Decline of the western society

GarryB wrote:Well I think the problem is more ignorance than anything else.

Just because glass is considered bullet proof doesn't mean it wont crack or be damaged by an impact.

The definition of bullet proof is stopping penetration by a bullet of a specific performance.

There is no such thing as glass that will stop all bullets, so you need to define a performance level... calibre, velocity, bullet weight, and distance the shot comes from.

No glass will stop the APFSDS penetrator from a 125mm tank gun, but for the purposes of this vehicle I would say it would need to stop at most a 50 cal projectile or less.

That is not to say it wont crack when hit... it is to say it stops the projectile from entering the truck and injuring the passengers.

It's pretty dumb marketing though, as most people just see a cracked window.

And then having to continue the demonstration of this fugly monstrosity with those cracked windows to boot.

Yeah.

https://youtu.be/PObBA2wH5l0


@KVS

About human diseases. Some say that genetics plays a part. If this is true, then we should see a normal statistical distribution. But if this is not the case, and we see environmental factors affecting this, then genetics must be ruled out. Then we are left with the problem of not addressing the cause of these problems. Instead allowing surgical mutilation against the public. Such is the sad state of affairs in Iran too. These tendencies are seen in socially distressed situations. Thailand comes to mind. Failing agriculture. Cheap American rice imports.

Regarding predicting the future of society. It looks like individuals in society can be visionaries or leaders. But society as a whole operates on more basic economic levels. It can go forwards or backwards. In rainforest of Amazon, agricultural , South American ( fuedal) society collapsed and society moved back to hunter gatherer ( communistic) existence. There are modern examples of reverse trends. But now we know that a possible future is extinction.

It's pretty dumb marketing though, as most people just see a cracked window.

And then having to continue the demonstration of this fugly monstrosity with those cracked windows to boot.

Yeah.

Well yeah, any engineers watching will be wondering if the inside surface of the windows are cracked or are they smooth, but the marketing and PR gods... Americans... will all be thinking even if it didn't break through all the layers to the inside it is a total fail and totally embarrassing and the main thing the potential customers and investors in this vehicle will remember about this demonstration forever...

The marketing department guy whose idea to use a metal ball to throw at the glass probably asked an engineer if it would go through and the engineer probably said no... and it didn't.

The problem obviously was that the marketing department guy didn't ask is this ball going to bounce off without making a scratch or even leaving a mark to impress the hell out of the entire crowd... because the engineer either would have said there will be external superficial damage but the window will remain intact, or he would say give me the ball you intend to use and I will test it and show you the results.

The reaction on stage clearly shows they expected it to bounce off like a rubber ball making no mark at all...

The irony is that he tried it on the other window too thinking that first one might have been faulty and of course it wasn't but now the public thinks they are all either faulty or all not bullet proof... when I suggest they are both likely bullet proof and performing correctly.

Tests on the glass in the Mi-28A attack helo had a 14.5mm HMG lined up about 5 metres from the glass directly from the side firing rounds into the glass... the glass had serious snow effect around the impact which made the glass hard to see through, but as shown in the test a man with a bare hand rubbed his hand over the inner surface to show it was smooth with no penetration. (Compare that with the Apache whose side glass panels can be penetrated from the ground by AK rounds (ie 100m plus range shots)).

@KVS


".......... You are right, humans have insufficiently evolved intellects. By this I mean we don't have intelligence instincts that help us follow the right Path in learning and thus growing our IQ........."

https://youtu.be/Nubc09jTW-M

https://youtu.be/NTcw012d2ag

https://youtu.be/pieJ-GSdyx8

https://youtu.be/FXe3wmtN5tU

nomadski wrote:@KVS


".......... You are right, humans have insufficiently evolved intellects. By this I mean we don't have intelligence instincts that help us follow the right Path in learning and thus growing our IQ........."

https://youtu.be/Nubc09jTW-M

https://youtu.be/NTcw012d2ag

https://youtu.be/pieJ-GSdyx8

https://youtu.be/FXe3wmtN5tU

I never said mammals (including house cats and dogs) did not have any IQ and even distinct personalities (which reflects IQ).
The point is that humans fancy themselves as god-like evolved beings with big-brained intellect. Empirical evidence points to
this being a delusion. Animals, including cats and dogs don't have to deal with politics and assessment of technological impacts.
Humans do need to be engaged and 99% are not exerting their potential IQ to do this.

