status, and credentials are not any better. Since their markets produce only a fraction of the innovation and authenticity as America, we can’t put credence in their U.N. Certified superior test scores.

Across global education, one major item of this absolute ignorance is the caricature of fascism. Here are the misleading half-truths they teach about fascism:

Fascism is hyper-nationalistic. This is true, but not unique to fascism. While socialists claim “international devotion” in idiotically propagandistic phrases like “workers of the world unite,” and “the global village,” the best way to determine whether or not a nation is hyper-nationalistic is by how much they actually cooperate with other nations through aid and trade. That includes the trade of citizens and visitors as well as commerce.

How much international aid have the communist North Koreans, Chinese, and Venezuelans provided to the world during crises? How much aid did the communist soviets provide? The theocracy of Iran? Saudi Arabia? How many desperate people have Latin American nations dumped onto US social insurance and public services? How many wars have African, Asian, and Latin American nations fought to secure liberty and prosperity for allied foreigners?

These social democracies, theocracies, communist nations, and monarchies might hurl podium bravado about how internationally-minded they are, but when their self-interest and failure to do much of anything for other nations is considered, they are hyper-nationalistic.

The pageantry of Fascism is certainly hyper-nationalistic, but its net effect in international exchange is not much different than more than half of the planet which does not describe itself as fascist. Mindless “educated” functionaries can’t tell the difference between podium propaganda and ground truth.

Fascism has an extreme level of authoritarianism. This is true, but not unique to fascism. Communism, monarchy, theocracy, indebted social democracies with large governments, and Jacobin “democratic states,” share this feature.

In the authoritarian state:

  • Civic proposals do not get fair and honest consideration by the public. They constrain political pluralism
  • Political power relies upon appeals to emotion
  • “Enemies of the people” are scapegoated for national strife
  • Social mobility is limited by political affiliation and connections
  • Laws enter every sphere of life and executive power is immense

All of the other forms of governance listed above, including social democracies, share these features. Even scholars at Stanford’s Hoover Institution have argued to dispose of the “checks and balances” that have constrained centralized power in the USA:

But the fascist is beyond authoritarian. They are totalitarians. The totalitarian is not satisfied with acquiescence to authoritarian standards. In addition, they require that citizens affirm specific ideas as well, so thought control and thought crimes are added to the authoritarian program.

With Human Resource departments in corporations and job recruiters building blacklists, universities punishing students and professors for speech, social media de-platforming and censorship, people jailed and fined for “hate speech,” and carbon-copy news reports propagandized in unison by NewsGuard “trusted” websites, the social democracies share totalitarian standards with fascists. The only difference is the level of control.

Fascist economy is corporatism. The fact that there are corporations does not make a nation “corporatist.” Corporatism is function-segregated industrial organization that is hierarchically controlled by “experts,” such as the CDC, the American Medical Association, the U.N. WHO, government departments, and unions.

Democratic socialists, union socialism (syndicalism), monarchies, theocracies, and communists have employed the corporatist model.

The promise of corporatism was for industrial self-governance. The reality is that regulations, union lobbying, and tax codes erode ownership and indirectly eradicate industrial self-governance. The social democracies can claim they are not socialist because “the government does not own the means of production.” This is a lie.

The government does not have to directly own the means of production to control it. They erode ownership with ten-thousand regulations, tax codes that favor some while punishing others, and union lobbyists buying laws that reduce competition.

At last count, and published in the book Economic Sovereignty, the US government imposes $2 trillion in regulatory costs upon its citizens, $6 trillion in federal, state, and local taxes, and spends $2 trillion per year on nonprofit civics. The USA is spending $10 trillion per year on civics, while its citizens combined barely make more than that amount for themselves in income.

The French call it dirigisme, and the Germans call it zwangswirtschaft (command economy). Economic command-and-control is a program of the democratic socialists, communists, fascists, monarchs, and theocrats. For citizens, it is economic bondage – serfdom. It is opposed by economic freedom – what I call Economic Sovereignty.

Placing a vapid label of “corporatism” on imagined economic freedom, and disparaging those who argue for economic freedom as “fascist” is one of the most banally ignorant items of propaganda in leftwing politics. The fascists hated capitalism as much as communists. They all co-opted the wealthy, pandered to the poor, and slaughtered the upper middle class (defined as vorardennes in Economic Sovereignty).

Along with this fictitious view of corporations, they paint pictures of “fat-cat” CEOs, greed, and wealth. In reality, those “fat-cats” were created by leftists. It is their program of economic command-and-control that builds oligopoly and eradicates competition.

If they read the history of fascism and communism, they would realize that the level of dirigisme in the USA would even make the fascists and communists jealous. From FDR’s New Deal to LBJ’s Great Society, the irrevocably unintelligent leftists complain about the product of their own policies.

Fascism brings militarism. And I suppose we should call “fascist,” the democratic socialists of Europe, for invading Libya under Samantha Powers’ U.N. doctrine of “responsibility to protect” (R2P)? Do the incessant socialist military parades in North Korea, Russia, and China indicate fascism as well?

Warfare emerges universally in democratic socialism, monarchy, theocracy, democratic republic, fascism, and communism. Economic and political freedom combined minimize the domestic incentives to instigate war.

There are martial ideologies that prevail in all of those forms of government. They impact the kind of warfare nations choose. That is an in-depth item which will be published in the next Alvarism book.

Much confusion about fascist militarism arose from ignorance of German history. They conflate the prevailing German martial ideology from Bismarck to Hitler, with fascism itself. A survey of the militarism across all forms of government, makes it an unremarkable feature of fascism. If most governments are doing it, it is not a special feature of fascism.

Fascism is hostile to liberalism and Marxism. This is superficially true. Pepsi and Coca-Cola battle each other mindlessly for market share as well, like an eternal Looney Tunes episode. They might change the symbols, the slogans, the brand, the surface rhetoric and claims, but honest people will admit – Pepsi and Coke taste almost the same.

Fascism is hostile to communism, because it emerged as an alternate form of socialism, as Hitler noted in the quote from Economic Sovereignty. The formula for fascism emerged from Marxism, and guild socialism. The fascists were all socialists when they formed their new brand.

It would be more accurate to say that fascism is fundamentally hostile to economic and political freedom, but only symbolically hostile to Marxism. The other forms of government mentioned share hostility towards economic and political freedom as well.

Fascist is “far-right wing.” This is a blatant lie created and perpetuated by leftists. Fascism is opposed to liberty, as much as social democracy, communism, monarchy, and theocracy. They have different methods of eroding freedom, but they do it all the same. This makes fascism “far-south wing,” along with those other forms of government.

