we´re seeing an explosion of foodie & bloody cults

 

nothing new really.

except it´s more mundane & ‘industrial’ than ever.

tumblr_m4zayxD1QX1r64le7o1_500
Soviet propaganda poster.

Dr. Attiyya: The Palestinian woman’s womb is a factory for the conflict; it produces fighting children. After this fighting child is produced, he is taught: “This is your land, this is your country, you will fight for it, stand on it, and die for it.” Therefore, a very important connection exists between motherhood, land, and blood.

[Syrian historian and author Dr. Georgette ‘Attiyya. Syrian TV aired this interview on June 15, 2005.]

2016-05-12 07_21_15-Blood and Soil - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In ecology, r/K selection theory relates to the selection of combinations of traits in an organism that trade off between quantity and quality of offspring. The focus upon either increased quantity of offspring at the expense of individual parental investment in r-strategists, or reduced quantity of offspring with a corresponding increased parental investment in K-strategists, varies widely, seemingly to promote success in particular environments.

The terminology of r/K-selection was coined by the ecologists Robert MacArthur and E. O. Wilson based on their work on island biogeography, although the concept of the evolution of life history strategies has a longer history.

[ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory ]


 

Consider the outcrop of dictatorships, only possible when moral growth is in its earliest stages [i.e. lacking], and the prevalence of infantile cults like Communism, Fascism, … Health Crazes, Occultism in nearly all its forms, religions sentimentalised to the point of practical extinction.

13221711_827891430690924_1830599727094270048_n
3 agrarian societal modes. rebellions from the land. “blut & boden”, tyrannous “workers” & “new farmers” over olde farmers.


Consider sport, the babyish enthusiasms and rages which it excites, whole nations disturbed by disputes between boys.
Consider war, the atrocities which occur daily and leave us unmoved and hardly worried. [Which is a sign of a lack of the right mental development.]
We are children. [— Aleister Crowley, in «Liber Al Vel Legis», 1904]

chthoniccommunismbloodtempel

Greek Goddess Demeter, the Celestial Corn-Mother
Historically there´s often a reversal of roles. inversions of inversions. mirrors of mirrors.

 

 

[ … the Ideal of being in the “Civilization of the Mother”—yes, it itself, as it experiences and acts in the world—(indeed as a world, it as a being that)—] has a birth and a decline, [and] a purely individual finite and evanescent life. [Quite separated from mental clarity], all that is force and manliness thus assumes an obscure, wild, in fact ‘chthonic’ and ‘telluric’ nature. And if ‘telluric’ generally makes one think of seismic phenomena, this association of ideas, to a certain extent, is sound. In the vision of the world in question, virility has for its prototypes divine figures such as Poseidon, also called the ‘earthquaker’, the god of chthonic subterranean and turbulent waters, analogically linked by the ancients to forces of passionality and instinct. More generally, the age or civilisation of the Mother is ‘telluric’, with reference to a sense of destiny, of necessity, of fatal evanescence, of life mixed with death, source of wild and irrepressible impulses
[Evola, 1949]

Continue reading “we´re seeing an explosion of foodie & bloody cults”

we´re seeing an explosion of foodie & bloody cults

transnihilism, beyond thought

>{ Characterizing technological society as essentially nihilistic prejudges the whole question of what it is. }

yes, i´ve always known this. no one is absolutely nihilistic. what was meant by nihilism was that it´s nihilism compared to medieval Faith. it´s not “total” nihilism; only a type of outlaw, at most, would come “close” to that.

>{ Such a dismayed reaction is as likely to close down thought about its nature as much as does any progressivism. }

quite.
nihil

incidentally, the novel i find is the mystical work of our late age is Neuromancer. i think it took me a while before i noticed the name means not only someone who does ‘neuroscience magic’, but also it means ‘new romancer’ (i.e. a new mythos, the word ‘romance’ after all is for medieval knight tales), and third ‘Neu Rom-ancer’.
the author is not an “occultist” or “esotericist” or much anything like that. but the work is alchemical. transformative. shamanic. esoteric. it gives a comparatively rootless society a mythos, in the movement it gets roots. the spirit is always here.
it so happens that there are actually Christians in the story. both esoteric vs. proselytizing.

>{ It has undermined our ability to think that there could be knowledge of what is in terms of which the justice of every possible action could be judged in advance}

yes—this has been observed by me since i was a teenager. most folks somehow cannot see, about some things anyway, that they are true or not in their minds, while someone like i can.
i mean, that´s really the difference between a real philosopher vs. nondescript folks.
the real philosopher will know. know in his mind more surely than even those might who make schemas all their lives. people tend to confuse philosophy with mere thinking. mere thinkers. they may be good thinkers, but not necessarily good philosophers.
13240097_832170840217377_7989006441704973075_n
if they cannot answer these questions in a significant way, they´re just thinkers.

