The House of David

"dawnbreak in the west"

Saturday, July 08, 2017

Transferring Forgottonia

The state Illinois has run out of Other People's Money and the knives are out. One interesting article came here from Kass in Chicago: divvy Illinois' territory between its neighbours. I suggest starting according to historical precedent.

Some time ago I read about states-that-weren't; among these was a section of Illinois, 'Forgottonia'. The state 'Illinois' is called that because the middle third of it follows the Illinois River on both east and west sides. The west bank of the Illinois, all the way to the Mississippi (the border) was, historically, the Military Tract of 1812; it got tossed into Illinois in 1818. Since then the old Tract has been ignored by Chicago and Springfield. Local sleazebag Dick Durbin recently used it as his springboard into Congress where he can ignore it full time.

My suggestion is for Illinois to sell this land back to the US military. The two parties can agree on what amount of state debt the tract is worth, in men and land. The Feds can then immediately turn around and offer this tract to Iowa and/or Missouri over to the west.

The name of the 'Illinois' remnant might become less accurate, since now it will be wholly on the eponymous river's eastern shore; but Mississippi is almost all on the east side of that river too.


posted by Zimri on 14:17 | link | 0 comments

The Jews did not aid the Muslims in Spain

When I got Larry Gonick's Cartoon History Of The Universe part 3, it mentioned the Islamic invasion of Spain. Gonick assumed a consensus of late 1990s history-books, that the Jews had acted as a quinta columna. Gonick didn't deny it; instead, he excused it. Naturally the White Right has its own take.

When Gonick was writing, Norman Roth had already called shenanigans. The fact of eighth-century 'Islamic' Spain is that it was a damned mess. The first 'Muslims' who showed up were a ragtag band of Berbers and Arab adventurers, who did a lot of plunder but not a lot of ruling. The Arabophones left no contemporary records and precious little in the way of hadith. The Berbers were illiterate and the Jews were near-silent.

To the extent there was a common-tongue it was probably North African Romance (h/t zeca), which might even have had a name by now: Andalosi. Accordingly there survives a Hispanic Christian chronicle in Latin. But it mainly seems to be a translation of a Damascene Muslim text, with a very few local notices added in.

Last year I found some contemporary records of what was going on in late eighth-century Spain, over in France. The most credible military powers in Spain appear to have coalesced as an Umayyad exile-state, running the courts according to Awzaite jurisprudence. Azwa'i over in Syria was the last Umayyads' jihad-state jurist. Where did that leave the Jews under his legal system... er, badly.

Gonick's excuse for that Jewish collusion he'd assumed was that the old Visigothic king of Spain had been a bigot. And hey, why not; I am not here to defend Dark Age monarchy. But the Muslims were bigots too; Suras 3-5 were all in the Qur'an by the turn of the eighth century. If Umayyad jurisprudence was bad for the Jews in the 760s AD, it was probably bad in the 710s as well.

Given this model, one should expect a lot of silence from Jewish sources as they tried to avoid getting killed by any of the factions ravaging the Spanish countryside. This silence is exactly what we find. Maybe we could assume, with Andrew Anglin, and even with Larry Gonick(!), that modern Ashkenazi Jews hate Teutonic Christians just so much that Jewish treachery is to be suspected in the absence of evidence. But we are dealing with a different time in a different place with different Jews under different circumstances. So until further evidence comes to light I am siding with Norman Roth.

UPDATE 7/16/2017: Rep. Scalise followed Gonick's example.


posted by Zimri on 13:37 | link | 0 comments

Friday, July 07, 2017

How the media defends its lies

When someone is out undermining Western asabiya, the media don't like to report on that. Instead they like to report on the people doing the actual reporting. Usually with an aim to destroy them.

Take this house servant of the New Class, Terry Collins, reporting on online 'hate'. Does Collins look into both sides? Nah. He looks at the opposition to such bottom-feeders as Michael 'Mikey' Weinstein. Weinstein is one of those who founds Foundations, in this case the 'Military Religious Freedom Foundation'. Weinstein is following the SPLC's racket, attracting donations to cause a big fuss where it's not wanted. Collins isn't writing an article about actual hate; he's writing to convince you that all the 'hate' is on the Right and that the Right is 'hate'.

There was a time that we might be swayed by this. But we're too used to it; we're too used to the old okie-doke. We're too used to some ambitious troll making waves on the Left by telling lies about the Right, and then riding on the wave of pushback as A Stance Against Bullying.

When the media get back to reportage and lay off the power trips, then I'll consider their case again.


posted by Zimri on 21:00 | link | 0 comments

The 'pharisees' were a rhetorical trope

I am a not-so-proud bearer of a 'B' in GCSE Divinity, Royal Shrewsbury 1989. The Divinity course was the Crown's way of instituting good Anglicanism into us fifteen-year-old boys. QE2 and Maggie agreed it very important we all knew that the first Western Pope, Saint Peter, was married. Among the other fact(oid)s we were 'taught', was that the Pharisees were the ancestors of the modern Jewish rabbis.

Yeeeah, wellll... about thaaaat. Annette Yoshiko Reed asks: When did Rabbis become Pharisees?. Dr Reed looks into the Christian witness at the migration of the 'pharisee' trope throughout early Christian literature. She turns up that after Matthew floated how wicked the Pharisees were, many early Christians approvingly quoted it, especially chapter 23... as we'd expect... except that they didn't use the word 'pharisee' against the Jews. Usually Christians used it against people in their own church whom they disapproved. It took until Jerome before Christians started thinking, maybe these are the forerunners to the fourth-century rabbinate.

