Some salient facts about Canada:

•Roughly 90% of Canada’s population lives within about 100 miles of the US border

•Most Canadian provinces historically traded more with the US than with other Canadian provinces

•For the past 30 years around 75% of Canada's international trade was with the US

•For the past 30 years Canada's trade with the US has been roughly 3 times the size of its inter-provincial trade

•Canada's effective inter-provincial tariffs have generally averaged between 10% and 20%, depending on definitions

•Trump increased average US tariffs on Canada from 2% to 9% this year, almost matching their internal trade barriers

•By 1815, Americans made up nearly two-thirds of the population of Upper Canada (modern Ontario)

•By 1830, the US state of Ohio alone had more people than all Canadian provinces combined

•In the late 19th century, American settlers formed large shares of Canadian prairie populations (20% of Alberta, 15% of Saskatchewan, etc)

•From the 1860s to about 1900 Canada experienced net emigration, and by 1900 roughly 20% of people born in Canada were living in the US

•In the 1920s alone, about 1.2 million Canadians moved to the US, ie about 10% of Canada’s population at the time

•By 1940 about 10% of US immigrants were Canadian-born, and people of Canadian origin in the US equaled about 1/3 of Canada's population

•Canadian emigrants to the US were disproportionately drawn from the educated and economically productive classes

•The Continental Congress attempted to conquer Quebec in 1775 and incorporate it into the US, and Patriot sympathizers in Nova Scotia invited us to invade in 1776

•In 1849 about 350 prominent citizens of Montreal signed a manifesto calling for annexation by the US (one signer, John Abbott, later became Canada's Prime Minister)

•By 1860, the US had become Canada’s largest trading partner and annexationist sentiment was widespread on both sides of the border

•In the 1860s the US Senate discussed purchasing large parts of western British North America, and in British Columbia about 1% of the white population signed a petition asking President Grant for annexation

•In 1910–1911, several major US political figures supported annexation: eg Speaker of the House Champ Clark declared he expected the US flag to fly over all British North America and his speech was met with broad applause in Congress; President Teddy Roosevelt reportedly considered annexation in the event of war with Britain; President Taft supported deeper economic integration intended to turn Canada into a “virtual American colony"; etc

•Canada only even became a country in 1867

•Canadians were legally British subjects until 1947, when Canadian citizenship was created

•The British court system remained Canada’s highest legal authority until 1949

•Canada adopted its current national flag in 1965

•Canada’s current extremely woke & undemocratic constitution dates only to Trudeau the Elder in 1982 (Quebec has still never formally accepted it; Quebec, Saskatchewan, & Alberta have all pursued independence from it)

•Many provinces initially rejected joining Canada: Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland; British Columbia even showed public preference for joining the US before entering Confederation

•Canada has repeatedly renounced sovereignty & self-identified as genocidal

For these & many other such reasons, we should aggressively support our brothers across this artificial border who seek to join us as additional states!


For more on the woke unaccountable 1982 neo-constitution pushed by Trudeau the Elder, see this—& other such essays making the case for liberating Canada—by @Peter_Nimitz (from whom pretty much all of this is drawn)

Good old post from @curtis_yarvin on the viral Compact Mag essay: the culture industry’s a MLM federal jobs program designed to produce people capable of noticing & replicating & teaching the preferred narrative, bc this comes with status benefits, & it’s what allows for capture-


@curtis_yarvin The first creative writing program was only created in 1936—at Iowa, still the top of the pyramid & origin of every official fad. By 1980 there were over 250 in the US; now ~500. As writing becomes this kind of commissariat, ofc it’s vulnerable to dysfunctional campaigns & purges

Brief thread on how & why to deal with terror. This paper uses synthetic controls to show that the 1996 start of organized terror in Xinjiang caused it to steadily fall further below its likely counterfactual trend—with income losses reaching 38% by 2018. Passes placebo test well


& this paper uses synthetic controls to show that the 2016 start of organized crackdowns in Xinjiang barely affected its GDP while hugely increasing its arrest rate & security spending. There are *dozens* of pages of robustness tests, & in all of them the takeaway looks the same.

In 1974 Congress was upset about Nixon having refused to spend appropriated money on programs he disliked, so they banned this discretion in a law that also formalized all the appropriations bills (usually 11-13 per year) into one standardized process. Huge constitutional change: There’d only ever been one “omnibus” bill before this in our nation’s whole history (1950, as an efficiency experiment that nobody found interesting or fruitful then). The 2nd was in 1986. From 2012 to 2024, 147 of 149 budget bills were passed in omnibus form. Huge transformation

Odd! Not sure what one could possibly make of this! Very surprising to anyone who’s ever interacted with male, female, & mixed groups! We must fund extra research ASAP to figure out what combination of carrots for women & sticks for men can help women come out as equally liberal!


