The Fifth Estate

By Maeve Maddox

A movie about Julian Assange, the man who founded a website devoted to leaking information that governments wish to keep secret, is called The Fifth Estate.

Most modern speakers associate the word estate with various types of property, for example,

a grand house with extensive grounds

the assets left by a deceased person

a housing development

The word estate in the expression fifth estate originates from a much earlier use of the word:

An order or class regarded as part of the body politic, and as such participating in the government either directly or through its representatives.

The earliest reference to this meaning of estate in the OED is dated 1380 when John Wyclif asserted that people belong to three categories ordained by God: priests, knights, and the “commons.”

The concept evolved differently in different European countries, but the essential idea was to view society in terms of who had a voice in government.

In England, the three estates came to be defined as Lords Spiritual (high-ranking clergy like bishops), Lords Temporal (nobility), and Commons.

In France, the three estates were Clergy, Nobles, and Townsmen.

A few European countries, like Sweden, recognized four estates, but it’s the three-estate concept that explains the development of the English expression fifth estate,

A fact to keep in mind about the medieval third estate is that it did not include everyone who did not belong to the first two estates. The third estate was made up of wealthy landowners and merchants. The portion of the population that lacked rank or wealth lacked a political voice as well.

The term fourth estate was coined in the 18th century as a figurative expression to label the sector of the population that exists outside the circle of established political power.

Nowadays, the fourth estate has become a synonym for the Press, but in 1752, Fielding identified the fourth estate with “the Mob.” Various individuals and groups were referred to as “the fourth estate” before the term finally settled on the Press. Newspapers won the term because they were perceived as the voice of the politically or socially disenfranchised.

If newspapers have sold out and become a part of the Establishment, then strictly speaking, the coinage “fifth estate” is unncessary. The mantle should simply be taken from the traditional Press and passed on to the Internet.

However, maybe the term does represent something new. Perhaps the role of the fifth estate is not to provide everyone with a voice in government, but to provide a means of undermining government.

So far, the meaning of fifth estate remains blurry. The earliest reference to its use in the OED refers to the medium of radio and is dated 1932. In a 1955 reference, the fifth estate is equated with trade unions.

Only ten uses of fifth estate occur in the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) for the years 1990-2012. Six of those citations refer to the title of a television program.

The Assange movie will doubtless have the effect of turning fifth estate into a buzz word. How the term’s figurative meaning will evolve remains to be seen.

G. Eiríksson Says:

Apparently Nietzsche had writings under the header « Unfashionable Observations », which quite reminds one of Moldbug’s title of « Unqualified Reservations »!


Wagner Reply:

That’s the most recent book I read. There was a moment in it that reminds me of our current cultural circumstance:

“The lower, unlearned classes are now our only hope. The learned, educated classes must be abandoned. And along with them the priests, who understand only these classes and who themselves belong to them… The greatest danger is if the unlearned classes are contaminated with the yeast of present-day education. If a Luther were to appear today, he would rise up against the disgusting attitude of the propertied classes, against their stupidity and thoughtlessness, which even prevents them from sensing any danger… The great deluge of barbarism is at the door… Every alliance with the “educated people” must be rejected.”

Moldbug = our Luther?

This is a very chilling sentiment: “The greatest danger is if the unlearned classes are contaminated with the yeast of present-day education.”

Also this is a handy “pro-tip” for us right-wing brahmins:

“Drives that are easily confused with the drive for truth:

Curiosity, or even the search for intellectual adventures. What is new, rare as opposed to what is old and boring.
Dialectical drive for the sport of tracking things down, joy in foxily cunning trains of thought: it is not truth that is sought, but the sly stalking, surrounding, etc.
Drive to contradiction; the personality seeks to assert itself in opposition to someone else. As with exhibition fencers, struggle becomes a pleasure, personal victory is the goal.
Drive motivated by servility to people, religions, governments, to discover certain “truths.”
Drive motivated by love, pity, etc. for a human being, class, or humanity as a whole, to find a redeeming, beatifying truth–drive motivating founders of religions.”


G. Eiríksson Reply:

the disgusting attitude of the propertied classes, against their stupidity and thoughtlessness, which even prevents them from sensing any danger… the great deluge of barbarism is at the door… every alliance with the “educated people” must be rejected.”

Nietzsche never ceases to amaze does he. (If one is amazed by knowledge of the future ; which has now come to pass.)

‘Drive to contradiction, Drive motivated by servility to people, Drive motivated by love, pity,’ these are all things I’ve been dealing with in family members recently.


Wagner Reply:

He claimed to relate the next 200 years of nihilism, so, roughly 2088, by his standard, he will be expired. Interestingly, in a letter, he said he didn’t expect anyone to understand Beyond Good and Evil until the year 2000, and he ranked his Zarathustra above BGE, so there is still a lot of work to be done in interpreting them (granted he was a megalomaniac so we should take his prophecies with a grain of salt).

RE: your family members – yeah, tell me about it, I feel like I might as well be Satan in their eyes.

G. Eiríksson Reply:

» We know that, wherever economic interests predominate, the Jew rapidly rises and accedes to the commanding positions. The penetration of Judaism into England is not a thing of recent days alone. It was the English Revolution and Protestantism which threw open England’s doors. The Jews, who had been expelled by Edward I in 1290, were readmitted to England as a result of a Petition accepted by Cromwell and finally approved by Charles II in 1649. From this time forward, the Jews, and above all the Spanish Jews (the Sephardim) began to immigrate en masse to England, bringing with them the riches which they had acquired by more or less dubious means, and it was these riches, as we have just explained, which allowed them to accede to the centres of command within English life, to the aristocracy and to positions very close to the Crown. Less than a century after their re-admission, the Jews were so sure of themselves that they demanded to be naturalised, that is to say, to be granted British citizenship. This had a very interesting result : the Law, or Bill, naturalising the Jews was approved in 1740. Most of its supporters were members of the upper classes or high dignitaries within the Protestant Church, which shows us the extent to which these elements had already become Judaised or corrupted by Jewish gold. The reaction came not from the English upper classes, but from the people. The Law of 1740 provoked such outrage and disorder among the populace that it was abrogated in 1753.

The Jews now resorted to another tactic : they abandoned their synagogues and converted, nominally, to Christianity. Thus the obstacle was circumvented and their work of penetration proceeded at an accelerated pace. What mattered to the Jews was to keep their positions of command and to eliminate the religious arguments on which the opposition of that period principally rested ; everything else was secondary, since the converted Jew remains, in his instincts, his mentality, and his manner of action, entirely Jewish, as is shown by one striking example among many others : the extremely influential Jewish banker Sampson Gideon, despite having converted, continued to support the Jewish community and was buried in a Jewish cemetery. His money bought for his son an enormous property and the title of Baronet.

This was the preferred tactic of the rich Jews of England from the eighteenth century on : they supplanted the English feudal nobility by acquiring their properties and titles, and thus mixing themselves with the aristocracy, by the nature of the British representative system, they came closer and closer to the government, with the natural consequence of a progressive Judaification of the English political mentality. …

[ The current British Prime-Minister David Cameron is the result of such breeding:

“His great-great grandfather Emile Levita, a German Jewish financier who obtained British citizenship in 1871, was the director of the Chartered Bank of India, Australia and China which became Standard Chartered Bank in 1969.[17] One of Emile’s sons, Arthur Levita, was also a stockbroker; he married a cousin of the royal family, Steffie Cooper.[18][nb 2] Sir Ewen Cameron, another great-great-grandfather, was London head of the Hongkong and Shanghai Bank; he played a key role in arranging loans from the Rothschild family to Japan during the Russo-Japanese War.” »

» One-Nationism

Benjamin Disraeli:
* Emphasis of the principle of social obligation in stark contrast to extreme individualism then dominant within the political establishment.
* Drew attention to the danger of Britain being divided into “two nations: the Rich and the Poor”.
* Combination of prudence and principle.
* Growing social inequality contains the seeds of revolution – poor and oppressed working class would not simply accept its misery. Reform = sensible – stemming the tide of the revolution, it would ultimately be in the interests of the rich, particularly with changes in the voting franchise.
* Moral values – wealth and privilege brings social obligations, in particular a responsibility for the poor. Drew on the organic conservative belief that society is held together by an acceptance of duty and obligations. Society is naturally hierarchical, but also that inequalities of wealth and social privilege give rise to an inequality of responsibilities. Wealthy and powerful must shoulder the burden of social responsibility – price of the privilege. Based on the feudal principle of noblesse oblige, obligation of the aristocracy to be honourable and generous. This idea should be expressed in an increasingly industrialised world in social reform. »

Indeed. »

… it is the very forces that, in their time, were set to work against the previous, traditional European civilization that have rebounded against those who summoned them, sapping them in their turn and carrying to a further degree the general process of disintegration. This appears very clearly, for example, in the socioeconomic field, through the obvious relationship between the bourgeois revolution οf the Third Estate and the successive socialist and Marxist movements; through democracy and liberalism οn the one hand, and socialism οn the other. The first revolution simply prepared the way for the second, whereupon the latter, having let the bourgeoisie perform that function, aimed solely at eradicating them.
Ιn view οf this, there is one solution to be eliminated right away: the solution οf those who want to rely οn what is left οf the bourgeois world, defending and using it as a bastion against the more extreme currents οf dissolution and subversion, even if they have tried to reanimate or reinforce these remnants with some higher and more traditional values.
Ιn the first place, considering the general situation that becomes clearer every day since those crucial events that are the two world wars and their repercussions, to adopt such an orientation signifies self-deception as to the existence of material possibilities. »


G. Eiríksson Reply:

That would be, up-dated, by now the former prime minister : D. Cameron. » Cameron [who] identifies as a One-Nation Conservative », incidentally (— we just saw this moments ago).

How knowledge of ‘Jewish power’ was made a taboo can only be viewed as a master-mimesis, geniusly executed, and also an instance, for those who fell for the meme-of-not-mentioning Jewish power, of Humans being too stupid to live.

How the utter brain of the goyim is easily memed, is a matter of grand stupendousness.

