October Article

 

October Article

*

A reprint from issue number ten of my magazine ( subscription information at the end of this article ) from last Spring.

*

WOMEN FIGHTING

Today we talk about if women should be allowed to fight come the apocalypse. And yes, I phrased it that way to get you gals all fired up ( “I'm a strong independent woman!” ). Sue me, I'm easily amused slipping into the sacred cow stockade at night and spooking the bovines. And yes, I actually have a very good reason besides that to bring up the subject. It will take tactics and apply them to tribal structure and the necessity of redesigning culture to the historic norm, as a survival mechanism.

*

I've been looking forward for some time to writing this, as it is a challenge digging into this deeper than normal, and I also love starting each new issue off with a metaphorical bang. Plus, I woke up in the middle of last night to urinate and my brain suddenly started charting this article in intricate detail and I couldn't get back to sleep. I went to the dining room where we have a pretty strong night light ( so as to help in the kitchen and living room ) and wrote a bunch of quick notes, just so I could tell my brain to stop trying to remember its sudden brilliance and go back to sleep. And its been the only thing on my mind this morning.

*

First, of course, as if any sane person of sound mind would think differently, I must veer off into the weeds and discuss a seemingly unrelated topic which is actually pertinent. Which are popular culture movies. It has been said that movies reflect the culture of the time in which they were made. I only agree with this partially. Of COURSE a movie reflects its era, because unless you are tripping balls on LSD, everything that goes into the film is obviously going to reflect your current reality and perceptions. All your actors will, mostly, have current fashions, current slang, idioms, your views of normalcy and etcetera.

*

I think movies are more a reflection of current concerns, a celluloid version of a dream. Dreams are great, to deflect stress and model out concerns, as the human brain hates uncertainty above almost everything else. Dreams bring order and answer to worries and anxieties, and I think movies have a parallel function. Just like a song is a marker the brain uses to reflect upon an era, so too do movies reflect a solution to a conflict the brain needs resolved for survival/safe functioning. If you are brutally frank with yourself, you cherish, love, memorize and dwell on a LOT of music and movies that are by themselves not all that great.

*

The music/movie isn't the reason for the warm and fuzzy memories, it is just indicative of something else. With movies, I believe they are our Aesop's fable of the modern Oil Age. Movies are our problem solvers, just like our dreams. And I would think that, as well, movies are of a highly personal nature. You could rave about a movie, quote it, and all I really remember is, “sucky movie”. But it isn't about the quality of the film. It is about your individual brain. There was a stoner movie around fifteen years ago, maybe twenty, that a lot of folks raved about. I thought the acting was terrible and the script more laughable than the jokes ( was that the one with McConnahay doing his “all right, all right, all right”? ).

*

But most folks would say the same thing about the stoner movies I enjoyed ( well, the stand up routines more than the movies ) as a kid, Cheech & Chong. So, please bear with me as I bring up those movies that imprinted far more than normal with me. It is going to be a personalized selection, but you should be able to relate as I bring them up to make my point. With books, I don't think there is so much time or culture specificity. I think it would be hard to argue that the one best non-fiction book for collapse, ever, would be Catton's “Overshoot”. Even in apocalypse fiction, it is hard to beat the sixty something year old “No Blade Of Grass”.

*

But movies are subjective. Even if you can generalize some eras. I think most 90's on up movies are more corporate culture than anything else. The 70's and 80's mostly a Rage Against The Machine ( or, Betrayal Of The Machine ). And prior to that, I'd broadly categorize as “conflict FOR tribe”. By Corporate Culture I mean to a large degree Political Correctness, but you can't just label that “communism” and move on. I think it is more closely tied to One World US Led Government, which is globalism, on the economic side and Corporate/Imperial Apologist on the cultural or political side.

*

“Betrayal” would be my best guess label in general for the movies of the 1970's and Eighties. Of course not all movies can be labeled the same, so I'm just looking at a “flavor” if you will. An overarching theme that can be VERY subtle or Hit You Over The Head obvious. You can be looking at the betrayal from the Oil Age itself in The Road Warrior. Betrayal of ones loyalty or morality in The Godfather. Betrayal by those you are fighting under or fighting for in Apocalypse Now.

