Oh how the Perfumed Princes Protest

Office bound metrosexuals trying to "teach" about their warped ideas of "manliness"

It is time this absolute joke of an excuse for “a man whom one should listen to” for his “wisdom” and “insights” in how to navigate the modern dystopia, is finally exposed for what he is, by someone that can read for comprehension. It is a sign of the times really that this pustule on the ass of competence was ever awarded a “featured blog” for his substack in 2024. Good God. It’s like people literally can’t read at all anymore.

Prepare yourselves dear Substakers, for what at my OH blog (where I currently released part 6 of Theoretical Models of Society, which as a series puts the lie to all that this moisturised, sedentary, ass-in-butter, theoretical wanna-be “aristocrat” has ever cogitated in his sub-par, midget skull) is called a Kurganing.

Kurganing: Verb - The unfortunate result of what happens to a deceiving liar, sophist, Freemason, general heretic, arrogant (but incapable) idiot, when he attracts the attention of The Kurgan and receives a public vivisection of his all too mortal inadequacy, incompetence, weakness of character, cowardice, and general faggotry, and as a result becomes the star in a blog post by said Kurgan.

Let us first of all identify the main posts (but really all of them will do) this ridiculous clown (Johann Kurtz, whose tag line is [in total humourless seriousness, I assure you]: Forming the new nobility: become beautiful, dangerous, and worthy of power at his idiotic blog “becoming Noble”) has created that immediately prove he is an idiot with delusions of elitism.

Here they are:

Meritocracy is not a Good Thing

Idiotic quote from the idiocy at that post (this one is especially relevant a little later)

Meritocracy necessitates and idealizes the destruction of traditional boundaries. This began with the attack on class structures, but after the moral primacy of ‘merit’ is accepted, it must also be conceded that other structures which impede the centering of ‘merit’ should be questioned: national borders, gender divides, insular communities, and prejudices of all kinds.

The seeds of meritocratic thought arose in the West with the broader Enlightenment, which held that the scientific process - with its advocacy of quantification and objectivity - could be turned upon politics and human affairs more generally, in order to progress society towards utopia.

A provable meritocracy thus demands that all achievement must be explicit, documented, legible, and acceptable. Meritocracy can only be conducted on the basis of what we can measure; this thing we call 'merit’.

Of course, distilling the ineffable qualities of human existence into quanta has always proved challenging for the social sciences, which is why they have strayed while the hard sciences have progressed.

The central question at hand is: “What is the definition of this thing we recognize as ‘merit’ within a meritocracy?” How is it measured, by whom, and when? Is the ‘good’ we are attempting to capture an intrinsic quality of the human subject or an objective outcome we are trying to engineer? What scale and timescale do we care about?

Notice how this idiot is TRYING to define/qualify/”explain” meritocracy as being some sort of magic formula of quantifying attributes into a…well a spreadsheet format? Notice how NO ONE ELSE ON THE PLANET does that, only him? It’s his idea, his way of trying to define it? Remember that, it’s important and it’s the biggest clue (among an ocean of them) that this guy is:

1. A moron

2. An “intellectual” (read: Midwit who thinks he is the smartest person in the room. Also, See 1.)

3. A Perfumed Prince - that is someone that EITHER was born relatively well off, never had anything very hard in his life, went to the right schools, kissed the right asses, sucked off the right bosses, and got himself some middle or maybe even eventual middle-high management position earning decent money (and/or he had some from daddy anyway) that makes him think he is a “self-made” man. With the manly in man, and the smarts. And regardless if he goes to gym regularly or is a weedy nerd or chubbster, he fancies his (self-invented and self-deceived) moral superiority somehow makes him in any case “better” than the “rabble” that laugh at his pontificating bullshit. OR a guy that maybe did come from not the lower classes but not particularly well off, and did work hard at being a good little drone of the system and managed to pull off some decent situation… that is… by… well, you know… going to the right schools, or doing well at the ones he went to, kissing the right asses, sucking off the right bosses to achieve… you get it. And the only difference is that now he feels even MORE entitled to be a smartboi (tm) because he (in his feverish mind) really IS a self-made man.

But let us see how he demonstrates this in his own words.

Meritocratic Education Ruins Children

Quote from the runoff produced therein:

Meritocracy is the notion that it is illegitimate to reward a person based on criteria other than a specific and artificial definition of merit, typically characterized by formal examinations and structured evaluations of performance. Meritocracy adopts tests, reviews, qualifications, credentials, and the quantification of performance and ability. The meritocrat is the Spreadsheet Man.

