Differences

Why do American blacks, Hispanics, whites, yellows, and Jews today have such widely divergent social and economic statuses? Because they're widely divergent in their natures, nurtures, and free wills. Because they're widely divergent in their genetics, upbringings, and moral choices. However universally and fanatically virtually all "good" people today evade and deny these obvious truths, this is the cause of virtually all of today’s group disparities.

It is not due to "hidden", "secret", "institutional", "cultural", or "systemic" racism. Not unless you want to consider the past 60 years of mindless, soulless, social demonization and legal persecution fo whites, yellows, and Jews – which no-one does. But such abuse of truly good people, along with absurd Hispanic and black supremacism, directly and indirectly harms everyone.

Right-wing conservatives and left-wing progressives are both drop-dead convinced that they can advance the brotherhood of man and social harmony by lying thru their teeth. They've assiduously brainwashed themselves into this cockamamie theory. Conservatives and progressives see explicit and clear statements about human nature, nurture, and volition as the high road to societal disaster. They're terrorized by even tiny amounts of open discussion and honest debate about group differences, lest a bit of truth seep out, and society experience a new Firebombing of Dresden. Thus conservatives and progressives are militant advocates of cover-up and fraud on almost all aspects of race and ethnicity, especially the progressives.

Meanwhile, today's helpless, impotent, and pathetic Objectivists and libertarians virtually all claim that any discussion or debate of the relevant issues constitutes "collectivism", "tribalism", and "racism". Their intellectual cowardice and dishonesty are marvels to behold. Their stupidity and depravity defy description.

America today needs truth. But who has any to offer?

 

People

 

People are pathetic. Such liars and cowards. Such failures and losers. Such monsters and insects. Such absolute vermin.

Even mankind at its best isn't very impressive. Think of the Greeks.

Anaxagoras never admitted the obvious and crucial truth – that there's no such thing as "god". Socrates didn’t either. Nor did Aristotle.

And what did these powerful and wide-ranging intellectuals get for their likely efforts to give humanity hope? How did their cowardly evasions and slimy lies profit them? Anaxagoras was driven into exile. Socrates was executed. Aristotle fled into exile, lest he be executed too.

And how did this enormous fraud benefit the world? It didn’t. It made pretty much everyone smaller and weaker. It slowed progress and detoured the ascent of man.

Even at the end of their lives, when they had almost nothing left to lose, Anaxagoras, Socrates, and Aristotle evidently still didn't tell the truth. They didn't speak it aloud, nor put it in writing, nor arrange for it to be publicized after their deaths.

And think of the geniuses and heroes of the Enlightenment, two millennia later.

Bacon, Locke, and Smith were similar liars and cowards. So too Johnson, Burke, Voltaire, Diderot, Jefferson, and Madison. Even Darwin and Einstein.

But what of the Objectivists, the leading liberal philosophers of today?

Peikoff, Binswanger, Schwartz, and Brook are all cultists – advocates and practitioners of religiosity. As for their rivals – Kelley, Hicks, Salsman, and Tracinski – they militantly refuse to damn or fight these demons and destroyers. Rather than defeating the illiberals, they claim to "have better things to do."

People are pathetic. Such liars and cowards. Such failures and losers. Such monsters and insects. Such absolute vermin.

Beyond Good and Evil

 

In carefully reading the opening passages of Friedrich Nietzsche's signature book of ethics, Beyond Good and Evil (1886), I'm struck by how much it's rambling and incoherent. Nietzsche seems to be a poor thinker and writer. He wanders and stumbles all over the place, expressing himself in a kind of almost-random, childish babble. Or, at the least, he engages in a lot of deliberately opaque, self-indulgent abuse of the reader. Anyone who extensively reads his loose, confused, contradictory, foolish speculation possibly gets what he deserves.

The book starts off with: "The Will to Truth, which is to tempt us to many a hazardous enterprise, the famous Truthfulness of which all philosophers have hitherto spoken with respect, what questions has this Will to Truth not laid before us!" This ungrammatically takes us in at least four dubious directions at once. And the next sentences and paragraphs don't get any better.

