Soren’s frequent use of irony if not sarcasm predisposed me to take something he said as less than serious.
He was serious.
Deadly serious.

Don’t jest on this topic. god is awake. time for a cut (prolog)
the right way to view the entire history of life is as a swarm of renormalizing dreams—our world is a dream. god’s dream. And when he is awake, fully awake, one will have won.

His reference to “prolog” is a pun, of sorts, on our mutual interest in programming languages—particularly logic—as mathematical metaphysics.  “cut” in the context of the Prolog logic programming language, terminates search for alternative paths to the goal, accepting the one at hand.

In all likelihood his death was a suicide.

He missed his wife, Judith.

Terribly.

Fatally.

From the PA website this afternoon:

An Open Letter to Michael Gove

Today in parliament you listed Patriotic Alternative as one of five groups in Britain that are being assessed as to whether they fall under the Government’s new definition of ‘extremism’. The fact that such actions are being taken without due diligence or parliamentary oversight or debate is anti-democratic in itself, but more worrying is that from this point onward anyone rejecting what the Government terms ‘liberal democracy’ could fall foul of this draconian legislation.

This presents a major threat to both freedom of speech and freedom of association and is a dangerous step toward a totalitarian state where those who do not adhere to state doctrine are silenced and have their human rights curtailed.

This would all be bad enough; however you went further and used your parliamentary Privilege to make several completely misleading claims about Patriotic Alternative, which we seek to rectify here.

Your first false claim is that Patriotic Alternative seeks ‘forced repatriation’ of ethnic minority groups. This is completely and demonstrably false; we have a policy of voluntary repatriation for settled immigrants and the only people we seek to forcibly deport are illegal migrants and foreign criminals – something that the Conservative Party have repeatedly pledged to do but failed to make good on. We also oppose mass immigration – a view that is held by a large section of the voting population and something that the Conservative Party have again repeatedly pledged to get under control whilst in reality increasing net migration to new highs.

Your second claim is that Patriotic Alternative seek a ‘White ethnostate’. To clarify this, we state in our policies that:

“The British people are made up of the English, Northern Irish, Scottish and Welsh. These are the indigenous peoples of the United Kingdom and only they have an ancestral claim to it. The United Kingdom is the only place where the British people, and they alone, can realise their natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination. As such, we will pass a Nation State Law to enshrine this principle and ensure the British people never become a minority or second-class citizens in their ancestral homeland.”

In short, we stake a claim to the ancestral homeland of our people and declare that our homeland should be governed for the benefit of our people.

You are an ardent supporter of the state of Israel, a state that has a nation-state law worded in a very similar way to the proposal that we are in favour of. If you support such a law for the Israeli people, why are you so offended that the indigenous people of the British Isles would also campaign for a similar law in order to protect our cultural and ethnic interests?

This would not be the creation of a ‘white ethnostate’ as you put it, but in fact ethno-states for the constituent nations of the British Isles – on the mainland that would be the English, the Scottish and the Welsh.

We believe that the indigenous people of these islands should never become a minority and should remain what we term a ‘super-majority’, this however does not mean that those of migrant descent would not remain here or that such people would be forcibly removed (unless under the conditions that they were here illegally or had committed crimes on British soil).

Your third claim was that we endorse ‘neo-Nazi ideology, we reject this claim. In fact, we have repeatedly attempted to register Patriotic Alternative as a political party in order to participate in the democratic process and stand in elections. It is however the Home Office, which currently operates under your very government, which has pressured the Electoral Commission in order to prevent us from registering as a political party – effectively denying us our democratic rights to stand in elections and also denying the public the right to vote for us. This represents a bureaucratic impediment to the democratic process that you claim to be in favour of.

Your final claim is that we ‘target minority groups for intimidation’. This is a complete and total fabrication. We are a lawful community group that campaigns on a range of issues. We have never targeted any group with violence or carried out acts that are intimidatory. In reality the very opposite is true. What’s more, we have members and supporters from ethnic minority backgrounds and have repeatedly reached out to other ethnic groups for discussions on issues such as immigration and multiculturalism.

