Author Topic: Homo Hubris  (Read 3213 times)


  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7382
    • View Profile
Re: Homo Hubris
« on: February 18, 2021, 11:26:32 pm »
Our enemies can never write enough of these articles; do they realize that each such article further lowers our opinion of them?

It’s one of the most interesting, enlightening and eye-opening books I’ve ever read: Simon Winchester’s Exactly: How Precision Engineers Created the Modern World (2018). Winchester tells a story of astonishing ingenuity, intelligence and effort from the steam-engine (44) to the “extreme ultraviolet” laser (296). And it’s almost exclusively a story of stale pale males—of White men from northwestern Europe.
slavery was neither necessary nor sufficient for the rise of Britain as an industrial and technological giant. Black slaves effectively played the role of horses and oxen: their muscles powered mechanisms and economic systems created by White ingenuity and foresight, but Blacks had no intellectual or creative role in what they powered.
White men have achieved most in all manner of fields, from engineering and mathematics to exploration and mountaineering. But they are also the most vilified group on earth and are held responsible for all manner of evils, from slavery and pollution to systemic racism and police brutality. Why does the highest-achieving group also receive the greatest opprobrium?

Because we never gave consent for you to modernize the world that all of us live in! But in typical Western disregard for seeking prior consent you did it anyway, thereby forcing the rest of us to live in this modern world that you created whether we like it or not.

I hadn’t heard of Maudslay and his “formidable skill in delicate engineering” (p. 54) before I read Exactly. Unlike George Floyd, Maudslay exerted himself to defeat crime, not to commit it. He helped perfect the effectively unbeatable locks of his mentor Joseph Bramah (1748–1814). He then went on, in Simon Winchester’s words, “to become the founding father of precision toolmaking, mass production, and the key engineering concept of perfect flatness.” (p. 62) Among much else, he invented a lathe that could “efficiently, precisely and [quickly]” make something that contributed far more to Britain’s wealth than “centuries of African enslavement.”

What was the something? It was “that most essential component of the industrialized world, the screw.” (p. 63) Henry Maudslay, unlike George Floyd, helped hold the Western civilization together — and literally so. In a sane world, his story would embolden Whites to say “Screw you!” to inane and self-righteous anti-White groups like Black Lives Matter.

We have been building everything we needed in daily life for thousands of years without ever requiring screws. So in the eyes of all of us who oppose industrialization (which is an ongoing macro-scale crime against the entire planet that daily dwarfs anything Floyd could possibly have done), it follows that the screw is to blame, and hence its inventor is to blame. So no, screw Maudslay!

Nor did we hear about a Swedish engineer who contributed immensely to perhaps the most important part of precision: measurement. But Winchester points out that the Swedish engineer has been unjustly forgotten for a long time: “Carl Edvard Johansson died in 1943, respected and beloved in Sweden, and forgotten elsewhere.” Johansson (1864–1943) invented measuring instruments known as gauge blocks or Jo blocks, which come in varying sizes and can be fitted together to measure, for example, “any of the 1000 lengths from 3.000 to 3.999 mm in 0.001 mm steps.” Winchester writes that Jo blocks are “machined with such precision that there [are] no asperities whatsoever on their surfaces that might allow air to get between and form a point of weakness. They [are] so perfectly flat that the molecules of their faces [bond] with one another when they [are] joined [and it becomes] impossible to break them apart. … They can only be slid apart.” (p. 3)

Winchester adds that scientists still don’t fully understand the physical mechanism behind the bonding of Jo blocks. In a sense, White ingenuity is still defeating White ingenuity: Johansson’s measuring blocks created a mystery.

Whatever turns you on.

Seriously, again we had been doing fine for thousands of years without needing this type of measuring. so why do you expect us to be impressed with gauge blocks? They are nothing but another accomplice in industrialization, the negative consequences of which are manifold and inescapable:


they direct themselves outwards, creating ingenious and awesome machines, scaling the earth’s heights, plumbing the ocean’s depths, and landing in person or by proxy on the Moon, Mars and Venus.
So is it ironic that Kehinde Andrews and countless other anti-White ideologues go through life relying absolutely on White male invention and ingenuity without acknowledging the debt they owe, let alone expressing any gratitude?

We are forced to use your machines in reaction to you using the same machines, to prevent you gaining too great an advantage over us. This does not mean we enjoy using your machines. We would prefer they were never invented. So why should we feel indebted to you, let alone grateful?

No, I don’t think it is. I think it’s entirely predictable. One could hardly expect Kehinde Andrews to admit that merely one tiny White group like the Swedes have contributed more to science and technology than all Blacks who ever lived.

Indeed, the single Swedish male Carl Edvard Johansson contributed more to science and technology than all Blacks who ever lived.

Yes, and that is what makes Swedish engineers, not least Johansson, accomplices to industrialization and hence villains of world history.

By the way, Kehinde Andrews is the same person whom I recently posted about here:


The culture of critique is already proclaiming that Black women “played a crucial part” in the Moon Landings and the creation of GPS, the global positioning system whose genuine White male creators are described in Winchester’s book.

Proud Black wimminz in, hate-filled honkies out

As Black women are written into the history of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics), White men will be written out. Our hostile elite aren’t really following the script of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949), but they might as well be: “In his own schooldays, Winston remembered, in the late fifties, it was only the helicopter that the Party claimed to have invented; a dozen years later, when Julia was at school, it was already claiming the aeroplane; one generation more, and it would be claiming the steam engine.”

The steam engine, the aeroplane and the helicopter are all products of White male genius. The parasitic Party had already claimed two of them for its own in Orwell’s novel. In our reality, the parasitic culture of critique is beginning to assign the products of White male genius to Black women.

This is a False Left manouevre which as a True Leftist I have denounced over and over again. Any "non-whites" who wish they had invented any modern machines are in spirit no better than the machines' actual inventors, as they are in effect wishing they had contributed to industrialization. They too are Westerners, and hence our enemies. Nevertheless, this problem too could have been avoided if only the machines in question were themselves never invented in the first place! Most fundamentally to blame are still the actual inventors.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2022, 09:36:18 pm by 90sRetroFan »