Because fascism seeks to rapidly experiment on society with government action, it is left wing. Because fascism invokes heritage and pageantry of historical symbolism, it is right wing. In the synthesis of these two polarized drivers, fascism is enigmatically centrist. If you remember that one fact, you will understand why fascist authors constantly berate both left- and right-wing political parties.

In hysterical contradiction, the modern leftists call Trump “fascist” while calling themselves educated at the same time.

The Real Features of Fascism

While other forms of government share features espoused by the public school’s ignorant definition of fascism, what are the true indicators of fascism?

  • Workers’ Rights (syndicalism, unions, guild socialism), because fascism’s economic program involves domination of the economy by institutions, regulations, and unions
  • Anti-imperialism. Fascists seek liberation and subsequent autonomy of their ethnic brethren across the globe. Sound like leftwing anti-colonialists? It is. Sound like Palestinians? It is. Sound like Iranian theocracy? It is. Sound like most Islamic nations in the world? It is.
  • Environmentalism. Fascists claim that autonomy is only possible by preserving a synergy with their environment. The Nazi policies of environmentalism included blut und boden (blood and soil), Wandervogel, and lebensreform.
  • Responsible markets. By responsible, they mean zwangswirtschaft – command economy – highly regulated and centrally planned by the government and its delegates in industry.
  • Law and order, and addiction-free community. Crime, self-harm, and weakness have no place in the fascist society. The belief is that it is the duty of the government to stamp out every facet of criminal culture and self-harm. They use nonprofits, “help” groups, medical centers, and other state surrogates to insinuate the program of eradicating harmful existence throughout every community. In the extreme form, this created concentration camps, forced sterilization, abortion, and other eugenics implementations.
  • Ethnic autonomy and preservation of heritage and culture. The fascists respect other nations’ desire for cultural autonomy as much as their own. They do not believe in radical egalitarianism – that all people should have equal outcomes – and they do not believe that multiculturalism is beneficial. They believe their societies are best served by preservation of heritage. How many white people are in China? How do the Chinese treat internal disruptions to ethnic conformity? Ask the Falun Gong. How many Christian churches has the Chinese government demolished? The Chinese even invade American universities with espionage operations to coalesce ethnic enclaves internationally.

Fascism in the World Today

Fascism correctly describes the Nazis, the Italian Fascists, effectively the Japanese under Hirohito, and most Muslim nations of the modern era, including Saddam Hussein’s Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party and other pan-Arab movements inspired by men who fought alongside Nazis like Amin al-Husseini.

Russia has transformed into a neo-fascist state after perestroika, with the Eurasianist program and people like Aleksandr Dugin and Vladimir Putin leading the way. Russia’s annexation of Crimea was a pure fascist play – as they claimed “ethnic synergy with Russians rather than Ukrainians,” as the justification for “reuniting” Crimea with Russia. China is taking on more fascist features after the “Food is Heaven, State Capitalism” deception of the 1980s. They preach different rhetoric, which insults the intelligence of any citizen with a brain, but in reality, the Chinese have simply recalibrated policies of tyranny and control.

Whether, inspiring fear with class warfare, poverty hustling, hatred of the rich, racial paranoia, egalitarianism, or any other item of social division – the net result is high taxes, control, and erosion of economic, social, and political freedom.

Alvarism opposes all of these things. The best way to eradicate systems of tyranny is with virtue and knowledge. We inspire the confidence in economic, social, and political freedom that knowledge enables. The standard “education” on fascism is a key example of how misinformed people can perpetuate features of fascism because they’re lost in the wrong definitions and labels.

It’s pathetic that a nation which claims to be the land of liberty now spends $10 trillion per year on civics. This doesn’t make America much different from the other “democracies” across the globe. But remember – they’re all opposed to fascism, even though they share some of its key features.

Extra Credit

The following is an excerpt from an addendum in Ludwig von Mises authoritative book, Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis. The original work was published in 1922. If you want an accurate chronicle of fascism, this is the knowledge that will gratify you. After reading this article, you will see how relevant this history is to our present problems in global governance. Do we have new labels, new slogans, and symbols? Do they implement fascist policies under the name of democratic socialism and “democracy?” In conclusion:

“It may happen that Fascism will be resurrected under a new label and with new slogans and symbols. But if this happens, the consequences will be detrimental. For Fascism is not as the Fascists trumpeted a ‘new way to life’; it is a rather old way towards destruction and death.”

From Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis

“Syndicalism is nothing else but the French word for trade unionism. The glorification of violence which characterizes the policy of Russian Sovietism, of Italian Fascism and of German Nazism, and which today seriously threatens all democratic governments, sprang from the teachings of revolutionary syndicalists. The essence of the trade union problem is the compulsion to coalesce and to strike.

lt is important to realize that Fascism and Nazism were socialist dictatorships. The communists, both the registered members of the communist parties and the fellow-travellers, stigmatize Fascism and Nazism as the highest and last and most depraved stage of capitalism. This is in perfect agreement with their habit of calling every party which does not unconditionally surrender to the dictates of Moscow – even the German Social Democrats, the classical party of Marx­ism – hirelings of capitalism.

lt is of much greater consequence that the communists have suc­ceeded in changing the semantic connotation of the term Fascism. Fascism, as will be shown later, was a variety of Italian socialism. lt was adjusted to the particular conditions of the masses in over­-populated Italy. lt was not a product of Mussolini’s mind and will survive the fall of Mussolini.

The foreign policies of Fascism and Nazism, from their early beginnings, were rather opposed to one another. The fact that the Nazis and the Fascists closely cooperated after the Ethiopian war, and were allies in the second World War, did not eradicate the differences between these two tenets any more than did the alliance between Russia and the United States eradicate the differences between Sovietism and the American economic system.

Fascism and Nazism were both committed to the Soviet principle of dictatorship and violent oppression of dissenters. If one wants to assign Fascism and Nazism to the same class of political systems, one must call this class dictatorial regime and one must not neglect to assign the Soviets to the same class.

Dictatorship and violent oppression of all dissenters are today exclusively socialist institutions. This becomes clear as we take a closer look at Fascism and Nazism.

When the war broke out in 1914, the ltalian socialist party was divided as to the policy to be adopted. One group clung to the rigid principles of Marxism. The second group was deeply affected by the traditional hatred of Austria. In their opinion the first task of the Italians was to free their unredeemed brethren. Only then would the day of the socialist revolution appear. When the war came to an end, Mussolini’s popularity dwindled.

The communists, swept into popularity by events in Russia, carried on. But the great communist venture, the occupation of the factories in 1920, ended in complete failure, and the disappointed masses remembered the former leader of the socialist party. They flocked to Mussolini’s new party, the Fascists.