Patriotic Alternative is wholeheartedly opposed to violence or confrontation and through our lawful activities we seek to engage with people who hold similar views and give those people a healthy and peaceful outlet for their justified frustrations with the current British political establishment.

Patriotic Alternative wish to be involved within the democratic process and the claim that we are ‘extremists’ is as absurd as it is worrying. To include peaceful community campaigning groups under this legislation is not only a threat to our human rights, but represents the creeping totalitarian nature of a government that brands itself as ‘Conservative’.

This is nothing more than communism via the back door.

We respectfully request that you remove our name from this list and that you put an end to this anti-democratic power grab that threatens to infringe on the rights of all British citizens who wish to speak freely and organise democratically.

Yours Sincerely.

“Unwilling to rest on the foot of conscience, my Russia took a few big leaps, pushing everyone around, but them slipped and collapsed with a crash, destroying everything around it. And now it is floundering in a pool of either mud or blood, with broken bones and the poor, robbed population, surrounded by the tens of thousands of victims of the most stupid and senseless war of the XXI century.”
- Navalny, 20th July, 2023.

Claimed details of Navalny’s treatment at Correctional Colony 3, Yamalo Nenets here.

This video explains the short- to medium-term geopolitical objectives of Moscow and Beijing in their struggle against American global hegemony and the western international order.  It is produced by the Warsaw-based institute, the Centre for Eastern Studies.  Its website explains:

The Centre for Eastern Studies (OSW) was established in 1990 in Warsaw as a public institution. It was created to meet democratic Poland’s demand for analytical research on the processes that had occurred in the Soviet Union, and later in the states that emerged following its collapse. At present, the OSW’s portfolio includes Russia, Eastern and Central Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia, the Balkans, Germany, the Baltic and Nordic states, China, Turkey and Israel. In addition, we carry out research focused on specific sectors, for example the EU’s energy policy, transport, trade and digital connectivity in Central Europe, as well as on European security.

Here is a sampler from the work of a Ukrainian content producer, the content being the busting of propaganda from Moscow.  The video is titled 20 Confirmed Lies, Imperialism & Moscow’s Propaganda from Robert Kennedy Jr. on Ukraine.

Beneath the videos, Yaroslav - that’s his name, apparently - notes the following:

Moscow’s immense investments into propaganda paying off from the mouth of Robert Kennedy Jr. Most disgusting lies about Ukraine I’ve ever heard from a presidential candidate of a democratic state.  Over 20 of confirmed lies, severe imperialism symptoms, justifying Moscow’s unprovoced invasion, borderline betrayal of US interests

Timecodes:
00:00 Intro
00:38 Lie#1 Putin asks for negotiations everyday
02:35 Lie#2 Gorbachev destroyed himself politically
03:17 Lie#3 We swore not to expand NATO
04:27 Lie#4 We put missiles in Romania and Poland
06:11 Lie#5 WE overthrow Ukraine’s government
06:58 Lie#6 Ukraine’s government was overthrown
07:45 Lie#7 Crimea taken without firing a shot
08:55 Lie#8 Killing ethnic russians in Donbass
09:45 Lie#9 Voted to leave and join Russia
10:14 Lie#10 Ukraine controlled by ultra right
10:38 Lie#11 Ukraine refused to sign Minsk Accords
12:00 Lie#12 Zelensky threatened by death
12:23 Lie#13 USA controls Zelensky
12:37 Lie#14 Moscow sends only 40,000 invaders
13:00 Lie#15 Muscovites withdraw in good faith
13:30 Lie#16 US forced to not sign peace treaty
13:40 Lie#17 450,000 kids have died
14:00 Lie#18 More Ukrainians die than invaders
14:20 Lie#19 Ukraine has no men left
14:38 Lie#20 US looks like the aggressor
15:00 Conclusion