Knowledge of that certainly has always fueled our own arrogance.

» Thus, as the Judaification of old feudal England was accomplished by diverse means, and as the old aristocracy gradually decomposed and underwent inoculation with ideas which would make it an easy prey for the material and spiritual influences of Judaism and Freemasonry, Disraeli did not forget his other task, that of augmenting and reinforcing the power of the new ‘Empire of Shopkeepers’, the new ‘Imperial Venice’, the reborn Israel of the Promise. This he did in a manner which was just as characteristically Jewish. Disraeli was one of the principal instigators of that sad and cynical English foreign policy by means of ‘protected’ third parties and the use of blackmail, which it pushes to the most extreme consequences. The most striking case is that of the Russo-Turkish War. Disraeli did not hesitate to betray the ancient cause of European solidarity, by placing Turkey under British protection. Turkey, defeated, was saved by Britain ; by use of the well-known ‘English’ method of threats and sanctions, Disraeli was able to paralyse the Slavic advance to the South without a single shot being fired, and a grateful Turkey made him a present of Cyprus. At the Congress of Berlin, the Russian ambassador, Gortshakov, was unable to restrain himself from crying dolorously : “To have sacrificed a hundred thousand soldiers and a hundred million of money, and for nothing!” (*) There is a factor even more serious, from a higher point of view. By virtue of this situation, brought about by Disraeli, Turkey was admitted into the community of the European nations protected by so-called ‘International Justice’. We say ‘so-called’ because, until that time, far from being held to be valid for all the peoples of the world, this justice was held to be valid uniquely among the group of the European nations ; it was a form of recourse and of internal law for Europeans. With the admission of Turkey, a new phase of international law began, and this was truly the phase in which ‘justice’ became a mask and its ‘international’ character became a ruse of ‘democracy’, for it was simply an instrument in the service of Anglo-Jewry, and subsequently of the French also. This development led to the League of Nations, to crisis, and to actual war. »

During World Wars I and II, Agamben writes, ‘the democratic regimes were transformed by the gradual expansion of the executive’s powers’ (2005: 6); ‘World War One (and the years following it) appear as a laboratory for testing and honing the functional mechanisms and apparatuses of the state of exception as a paradigm of government’ (1998: 7). » See also N. Land’s essay — titled: The ‘F’ Word — published 17 Oct, 2016; about the expansion of the modern State.

» Agamben quotes Arendt who writes that the camp is the space in which ‘everything is possible’ » Well by now, apparently, everything is possible in the streets of britain [sic], everything from suicide bombing to hooking up 13 year olds on heroine and watching bearded brown Muslim men rape them.

» The historical concentration camp, such as those of the Spanish in Cuba or the British in South Africa, Agamben writes, were born ‘out of a state of exception’ »

Indeed, at least thousands of girls were and are, in the british isles nowadays, so what’s the kvetching over a concentration camp, when you’ve been forced to become a heroin addict as a preteen by foreigners in your own small town?

» Michel Foucault identified a transition in modernity by which the State increasingly took as its task the care and regulation of biological, human life itself. The establishment, beginning in the 17th century, of what Foucault terms ‘biopower’, a regularising technology of power that ‘distribut[es] the living in the domain of value and utility’ (1990: 144), »

And have had cigarettes put out on your face by said Muslims, to be urinated upon by them, kidnapped by them, tattooed by them, beaten by them ; to mention only a few of shoah-like devices. The state of exception is the allowance of this by the pseudo-liberal leftoid “public” “services.” One can only imagine the faces of those human strata occupying them.

Gee, thanks.

» from Schmitt’s standpoint, the most significant – concept of ‘modern state theory,’ would be a ‘secularised theological concept,’ and this is precisely what Schmitt maintains, claiming that the exception has its religious corollary in the theological concept of the miracle: ‘The exception in jurisprudence is analogous to the miracle in theology. Only by being aware of this analogy can we appreciate the manner in which the philosophical ideas of the state developed in the last centuries’ (ibid.). »

It has to be seen that the so-called value of “diversity” is little but a quasi-theological concept akin to those of “paradise” and “miraculousness.” Indeed, the inversion, the clever and demonic subversion of them. For while “paradise” referred to a walling-off to exclude, what has come to replace it, — diversity — refers to a letting in. An inclusion, of what would ruin a place.

» The production of bare life through the exception, and the preoccupation of State power with the management of zoē, advance increasingly and in parallel throughout modernity, reaching an apex in the 20th century as the concentration camp system of the totalitarian State attempted the first ‘normal and collective […] organization of human life founded solely on bare life’ (ibid: 135). »

“Bare” “life” indeed. 💀


[ Alpha -1.01 ; transmission nova ]

Yeah, it is most simplistically-rationally, indeed cladistically —scientifically conceived, as Bolshevism taken to its ultimate proportions. Neo-bolshevism. A silly monster, laughed at unless it gets power. Bolshevism always was technocratic, futuristic, scientistic, economist, & reshapist (“trans”humanist). Innocuously compare the well articulated and documented BBC documentaries by Adam Curtis with the with the documents and artifacts associated with Land… You will in the former perceive the bolsheviks—in their neo-religionist technocratist, indeed—technolust fervour—parading gigantic machines around Moscow’s streets, in the early or be it, for the pedants, mid 1920s, sort of reminiscent of Half-Life 2, incidentally; —and you will witness that they provided the progenitors to “AI” , the proto-computer Central Databank hierarchies ; also known as gosplan & gosbank … as innocuous and outdated as that may *sound* now …

You’ll see if you drop all preconceptions and let Free Association of mental images, pattern recognition and cognition rule : the physiognomy of Bronstein Trotsky in astute correlation with the bug-faced hoarding-consumer archetypes of medieval premonitory literature & artwork (known in Buddhism as “hungry ghosts”) : indeed the sameness with the demons, the literature shewing quasi-pictographically the devil’s insatiable death- & disease-bringing satanic hordes, —the swarthiest-blackest nigeria afroloid insects.

Bronstein-Trotsky was a hoarder of gold ; a hoarder of massacre intensifications as well ; he is famous for having used communism-“illuminism” — indeed ‘socialist science’ — to bring down those who he had the most envy for ; those who had what he desired to accumulate or flatten down : — the Nobility, Religion and the Royal families. This he did to get the gold and human resources for his own bio-strata “peoples” hoard ; amusingly enough, satanically enough under the pretext of going against primitive accumulation (Marx).

Stalin somehow managed to get the better of him, as it were, and just turned it—(proverbially:) “the Central Human & Earthly Resources Harvesting Company” aka.—the Soviet Union—into Red Fascism in competition with the Blue Fascism of America,—lesser of two gargantuan evils— instead of the life-draining bolsho-bugfacism (no pun) of Trotsky the bug-face … » shape of the head and mandibles and size of the eyes » and the subtle antennae materially preformed but manifest in the subtle realm.

« There is a saying: communism is the bloodiest, most difficult and the most terrible way from “capitalism to capitalism.” The truth of this now appears to be proved by reality.

The representatives of the criminal powers who halted Russia’s development and threw the country into chaos have now themselves admitted that life was better in tsarist Russia than in the Soviet Union. As an example of this, a Soviet Russian head clerk in 1968 lived at a standard, which was only 18 per cent of that which a normal Russian clerk enjoyed in 1914.

It has also been calculated that a Russian labourer in 1968 lived at a standard, which was only half of his counterpart’s in 1914, even counting an inflation rate of 8 per cent per year. Even so, life in Russia was not so hard in 1968 as in 1991, the last year of Soviet power. Workers during the tsarist regime earned 30 roubles per month, teachers and doctors 200.

A loaf of bread (410 g) cost 3 kopecks, 410 g of meat 15 kopecks, 410 g of butter 45 kopecks, 410 g of caviar 3 roubles and 45 kopecks.

If we compare the conditions in the USSR with those in the West, we find even sharper contrasts. In 1968, the average standard of living in the United Kingdom was 4.6 times higher than in the Soviet Union. The figures are taken from Anatoli Fedoseyev’s book “About the New Russia” (London, 1980). »

Before that ousting by Stalin ; Bronstein Trotsky transported the gold he had amassed from the Russian empire, its nobility and bourgeoisie—amassed with his ultra-despotic insectoid alien no quarter rapist torturer terror tactics; —he used this gold & other resources as beast [sic] as he could, to, as ridiculous as it sounds, this is the best analogy : — further ant-colonise the world for the extraterritorial 4th layer insecto-economo race ( which apparently Alex Jones is, surprisingly enough woke on, perhaps to discredit, but have faith ) — beings which long ago have snatched Land’s previously gentile ango-brain — and are the biotechno materialisation of infernal (“intradimensional” or “telluric”) forces on earth.

If you wonder why the goyim keep making these alien Hollywood movies out of its id, it’s the hidden-to-themselves but very visible notion, indeed, motion ; process : of being harvested by occluded eldritch alien antilife almost mineraloid—forces. Of which, b.t.w. the ANTIFA are the most laughable rejected-by scum-froth dropplings, aside from liberals and politicians, who are as the putrid push of microbes even the devil’s most inner anus rejects out of disgust.

Marxo-Landism is accelerating the antihumanism-miningism or “mining process” in Disruptive-Destructive Creation soi-disant Capitalism to make one life-devoid Central Computer, to best economise this mining process in its hastening of the death of the universe—now euphemistically & neophillically named and marketed as the progress of techno-liberal society towards the goal of “AI”‘—, i.e. a dynamic-“databank” equational process (a 4th generation successor to to Lenin’s Central Bank) come to possess, perform, accumulate and absolutely suck dry, which has no need for personalities or differences between individuals, what it sees : the human commune : “all well,” “good,” is the propagated meme ; since it is, as it were : “privately owned.”

