The Charge against Abrahamism - The Natural Law Institute (2023)

stories

The grammars of civilizations tell us everything we need to know

1-AristotleHe wrote protoempiricism: reason, naturalism, protoempiricism, law, calculation. (TRUTH)
2-sol tzuyConfuciuswrote Wisdom Lit.Lao Tsecrossed the line into the questionable. (Wisdom)
3 – Oindianswrote mythology and wisdom literature, bordering on political science (Wisdom)
4 – Othe persianswrote supernatural and supernatural wisdom literature. (Utopian Universalism)
5 – OegyptiansHe wrote Supernatural Ritualism (Animism, Anthropomorphism, Paganism) Doctrine and Ritual.
6 – Oof Abrahamwrote Mythology, Rebellion, and Lies and Destruction of all of the above. (utopian lie)

Class grammars also tell us something.
by Juan Marcos

Aristocracy: War “We will apply violence in any way that is necessary/beneficial, including war conquest and colonization, to suppress parasitism in our productive group/tribe and prevent it from undermining or losing (any form of) capital. ”

Superior: Law “Due to our wealth and influence, we have the opportunity to affect the rules of society in a way that benefits us; sometimes the way we affect the rules can be good, sometimes bad (e.g. buying/owning corrupt politicians to write rules that allow us to privatize the profits and socialize the losses for everyone else).”

high average: Science (Econ) “We're looking for a competitive advantage, so we like to use science, R&D and innovation to gain an advantage. We make economic (often libertarian) arguments because we don't want our efforts to get ahead to be jeopardized."

Middle class: Philosophy “We would like to have more power than we have, but we feel we have an opportunity to gain more power or at least affect those in power, plus we often don't like what the upper class does when it acts on its own . interest, so we put a lot of effort into thinking and talking about how to make sense of the world and what those who have more power than we dowe mustdo (what we would like them to do). (What we often don't realize is that the upper class doesn't care what we think they should do.)

working class: Religion “We want/need something that makes us feel better about life and gives us a safe and comforting sense of community (we don't have much else). Religion fits the bill."

subclass: Intuition “We're not smart, but we don't know it (Dunning Kruger), and we're low status, we hate it, and we don't know how (we can't) fix it, so we instinctively feel the world isn't fair and those who are better off -successful than us must be cheating somehow. So leftism/socialism/communism/SJWism tells us what we want to hear and we're extremely excited about it because we have no other strategy in life, or the ability to conceive or execute another strategy."

INDO-EUROPEAN: THE LANGUAGE OF A HIGH SOCIAL STATUS?
By Kurt Stegmann von Pritzwald (Professor of Philology at the University of Marburg)
(Sociologist, Vol.V, No.1, 1955, pp.56-67)

RESUME:

During the Lower Neolithic period, companies of men using horses and carts roamed the multilingual area inhabited by people from the North, Corded-Ware and Banded-Ware to establish a degree of communication. To make themselves understood by local populations, they used a semi-Indo-European lingua franca. This improvised language was characterized by infinitives, with non-Indo-European and Indo-European components. From these "hosts" a smaller group was linguistically separated, which made an effort to observe a "proper", filtering the vocabulary and fixing the sentence structure. Members of this linguistic community recognized each other by adherence to “their own form” which led to an even closer union. With that, linguistic expression transcended the purpose of pure and simple communication, and the social function of language came into play. Even if we maintain the thesis of a compact Indo-European cradle, we must assume the existence of a distant group as the originator of the "proper form" of the "high" Indo-European language. It is most likely that this group became aware of its own uniqueness that distinguishes it from the rest of society and managed to consolidate itself as holder of a position of colonial or other type of power.

The development of High Indo-European forms is based on the phrase, a feature that distinguishes it from the isolating method of semi-Indo-European language mixing. This led to a well-crafted style suitable for communicating facts and stories, a step on the way to the epic style that marks the entry of nations into history. By distinguishing between agent and action, noun and verb, subject and predicate, this style transformed a language of sensations into a formative language of civilization, guided by definite rules to which long-range warbands must conform, reporting their experiences. lives. your travels and adventures. The relationship between the Semi-Indo-European lingua franca and the language of the Upper Indo-European high stratum is reminiscent of Homer. Homer introduced the colonial jargon of Greek dialects into epic art forms.

Before the onset of the Bronze Age, the reporting style had already become the language of the upper social stratum. This "high" language, characterized by an important ethical content, became the standard for grammatical development. The upper stratum used this means of expression to promote an aristocratic ethos and a firm grasp of the environment. In the social sphere, it created the patriarchal family order and a mixed authoritarian-cooperative power structure.