Under meritocracy, it is illegitimate to elevate an individual based on broader criteria, such as whether they are a friend, relative, local, particular sex, member of a known family, member of your faith, member of your class, or a representative of a range of ‘protected characteristics’.

In other words, meritocracy is the antithesis of the concept of birthright. It is an attack on the integrity of sovereignty, undermining the ability of the steward of an asset to entirely determine to whom that asset is apportioned.

To doubt the moral monopoly of meritocracy is thus not to insist that merit should be restricted in the opposite direction (ie. characterized entirely by birth) but to broaden one’s conception of merit to contain both the notion of qualifications and the legitimacy of other factors, as may be relevant in different circumstances.

See that GIANT strawman he sets up in part one? Meritocracy “defined” as some arbitrary quantification of the ineffable into a spreadsheet type format that has no bearing to reality? Only to…

Knock it down in part two, to “prove his point”. A point no one ever before him ever made because it doesn’t exist.

There are illiterate Khoi San and Amazonian Pirahã that are perfectly capable of understanding and explaining what meritocracy means, because especially in their societies, it is still a thing. And it is only because men with brass balls and iron wills managed to create such bounty on the Earth —where the village idiot was safe to reproduce and foster upon us a melange of genetic misfits like this pale, belly-frogged constituted “man”— that it is no longer required in the general West for larvae-spawns such as Johann to continue to survive and even do “well” for himself.

So let me explain it to you in short words of few syllables:

Meritocracy: from the word MERIT, which is defined as the the state of becoming entitled, deserving of, have earned either a reward or a punishment on the basis of one’s behaviour, actions, effectiveness at [something].

Literally, little children understand what merit is. And a meritocracy is simply a society in which the person that is best at doing a specific task is placed in the position of doing it. You know where meritocracy is absolutely clear and obvious to everyone and anyone? A violent fight. Or a group of fighters in a ring, dojo, or street. In Systema, the guy who can kick everyone else’s ass best teaches. It is the surest form of meritocracy I have ever encountered and I would bet money that our perfumed prince Johann has never entered a ring or dojo floor in his life. Nor is he likely to. How do I know? Well, he either hasn’t got the first clue about meritocracy at all, which means he is a fully “theoretical” creature, and it’s bad theory at that. He apparently works in some kind of tech/IT/software field, so you can see what I mean. Maybe he can code, but he can’t do much else. He has no concept of physical results in the real world beyond that artificial bubble he has been raised, grown and produced in, like a clone from a vat-factory in the RPG game of Paranoia. There are another six just like him, called Johann-Smarty “Pants” Kurtz - 001 through to 007.

And just like a dweller of Alpha complex, if he ever pokes his head out of the underground artificial world he lives in, and sees some trees and a squirrel he may well freak out and push the nuclear launch codes.

So we have already established he is an impractical man that has never taken a punch (or ten) in the face and has certainly never given any (it might have spoilt his little prefect-perfect schoolboy-cum-teacher’s-pet road to “riches”).

We also know that he has delusions of grandeur, and is little more than a hopped up peasant, who is grasping, like a drowning man for what he perceives as his supposed “due” of “new nobility”. Which he will never achieve. Because nobility is first of all a matter of intrinsic character, one he absolutely lacks, and secondly, no one is handing out family crests to retards anymore.

We know he thinks that the path to “nobility” is achieved by being a good drone that goes to the good schools, and does the “good” things he is told and kisses ALL the asses (with a little lick for extra credit) in order to climb the corporate/status/suck-cess ladder. How do we know? Well, because he expressly tells young men to do just that.

He first posited this “way” here, and the title is oh so telling: Jobs for sensitive young men, and then defended it here. So we also know Johann is/was/sees himself as/ will never grow out of, the idea that he (is) was a sensitive young man. Oh so sensitive. Because of his smarts you see. The poor lad was just smarter than all his peers who cruelly did not respect and understand his sensitive thoughts. It is the sort of duplicitous and self-serving as well as intrinsically false narrative people like Johann invariably have about themselves. It’s the midwit gamma complex. Johann’s excuse is that anyone with a “higher” IQ would simply avoid physical brutality, don’t you know. Unless they were evil. Evil I tell you. The concept that anyone with a 155 IQ would indulge in physical activities like martial arts or being a bodyguard or a doorman simply does not parse for him. He may lie about it if he ever reads this, but I know this type of creature. Violence is only for the “evil” brutes of life. Or… or… well, yes, okay, the very NOBLE people, but only as a last resort (that he prays in his suburban home “ivory tower” never, ever, ever comes to pass) and only for the NOBLEST of reasons (all so rarefied and theoretical that not even tardigrades can survive in that atmosphere) none of which will ever activate even as he is raped to death by marauding pirates.

