Brassless Balls

Not brass dinosaurs

Several years ago I went through a phase of collecting brass (and sometimes bronze) statues from antique and thrift stores. Through working for a company that distributed electronic components, I learned that the price of copper had gone up quite a bit (brass contains both copper and zinc.) This was often a factor in the price increases of certain products. “Tell him we can’t honor that price anymore. The price of copper has gone up,” would be a typical explanation you’d have to give to a customer.

Anyways, occasionally I would have the inclination to go to contemporary outlet and department stores hoping to find similar statues and artifacts, with the hope that I could score something neat that might increase in value in the future. Well, I was sorely disappointed to discover that nearly everything was absolute junk. Worse than that though, was that these companies would try to pass off something that was meant to look like one of those nice brass statues or bookends, yet it would be merely come cheap metal or ceramic that was slathered with gold paint. To add insult to injury, they would sell it for the same price (even adjusted for inflation) as what one could get a quality brass knick knack back when you could still get them 20 years ago. The savings in manufacturing a cheaper, lower quality product is barely even passed on to the consumer. My guess is that if there are people still making legit brass and bronze statues, they are being sold as luxury items at exponentially higher prices. This might all seem trivial, but it’s a microcosm for what corporations do:

1. Manufacture something as cheaply as they can and provide the lowest quality product that people will accept.

2. Claim to be offering the product at a better price, even though they’re pocketing the bulk of the money they’re by saving using cheaper materials and labor, and the consumer is still paying almost the same as before.

3. Offer something as a luxury item that used to be a standard, inexpensive item or add-on. A good example of this is when hotels started tacking on “resort fees” for things that used to be free like using the pool or making a local phone call from your room.

4. Copy each other, so that all companies basically have the same policies, processes and products, leaving you with no choice (you decide to take your business to another department store and then another, only to find that none of them carry genuine brass statues, and the gold painted ceramic triceratops is your only option.)

Libertarians or republicans might read this and say, “Well that’s just the free market, bro.” Perhaps, but let’s not pretend that the free market innovation inherently results in better quality products being made. They are only “better” in the sense of being able to make a more efficient profit for someone, somewhere. Just as beautiful and intelligent creatures don’t always survive the evolution and natural selection process without a little help from their friends, often times, the unchecked free market often leads to one being surrounded by cheap junk.

Not brass (not marble either)

Brandon Adamson is the author of Beatnik Fascism


Robert Stark Talks to Ashley Messinger About Retro Futurism ( Part II)

Robert Stark and co-host Brandon Adamson talk to returning guest Ashley Messinger. Ashley is based in the UK and writes for Brandon’s You can also find Ashley on Twitter.

Interview can be found here.

Topics Include:

A continuation on the topic of a “Redpilled” SWPL culture and it’s viability
The implicit Whiteness of progressive causes such as Environmentalism, Effective Altruism, and Transhumanism
The importance of being technologically advanced in contrast to gun culture and “Becoming a Barbarian”
Creating City States based on shared interest
Biopunk, Biomorphism, and vertical gardens
Brandon’s interest in 70’s Retro Futurism (ex. Logan’s Run)
Steampunk, Urban fantasy literature, and the technology of Victorian England
Decopunk; the film Dark City
The lack of vision in new architecture and urbanism
Roman Archeo Futurism
80’s Retro-Futurism, Cyberpunk, and Fashwave
The Bearer of “Trad” News
Hip to the Moon: Brandon Adamson Drops Out to Conquer the Stars
Robert’s Journey to Vapor Island; Roger Blackstone’s “Neon Nationalism”
The Man in the High Castle series; the alternative society portrayed and the Retro-Futuristic architecture
Whether Fascism was anti-modern or about creating an alternative modernity
Ashley’s review of the film Call Me by Your Name
Age of Consent Laws
The film The Crush Starring Alicia Silverstone

Interview With Ashley Messinger on The Stark Truth (Part I)

Robert Stark and co-host Brandon Adamson talk to ASHLEY MESSINGER. Ashley is based in the UK and writes for Brandon’s site, You can also follow Ashley on Twitter. The interview can be found here.

