SpaceX: There is no mission to Mars

SpaceX succesfully lauched its Falcon heavy which is currently the most powerful rocket on Earth (Thank you Wernher). A great publicity for Elon Musk and his Tesla car which is in current orbit around the Earth. The successful launch is a engineering marvel as the booster of the rocket made back on earth (at least 2 of them). Elon keeps on saying Mars is his main objective. An alternative from Earth. Is Elon altruistic? or is it all BS?


If you are reading the blog regularly, you already know I am going for the second option. The CEO of SpaceX has shown on multiple occasions already his allegiance to the US deep state and spread lies in order for his publicity. The mission to Mars being one of them.

First of all, Mars is NOGOOD for anything else beside scientific research. There will be no permanent colony on Mars. Take the worse scenario of any nutjob employee of the IPCC, multiply it by 10. And Earth is still far more habitable for humans than Mars. I did not even take into account the danger and cost of inter-planetary journeys. Mars has no atmosphere, nor magnetic field protecting it from solar winds nor cosmic rays. Temperature range from -55 to 20 degrees Celsius  (-67 to 68 F). And even if any martian manages to deal with all these huge problems. Mars has only 40% of the gravity of Earth. Which will for sure have negative impact on any human staying there long term. And there is no foreseeable solution concerning this.

So if the Mars is all BS… what is Elon Musk doing with his Flacon heavy (or BFR)? In short: Space is big and not so empty … And some stuff hanging out there are literally gold. Asteroids the size of Manhattan made of pure silver, gold, Platinum and other precious metals can be easily put into orbit around the Earth or the Moon. Given the potential price for gold in the future, and lowering of the cost of sending probes in high earth orbit. One can imagine how such a business can become profitable.

Are we all programmed?

Every motivational speaker tells you that you can do anything. Society tells you that all depends on you. But let’s think about it… what facts support this theory?


At patriargate, on the contrary we believe that every individual is more or less bound to a certain destiny. Let’s look at basic facts:

  1. We are born with the genes we have, nothing more
  2. Behaviors depend on genes at least by 50%
  3. Our social environment is determined at our birth
  4. The culture and country we live in as children is not in our hands
  5. Our brain develops until teenage
  6. We have no control over the food we eat until adulthood
  7. We have no control over our education
  8. We have no control over the amount of money our parents have in our childhood

So let’s face it, what control do we really have over the way we evolve? Factually, our brain builds up during our childhood without anything in our control. Almost nothing that is given to us actually depends on us.

As adults, what was given to us by society and nature is pretty much what we have. Can we change our biology? No. So what is under our control? Only two things:

  1. Our environment
  2. What we put in our head

Yet, our environment is only a mere aggregate of our past which translates in our present ability to select it. Of course, luck exists, but is not sufficient.

This is also why we believe that society has to change as a whole for individuals to change durably.

You can’t be what you aren’t

You can’t know what you don’t

You can’t change without a model

Until now, science has not been able to modify our genes. So, the biggest impact on our biology in our hands derive from:

  1. Sleep
  2. Nutrition
  3. Sport

After this, the only thing that’s left for any of us is to develop self consciousness, and to work slowly on one or two aspects. The typical timeframe to change one thing about us is one year. What you will need for that is good habits, and a model. That’s not easy, believe me. You just can’t become what you would have been under ideal conditions. Fine tuning, that’s all we have.

Remember that the biggest change is to be brought to your children. So, get a wife and make children.

The truth about modern economics

Western white population is declining, in all the meanings. Let’s dig into why a normal man can’t anymore handle a family.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "broke student"

In the Red Pill world, most men are facing the same issue: the more you are conservative, the more you face the entire post-modernist society and its economical challenges. 

As a child, you have been raised to believe in a sunshine and lollipop world where getting a university degree will get you high paying job to start a family, buy a house, buy a nice car and have an early retirement. But as you finally  grow up, you realize :

  1. The studies you took did not even lead you to an average paying job that can sustain your way of life, nor your family… nor anything else.
  2.  There is no one older than 50 years old in your company; your career will most likely stop at 50.average age by tech company
  3. Your wife studied at university (maybe made an Erasmus in case of Europe), and is now having an average job. It is likely that she had quiet few sexual partners ; increase in the chance to ruin your marriage by a factor of 3 (at least).
  4. Inflation is out of control, no matter what are the official statistics. Healthcare costs are rising… and so is education, houses…

So, facing these realities, you struggle to choose between a house wife which is conservative, young and uneducated that will bring little if no money at all or that crazy feminist bitch that will suck out your masculinity, time and energy. And that latter won’t probably bring much to your life than blathering about her modern class warfare against patriarchy.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "feminist employeed"

Analyzing the history of the purchasing power of the average man can gives us answer on where the problem lies. We know live in a modernized world with advanced automation. Productivity has skyrocketed. Women’s life got so much easier that they can now undertake studies and work as well for the family. Our purchasing power should, theoretically have increased significantly. Did it?