Magic, Indo-Europeans and the Domestication of Pasta

From an anthropological point of view, traditional magical practices were perfectly suited to a certain level of development. In this sense, 'authentic' magic aims to clarify a psychotechnique (self-discipline) with a specific goal in mind; orients man towards the appropriate form for a given project. Either it prepares man to bear without undue anxiety the hostile pressures of a universe which he does not yet control, or it helps to give free rein to certain instincts and repress others, so that he may carry out a certain enterprise more successfully.

With this kind of magic, man learned to manipulate himself. He had given himself a self-chosen nature and achieved his hominization. Thus, authentic magic constitutes the “know-how” originating from human self-domestication, and the domestication of the psyche by consciousness, organized by a science that was born from reflection on the know-how of animal nature.

Magic degenerates to the extent that it intends to find an application for a relationship different from that established between consciousness and the psyche: that is, between man (as a living being) and the world (as an event), under the totally imaginary pretext that the human psyche participates in this, in the cause of this event. So it leads to a cosmological theory that is completely unfounded. On the other hand, where this reflection allows him to isolate the true terms of the "magical relationship", man acquires an exact description of himself and his circumstances, and of the position he occupies in the living world. From then on, he becomes the tamer of the living world.

Hundreds of thousands of years after hominization, it is with the Indo-European/Neolithic Revolution that another type of man appears. Having learned what to "move" himself, man now tries to "move" animals and plants in accordance with his desires and needs. As for social animals, he intends to take on a managerial role, becoming pack leader. Likewise, having achieved a higher consciousness - thanks to the correct understanding of magic - she presents herself as an aristocracy in relation to the rest of society and asserts her own sovereignty.

With the advent of the Indo-Europeans, man's domestication of the living world paralleled the elite's domestication of the masses. Henceforth, 'religion' becomes the ideological system that will serve to 'bind' society and subject the group to a certain influence.

our original origin

'Indo-European' is the term used to designate a language spoken in the early Neolithic and 'discovered' during the 19th century through the new discipline of linguistics, linguistics becoming a proper science in the process.1 Since every language presupposes users, the discovery of the Indo-European language represented the discovery of a group of speakers —the Indo-Europeans— and, consequently, of a people and a civilization whose true characteristics were brilliantly outlined by Georges Dumézil, among others.

We now know with some certainty what was totally unknown at the end of the 18th century: that an 'Indo-European' people lived in the remote past,2 and that their language was the direct ancestor of a large number of languages ​​spoken both in antiquity and in modernity. The Romance, Germanic, Celtic, Baltic, Hellenic, Slavic and Indo-Aryan languages ​​were and are among the most important of these languages. We also know, with no less certainty, that the Indo-European heritage decisively shaped the cultures that gave rise to "European civilization". 'world view' which, although fragmented in substance today, remains active as a constraining force of representation, giving structure to our mental structure.

From the evident semantic roots in all derived languages, it is possible to reconstruct a certain way of life, as well as the geographical position occupied by Indo-European speakers during the unitary phase that preceded the first dispersion, probably around the third millennium BC. .

Anthropology and ethnology indicate that these people manifested a characteristic and precise racial physiognomy. Such physiognomy anticipated the current Europide race in its varieties, today concentrated in Europe and in the countries whose populations emigrated there from Europe. It can still be detected today in specific groups of settled populations in present-day Iran and the northern parts of the Indian subcontinent.3

From the intersection of linguistics, archaeology, anthropology and other related sciences, it is possible to represent this people as hunters with white skin, tall stature and dolichocephalic skulls. A people emerged from the mists of the last ice ages and, coinciding with the onset of the Neolithic Revolution and the introduction of agriculture in Europe, formed a unified civilization that stretched from the Baltic and North Seas, from the Danube and the Rhine to the Königsberg line. -Odessa. This civilization was based on animal husbandry, fishing, and sailing, developed advanced crafts, cremated the dead, and used flexible, sophisticated language to express abstract thoughts and convey nuances. From the forests of northern Europe, their descendants began the greatest of human adventures. In a succession of conquering waves, they moved across the world.

From the analysis of religious, political-social, ritual and other generic cultural traditions existing in historical civilizations born from this common Indo-European matrix, it is possible to form a global image of our past and ancestral roots.
Georges Dumézil created the term trifunctionality to describe the character of Indo-European society, which comprised three main groups, corresponding to three different functions.4

The first function was associated with sovereignty —royal and priestly— and with everything that this concept implies: power, knowledge, wisdom, magic, direction of the people—and, consequently, politics, law, religion, and representation of the community in or outside.

The second function goes back to war, struggle, effort and physical strength in all its peaceful and warlike aspects: defense and military needs, sport and energy. It embodies heroism, personal courage, the spirit of sacrifice, readiness for action and bravery.

The third function probably finds its original principle in the idea of ​​fecundity - human and animal - to which the ideas of love, voluptuousness and pleasure were later added. It is related to agriculture, livestock and handicrafts; to economic production and wealth - and is identified with the idea of ​​quantity and large numbers. This role was governed by the principles of temperance, moderation, and limitation.