*

Were “Animal House” or “Stripes” or similar a tale of rebels or non-conformists, or a tale of the system itself forsaking its participants? Yes, I know, a bit of Freshman college student midnight philosophizing, but I actually DO have a point to all this. If we can look at the general message of the tale, know where it was inspired from culturally, we can see the type of messaging that is either useful or harmful. We can judge its usefulness as belonging solidly in the past, or applicable to the future. I would say that collectively, most films of these fables deal with the collapse of the old age. And that is useful. We can discount misplaced loyalty. But we must also discount the new era message that was on top of the desired fable.

*

One of my favorite little movies was “Taps” with Timothy Hutton and George C Scott. Viewing it at a young age, as with most movies, you are entertained by the superficial aspect of the action or comedy or whatever. Taps was a drama/suspense/action film, the kind we had a lot of prior to straight special effects driven action. Before it was Year Round, the Summer Blockbusters from the Lucas/Spielberg era on were mostly just action. But the rest of the year, budgetary realities called for a lot more talking than explosions.

*

You got a LOT of really good movies that really stuck with you, multi-layered and multi-faceted that invited repeat views to unwrap that onion. “Taps” had a lot of layers. On its face its premise was unrealistic, but that made it both exciting for its uniqueness and acceptable because of its fable. You had a passing of an era, the end of Nation State Tribe, and the fight against that. An unwillingness to let it go without a fight. These two decades of movies, almost a generations worth, was both lamentation and hostility to the end of our nation. After that, it was just messaging to accept the new order.

*

Then there was “The Terminator”. Obviously ONLY the first one as all others were both Political Correctness and Summer Blockbuster Action Only. I've always viewed it as post-apocalypse because of its doom and gloom flavor ( and for the same reason, why “Beyond Thunderdome” was NOT a post-apocalypse movie ). And I was begrudgingly acceptable of its near Feminist message. Just like Cameron's other perfect film, Aliens, the Strong Female Lead was strongly female. She wasn't secondary to the male lead as much as a partner that was biologically true. She was Cub Mother Protective. She was half of the team. Only after that did females turn to Xena Princess Warrior Lesbian Super Hero, the goal to replace males.

*

The message should have been, Pro Motherhood. That women have a predominant role in the family, where males are more Outward focused, protectors on the offensive and providers. The message was perverted into Females Don't Need Males. And NEVER explored is the role of firearms and other carbon fuel mechanization allowing this “miracle”. You don't see bitches disadvantaged WITHOUT a gun. On the other end of the spectrum, you see TOO MUCH gun causing miracles. Returning to “Taps”, focus on one of the best scenes of the movie, at least as far as gratuitous violence.

*

Tom Cruise, acting as he always would forever more as a short little egomaniac over compensating for his stature, was on the M-60 at the window overlooking the forces aligned against the cadets, burning off a belt of ammunition and pausing to look at his observer, “it's beautiful, man!” ( no, I haven't watched the movie for decades, but I'm pretty such I got that one right. As I said, some movies really stick with you. Perhaps because of my perception the military was a betrayal of expectations? Yes, I over analyze myself as well, in case you didn't pick up on that ).

*

Well, yes, truthfully it was a very beautiful thing. But I don't think most of us took the view after watching it that fully automatic fire was not the greatest idea. I think most of us just stopped at “firepower rocks”. Or, perhaps, the answer to most problems is a sufficiently delivered amount of firepower? We can all relate. Most answers to most problems ARE just killing the problem. Basic male programming. Unfortunately, it doesn't pass muster with Guerrilla Warfare solutions, does it? We've all been running around arming up and buying more ammo, rather than retiring to a hermitage which is a metric butt ton more logical and effective but which none of us do, including myself.

*

Similarly, arming up females is NOT the easy answer either. You'll note, I hope, that females were not combat armed for centuries AFTER gunpowder became dominant. Now, why wouldn't that be the case? If muscle weapons precluded female combat, from lack of body strength AND endurance of a Quick Energy Dump nature ( for the majority of females. The minority does NOT make your case of physical equality ), yet gunpowder weapons allowed it, why were there centuries of traditional Female Exclusion on the battlefield?