Modern women and their perceptions of men and reality. The days of western civilization are numbered.

It is interesting you mentioned the natural world. And human intelligence. That is why I posted the links concerning animal interactions. It is clear to see that the relationships in nature are constructive. That animals maintain and help each other to survive. So these video makes clear that social Darwinism used by some to justify capitalism is a false theory. From logic, a destructive relationship can not even exist.

Humans have destructive relationships with nature and with each other. Animals participate in predation. Humans participate in hunting. Yet some humans confuse hunting with predation. These are different processes. Hunting and by extension herding and farming gives humans an unfair advantage. Destroys the environment. Predation allows for a fair struggle. Where the animals earn their keep by the sweat of their brow. Fitness to survive must be understood in this way. The fitness to establish constructive relationships and maintain diversity. Perhaps animals know this in their bones. A law of nature or God. What humans have forgotten.

In the future, if humanity is to survive. Then it must apply these natural laws to human society. It means no industry and very little agriculture or medicine. And if we wanted to eat a chicken, then as long as it is running wild and we use no tools to catch it, but our bare hands, then we may be allowed to eat it. Have you ever tried to catch wild fowl with bare hands? It is very difficult. Keeps you fit.

So our IQ, only useful if we use it to find natural laws and apply to our own society. Human society. To return to nature is a long road. For all nations. Not just the most corrupt Western versions....

The flurry of racist posts in other threads prompts me to post the following.

The story of black communities in the USA puts the lie to the view that they are "lazy" and "uncivilized".

1) Before the 1960s with its welfare and "no fault divorce" laws, the number of single parent (mother only)
families in the black community was much lower.

2) Affirmative action pursued by academic institutions in the USA from the 1970s onward have actually reduced
the number of blacks (and hispanics) participating compared to the 1960s.

Black communities are being ravaged by the destruction of families due to ludicrous laws that give females the
idea that they can use men like beasts of burden. For the modern female in the USA and the EU, the state is
her husband. She can lie about "rape" and the man will be jailed based on her word alone (that's right, on
her word and not on witness or forensic evidence). Females can divorce rape men at any time and they initiate
the majority of divorces. It is no wonder that black men do not hang around their families. Being in the
lower income stratum aggravates family problems so you see the impact of the absurd 1960s laws on divorce
in this stratum most clearly. But similar decomposition is happening in the higher income strata where most
whites reside as well.

It has been established that affirmative action in education results in negative experiences for the "victim group"
being given easier access. A student who gets into Harvard or MIT with less credentials finds it hard to deal
with the higher academic demands. You can't fix lack of preparation by hacks like affirmative action. People
get to these levels by academic merit and not skin color. By lowering the admission standard you also send the
wrong signal to black (and other minority groups) students before they apply to university or college. They
know they can be admitted with lower marks. So they don't try as a hard. This is a universal human trait and
not some race-specific pathology. Primary and secondary education is not play time unlike the PC do-gooders
claim. Of course, the breakdown of families has contributed to reduction in higher education participation.

All of the alleged good intentions aimed at helping blacks and others since the 1960s have paved the road to Hell.
As I posted before, the migrants moving to the EU are not a representative sample and are people smoking the
easy life crack. If there was no welfare in the EU and every immigrant had to start from scratch, there would
be vastly smaller numbers coming. Welfare is not supposed to be a lifestyle. It is supposed to be assistance.
In the real world too many are using it as their "job".

If there was no welfare in the EU and every immigrant had to start from scratch, there would
be vastly smaller numbers coming. Welfare is not supposed to be a lifestyle. It is supposed to be assistance.
In the real world too many are using it as their "job".

Well that is important too... even if they don't get welfare... even if they have to work hard in menial low paying jobs in Europe, even if their accommodation doesn't even have WiFi or Sky TV most will still be a lot better in a small flat in Berlin with nice clean streets and law and order and nice shops filled with lots of nice looking products... many of these people come from countries where the main street in their town is a dirt road... there are no jobs, and they get beaten up by the local muslims because they don't like christains no matter what their skin colour.

