Observations.

– Ke$ha, is like the Tracy Twyman of popular music. I deleted the rather insulting verbiage following that observation about both women, both are not without their talents and … public roles.

On Kesha, doubtless there are a few perverts reading this blog. What follows is simply out of an aesthetic appreciation of her dancing abilities. Obviously the girl started young.
Obligatory Jail-bait warning concluded.

Talented girl. Whatever became of the kid with the hat anyway? Thank god digital camcorders did not exist when I was in high school, neither did YouTube. It made it difficult to capture on video douche-like moments. We weren’t deprived though, we did have bbs’s, ascii art, and Fidonet..

Next topic.

– Bands like Dimmu Boigor, are evidence of something. What, you ask? That a steady diet of fantasy novels and psychotropic drugs can damage both good taste and sanity. A tendency to take H.P. Lovecraft novels as somehow indicating reality is linked to this. A tendency to take Peter Levenda’s Necronomicon as anything other than really creative occult fiction, well ditto.

Musically Dimmu Boigor are talented musicians. I do not deny this, most Black Metal bands are insanely talented on a technical level. But no Skarsgård, the dark creeping chaos beneath the occeans depths will not respond to your Enochian calls embedded in half-growled lyrics, underneath a 200bpm drum track…

-Sanity can be defined in a simple way: as the degree to which we recognize reality as real, and deal with it instead of escaping it.

-Blood Money: bring back weregild and diyaat. Most people oppose ‘Blood money’ on an ethical and pseudo-moral level. This is an error, for one the world generally pisses on your morals and laughs at the inside joke. For two, blood money is actually a deeply ethical and moral concept. Whenever someone is killed by an act of homicide or manslaughter does the “state” suffer?

No, people do.

People suffer emotionally, and they suffer financially. The Sharia’s diyaa, and the old Gothic/Teutonic Weregild recognized this, in compensating heirs and dependents to ease the economic impact of loosing a loved one. Do you have any damn idea how expensive funerals are? I regard this as self evident, so let’s move on.

-Dueling should be brought back. Have I gone too far man? No, not really.

It’s like, people talk about having abolished slavery, but slavery was never abolished. In fact it still exists on a far more massive scale than ever. Google “modern slavery” and “human trafficking” if you have any questions. Chattel slavery was just made formally illegal, on the level of private ownership.

Sorcery and magick are of language, twist words and definitions and lo, you can hide an elephant in drag under most people’s noses. The magick is in language. Slavery exists and certain people benefit from it to the tunes of hundreds of billions of dollars a year. (On a public level felons and military personnel are still 0wned by uncle Sam, but back to private slavery).

People have a ludicrous and cartooonish view of what bondage and slavery legally are, and are not. What do you thing wage slavery is? We should grow beyond entertaining verbally expressed mendacity and disingenuous speech.

Slavery still exists and in some form it will always exist. This isn’t an apology for it, it’s discussing reality.

So, on the same level – retributive violence still exists, as do blood feuds, and always will on some level.

That’s why I say, “Bring back the duel.”

Yes, the duel. Why? Well, it is simple, legal duels could decrease violent crime rates, while re-instituting some semblance of a culture of honor.

The West will never have a true culture of honor again, but you shouldn’t romanticise these things anyway. Overly honor bound cultures have deeply disturbing aspects, but so does a culture full of honorless geldings.

Honor in general is a good thing, in my eyes, and we can take a step back a bit to a world in which some small semblance of honor, enforced by the notion of someone you insult blowing your head off in a field in front of spectators, returns.

For the record, I’m actually serious about this, bring back dueling.

Why do people flagrantly cut each other off, spit on them in public, berate each other and act without couth?
Because they know the probability of someone whipping out a gun on them is remote.

So, if someone cuckolds you, takes your girlfriend from behind like a bitch in heat on your bed, and you walk in and catch them, then what?

Simple, call the authorities on the iphone, inform them you are challenging such and such to a duel, and let the registry of dueling malefactors schedule you two for a time on the green. If the guy is a dishonorable bastard, you can always kick him in the pecker and beat him senseless. Since he’s in your home, in your bedroom, I think assault charges will be hard to stick.

But the duel is preferred. And it shall solve problems. 50/50 chance one or the other will survive, honor and face restored.

I see nothing wrong with letting people kill each other over matters of insults and honor in controlled environments, where bystanders cannot be hurt.

The problem with our culture is a culture of coward geldings who are content to outsource their violence to other countries, drone bombings and watching out of shape mercs (aka contractors) doing it on TV.

Except the working classes and the poor, they know how to get real about such matters. I respect this, if someone says something that dishonors you and you punch him for it, frankly I think that’s a justifiable assault. But the middle classes and upper classes, cowardice. It makes it easy to do things to other people and only face the prospect of lawsuits and legally destroying the other’s life, if you have enough money.

To hell with this, a pistol, and 50 steps on the green.

Objections can be distilled to “dueling is violent and immoral, and so is killing people.”

I agree, with a few tiny caveats. However it remains that dueling will restrict the natural and inevitable violence that will occur anywhere you have a population of men who are not geldings and who are possessed of a reasonable amount of testosterone. How many people die in accidental bar fights every year? People who object to this stuff typically lead sheltered suburban lives.

Violence is inevitable, you want to limit it to a small circle. This will prevent murders, hits, and assassinations.

It’s a better alternative to drive by shootings.

So again bring, to deal with the results of duels, the old germanic/Anglosaxon weregild (what the Muslim Sharia calls diyaa) as a formal public welfare function. Murder isn’t a crime against the state, it’s a crime against specific people who are financially affected by it. If you kill someone then you damn well need to be able to pay up, this fits well with dueling.

I’m serious. The benefits are too obvious to go into, I trust and respect my reader’s intelligence. I mean, just think it over for a moment.

_EOF