Topics Include:

Why Brandon’s moniker is now “The Left of the AltRight”
Ashley’s political evolution to the Alt Left (Left Wing of the Alt-Right)
Ashley’s disillusionment with the Alt-Right
The immigration and demographic situation in the UK
Radical Islam, the Charlie Hebdo Massacre, and the Rotherham scandal
The ineptitude of Right Wing politics in the UK
Ashley’s preference for SWPL cultural amenities
Whether there is a large enough demographic for a “Red Pilled” SWPL movement
Misconceptions about English culture
The Thacherite Neo-Liberal de-industrialization of the UK
Ashley’s support for a secular form of Distributism
Luck egalitarianism
The Signalling Model of Education
Automation and the Basic Income
The Techno Futurist faction of Neo-Reaction
Effective Altruism
Ashley’s article The Push to Normalize Polonophilia

The Bearer of “Trad” News

One of my least favorite memes/concepts employed by the alt-right is “trad” – short for “traditional” – primarily because the concept bears so little relationship or relevance to the world that we currently live in.

If you live in a technologically modern country, your way of life is overwhelmingly likely to not even remotely resemble anything that can accurately be described as “traditional”. For a way of life to be traditional, it must must follow in the footsteps of prior generations. The Amish, for example, are one of the very few subcultures within North America, who live in a truly traditional manner. They practice a low-tech agrarian mode of subsistence, in which new technologies are only adopted very selectively and only following great deliberation. Due to the exceedingly slow pace of technological change in Amish communities, sons still lead very similar lives as their fathers and grandfathers. They have the same profession (typically a farmer or artisan), practice the same religion, and participate in similar social arrangements and events. This cannot be said by over 99% of the North American or European population. If you are reading this, your way of life is likely radically different from that of your parents, whose lives were equally different from that of their parents. This can be said, at minimum, about every generation born since the earliest periods of industrialization – and possibly before that, as agrarian societies weren’t nearly as stagnant as commonly conceived of.


Present societies are “intergenerationally multicultural”, in that every generation practices a different culture than the prior one. Conditions differ sufficiently between generations that each generation adapts differently to their respective circumstances. Of course, generations don’t regard each other as completely alien and unintelligible, as common practices and frames of reference do link them together. However, even shared practices differ in both subtle and dramatic ways. In North America, boomers, Gen-Xers, Millennials, and Gen-Zers all speak English, but they don’t exactly speak it identically. Accents differ and new slang is introduced with every generation, the latest of which tends to be inspired by memes originating on Internet discussion forums. All living generations use automobiles, but younger generations are more likely to forego car ownership and rely upon Lyft, Uber and various carsharing services. All generations consume media entertainment while looking at a screen. However, older generations are more likely to watch cable and network television, whereas the youngest generations play video games and watch five minute YouTube clips. Boomers still advise Millennial men to pursue women using courtship rituals that worked in the 1950s, but would likely get one branded an obsessive creepy stalker today. Millennials who happen to be employed often work in job categories that didn’t exist 50 years ago. Popular musical styles vary dramatically between generations – to the point where prior generations regard new music as unlistenable. Sexual mores have both loosened and tightened in different respects. There are far fewer settings where pursuit of sex or romance is considered appropriate – For example, the days of a lawyer or detective romantically pursuing and marrying his secretary seem to be over. However, due to the ubiquitous availability of Internet porn, even the most sexually conservative Millennials know the meanings of terms like “bukaake” and “double penetration”. The once predominant ideology of the U.S., namely American exceptionalism – has been dethroned within the course of my lifetime by progressivism, and yet older generations are oblivious to this transition. Right-wing Millennials are more likely to join the alt-right – a movement that’s arguably both post-American and globalist, despite calling itself “nationalist” – than to embrace the “respectable conservatism” of William F Buckley and the National Review.