The youth greeted with tur­bulent enthusiasm the self-styled successor of the Caesars. Mussolini boasted in later years that he had saved Italy from the danger of communism. His foes passionately disputed his claims. Communism, they say, was no longer a real factor in Italy when Mussolini seized power. The truth is that the frustration of communism swelled the ranks of the Fascists and made it possible for them to destroy all other parties. The overwhelming victory of the Fascists was not the cause, but the consequence, of the communist fiasco.

The programme of the Fascists, as drafted in 1919, was vehemently anti-capitalistic. The most radical New Dealers and even com­munists could agree with it.

Fascist economic policy did not – at the beginning – essentially differ from those of all other Western nations. lt was a policy of interventionism. As the years went on, it more and more approached the Nazi pattern of socialism. When Italy, after the defeat of France, entered the second World War, its economy was by and large already shaped according to the Nazi pattern. The main difference was that the Fascists were less efficient and even more corrupt than the Nazis.

lt was almost forgotten when the Fascists attached to it a new label, and flamboyantly proclaimed corporativism as the new social panacea. The public inside and out­ side of Italy was captivated. Innumerable books, pamphlets and articles were written in praise of the stato corporativo. The govern­ ments of Austria and Portugal very soon declared that they were committed to the noble principles of corporativism. The papal encyclical Quadragesimo Anno (1931) contained some paragraphs which could be interpreted – but need not be – as an approval of corporativism. In France its ideas found many eloquent supporters.

It was mere idle talk. Never did the Fascists make any attempt to realize the corporativist programme, industrial self-government. They changed the name of the chambers of commerce into corpora­tive councils. They called corporazione the compulsory organizations of the various branches of industry which were the administrative units for the execution of the German pattern of socialism they had adopted.

But there was no question of the corporazione’s self-govern­ment. The Fascist cabinet did not tolerate anybody’s interference with its absolute authoritarian control of production. All the plans for the establishment of the corporative system remained a dead letter.

Fascism was not, as its advocates boasted, an original product of the Italian mind. It began with a split in the ranks of Marxian socialism, which certainly was an imported doctrine. Its economic programme was borrowed from German non-Marxian socialism and its aggressiveness was likewise copied from Germans, the All-deutsche or Pan-German forerunners of the Nazis. Its conduct of government affairs was a replica of Lenin’s dictatorship.

Corporativism, its much advertised ideological adornment, was of British origin. The only home-grown ingredient of Fascism was the theatrical style of its processions, shows and festivals.

The shortlived Fascist episode ended in blood, misery and igno­miny. But the forces which generated Fascism are not dead. Fana­tical nationalism is a feature common to all present-day Italians. The communists are certainly not prepared to renounce their principle of dictatorial oppression of all dissenters. Neither do the Catholic parties advocate freedom of thought, of the press or of religion. There are in Italy only very few people indeed who com­prehend that the indispensable prerequisite of democracy and the rights of men is economic freedom.

It may happen that Fascism will be resurrected under a new label and with new slogans and symbols. But if this happens, the consequences will be detrimental. For Fascism is not as the Fascists trumpeted a ‘new way to life’; it is a rather old way towards destruction and death.”

Ivy Lies: UK Male Professor Divines The Secret to Female Happiness

“Don’t get married, and don’t have children if you’re a woman who wants to be happy.” That is the latest volley in sexual culture wars circulating the “trusted” NewsGuard-verified websites. It started with a New York Times article that promulgated a study showing conservative religious wives are the happiest of all spouses. The global left immediately reacted in peak cognitive dissonance. Unfortunately for them, the study was thorough and methodical.

But what visions would make the global left react so acutely? In leftwing sociopolitical culture:

  • Large families are shameful because they are destroying the environment
  • A religious male patriarchy oppressed women for time immemorial
  • Promiscuity is a positive form of “liberation” (i.e. slut walk, “sex-positive” academic invocations)
  • Suburban traditional family life is stifling, hypocritical, miserable, and boring (i.e. dark suburban drama and related genres of movies)

A person who accepts these visions as true, would certainly be perturbed by a study that shows conservative religious wives to be the happiest.

And what did the leftists do in response to such cognitive dissonance? Did they exhibit that incredible open-mindedness they advertise as a feature of the left? Or perhaps they showed respect for “science” and analytical results, that they proclaim as an advantage of leftist politics?


Their reaction was to kick and scream emotively and fish for contradictions. It only took one week for the “trusted” websites to dig up a counter-narrative, using an unjustified professor to feed their confirmation bias. And boy, did the leftists suck his Ivy Lie through a straw.

In typical propagandistic modus operandi, carbon-copy articles across “trusted” websites popped up in unison: The Guardian, The Independent, MSN, Daily Express, Metro, Whimn, Harper’s Bazaar, Yahoo, and The Telegraph to name a few.

The premise, espousing the feminist visions listed above, asserts:

“We may have suspected it already, but now the science backs it up: unmarried and childless women are the happiest subgroup in the population. And they are more likely to live longer than their married and child-rearing peers, according to a leading expert in happiness.”

That “expert” is Paul Dolan. It’s always amusing when people invoke “science” like “god,” when their disrespect for the empirical does not even inspire them to review the evidence. By “the science,” of course, the high-IQ journalists, mean to exclude the thorough study demonstrating the happiness of conservative religious wives, while supplanting it with Paul Dolan’s bogus “science.”

It is worthy to note that Paul Dolan is a Head of Department and Professor of Behavioral Science at the London School of Economics and Political Science. He had a Nobel Prize winner author the foreword to his book on happiness economics. Also, as a man who has devoted his life to studying humanity, he claims that he has never read a novel.

Of course, for those of us who have actually studied culture for purposes that make or break major human endeavors – we would find Paul Dolan’s willing ignorance of literature to be monumentally foolish. The story, as a category, is a major element of culture. There are aspects of our humanity that are best understood through our creation and consumption of fiction.

If I was assigned to develop a new corporate or institutional culture, I’d have to write a story about the founders and the history of the institution, and all of the people it has impacted over the years. Stories, stories, and more stories! Some are true, some are embellished, and some are outright fiction (we use advertisers and marketers for the fictional stories). There is more truth in a classic novel than there is in many biographies of politicians and celebrities.

But Paul Dolan knows better than us all, doesn’t he?

Probably not. His analytical methods are as defunct as his cultural understanding. He refers to the ATUS data to assert that never-married women without children are the happiest. The Well-Being module in the ATUS is a banal questionnaire, which asks respondents to list what activities they did yesterday. Then they are to choose a number between 0 and 6 to indicate how happy they were during that activity. Examples include “driving home from work,” and “watching TV.”

If you’re Paul Dolan, you would add up the happiness scores of people based on marital and parental status, and gender, and then make unjustified claims to feed the confirmation bias of childfree culture.