About a hundred years ago, a worker was earning 100$ a month in USA, while an engineer had around 400$. The cost of living was approximately the same as today adjusting to gold. The USA was on a gold standard and the gold was at 20$ an once. An average house cost around 80 ounce of gold, depending where you bought it. In other words, the median worker was earning around 5000$ / month (in today’s money, 5 ounce of Gold), and needed to work 3-6 years to buy a house on his saving. He didn’t need a credit.

Today, a young man having an average university degree will earn about 1.5 ounce of gold/ month, and a house costs about 200 ounce of gold. An average university degree holder in a top firm can save about 20% of his revenues if he makes some compromises on his life. In France for example, a house costs 400.000€ with an average salary of 1500€ a month. This means that a normal bachelor or master degree holder will need about 100 years of savings to buy a house, or 50 years for a flat. In eastern countries, with an average salary of 800 euro a month and a house for 100000€, the problem is the same. 

In other words, a quick calculation demonstrates that a conservative man can not sustain a descent size family. So, if he wants to have a traditional family, he will have to make a lot of compromises or be very lucky: get a big heritage, some help from the parents or find a very high paying job in the alt-right… and if you see one, please just let me know.

Hence it is essential that conservatives join forces economically. Even if some of our views might differ, the development of the community should be a core issue. If we (on the right) do not start building a new world, a new community then nothing is going to change. At the moment, the left has all the resources  (Soros, Zuckerberg, Musk…), and the only way to start taking them is by uniting the right and fighting under the same flag. As much as we have to stop playing by their rules, we must also find a way to create some true solidarity. If you can give a job to someone sharing the same values as you do: DO IT. Give discount to people you know. Be generous.  Undertake projects together. There is so much to be done. The entire web,  entire villages, houses, infrastructure etc. have to be rebuilt.

Our duty is to help each others as brothers to create the families of tomorrow.

Remember, the only way for our ideas to become reality is to fight; surviving together as a community rather than dying as individuals.

The illusion of choice

Thinking about my life and the lives of others, I keep wondering if everything is determined. If everything has a sense and if choice really exists or rather is an illusion.

Genetically and physically everything is programmed and led by mathematical laws. Some of the latest research in physics would indicate we are programs living in a matrix. The creation order would then already have decided of everything, we’d barely be executed, prisoners of ourselves. Why would you thrive if in the end all is already programmed? Well, it is not so easy.

At an individual level, the complexity of the world is barely sizable. We merely distinguish basic light and sound spectrum, basic pressures and have very limited view of our environment. Nonetheless, these parameters are already sufficient to provoke confusion and make us feel in control.

Arbitration is based on criteria which are gathered and analyzed by our biology. Our body, our mind is made of cells, and messages transmitted thanks to a few molecules, which are hard coded in our DNA. Our emotions, the control we have on them is very limited, and even our conscious is barely a combination of our past and our biology.

Hence, do we really have a choice? Are we in control? Actually, we are not, we can only place ourselves at the right time at the right place to maximize our deterministic behavior. At an individual level and over a relatively long period of time, we have a purposeful choice. At micro-level, the smallest biological variation defines our immediate responses.

You go to the shop and wanna buy some strawberries. On the way, this beautiful  girl proposes you to buy raspberries. Depending on your biological answer, your decision may be influenced, and you may choose the raspberries. Did you choose the raspberries? No, you did not. Yet, if you would select a path where there wont be anyone selling anything else, you made the choice to insure not following your biology, but rather your will.

The illusion of choice is applicable in a specific environment at a specific moment. Hopefully, the immensity of the universe enables us grasping free arbitration through the selection of our environment.

Practical consequence over your life?

Analyze people and some key patterns: emotional reactions, behaviors, brain speed, heart beat, skin tone, speed, voice, sexual response, etc. Depending on these traits you can adapt their environment to lead them to a become better persons, or to control them. The rest is a question of morality.

Dominant genes vs natural selection

I often hear that blacks and Arabs have dominant genes. The common assumption made by Mudsharks and Camelfuckers is that their genes are stronger, superior to those of white people, hypocritically covering their abnormal sexual affinities.

Dominance in biology means that a gene overrun another statistically. Just like putting shit on you makes you very likely to smell like shit, mixing with blacks or Arabs makes white people like them (physically and personality wise – due to genetic impact of brain constitution). But does it mean that the result is more adapted from a natural selection point of view?

To find the answer, I refer to the past. Between 50000 and 25000 years ago the Homo Sapiens came in Europe and mixed with the Neanderthal. The homo sapiens was 100% black, as Africans are today. Nonetheless, Europeans are white, and if Camelfuckers hadn’t mixed them throughout extensive conquest and women slavery/rape, they would still be white from the north to the south, and the west to east.

What does it tell us exactly? It tells us that naturally, the white color and white European biological constitution emerged as the only evolution, disqualifying black color and African customs. This also draws a line between statistics and evolution.

Genes transmission are statistical while evolution is selective. Anyone can reproduce, but the most adapted survives, and that is a big difference.