Mythology was divided in the same way: each social group had its own god or family of gods to represent it, and the function of the god or gods coincided with the function of the group.

Our ancestors not only practiced a division of labor into three orders, or of society and the pantheon into three classes: the three functions present in man and in the cosmic order were linked to countless facts and notions.5 These ancestors also theorized about this. division and produced an 'ideology' (Dumézil's term): a global vision of the forces that create and sustain the world, of the balance, tension and conflict necessary for the proper functioning of the cosmos and the polis, the societies of gods and men.

But surely every human group must experience the need to be led, defended, and fed; each individual must satisfy the needs of heart, stomach, and spirit. Dumézil repeatedly responded to skeptics who questioned the originality of the Indo-European trifunctional system. He held, for example:

In the ancient world, neither the Egyptians before coming into contact with the Sea Peoples, nor the Sumerians, Elamites and Hurrians, nor the Mesopotamians before the Kassites dominated the area, nor in general the Semites, Siberians or Chinese ever had a structure similar to the backbone of their ideology and social life. There are undifferentiated organizations of nomadic tribes, where everyone is at the same time warriors and farmers; or the sedentary theocratic organizations, where there is a priest-king or a divine emperor and a humble and homogeneous mass of subjects; or groups where the sorcerer, despite the fear his craft may inspire, is just one specialist among others.6

The structural and descriptive notion outlined above derives its full meaning from the structure provided by a peculiar set of values. According to Indo-European ideology, the proper functioning of a society implies a situation of dynamic balance between the three classes or castes, corresponding to the three sovereign/sacred, martial and economic functions. In contrast to our modern Western model, the economic sector was specifically subordinated, viewed from a hierarchical rather than a functional perspective, to the other two functions. In this sense, it is legitimate to describe our current Western society as characterized by a pathological hypertrophy of the economic function, and of the values ​​and spirit that sustain it. The quantitative perception of social facts from which, along with many other things, the modern idea of ​​political democracy derives, finds its origin here.

It would be easy – at least given the reductionist mentality that pervades our culture today – to infer that Indo-European ideology expressed a kind of contempt for the values ​​of productive work, wealth, fertility or pleasure: that it practiced the exclusion of, and subordination to, the warlike and sovereign functions of economic activities. Nothing could be further from the truth. In Indo-European ideology, the three functions are not reducible to each other: they are equally indispensable, have equal social dignity and full autonomy in their respective spheres. The third role had a distinct identity and role, just as important as the other two: it had its own gods and participated in community life in its own way.

This predilection for differentiation was also reflected in the horizontal subdivision of society, which was structured not as a division between masses and individuals, but as a people whose genius, personality and aristocracy were the sources of expression, conception and representation. The Indo-European culture exalted values ​​such as loyalty, a sense of belonging and the distinction of roles. These values ​​constituted the ethical, psychological and political foundations of a system that favored the affirmation of natural principles such as hierarchy, selection and territoriality, rather than their negation.
Thus, since antiquity, political and social life has been extremely articulated —unlike those theocratic state organizations in which the subject position is essentially that of the king's slave7— and based on the participation of all members of the social body, as representatives of the set of free men. This organic participation took place at different levels, starting with the *genos (great exogamous families) and *wenos (the community created by the alliance of several *genos) and passing through an assembly of *paters, who would elect a primus inter pares to carry out the function of *reg-s (king) whenever there is a need to find a guide and a unitary representation for all the people.

The distinction of roles in relation to gender was also expected. The culture of our ancestors was indeed patriarchal, patrilineal, patronymic and patrilocal. But, as with the three functions mentioned above, this gender division sought to articulate a society that intended to be complete. In this context, women were not only admitted as members of society, but also honored in their particular sphere:8 the relationship between the sexes was seen from the perspective of complementarity, expressed in the androgynous myth. This notion probably stems from the feeling that a worldview based on difference and inequality is also based on recognizing diversity. Consequently, the 'other sex' was seen as an enrichment, rather than a 'curse' supposedly stemming from 'original sin'.