If you’re an honest and intelligent analyst, you’d never dream of creating such a lie. How many of those women are using alcohol or psychiatric medicine for artificial happiness? Around 26% of adult women take happy pills. The same report points to studies showing a surge in alcohol escapism. A person who is genuinely happy with their life is not using chemicals to manufacture happiness.

Psychiatric condition is not the only problem with Paul Dolan’s use of the ATUS. What is the average age people get married? Are young adults living on credit, parents, hope, and new experiences happier than middle age adults who are paying their debts, struggling with health problems, losing their prime, and facing the limitations of their lives?

Which of the two age groups are likely to be married and childfree? Is a childfree 19-year-old watching TV happier than a 52-year-old with child and spouse, who has seen it all before? That is the kind of question the ATUS presents. The 52-year-old with spouse and child is not as likely to answer “six” on happiness to the same question. The 19-year-old may very well be much less happy when they turn 52, with no children, and no spouse. So Dolan’s “study” confuses happiness from age with happiness from being childfree.

Correlation is not causation. Isn’t that the first lesson they drive into our heads in sociology 101? Why did Paul Dolan miss that lesson?

At any rate, these age and psychiatric distinctions are just a few of many that make Paul Dolan’s chosen dataset useless to support his claims. Perhaps if he read some novels, he might understand humanity enough to discern such nuance in his behavioral science? We can’t have science without accurate observation.

Truth be told, I have no vested interest at all in answering the questions of these researchers. While the study that showed conservative religious wives to be the happiest was meticulous and thorough, and Paul Dolan’s use of the ATUS was completely bogus, “happiness economics” is a very dangerous field of scientism (analytical inquiry that claims scientific authority, but deserves none).

In the book Economic Sovereignty, I showed why we should be highly skeptical of “quantified intangibles.” At best, surveys of collective happiness can measure how relatively placated populations are at a particular moment. Being placated is not genuine happiness. An impoverished child with a lollipop is the happiest person on the planet. The sadistic serial killer who stalks right next to him, is just as gleeful about the person they killed moments ago. Values, visions, happenchance, and patterns of behavior combine to produce emotional disposition. That formula varies from person-to-person infinitely.

A person can say they were happy at a moment, during an activity, but emotions are fleeting, and often the cause of a mood is not articulated even to ourselves. Can you remember times when you had a positive or negative mood, and you couldn’t quite put your finger on the reason? Happiness economics eternalizes this confusion by associating myriad demographic factors, and activities which may have little to do with our temporal happy feeling.

Students of Alvarism are already thinking critically about quantifying intangibles, thanks to Economic Sovereignty. I hope that students of Alvarism correct these massively failed “thought leaders.” Their falsehoods are leading to very wasteful and destructive public policies and trends in society. Politicians are using the bogus studies to make laws, and institutions use them for labor management. Europe, New Zealand, and China are just a few regions using this harmful scientism to poorly govern, and corrupt labor markets.

Unlike Paul Dolan, I have read countless novels in my life. They reflect my real experience with people: I am always amazed at what pleases and displeases every individual. The fluctuation of emotional states and motivations of people are as unpredictable and prone to adaptation as the most limber gymnast. I allow them this liberty by refusing to atomize their emotional dispositions, as if people’s feelings are some kind of equation to be formulated.

Yes we can learn from tradition and history what is harmful or helpful in very specific terms, with social norms. When we broadstroke those norms with demographics and legal status, we’re guaranteed to violate sociology 101, confusing correlation with causation.

It is utterly irresponsible to tell people of all sorts of capabilities, interests, virtues, and defects, that a very specific lifestyle is necessarily the singular ticket to happiness. The more vulnerable amongst us would use such scientism poorly, interrupt their own self-knowledge, and get thrown off-track by the Ivy Lie.

I’m sure there are some wine-guzzling childfree, never-married women who are artificially happy because of their constant escapism and chemical dependency. I’m sure there are some genuinely happy childfree elder women – I have met some nuns of the Catholic Church who fit that description.

I’m also sure there are masses of miserable conservative wives with children. They might be miserable because of a debilitating health condition. They might be miserable because their child was crippled by drug cartel criminal assaults. They might be miserable because obesity restricts their normal activities.

Whatever their cause of happiness or misery, it would take a very arrogant, unjustified, and unintelligent “trusted” professor to assert that cause with any amount of certainty, much less reduce it to their parental or marital status. Some approximations are thorough and meticulous, though still problematic, such as the study on religious families. Others are outright misleading, such as Paul Dolan’s molestation of the ATUS well-being survey.

That is “happiness economics.” Global news consumers certainly obtained the confirmation bias they sought, during this latest round of sexual culture wars.

Between the “prestige” of Ivy League universities and NewsGuard “trusted” websites, more people will be taking Denzel Washington’s disposition when they encounter journalists and professors:

Censored: Islamist Assault in Peaceful UK Neighborhood

Add the BBC, Independent, Guardian, and CNN to your list of questionable news sources, if you didn’t already approach those sites with skepticism.

Here’s a very basic lesson for the influential journalists working for Facebook, Google, and Microsoft NewsGuard “trusted” news publishers:

The guys who cover their faces in mob action are the violent criminals.

They usually are seen attacking people whose faces are not covered – people who have no reason to hide their faces. These failed journalists could have learned this lesson while they were watching cartoons as children.

They reviewed the video evidence, yet reported wild lies aimed at deterring votes for Tommy Robinson. They insinuated that the violence was equally instigated by “far-right” Tommy Robinson. They accused Tommy Robinson of instigating division and conflict. I’m sure Robinson’s supporters believe they are responding to the chaos that Islamist groups instigate. The failed jouranlists say the police quickly defused the conflict.

The video shows officers doing very little, and arresting nobody, as violent masked Muslims hurl bottles, rocks, and bricks at people right in front of the officers.

The video shows this violent mob of 200 to 300 masked Muslims marching for miles, escorted by police, to a Tommy Robinson political campaign speech. To be fair to the police, such escorts are potentially infiltration to guide the mob towards barricades, and also listen for violent intentions.

The video shows the Muslim mob chanting the refrain “Allahu akbar,” “racist scum,” “Nazi scum,” “You’re old men [police], we laugh at you,” and “no one disses our religion.”

No Quarter for Weak Victim-Speak

The Muslim Defense League organized the mob. Their hatred and violence is not censored by Facebook and the other Democrat-biased technocrats. As for the slogans of this mob – rational citizens give no quarter to their weak victim-speak.

First of all, nobody can be racist against Muslims. Islam is not a race, it is a religion. There are black, brown, and white Muslims. The US government considers Arabs (mostly Muslim) to be white, in their statistical demography. So when an Arab Muslim stabs his sister in an honor killing for dating the guy she likes, the US government logs a white guy as a murderer in their statistics. There is no option for “Muslim” race.