In the above paragraph, I’m not conveying any information that the reader doesn’t already know, but my point is that those who deem themselves “trad” are not exempt from the aforementioned generational shifts. If you shitpost memes about “thots” and “Chads” on Twitter and 4chan, listen to synthwave or neofolk on YouTube, or participate in a Skype group with other “trad”-minded folk, there’s nothing about your way of life that even approximates anything traditional. No generation prior to yours has spent its free time in this manner. If you attempted to explain memeposting to your grandfather, it would strike him as every bit as alien as the culture of a Muslim, if not more so. Your daily activities are as much a manifestation of modernism as that of green-haired intersectional feminists who think broadcasting their politics on Tinder is a good way to attract a man. Furthermore, if you ever end up having children (like a good “trad” should), they are unlikely to mimic your idiosyncratic customs, as they will grow up under a different set of conditions and will regard your practices as irrelevant to their “lived experience”.

I’ve observed attempts at reconstructing lost traditions, most notably Asatru – or Germanic paganism. Given that most of our European ancestors converted to Christianity at various points during the Middle Ages, depending upon location, the practice of paganism amounts to a form of historical reenactment (e.g., LARPing), based upon mythological texts written after the Norse conversion to Christianity, incomplete historical accounts and archeological digs. A religious practice is not exactly “traditional” when neither your father, grandfather nor great-grandfather had any familiarity with it, much less if you have to rely upon a potentially faulty interpretation of scattered historical remnants to reconstruct it. Also, the children of those who practice Asatru are more likely to regard Asatru as a weird eccentricity of their right-wing hippie parents than to embrace it themselves, meaning it won’t likely transfer between generations.

Others on the right have attempted to adopt traditions that have persisted unbroken in other cultures, most notably Eastern Orthodox Christianity. Unlike Asatru, the practice of Orthodoxy has been practiced in an unbroken lineage since the formation of the church. However, it also doesn’t strike me as particularly “traditional” for Anglo-Germanic descended white Americans to convert to a religion historically practiced by Slavs and Middle Easterners, particularly when so few of their white American coethnics living in the same community are likely to follow suit. As with the children of parents who practice Asatru, the children of Orthodox Christian converts are just as likely to become atheists or Buddhists as they are to embrace what they see as their kooky right-wing Dad’s LARPy religion. In the meantime, numerous Orthodox Slavs, Armenians and Lebanese remain “Orthodox” in name, while adopting the same modern lifestyles as any secular liberal in response to the incentives generated by the modern world.

One other possible option is to invent something completely new and turn it into a tradition. However, I see this as unlikely, given the rapid pace of technological and economic change during the era in which we live. A traditional way of life is dependent upon a “steady state economy”, in which available technology and economic demands don’t vary significantly between generations. Within an agrarian, pastoral or hunter-gatherer setting, traditions serve as useful intergenerational knowledge, freeing up each generation from having to repeat the discoveries and mistakes of their predecessors. Under such circumstances, traditions conducive to survival and reproduction tend to persist and proliferate, while those that don’t tend to be discorded – or kill off or reduce the numbers of those who practice them. In an industrial or post-industrial economy, all traditions end up discarded, as the practices useful to one generation don’t necessarily impart practices useful to the next. The demands required to make a living, find friends and attract a mate can change so rapidly that any given set of customs can be rendered obsolete within a decade. It is certainly possible that industrial society could collapse even in our lifetimes, but those born during this period will adopt a very different culture than ours. Furthermore, we will most certainly die before the world once again reaches a steady state economy that persists between generations.

If we actually were able to experience a traditional way of life in a small community under a steady state economy, what makes us so certain that we’d actually like it? We are not psychologically adapted to such an environment. Regardless of how “traditional” or “right-wing” one might think of themself as, each of us grew up in an atmosphere of material comfort, overstimulation and hedonism, and I haven’t witnessed a single person completely sever their addiction to it. We like comfort and convenience, digital entertainment, easy access to sex, urban anonymity, plentiful mood-altering substances, the ability to video chat with friends from other continents, vacations to remote locales, Lyft rides home when drunk, etc. Hedonism by itself is of course insufficient to make us feel satisfied, and when taken to excess, it can lead to self-destruction. Many people do find themselves uninspired and depressed by the softness of the modern world, but they generally respond not by abandoning it entirely, but by adopting surrogate challenges or mini-struggles to counter-balance it. They will take up rock climbing, crossfit, boxing, mountain biking, hiking, bushcrafting, etc, which allows them to experience a psychological state approximating pre-modern struggle for a brief period of time, before returning to their modern apartment – with packages just delivered from Amazon Prime waiting in a locker in the lobby (accessible by code delivered via text to their smartphone).