Talking about people based on skin colour makes as much sense as talking about people based on hair or eye colour.... it is just ignorant.

Welfare is certainly a trap and it traps blacks and whites and yellows and any other colour you like... it is colour blind.

I was working with an Aussie guy in the early 1990s on a building site and he complained and moaned all the time. Turned out he was made to come and work as an unskilled labourer... his partner has 6 kids all under 15 years old and so the government was paying him over $800 a week to do nothing... it was supposed to be to help look after the kids but I doubt they saw much of it. At the building site job he was getting $350 a week and he had to turn up every day and do stuff.

Well of course he is a prick, and he and his partner are screwing the system... he is white by the way... but do you blame him or the system that lets him get away with it.

Of course there will be families that are struggling and do need support... what we need is a system that supports those who need the support but catches out and punishes those trying to abuse the system.

People in the west have weird understanding about socialism in Soviet Union as well. It's either black or white.
I've had a chance to live some years under red banners and I can say that even last stages of communism had decent quality of life through the Union..

You HAD to work, there was no benefits per se, as you see in UK.
There was no lazy culture and generally people were quite hungry for money.. by hungry, I mean, most of the people were really good at making businesses.

Streets were clean, children playgrounds had no bottles, siringes, pavement was in top condition, parks - safe and clean, culture centres had plenty of going. It was almost idyllic. Because there were people who did that job and did it well.

Well, to go hungry you will probably needed to be heavy alcoholic. But even then, people were forced to go to work in some form or another. By force, I mean, it was done through social workers. So you had to be on self-destructing path to starve.

It's just west that does it so WRONG.. benefits- the way they are paid in UK, Norway, Germany... It's so counterproductive.. it wins the votes for politicians, but it doesn't help people get to work. I personally think - people should be forced to work. If they don't want to- let them go through social structures and explain themselves why they are not contributing to society and if they are capable to work, but don't want to- make their easily lifes unbereable by social workers visits, property confiscations and even arrest if needed. No one is that lazy to go to jail for it.

You can dismiss this video as some vapid opinion spew. But it has non-zero content which highlights key aspects
of the whole mass migration problem. Migrants coming to the west do come for the welfare. And when that
welfare is cut off, they bugger on off elsewhere. This is the reality and not some romantic vision of immigrant
pioneers.

Most immigrants have no idea what the west is really like before they come.... most likely hear from friends of friends who came last year or five years ago and they are doing great... you should come too... because the sweatshop owners that have them working 20 hours a day and living in squalor and wont give them back their passports need more super cheap labour...

Most Immigrants get screwed by someone... often their own kind.

Regular wrote:People in the west have weird understanding about socialism in Soviet Union as well. It's either black or white.
I've had a chance to live some years under red banners and I can say that even last stages of communism had decent quality of life through the Union..

You HAD to work, there was no benefits per se, as you see in UK.
There was no lazy culture and generally people were quite hungry for money.. by hungry, I mean, most of the people were really good at making businesses.

Streets were clean, children playgrounds had no bottles, siringes, pavement was in top condition, parks - safe and clean, culture centres had plenty of going. It was almost idyllic. Because there were people who did that job and did it well.

Well, to go hungry you will probably needed to be heavy alcoholic. But even then, people were forced to go to work in some form or another. By force, I mean, it was done through social workers. So you had to be on self-destructing path to starve.

It's just west that does it so WRONG.. benefits- the way they are paid in UK, Norway, Germany... It's so counterproductive.. it wins the votes for politicians, but it doesn't help people get to work. I personally think - people should be forced to work. If they don't want to- let them go through social structures and explain themselves why they are not contributing to society and if they are capable to work, but don't want to- make their easily lifes unbereable by social workers visits, property confiscations and even arrest if needed. No one is that lazy to go to jail for it.

I don't know what is true.  I think you might be romanticizing Communism maybe.  Of course you know that the US is a very right wing reactionary country.  I think a major problem for Americans is that the words Socialism and Communism have different meanings and interpretations and isn't properly defined.  Many Americans especially on the right view Norway as a socialist country while others view it as a capitalist country; the same as some very right wing reactionaries view Nazi Germany as socialist while other socialist think that is crazy to view the Nazis as socialist.