A person can be critical of Islam. They can be disgusted by trends and norms in Islamic communities. They cannot be racist against Muslims any more than they can be racist against Christians. The Islamist demagogues should invest in dictionaries…and cognitive enhancement supplements.

Secondly, if Allah was so great, why would his devotees cover their faces like cowards while they inflict potentially lethal injuries upon children? The video made it clear that the mob was intent on disruption, violence, and nefarious action. It showed who was throwing the rocks, bricks, and bottles – not surprisingly, the Muslims who covered their faces in cowardice.

The MDL should ask their inadequate and dishonorable devotees to unmask themselves and take responsibility for their actions to show that “Allah is great” if they have nothing to fear. Hiding behind masks gives the message that Allah is weak and pathetic – a god with followers who will not even take responsibility for whatever they choose.

Calling Robinson’s group “Nazi scum” was particularly amusing, considering that the ethno-nationalist pan-Arab movements that created the nations of origin for these Muslims, were the ones who actually collaborated with Hitler during WW2. Insulting elderly police officers who are brave enough to confront violent mobs is also a bit amusing. These masked Islamist cowards will not have a fraction of that bravery ever in their lives, let alone in their twilight years.

Lastly, everyone can disrespect Islam, and they should if they feel compelled. Welcome to liberty, Muslims! People of all faiths have their beliefs challenged by every manner of insult and critique – Christians and atheists included.

If “Allah is great,” then Muslims would accept the criticism, respond to it with facts and logic, and denounce those who misrepresent their faith and culture, while making themselves living examples to the contrary. Every time Muslims respond to perceived insults with violence and destruction, they prove their critics right.

Journalism or Propaganda?

After reviewing the video footage, the lies of “trusted” news media are as apparent as they are sickening. InfoWars, the censored network, at least provided the raw footage of the event, uncensored. If you can entertain some prophetic hyperbole, it was the most comprehensive report on the event.

The Independent has since updated its article to remove the biased satire captured in the InfoWars video. It still leaves an ambiguous description, which makes Tommy Robinson’s supporters seem as culpable as the masked mob of Islamic instigators. Like the other deceptive reports, it quotes politicians who pander to Islamist violence, while not quoting anything positive from Robinson himself.

The Daily Mail reported bottle projectiles from the Tommy Robinson side of the conflict. After reviewing propaganda online from MDL-advocates, I counted three items – two cans and a bottle from Robinson’s side. That was a pittance compared to the dozens of volleys from the Islamists. Then again, the Islamists came masked and determined to do violence, so it’s not surprising that in the heat of being assaulted, Robinson’s supporters returned a negligible volley.

The Muslim Defense League deleted its own video off of Facebook. That is yet another indicator that the mob they instigated did not have the positive propagandistic impact for which they had hoped.

CNN, The Guardian, and the BBC reported the fictitious narrative in an equally ambiguous and deceptive manner. A person who saw the video would ask, “why are the cops only now pursuing arrests, when they had the Muslim suspects right in front of them, red-handed, throwing lethal objects?”

Perhaps the reason is because the courts are releasing convicted violent Islamists with no punishment, so arrests of violent Islamist mob activists are superfluous in the UK. The judge claimed that an old Muslim with the vibrant health to assault a police officer, does not have the health to be imprisoned, or even punished in any way at all.

Jihad Watch provided further perspective from the ground reports.

Pretty soon, we might be using “NewsGuard” and its elitist “trusted” news media as an indicator of what is not true. They report it? We suspect the opposite. We’ve already been using movie critics as inverse indicators for years.

Alabama Bans Abortion: August Caesar Also Threw the Baby Out with the Bath Water

I have a bust of Augustus Caesar in my office. It’s not because I want to emulate him. It’s because he is a reminder of the limitations of power even with all of the wealth and lethal command in the world. As the first Keynesian, he is a reminder of the tyranny and failure of economic central planning, which modern day dirigistes are too corrupt and/or unintelligent to acknowledge.

While the statement “you can’t legislate morality” is an oversimplified falsehood that fails to appreciate the intersection of laws and morals, the truth is that law cannot quickly overturn prevailing morals without great social upheaval. Augustus Caesar is a reminder of the futility of such aggressive moral imposition with state power.

In my personal life, he is an image of the pathetic futility of democrats, leftists, and socialists who have dominated my life since childhood, preaching their values and visions of society in school, on television, in the governance halls of the progressive metropolis, and on the news.

He is also an image of the foolish futility of Catholic priests who have dominated my religious life since childhood, thinking that their seven-minute homilies, and brochures-for-adults can effectively persuade fully-matured thieves, harlots, adulterers, drunkards, profligates, and sloths to become more like Christ.

Our core belief systems and values are formed powerfully in childhood by our parents, teachers, entertainers, and churches. I enjoyed a scholarly and tradition-intact Catholic Church teaching experience in childhood. I owe nearly half of my moral foundation to that blessing. But adult experience in the church is maintenance – not reformative or formitive. Augustus Caesar’s rejuvenation of the Roman State Church would not appreciate this anthropological fact. The concepts of moral formation apply to other religions, and irreligious substitutions (i.e. Secular Humanism), as much as Catholicism.

And so Augustus Caesar sits in my office as a constant reminder of what not to do with power – intellectual, relational (reputation/fame), psychological, and martial.

Like Caesar, we will turn to dust, and if we are as foolish as he was, our lives will be futile instead of enduring. We will lament the old woman, who looks upon the corrupt children she raised, lying to herself in pure delusion. She spends her last days denying what she once knew as eternal and true, just so that she does not have to scream herself to sleep every night.

In rare moments of honesty, she will ask herself, “Where did I go wrong? How are my children so corrupt, dishonest, ignorant, trivial, immoral, and inconsequential to the world I leave behind? Why are they destroyers of prosperity and continuity? Why do they consume more than they produce?”

Many-a-Roman was cursed with this terrible consequence of their failures at the end of the Roman Empire. I wonder sometimes if Augustus Caesar was prescient enough to understand his folly, or if he died in delusion like so many “hope-filled,” “positive,” neurotic, and manic “globally-minded” citizens in the modern day.

Ancient Rome has much to teach the Republicans in Alabama. Their recent Alabama abortion ban is a terrible thing for pro-life citizens, and a gift to pro-choice citizens. To understand this counterintuitive impact, we must appreciate the censorship employed by terrified elites in Hollywood, the judiciary, Silicon Valley, and academia. We must also consider public opinion on abortion, and the history of using centralized power for moral imposition.

