control system

The Alt Centrist Approach To Recreation

‘Live, love, laugh and be happy’ goes the common refrain. Unfortunately for those of us in the West, our historical approaches to recreation have been coloured by a Christian philosophy of life-denial that considers all pleasures inherently sinful. The logic of the Abrahamic cults is that the world is evil, and that all pleasures are the province of the forces of evil, and so recreational pleasures are forbidden.

Complicating this are ruling class narratives about how the working class needs to be put to work or it becomes destructive. Capitalist dogma holds that if the working class is given too much opportunity for recreation it will stop wanting to work, leading to economic collapse, and therefore recreational opportunites must be restricted.

On top of this is a lingering workamania that makes people feel as if recreation is immoral.

All of these factors have drawn people away from what would be a rational approach to recreation. Great thinkers such as Aristotle, Buddha and Confucius advocated for a middle way between asceticism and indulgence. The alternative centrist prefers this to either the indulgence of the Satanist or the life-denial of the Christian.

Plato, in Laws, argued for the importance of drinking parties. His logic was that moderate alcohol use, by repeatedly inciting a small loss of self-control, trained people to exhibit greater self-control in times when it might otherwise have been lost (e.g. mass hysteria). A contemporary cynic might observe that a list of the countries that have banned alcohol overlaps heavily with a list of the countries whose citizens commit the most rapes and sex crimes per capita in the West.

Aristotle noted, in Politics, that tyrants prevent people from coming together in common cause, prohibiting common clubs and education so as to sabotage mutual confidence and high spirits. The idea is that preventing recreation will demoralise a population into submission. Adhering to the Second Acceptance would therefore involve doing the opposite of this. Thus an alternative centrist state would encourage any and all group recreational activity that was not degenerate or criminal. Even if outsiders could not see much value in some activities, the reasoning is that social bonds are developed in any case, and therefore the general health of the nation is strengthened.

All of this presents a clear picture to the alternative centrist.

The alternative centrist state has to promote recreation for the sake of the population’s mental health: the opposite approach to a tyranny. This is not just for the sake of the recreational activities themselves, but also for the social aspects of the recreational activities, which contribute to the solidarity necessary for a nation to function.

This will mostly require the government not to step in, but to get out of the way.

In particular, this means ending the War on Drugs. Existing drug law would be replaced with a model based on the work of actual drug scientists, such as Prof. David Nutt, whose works such as Drugs: Without The Hot Air would form the bedrock of future policy.

The alternative centrist looks to history and sees that Western societies have generally tolerated alcohol and the harms caused by alcohol. Experiments with prohibition have caused more harm than they prevented. The most intelligent way to balance order and freedom, therefore, is to tolerate alcohol and also every drug safer than alcohol. Because alcohol use is normalised, any less-harmful drug effectively becomes an exit drug for alcohol. The California Sober phenomenon reflects the will of people today to live a healthier lifestyle than is possible with an alcohol habit, and is proof that people will naturally use less harmful recreational alternatives to alcohol if given the choice.

California Sober is mostly about using cannabis instead of alcohol, but several other drugs meet the criteria of being safer than alcohol when used in a recreational setting.

Licensed venues for consuming several of the safer drugs would be a feature of alternative centrist recreation. Apart from bars there would also be cannabis cafes, MDMA lounges and magic mushroom grottos. Licensing would be a complicated and expensive process, so as to exclude clowns and cowboys from the market, but would not be substantially harder than getting an alcohol licence.

The alternative centrist state would generally have an extremely light touch when it came to sporting, cultural and spiritual organisations (although it might run a state religion: see The Alternative Centrist Approach To Religion). Sporting and cultural organisations would be heavily funded and promoted, and created if they didn’t already exist.

To a major extent, sporting recreation will be a function of the history of the nation and of the local geographical opportunities. In most scenarios this would be self-funded and self-organised. The role of the alternative centrist state would be to facilitate opportunities where they wouldn’t otherwise exist, such as maintaining a conservation estate for trampers and hikers, or subsidising sporting insurance through economies of scale. Maintaining facilities for racing, drag racing or drifting would have the bonus of justifying hard crackdowns on anti-social road use.

John Wanamaker’s famous quote “People who cannot find time for recreation are obliged sooner or later to find time for illness” is relevant here. This suggests that workers ought to be able to make enough money in a 40-hour work week to own a home and raise a family (a point addressed at length in The Alternative Centrist Approach To Work And Employment). This should allow them sufficient time and energy for appropriate recreation.