*

No, Karen, it was NOT because we are suddenly smarter or more progressive in our thinking. Most Moderns are friggin retarded using logic. Just look at the gender segregated sports being integrated under Equality Of Invented Genders if you are in any doubt. Females themselves declined to make a profession of arms long after they were allowed to vote, although long before some of them idiotically voted to disarm themselves and make themselves victims, they had enough sense to use firearms for defense.

*

Defense with weapons was never anything new. That is not the question. The confusion lies in participating in actual combat. Just because a rapist or attacker after killing the husband MIGHT be armed against does not make a woman a combat participant. Now, tactically, you can argue whether a female should even arm herself or not. Yes, the weapon equalizes the genders. But what happens when she is defeated? THAT is the problem.

*

If a female fights, a firearm gives her as much of a chance of prevailing as it would a male. But a male will be killed regardless ( granted, there is the economic issue of slavery, but let's focus on straight combat and then prisoners for immediate assimilation ). A female, of breeding age, usually will be spared, all things being equal. If she is armed WITHOUT a combat firearm, and can offer only token resistance, easily overpowered, she will not be killed. But whereas a defensive firearm is acceptable, a combat gun is not. I believe that lays with the proviso that rape avoidance is acceptable, that she is STILL a non-combatant.

*

Remember why rape was so bad, from societies viewpoint. It brought into question the problem of identifying the father. When divorce was traditionally outlawed, for the protection of both the wife and children going without support and protection, it would be an economic disadvantage to raise a child NOT of your genes. Yes, step-parents were a very normal thing, but you paid an economic price for secondary optimal offspring. The less affluent, hence less Food Secure, bid on stepchildren. The stronger genetic stock bid on their own genes being passed on.

*

So a woman was expected to try to prevent herself from being raped ( it might seem ridiculous to accuse a women of “asking for it, by the way you were dressed”, but that fell under the old conviction that rape avoidance and if necessary male supervision/protection was normal ). A personal defensive weapon was allowed and even expected. HOWEVER! Once she Armed Up, went Tammy Tactical, she went from defense to offense and she stepped out of the allowed firearm usage. Obviously, a tiny .32 derringer was great for popping a cap into a rapists ballsack. The first idiot in the door after killing a settler was dumb enough to invite a dagger or a pistol shot if he tried to force himself on the wife.

*

His fellow combatants both laughed at his lack of intelligence and approved of such an equalizer, as females were obviously physically weaker. A true warrior would be able to disarm said female, and give her credit for trying to defend herself. But if she were in the cabin, with a rifle or shotgun, helping to defend the family by engaging in long distance shooting, well then, she was now a combatant and treated as such, NOT just a defender of her virtue and her family. Do you see the distinction? Even armed with a long arm, if she stayed in the cabin and only fired at intruders already inside, she went back to defending only.

*

Old Time combatants were most likely very un-Politically Correct. They treated women better, by virtue of them being women. You might hate the reason for that, because they were valuable breeders, but the fact remains. By STAYING breeders, and NOT combatants, they gained a survival advantage. Survival was NOT guaranteed by being unarmed offensively, but it sure as heck increased the odds. So, it wasn't the issue of females having guns or not, it was an issue of what they did with those guns.

*

Now, of course, I have to acknowledge my tendency to plan for AFTER the collapse. I tend to view proper behavior through the lens of what is going to work long term, after the die-off. But you are probably asking, well, what about DURING the die-off? Isn't it kind of important that All Hands Are On Deck, combat ready wise? If there is usually a common thread throughout modern ( post-JFK assassination, just for a defining demarcation. I understand we had a strong resistance at least at first with giving up the tradition gender roles, so Strong Single Mothers while a tsunami, was at least a decade long switch ) post-apocalypse fiction, it is Linda Hamilton.

*

Or perhaps, the Road Warrior gals in the compound, Big Hair and crossbows. I'm not sure which came first. But everyone equates the Terminator with the female warrior stereotypical character. And she did a kick-ass job and its a shame she had a bit of a dead cat bounce in her career. But, even though it is unjustified-see previous comment on the character-Sara Conner did unfortunately set in motion all the PC Bitches. Sara might even have been inspired by Patty Hearst, but it took popular fiction to start the trend of Bad Bitches With Bullets.