My intention is not to impart the message, “Change is inevitable, therefore it’s good, therefore embrace all of it in its entirety”. However, I don’t think we have any choice but to recognize that our identity is inescapably modern. Traditions don’t have much to offer us, hence why they long ceased to propagate themselves. Our way of life is new and bears little resemblance to those who preceded us. However, we must recognize that not every behavior that the modern world permits or encourages is to our advantage. It’s in our interest to engage with the modern world selectively, and we can only inform our decisions by observing the fallout of other peoples’ and our own bad decisions. While it would be more efficient to inherit the practices and customs of our predecessors, this is not an option in a world characterized by accelerated economic and technological change. Each generation must perpetually reinvent their culture, retaining only the practices of prior generations that prove themselves beneficial, while discarding the remainder and replacing them with something new. Our best option is to adopt an orientation of selective futurism, while purging the word “traditional” from our vocabulary. It doesn’t exist and will never exist in our lifetime.

Decay blogs at

The Hand is Pinker Than the Eye

Apologies for borrowing the title of this article from one my favorite Pink Panther cartoons, but it seems as appropriate as ever. The AltRight was quick to embrace Harvard professor Steven Pinker’s recent remarks referring to them as “highly intelligent and internet savvy.” This was somewhat laughable to me, as it should be clear to anyone with the least bit of critical thinking skills that in the overall context,(as Jesse Singal correctly observed) Pinker was saying that people in the AltRight held incorrect views and were simply just not exposed to the powerful counter arguments and explanations which would refute their ideas. He referred to them or (or those potentially susceptible to persuasion toward their way of thinking) as lacking the necessary facts which would provide ideological immunity toward embracing identitarian views.

Now you might think at this point that someone as intelligent as Pinker must hold some kind of trump (small t) card and that these counter arguments he has must be devastating. Well, far from me to come off like an anti-vaxxer, but let’s just say that the “immunity” that Pinker offers to inject you with consists mainly of the same basic bitch arguments you’ve likely already heard a thousand times already and rejected.

Allow me to give a couple of examples:
Pinker claims that the “the majority of domestic terrorism is committed by right-wing extremist groups.” First off, this statement is rather vague and misleading in and off itself. For one thing, Muslims represent a tiny percentage of the population relative to whites and other demographics, so who commits the “majority” of domestic terrorist acts isn’t the most relevant statistic. Here are a few things to keep in mind:

A. Muslims commit terrorism at a rate which is vastly disproportionate to their percentage of the population.

B. Islamic groups self identify as Muslims and almost always clearly state their religious motivations for carrying out their attacks, whereas “right-wing extremist group” or “white supremacist” are dubious, subjective classifications often attributed by third parties and which may or may not be accurate or even have served as primary motivations for the attacks.

C. The media and the government frequently downplay Islamic violent acts, to sustain the narrative, minimize panic and prevent the dreaded backlash against Muslims. Often attacks will be comically categorized as “workplace violence” and the Islamic component of the crime will be ignored, even when explicitly stated by the perp as an inspiration for committing the act.

D. When Pinker says “the majority of domestic terrorism is committed by right-wing extremist groups,” what metric is he using? Are we talking body counts or number of incidents? Can we really give the same weight to an incident like 9/11 where 3000 people were killed to a situation where someone whom happens to be AltRight panics and drives into some people while his car is being surrounded and attacked? I’m looking over the list of recent domestic terrorist incidents, and I’m just not seeing a whole lot of “right-wing extremist groups” or even whites being implicated. There is the Vegas shooting of course, but as yet we have no information as to the motive.