I copied this from a website I was reading and it sums up a good point of view on the capitalist socialist debate:

"My contribution is very basic. The trouble with socialism (at least when it was practiced in Ethiopia in 1974–91) was that it stopped people from investing and it hardly invested as a system. The classic case is housing. It nationalised private houses but did not maintain them or build new ones; it did not allow individuals to maintain or build — the result houses fell down and homelessness became rampant.

Where investments were made, say in state farms, they were not managed efficiently leading to wastage of public resources. Of course the “Workers’ Party” members took the lion’s share of the limited resources and led luxurious lives. I therefore disagree with Umair’s assertion that socialism is you getting rich. Socialism, as I understand it, is actually us getting poor except those who take power in the name of workers.

We, as humans the most intelligent creatures (at least on this planet), must be able to build a system that is fair to all citizens. We should not discourage capitalism from growing but it must grow responsibly! We must develop mechanisms so that we don’t get capitalists richer while us getting poorer. I am not just thinking about taxation here — social protection systems, PPPs, philanthropy, and building strong community structures that can make sure the poor are not left behind. The latter can also hold accountable those who get rich at the expense of the poor.

What is the role of government in all these? Providing a conducive policy environment for the development of “capitalism with a human face” and empowering individuals and communities! "

Here are some good reads:

https://www.mixedmartialarts.com/forums/OtherGround/Americans-dont-understand-communisms-dangers:2799985

https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1261275/

The pathology of SJW maggots. Posing as do-gooders, they are basically the source of a huge chunk of evil today.

What I want to know is when did trannies become the masters of the universe. It is absurd to lump their "plight" into a
different class than that of gays. It is obvious that both gay and tranny rights advanced in lock step. Access to
regular (real) female facilities is not a right. The courts are proving this fact by overturning attempts by tranny
"activists" from demanding female services. Recall that these trannies are not gender-changed, but just pretend
that they are females.

The age of reason in the west is over.

@KVS

Good articles. The west exerts huge cultural influence in the world. This culture is corrupt. Well more corrupt than other examples in the world. We should learn not to follow them. The Hollywood culture. Russia is right to have it's own moral codes regarding social conduct. But there is danger too for Russia. I see on sputnik news, nudity and a kind of homage to corrupt Western culture. This must be fought. Opposed.

And the funny thing is that the west will defend nudity after spending centuries drumming into the natives their conservative christian values of prudishness... some see it as freedom to express yourself, but you could equally argue against it as respect for privacy and embarassment... not everyone looks good naked.

The natives lack of clothing in Africa , was not a sign of corruption. But in modern society, it has bad meanings. Irrespective of modern political system, human biological reproductive maturity and capacity leads modern human economic reproductive capacity.

Social planning and laws, to avoid prostitution and corruption should allow for early marriages with guidance against child bearing, until economic maturity is reached.

However, economic independence of women in modern economy, is an obstacle to early marriage. Contributes to corruption. Together with cheap and non unionised female labour force. Adding to low wages and conditions for men too. The age of marriage for women increasing in developed countries. In Japan, this is about 35 years old.

nomadski wrote:@KVS

Good articles.  The west exerts huge cultural influence in the world. This culture is corrupt. Well more corrupt than other examples in the world. We should learn not to follow them. The Hollywood culture. Russia is right to have it's own moral codes regarding social conduct. But there is danger too for Russia. I see on sputnik news, nudity and a kind of homage to corrupt Western culture. This must be fought. Opposed.

I have seen 5 Hollywood movies the last 10 years, everything I buy these days is Chinese except of my cars which historically are German, (but I try to switch to Japanese makers partially).
Personal life, almost ban western women at all. I am totally immune to Western culture, I am reasonably wealthy (and getting better) and do high-end stuff in my field of expertise.
For me anglo-zionist soft power is a thing of the past, and since I use to be quite rapid in adapting changes I believe more like me will follow after the mid 2020s.

It is good to know hannibal . And until laws are passed that foster family and social life, personal actions are all that is left for us, to try to save ourselves from the rot. And it is not easy. Surrounded as we are with filth.