*

If the character only had limited influence in the early 80's ( beyond pimply teenager fantasy material ) from Terminator, she REALLY dropped the bombshell in the sequel where she pretty much replaced a Marine Squadron in firepower and machismo. From then on, bitches with Poodle Shooters were cemented in our culture as sexy to guys and inspirational to women. I even wonder, as the 80's had different influences, how much T2 inspired the vastly inflated interest in the M16. Did Linda sell more AR's than Clinton? :)

*

It seems, at least in said modern era, that new trends take just one generation to become normal ( the paycheck attached to that probably helps, right, Captain Obvious? ). Divorce took one generation to become all the rage the cool kids were doing. Immigration became New Normal in about the same time frame. And suddenly, within one generation, it became okay to be a female princess warrior. I of course weep, but I want you to understand that this is JUST a unsustainable trend that was recently introduced and it is NOT normal, rational, biology based behavior.

*

Females evolved to switch allegiance to the superior warrior, for her protection and her children's, and that did not mean fighting back against a change in management. Do you know what I really, REALLY hate with 99% of all the survivalist guru advice out there? Come on! This should be an easy one. All the pussy footing around denying reality. I cannot think of one who doesn't suck on the Hopium glass dingus, if for no other reason than to increase his bottom line profits. Sure, they are honest. They don't lie. But nobody gets paid if they don't hold the same mindset of their audience, that of Guarded Optimism for the future.

*

I hold out GREAT hope for the future, that we revert to traditional historical cultural norms, and get rid of all the surplus population, that we return to tribal organization and that we eliminate all the polluted genetic material from our species. I know, I've been accused of Social Darwinism before. I'm not saying they are wrong. I'm just disavowing myself from any comparisons with the Nazi's. But you have to admit, surely, that the existence of Soy Boys, Gender Reassigning PC Pukes, Cat Ladies, and devoting hundreds of thousands of dollars into keeping Shriner's Kids alive is NOT the best allotment of resources. Not because I lack compassion for those kids ( I have ZERO for the others listed, and wish them a swift death-which is all the compassion I can generate ) but because I know resources ARE shrinking.

*

All these other ass faces think resources are infinite and our economy is an infinite growth model. And have even one of them read “Overshoot”? Or did they all just read Howard Ruff for his business plan for shearing the rubes? I've hinted before at denying women and children firearms, just as an ammunition saving practice. Now, how do I look on that stance among $2 shotgun shells and $1 9mm? Do you Honest Injun think that we will return to Ammo Normal prior to Corona Collapse?

*

I'll veer off on one detail, to make my point, and then return. The CDC just magically “discovered” that an elementary school in Atlanta has teachers passing on Corona to students. Yeah, just when the hue and cry to open up schools got the loudest. Look, I'm not smart. This thing is easy. Look at a news report. Now, ask yourself, who gets paid? That is all there is to spotting Fake News. Every government body benefits from keeping schools closed ( at the same property tax levels, of course ). And yet, didn't the CDC opine for open schools this last year? Corona Will NEVER, Ever Never Die. No return to normal for you.

*

So, that is number one for the reasons during a die-off to NOT arm your females. If your family is all your tribe, and you need your wife to Arm Up, you need to change your plan, but more on that later. For now, just consider my oft repeated warning against spraying and praying. Again we return to “Taps”. “It's Beautiful, Man!” is not a very good treatise on tactics. Why am I always repeating myself? The definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results. Am I insane? The last time I looked, all you mother humpers were the insane ones and I was a one eyed king in the valley of the blind. So, I'll just keep repeating myself, hoping the sticker shock of $1.68 a round 38 Special forces you to listen.

*

ALL other armed forces in WWII used bolt action rifles. They might have saved a buck or two not modernizing, but they had the resources. They were replacing all aircraft, all tanks, most ships and etcetera. Why would long arms strain the even limited budget? Do you know why Germany invented the assault rifle ( besides being exponentially better at warfare than everyone else combined )? Because the carbines were cheaper to assemble. NOT cheaper to save money, cheaper to churn out millions more compared to bolt actions.