Women were fully integrated into the socioeconomic and cultural structures of the community and performed, among other tasks, the important task of transmitting tradition. Likewise, sex was experienced as part of the dialectic of joy and holiness, an attitude that would later be defined as essentially pagan. Marriage was based on distinction of roles, honor, loyalty and mutual respect. Sexual freedom was not repressed or denied by the idea of ​​sinfulness, but regulated by a natural sense of dignity, by an awareness of the role one was expected to play in society, or by eugenic principles. The role of the wife was not perceived as inferior to that of the husband: there was no single, universalist, egalitarian and reductionist role to which everyone should submit, regardless of gender, religion or social position, in short, regardless of identity .
It is significant that the Indo-European "patriarchy" contemplates the active and necessary participation of women in family rites, while Judaism and the religious customs imported into Europe with Christianity forbid it: for example, the consecration of the Eucharist. From a Judeo-Christian point of view, the very notion of a priestess is blasphemous.
Finally, in the Indo-European world, the distinction between shame cultures and guilt cultures applies. While the latter are defined by a 'morality of sin' based on a system of revealed dogmas, the former base their 'ethics of honor' on the idea of ​​self-respect, which implies a direct connection between the individual and his socio-cultural context. environment. . . Shame and glory are the two main forces of social pressure and repression, unlike guilt cultures where the notion of sin plays this role. While in guilt cultures guilt is typically objectified in reference to a supreme third party, which is why they are linked to a universal and metaphysical ideological system, the Indo-European worldview is inexorably linked to the notion of a plurality of gods. It mythically expresses a radical anti-universalism and a cohabitation of men and gods: it assumes both a unity and an ontological autonomy of reality and a sacredness of the world and nature. The divine permeates all of nature, including its human manifestations: for example, it is involved in art, excluding all iconoclastic manifestations; and politics, making the separation between Church and State, or between civic and religious duties, absurd. Specifically, the divine is not extrinsic to man, but represents a dimension attainable through the transcendence of the self, a concept captured in the exemplary figure of the hero, typically a mixed human and divine descendant and founder of his own lineage.

This is because Indo-European gods do not consider men as their rivals. The great deeds of human beings magnify not only humans but also gods. Far from men being forbidden to achieve fame for themselves, it is precisely this that justifies their existence and entitles them to eternity. 'My journey home is over, but my glory never dies', says Achilles.9 This is also stated in one of the Edda's most famous maxims: 'Men die like animals, but the only thing that does not die is fame. of a noble name.”10 While the Bible expresses its intention to limit human sovereignty through a series of prohibitions, the religions of ancient Europe conferred a heroic dimension on man who surpassed his capabilities and thus participated in the divine. Where the Scriptures view life with a mixture of distrust and fear, paganism in its beliefs hypostasizes all the heat, intensity, and pulsation of life. It is easy to understand how members of these cultural types – Indo-European and Judeo-Christian – saw themselves as atheists.

Based on the vigor and expansionist force transmitted by this ideological and conceptual heritage, Indo-European culture became the matrix of all European historical civilizations. Its ultimate offshoots include ourselves.

Heroism is our group strategy

Man is a social animal. To realize himself, he must create himself and his society. In relation to this self-creation, individuals incorporate and update different values. The "mass man" and the "founding hero" can be considered the extremes within the sociological parameter that measures the historical value of the human being. The first is a "non-humanized man", whose impulses are not directed towards a culturally determined goal. Incapable of cultural self-determination, the mass man ends up being determined from time to time and at random, by chance or by contact, mainly human contact. He still doesn't know. On the other hand, the founding hero, or the realized man, projects an idea about himself and about the society to which he belongs and realizes it. He is a creator of cultural facts. To varying degrees, all individuals participate in both sociological categories. This allows, within a given culture, the organization of society and the establishment of a dynamic game between the poles.

The pre-existence of a given culture offers the opportunity for the individual where mass values ​​predominate. Given social traditions and education, he can be educated to repeat the process of human self-creation offered in the cultural model received: he can incarnate a social type, thus becoming an integral part of the social group, the people. The repetition of this integration process, codified in each culture, corresponds in its simplest form to initiation rites. In modern societies, this process is organized through educational systems and is reinforced by social conditioning techniques.

One might think that the individual in whom the creative value prevails would logically be led to reject the culture and values ​​he inherited in order to assert his own originality. However, this only occurs in old, decrepit cultures, not adapted to historical need. In young and lively cultures, where the humanizing force of the social type remains, the creator takes care of both the preservation and the improvement of this type: he strives to elevate it by his own example, thus asserting himself as a person.

Furthermore, in a youth culture, the model remains very open and appears as an ongoing process. It is perceived as susceptible to new interpretations as long as there are domains of human activity in which the model is not yet incarnated. Creative value is historical value par excellence. And that is why in every era, the founding heroes, the geniuses, the great artists are venerated. This is also why an original work is valued more than its copy, even when it is identical in every respect.

Personality is not the exaltation of individual selfishness; on the contrary, it is the maximum expression of a society, of which it represents the consciousness and superior will. The personality aspires to realize the highest idea it has of itself and the other, that is, of its own society. Thus, at a given historical moment, personality is tested by responding to the sociocultural imperative of that moment; it is recognized, accepted and followed precisely because it satisfies the unconscious aspirations of a community and a people. There is constantly a sacrificial component in the personality, and in some cases this can imply extreme renunciation. That is why anyone who offers himself for the good of a society or a culture becomes a hero. By taking on society as a whole, the hero correctly positions himself at the top of the social hierarchy.

