02 Sep 2019


, ,


Yesterday, I ran across a Dark Web blogger and contributor to Twitter who calls himself “Spandrell.”

He is, typically of Dark Web types, both clever and well read. He is, for instance, obviously naming himself after a character in Aldous Huxley’s 1928 novel Point Counter Point: “Maurice Spandrell, an intellectual without purpose or faith (based on Charles Baudelaire..). For years Spandrell has devoted himself to vice and deliberate wickedness.”

Spandrell is critical of the Hong Kong demonstrators, and claims the US is putting them up to it. His hostility to America and his obvious familiarity with Hong Kong suggest that he is a Brit and what the British refer to as “Filth”: “Failed in London, Try Hong Kong.” He boasts of being the inventor of the concepts of “IQ Shredders” and “Bioleninism.”

The latter is described here:

[Y]ou can’t run a tight, cohesive ruling class with white men. They don’t need to be loyal. They’ll do ok anyway. A much easier way to run an obedient, loyal party is to recruit everyone else. Women. Blacks. Gays. Muslims. Transexuals. Pedophiles. Those people may be very high performers individually, but in a natural society ruled by its core of high performers, i.e. a white patriarchy, they wouldn’t have very high status. So if you promise them high status for being loyal to you; you bet they’re gonna join your team. They have much to gain, little to lose. The Coalition of the Fringes, Sailer calls it. It’s worse than that really. It’s the coalition of everyone who would lose status the better society were run. It’s the coalition of the bad. Literal Kakistocracy.

There’s a reason why there’s so many evil fat women in government. Where else would they be if government didn’t want them? They have nothing going on for them, except their membership in the Democratic party machine. The party gives them all they have, the same way the Communist party had given everything to that average peasant kid who became a middling bureaucrat in Moscow. And don’t even get me started with hostile Muslims or Transexuals. Those people used to be expelled or taken into asylums, pre-1960. Which is why American Progressivism likes them so much. The little these people have depends completely on the Left’s patronage. There’s a devil’s bargain there: the more naturally repulsive someone else, the more valuable it is as a party member, as its loyalty will be all the stronger. This is of course what’s behind Larry Auster’s First Law of minority relations: the worse a group behaves, the more the Left likes it.

This is also why the Left today is the same Left that was into Soviet Communism back in the day. What they approve of today would scandalize any 1920s Leftist. Even 1950s Leftist. But it’s all the same thing, following the same incentives: how to build a cohesive ruling class to monopolize state power. It used to be class struggle. Now it’s gender-struggle and ethnic struggle. Ethnic struggle works in America because immigrants have no territorial power base, unlike in Russia or China. So the old game of giving status to low-status minorities works better than ever. It works even better, unlike Lenin’s Russia, America has now access to every single minority on earth. Which is why the American left is busy importing as many Somalis as they can. The lowest performing minority on earth. Just perfect.

If you think it can’t get worse than transexuals or pedophiles, you’re really not understanding how this works. Look at this NYT article: a black woman, ex-con, convicted of murdering her own 4 year old son. She served 20 years in prison, which she spent studying sociology or something. After leaving prison, she applied to study a PhD at Harvard, which rejected her. Progressives were up in arms. How could you!

Go to the link, and look at that woman. Look at that face. She never expressed any remorse over killing her children. She lied about it in the PhD application. She disposed of the body and never told the cops where her son’s corpse is! This is utter and complete psycho. Nobody in their right mind would want anything to do with this woman. But that’s precisely the point. In most human societies before 1900 she would have been killed, legally or extralegally. But precisely this kind of person, someone who should in all justice be the lowest status person on earth; that’s exactly the people that the Left wants on its team. You can count on her extreme loyalty to any progressive idea that the party transmits to her. And so, yes, of course, she finally got her PhD, at New York University. And unlike 97% of PhD students out there, you can bet on her getting a full tenured professorship very soon.

Yes, it’s all madness, but it works. It really works like a charm. The richest parts of America, California and New York, are now a one-party state. America has legislation which forces every private enterprise of size to have a proportion of women, of black people and sexual deviants; who of course know they don’t belong there, and thus are extremely faithful political commissars. More faithful than the actual official political commissars that Communist China has also in their private companies.

And Biological Leninism is extremely powerful overseas too. The same way that Soviet Communism all had natural fifth-columns across the world, with industrial workers forming parties and all doing Moscow’s bidding across the West; American Biological Leninism is also an extremely strong means of agitation all over the world.


3 Feedbacks on "“Bioleninism”"


Are you sure he isn’t the spokesman for the DNC?


Anytime you want to absorb the “I hate Murica” vibe all you have to do is head over to the comments at ZeroHedge. They got em. Yeah, the braintrust inside the beltway has consciously elected to support some pretty awful stuff over the years, but to put blame for what they do (and don’t do) on the heads of every American is to admit to a complete lack of understanding about how a republic operates. And to confuse the permanent fever in DC (and academe) with the American Idea is even worse.


“Bioleninism” is an interesting term.

The Bolsheviks ans Chinese Communists, I read, preferred to recruit from the “underclass”. Anyone else probably knew that they could survive in any system. The “dolts” were loyal since they were doomed to return to heavy lifting or trench digging if the “Party” lost power. That is probably why the Cambodians killed the educated, teachers, and professionals. Those would always have other options.

The current Leftist/Progressive/Socialist prattle about all people being equivalent is only for those at the lowest levels.
The Progressives etc would, of course, picture themselves in the big offices and dachas. Anyone else with a trace of intelligence is just trouble. Stalin and Mao worked hard at pre-emptive murder to make the world safe for their ruling class.

“Bioleninism”, although the underclass and the would-be ruling class will fail to understand that future. Or at least deny that Bioleninism is actually their plan.

Los Angeles, and Compton in particular, show that the struggle at the lowest levels can be savage, but as long as it doesn’t get to the dachas, who cares?


Please Leave a Comment!

Please note: Comments may be moderated. It may take a while for them to show on the page.

Entries (RSS)
Comments (RSS)
Feed Shark