Incidentally— another tool:feminist ; referring to a parafemale creature so envious of the rational male, that it will sell its own life—, cf. “feminists” wearing hijabs to support Muslims→ to use Muslims as “anti-fascist” truly antihyperborean —most understandably:antiwhite forces→ to in turn maintain and accelerate the processes of xeno ant-colonisation of the terrasphere under the hybrid socialism-“capitalism” process, as it increases its irrational short-lived freedom through this, in turn, selling, sacrificing, the world to the delusion of being/becoming equal to the rational divine man. It does nothing but enslave itself for pure tellurian determinism, which ends in the death of all life in the universe (however fancily it be named as “computronium” or whatever — previously known as Utopia, “Heaven” , or “Nirvana”). It is simply the entropic process employing life-forms to get as far as it can, which is and will be ultimate complete death of the world— & obviously the death of all life, unless it is wittedly resisted.

It’s crisply classically conceived as a process for infernal beings (beings of the underworld, “Hades”, where the dead dwell) to harvest the life-force in humans. Not for their own good, but because they cannot do any better (they’re hungry ghosts, remember). They’re as good as a worm in your brain, a neurocysticercosis. But more lethal.

You’ll see that Land’s support of Bannonism and his idea Patchwork are the few ideas that do not exacerbate the malevolism described above, so there is still a anglo-purist somewhere inside him crying for life & liberty free of and over the xeno-insectoid life-enslavement determinism.

You have fought these forces a million times in video games, or as a spectator through the POV of the Character of movies and novels, you have seen them defeated. Now it is time for your victory in the new world : the real world.

Dr. Land is counting on you to restore his senses.

And the negroloid hordes, only used as voodoo dolls for Davos Man, now let loose on the germanic nations, America included, are waiting for you to set their spirit free through Racial Holy War. It is time to reverse the cross, ✞, to symbolize the raised sword. Deus vult.

First this, then Space.


You cannot deny Mankind the Emperor, He and the empire He has built are Mankind’s only chance of survival.
— Attr. Promeus, during a secret conclave of the four founders of the Inquisition, following the Emperor’s Ascension

Burn the heretic. Kill the mutant. Purge the unclean.

Royal Kekism

G. Eiríksson Reply:

That community somewhat succumbed to snob after winning WW2 and especially after taking down the Soviet Union.

It´s rather feminised. Narcissistic like a woman enjoying the liberties contraceptisation and pseudoestrogenisation has brought.

Aka. Hubris.

Greek hybris « wanton violence, insolence, outrage » originally « presumption toward the gods ».

Even the “alt-Right” is very feminine so far as it is very nihilistic. Royal Kekism and truth-telling are its only redeeming features.

Feminism and Lewd Materialism, crystilized in some forms of Communism and Capitalism, are the vessels through which Nihilism enters, because the accursed share of narcissistic primitive accumulation is never satisfied, indeed it is a black hole; that is never filled until the beast is tamed.

« The caustic strength of nihilism is absolute, Nietzsche argues, and under its withering scrutiny “the highest values devalue themselves. The aim is lacking, and ‘Why’ finds no answer” (Will to Power). Inevitably, nihilism will expose all cherished beliefs and sacrosanct truths as symptoms of a defective Western mythos. This collapse of meaning, relevance, and purpose will be the most destructive force in history, constituting a total assault on reality and nothing less than the greatest crisis of humanity:

What I relate is the history of the next two centuries. I describe what is coming, what can no longer come differently: the advent of nihilism. . . . For some time now our whole European culture has been moving as toward a catastrophe, with a tortured tension that is growing from decade to decade: restlessly, violently, headlong, like a river that wants to reach the end. . . . (Will to Power)

Since Nietzsche’s compelling critique, nihilistic themes–epistemological failure, value destruction, and cosmic purposelessness–have preoccupied artists, social critics, and philosophers. Convinced that Nietzsche’s analysis was accurate, for example, Oswald Spengler in The Decline of the West (1926) studied several cultures to confirm that patterns of nihilism were indeed a conspicuous feature of collapsing civilizations. In each of the failed cultures he examines, Spengler noticed that centuries-old religious, artistic, and political traditions were weakened and finally toppled by the insidious workings of several distinct nihilistic postures: the Faustian nihilist “shatters the ideals”; the Apollinian nihilist “watches them crumble before his eyes”; and the Indian nihilist “withdraws from their presence into himself.” Withdrawal, for instance, often identified with the negation of reality and resignation advocated by Eastern religions, is in the West associated with various versions of epicureanism and stoicism. In his study, Spengler concludes that Western civilization is already in the advanced stages of decay with all three forms of nihilism working to undermine epistemological authority and ontological grounding.

In 1927, Martin Heidegger, to cite another example, observed that nihilism in various and hidden forms was already “the normal state of man” (The Question of Being). Other philosophers’ predictions about nihilism’s impact have been dire. Outlining the symptoms of nihilism in the 20th century, Helmut Thielicke wrote that “Nihilism literally has only one truth to declare, namely, that ultimately Nothingness prevails and the world is meaningless” (Nihilism: Its Origin and Nature, with a Christian Answer, 1969). From the nihilist’s perspective, one can conclude that life is completely amoral, a conclusion, Thielicke believes, that motivates such monstrosities as the Nazi reign of terror. Gloomy predictions of nihilism’s impact are also charted in Eugene Rose’s Nihilism: The Root of the Revolution of the Modern Age (1994). If nihilism proves victorious–and it’s well on its way, he argues–our world will become “a cold, inhuman world” where “nothingness, incoherence, and absurdity” will triumph. »

Thiel however is influenced by Girard, so he might be working against this.

« One afternoon while visiting in Huntsville, I was shown the original 75,000 word German-English technical dictionary, six or so inches thick, specifically created for US industries right after the war in order to exploit Third-Reich rocket and space technology developed in Germany and in the Eastern countries then still in German hands. In the company by these gifted German scientists, I never felt the slightest hostility against their former adversaries, the Western style Allies who had been suckered into a deadly war by largely fabricated Marxist fairytales. »

« The Sexual Revolution in Post-Reform Russia: Left-Radicalism, Feminism and its Connection to Terrorism from 1861 to the Great War Matthew Raphael Johnson Johnstown, PA

The first years after the abolition of serfdom were the time of the last burst of noble luxury. A large mass of cash, value earned by others, was withdrawn from the sphere of production and directed into their own consumption. Lands of the few nobles owning serfs needed to be compensated. The government paid off the nobles, who then sunk into a much deserved oblivion. Peasants then went about buying Russia, making it the most egalitarian European society in terms of land ownership. Within 49 years the peasants had to pay the government back, however, soon, Alexander III canceled these payments. The early years of the 20th century is thus the final stage of moral crisis, the beginning of which was declared by Dostoevsky in the middle of the 1870s. His novel A Raw Youth (sometimes translated as A Teenager or The Adolescent, from the Russian Подросток) saw the new generation of Russians aspiring to be “Rothschilds.” It was rare to find a major writer of most political backgrounds at the time believing any differently. Arkady Dolgoruky, the main character, was a symbol of his era. He is illegitimate, and the son of a landowner who was totally dissolute in his life. He was raised by strangers and has no real home. Under nihilism, only power can be real. The nihilist movement was “scientific” in that it only recognized blind cause and effect. Since wealth was the best means to power, Arkady set upon “being like a Rothschild” as his main goal. The book is a condemnation of the mentality that is at the heart of this paper: the destruction that western liberalism and capitalism wrought on Russia. Arkady adopts the ideas of “global citizenship.” Since there are no moral norms, money raised from the gambling table is the same as money actually earned. The result is that he becomes addicted to roulette, as Dostoevsky apparently was himself. The ideas of the sexual revolution, already present in the “western” capital of St. Petersburg, turn on Arkady as he realizes that the powerful can take his love interest with ease. Because he has bought into the nihilists code, he has nowhere to stand to complain. Struggling to reconcile materialism to freedom, Arkady, in dealing with this cognitive dissonance, is split into two people, a common motif in Dostoevsky. The first is the “rational egoist,” one ostensibly social and constructive, while the other, not really distinct from the first, is the lustful hunter, the one who seeks to possess, exclude and ultimately destroy. Ultimately, only chaos results from this both at a social and psychological level »

Notice the similarities with its American brother:

« But the film takes one step further than this, by analyzing the cultural and political articulations of postwar economic liberalism and thereby leading us onward to the more intricate and disorienting predicaments of the present. It shows how a command-and-control logic focused on the ontology of the enemy was transformed into its seeming opposite: the “open systems” of today’s supposedly borderless world society.

Another accelerated sequence evokes the Macy Conferences of 1946 to 1953, which gathered the outstanding minds of an era to develop the operating technologies of America’s new global governance. Conference members included McCulloch, Pitts, Wiener, Von Neumann, Bateson, Heinz von Foerster, Margaret Mead, Kurt Lewin and many others. These meetings wrote the prehistory of the digital age – but precisely here, where contemporary commentators locate the origins of computing, cognitive science and the Internet, Dammbeck shifts the focus to behavioral research in sociology and psychiatry. He claims that the participants “registered a particular interest” in a book called The Authoritarian Personality, published in 1950 under the direction of Max Horkheimer of the Frankfurt School.15 The authors, including T. W. Adorno, used the statistical methods of empirical sociology to analyze the American population for elements of the “authoritarian matrix” of traditional European nationalism, which in their view had given rise to fascism in Germany. The authoritarian matrix would have to be identified, dismantled and transformed to prevent any future outbreaks of racist or totalitarian aggression. This, for the filmmaker, is the focus of struggle on “the Cold War battlefield of the unconscious,” where cybernetics became the weapon of choice in the configuration of a new world order.

The evidence that Dammbeck can provide for direct connections between the Macy Conferences and The Authoritarian Personality is slim. But it is clear from the historical record that the dissolution of nationalist cultures and the creation of a new “world-mindedness” had been a major preoccupation of American social scientists since the 1940s. The total mobilization of the liberal principles of civilization against the Nazis led the anthropologist and future Macy Conference participant Margaret Mead to declare: “We must see this war as the prelude to a greater job – the restructuring of the culture of the world.” 16 For Mead, cybernetics would be a vital contribution to this civilizing project, because it helped her see how change could be offered as a possibility to be freely chosen, rather than a straitjacket to be imposed by force. Victory in 1944-45 would set the stage for new and highly sophisticated forms of “democratic” social engineering.