For cases where recreation goes as far as addiction, see The Alternative Centrist Approach To Mental Health.

As alluded to above, a fair and reasonable approach to recreation, rejecting the tyranny of moralisers, would provide full and fair opportunity for any pro-social recreational desire, and would therefore justify crackdowns on anti-social elements. This is one of the reasons for the severity of The Alternative Centrist Approach To The Law.

This chapter is from The Alternative Centrist Manifesto, the upcoming work of political philosophy that offers the answers to the political problems of the West.

For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms!
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books!

If you enjoyed reading this piece, buy a compilation of our best pieces from previous years!

Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2024-25
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2023
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2022
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2021
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2020
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2019
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2018
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2017

If you would like to support our work in other ways, make a donation to our Paypal! Even better, buy any one of our books!

The Alt Centrist Approach To Relations Between The Sexes

Good relations between the sexes are absolutely fundamental to a functioning society. The union between men and women in loving marriage is the most powerful social alchemy that exists. Absent such relations, healthy families cannot exist, and so a next generation of properly civilised people cannot be brought into being. Thus without good relations between the sexes, a society either collapses into totalitarianism or dies.

The current sitation facing the West – of fertility rate collapse – is a function of several things. One of those things is deteriorating relationships between the sexes. Dave Chappelle observed some years back that men and women don’t get along any more. Relations have only become worse since then.

There are two extremely unnatural approaches to relations between the sexes. We’ve swung from one to another and they’ve both failed.

One is the excessive order approach. This is best exemplified by the Abrahamic cults. The narrative of scriptural passages such as 1 Corinthians 14:34-35: “Women are to be silent in the churches. They are not permitted to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church,” or 1 Timothy 2:11-12: “A woman must learn in quietness and full submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; she is to remain quiet,” is that women are categorically less than men, inferior.

Islam is, of course, even more extreme than Christianity in this regard. The Abrahamic approach to relations between the sexes is suited to equatorial people, a totally different sort of person to the white and Asian people who are the intended audience of this book. Thus it is rejected under the First Rejection.

The second is the excessive chaos approach. This is best exemplified by today’s total confusion. Gender relations are in a state of flux owing to no-one being willing to state, or even knowing, what masculinity is and what femininity is. The girlboss is just as much a travesty of humanity as the man in a dress, for both are miserable.

This excessive chaos, rejected under the Second Rejection, is a consequence of Communist influence. Communist logic is that men and women are identical, and therefore there are no such things as natural sex roles or natural sex-based behaviour. Some social justice warriors, delirious on this logic, will even claim that men are taller and stronger than women because they monopolise sport and exercise opportunities growing up.

Neither of these approaches are satisfying, as can be seen from the high divorce rates, from the involuntary celibacy epidemic, from the monumental suicide rates among trans people and from the popular rush from OnlyFans to tradwife then back again.

As usual here, the Alternative Centrist approach is first to understand the truth of the matter, as per the Fourth Acceptance. The truth is that most human behaviours are natural, and significant sex-based behavioural differences are also natural.

Sex differences in behaviour are readily observable in toddlers, and become accentuated in puberty. Cross-cultural studies demonstrate that these sex differences are biological and not cultural in origin. In fact, there have been about a billion years of evolution establishing differences between the sexes.

Most adults are readily aware of these differences. At parties, it’s often observed that women migrate to the kitchen and men to the barbecue. In the workplace, it’s often noticed that women prefer to avoid dirty and dangerous jobs. In the dating market, many have seen that women generally select for strength and men for beauty.

“Neither prejudice nor ideology” is the motto of the Alternative Centrist approach to relations between the sexes. Thus the Alternative Centrist approach categorically rejects the approach of the Establishment Right, and of Abrahamic religions, that women ought to be subjugated. It also categorically rejects any ideology insisting on absolute equality or conflict between the sexes, such as Communism, feminism or blank slate theory.

The approach is to accept that the two sexes are equal metaphysically, but in body and mind are different in a great number of ways, and in some of those ways profoundly.