 

The term nihilism was first used by Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi (1743–1819). Jacobi used the term to characterize rationalism and in particular Immanuel Kant’s “critical” philosophy to carry out a reductio ad absurdum according to which all rationalism (philosophy as criticism) reduces to nihilism—and thus it should be avoided and replaced with a return to some type of faith and revelation.

[en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism]

To describe a destiny is not to judge it. It may indeed be, as many believe, that the development of that paradigm is a great step in the ascent of man, that it is the essence of human liberation, even that its development justifies the human experiment itself. Whatever the truth of these beliefs, the only point is that without this destiny, computers would not exist. And like all destinies, they ‘impose’. (22) Some modern thinkers state that beyond the rootlessness characteristic of the present early stages of technological society, human beings are now called to new ways of being rooted which will have passed through modern rootlessness, and will be able at one and the same time to accept the benefits of modern homogenization while living out a new form of heterogeneity. (24) Characterizing technological society as essentially nihilistic prejudges the whole question of what it is. Such a dismayed reaction is as likely to close down thought about its nature as much as does any progressivism. (29) “…technology is theontology of the age. Western peoples (and perhaps soon all peoples) take themselves as subjects confronting otherness as objects – objects lying as raw materials at the disposal of knowing and making subjects. Unless we comprehend the package deal we obscure from ourselves the central difficulty in our present destiny: we apprehend our destiny by forms of thought which are themselves the very core of that destiny. ‘When you see something technically sweet, you go ahead and do it’ (said Robert Oppenheimer).” (32-33) But the account of existence which arises from the modern co-penetration of knowing and making exalts the possible above what is. It has undermined our ability to think that there could be knowledge of what is in terms of which the justice of every possible action could be judged in advance of any possibly future: ‘Beyond all bargains, and without any alternative’.” (34)
George Grant, «Technology & Justice», University Notre Dame Press, 1986, Thinking about Technology
sam-harris-on-atheism-copy.png
transnihilism, beyond thought

hierarchy

why would anyone who admits any kind of rule, if at least self-rule, deny there are archons? only fools.

anyway, the word hierarchy has been kind of disvalued. people associate it with North-Korea. Imperial Japan. and Nazi Germany. but everything in the world has hieararchy. such as your body. the true show of that your body is a hierarchy is that it has vital organs. i.e. that some organs are more vital to its functioning than others. some organs can be removed, while you die if others are merely somewhat damaged. also, there´s a hierarchy of nutrition.2016-05-17 13_01_35-WHO _ Essential Nutrition Actions


the corruption of a the understanding of a concept as basic as hierarchy is just an example of how dumb people have invaded what used to be mostly, almost only, an intellectual playing field—the literary discourse.  (as previously, mostly only intellectuals could read and write.)

every single corporation or business in the world has hierarchy. every single organization or organ has it.

hierarchy, what is properly meant by the word in a social context  is ‘the rule of those who deserve it.‘ now if it is tyrannical, it is a  misarchy, but not a hierarchy.
and that, ‘deserve it thru ability’! so if you happen to be the most adept at calculation in the group. maybe it be best, in a given, i.e. a typified situation, a scenario where you are most likely to do it successfully, rather than anyone else, and the situation is that people rely on you to succeed, maybe it´s best that you do it?

aristocracy btw. means ‘rule of the best.’ nothing else. its purported meaning was ‘rule of those best at creating a situation which is best for everybody’.

it´s however — misappropriated to mean many different things. it´s confused with e.g. ‘plutocracy’, ‘oligarchy’, ‘kleptocracy’, ‘tyranny’. but this is its correct meaning: { Greek aristokratia “government or rule of the best,” from aristos “best” (originally “most fitting,” from PIE *aristo-, superlative form of *ar– “to fit together;” see arm) + kratos “rule”. }

it can be translated as something else. but that´s what it means.

hierarchy

1. guys who hide behind pseudonyms

1. guys who hide behind pseudonyms, that makes you suspicious. suspicious is not ‘cool’.

2. always block trolls
3. delete or block legitimately stupid or negative people. i don´t mean people who disagree with you but people who just legit cannot discuss perspectives, or see thru positive enough angels
stupid people typically use caps for emphasis.
block people who´re a lot into paraphernalia. people who idolize, or fetishize, cultural items or styles, suck as “vikings” or whatever, but are not able to know the world-view. these people are only a distraction. except for the rare species that collects e.g. very high quality images, and e.g. actual ancient historical items.
4. learn from all “enemies”

1. guys who hide behind pseudonyms

Ye olde impostor?

stare too long into the abyss, and the abyss stares back at ya. sound like a cliché. but clichés aren´t clichés for nothing (e.g the cliché of the possessive person sending death threats). and most people don´t even know that that means. abyss? what´s that? lets leave that for later. there´s oceans of writ on it anyway, thru google.

we´d like to introduce you to a man, who somehow claims to represent “Christian” morality. his name is Toni Ciopa, goes by the alternym of Cologero, and this is his output:

scroll down a bit on this page, and you get to this.

2016-05-11 21_43_45-Too Late for Groundhog’s Day _ Gornahoor

 

Ye olde impostor?