He also has ZERO understanding of how to be a man in relation to a woman (this is to be expected, he is after all English). We know this thanks to his “enlightenment” level idea that women do not or will not have children because it implies a loss of status.

And one has to ask… What Status? What Status is he talking about? And it is obvious he is talking about what HE perceives as being a desirable sign of status:

• Financial success (having enough money to be living well above average)

• Knowing and being seen by the right people in the right way

• Driving the “cool” car

• Going to the right schools

• Having the right clothes

• Probably having a trophy wife (though I doubt he does)

And of all of the above, the only one that personally makes a difference is having enough money to say “Fuck you” to whoever. And by “makes a difference” I simply mean that it makes it less of a concern at all to do so. Not that you don’t do it if you lack the money. I certainly have never held back saying “Fuck you” to anyone I ever felt deserved it. Regardless of pretty much anything other than my personal sense of justice. But sure, a bunch of cash makes life easier. I’ve had money and had no money, so I can tell the difference, but it will never be something that defines my character.

But do ANY of these things really matter to a woman? No. Not really. They only matter to her in the context of the zeitgeist of the disturbed society we inhabit. And of course, no woman wants to live under a bridge with ten kids she has no means to feed and a deadbeat for a husband. But my point is simply that as long as you are:

1. Actually a man, not some facsimile of a metrosexual, moisturised, vegan, midwit “intellectual”, and therefore provide the required practical support for your wife, and even if that should collapse (due to war, unforeseen circumstances, bad luck, whatever) she has the unwavering certainty that if anyone can climb out of a hole and rebuild a good life it is you, and you with her and your children, and,

2. Provide her with the natural experience of being with an actual man, as described above, she will NATURALLY return to her “prime directive” as a woman, which is to make a bunch of kids.

Are there women too damaged by the dystopia we live in to “change” or evolve past the lies and deception they were raised with? Sure. But are MOST women this damaged? No. They are just mostly lacking any actual men to provide the 2 things above. Plenty of soyboys like Johann there, but actual men? Eh… it’s slim pickings.

The truth is that a woman safe to exhibit her femininity and natural sensuality and sensitivity RELISHES in being a mother. Her life feels meaningful and full and worthwhile, and all the struggles and heartache she might suffer, in the light of a happy family become badges of honour, medals on her uniform as glorious mother and loving wife of a… MAN.

But does our Perfumed Prince stop here? Oh no, no, no, he persists in his imbecilic, literally mouth-drooling, arrogance. Behold his latest piece:

Meritocracy Kills Fertility

and the requisite quotes from it:

This time he prefaces it with a kind of “hands up gesture” to try and prevent the obvious stupidity of his argument from being well… blindingly obvious.

Editor’s note: this is a continuation of my series on meritocracy. The motivation for this series is to establish the logic which will be presented in my upcoming book ‘Leaving a Legacy’, in which I will attempt to convince wealthy individuals to not squander their estates in donations to the inefficient and destructive ‘charity’ industry.

The book will instead empower heads of families to establish rooted, virtuous dynasties which can sustain communities for generations. Necessary for this project is to convince fathers that it is not good to disinherit their children in a misguided attempt to force them to generate their own wealth in a ‘meritocratic’ system. This destroys their childhood, closes their minds, and interrupts their ability to raise the next generation - as we shall see.

You see, it’s all about the boomers not leaving money to their children. Which sure, who can argue that’s not a thing. It is. Boomers are the most narcissistic, destructive, toxic, generation that has ever crawled on the face of the Earth. Maybe Johann here is trying to tell daddy to not leave the family castle to the SPCA or something. But regardless, if this is the “argument” against meritocracy he wants to write a whole book on, it’s really quite pathetic.

He’s again, setting up a strawman, that supposedly, if you are wealthy, you will cut your kids off in order to “teach them meritocracy”. What complete nonsensical fabrication is that, pray tell?