Even then, we see problems with the pharisee - rabbi connexion. For instance Matthew's 'pharisees' were astrologers where orthodox Jews aren't, and haven't been. Y'all did watch Husbands and Wives, nu?

I am reminded of how the Dead Sea scrollwriters used to hurl invective against the Seekers Of Smooth Things (dorshei hakhalakôt). The targets aren't around to explain themselves; we have to translate the puns which their enemies hurled at them. The Dead Sea's enemies were presumably dorshei after halakha.

As for Matthew's enemies - well, that's anyone's guess. First-century Judaean popular piety was fluid and, often, simply insane. You might honestly be better off watching Life of Brian again.


posted by Zimri on 20:37 | link | 0 comments

Monday, July 03, 2017

Alien Legacy: extension to the FAQ

Every few years I try to play Alien Legacy again - as you may remember. Back then I got about as far as starting up The Plot; see the FAQ.

In my latest go-round, The Plot started rather later - somewhere around 1690. I think this is because I'd delayed building habitats beyond the one per colony. I'd discovered Level 3 power-plants, and upgraded the lot of mine, which started to drain my life-support on those colonies. Since habitats add life-support, I'd sort-of had to build those extra habitats. Apparently if you build more than four habitats across Gaea and Rhea, The Plot takes notice of your burgeoning population.

Another plot device I've noted: at some point I had to build two research facilities on "a station" which meant, Calypso. Since my doodz were at near-full employment, I couldn't get them off my ship, and couldn't wake any more sleepyheads. So I built an extra hab on Calypso, and the colonists started awakening faster. Then I got the opportunity to upgrade to level-2 habs, albeit only on Calypso. That's space for 400 doodz on the home base. Great! Until the cryo starts malfunctioning, and you have to clear the sleepyheads all out. Inconvenient if you don't have a lot of vehicles on hand... anyway, by keeping the doodz to south of 150 (by shipping them off), and by keeping a vehicle parked on Calypso, this plot device doesn't kick in. I didn't even know about this particular plot-point until tonight. Move 1700ish.

Remember that solar-systems are concentric. You can make this work for you. For instance: Calypso got all the way to Gaea, third planet from the sun. Did you know you can move it that little bit further in? I recommend the second planet, Rhea; a lovely tropical resort this season, and with much spare ore, and near to Prometheus also with much spare ore. Do this after you've planted some colonies and exactly one vehicle on Gaea (for future exploration).

Some say, don't bother colonising the eight Beta Asteroids. I say, phooey on that - well, half phooey. By keeping a colony on all even numbered Betas (or odd), with lots of spare doodz and botz, and one ship on each of the four: you can launch off whichever Beta is closest to the Zeus system and populate it thence. It doesn't take a lot of robots to people Zeus because the two planets there have leftover botz from Calypso. The Betas are also good for Thetis and (later) Hades - although, you'll have to bring your own robots for these. One issue I had in one of the Betas, a decade ago, was a bug that granted me (or cost me) tens of thousands in ore or energy.

Another point: you can, of course, refuel a vehicle from a colony. But: you can do this only if that colony has some energy points on hand. It is safest to bring energy along on your trip. If you want a hab on there for humans, which - spoiler - you do, then you'll almost certainly need to bring your own botz and life support, as well. My usual plan was to send one ship with 20ish botz (and the other bric-a-brac); the next ship full of doodz and maybe some extra botz. Why not on just one ship? My experience with Hades will teach you, young padawan . . .

By the time I'd got the opportunity to push to Hades, I was short on ships and the journey was going to take 48 turns out of the limit of 50. (Also, I like to live life on the edge.) I was able to colonise Hades on one ship with 200 fuel left, carrying only 30 doodz, some botz, and life. First I built the colony and dropped the botz and life off. Then I visited another square for energy and then one more square for ore, came back and dropped THOSE off. But I still couldn't refuel, with the doodz on board! So I sent the ship with doodz into orbit; built a hab on Hades; then put my doodz back onto Hades (by freefall, presumably). I then set my doodz n' botz to building all that other stuff a healthy colony needs. Yeah, the moons and planets tend to have ruins with some spare life. No, you're not going to find it if carrying doodz and <=200 remaining fuel.

Other general points: I built two research facilities on Calypso and moved them to math as soon as I could. This helps a lot early on, saves tedium on exploring worlds. Later, though, the outer worlds Thetis and Hades appear to have a lot of their own math. So, when the Science Gal (Patel, in my run) told me it's time to upgrayyed, I took that opportunity to retool to Electronics, by now thinner on the ground.

When starting out, you'll want a factory on Calypso for vehicles. After you've got your vehicles on four Betas and roaming around the outer planets, it's safe to stop and move to botz. I made an effort to fish-out Hebe and Hera, and Thetis, of all their plot-points and research-points, so I wouldn't need vehicles on them; I sent the vehicles back into the inner-system, by way of a Beta if need be.


posted by Zimri on 18:41 | link | 0 comments

On this site




Sophia



Politics



Random crap

Powered By Blogger TM

Property of author; All Rights Reserved