When a culture no longer satisfies this human need, a chaotic mass society forms and its members, bereft of a cultural "type" with which to identify, become a mob, a mob. Then comes the moment when a founding hero, aware of the collapse of his own society and culture, can emerge and undertake the necessary revolution: an act of conservation whereby human nature, threatened with death, can be preserved.

Areté – Transcendence

The tragic impulse of self-improvement (transcendence) can be identified as the only way to ennoble man and his presence in the world, and this was the main element of traditional Aryan ethics. It's what the ancient Greeks called areté, the pursuit of excellence: the act of living up to your full potential.

For Aristotle, the doctrine of areté included the following virtues: andreia (courage), dikaiosyne (justice), and sophrosyne (self-control). In Greek mythology, Sophrosyne was a Greek goddess. She was the spirit of moderation, self-control, temperance, moderation, and discretion. She was said to be one of the good spirits who escaped from Pandora's box and fled to Olympus after Pandora opened the lid. The complex meaning of sophrosyne, so important to the ancients, is very difficult to convey in English. It is perhaps best expressed in the two most famous sayings of the Oracle of Delphi: "nothing in excess" and "know thyself".

Given that proprietarism recovers and transfigures the founding myths of Indo-European culture, when specifying its particular postulates, characteristics such as the following can be listed: an eminently aristocratic conception of the human individual; the importance of honor ("shame" rather than "sin"); a heroic attitude in the face of life's challenges; the exaltation and sacralization of the world, beauty, body, strength and health; the rejection of any 'world beyond'; and the inseparability of morality and aesthetics.

The supreme value of an Aryan ethics resides, without a doubt, not in a form of "justice" whose objective is essentially interpreted as the flattening of the social order in the name of equality, but in everything that can allow man to overcome himself. . Whereas to regard the implications of life's basic structure as unfair would be palpably absurd, classical antitheses like noble vs. short, gritty vs. cowardly, honorable vs. dishonorable, beautiful vs. deformed, sick vs. healthy come to replace the operative antitheses. in a morality based on the concept of sin: good vs. bad, humble vs. vain, submissive vs. proud, weak vs. arrogant, modest vs. arrogant.

Fire of Prometheus: Aryans, Semites and Science

Today's world is dominated by technology like never before. It's impossible to travel anywhere without seeing some manifestations of the technological wizardry that shaped life on the planet today, most notably the innovations developed at the time of the Industrial Revolution. A crucial and often overlooked feature of this incredible technological revolution is that the great technological innovations that set the pace for the entire world are exclusively the product of a tiny minority of Europeans. One of the particular characteristics of Indo-European languages, already noted in the 19th century by philologists such as Wilhelm von Humboldt and Ernest Renan, was their implicit capacity for abstract thinking, a precondition for any kind of scientific theory and practice. Renan was also the first to establish a link between religion and ethnogeographical origin. He compared a "desert psyche" found among Semites - "the desert is monotheistic" - with a "forest psyche" characteristic of Indo-Europeans, whose polytheism seems modeled on a changing nature and the diversity of seasons. He noted that the intolerance of Semites is an inevitable consequence of their monotheism. The Indo-European peoples, before their conversion to Semitic ideas, never considered their religion an absolute truth. That is why one finds among these peoples "a freedom of thought, a spirit of critical inquiry and individual investigation". “specifically human”. It is an inevitable companion of the progress of human knowledge; however, it also describes something that was uniquely conceived and developed only in the Indo-European context: from the war chariot of the Battle-Ax culture to the lasers and moon rockets designed by Wernher von Braun. In particular, modern technology is closely linked to the West, to a culture sustained by a "compromise" between Europe and Judeo-Christianity. After the Christianization of Europe, Paganism survived underground in various forms. It has survived in popular beliefs and traditions; in 'heretical' tendencies within or outside the official religion that extend into the present; and in a collective unconscious that finds liberation mainly in music, science and technology. In this sense, science and technology can be interpreted as resulting from the impact of the prolonged monotheistic repression of the European collective subconscious and the contradictory process of secularization and emancipation that gave rise to this repression and which began with the Renaissance. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger... Let's recall the names of American rockets and space programs from the time of von Braun: Thor, Atlas, Titan, Jupiter, Delta, Mercury, Apollo. None were called "Jesus", "Forgiveness and Love" or "Holy Bible". In Man and Technics, Spengler wrote, "To build a world for himself, to be God himself: that is the dream of the Faustian inventor, and from it sprang all our design and redesign of machines." the 'great narratives' he produced - is explicit in his rejection of the Faustian temptation. Nietzsche observes in El Anticristo that “a religion like Christianity, which does not touch reality at a single point and which collapses at the moment when reality asserts its rights at any point, must inevitably be the mortal enemy of the wisdom of this world. that is, of science”. Man must repress his "pride": he cannot eat the fruits of the Tree of Knowledge, lest he create instruments that compete with the perennial nature created by God. It is sacrilegious behavior, as the Golem myths and the story of Frankenstein remind us. As in the past, in opposing dissection, the Church now condemns contraception, genetic engineering, and biotechnology research in general. It is not hard to see why egalitarianism is anti-Promethean. Every new advance in technology is an advance in the ability of some to control others. If we consider, as in the Bible, Rousseau or Marx, that it is an ethical duty to condemn the exercise of control or power -the domination of man by man-, then it is easy to see that a mutation of the era like the one they are experiencing Our experiential societies will produce a new vertical division between man and man, and between society and society, just as the Neolithic Revolution brought: namely, (1) differentiation between the membership body and the aristocracies that came to exercise political power, creating cultural forms and directing the life of the community; and (2) the fact that certain societies come to dominate others. Any dream of independence and self-determination, individual or collective, any kind of political, economic or cultural sovereignty, can only be realized through the technical means necessary for such an ambition. Science is a domain that the European mind has monopolized, and technology a tool that can turn man into a god. These must be especially valued by Europeans if they are to mount a primal Faustian response to life that can recover and transcend the Indo-European perspective of post-Neolithic man.