The Alternative Centrist approach on this subject agrees, to a major extent, with Muammar Gaddafi. He wrote, in The Green Book, that women ought to be free to pursue any profession they desire, same as men. But a woman’s natural function is to bear children and raise a family, and if she is prevented from doing this by adverse economic conditions, she is just as much a slave as if made into a breeding sow by religious fundamentalists. Therefore, a just system would allow one man to afford to raise a family on his wage alone (see The Alternative Centrist Approach To The Economy).

The Alternative Centrist feels no need for the insanity of quotas for women in governance, in academia and in boardrooms. For one thing, women are already doing better than men at university, and are also well represented in Western democratic parliaments. For another, the inherent genetic differences outlined above seem to cause men to strive harder to distinguish themselves in the workplace. Geoffrey Miller’s brilliant book The Mating Mind explained how men evolved to put in tremendous efforts of diligence and applied intelligence to impress women. Women, not needing to chase men, need not make such efforts.

This, and not discrimination, appears to explain why men have greater career success than women in many contexts. The Alternative Centrist approach is to leave them to it, and not to force women into their spaces.

Absolutely no obligation is felt by the Alternative Centrist to give representation to sexual deviants in high office (or anywhere else). Thus there will be no quotas for homosexuals, asexuals or anything similar. Recognition of the greatness of Hadrian precludes the Alternative Centrist from banning homosexuals outright. Heinrich Himmler was correct when he argued that homosexuals, if tolerated, will seek to bring more homosexuals in, and therefore their numbers have to be kept at a minimum. Transsexuals will not be tolerated at all, being why the Third Rejection needs to exist in the first place.

If the Alternative Centrist state ran a state religion, as per The Alternative Centrist Approach To Religion, it would have a relatively even mix of men and women among the priests and priestesses, as per ancient Greece and Rome.

The general rule on this subject is that the subtler the relevant quality, the more it is accessible to both men and women, but the grosser the relevant quality, the more it is particular to one gender. So spirituality is something for both men and women, but physicality divides the two, e.g. men into soldiering, policing and labouring; women into caring, nurturing and pregnancy.

Thus in spirituality and academia there might be a roughly even mix of men and women; in politics and other warrior-class endeavours most (in some contexts all) participants will be men; most people-focused jobs will be done by women and most tool-focused jobs will be done be men. Ultimately, both are worthy of the same level of basic respect, although Lysistrata-style pisstakes will always be enjoyed.

This chapter is from The Alternative Centrist Manifesto, the upcoming work of political philosophy that offers the answers to the political problems of the West.

For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms!
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books!

The Alt Centrist Approach To Education

The existing model for the education systems of the West is the Rockefeller education model. Based around the workings of the General Education Board, a Rockefeller-funded vehicle, it systematically dumbed down education for multitudes of American students, and, through American soft power, for multitudes of non-American students as well.

Rockefeller was not interested in developing the natural capacities of the students. He wanted an education system that pumped out robots to serve an industrial machine. He summarised his aims with the statement “I don’t want a nation of thinkers, I want a nation of workers.” He didn’t want artists and philosophers; he wanted men who could build steam trains, aeroplanes, skyscrapers, artillery pieces, and who could work the machines needed to manufacture and transport goods.

This meant that education lost its classical focus. No more was it considered important to know Greek and Latin; now it was just numbers, mass, quantity, volume, speed, distance. Teaching students to reason through philosophical positions was abandoned in favour of a focus on simple obedience. The end result is today’s Clown World: a population terrified into believing whatever the television tells them, too afraid to read and come to their own conclusions.

Any education system that discourages students from reaching their full potential is cruel. It’s also stupid, because the economic consequences cause everyone in society to suffer a lower standard of living. It’s therefore rejected under the Fourth and Fifth Rejections.

A former teacher, John Taylor Gatto, wrote the book ‘Dumbing Us Down‘ to explain the workings of the American education system. Gatto’s central thesis was that the education system was primarily intended to teach submission and obedience, mostly by breaking the students’ self-esteem and making them psychologically dependent on approval from authority.

Running an education system in this manner is highly orderly, in a sense, because it maintains and solidifies the existing class structure. This approach, however, leads to stagnation.

Alternative centrism recognises that children are created different by Nature, and that the souls placed in them by God are also different. Therefore, justice is the right schooling for the right soul.

This results in different schools for the different grades of soul. For the purposes of the education system, these would be fivefold: clay, iron, copper, silver and gold. Primary schools would be of clay and iron; secondary schools would be of iron, copper and silver; tertiary schools would be of copper, silver and gold.