As teen was taught female orgasms require complex rube goldberg machinations. It’s actually quite simple, but getting any group which defers to its female members to eg actually consider any factual or logical assertion instead of status quo-ing requires comical game foreplay etc

He notes that starting around 1965, US college students began throwing shrill fits at their admins in ways that their admins began coddling instead of disciplining. He notes that this began at UC Berkeley (which “boast[ed] more women students than any other US coed institution”).

https://twitter.com/juice8882/status/1976978107321270451

The alum page on “150 years of women at Berkeley” notes that women were prominent in all these campaigns (& for once they’re not just making them up as “hidden figures”). 1960s was when all the “in loco parentis” rules evaporated—no more female curfews, bans on mixed sleepovers…

In 2023, SCOTUS considered whether independent artists offering their services for hire must agree to produce “acceptable” art for gay marriages upon request, bc of civil rights laws. All 3 libs voted for subordinating the 1st amendment to “non-discrimination” laws. They hate 1A.

https://twitter.com/CEBKCEBKCEBK/status/1926119741434798494

If Hillary had won, SCOTUS would’ve upheld this literally incredible (as in almost nobody believes me when I tell them about it) assault on free speech, & gone farther. The key reason we still have any semblance of free speech rights is thanks to Donald Trump. Crush the left now!

Men are more naturally monogamous bc we wanna just have our home life settled so we can use it as foundation for external pursuits. Women are the ones always working on their home life, introducing new projects to it, etc. If she’s in love, that means making his home better—but… Polygamy’s only more common than polyandry bc a) it’s much more stable, & b) so many women so underhandedly pursue the few top men that sometimes they can’t focus enough to reject these additional distractions. Men who have their shit together never say “if only I had more wives”

Men build civ best under monogamy: ie when we have to compete with each other over other things than extra wives; when that’s been successful & consensual, it’s thru neolocal nuclear families, thus not even about securing high-value mates for our kids. Opaque spergy men’s clubs >

https://twitter.com/LizzyStarrrdust/status/1962995191893393756

ie perhaps the *removal of the desire to fuck women from public life* is what allows men to build civ: if we already have wives at home & can’t fruitfully seek extras, then we have no reason to let women into these clubs or cater their competitive outputs to women’s sensibilities

This is what “the sixties” actually meant: the 1950s were about “amoral excellence,” big-is-beautiful, etc (highways, air travel, television, football, company men, conglomerates, the space race…). Small-minded hippies rejected this as unnatural & scawy & enthroned mudhut morals

https://twitter.com/CEBKCEBKCEBK/status/1961102214497534238

The Pentagon was only built at the end of WWII & even still the National Mall was covered in simple big War Department buildings through the 1950s as action-oriented power-seeking bureaucracies exploded (unlike the passive red-tape self-flagellating bureaucrats who replaced them)

Wonka (2023) was written by LLM. The whole movie’s just “set up some sweet lazy tropes then sacrifice their coherence to sweet lazy one-liners”—next token prediction run amok. Plot, character, theme, world etc are all obvious but gorge on so many obvious gags that they fall apart This IP was expected to make parents buy kids movie tickets bc Wonka’s recognizable: abrasive recluse obsessive prankster; in this he’s just his ever-gaudier accessories on a bland saccharine wizard who always has magic macguffins for friendship while switching btwn dumb & genius

Charming & sympathetic. As she says, they’re *producing* the time that we then “commodify” (ie invest into projects which then allow them to demarcate yet more time for us to reinvest). Like how musicians can only net perform if there are musical illiterates to produce audiences.

https://twitter.com/GodCloseMyEyes/status/1958576312764768377

Distance becomes poorly defined below the Planck length, bc the energy required to precisely probe this gap would necessarily produce a *black* hole larger than it. & same with time: you can’t clock anything shorter than how long light takes to “walk the Planck.” Same basic idea.