Yoga and Indian Philosophy. a Bio-Cultural Diagnosis.

I. Instant lighting

Consider the following facts about the spiritual landscape in America: contemplation is enjoying its greatest renaissance since the Reformation; science and spirituality are generally seen as allied and confused in "empirical spirituality" or "evolutionary mysticism"; elements of Buddhism and Hinduism have become so popular that Newsweek declared in 2016 "we are all Hindus now"; half of all Americans claim to have had a mystical experience; Sadhguru's "Inner Engineering: A Yogi's Guide to Joy" became a "New York bestseller" two years ago; Yoga has become so prevalent that an estimated 14.9 million Americans (most commonly women) incorporate some form of the practice into their lives; and yoga practitioners spend up to $5.7 billion a year on yoga classes, products and retreats.

It seems that most people, while nominally adherents of an Abrahamic religion, actually embrace what Aldous Huxley called the "Perennial Philosophy": a kind of Hindu-Christian syncretism that he used to offer as a remedy against the "Brave New World".

The trend is similar in the rest of the western world. For example, 15.7 million Germans currently practice yoga or are at least interested in starting it; and Yoga Day, an international initiative from India enthusiastically supported by all EU governments, has been celebrated in most European capitals since its inception in 2015.

The current embrace of Eastern spirituality, the blending of science and religion, and the rise of yoga began in earnest with California's counterculture. Aldous Huxley and a group of three other British expatriates played key roles in its development: Christopher Isherwood, Gerald Heard and Alan Watts. All four were public-school educated English gentlemen who grew out of the remnants of the British Empire.

It is significant that the latest trend in Yoga started with the hippies and Flower Power. On previous occasions, interest in Eastern mysticism always coincided with moments of despondency or despondency in Europe.

Although it was during the 16th century that Europeans became aware of the existence of the ancient holy books called 'the Veda', when Jesuit missionaries began to learn Sanskrit, the classical language of the Brahmins, it was only in the 19th century that once the curiosity of the learned world was awakened not only in England, but especially in Germany, that India had become a "philosophers' paradise" in the imagination of Western man.

After the disaster of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars, Schopenhauer was the first to transpose into Kantian language the metaphysics of the Upanishads, which he used to describe as "the consolation of my life" (The world as will and representation).

Amidst the carnage of World War I, Keyserling in "A Philosopher's Travelogue" pitted the Hindu quest for inner perfection against the Western obsession with productivity and Romain Rolland thought he found in Gandhi, Ramakhrisna and Vivekananda a universal gospel that would reveal, beyond any antagonism of race, ideology or religion, the 'polyphonic unity of all men'. Herman Hesse, in "Siddhartha", contrasted the spiritual values ​​of the East with the utilitarian techniques of the West.

II. the grammar of intellectual fraud

Although the Indian subcontinent has produced a wide range of religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism) and speculative philosophies, they are all linked by textual resources, cosmology, concepts, rituals and yoga practices.

The chronology of the earliest texts describing yoga practices is unclear, but Hatha Yoga texts appeared around the 11th century. The 'Hatha Yoga Pradipika', written in Sanskrit, is among the most influential surviving texts. It combines folklore and myth, magical rituals, claims of medical knowledge and psychophysiological techniques. These practices and disciplines have remained unchanged for at least 1000 years and are still taught by the various gurus and more or less official Yoga institutes that abound all over the world.