Clay schools would teach simple trades and arts. Iron schools would teach trades, sports and military science. So the focus for young children would always be on basic trades, life skills and survival skills, but in iron school there would also be a heavy sporting component. This would also exist in clay school, as arts would exist in iron school, but to a lesser extent. There would be no emphasis on forcing hated subjects on students on the grounds it “builds character” or similar. Education must be made to seem a universal public good.

Copper schools would teach arts and commerce. In early years, the commercial focus would be on running small enterprises, and in later years on multinationals and corporates. So the scope of teaching would become more macroeconomical as time progressed. The arts component would be heavy as the copper schools should produce the bulk of the artists, performers and entertainers, i.e. those who don’t need to be grounded in physical reality.

Silver schools would teach business, administration and military science. The business element would overlap with the copper schools to some extent, but in the silver schools the focus would be more on the organisation of human society rather than profit. The graduates of these schools would be expected to become the administrators of the governments of the future.

Gold schools would teach science, philosophy and military science. This would cover the most advanced subjects and be where the majority of society’s original research is generated. If the graduates of the silver schools are to be the managers of the governments of the future, the graduates of the gold schools are to be the leaders. These graduates would be the philosopher-kings of the alternative centrist utopia.

The students would be sorted thusly.

At age five, they would be tested for physical health and strength. Essentially the deciding question would be whether they enjoyed playing sports. They wouldn’t need to be good at sports, but those who enjoyed playing them could be expected to develop the fundamental grounding in reality that is absent in those who are uncomfortable in the physical. Those students are also more likely to be prosocial. So the ones that are good at sports go to iron school, and the ones that are not go to clay school.

At age eleven, the children would be tested again, only this time for intelligence.

The ones of clay, if they prove intelligent, would move to copper school (secondary) for the remaining years until age 17. If unintelligent, they move to clay school (secondary). The ones of iron, if they prove intelligent, would move to silver school (secondary) until age 17. If unintelligent, they move to iron school (secondary).

Then the ones in silver school (secondary), upon reaching age 17, either move to copper school (tertiary), silver school (tertiary), or to gold school, which is only tertiary. The qualification for gold school is that one is interested in taking a transformative dose of a psychedelic, as per the Eleusinian and Elemental Mysteries. Anyone who freaks out upon encountering their own soul is prohibited from attending gold school. This means that spiritual acumen is the major qualification for entrance.

The logic behind this system would be to educate students for the societal niche that they naturally belong to. The fashionable modern idea that any student can be made into anything is utterly rejected. Humans are far from blank slates. Biology and karma both work to limit choice. The most just and least stupid education system would identify the social niche a child belonged to as early as possible, and then tailor the child’s education for success in that niche.

This system would also have the immense benefit of keeping the merchant class out of the ruling elite, thereby resisting much of the degeneracy that has consumed the West.

Not all schools are available to all ages. Thus, the youngest children will end up in either the clay or iron schools, the intermediate ones in the secondary schools and young adults in the tertiary schools. Older adult students could attend any tertiary school they qualified for.

To maximise freedom, it would be possible for students to move to any different school they qualified for, perhaps after special qualifying examinations at the end of each school year.

Teachers in these schools will be graduates of the gold, silver and copper schools. The idea is that they would be the best examples of their metal, paragons that the students could model themselves after. Some of the sporting instructors could be graduates of the iron schools.

As with the other features of school life, discipline would depend on the school and the nature of the students: iron schools could use corporal punishment, copper schools could use social exclusion and shame, silver and gold schools could use reason. Perhaps lead schools could be instituted to deal with the antisocial students.

The underlying logic of this system is a total rejection of the “No Child Left Behind” logic of George W Bush. The end result of the alternative centrist system would be young people able to contribute to their niche in society. Those capable of further education would be able to receive it; those incapable of further education should at least have the base skills to make themselves useful.

This chapter is from The Alternative Centrist Manifesto, the upcoming work of political philosophy that offers the answers to the political problems of the West.

For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms!
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books!

If you enjoyed reading this piece, buy a compilation of our best pieces from previous years!

If you would like to support our work in other ways, make a donation to our Paypal! Even better, buy any one of our books!