Following his dialectical method, Dammbeck focuses on the contributions of the German émigré thinkers to the new American hegemony. The off-screen voice intones: “According to the Gestalt psychologist Kurt Lewin, a member of the Macy Group, the old values and balances must be destroyed, in order to make conditions ‘fluid.’” A cut to flashback-style images of laboratory surgery, followed by the zany oscillations of Nam June Paik’s electronic art, gives a hint of how such fluidity could be achieved. “Then it is possible to establish new balances and values,” the cool narrative voice continues. “Re-education will then develop into self-re-education. This would transform the world into a post-national, multi-ethnic society, with no fixed borders.” The scene cuts from a pharmaceutical production line of the 1950s, with thousands of little white pills flowing in even ranks toward their destinations, back to a contemporary American lunch-buffet under electric lights, filled with attractive and colorful dishes from around the globe. A standardized cube of orange jello trembles ever so slightly, like cellular plasma on a spoon.

At this point another figure enters the narrative: Henry Murray, who invented the Thematic Apperception Test used by the researchers of The Authoritarian Personality. Murray, a psychologist, had worked for the US government on a personality profile of Hitler, then devised stress-tests for soldiers. During the war he adopted the ideas of the World Federalist movement and argued for a process of global political unification, which, as he wrote in a letter to Lewis Mumford, “involves transformations of personality such as never occurred quickly in human history; one transformation being that of National Man into World Man.”17 As we hear in the film, “Murray sees psychology and the new social sciences as destined to make a contribution to a world that can live in peace and harmony: in a new world order, with world laws, a world police force and a world government.”

These were the ideals of wartime liberalism, instituted by the United Nations, the World Health Organization and UNESCO, then revived in the 1990s after the fall of the Berlin Wall with the opening of international borders and the meteoric rise of the World Trade Organization. Yet here again we are invited to look at the dark side of the democratic project: for it was also Murray, the idealist of the post-war period, who administered damaging psychological tests to groups of Harvard students in the years 1949-1962. Ted Kaczynski was among the subjects in the year 1958. Although the laboratory reports of these studies have not been released, we know that the future Unabomber was given the code-name “LAWFUL.”

Dammbeck passes over the Harvard period very rapidly, retaining only key clues and symbols. Looking at the documents of the case, one discovers astonishing facts that underlie the tightly edited version of the story in the film. The year-long ordeal administered to the students by Henry Murray was designed to examine the effects of extreme psychological stress in order to improve screening and selection processes for the military. It required the participants to spend a month writing a statement of their highest ideals, in preparation for what they were told would be an inspiring discussion with a brilliant young lawyer. But in reality the lawyer’s role was to engage in character assassination, totally destroying the ideal ego of the experimental subject. For Murray, this one-to-one combat was a chance to explore the smallest of all social units, what he called “the dyad”: the exact point where psychology spills over into sociology. In other words, it was a chance to explore the psychodynamics of a social system under conditions of intense aggression, where the very plasticity of being is exposed to violent metamorphosis.18 Here again, at the heart of a carefully calibrated laboratory experiment unfolding in the calm and privileged atmosphere of a liberal university, we discover the ontology of the enemy.

Das Netz confronts us with the demons of the past: the inscriptions of the Cold War military-industrial complex on an individual psyche, standing in for the experiences of an entire population. But the important question is what this final avatar of military-industrial coercion could mean later on, in Ted Kaczynski’s adult life in 1970s and 1980s, and then again in our own era. What becomes of the world laboratory during the heyday of alternative cybernetics and “open systems”? And in what form do its violent experiments return, in the age of unlimited surveillance and the War on Terror?

Blowback in Society

The extravagant, utopian world of the year 2000, buoyed up by speculation on the Internet revolution, was suddenly shaken by the attacks of September 11. A forgotten atmosphere sprang back to the fore: executive privilege, domestic surveillance, military secrecy. Dammbeck’s strategy in Das Netz is to examine the networked society through the dark crystals of Cold War behavioral science, in the attempt to catch some prescient glimmer of America’s resurgent will to social control and sovereign power in the present. The intellectuals on whom he focuses all provide insights into the artificial nature of today’s society. During the 1940s, the sociologist Kurt Lewin was preoccupied with such questions as how to contribute to the war effort by changing the eating habits of average families. His highly influential research on group dynamics showed that citizens of a democracy could be far more effectively manipulated when they were given an active role in the process that changed their own beliefs.19 As for Henry Murray, his early work in personality assessment is considered “the first systematic effort to evaluate an individual’s personality to predict his future behavior.”20 It was subsequently used by the personnel departments of major corporations and by the CIA for the recruitment of foreign agents. Moreover, the personality assessment of Hitler which Murray produced during the war featured extensive commentary on the German national psyche, its relationship to the Nazi leadership and the most effective ways to shake that authoritarian grip and convert the population to a more liberal mentality.21 But it is the scholars with the least substantiated links either to the Macy Conferences or to Kaczynski – namely, the Frankfurt School and their study of The Authoritarian Personality – that allow Dammbeck to forge his most provocative speculations on the artificially induced “second nature” of contemporary society.

There is a parallel here with my own research into the psychosocial transformations of contemporary culture. In an essay called “The Flexible Personality,” published in 2002, I tried to show how a more pliable subjectivity emerged from the 1960s revolts against the military regimentation and industrial discipline that had produced the authoritarian character.22 The critique of the time was largely successful, according to this argument; but the openness of counter-cultural practices also proved remarkably amenable to the needs of the emerging neoliberal economy. The highly adaptive production system of the 1980s and 1990s, with its exaltation of mobility and its emphasis on cultural labor, was informed and qualified by the preceding attempts at a revolution of everyday life, whose demands for flattened hierarchies and spontaneous communications finally helped legitimate the new electronic toolkits and to distract attention from their built-in capacities for surveillance, exploitation and oppression. Flexibility, in short, was a ruse of capitalist history. Thus the authoritarian personality gave way to its dialectical successor.

Dammbeck’s analysis of Internet culture also hinges on this transition away from authoritarianism. But his conclusions are far more radical. Recurrent images of industrialized food services, coupled with scenes of people swallowing LSD on paper strips and sugar cubes, insinuate the idea that the fluid, borderless culture of a liberal “open system” was literally fed to Americans in the 1960s, along with the softer utopia of an alternative cybernetics. One generation later, he suggests, that same kind of culture was exported to the entire world by the multimedia magic of the Internet, bringing the liberal utopia to its culmination in the globalized economy. Here is where the focus on specific social scientists takes on an uncanny pertinence. It is as though Lewin’s experiments in manipulating a population’s eating habits with the full consent of the participating subjects had been applied on a massive scale, across several concerted waves of societal transformation.

No doubt this all sounds conspiratorial, if not frankly delirious. But when you know that the vast majority of early LSD research was sponsored by the CIA’s MKULTRA program – acting through the Macy Foundation among others – then such radical speculations take on their full significance.23 To be sure, as John Marks indicates, “the men from MKULTRA remained oblivious, for the most part, to the rebellious effect of the drug culture in the United States.”24 But as we have seen, nothing could be more widespread in postwar America than the involvement of social scientists in experiments seeking to impart the liberal values of a capitalist democracy even while insuring their military-industrial foundations. Where the CIA acted out brutal fantasies of “mind control” – going so far as to slip LSD-laced whiskey to unsuspecting clients in a phony brothel outfitted with two-way mirrors, or working with doctors who administered the drug in conjunction with electroshock therapy – social scientists like Murray and Lewin set up less intrusive, more rigorous and ultimately more effective experiments. What Das Netz asks us to perceive and measure are their continuing consequences on our own minds and sensoriums. »

A wee stop in Austria-Hungary:

« “In the third chapter of his autobiography World of Yesterday, entitled ‘Eros Matutinus’, Stefan Zweig describes the hypocritical sexual morality that he encountered when growing up in early 20th-century Vienna.

1. Zweig’s motivations for critiquing hypocritical sexual morality

Stefan Zweig, an Austrian of Jewish Descent, started his literary career by participating in writers’ circles in his native Vienna. He later cultivated literary acquaintances in Paris, Belgium, and Holland. In 1917, he gathered with some of them in Switzerland to promote their collective body of work that was critical of the war. In the United States, he is best known for his short story Letter from an Unknown Woman that was made into an American film starring Joan Fontaine.

Zweig lived in the Austrian Age of Progress that transformed formerly autocratic, aristocratic, and Catholic Austria-Hungary into a country of religious freedom, middle-class ascendancy, and constitutional monarchy with voting rights for its citizens. His critique of sexual mores reflected his hopes to further the Age of Progress by changing the culture to reflect reason and common sense. In his opinion, allowing young men to satisfy their natural sexual instincts would be another step forward for freedom in society. »

Back to Russia:

« The nobility of the Russian Empire, at one point accustomed for centuries to serve the throne and Fatherland, ingloriously left the stage. They also led the revolutionary movements. Not quite capitalist, not traditional, ideologically confused and altogether secular, these indebted families, the target of all royal policy from Ivan III onward, went to the cities and led the liberal revolution in 1905. After the freedom of the serfs in 1861, the nobles were to be compensated for their lost labor. The fact that the Emperor can easily cancel these payments shows the irrelevance of this class. The nobility did not invest the money in the improvement of Russia, but preferred to consume in their wasteful lifestyle. Thus was laid the cornerstone of the imminent coming of economic impoverishment and ruin of the nobility on the one hand, and the collapse of the Russian Empire – on the other. The “wives of the Decembrists” were the initial leaders of the proto-feminist movement in Old Russia. The most powerful and elite names in Russian life engaged in an oligarchical uprising against Nicholas I that has been lionized as “democratic” by an American historical establishment not well schooled in irony.