Between them:
– abstinence from alcohol and fasting, non-violence, chastity and dietary restrictions;
– One-way approach and purposeful pursuit of an object (ekagrata);
– Static physical position to minimize physical effort (asana);
– A set of breathing techniques where the breath is intentionally altered (pranayama);
– Looking at the tip of the nose (nasikagra drishti);
– Contraction of the perineum to facilitate retention of semen during ejaculation (mula bandha);
– Chant of syllables, words or magic phonemes (mantra).
According to its teachers, the purposes of Yoga were: to/ cure mental and physical illnesses; b/ acquire magical powers (siddhis); and w/ achieving 'mystical union' (samadhi).

A/ Cura
– Western medicine has been in progress since the time of Avicenna, who was a contemporary of the author(s) of 'Hatha Yoga Pradipika'. Is it unfair to compare the constant increase in life expectancy around the world, driven in large part by the advancement of modern medicine, with the therapeutic results obtained by Ayurveda, the traditional yogic medicine?
Recalling the Aristotelian distinction between doing evil by omission and by commission, Australian philosopher and bioethicist Julian Savulescu reminds us in “Medical Ethics and Law”: 'Delaying the development of a treatment that cures a lethal disease that kills 100,000 people in one year a year is to be responsible for the deaths of 100,000 people, even if you never see them'.
For example, when Gandhi's wife contracted pneumonia, British doctors told her husband that an injection of penicillin would cure her; however, Gandhi refused to have alien medicine injected into his body and died.
– Many studies have attempted to determine the effectiveness of Yoga as a complementary intervention for cancer, schizophrenia, asthma and heart disease. The results of these studies were, at best, inconclusive.
– According to the latest reports, meditation is no better than watching TV.
– Veganism can be described as “postmodern nutrition”. It's usually pure ideology, biased activism, and almost always not supported by medical facts (limited nutrients during pregnancy and growth). Looking between the lines of vegan arguments, one finds a pathological attempt to avoid any kind of suffering: the pacification of all life. The fact is, we simply wouldn't be here as a species if we hadn't eaten meat. Our brains would never have grown to the size they are unless we had access to the protein that meat provides.

B/ Power
'Siddhis' are spiritual, paranormal, supernatural or magical powers, abilities and achievements, such as knowing past lives, knowing the minds of others, shrinking or expanding the body at will, teleportation, levitation counteracting the force of gravity or walking. the water. As the reader of these lines can imagine, none of these phenomena has ever been empirically verified.

However, it is true that some gurus manage to regulate their sympathetic nervous system in surprising ways, which may indicate the absence of a clear line of demarcation between the voluntary and involuntary functions of the nervous system. A team of scientists from the University of Cambridge discovered in 2014 that half of Western Australia's indigenous population has a genetic mutation that helps them control their body temperature. This genetic mutation may have spread across the Indian subcontinent, carried by ancestral Austro-Asiatic populations, and may be behind many of these yogic feats.

W/ Liberation
But the ultimate goal of Yoga is to achieve 'samadhi', associated with freedom from pain, suffering and 'samsara' (birth-rebirth cycle). It is alternately described as a state of trance or ecstasy, as a 'deep dreamless sleep' (i.e., a lethargic state) or as 'superconsciousness, a non-dualistic state in which the consciousness of the experiencing subject is back to normal. experienced object.

A state of pure consciousness in which there is no subject to experience and no object to provide content is a good example of what Bertrand Russell used to characterize as "metaphysical nonsense." The experience of 'samadhi' is more like a state of unconsciousness, spiritual hibernation.

third Beware of nonsense

It could be argued that many people in the West simply take yoga classes because they are good for the body and reduce stress levels.

But is it possible to opt for physical exercises and discard the others, becoming immune to a philosophy that teaches to settle for not understanding the world as a great excuse to escape the need to think and evaluate the evidence?
The only measure of a worldview is the economic conditions of the population that created it.

At the heart of Hindu philosophy and yoga is the idea that the divine exists in all beings, that all human beings can achieve union with this "innate divinity," and that seeing this divine as the essence of others will promote love and social harmony.

A brief visit to India is enough to shatter any romantic illusions about sweetness and brotherly love. Beggars and homeless people littered the streets of Kolkata and many other cities. In Mumbai, it's impossible not to be amazed by the aerial view of the biggest slums in the world.

Belief in karma assumes that everyone is rewarded or punished for the things they did in their previous lives. The traditional division into caste, social position, economic wealth, social success or state of health is justified because it is predetermined by the laws of karma. Therefore, there is almost no support for reform.

Any notions about the harmlessness of Yoga may be dispelled by this bizarre report from "India Today": 'Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh, an Indian pop star and television preacher with a reported net worth of over $50 million, is under investigation after allegedly manipulated some 400 men into having their testicles removed. Victims were told that only those who were castrated could find God."

4. Deconstructing Reality

Any major philosophy, no matter how complex, can be classified as either dualistic or monistic.