E. Unlike other forms of domestic terrorism, Islamic terrorist is almost entirely preventable. It’s like “bonus” terrorism. The 9/11 hijackers were all here as a result of student Visas. If we did not continue import people (whom we do not benefit from anyway) from Islamic countries, our risk for this particular brand of terrorism would be greatly reduced. Since these people explicitly state their hostility toward western values and express no desire to assimilate to our cultural and social norms, one wonders what the point is.

Another factoid Pinker touts as some kind of antidote to AltRight ideas is that even though Blacks commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime, the Irish also once had high crime rates, therefore it’s possible for groups’ criminality to change over time. Okay sure, but so what? A few points:

A. What parameters are we talking about? The Irish once had higher crime rates, but what was the murder/violent sexual assault rate relative to the rate among blacks for the same types of crimes? This would be useful information to know. Italians also were once over represented in crime. It’s perhaps telling though, that the nature of their criminality was vastly different from that of blacks. Italian crime took the form of organized and sophisticated syndicates which often involved committing murders and robberies in association with those activities. The mob built and managed casino resort hotels though. It didn’t rape old ladies or kill random people on the street for 5 bucks. There was a degree of impulse control and future time orientation in play even within the criminal element.

B. While crime rates do fluctuate among groups depending upon their circumstances and cultural environment, the violent crime rate among blacks is consistently higher throughout the entire world, remaining elevated, spanning over a wide variety of countries and radically different environments. Sure, it’s certainly possible that over the next 80 years, the violent crime rate among blacks will be greatly reduced…but so what? Why are we obligated to subject ourselves to it in the meantime and accept this finality as a given. It’s a bet I didn’t agree to take. Since the vast majority of blacks have little interest in assuming any responsibility for their own behavior and would rather blame white people, wouldn’t it make more sense to go our separate ways and allow blacks the self-determination to flourish to remove whites as a variable in their equation for success/failure? Then in 80 years, after nations like Haiti have advanced space programs, established functioning sewage systems and can sustain violent crime rates equal to those of poor white communities if West Virginia, perhaps we can revisit the possibility of multiracial integration. If in 80 years blacks have demonstrated they have the ability to act civilized and courteous in public in accordance with western ideals, then we can give it another go.

C. Using the argument of Irish or Italian crime fluctuation is unlikely to persuade people with potentially AltRight leanings to embrace multiracialism or mass immigration from non-white countries. In fact, most people who hold these views believe that allowing migrants from Italy, Greece, etc into the US was a mistake to begin with (I say this as someone whose 1/4 Italian by the way.) These migrant waves did irreparably transform the country in culturally undesirable ways for the Anglos who were here at the time, and they had every right to resist being overwhelmed by them. Just because the status quo seems “normal” to us in the contemporary, that isn’t inherently indicative of it being an improvement for those who pre-existed its manifestation. As F Scott Fitzgerald (part Irish!) wrote in This Side of Paradise:

When Amory went to Washington the next week-end he caught some of the spirit of crisis which changed to repulsion in the Pullman car coming back, for the berths across from him were occupied by stinking aliens-Greeks, he guessed, or Russians. He thought how much easier patriotism had been to a homogeneous race, how much easier it would have been to fight as the Colonies fought, or as the Confederacy fought. And he did no sleeping that night, but listened to the aliens guffaw and snore while they filled the car with the heavy scent of latest America.

It’s been nearly 100 years since This Side of Paradise was published, and Fitzgerald’s sentiments still ring as true as ever, while Pinker’s ideological inoculations carry the familiar scent of snake oil.

Brandon Adamson is the author of Beatnik Fascism

Skirting the Issue With Tara McCarthy

For a long time, this site sported the tagline, “The Left Wing of the AltRight.” Not many people have noticed that several months ago,(around the time I wrote this article) I changed it to “The Left of the AltRight,” which signified a location change from the outer left ideological sphere of the AltRight, to the actual outside of it. This wasn’t due to any particular change of beliefs on my behalf, but rather the AltRight’s endless purges and the shrinking of the ideological sphere itself to a point where some of us suddenly found ourselves no longer within it. It has been reduced to mostly a club for a small group of relatively insufferable people who waste most of their time trashing and alienating their few public advocates.