Basically the plot of Atlas Shrugged. FL turned down a $2.5B grant from Obama for public “high-speed rail,” & approved the only private inter-city passenger rail in the US, Brightline, which in 9 years opened a 235 mile rail network for $25M/mile, while CA’s likely at ~$300M/mile

https://twitter.com/aaron_leib/status/1945112835492602086

In 2008 CA promised it’d have SF-LA HSR open by 2020; now the projected opening’s already been pushed past 2045, & it may never even get there, but official projections are still optimistically estimating its likely inflation-adjusted price at ~$275M/mile (ie it’ll be way more)…

*If the IRGC dissolves* then Iran quickly goes from costly menace to productive & grateful & useful regional ally (Iraq was different). I’m happy the US is helping Israel prevent them from getting nukes & offing their leadership. But IRGC won’t fold so regime change’d go very bad

https://twitter.com/CEBKCEBKCEBK/status/1935350771920273682

If anything, helping the mullahs retain their official power might be good for weakening IRGC, bc the mullahs are so unpopular & weak, & bc they can only retain influence by further strengthening the liberal-democratic apparatus & culture, to keep IRGC from taking ever more power

I read the paper. Precisely what you’d confidently guess based on the pic & caption. Total of ~10,000 respondents across 2 versions (nodes are attitudes on abortion, redistribution, etc). In both, position correlates v well with partisanship scale & even more with partisan hatred

https://twitter.com/RichardHanania/status/1932951391628313082

In other words, extremity of left vs right in these reliably correlates with self-reported extremity of left vs right; but the correlation is even stronger for self-reported partisan ingroup feelings bias (far left more identifiable by hatred of far right than by self-ID as such)

Piketty’s new paper has good graphs but retarded thoughts (brief thread). He shows that 19thC Europe had an incredible current account surplus, & so—by definition—accrued an incredible capital account. Again: this is definitional—net income is net wealth accrual in this data. But


He says this is bad bc Europe’s goods trade balance was negative (imported lots of raw materials & exported ~half as much manufactured value). So this wealth was colonial theft, & Europe “should’ve” been *much* poorer (if it paid 20% more for raw imports & levied 0 taxes abroad).

You’re telling me that Republican voters like red state policies? That Democrats don’t suddenly pretend they’ve always hated blue state policies? I guess it was worth testing whether they’d switch on a dime when Ezra told them to, even tho the groups are still favoring the groups

https://twitter.com/RichardHanania/status/1929499253996724695

In fact, the *only* person who *should* be surprised by this is Hanania: his hypothesis for the past few years has been that EHC types (eg Ezra Klein & his readers) are uniquely suited for *both* adopting objectively good policies *&* popularizing them among the blue tribe. Oops!

Women’s tears in the marketplace of ideas are most costly when they’re tears of joy. Shrieking at you to euphemize more in public is noticeably annoying, but it’s far more notably bad that female suffrage immediately leads to limitless childish negative-sum collectivist signaling

https://twitter.com/Kounkuey/status/1659256781305171968

Can our civ muster the will to tell groups of women that what makes them feel good is bad—that they should be politically disempowered—that their insipid saccharine groupthink is retarded & smothering & destructive? History says no—esp as girlbossing substitutes for childrearing.

KKK reached peak membership in 1924 (destroyed by sex scandal & Ellis Island in 1925). They were focused on Progressivism (prohibition, anti-corruption, the Fed, free trade, immigration restrictionism, etc), not lynching—meantime Ellis Island gangs waged war on cops & Anglo order

https://twitter.com/CEBKCEBKCEBK/status/1799683307300684267

They used their peak influence in 1924 to back McAdoo (whose main accomplishment was creating the Fed) & pass the Johnson-Reed Act (closed borders). Then they got forced from power by corrupt & actually buffoonish actual terrorists who imposed low IQ larps of nativism (tariffs)…

Surprisingly persuasive paper. Synthetic controls suggest that populists are very bad for things like real GDP growth; this is robust across five different specifications of who counts as populist, & all sorts of other checks. Populists are generally defined by anti-elitism. And-


The more you drill into details, the worse LW populism looks (esp in LatAm & pre-1990), & the less awful RW populism looks (eg see pic separating emerging from advanced economies). & populist power grabs are more surprisingly bad when they’re more surprising. Cf other correlates:

There should be more no-fault contracts. If you sign an NDA, you should be allowed to tear it up if you ever feel like doing so, & still keep half of what they paid you for signing it, with no negative consequences. You can kick out lessees at random, & keep half the year’s rent. This might seem like precisely the opposite of a contract, but it’s what we do with marriage, the most generally sacred of contracts; & it’d be odd if we applied higher enforcement standards to NDAs, leases, etc than to marriage, so why not make tenant law similarly “open-minded”