Pro-Abortion Elites are Terrified and Dishonest

A person who is confident in their position fears no opposition. They state the facts, and they welcome honest criticism that is void of dysfunctional argumentation such as ad-hominem, name-calling, arguing “tone,” fallacies, and propaganda techniques:

A person who is terrified and dishonest uses these dysfunctional arguments. They also use propaganda techniques, fallacies, and emotive language backed up by no hard evidence and no logic. They silence, censor, disinvite, deplatform, intimidate, and ostracize those who contradict them. They care more about spreading their agenda than what is true.

These basic inferences indicate that pro-choice, pro-abortion elites are terrified and dishonest.

Even the most liberal democrats in our universities do not honestly support unregulated abortion. I say “honestly” because if they were not lying to themselves, they would actually encourage the scientific and medical exposure of abortion, which they have suppressed like Goebbels whitewashed Nazi concentration camps. They silence speakers who share the medical science of abortion. They disinvite speakers from campus for sharing abortion science.

Which journalistic outfits show the reality of abortion from a medical and scientific perspective? Which documentarians do so on educational TV? The Washington Post considers whether it is rude to share such realities. Why do journalists operate nearly entirely on euphemisms with no medical or scientific images and descriptors?

Why did the Supreme Court justify censorship of science? Some people are baffled that the Supreme Court tacitly upheld laws banning scientific truth of abortion. I am not baffled. The lying elites of mob-rule ochlocracy do not want free speech and proliferation of hard evidence. They like people to remain ignorant and emotive, with no knowledge, and inaccurate understanding of the world in which they live. One look at a social media comment feed, twitter, and instagram, is all that is required to understand that we live in ochlocracy.

Universities, journalists, and the judiciary are not alone in their terrified dishonesty about abortion – entertainers lead the way. The most liberal democrats in Hollywood do not honestly support abortion. Their delusion is so powerful that they even tried to stomp out a movie exposing an abortion slaughterhouse that We The People employed FBI and criminal courts to rectify:

And lastly, the most liberal democrats in the humanities-deprived Silicon Valley do not honestly support abortion. They are so terrified of reality that Twitter went full-totalitarian censorship on Unplanned – a movie about the hardships that abortion workers encounter. Google’s “machine learning” artificial intelligence must have been learning from pro-abortion activists, because it treated Unplanned like the Nazi flick Triumph of the Will – rote propaganda. I wonder why their artificial intelligence does not flag interpersonal stories of feminism and black civil rights history as “propaganda.”

Unfortunately for the Stalin-emulating technocrats, Unplanned succeeded despite their attempts to destroy it.

Meanwhile, people like Ben Shapiro are having none of the dishonesty:

Laws that are not reflected by the values of the populace do not stand

When the elites who promote abortion are so terrified and dishonest, why do Republicans pass laws that have no chance at succeeding? Conservative venue Breitbart indicates that the Republicans of Alabama realize that the law is not enforceable. They passed the bill in order to challenge Roe v. Wade.

But they have not learned from history.

Shortly after the golden age in Rome, social retrogression was acknowledged from patrician to plebe, from scholar to entertainer. One such entertainer was Petronius, a satirical “South Park” creator of his era. Victor Davis Hanson recently recalled modern American parallels:

“Petronius seems to mock the very world in which he indulged. His novel’s accepted norms [in Ancient Rome] are pornography, gratuitous violence, sexual promiscuity, transgenderism, delayed marriage, childlessness, fear of aging, homelessness, social climbing, ostentatious materialism, prolonged adolescence, and scamming and conning in lieu of working…Never in the history of civilization had a generation become so wealthy and leisured, so eager to gratify every conceivable appetite — and yet so bored and unhappy.

One online encyclopedia accurately describes Augustus Caesar’s moral reforms, but misleads the reader with its exclusions. In order for such sweeping moralizing laws to be inspired, Senātus Populusque Rōmānus must have already identified moral squalor that begs for correction. Based upon the social retrogression that Augustus Caesar left in his wake, chronicled by men like Petronius and hundreds more, his moralizing laws were abject failures.

Why are laws that tell people how to live so ineffective? In our day-to-day activities, civic power is an afterthought. The specter of punishment is ultimately dismissed because rational people realize that government enforcers are not omnipresent. Soft Power is what influences morals and behavior. This is why China, Russia, the EU, the USA, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Islamic autocrats of the modern day employ intelligence agency influence operations to sway hearts and minds.

Will somebody please teach these truths to pro-life Republicans? For those who claim command over tradition and history, such oversights are unforgivable. The application of soft power is not rocket science. It’s a very basic skill set, which is one part cerebral, one part heart, and one part empathy.

Because conservatives lack the empathy component, leftists have buried them in the dust using soft power in the culture wars.

The Abortion Ban Is a Gift to Pro-Choice, Pro-Abortion Advocates

This article does not intend on adjudicating abortion, and all perspectives on it. The fact is simple – American moral disposition towards abortion will not accept a total ban. They want abortion to be legal if:

  • The woman’s life is endangered (83%)
  • The woman was raped or abused by incest (77%)
  • The child would be deformed physically or mentally (49-67%)

Americans do not want abortion to be legal because the woman is inconvenienced and chose sexual activities she regrets (only 45% of voters support abortion for any reason).

The consequence of imposing moralizing laws on a populace whose values and visions do not align is that the laws will not succeed. Black markets will arise. Unqualified politicians will get elected simply by promising to overturn the law that most people do not want. The elected official who promises to overturn the abortion ban will enact many laws outside of the issue of abortion.

In that way, unintended harm in many areas besides abortion will emerge – national security, criminal justice, economics, taxation, research and development. Should I mention again that the abortion law itself will not prevail in the long term?

Republicans have a chance at passing a law that permits abortion when women’s lives are in jeopardy, when they are raped, or victims of incest, and when the child is deformed. If they understood soft power, they would use it to advance their moral causes (despite elite technocratic censorship of their soft power access), while aiming for laws that the voter will actually sustain.

Pregnancies from rape and incest are estimated at 1.5-3% of rapes, considering oral contraception ratios, along with the rape studies. That is around 800 – 1,600 pregnancies per year. If all of those pregnancies were aborted, it would rape/incest abortions would constitute 8 in 10,000 of the nearly one-million abortions per year.

If Republicans are willing to fail completely in order to insist that 8 in 10,000 abortions must be forbidden, they are not just in need of history lessons, but also lessons in kindergarten arithmetic.

Not only are they throwing the aborted baby out with the bath water, but Republicans who are willing to cede power over national security, criminal justice, economics, tax, and research, while temporarily restricting abortion, have forgotten the first rule of democratic republic – they are representatives, not kings. As much as they do not like it, they must respond to the sentiments of the citizens.

Here they stand, on the precipice of restricting 500,000 to 850,000 abortions per year, and they are going to throw it all away for a lack of compromise and wisdom. The folly will also lose ground in the culture wars, if Republicans truly wish to move the hearts and minds of Americans towards broader laws.