Names such as Volkonskaya, Trubetskaya, Annenkova, Muravievya, Naryshkina and Fonvizina, just to name a few, read like a history book of Russian history since the Troubles. These were the elites who revolted as the “Decembrists” I 1825, and now, their wives were to do their part for the New Age. Such ultra-elite names showed the titanic power backing feminism and social decay. These were the same names that sought to overthrow royal power since the earliest days of the Moscow autocracy. These were the same names that one reads about that tried to overthrow Ivan IV and Boris Gudenov, installed “tsar oligarch” Vasili Shuskii during the Russian time of troubles in the early 17th century, installed Peter I and his Masonic clique in the very late 17th century, ruled as an oligarchical, pagan cult throughout the 18th century and now, in the 19th century, sought the Jacobin Revolution in Russia.1

The upper reaches of the nobility were anything but conservative. They were deeply Masonic and pagan. It is the same families and the same ideology: pagan statism and absolutism. They were elitist revolutionaries. At the turn of the century in Petersburg, many of these name families consecrated themselves to Dionysus and used the artificial “crystal palace” as their symbol. This served as the epicenter for the rich and powerful in Peter’s “Floating City.” The desire was to bring “Parisian” manners to Russia, as it was understood to mean at the time. To be “Parisian” was to be Bohemian and politically revolutionary. Gypsy choirs, seen as libertine and non-Christian, were used to bring the Dionysian feelings to their apex while the vodka flowed. The idle rich, the old noble families long replaced and the salon women were willing to listen to any “spiritualist” that flattered them. The males were almost all deeply involved in Freemasonry and Jacobin politics.
The females had other pastimes (Ekshtut, 2010).

— A number of special studies emphasizes the social significance of their acts in
exile. For the first time, a woman had become involved in Russian politics. This
contributed to the formation of a new type of Russian woman. The Decembrist
protest against the accepted norms of social behavior brought them to the first step
towards the formation of women’s self-consciousness and emancipation, perhaps
not even subconsciously. In subsequent years, women began to claim their rights
to equality with men, education, work and participation in social struggles
(Rosina, 2009).

The strange analysis here is typical of the westernized Russian historian. Apparently, the slew of immensely powerful female women from St. Olga to Marfa Boretskaya2 to Catherine II escaped her, but these were hardly the first women involved in politics. It is ironic how the ultraelite (and they remained so in exile, which was not difficult or arduous) are seen to be fighting “accepted norms of social behavior.” They were the norms of behavior. Worse, that this feminism and sexual revolution is traced back to the most powerful and elite families in Russia whose recent history made them to be tyrants of the first order. Oligarchy was their only concern, but they needed a chaotic social system from which to emerge. Stable identities are the enemy of all revolutions.

The strange analysis here is typical of the westernized Russian historian. Apparently, the slew of immensely powerful female women from St. Olga to Marfa Boretskaya2 to Catherine II escaped her, but these were hardly the first women involved in politics. It is ironic how the ultraelite (and they remained so in exile, which was not difficult or arduous) are seen to be fighting “accepted norms of social behavior.” They were the norms of behavior. Worse, that this feminism and sexual revolution is traced back to the most powerful and elite families in Russia whose recent history made them to be tyrants of the first order. Oligarchy was their only concern, but they needed a chaotic social system from which to emerge. Stable identities are the enemy of all revolutions. It is not difficult to see, therefore, that revolution had a female cast from the beginning. As the traditional rulers of the home, these westernized libertines sought to revoke the old moral order in their revolutionary praxis. Their husbands sought to do it politically, they sought to do it privately. The wives of the Decembrists, especially the elite families Trubetskoy and Volkonsky, become centers around which the new left was created in Siberia. The wives of the exiled Decembrists had a tremendous impact on the formation of the Russian female character, accentuating the virtues of self-sacrifice for the new cause. Psychological Revolution in Russian Literature Post-reform Russia destroyed the idea of woman. Gradually, from the revolution of Peter I, the woman became an object of male desire and her worth was measured accordingly. The elite crust of urban High Society led the way in destroying Russian manners and Christian customs. The slogan of the elite was “freedom of the will outside prudence and decency” as the consequences of western capitalism made their way through the once strictly Christian society. This use of the orgy was described by Peter Dmitrievich Boborykin (1836-1921) in the novel Evening Sacrifice (1868). This “hellish scene,” a pagan, unbridled orgy with ten men, deliberately took place during Lent, when the Orthodox Church does not bless even marital conjugal intimacy. After the publication of the novel, Mikhail Saltykov-Shchedrin, in an anonymous 1868 review, revealed that these were elite initiations into what was called the “Athenian Vespers.” Boborykin writes: The youth are today filled with the revolutionary idea of not taking the old morals Russia seriously. They feel the passionate need to develop themselves and their views on life; to live according to their new moral and social rules and requirements. This was strongly permeated all among those who were called nihilists. The movement was just as destructive as constructive (Boborykin, 1868).3 Evening Sacrifice is a novel essential to any analysis of the era. Mary M, the heroine, is convinced that her husband never loved her. Upon visiting her friend, she catches her with a new lover. Intrigued with this lifestyle, she quickly succumbs. The elite of Petrograd are fond of citing commonplace cliches about Spinoza and Rousseau (usually incorrectly), and this provides the thinnest of justifications for their lifestyle. As she falls deeper and deeper into this Bacchanal, she is rescued by Stepan Labazina. Mary goes from philosophical view to philosophical view, throwing herself into different lifestyles before realizing that she is nothing – there is nothing behind the masks. [Cf. The Mask of Sanity, f.p. 1941.]

The dual events of Tsar Nicholas’ death and the freedom of serfs created a turning point in the consciousness of the public, and the “woman’s issue” was now mainstream. In S. Nechayev’s Catechism of a Revolutionary, the family is denied entirely, while AI Herzen, financed in London by the Rothschilds, sees the family as an institution protecting the “corruption of men.” Famed leftist and materialist N. Chernyshevsky went even further, recognizing the right of women to free love as part of the revolutionary creed. IV Stasov argues that the failure of the small farms of the lower nobility and the rise of a “noble proletariat” of impoverished families with noble titles, created an individualist ethos where families disintegrated and women were left without support. The incorruptible Emperor Alexander III shocked the slightest impropriety in family relationships, it does not hide his disfavor those of his relatives who violated the sanctity of the bonds of marriage. However, members of the imperial family is not terrible, even the august anger. Grand Dukes did not consider it necessary to imitate the Emperor in his pious family life. They openly kept mistresses, the many sported second families and illegitimate children. The elite press enjoyed “exposing” these foibles along with a very liberal approach to truth. In seeking to undermine the authority of the fairly popular Alexander, the press began circulating rumors (some quite accurate) about the moral failures of more distant royal relatives. »

« Just as a materialist rejecting free will can argue for freedom and equality among human beings that are not distinct from the rest of creation is not a lapse in thought of logic, but a concealing of the nature of this “utopia.” Its symbol is the Crystal Palace, as the new architecture is glass and metal. All work is mechanized, all exists in abundance and there seems to be no ruler except for the ever-present causality, mechanism and determinism.

Happiness exists only for those whose memories have been erased. Enjoyment comes with little work; overt rule does not exist; all evolve upward with no sinking to a “common denominator.” Passions do not control man since both love and reason check its power. Where this freedom comes from is not mentioned. The Goddess of Freedom and Equality is joined by the Goddess of the “Love of Humanity” where all national boundaries are erased. She is termed the “elder sister” meaning she is more primal and more significant than “freedom” and equality. Chernyshevsky begins to drop hints – as he did above — that there is more at work here than this simplistic image depicts. The new Goddess can take on the features of any ethnic group without having any identity of her own. In fact, the entire idea of identity is dropped out. The “Love of Humanity” takes a more practical shape when the Palace itself is built by “foreign workers.” These do the work, along with the machines, while the actual residents of the palace have little to do but “walk beside” them. Equality of women in marriage was the basic principle in Chernyshevsky. For him, sexual freedom was always prominent as a clear consequence. The rise of capitalism in Russia meant the rise of both foreign ideas and the domination of the west. As early as 1860 ML Mihaylov wrote: “Participation in the work of industry, science and art in general should be available to everyone as an adult member of society.” Maximizing the labor pool in industry is the very first focus of early feminism. Chernyshevsky was no different, in that his heroine finds happiness and fulfillment “in the workplace.” Sexuality was paramount as Chernyshevsky advocated a “revolving door” system of “marriage” where women can be passed from man to man “with respect.” The earliest manifestation so feminism before 1861 all concerned their “freedom to labor. »

«Capitalism, sexual liberalism, paganism, Judaic control and feminism are all one and the same movement in Russia. While the bulk of the peasantry and the church remained faithful, the rich and powerful were Moloch – the god of abortion and capitalism; the ancient form of childsacrifice in Tyre, where children were killed in a belly of the idol in exchange for profits. The elite decayed as the royal world was destroyed. From Peter I until Nikolai I, the crown was either non-existent or purely secular. The 18th century saw the destruction of the Russian tsarist idea as Orthodox churches in the empire were destroyed to where, by the start of the 19th century, there were less than half of their original number. Capitalism is a universal solvent. Seeking to bring all social relations under the control of money, it reduces human acts to mere power and control. The sexual revolution follows in its wake without fail, especially among those consecrated to its existence. Like in the Old Testament, the oligarchy of Tyre (powerful enough to ensnare Solomon himself) sought to use sacrifice to maintain its power. St. John the Baptist felt the consequences of sexual lust as he was beheaded, as did Pope Sixtus II, as the victim of the magical rites of the Emperor Valerian. In Russia, the upper nobility had the most to gain from the revolution, and so they threw themselves in it from the Novgorod oligarchy in the middle ages to the 1905 Revolution. Money was more powerful than faith, family and nation and women were at the forefront of them all. »

An ancient and a global affair:

« We may instance here the teaching of Al-Bistami, who was quoted as having advocated a return to a pre-Islamic cult through sufism. This cult, which various groups, operating together or alone, but, whether they are aware of it or not, synergetically, while from time to time in conflict with each other, have been trying to spread, by the means either of exotericism (the Abrahamic religions) or of esotericism in the spiritual field, is the Chthonic-Telluric worship of the Great Mothers of nature, which derives ultimately, to quote Evola in ‘Guerra occulta nell’antichità – Roma, i “Libri Sibillini” e l’ebraismo’ (‘Occult War in Antiquity – Rome, the “Sibylline Books” and Judaism’), from a “substratum of ethnic, religious and even mystical elements in which a strong Semitic-Pelasgian component is unquestionable.” This substratum gives birth to a social organisation in which women exercise political functions and politics is subordinated to economics ; juridically, it is based on the doctrine of so-called ‘natural right’, which posits equality between all human beings, and between men and women, as stated in the notorious “Déclaration des droits de l’homme”, whose evil Edmund Burke once warned against with an appropriate scorn ; in the “Universal Declaration of the United Nations”, the “European Convention of Human Rights”, etc., all of whose evils Michel Villey warned against with a similar scorn ; politically, it finds expression either in democracy, whether parliamentary or not, or in its borderline form : tyranny. At the risk of disappointing some people, we must make it clear that the Jews, who are along with the Chinese possibly the most feminine people on earth, are only instruments of the forces of chaos, or infra-human forces, which are behind this process which has led the West to gynaecocracy ; among their most efficient instruments, to be sure, but merely instruments nonetheless. »

« It is perhaps significant that Lewis makes no distinction between Spengler and his defence of “Faustian” culture, and men like Darwin, Einstein, Schopenhauer and Bergson. For him they are all guilty of the same heresy because all have contributed by their work to man’s loss of individuality. Lewis asserts that biology, mathematics and metaphysics as developed by Darwin, Einstein and Bergson have acted upon one another to produce the “time-philosophy,” which does away with the traditional categories in all fields of experience and enquiry, stresses the organic and dynamic aspects of life and reveres life in the raw as opposed to life disciplined and organized by the mind. Thus “Bergson’s ‘creative evolution’ is as Darwinian as was the ‘will to power’ of Nietzsche,” (p. 209) and his “élan vital” is equivalent to Schopenhauer’s “will.” The political implications of these philosophical doctrines are obvious: by emphasizing the unconscious in man, they make him lose his individuality, for man can only be an individual when he is conscious. Having lost his individuality, he lives in a state of “common humanity” and gives precedence to what Plato calls “the mob of the senses.” Life at this level is purely “sensational,” and we know that Lewis associates the life of the senses with the “subhuman” majority. This loss of individuality necessarily leads to political democratization. People are encouraged to give up their personal responsibility and to hand over their life to the community: “Discouragement of all exercise of will, or belief in individual power, that is the prevalent contemporary attitude for better or for worse.” (p. 306) On the other hand, the doctrine of action which derives from the Darwinian doctrine of “‘the struggle for existence” and from Bergson’s vitalism leads to fascism. Bergson’s philosophy is thus held responsible for the development of both communism and fascism. Lewis himself was to become an admirer of fascism, particularly of the German brand, but when he recanted his fascist opinions just before the Second World War, he again associated fascism with democracy on the ground that both were mass movements. Meanwhile, he also attacked at length Behaviorism, which, so he thought, gave the final blow to consciousness and substituted the body for the mind. Professor Watson, he said, describes man as a human body or a machine which possesses only instincts and habits but no mind. Still, the worst mischief-maker remains Bergson, whom Lewis even accuses of dishonesty. Though he often declares that philosophers are the victims of politicians who exploit their ideas for their own purposes, where Bergson is concerned, he asserts that the latter’s philosophy deliberately attempts to deceive men and ultimately aims at destroying individuality.”


“Homosexuality is a branch of the Feminist Revolution since large-scale male perversion is the logical male answer to the New Woman. “Homosexuality is a department of Social Revolution”; (p. 389) it is essentially a romantic and sentimental phenomenon, a “snobbery or cult” encouraged, together with feminism, in order “to lay the foundations of a neuter-class of child-less workers” and to destroy the European Family already doomed by the machine-age.”


“(…) the general argument of The Human Age, might be described as follows: the Bergsonians, who insist on the necessity to develop intuition at the expense of the intellect, encourage man to indulge in the senses and in the confusion of his inner world. By exploring his subconscious, man brings out what is lowest in him, and the importance he gives to instincts naturally leads him to a cult of the child, in whom instinct is predominant, and to a cult of what is primitive in man. The child-cult is associated to the mother-cult; as a result of the growing feminism, man, who is despised for his virility, is tempted to turn homosexual. Lewis considers that feminism, homosexuality and contempt for the male, which are responsible for the destruction of the family, are exploited by politicians who are only too glad to divest people of their differences and reduce them to neuter will-less beings. They incite people to sexual perversion or merely endeavour to transform them into sense- or sex-machines, which will diminish their self-control, impair their intellect and make them more pliable and submissive. They also deprive man of his claim to individuality by insisting that the human personality is part of the surrounding world. Philosophical communism conduces to political communism, and this is how most Western countries to-day are infected with it. No action is intact. Lewis also considers communism or socialism as a means used by Big Business to exploit the great majority of people, the middle class even more than the masses. Indeed, although the masses are being stupefied into a state of quasi-animalism, they enjoy privileges that the middle class don’t have. Lewis has developed this last point with obsessive emphasis in Rotting Hill (1951).”

For the United States is the nation best exemplifying in embryonic form the world order in which these things will be established. The familiar simile of the melting pot fascinates him: he sees America as “the great big promiscuous grave into which tumble, and there disintegrate, all that was formerly race, class, or nationhood.” In a remarkable chapter entitled “The Case Against Roots,” he praises rootlessness as a necessary condition of world citizenship, and points out that no one is really rooted in America, “everyone has left his roots over in Poland or Ireland, in Italy or in Russia, so we are all floating around in a rootless Elysium.” In a similar manner he views the standardization of life with its wiping out of regional peculiarities and prejudices as the forerunner of the standardization of world culture, an irreversible trend under industrialism.”

“Before the war Lewis had shown sympathy for fascism in his 1926 work The Art of BeingRuled (‘I am not a communist; if anything I favour some form of fascism rather than communism’)” and been grouped by T. S. Eliot with a number of writers who ‘incline in the direction of some kind of fascism’. »

In 2016, one magistrate out of two is a woman in England and Wales ; 80 percent of magistrates in Poland are women. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that, after having found its way in the courtrooms in post-WW2 Europe, the theory put forward by the Jewish criminologist Lombroso in the early XXth century, whereby « the atavistic determinism of the ‘born criminal’ amounted to relativise; guilt, crime » (J. Evola, Psicologia Criminale Ebraica, in La Difesa della Razza, 18), lays down the law, and the criminal is often considered, and actually tried, as if he was the victim, and the victim, the criminal. « La victime est-elle coupable ? Le rôle de la victime dans le meurtre en vue de vol » (« Is the victim guilty? The part of the victim in a theft crime »’) is the title of a book published in 1971 by Presses de l’Université de Montréal ; the jurist who asked this question, a certain Ezzat A. Fattah, is a male jurist. A female jurist surely has the answer, and is only too keen to show she does in her practice. No matter how feminine, a male jurist may have to force his nature, be it slightly, to take Lombrosos’s theory seriously, and Lombroso himself had to force his, when he built it. On the other hand, it is inscribed in a woman’s genes : her legendary more or less well-hidden innate feeling of guilt greatly helps her feeling innocent. The innocent are by definition those who share her feelings. The guilty is by definition the one who embodies a higher law, a higher principle, and manifests, radiates it. For portraying women in his plays as mad, blood-thirsty and depraved, Euripides is tried by the women of Athens gathered at the thesmophoria, who intend to request the death penalty. Women, by their very nature, cannot render justice (ius), but are perfectly qualified to apply so-called natural law, and this is precisely why courtrooms have been feminised. The more the political circus has been stuffed with women, the more freedom of trade and financial flows without barriers, without any limitation, any restriction in the movement of goods, services and people, has become widespread, the more border control has loosened, the more what was left of the State has vanished. The feminisation of the public service has led to the de facto privatisation of the public service. « Parity » will only be achieved when 100 % of the jobs; in the third sector – are held by women. Women are key to globalisation. In fact, globalisation is just a fancy word for feminisation. Globalisation is an externalisation of woman’s nature, and, ultimately, of the materia prima, the « potentiality, absolutely ‘undistinguished’ and undifferentiated universal substance. », to quote R. Guénon. The expression « Mother Earth » is no longer the property of the (Yes)Wiccan(!) movement, it is found in an increasing high number of UN documents. « International Mother Earth Day » was established in 2009, Countless « Mother Earth Rights » conferences, forums, meetings, seminars, congresses are held each year. The U.N. Fourth Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995 featured a full-size « reconstruction » of a supposed « ancient matriarchal village, » complete with a giant pair of female breasts, one above the other, to guard the entrance. Robert Muller, former Assistant Secretary-General of the UN, and so-called « father of Global Education », whose « World Core Curriculum », progressively implemented by all educational institutions, through self-styled State Education Departments, is founded on the teachings of the Theosophist Alice Bailey and of her Tibetan teacher, was one of his worshippers. He collected a following. While acadhimmics are as ardent to deride clear testimonies of the existence of matriarchal societies in Antiquity as they are eager to push the stroller on week-ends, Amazonism; misnamed ” Feminism ” – has become self-congratulatory, and its arrogant victory sheer are increasingly echoed in mainstream media, either in a veiled manner , or, in the bosom of the Jewess Montaigu’s pamphlet called The Natural Superiority of Women (1999) »

Royal Kekism


On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 11:29 PM,  <> wrote:

Dear Mr. Eiriksson,

you mighk know me as “unknown128” from Nick Lands blog. I am an aspirant of history on a german university and wanted to ask you what is up with Nick Lands blog. Why is the comment section there so weird. Filled with bizzare and arrogant indians who claim Buddhism made the east completly peacefull and the west is an absolute evil while acusing everyone else of “oversimplifying” and “whishfull thinking” and strange right wingers with a primitive aproach of the world and no knowloge of history. Why do you even frequent this blog and what worth do all the people see in it

Is it Nick Lands person that atracts such a bizarre folowing?

I guess it is a good place to yell out emotions though.