Still, Nietzsche seems justified in showing contempt for almost all philosophers who came before him. He disdainfully refers to them as "metaphysicians" [sections 2 and 6] and says they insincerely, vainly pursue "a cold, pure, divinely indifferent dialectic". [5]  Nietzsche says "philosophers are insufficiently skeptical" [2], and are more engaged in "autobiography" [6] than a disinterested pursuit of the truth – even tho he sees truth-seeking as itself a dubious activity. [1]

Nietzsche seems to especially despise Immanuel Kant and Georg Hegel – the two most illiberal philosophers ever. He impugns the "Tartuffery" of Kant, the possibly nonexistent "antitheses" of Hegel, and even the "hocus-pocus" of Baruch Spinoza [5] – which all seems deserved. Nietzsche calls Kant’s categorical imperative "mislead[ing]" and says his "synthetic judgments a priori" are "the falsest opinions" of all. [4] He says Hegel is "worse than a fool". [2]

So Nietzsche does take down some bad guys! But does he replace their many false and evil ideas with some solidly true and good ones? Not really.

Nietzsche never even gets close to the philosophy of liberalism. His respect for and adherence to the basic concepts and ideals of reason, science, naturalism, objectivism, individualism, and self-interest are medium and inconsistent at best. To begin with, Nietzsche confidently and unthinkingly damns "selfishness" and "cupidity" repeatedly. [2]

Nietzsche says "I do not believe that an 'impulse to truth' is the father of philosophy". [6] Moreover, he claims no philosopher really has a "Will to Truth" and seeks it without prejudice. [5] He says most philosophy is based upon "instincts" and "physiological demands". [3] Nietzsche displays his own lack of "Will to Truth" by almost bragging that "The falseness of an opinion is not for [me] any objection to it," because far more important is whether that "opinion is life-furthering, life-preserving, species-preserving, perhaps species-rearing". [4] But this opposition of truth-seeking and flourishment-seeking is a serious philosophical error leading to pain and misery for individuals and society. People can't skip over the truth-seeking part of life, as Nietzsche claims, and substitute for it ignorance, uncertainty, and lies. [1]

When it comes to metaphysical reality, Nietzsche rejects "the purely IMAGINED world of the absolute and immutable" [4], which is his rather poor description of the whole universe. He calls reality "transitory, seductive, illusory, paltry." [2] Nietzsche wildly claims that "without a constant counterfeiting of the world...man could not live." [4] He admits that "Granted that we want the truth: [but] WHY NOT RATHER untruth? Uncertainty? Even ignorance?" [1] He even argues that "the renunciation of false opinion would be a renunciation of life, a negation of life." [4] Horrifyingly, Nietzsche wants us "TO RECOGNIZE UNTRUTH AS A CONDITION OF LIFE." [4]

Early on Nietzsche compliments himself on his intellectual bravery and admits that his philosophy rejects "the traditional ideas of value" and that any such "philosophy which ventures to do" this is "beyond good and evil." [4] But, in fact, any such irrational belief-system is merely false and evil – not above and beyond these concepts.

Nietzsche condemns philosophers in general, arguing "there is not enough honest dealing in them" [5] and notes "How malicious philosophers can be!" [7] and says their ideas really constitute the "masquerade of a sickly recluse". [5] But all of these descriptions apply to Nietzsche most of all.

It’s especially sad to read Nietzsche condemn the liberal philosopher Epicurus in favor of the illiberal Plato. [7] Epicurus evidently called Plato and the Platonists, "flatterers of Dionysius", which strikes me as quite insightful. But Nietzsche says Epicurus wrote his anti-Platonic material "perhaps out of rage and ambitious envy of Plato." [7] Nietzsche even insults Epicurus by calling him a "garden-god". [7]

In the end, Nietzsche seems way off in most of what he claims at the beginning of his book of ethics. He’s clearly massively illiberal. Still, Nietzsche and his book are famous and well-regarded, so they're possibly still worth reading; thus, I plan to check him out a bit more.

Twisted Morality

 

A false, evil, self-hating, self-destroying, moral code freezes you. It leaves you unable to defend yourself. It strips you of necessary sword and shield, and makes you helpless before your enemies.

Examples of this perversion and horror abound:

 * The Western nations today freely give almost infinite wealth and technology to the Communist and Moslem nations which seek to conquer, enslave, and destroy them. And these nations are getting rapidly closer to having such abilities.

 * Americans let Thirld World savages and enemies invade and "immigrate" in massive numbers, radically undermining the country.

 * Western and American white people let blacks heavily morally condemn them, and call them "systemically racist", even tho the blacks deserve the condemnation, and are the racists.

 * Westerners impotently let the enemy Moslems and Third Worlders "nationalize" their oil – a brazen and unprecedented theft worth trillions.

 * Europeans willingly let the enemy Russians have crucial energy domination and blackmail over them.

 * Westerners foolishly let the Chinese steal practically all of their intellectual property. They do business in China and willingly tranfer almost all of their priceless technological genius to these economic competitors and deadly political enemies.