How We Will Lose Our Free Speech Rights

Because we’ve had peace and prosperity for so long now, it’s a common belief that both states are natural and no special effort is required to maintain either. This is a grievous delusion. It’s possible that, as per Phaedrus, the natural state of consciousness is incarnated in a higher dimension where there is no suffering. But down here on Earth, the natural state of life is brutish, nasty and short.

The tribal and violent nature of pre-civilisational life has been ameliorated, post-civilisation, chiefly through the invention of marriage, which has allowed supertribal consciousness to manifest through homogenising existing tribes in their shared offspring. The more tribes that married into each other, the more this higher consciousness was brought into being. Eventually clans formed, and then city-states.

These city-states had plenty of what Aristotle called philia. This was a kind of neighbourly solidarity that served as the mortar holding the edifice of society together. This philia created a sense that people were on the same team, moving in the same direction, and this goodwill allowed them to agree on things, e.g. that free speech would be important.

For most of human history, there has been a widespread understanding that the standard of living afforded by this homogeneity was a good thing, and so that homogeneity ought to be defended. So when new blood was introduced from the outside, it was married in to the existing stock so as to avoid factionalisation. Aristotle wrote, in Politics, that “heterogeneity of stocks may lead to faction – at any rate until they have had time to assimilate.”

This factionalisation is what destroys freedoms, as freedoms only exist when everyone can agree on their importance. Absent this agreement, any and all freedoms can and do become banned on the grounds they are destabilising, corruptive or degenerate influences. The sad truth about the human animal is that we are panicky, skittish beings prone to contagions of fear and hysteria. Hence we like to ban things, especially if we don’t understand them. If there isn’t general agreement that a particular freedom is important, it tends to get banned.

The freest country in the world, America, is the way it is because of general agreement on the importance of free speech, free assembly, free trade and various other freedoms. Children are taught at the earliest school that freedom is a foundational American virtue, and that only America’s enemies oppose freedom.

Unfortunately, this mentality is not universal.

New Zealand had a referendum on freedom with the cannabis referendum in 2020. NZ-born voters voted Yes, for freedom. Those born outside of New Zealand voted No. Their cultures don’t have freedom, they don’t understand it. So they voted ours away.

Kiwis responded with a shrug, and just got on with life. Another freedom gone, who cares?

We will lose our free speech rights the same way.

The image at the top of this article is a screenshot of a recent press release from a coalition of religious groups in New Zealand: the highest authorities for each of Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and Sikhs in this country. They have combined forces to agitate for further free speech crackdowns. This is in response to some of the statements made by Brian Tamaki (see 2:00 in this video for examples), in particular claims that Modi was purging India of Christians and that New Zealand ought to retaliate in kind, burning down mosques and temples and purging New Zealand of Hindus, Sihks and Muslims.

Tamaki has said several heinous things, and could rightly be charged with being a nuisance to public order. But if hate speech laws are introduced, they will soon become blasphemy laws. It’s no secret that some religions, particularly the Abrahamisms, would like to make criticising them illegal. Adherents of these religions will tirelessly push to widen any hate speech law that gets passed.

The main long-term danger is that, as New Zealand becomes less Kiwi through mass immigration, the population becomes less interested in freedom.

Free speech became a core Western value in the 1950s, as neither the Nazi opponents in World War II nor the Commie opponents in the Cold War believed in it. We were told that free speech was why our societies were better: it allowed them to self-correct, thereby avoiding the extremes of the totalitarian systems.

This worked out excellently for some decades, up until the end of the 20th Century. After then, there was mass immigration from countries with no traditions of free speech. Consequently, popular support for free speech started to waver. Having little of value to say, the immigrants could not see the value in free speech. So support for free speech is now declining. It will continue to decline as the West continues to muttify.

There might not be a referendum in New Zealand about free speech per se, but about a free speech-related issue. It might be about a proposed hate speech law. In any case, the Chinese, Muslim and Pacific Islander voters who voted away our cannabis freedom will (in all likelihood) vote away our free speech rights as well. They can’t be expected to vote for freedom because it’s not valued in their cultures.

If New Zealanders lose our free speech rights, it will be through the mass immigration of people who don’t value them.

For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms!
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books!

If you enjoyed reading this piece, buy a compilation of our best pieces from previous years!

If you would like to support our work in other ways, make a donation to our Paypal! Even better, buy any one of our books!