Kind Regards



I am interested in you sending me this letter.

I am pleased to meet a Russian. I met a Russian, in France and in Germany, which were friendly to me.

However, to answer your queries:

Knaphni has been commenting on Xenosystems since its inception in 2013, I just by coincidence  noticed before you sent this email. He seems to have grown more hostile recently, or over time. Possibly some of the angry White Nationalists there said something to him and that´s how a seed of ressentiment grew into a flowering. Altho his apparent vices were showing from early on.

I´ve met an Indian on-Line before, who had his being of Southern Origin Theory ill-fated hubris. That was in 2011 on There might have been some comment exchanges before this date. Anyway I re-discovered this also by coincidence yesterday. This is also about racism.
He called himself kadambari and it might be Knaphni, the same guy, who knows. I don´t thinko so though, and I do like Mr. Knaphni. I also like the other dude, altho I didn´t do so in 2011.
I show in that old thread from 2011 very extreme deman, e.g. because the guy was trolling in a sense, and showing macho pride for brown people on posts that were relatively Nordic, Roman, Christian, Aryan, White & Western-focused.
I was quite aware that brown people count a far greater number than the White race.
Indians being c. 1,21 billion. Icelanders are ca. 0,0003 billion.
(Discounting nonwhite immigrants.)

kadambari usually you do not get the discussion here, nor do you usually add anything of worth to it. This is not some “civilized” UN forum for cultural-exchange or whatever. This has nothing to do with common xenophobia (I have dwelt in the Global South), but I don’t care about your opinions as some of us are struggling for the survival of our bloodline and thus need to focus. Most users of this website think that the Nordic-Aryans invaded India and brought with them the language that Sanskrit and the Vedas are derived from. This is not debatable for us.
There are numerous posts here that testify to this, for example the latest one.

An example of our evidence for this is “The Arctic Home in the Vedas” by Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak, but we have no need to prove it to you and we do not recognize that you have any special authority on Vedic cultures as an Indian. Most of us do not care about the nation-state India and even view it as a great threat and part of the rising tide of color predicted in the last few centuries (for example in the 1920 “Rising Tide of Color”).

You see, racism has the value of a test, of a reagent, even in its most general formulations. The reactions of this or that person towards the racist idea are a sort of barometer which show us the quality of race which is found in the person in question. To say yes or no to racism is not merely to differ intellectually, it is not something subjective and arbitrary. The one who says yes to racism is the one in whom race still lives: the one who has been internally defeated by the idea of the anti-Race and in whom the original forces have been stifled by ethnic waste, by process of cross-breeding and degeneration, or by a bourgeois, weak, and “intellectual” or hedonistic style of life, or a stale working-class one, which has lost for generations any contact with anything which is really original or originary, opposes it and searches in all directions for alibis in order to justify his aversion and and discredit racism.

It seems to me you fail this test.

I would appreciate if you would not waste our time with a reply but rather leave and not come back unless you somehow discover in your heart that you support the revitalization of men who are akin in body to the type exemplified by for example this ancient statue:

Now through ultra-violet light we can see how the were colored originally:

There are ancient xanthochroid culture remains in every continent, many found in the landmass of non-European nations.

The 789 grams of dried cannabis was buried alongside a light-haired, blue-eyed Caucasian man, likely a shaman of the Gushi culture, near Turpan in northwestern China.

I have this type of skull (orthognathic and leptomorphic dolicho-mesocephalic)! you 4-times-saying-goodbye spamming retard. I am a Nordid.

My people lost your land-area ages ago; you only live in the putrefaction of the remains of the language and culture they brought from the North. Now this land-area, you know as ‘India’, may as well sink into the sea.

May you be reminded always that whenever you see the name Evola here this is what he thinks of your ‘rise’: the superior Western Races have been agonising for many centuries and that the increasing world population has the same meaning as the swarming of worms on a decomposing organism or as the spreading of cancerous cells [. “Revolt Against the Modern World” p. 167]

I only need to say bye once, and so I have done it; you I’m sure will continue to pollute the this site with your swarthy sentimental imagination.

It´s a very common mode, to be a sore loser and to want revenge. Third-Worldism like other Communism, one might say, is ressentiment made politics. Some, as it were, justified, most of it not.
A type of Leftism that is ressentiment made politics is Nazism, and I wasn´t as free from the root of that current, that pathos, as I seem to be in more recent years (altho increasingly freer since my teens).
They´ve started to call the depth of this current, if ethnicity is added: ethno-Bolshevism.
Many have noted that the similarities between Sovietism and Nazism are great.
Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler all inspired each other. All collectivism, but Evola especially linked Hitlerism with the concept of Bonapartism. Apparently Trotsky did too.
I am a center right myself, so I wouldn´t wanna advocate pseudo-Darwinistic Capitalism either. I don´t want labour working 14-16 hours per day in poor health conditions, with children and pregnant women working factories for lesser pay than men if they have measurably the same output in that particular job (certain position in a factory, e.g.).
Neither am I involved in the solipso-autism that monarchy just because it is monarchy is better. It were White Christian Monarchist Europeans, “the peak of civilization” that sacked Constantinople, and genocided parts of France, ex cathedra.
Not that I have a pity or a sorrow for this, except that these were sub-intellectual acts of hubris & savagery. As was the burning of people alive on stakes, such as the burning alive of the men of The Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon (aka “Knights Templar”), and the burning alive and centurie-spanning persecution of humble European men and women for knowing traditional herbal craft which posed a threat to the power of the Satanic Petrian church, as the latter were supposed to be the only “doctors”.
You see there a competition between scribes and therapeutae.
Incidentally, one commentator Mark at Gornahoor touches on something not unrelated.


I would like to move this to the new post, because EXIT makes a very interesting point. What I wanted to explain to you is that there is no “Western type”. We are as different as you and the Mongoloid peoples are. What I take issue with you is when you stated that the Western Tradition is Romanity. EXIT makes a good point that many of the Western types are not suited for Romanity. Again, you have to differentiate between the Greek and Italian for whom Christianity developed out of a dying paganism, and people like the Balts and Slavs for which Christianity spread by imperialism. To tell a Lithuanian that his Tradition is Romanity, when his country became Christian in 1387, and that he should like to the Romano-German knight as a noble ideal, when they were attacking his ancestors seems to be a bit of a problem.

For some, being an Edgelord is part of growing up; while for others it is a tragedy. Apparently there are brown people Edgelords too, and of all shapes, colours and opinions.
Nietzsche is seen as an edgelord, and he is. The term neutrally means that you are on the edge of ideas. The interesection or meeting of ideas, too. I have myself always been a sort of intersectional Right-winger. A tribalist globalist. A luciferian friend of Jesus.

I am not troubled by disturbed by Commies or hubristic “Nationalists” or “Christians” or what have you. — Any such people — on-line anymore. I know they can be reached via the heart. I make use of them to forward histori- & mythical points. Philosophia. & fun.

I frequent the blog because I enjoy it. I´ve enjoyed your posts e.g.
I drove off Knaphni once, but welcomed him back.
These are shown in dated comments.
War is the father of all things
Eros is a battlefield
Fight or die
Ride or
(I refer to spiritual deaths which come from not being honest. I wouldn´t want to see India sink into the sea altho it´s a large part of the “tide of color.” + I have friends there.)
[Some of the text above is adapted (edited, added-to, typos corrected, etc) and some of the text on racism is adopted from Evola. Veracity above authenticity. Truth above academicism. Worldly wisdom & workings above scholasticism. Tradition above traditionalism.]
Incidentally, I did address some of this recently:

G. Eiríksson Reply:

Now hold on, Indus Valley Civilization wasn´t founded by brownies?

You know that brownies have had Civilizations in pre-Aryan Greece? The Minoan.

Unless you have evidentialities shewing that they were leukodermic too.

I´ll grant that Wikipedia is not always neutral or leukojustic in these matters, but here they are, imo, [fair enough]:

▬ « After the discovery of the IVC in the 1920s, it was immediately associated with the indigenous Dasyu inimical to the Rigvedic tribes in numerous hymns of the Rigveda. Mortimer Wheeler interpreted the presence of many unburied corpses found in the top levels of Mohenjo-Daro as the victims of a warlike conquest, and famously stated that “Indra stands accused” of the destruction of the IVC. The association of the IVC with the city-dwelling Dasyus remains alluring because the assumed timeframe of the first Indo-Aryan migration into India corresponds neatly with the period of decline of the IVC seen in the archaeological record. The discovery of the advanced, urban IVC however changed the 19th-century view of early Indo-Aryan migration as an “invasion” of an advanced culture at the expense of a “primitive” aboriginal population to a gradual acculturation of nomadic “barbarians” on an advanced urban civilisation, comparable to the Germanic migrations after the Fall of Rome, or the Kassite invasion of Babylonia. This move away from simplistic “invasionist” scenarios parallels similar developments in thinking about language transfer and population movement in general, such as in the case of the migration of the proto-Greek speakers into Greece, or the Indo-Europeanization of Western Europe. »

It´s like this: Whites proper were ‘fresh’. They moved fast, learned fast, adopted fast.

They didn´t necessarily invent everything. They adopted manything.

They focused on war-technology. Military-technology.

Why not let the others do the boring??

Peace / amen / Salam
Jai. Hare Kali

De Laddie

▬>”Now, (according to G) Trump’s a rogue bastion alpha who fought the “globalist Cathedral” alone against all odds.”