If I had a few millions to leave to my children, I would. And if I were a billionaire I am sure I would also give them experiences that they would otherwise not come by, but their learning to be effective, efficient and good at whatever they decide to focus on, in other words, their putting in the work required to become good, has absolutely nothing to do with how much money I have or don’t have or leave to them or not leave to them. As far as I am concerned: THIS. IS. SPARTA!

You will move your ass and RUN, not walk. If you fall you get up. If you’re still breathing you can still get up. You will NOT give up, you will find a way. I am not worried about money or my children not having enough of it. I will teach them to merit whatever they aim for. By simply going after it and becoming good enough to get it. Regardless of the barriers to entry idiots like Johann naturally want to impose on their actual betters, for the usual obvious reasons.

But let’s continue to delve in this festering pile of bull manure.

I will quote quite a long piece here to prove that I am not selectively picking bits out of it. He really is this fucking stupid. It’s enough to make you wonder if perhaps he is of “noble” birth; you know, from one of those families that have been fucking each others’ cousins and occasional half-sisters for generations!

Behold, the very first sentence is the summary of the rest of the absolutely wrong “definition” he gives to meritocracy.

The key proposition of meritocracy is that the person who deserves the greatest reward is the person with the greatest aptitude who invests the greatest effort.

That is really all it takes to prove he is a complete moron. One who can’t afford a basic dictionary apparently.

Meritocracy is a society based not on the greatest effort someone puts in, you moron. It’s a society based on the results someone produces.

RESULTS, monkey boy. Results. Not effort, you blithering idiot.

But let him hang himself in his own words.

Meritocracy is a curious creature: it is a political philosophy which could be described as ‘progressive but inegalitarian’. As with all progressive philosophies, it is a liberal child of the Enlightenment and its advocates champion it as a repudiation of the hereditary class system.

Ultimately, however, it remains an inegalitarian system for defining who should rule over others. The term ‘meritocracy’ is the combination of the Latin-origin "merit" (from mereō meaning earn) and the Greek suffix "-cracy" (power, rule). In other words, it is rule by those who have earned it.

Meritocracy is progressive to the degree that it denies that one’s ultimate status should be defined by the circumstances of one’s birth. There remains an inconvenient fact, however: intelligence and other key attributes for success are parameterized at birth, and are nurtured by the family circumstances which one is born into.

To avoid the decidedly illiberal proposition of replacing one birthright caste with another - bloodlines by IQ - meritocracy opens the possibility for social mobility by integrating a factor which only emerges after birth: how hard the individual works. This factor serves as the moral heart of meritocracy.

It is feasible that the college selection process could, for example, operate entirely on a simple combination of 1) an intelligence test; 2) basic evidence of diligence via applicants’ key grades; and 3) demonstrating intellectual curiosity in an interview.

The typical elite selection process extends far beyond this, however. Evidence is required of an extraordinary record of effort. Extracurriculars, languages, instruments, volunteering, internships, startups, projects, and so forth are required. Aptitude is not enough.

If two applicants with the same level of intelligence are presented, the one who has ‘worked harder’ will be chosen, even if both have worked hard enoughto have confidence that they would fulfill their responsibilities as students. The same is true of two candidates for a professional opportunity: the stacked résumé wins.

Elites from athletes to bankers brag about how hard they work. This bragging would have been alien to the generation of elites which preceded the ‘meritocratic elite’ - indeed, elites used to be known as the ‘leisure classes’. But the centralization of effort is necessary to the moral logic of meritocracy, and underpins the system’s justification for existence - and effort therefore manifests as a virtue to be advertised.

It is clear that Johann advocates in his other pieces like the “jobs for sensitive young men” to become and be precisely the kind of one-dimensional, ass-kissing, ivy-league educated, smarmy, two-faced, parasites that end up having to rape children on Satanic altars while being ridden by a man in a donkey mask while snorting cocaine, because they are so utterly dead inside that this is an approximation of something that might make them feel something.

And yet, here he says, that the system that puts these vermin in the places where they have access to the levers of power is based on “meritocracy”. It’s absolute nonsense. Johan is CLEARLY one of those wanna-be’s that has never quite made it into the “high society” he so longs to be a part of, and is really very bitter about it, despite his airs of “being” or rather, “becoming” noble.