Scientists who will not resile from their truths irrespective of the punishments imposed upon them by their professional Establishments or the heinous blackening of their life’s work and their reputation by the media are, perhaps unsurprisingly, a rarity these days.  But such was Richard Lynn, who has died at the age of 93.  His achievement is immense, his humanity is unbesmirched by the all too predictable dog-whistle reportage from the mainstream media.  The Telegraph, for example, reported that his work on comparative group IQ had been “debunked”, and quoted Flynn and Singapore (neither functioning rebuttals).  Lynn’s magazine Mankind Quarterly is considered by its critics to be “a cornerstone of the scientific racism establishment”.  Well, there’s a surprise.  I wonder what the ethnicity of these critics is.

Lynn’s real legacy will not be the bitter badmouthing of the anti-white factions who now command the centre.  It will be in the diffusion of his ideas among the great mass of thinking dissidents, some of whom turned up in the comment section of the DT obit (paywalled).  Here are a few excerpts:

A short walk from my front door and I witness human devolution in full swing.

Depending on the study, intelligence is 50-80% heritable, higher than many other personality traits. That is to say, the difference in intelligence between people is 50-80% due to genetic differences, passed on from parents to children. This is hard science and has nothing to do with racism, but the implications are studiously ignored because to study or discuss them is to commit career suicide.

People who refute his ideas are similar to religious zealots who refute that evolution exists at all.
“Yes there is evolution, but it does not affect intelligence”.
In which case how did the intelligence of humans evolve and increase?

His ideas have not been debunked by scholarly research, they have been deliberately suppressed by people who will not allow anyone to consider that certain ethnic groups are not as intelligent as others.
The Dutch may be the tallest people on earth but pygmies would be exactly the same with a better diet is the usual false theoretical structure.

I am vehemently against the idea of eugenics. I believe society as a whole would be better if eugenicists were suffocated at birth…

A recent area of scientific advance is in the field of paleo-genetics, for which Svante Paabo won the Nobel Prize in Physiology/Medicine in 2022. It is now accepted that all contemporary non-Africans have 1% to 2% Neanderthal Man DNA. Recent advances have shown that the newly discovered archaic hominid species Denisovan Man contributed .1% to .2% of the DNA of current East and South Asian populations, with a striking 6% of the genome of highland New Guinea populations and 5% of the genome of Australian Aboriginals being Denisovan!
Then in 2020 scientists at U. Cal. Berkeley examined the contemporary African genome using Paabo’s groundbreaking techniques, and discovered that fully 11% (on average) of the contemporary sub-Saharan African genome is derived from an as-yet-undiscovered archaic hominid species (1) that separated from the lineage that eventually led to Homo sapiens 635,000 years ago, (2) with which species Africans interbreeded 45,000 years ago (long after Eurasian Homo sapiens left Africa).
Check out Dr. Paabo’s Nobel Prize acceptance speech on YouTube! Upshot: the sub-Saharan African genome is 11% that of a primitive archaic hominid species. All of the above is undisputed, albeit it has been given the “Hunter’s laptop” treatment by the media, surprise surprise. Sorry, folks, but genetics is real.

All that is needed to refute his data are a few properly conducted studies which Do Not show the same pattern as thousands of previous studies which show racial differences in mean IQ. No one objects when these studies show that East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews are, on average, more intelligent than other groups. The histrionics are over the dramatic differences between one race and all the others. If one allows oneself to think the unthinkable, that this difference is real, the underachievement and all the dysfunctions of that group become readily understandable, without need to invoke discrimination as the only possible explanation.

Certainly, but brain size does not seem to differ. Maybe it’s how the brain is used, or how the different structures interact, or… well we could be here with that debate for a long time!
Don’t let it pass you by that we are examining ourselves, an enquiry which is fraught with conceit, prejudice, wilful misinterpretation etc.
The fundamentals are always helpful. Does the physiology and behaviour promote survival?
The differences may be infinitesimally small and difficult to spot but hey, DNA has all the time in the world (I use that phrase with purpose) to help itself survive and the hosts, in many ways, may not be important at all.
Who is in charge here, DNA or the human species?
I know where I’d place my bet.