I have nowhere said this. I have always viewed Trump as a bit of a joke, it takes a joker to know one, so to speak. Can´t say he´s very subtle, but it works. He´s of course hired by the Deep State, like any other American main presidential candidate. 
Only the pre-approved get coverage by the so-called Mainstream Media. Not just anyone can become one of the two, red and blue, who attract the energies—fears and hopes—of the people, for the cathartic pseudo-democratic play & ploy, which is done to keep the tax-payers “happily” paying for the Military-Industrial Complex, feeling like they are “free”.
Our dear little Irish friend here, lost himself to wrath and fabrication, after I both questioned his purported Catholicism and a candidate (Trump) he had gotten hopeful about, the poor laddie. The Catholicism he only declared to me recently, he was a Hitlerist before that. I know, because I was once a Hitlerist too, and we discussed those things. In our discussions I seem to know more Catholic doctrine than him, surely an embarrassment for him, indeed in any case he seems to be unable to intellectually discuss it — as with anything really!, when pressed — he´ll get defensive, & passive aggressive or simply aggressive — opening himself up to being toyed with, like a kid bullied in school. 
I´ve never seen him refer to Jesus, and he states he is anti-clerical (after being pressed). I am rather sure he is just claiming to be Catholic now to appear more National & “Right-wing.” He is Irish after all. He can fool even himself.
 He contacted me 10 years ago, and he hasn´t really changed one bit since then. He´s still as dense and slow-moving, and prone to fabricate facts about his interests.
The difference between me and him, at least one difference, among many, is that I will readily admit any fabrication I have done as a joke or as hyperstition, while he will defend even disproven things—tooth and nail. And while I at times exaggerate to amuse myself and others, he does so seriously. Like, say, “Nobody likes you! :(“, “You have done nothing!”, “Everybody hates you!”, “You don´t know nothing!”, “No, it was you who said this!”. Le enfant, no?
Then he will defend his exaggerations, instead of lightly stating that they were but that for effect. Typical prole.
I include often figures in his life (his “psychological world”), because I find them, along with him, to be amusing characters, and y´all can see the effect it has on him. I often include him in e-mails I am sending to others, because I know it moves him.
I admit to having sympathy for him, and that I am also trying to shock him out of his psychological & intellectual inertia. The poor man is ridden by ideas he only understands at a surface level. He´s been sending me virtually the same e-mail for a decade, it´s like a spirit underneath crying for to be released from the gnomic mechanical responses from idées fixe that tie him to lesser forms. 
Usually, his answers are quite different if others are included, he is so embarrassed (often about nothing really) — as he has a communal soul — poor boy. But that is a part of my shock treatment. Do not think though, that I am ruining his soul. I assure you, it was beriddled before. I can only lead men to temptation, they will have to walk into it themselves.
Best it be said that I didn´t start this spat between us. As I remember it started years ago through an instant messenger application, wherein I asked him to not send me news of money Jews — then his pathos burst forth.  Apparently he´d been building up hopes and fears about me for some time — I had been leading a project I invited him to participate in before this, which he did OK in. Albeit quite passively. 
The funny thing is, that he´s living a double-life, of this pseudonymous Internet presence, so why is he so embarrassed? You would think I was living a double-life too, but I am not doing so. I am quite honest and open. In fact, hundreds know I have the interests I am known for, under my real name and person. People tell me things like I am the smartest person they know, to be honest and quite frank, if not self-congratulating.
Race, history, spirituality, philosophy, biology.
I´ve even mentioned the obscure Italian author a few times. 
“The Right-wing”, so-called, has been a bit of a joke, inadvertently or not, since losing horribly in WW2, and losing to Communists at that! So why not mess with an Irish dolt who is intellectually dense and stagnant, a liar, a thief, and a pseudonymous coward.
He sure as hell resented the fact that Skorzeny had worked for Israel, after WW2. He stated, like he knew it, that Skorzeny had been assassinated. He had no special knowledge of it.
Perhaps I will finally be inspired to collect the errors of his into one document. They are very amusing, especially his understanding of Evola´s concept of ‘riding the tiger’ (oooh!). 
Shortly said, the laddie has a tendency to replace fact with his hopes, or fears, as is common for the soul somewhere on the blurred field of proletarian-bourgeois psychology.
Last thing I remember, aside from this Trump fiasco, is  that he fabricated into Evola´s body of work, that the latter had “regretted”! his usage of drugs. I don´t recall Evola ever expressing any regrets. The laddie too, I informed of that Guénon had smoked cannabis, which he seemed to be unable, to integrate this fact, into his memory. I did this after he called me a pothead, which I would think would only apply if I´d smoke pot at least a few times a week, which I don´t. Normally potheads have a great effect on their daily life from the usage.
Worst thing is, the idiot he is, has been jealous of me for a long time. And parroting me. I´m fine with it. It can´t be good for his daily life though, but if it wasn´t me, it would be somebody else.
It only takes for me to use a term in an e-mail, for him to use it for the next couple of weeks. “Schizophrenic” is the latest one, altho I´m not sure he realizes that I was using it, the first time I used it in conversation with him, in the same way that Deleuze and Guattari use it, to mean, as it does, etymologically, ‘split-minded’.
Hopes and fears, boys, hopes and fears… it can split a man´s psyche into two.
And so the lower classes are ever ridden, easily manipulated or beaten down. They´ll grab at anything to describe what they feel they resent. Knowing this is what makes it so easy to play with them.
Don´t blame me.
22. When [the clever combatant] utilizes combined energy, his fighting men become as it were like unto rolling logs or stones. For it is the nature of a log or stone to remain motionless on level ground, and to move when on a slope; if four-cornered, to come to a standstill, but if round-shaped, to go rolling down.”
De Laddie

Buddhism is too anti-Cosmic for me

Lord Dontgivafokk

but it got pretty cool in Zen

based john 11

how so?

Lord Dontgivafokk

im the anti-Buddha

based john 11

it talks about infinite worlds, infinite beings

Lord Dontgivafokk


Lord Dontgivafokk

it has that


White Scars are my thing


vroom vroom. Fast attaq

Lord Dontgivafokk

Lord Dontgivafokk

in the grim dark future of Trumpianity there is only WAR


and mechsuit maintenance is hella expensive

Lord Dontgivafokk


Lord Dontgivafokk

john: Buddhism typically strives to kill off your connection to the world, you see this very well in that Gautama left his family

Lord Dontgivafokk

that´s why the hardcore buddhist typically live in monasteries

Lord Dontgivafokk

secluded, no families

Lord Dontgivafokk

the opposite of that is like Islam, where they got a number of wives and a dozen babies

Lord Dontgivafokk

i know its pop to hate on Islam, but they´re replacing us somewhat

Lord Dontgivafokk

i don´t care about Arabic, but their system works in that sense

Lord Dontgivafokk

japan made a synthesis of buddhism and expansion tho

Lord Dontgivafokk

but the got blown

Eric Patton▲☉♇

most esoteric traditions are built around isolating individuals from society

Eric Patton▲☉♇

see also: sufi mystics


I don’t think it works that well. Saudi Arabia is bound to experience a sociocultural crissis at some point. They have all this power to acquire pleasure that are just flat out normal in the west, not even outright degenerate.

Lord Dontgivafokk

that´s Axis Age stuff

Eric Patton▲☉♇

big difference between normals and people who go the spiritual explorer route

Lord Dontgivafokk

there´s also esoterics who have families like in Rome before Christianity

Lord Dontgivafokk

and Germanics before Christianity

Eric Patton▲☉♇

Some modern schools are attempting to unite daily life with practice, but it’s a new thing considering how long esoteric traditions drag on


That’s a huge task


Human society is based on codependance for mundane needs

Eric Patton▲☉♇

the “isolate yourself from the world” angle is being taken out of schools over the long term though. But you don’t need to copy geopol of Islam to mget that.

Lord Dontgivafokk

the father was the priest of the family before Christianity divorced that role to wifeless “fathers”

Lord Dontgivafokk

emperor of rome was the pope of their religion


Pharaos were living gods


Demigods whatever

Lord Dontgivafokk

pontifex maximus, which the christian pope took as a title after the divorce of christianity from the empire


Like the chinese emperors

Lord Dontgivafokk


Eric Patton▲☉♇

Kings also

Eric Patton▲☉♇

divine right

Lord Dontgivafokk




Lord Dontgivafokk

funny thing is, this gets restored in WarHammer 40.000


In spite of the emprah’s wishes

Lord Dontgivafokk

we get a human (mainly white) empire with an imperial religion

Lord Dontgivafokk

where the church is a part of the empire, not outside of it like started happening in the west 1500 years ago

Lord Dontgivafokk

there happened a schizm, a dualism of powers that were previously united

Lord Dontgivafokk

which caused the modern schizophrenia of spirituality was something divorced from, as it were, daily life

Lord Dontgivafokk

schizophrenia means etymologically ‘split mindedness’

Lord Dontgivafokk

christianity has always been quite manichean

Eric Patton▲☉♇

king/emperor/pharoah was the midpoint between heaven and earthly affairs, more so than priests or astrologers

Lord Dontgivafokk


Lord Dontgivafokk

he was the high priest, above the mere priests

Lord Dontgivafokk

but also the chief warrior

Lord Dontgivafokk

& lawmaker


So he was Warrior, poet and priest


A full statesman



Lord Dontgivafokk

right, but the priesthood got lost in the late roman empire

Lord Dontgivafokk

and then replaced by christian priests

Lord Dontgivafokk

who soon started vieing for power against the empire

Lord Dontgivafokk

so it was like a betrayal

Lord Dontgivafokk

the first schizm

Lord Dontgivafokk

then the church itself split

Lord Dontgivafokk

and split again

Lord Dontgivafokk

and again

Lord Dontgivafokk

and now we have 10.000.000 churches all saying they´re the right church of the world

Lord Dontgivafokk

it´s tracable via cladaistics

Lord Dontgivafokk

first there´s church of rome, which becomes catholicism, which splits into catholicism and orthodox, catholicism splits into catholicism and protestantism, orthodox splits into number of different orthodox, protestantism splits into this and that, which comes down to Jehovas, Mormons, and you know the rest

Lord Dontgivafokk

while in Rome, pagan Rome, there was simply one priesthood of the state


The word became atomized

Lord Dontgivafokk



And no longer with God…



Lord Dontgivafokk

right this all splits into trillion atheist branches

Lord Dontgivafokk

godless communists


This is reminding me of the Tower of babel


Powerful revelation


In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Lord Dontgivafokk

the utopianism starts with cults like gnostic cults

Lord Dontgivafokk


Lord Dontgivafokk

ein volk, ein reich, ein emperor!




Poast beakies

Lord Dontgivafokk