Aside the fact that he has no clue what meritocracy is or even means, as evidenced beyond a shadow of a doubt above —and that the vermin in question do NOT get there through it, but rather PRECISELY by his supposed preferred method of nepotism, knowing who to threaten, blackmail, pay off or suck off— it becomes clear that he also proves his own advice is retarded, ineffective, a lie and produces only a hellish life devoid of meaning aside the chasing of the ever elusive dragon of “status”. Which clearly he has not achieved; nor will anyone who takes his idiotic advice.

So let me explain it in perspective:

If you are a middling guy, maybe from a not well to do family, trying your best to have a monochromatic CV with ONE direction only, for your choice of career and sticking to it like a soulless drone, because ultimately you have the kind of brain that worries about that more than actually living a meaningful life and/or because to you that reach for the 2.5 kids, white picket fence and the fake “respect” of your peers for your “status” IS what life is all about, then… by all means, sunshine, you go right ahead. It’s what’s best for you for sure.

On the other hand, if you are not an average person, or even a midwit totally lacking in imagination, actually have an at least partially functioning brain, and realise there is more to life than Johann’s ever elusive “status”, and perhaps want to live some of it, you may notice that there are plenty of jobs that will still keep you comfortable and also allow you to have a family, if you simply apply yourself, but it is not required you sacrifice the details and joys of life for them.

In short, this guy tries to baffle you with bullshit. His veneer of “becoming noble” is a façade. He pretty much admitted as much when he wrote that he is “leaving Britain” (I wonder if he really ever will) which appears to be his whining lament that Britain is no longer a place where you can “make it”. But it never was. Britain is still one of the countries in which his much praised “class structure” continues to exist. He is too stupid to realise it is the very thing he wants to be a part of that will forever keep him out of it.

As for his piece of meritocracy reducing fertility it’s the usual nonsense. By “defining” meritocracy as “effort” instead of results, he concludes that:

Now we find something of a fertility ‘perfect storm’ developing. Three factors are now true which together would seem to inexorably suppress birthrates among those parts of the population which play the meritocracy game:

1. Elites - and aspiring elites - work longer and harder than ever before;

2. Elite children are more time-intensive to raise than ever before;

3. Elite children are more expensive to educate than ever before.

(For more commentary and data on points 2 & 3, see my last article.)

Something has to give!

But this is of course the “reasoning” of someone who can’t do a BASIC logical calculation of cost analysis.

It’s not hard to do:

Do I want to work 16 hour days and have no real life outside of my work for 30 years in order to be a billionaire (maybe, assuming the best case, because there are PLENTY of people who TRY to do this who are not even millionaires, and there are very FEW billionaires)?

Now, me, even if the billion was guaranteed? I would say (and did say, multiple times in life) a resounding, loud, echoing: “Fuck NO!” In fact I said no to much lower thresholds than that. Why? It doesn’t really matter, the point is that to ME my personal freedom to explore whatever facet of life I decide takes my fancy, is FAR more important than money or artificial success, or what really anyone besides a VERY small number of select people think about me or my life choices. And even those few only matter up to a point, because first and foremost, I have to be honest to myself. If you look at my life trajectory, or the things I have done, it would give Johann a brain embolism.

And you’ll also notice at least a couple more things about him that differs from me. I mean if you are deaf, dumb and blind, because otherwise you may notice many, many, many dozens of things, but in any case, at a minimum, I —unlike Johann— actually am noble. I literally come from a line of men that in the gold branch were awarded perpetual status of Marquis for the first-born, and in the Silver branch which I belong to of Patrician. In both cases the title to nobility was achieved as a result of martial prowess, by basically being better than everyone else at a given time and place at killing people. And as a member of the nobility, I can assure you, that Johann is not, and never will be one of us. And it really has nothing to do with titles that he may purchase along the way. because you see… they will not be merited. They will not be earned.

But more importantly, you might notice that Johann is a pseudonym. He writes anonymously. I do not. My OG blog is right there, my books have my name on it, and so on. While I use the nickname The Kurgan that was given to me by a group of online people I used to frequent, I do not hide who I am. And I write what I write.

So, why does Johann hide like a fearful, soft, and Perfumed Prince in fear? Because he simply CANNOT afford to say “fuck you” to whomever. Johann has neither the money (neither do I) not the balls (I do) or the supposed mythical “status” to do so.

In short, Johann, is, like his theories, a fraud.