*

They could churn out the extra ammunition for the carbines which were horrendous in accuracy ( I was wrong previously on that issue, thinking ammunition supply dictated rifle choice. It is true, but not in the scarcity way I envisioned ). They needed way more firearms and stamped verses milled was the way to go. That had always been the case, but the gunpowder/steel was modernized to allow a step up from pistol caliber only to better intermediate power carbines. Because prior, you had the weight and engineering issue ( say, the BAR ) to allow traditional ammunition to step up in power.

*

Semi-auto was important. You can't argue with the experience on the Eastern Front. But first and foremost, you needed MORE long arms to be employed. Ammunition expenditure COULD have been by bolt action, because the extensive training was marksmanship, NOT mass firepower. They just didn't have the manpower left, and semi-auto multiplied the trained marksman's ammo use to replace limited manpower. They certainly DID NOT pray and spray. That was an American tactic that did NOTHING to lower the body count, but it saved on training because Cannon Fodder was the primary means to win our war. Plus, it was Defense Industry profitable.

*

Remember how WWII was nothing more than a resource binge to save our industrial economy? Well, that “tradition” has pretty much been in decline the last decade. We are running out of Industry Quantities of ammunition. Wrap your thick skull around that. The New Normal is LESS ammunition. If you had Cased Up as I implored you the few years before Corona, you were only able to do so, and probably at BELOW cost, because there were no other buyers. NOT because so much was made.

*

I'll just stop there. Odds are good you do NOT have enough ammo, so just consider halving your expenditure on the battlefield. More volume doesn't mean more hits. Not unless you have a Maxim water cooled tripod mounted heavy machinegun and an ammunition factory right next door. Semi-auto only helps if you are a marksman. All others just waste ammo. Like your wife. Who should be running your household, NOT your patrols or defense. Now, if the bitch be infertile, you MIGHT make a case that she can be cannon fodder.

*

So, let's tackle that, shall we? Why, oh dear lord Baby Jesus, WHY, why would you think you can return to a traditional culture by postponing a return to traditional culture? Kindly riddle me this, Bat Boob. Traditional culture performs in a certain way not because ancient dudes were ignorant, unenlightened or insufficiently progressive. The culture was the way it was because it worked, for tens of thousands of years. If being a pillow biting taking it up the ass faggot was a practice that helped the species survive, we would have been doing that regularly.

*

Rather, like rats in an experiment, homosexuality is only seen regularly under periods of over crowding and resource scarcity. If wanting to identify as a female rewarded a society, there would have been less warriors and more pseudo bitches contributing nothing to society since they could neither breed or fight. THAT surely was a winning strategy! If females were meant to risk themselves and not breed or not take care of their families, and if that had been a survival strategy, it would have been a traditional cultural norm.

*

The Oil Age is a One Off, once in a species infinity limited single serving event. It allows robots to both replace warriors and to supplement child rearing. It is artificial food allowing surplus population. This is NEVER normal. So in an abnormal Age you get abnormal behavior like 99% non-contribution of the population, no need to breed, the ability to anally insert diseases and have them cured, bitches able to fight. Without oil, and for humps sake we ARE moving towards No Oil, you cannot subsidize non-survival behavior.

*

You are told, you must grow food now, to practice, because it takes trial and error. You are told, you must practice your firearm skills. You are told, practice lowering your dependence on the electric grid. But, somehow, it is okay to ignore anthropology? To ignore NORMAL culture rather than the abnormal we now have? I do NOT want to hear any of you whiny bitches talking about Male Privilege. The traditional role of the male is to die defending tribe and family. That is OUR honor, and we gladly accept the sacrifice. Now, you females, you must sacrifice yourself to child rearing. That is YOUR burden. NOT to play at Sara Conner fantasy combat.

*

Biologically, we are hard wired to perform our traditional gender based roles, and to derive pleasure and contentment from it. The worst thing a male can do is go Soy Boy Pussy, and the worst thing a female can do is deny themselves a family. Yet both genders were forced into those abnormal behaviors and both are miserable because of it. And you want to POSTPONE a return to real culture, because why? Because females not in combat halve your defense force? Who Humping Cares?!?! You are endangering your replacement units, and if your tribe survives by cannon fodder'ing females, the tribe doesn't survive anyway.