But for those who read this, then I say, if you have children of marriage age of late teen or early twenty. Then help them marry. Allow them to live with you, if they have no home of their own. Encourage them not to have kids early. Not until they have jobs. Look after their children to allow them to work.  Have extended family life. Living in big family units. Common households. Support each other.

https://summit.news/2020/01/13/student-demonized-for-protesting-against-drag-queen-storytime-commits-suicide/

One has to wonder:

1) Was he such a softie that he couldn't handle a bit of pressure.

2) Was the pressure so insane that it caused a normal person to commit suicide.

I lean towards (2). Whatever western bleaters claim, the west is a species of PC totalitarian toilet.

The classic case is housing. It nationalised private houses but did not maintain them or build new ones; it did not allow individuals to maintain or build — the result houses fell down and homelessness became rampant.

The problem in the western model is that there is often little or no tax on the rich... so we have a situation here in New Zealand where in Auckland there are many houses sitting empty worth a million dollars or more because they are investment properties.
Heres a little story... in this case the rich person happens to be Chinese, but the origin of the rich person makes no real difference it is a case of the rich getting richer and the poor continuing to suffer because of it... a Chinese millionaire comes to Auckland and visits a real estate agent and asks him to show him 10 houses worth about 1 million dollars, so they spend the next couple of days going to these three places and he looks and they get back to the real estate agents office and the guy asks him which house he is interested in. He buys all ten houses for about 1 million dollars each. He does not put people in the houses though he might bring his family over and put them in a couple of them... in five years time he then sells all ten houses... for about 2.5 million each...

Now with just owning a property and then selling it he made a profit of 15 million dollars in 5 years... he already had lots of money so he didn't need it, but the point is that when you are in Dunedin and are trying to buy a house and you have people coming in an offering 50K more than they are asking you have no chance of getting that house... in 2-3 years time they will sell the house on and make probably 2-3 hundred thousand dollars.... same game but on a smaller scale, but the point is that most people who work to earn a living could never make that sort of tax free income in that time... especially when you add in to the equation that they are probably doing it in other places too.

It is easier to make more money with money than to work and earn it.... you can talk about poor people being lazy because they want to sit back and get paid welfare, but rich people waste money on 10K gold watches and half million dollar cars, and they can afford that... not because they work harder or longer hours than you do, but because they are already rich and can make more at any time by using that money to work for them.

If you looked at a modern company... say apple where the CEO gets millions of dollars every year for approving the ideas of those below them and the people at the bottom who make the product probably get minimum wage... you would normally call that a pyramid scheme and think it was illegal.

The problem with the west is that the wages are skewed upwards.... the CEOs not only get huge salaries but they get bonuses and company cars and planes and free lunches and dinners and secretaries to help do their work for them, their own carparks so they don't have to arrive early to find a park, they often have healthcare insurance included and the business often pays for their phone and their fuel and their internet etc etc, so not only do they get more money than they need the company often pays for stuff so they don't have to pay for that either... clothing allowances etc etc...

The guy on the factory floor earning minimum wage doesn't get any of that... but if he fucks up you can bet your ass he will get fired and wont get paid any bonuses when he goes even if he has been working there for 20 years...

That is what is wrong with the west.

Affordable housing is a prime example of the free market cargo cult intellectual fail. In Toronto, we had the municipal government
giving hundreds of millions of dollars in grants to condo and apartment developers for "cheaper units". Nobody even knew
about this program. I am quite sure that no poor ever moved in to those units and thus it was just a cash gift to the fat cats.

I am always hearing true believers talk about the efficiency of the market. They argue that privatizing affordable house construction
only brings benefits. BS. It brings in profit overhead. It is way cheaper for the municipality to have its own construction company
to build such units. There are no stock holders and executives that need to be paid an arm and a leg. Russia is actually a great
example how far one can go on a model where the government owns critical companies. Russia can build ice breakers and submarines
5-6 times cheaper than fat cat profiteer western outfits.

And here it is clear that price =/= quality. In fact, high price can bean total garbage like the Zumwalt. The only thing those tubs
had going for them were their supposed "all aspect" stealth. Fanboi wet dreams don't create physical reality. Over the horizon detection
of ships by bouncing EM off the ionosphere is not affected by this "stealth".