 * The Western nations passively let evil China infect the world with Wu Flu, murdering millions and destroying trillions in wealth. All this is done virtually without condemnation or punishment.

 * American white people absurdly let blacks commit crime, go on welfare, contribute little in taxes, practice bigotry of all types, degrade the quality of life, and vote for tyranny – all essentially without criticism or deportation.

 * Jews, Orientals, and whites weakly let blacks and Hispanics replace them at elite universities almost without protest. They surrender many or most of the good jobs and promotions to them. They allow blacks to target them for crime and racist hatred with practically no moral condemnation or fighting back.

What self-hatred! What self-destruction! The supposedly good guys of today seemingly have no honor, pride, self-respect, or self-love.

So they pretty much deserve to suffer and die. Truly good people today positively root for the bad people to hurt the brainwashed and defenseless good ones. Their philosophy and approach is, and pretty much should be: "Kill 'em all! Until or unless they wake up, let 'em all perish!"

In life, self-esteem and proper morality aren’t optional. All the above self-haters deserve to be crushed!

TMJM

 

Rather than creating a society based upon the standards of DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion), and running companies based upon the standards of ESG (environmental, social, governance), we ought to adhere to the ideals of TMJM (talent, merit, justice, morality). Each person in a civilized, advanced nation who seeks to attend a college, or work for a company, should be treated as an individual, and examined on the basis of his relative level of talent and merit for the desired school or job. He should be judged based upon the objective standards of justice and morality.

No-one should be favored due to their race, gender, sexuality, or the like. Nor should anyone be discriminated against because of them. Nobody ought to be privileged because of their BIPOC or LGBTQIA status. Such bigotry directly damages and outrages society. But it indirectly harms even the persons who supposedly benefit, because they generally end up in a place they aren't qualified for and can't exploit.

The good and great should receive their proper rewards everywhere and always. This is how mankind progresses and ascends. The virtues of talent and merit should be treated as sacred. Absolute standards of justice and morality should obtain.

TMJM will yield individuals of magnificence and happiness, living in a society of harmony and nobility.

Philosophical Failure

 

It's a tremendous indictment of philosophy that it evidently can’t offer people the meaning, purpose, and satisfaction that they need. It seemingly can't supply them with the consolation, solace, and hope in life that they demand.

Clearly the various well-developed thought-systems of Democritus, Socrates, Aristotle, Epicurus, Zeno the Stoic, and their successors -- in at least some important senses -- have failed. The simple fact is: no-one wants to die. And no-one wants to think about that immense and terrible eventuality.

But it's the absolute job of philosophy to explain to us why it's going to happen; tell us what it means; and teach us how to deal effectively with this sheer horror and pure evil. But philosophy -- historically and currently -- seems to fail at this.

Hence people turn to "god". They knowingly believe a lie. They deliberately brainwash themselves with as much self-hypnosis, self-created mental fog, and relentless self-deception as is needed to embrace religion. They don't go beyond this, or reject reason entirely, because self-induced irrationality, ignorance, and foolishness is harmful in the short and long term.

But in order to mentally and psychologically escape death, people are willing to be dishonest, cowardly, and slimy. At least up to a certain point. After that, they become afraid, and draw back from the abyss.

But why is philosophy evidently so empty and incompetent that it forces people into such a god-awful choice?

This Book

 

This book reframes and redefines the battle between good and evil, truth and falsity, rationality and irrationality, civilization and barbarism. It does it so cleanly, cleverly, and perspicaciously that it makes this crucial war much easier to win.

Describing the fundamental worldwide battle as "liberalism vs. conservatism vs. progressivism" allows both the intellectuals and the masses to understand far better the nature of the current war in the West. It deals a telling blow to illiberal philosophy and puts the illiberals back on their heels.

Before, it was just a tiny, isolated group of oddball Objectivists against the whole world. And most of the best and strongest of them were a bunch of weird, idiosyncratic, malicious cultists. These mediocre liberals didn’t offer much in the way of virtue or vigor.

But now there are whole armies of intellectuals, organizations, and historical eras on the side of liberalism. All the good and great liberal thinkers and champions of Greece, Rome, the Renaissance, and the Enlightenment are now successfully recruited to the side of the good guys. And these highly effective intellectual and cultural warriors are ready, willing, and able to fight. Let the battle begin!

The conservo-progessive enemies and villains were vulnerable and weak all along. But now the philosophical smallness and helplessness of these insects and monsters is much more noticeable. This book discourages and dispirits the bad guys while empowering and energizing the good ones. The pivotable war for the soul and future of mankind is now much more winnable.