*

Has the last century taught us nothing? At the very least, can't we agree that short term emotionally satisfying actions lead to terrible long term consequences? That should be the very least we have learned from this “great” experiment with progressiveness. Your daily actions MUST incorporate long term survival trends. Breeders do not belong on the battlefield, for the very simple long term replacement they represent. How hard is it to understand that sperm is cheap but eggs are dear? One guy can service the whole village of breeders. Not enough breeders and the larger sperm supply is wasted. It takes several seconds to ejaculate and nine months to gestate.

*

You kill ten men and the women stay pregnant. You kill one female and you cannot replace her womb. Why does the bitch have a weapon in her hand making her a target? Now, under primitive medical conditions, a female can safely ( all things being equal ) procreate from about age 15 to 30. Up to ten offspring. She won't live too far past first grandchild age at that rate, dangerously depleting her bodies stored nutrients. But it can be done. A male has about the same lifespan as far as fighting ability. Do the math.

*

That is five fighters and five mothers producing fifty children in a smidge over one generation. You can kill five males and still get twenty-five females as well as five times the fighter replacement rate, from that ONE female you didn't kill in battle, in thirty years time. Of course, death in childbirth and etcetera, and it doesn't work out that well, but it shows the math. Which is only hard past addition and that is ALL you need to understand. This ain't calculus or some crap. It is taking off your shoes and counting digits simple.

*

But, Jim, you cannot get ANY offspring if the males die and the females are defenseless. No, you can't get offspring from your tribes males, but you can get them from the males that killed your tribes males. THAT, my fine feathered minions, is called species survival, NOT individual survival. Look, we all want to be the universes extra special snowflake meant to be framed and admired. But none of us are. Not Cathy Cat Lady, not Mr. Sports Ball, not El Presidente For Life. We are just meat sacks here to do the species bidding.

*

What you want and desire means dingus all. If you choose to ignore your base programming, hard won after a couple hundred thousand years ( but Jim! Mankind sprung forth whole formed as farming peasants. Okay, perhaps. Evolution or design by deity, the programming is still the pinnacle of perfection ), you WILL be replaced by those who were not so pig headed stupid. You will, very simply, die. Your polluted genetic material will cease to stain a cervix. Lucky is needed WITH smart. Stupid never gets the chance to see lucky, not in a resource scarce environment.

*

If you fail to flip the switch to smarter cultural programming, you will cease to exist in the long run ( even with carefully preserved Oil Age Artifacts, because culture is the ultimate tool, NOT any Industrial Age tool you care to name ). Not caring about the long run, means you hate your grandchildren. It is about as simple as that. You can layer all the lipstick you want on that pig, she's still a pig. Excuses and “Ought A Be's” are trying to turn a pig into your prom date. You either reprogram or you perish.

*

You can do the math all day long on the EROI of firearms verses manual muscle powered weapons, but it doesn't matter. Chemical energy replaced muscle energy for conflicts. But while its easy to stockpile chemical energy, it ain't anywhere close to as easy to store the metric butt tons of all the other energy needed to enable our cultural change we “enjoyed” the last hundred years. Females only were able to match male muscle power through electronic or gasoline powered machinery. Absent those two Equalizers, having chemical energy firearms means little to nothing.

*

If you cannot raise excess calories with oil, you cannot kill off your breeding stock in battle and replace your offspring with imported Little Brown Babies. Do you have any clue what decentralization through energy contraction leading to a Dark Ages means? It means you get to do it all on your own, a future anarchists will NOT be very happy about. So your breeders become JUST breeders, or you won't replace casualties. Meaning your tribe cannot feed or defend itself and your tribe is extinct, beyond the minor genetic contribution the cream of your surviving females will make to the new tribe.

*

Now, if the die-off is rapid, because it has to be, because your surplus food is not available to your surplus population, that means you don't have time to hump around. You do NOT have the luxury of time, or of mistakes. To me, that means your females need to be females again. Immediately. And that entails not just popping out kids but of raising them. If you are not able to birth them, you sure can raise them and provide home economics for both them and the fighters. Infertile doesn't mean useless. It can simply mean a decentralized production system, logistics support for the fighters. He is on patrol or guard most of the time. He still needs meals, clothing and footwear, and etcetera.