Thank you for your dedication to truth, Richard Lynn.  One fears that rarities such as you would never be granted a career today.

How the action began a few kilometres to the west of the town, with small groups of
Russian Army soldiers like this forced from cover.

It is several days ago now since we began to be informed of a successful flanking action by Ukrainian specialist forces to the south and west of Bakhmut.  Yevgeny Prigozhin railed at the regular soldiers who were, he said, “crumbling”, and was quick to claim that the defender’s long-awaited counter-offensive was “in full swing”.  Since then the action has continued, with steady and sometimes substantial gains for the Ukrainians while the Wagnerites and other PMCs together with VDV contingents inch forward in the town itself.

It is becoming clear that Bakhmut means something different to each side.  The Russian penchant for proclaiming victory in the form of completely capturing the town or cutting the Ukrainians’ “Road of Life” gesture more towards the spite and jealousy which exists between Progozhin and Sergei Shoigu and between Prigozhin and Valery Gerasimov than towards anything demonstrably true about Russian progress.  The field commanders are plainly responding to political as much as military goals.  Moscow demands a victory.  It’s been that way for many months, and perhaps there is not too much more to say about it.

During most of that time the line from Kiev has been that the town is not strategically important, and losing it does not hold wider meanings.  As long as the kill rate was favourable for the defenders they would stay and fight.  Once the cost rose too high, they would leave.  This is the policy which had held sway throughout the war, and was summed up in the simple formula that Russian leaders in wartime traditionally value territory above soldiers’ lives, but the Ukrainians do not have the luxury of numbers of soldiers they can throw away, and are quite content to trade territory for the lives of men who can fight another day.  But now we are not hearing that.  For the last six weeks Zelensky has been explaining that Bakhmut must be held, or the way is open to Kramatorsk and Sloviansk.  So why this change?

The Ukrainians have not employed the new Western equipment in their flanking action.  They are fighting with the usual Soviet-era equipment.  But they are pouring in their best people to the offensive, just as the best Russian units are invested in taking full control within the town.  This little, ruined place has become much more than a local hotspot.  With the Russians turning to defence almost everywhere else along the front, and the Ukrainians preparing and preparing all over again for their main counter-offensive, the war is narrowing down to what happens here, and the stakes for both sides are rising.  The Ukrainians are manifestly intending to encircle the Russians in the town, cut off their ammunition supply, and force a Russian turning action or a surrender.  If that comes to pass Russian morale will collapse everywhere, and the main Ukrainian counter-offensive will be massively advantaged.  The Ukrainians have four to six weeks to make it work.

The moment Charlie finally got everything his way, including “Queen” Camilla.

I have read none of the press articles and studiously avoided all the broadcasts on Charles’ coronation, including the coverage of the event itself.  It is of less interest to me than the birdsong in our garden or the gentle rain that fell for much of the day on its newly cut lawns.  These things gladden.  My wife tells me that, as has become traditional at the coronation of British monarchs, they sang Hubert Parry’s “I was glad” in Westminster Abbey.  But what, to me, is the accession of this self-absorbed man, the very model of the paternalistic liberal and a climate alarmist and diversitoid to boot, to the British throne?  As an institution in Time, hereditary monarchy testifies - or should still testify - to the nation’s dignity and standing, and should function as a focal point for the people’s identity.  Does Charles have any thought whatever for the English people?  The non-whites colonising us obviously pre-occupy him.  The Welsh and Scots perhaps also, in some antique way.  But the English?  I see no sign that he even knows who we are, or wants to know.  Our name is becoming unsayable.

It can at least be said of his mother Elizabeth that she rigorously avoided all public entanglement with politics.  Not for one moment will the new monarch be able to replicate that.  I foresee inevitable damage to the reputation of the monarchy, and a steady if not spectacular detachment of the British Establishment’s messaging about the British nation from our own sense of identity and relation.

Now that would be worth a bit of attention.