And so the centrist voters will see Republicans as extremists, and refrain from electing them. Perhaps I should gift busts of Augustus Caesar to the Republican officials I know, along with a copy of this article. When Dirty Harry said “a man’s gotta know his limitations,” it applied equally to his personhood and profession. Will politicians of both parties learn the limitations of legislation in the real world, rather than the limitless visions they write on paper and imagine in their heads?

The White Nationalism Diversion Pt 1: The Fiction Exposed

The current fixation on white nationalism is a deluded product of political opportunists and journalists with civil rights movies playing on repeat in their heads.

The white nationalist diversion is easily exposed with a simple question: what’s the body count?

We don’t accept speculation about ideas in a brooding kid’s head, or even a kid who punches a target in the face. Where terrorism is concerned – show us the blood or show yourself the door. While injuries and anger are useful to the criminologist, the body count indicates the real threat of terror groups, the measure of their lethality, and the item in which all doubt is removed as to their level of danger.

Terrorists motivated by white nationalism (or any white racist cause) have killed only 27 people in the USA since the Islamist terror attack of 9/11. I base this on the years 2001 through 2017, for which the available data is currently reliable. You must want to hide under your bed from the white nationalist terror threat, knowing that fact!

In the same duration, terrorists motivated by Islamic nationalism and anti-white causes have killed 134 people in the USA. Why do activists and journalists spread fear of white nationalism when it produced a body count that is only ~20% of Islamic and anti-white terrorism? Meanwhile, 720 people died from lightning strikes, and there were around 272,000 homicides at the hands of cold-blooded criminals.

Speaking of race and violence, blacks, native Americans, and Hispanics exceed whites as well. Based on murder arrests in 2013, black people were 730% more murderous than white people, while Native Americans were almost twice as murderous, and Hispanics were 30% more murderous than whites. Year after year, and by conviction as well as arrest data, similar racial ratios of violence occur. White people seem to be as ineffective at homicide as they are at terrorism.

Call me a numbers guy, but I’m about 27-times more fearful of getting electrocuted to death by a Zeus bolt from the sky, and about 10,074-times more fearful of getting shot by a criminal, as I am fearful of white nationalist terror. Except in the event of a lightning strike, my most effective insurance policy is the spectacularly accurate and lethal .45 caliber pistol depicted above.

While the racial fearmongers may lack the intelligence and knowledge to justify their beliefs with hard evidence, their fiction has destructive results.

Fear of effectively non-existent white nationalism feeds the power of identitarian manipulators in culture, business, and governance. It feeds overblown security budgets. The resultant anti-white racial paranoia also impacts social cohesion on an interpersonal level. It also produces the kind of fear about legal gun ownership that helps anti-self-defense activists who ultimately aim to repeal our constitutional right to defend ourselves with weapons.

In short, the pragmatic drivers of this fearmongering are:

  • Identity politics, fear-journalism, and diversity zealotry
  • Government employment largesse
  • Cultural segregation
  • Gun control

There are fascists across the globe. Nations in the present day employ some key aspects of fascism under the name of “democracy.” And the global ignorance of fascism was never more apparent than the international reaction to prolific Islamic violence and the few white nationalist anomalies we can count on one hand.

Understanding fascism is critical when celebrities, congressional hearings, and low IQ news shows incite fiction about white nationalism. There are fascist threats across the globe. How will a good citizen identify them if they’re cowering from imaginary enemies?

In the next article, we will explore the gory details about fascism that are extirpated from news media and public education, but cannot hide from the erudite scholar.

Angry Women: You Do Not Have Sexual Power Over Politics

On this Mother’s Day, I wrote a short and sentimental letter to some incredible mothers I have known. For those whose email addresses were not on hand, I will repeat it here:

Ladies of consummate devotion in Mother Mary’s example, 

I honor you today as I recall what special celebration I enjoyed with my mother each year on this day. Thank you for the joy to observe such inspirational motherhood; with your grace and love for your families, my hope for humanity is encouraged. The good you do for your families extends far beyond the walls of your home.


I then thought of a way I would have made my mother laugh if she were still with us. I would bring her bean sprouts and veggie bagels, and tell her “I want you to live a long and healthy life, so for Mother’s Day, I bring you the gift of optimal nutrition!”

She would have said something like, “You little bastard, where’s my real breakfast?”

We would laugh and I would take her to a place like The Blue Duck Tavern, which was her favorite Mother’s Day treat of all time, with wild mushrooms that she claimed were only matched by those her father picked freshly from the forest when she was a child.

Then my reflection upon these honorable women was once again shattered by the priestesses of cultural squalor from their unholy land of fiction-worship, Hollywood. They shrieked bravely from their smart phones, encouraging women to stop having sex until 3% of America (the state of Georgia) democratically passes abortion laws with which they agree.

While there are few things that could improve the gene pool more than women like Bette Middler and Alyssa Milano withholding their contribution to it, their stain on the dignity of women is an unhappy advent.

Social Conservatives Rejoice

People who use sex for ulterior motives, transactions, and power are sexually permissive. Social conservatives believe those behaviors create pervasive problems in communities. Consequently, sex strikes only affect people who should not be having sex anyway. Fewer sexually transmitted diseases, reduced social dysfunction, reduced perversion of romance, reduced objectification of men and women, less procreation by people who would be awful parents? The politically motivated sex strike is a massive score for those who accept nothing less than genuine love and romance.

A social conservative treats sex as subordinate to romance – a sacred devotion. If a lover told a social conservative, “I will not have sex with you because I want to coerce you to share my ulterior motive,” the social conservative would say, “if you are willing to use our love and devotion to each other for ulterior motives, you are then not worthy of my love and devotion, making a mockery of it and subordinating it to third party events. Goodbye.”

Collective Punishment Meets Armchair Altruism

The socialists made collective punishment infamous. Decimation in Rome was a tactic of intimidation for the survival of an empire in dark days. Socialists slaughtered entire communities with forced marches, racial shaming, class shaming, executions, slavery, struggle sessions, ridicule and ostracism for disagreeing with their politics.

While institutionalists in the USA do not currently have the power to enslave their opposition in “labor reeducation,” they use industrial power to crush careers and businesses of ideological opponents. They also indoctrinate children with some of the most wicked attitudes and values imaginable. They follow Karl Marx’s invocation, that truth does not matter – only defeating the opposition and striking them in discourse:

Its [criticism’s] essential feeling is indignation, its essential task denunciation… It is not a matter of knowing whether the opponent is a noble, equal-born, or interesting opponent; what matters is to strike him.