*

No one is going to be idle, as far as basic tasks. Our Oil Age materials WILL allow more luxury and idleness, as not everything must be Cottage Industried right away, but the males will still largely use most of their time expanding the defensive perimeter and females most of the time providing their logistics ( be that food and clothing or the biological replacement unit ). Old bitches will still provide home duties, and old dudes still will be able to train the young males and provide immediate defense inside the wire.

*

Yes, things will be far from ideal at the very beginning. A lot of homesteads will be living off stores, with far less people than what a self sustaining village needs. You will all be both living off stores and pulling double or triple duties. And at first if you have all old females, even with orphans the temptation will be to incorporate the surplus females into your defense force ( because while young soldiers with guns will mostly defeat old guys with guns, anyone with a gun is still something of a formidable force ). But you are still ignoring the culture and focusing on the tactical.

*

Only the idiots today think talk trumps action. That is because you can only talk when action is impossible, because you ignored biology. ACTION is what is teaching the next generation. ACTION is what cements the tribe together, NOT talk. You cannot have grandma fighting the tribes battle, while at the same time telling young girls they can only be breeders and homemakers. The young girls might want to grow up to be fighters. THAT endangers the tribes future. See the above math . Because most people ARE dumber than dirt and can only be programmed, not taught.

*

I don't mean to sound like an elite excusing mistreating the poor. Most rich or powerful people are also idiots, because they act out of greed at the expense of social stability. They are ANTI-tribal. Which translates to species endangerment because their tribe cannot survive on its own, being mere parasites. But most people are dumb asses. Which is why traditional culture is superior. The bloodshed has already been spilled in proof of concept. All they must do is blindly follow their training as children and they will have increased survival chances.

*

Under traditional cultural training, you MUST brainwash these dumb asses into unquestioning compliance. So training is everything. And training is SHOWING. It is not telling one thing and doing another. Even smart people are better off NOT questioning almost anything. They get too smart for their own good that way. And they trick themselves into believing self interest is the same as tribal interest. Do you think otherwise smart people would actually think, say, race determined intelligence?

*

No, but programmed people who were otherwise intelligent, freely abused different races under that theory, which strengthened their tribe who was colonizing the other race. Make sense? Of course it does. Racism is a survival mechanism in many different ways. Meaning ALL races who survived are full of racists. Racism is not just a White Thing. Those who tell you so want to colonize you. Ignore that at your own risk. But, the point is, tribal behavior is irrational behavior, and needs programming, NOT teaching. The smartest naked ape in the room does better under programming than pure logic, species survival wise.

*

Flip the switch on programming, and get those gals back in the kitchen chained to the stove with babies hanging from their teats, and get guys back in the field as targets, NOT hiding behind a woman's skirt. Biology doesn't have to be fun, just followed.

( .Y. )

*

End Article

To Subscribe:

James M Dakin

181 West Bullion Road, Unit 12

Elko, Nevada 89801-4184

*

e-mail: jimd303@protonmail.com ( that is three ZERO three )

*

$1.19 per issue, as many or as few as desired, domestic mail. All overseas readers, $1.99 per issue ( prices subject to change ). That is for a mailed CD, which will contain PDF and MOBI files, extra writing from me when available, and public domain books. This is my cost ( subject to change ), and all that you are required to pay. However, gratuity, tip, donation is encouraged and appreciated on top of the above price ( please specify which amount is which ).

*

You may subscribe via e-mail ( when communicating with me, please include your real name as well ). Everyone’s cost is $1 an issue ( with the same plea for extra donations ). You will ONLY receive a PDF file of the monthly magazine, no extra material. The e-mail subscription will only be available while I have access online ( our local library closed for a year, so Going Dark can happen ).

*

You can send cash or US “forever” postage stamps, but for safety I encourage checks or money orders instead. OR PayPal me at

paypal.me/jimd303 ( or just use my e-mail at Paypal.com )

Make checks out to James M Dakin. I'm happy to correspond but would appreciate a Self Addressed Stamped Envelop to help me with costs, as this writing income is my only retirement. Free sample with e-mail or through the mail with SASE and SD Card.