It’s essentially become a bunch of snake handlers raving about sodomites and porn and women and “degeneracy.” Yeah if I wanted all that I’d just go downtown Friday night and listen to those annoying weirdos with megaphones that yell stuff all night and hand out those cheesy fake “million dollar bill” bible pamphlets. Imagine having those obnoxious busybodies as your neighbors, monitoring your interactions and peering in your window late at night. The “movement” as it is, is filled with such socially insufferable people who an ardent pro-white individual might even conclude that diversity and multiculturalism aren’t all that bad comparatively. It’s a group with strategy that seems limited to street fighting fantasies, reading old books and Little House on the Prairie LARPing.

This brings us to the case of Tara McCarthy, who (quite reasonably) is beginning to wonder whether it is worthwhile to publicly advocate for people who show nothing but disdain for her:

Here’s my unsolicited advice: Don’t bother, Tara. It’s not worth it. You’ll never appease these kinds of people and the only way forward is to become part of something that they would never want to be included in. The best way to get away from people you don’t want to be around is to set up shop somewhere they would never want to go. If you market your content to radical traditionalists and uptight sexual puritans that want “white sharia” (or a slightly milder version) and guys that don’t believe women should be involved in politics or speak in public without a male chaperone, then ultimately you can expect to clash with your audience as they inevitably begin to scrutinize you according to those same standards.

Better yet, just ditch “traditionalism” and avoid the confusion altogether. Then those annoying people can fight among themselves forever about what’s “trad,” and you can focus on creatively adapting to the future. Those traditions which you find aesthetically appealing or practically useful in a technologically advanced society can be retained, and those which are incompatible or no longer offer a significant adaptive advantage can be discarded.

The Golden One recent made a video coming to Tara’s defense, which she quickly touted on Twitter as validation. This was somewhat amusing though, because The Golden One’s rationale for supporting her is that he sees women like her essentially as “useful idiots” (though he does not use those words) toward dismantling the left’s narrative that the AltRight is nothing but bitter incel losers. He doesn’t truly *believe* women should be allowed or trusted to be involved in politics on any genuine level. He just sees it as temporarily useful for optics purposes. Once the march through the institutions has been completed, the law will be laid down and all women will be forced to remain barefoot and pregnant, and only their husbands will be allowed to do the talking.

Ramzpaul provided a much better and more authentic defense of women in the AltRight. He also indirectly addresses an issue that I find common in the AltRight, which is the frequent inadvertent signaling of their own lack of self-control. They seem incapable of mastering simple skills like multitasking and time management. According to them, you’re either a guy who sits home and jacks off to porn all day, or a married family man with six children. Does it not occur to them that most people are perfectly capable of being married, having children, working a full-time job and jacking off every few days? They take the same tact with just about everything. There’s nothing preventing a woman from working, taking care of her children and making youtube videos about politics or any other subject. Millions of women can and do manage their time just fine in this way.

A friend of mine and fellow blogger recently made a similar observation:

“I get the impression that a lot of trads have extremely addictive personalities, such that they’re incapable of moderation. ‘If you open up the door for just a little bit of muh degeneracy, how do you prevent yourself from sliding into a meth-fueled gay orgy?’ Gosh, I dunno, somehow I manage to avoid it. Using intelligence to determine that too much of behavior X might cause one problems in the long run is apparently out of the question for them. You have to have some sort of blanket prohibition passed down from on high.”

Anyway good luck with the AltRight, Tara. I think I’m about finished with trying to influence it though, so I shouldn’t comment on it much more, else I’m liable to end up some kind of permanent concern troll. I prefer to just quietly leave and do my own thing. I recognize that ship has sailed for good. AltRight is a basically Westboro Baptist and Return of Kings hybrid ideology now. You can be pro-white without being in the AltRight and having to entertain their pet add-on issues or be constantly weighed down by all their psychological baggage. There are a lot of creative paths toward securing a future, and there are allies to be found in unlikely places.