They think in abstractions of groups of people. To understand the psychology of the sex strike, a person must understand the collectivist visions of socialism. As Marx commanded their teachers’ ideology, the individuality and personal value of the people they engage is meaningless to them. They are the enlightened, and they must strike the “racists, misogynists, wealthy, Christians, conservatives, heterosexuals, cisgenders, teetotalers, and traditional family.”

Following the collective punishment mentality of the socialists, seeing only abstractions of people instead of their humanity – the sex strikers demand coercive punishment of all men, for laws that affect less than a fraction of a percent of Americans, who live far away from them in the state of Georgia.

Think about that for a moment. These wealthy and privileged women in Hollywood, who cannot even think critically, and lack the basic zeal and diligence to spend time thoroughly researching their interests, use their undeserved national platform to instigate collective punishment.

Imagine if a national masculinist movement stopped paying women’s bills (in aggregate, men still pay 3x as much as women). Is that female privilege? Is it a privilege for other people and the government to pay for most of your living expenses, considering feminists call it “male privilege” to choose dangerous and challenging jobs that make you drop dead ten years earlier, for higher pay? Is it “male privilege” to earn that extra pay from working longer hours as well? Was it “male privilege” for me to devote decades of my life encoding entire libraries of knowledge into my brain, while others socialized and enjoyed leisure?

How infinitesimally shall we atomize the advantages and disadvantages of male and female biology and consequent social roles? The masculinist movement would say that metropolitan women earn more money than men, and demand that they start using it for communal expenses in marriage and romance. That would be just as foolish as the sex strike for the Georgia heartbeat bill.

Women who have nothing to do with these conflicts of greed and charity would then be paying the price of their activist men’s angry and egotistical god-complex, where they punish people they know personally for political affairs in distant lands. Thus are these tyrannical Hollywood wenches. Courageous to a fault, they set up their political warfare command-and-control centers from their beach house armchairs as they suckle fruity cocktails.

If demographers were looking for depopulation and sub-fertility replacement rate contributors for white and Japanese people, a thorough inspection of how socialist ideology replaced traditional romance, which aims for value-exchange and quality delineation and deference, with sexual expression based upon power-exchange, egotism, and pragmatism.

Those who employ collective punishment in sexual relations can be assured that their attitudes and values towards sex were indoctrinated by the socialists. Remaking the human being was the dream of utopian socialists like Charles Fourier (the one who coined the term “feminism”), eugenicist progressives and guild socialists (fascists), transhumanists, and present-day institutionalists.

Sex Strikes Do Not Work

Despite their unjustified claims to the contrary, sex strikes are predictably ineffective. It has the opposite effect of the desired intimidation. The innocent victims of collective punishment eventually revolt and resent those who punished them for things out of their control. This is why in Ancient Rome, decimation was rarely practiced. Obliterating morale of the troops was not worth the deterring impact of the tyranny.

In an era where the most powerful transnational tech corporations implicitly censor knowledge with tyrannical products like “NewsGuard,” it is more important than ever for our readers to spread Alvarism as a basis for learning and analysis. A successful student of Alvarism would be able to instantly repudiate the claims of efficacious sex strikes.

Our rationalist perspective: sex strikes are collective punishment. Collective punishment is ineffective throughout history, for very logical reasons, already stated.

Our empirical perspective: sociology 101 indicates that correlation is not causation. Wouldn’t it be amazing if any of these “professional” frauds with useless graduate degrees actually employed the basic concepts they were taught during the most extravagantly costly and wasteful eight years of their lives at the university?

The AFP, a self-proclaimed “hard news” wire syndication service justified a claim that sex strikes are effective by citing an ancient fictitious comedy. Yes, “hard news” now cites fiction as evidence. Microsoft NewsGuard considers AFP “reliable.”

Wikipedia cites instances in Latin America involving warfare in which the sex strike began and the war ended four years later. In all of the cases they mention, they present no context for the conflict, nor additional motivators and factors. No empirical evidence is given as to the contributing impact of the sex strikes compared to all other factors involved. An uncritical reader would come to the conclusion that the sex strikes were effective in achieving their intentions. A thinking reader would toss the Wikipedia article into the trash. Microsoft NewsGuard considers Wikipedia so reliable that they collaborated with its founder.

Similarly in the case of the Georgia heartbeat abortion legislation, the sex strike activism is concurrent with business boycotts that threaten $2.7 billion and legions of jobs, political pressure, academic pressure, medical industry pressure, and nonprofit activism. Explain how an honest person would measure the efficacy of collective sex punishment by a handful of sexually corrupt women, compared with all of those other factors? My belief is in the economic, medical, and political pressure. Money talks, and sex with someone who uses you for ulterior motives is disposable.

Our perennial perspective: with the history of collective punishment proving counterproductive in the whole, we deem the sex strike to actually serve opposite outcomes to the intentions. Those Roman troops forced to participate in decimation lost morale and devotion to the empire. Those victims of socialist collective punishment became the most vociferous dissidents.

Microsoft NewsGuard, would you kindly employ human beings with functional literacy and critical brains to consider these methods of evaluation? Your thought control censorship service is looking like the king of unreliable sources at this point.

Abortion Advocates Engage the Futile Yet Again

The heartbeat bill is a futile endeavor to oppose, even with moronic activism like the sex strike. The heartbeat bill is, to abortion, what Democrats in blue states (New York) are doing to the right of self-defense. They want to force gun owners to buy million dollar liability insurance to subsidize consequences of criminals, and they want to make ammunition unaffordable.

Ultimately, these stopgap laws which seek to erode the scope of legally permitted activity, will be challenged at the bench. There is indication that the heartbeat bill could be deemed unconstitutional when judged against prevailing interpretations of Roe v. Wade.

That is the where the ultimate ruling will occur – in federal court. It would be honorable for the mob of activists to read this article, educate themselves, and redirect their energies towards admirable civic engagement. As it stands, they are making fools of themselves and misleading hordes of the most impressionable and vulnerable of our neighbors.

Social conservatives are rejoicing and laughing at the prospect of sexual utilitarians collectively punishing themselves in utter futility, but it is quite embarrassing for a dignified Constitutional Republic that spends over $1.5 trillion on education and training each year.

Unless we are talking about corrupt sexual utilitarians like Monica Lewinsky seducing king Democrat Bill Clinton, women do not have sexual power over politics.

Then again, the noble women I referred to in the beginning of the article expressed their sexuality romantically in a beautiful way. As mothers of good morals, wise tradition, and beautiful hearts, they have more power over politics in the upbringing of their children, than any promiscuous woman in heat. Those who claimed that “male patriarchy” has ever ruled the world are too stupid to even remember who it was putting every single idea in their head during their most impressionable years. We have Mother’s Day to remember and give thanks for the women who have always ruled the world through their children.