Monism asserts that there is only one world and one way to apprehend it, through our senses. Reality is an absolute. There is a world independent of our minds to which our thinking must correspond if our ideas are to be true and therefore of practical use. He also holds that reason, the faculty that operates through observation and logic, is man's means of knowledge.

Dualism proposes the existence of two hierarchically organized worlds: an inferior world, physical and material, hopelessly unworthy; and the superior, metaphysical, transcendental world, source of our 'Ideas'. Experience is just a lower form of knowledge; Superior and proper knowledge is obtained through mysticism and the manipulation of speculative concepts. Knowledge can be acquired by non-sensory and non-rational means such as faith, revelation, ESP, intuition.

Dualistic systems sometimes present one part of reality as merely the reflection, or superstructure, of another aspect of reality; or argue that the body and mind belong to different realms. Indian philosophy can be classified as dualistic: this world is just a mere appearance, a mirage (Maya) opposed to the World of Pure Being (Brahma). Its practical conclusion is the rejection of the distinction between 'I' and 'not-I', the denial of individuality, just an illusion. Tat Tvam Asi.

All these dualistic systems are in fact an expression of the same denial of life. And none of them even have the merit of being consistent. After all, one can obtain liberation from this world by committing suicide, the quintessence of philosophical action. This lack of logical coherence and internal consistency reflects a state of mind or mood, not an elaborate abstract philosophy. A genealogical approach, investigating the origin of certain ideas, of what kind of man they are an expression, what they reflect and where they lead, will be more fruitful. Any view of the world is inevitably linked to a particular view of man, the world and history; and, in turn, depends on the mental make-up—itself anchored on a biological level—of the particular people by whom it was created.

V. Anthropogeography of Derealization

The deconstruction of reality has its own human geography. The religious and philosophical systems that offer an escape from reality were born and developed in the area between the Maghreb and the Bay of Bengal. Culturally speaking, the Iranian-Semitic Middle East and India.

This Afro-Oriental space has historically experienced a complex history of miscegenation and today constitutes an authentic melting pot of the three so-called macro races: white, black and yellow (Hittites, Greeks, Macedonians, Romans, Vandals; Asian tribes that cross the Himalayas and Turkestan valleys ). ; slaves from Ethiopia, Nubia or Sudan sold in the markets of Arabia, Palestine, Egypt or the Maghreb).

Furthermore, the area also witnessed a peculiar phenomenon: the relative lack of differentiation in the evolutionary development process experienced by its native populations. Developments pushed Europe, the Far East and sub-Saharan Africa, respectively, in the European, Mongolian and Negrian directions. However, in the Afro-Oriental area, intermediate types prevail: Dravidians and Ethiopians are not exactly black in complexion and do not have a Negroid profile; The Arabs, Iranians or Indo-Afghans are not white, but dark or brown, their hair is woolly, their physiognomy has a certain Negroid touch. Furthermore, around the eastern Mediterranean coast, the process of sexual dimorphism is attenuated: males tend to have feminoid adipose tissue and females, abundant hairiness.

The region suffered two waves of invasion:

1. Eastern Indo-Europeans (2nd millennium BC): Coming from southern Russia, the Indo-Iranians occupied northern India and the Iranian plateau.
2. Western Indo-Europeans (3rd millennium BC – 1st millennium AD): From central and southern Europe, Hittites, Greeks, Macedonians, Romans, Celts, and Germanic tribes descended into the area.

The arrival of the tall, thin and handsome horsemen on the banks of the Ganges and the Indus, the Tigris and the Euphrates, the Jordan or the Nile must have produced a profound effect of 'alienation', more painful than the shock of military defeat. The dispute, in addition to its military significance, exposed the comparative worth of the conqueror and the conquered. The winner wasn't just stronger than the loser; he was 'the other'. Among them there was no common measure of worth. The other winner drew his strength not from the weight of numbers, but from a mysterious element: he belonged to a homogeneous, unaltered biological block. Anthropology and ethnology indicate that the Proto-Indo-European people manifested a precise and characteristic racial physiognomy. Such a physiognomy anticipated the current European race in its varieties: white skin, tall stature and dolichocephalic skulls.

Dualism can be seen as the response that the vanquished offered to this distressing underestimation. From now on, the lowest value has been declared simply "apparent", a claim that is facilitated by the distinction between a world of appearances and a transcendental higher world. These speculative stunts helped to magically replace painful reality. A second scale of values ​​was constructed, opposite to the one preferred by the winner. Victory in this world and the hereditary traits that made it possible were declared "non-values."

A pre-Orwellian Decalogue was about to be born: 1. the imaginary is real; 2. Life is death; 3. Defeat is victory; 4. Weakness is strength; 5. Cowardice is honor; 6. Poverty (of spirit) is intelligence; 7. True is false; 8. Ignorance is knowledge; 9. Ugliness is beauty; 10. Laziness/inaction is action.

Most remarkable in this story is how this crude figurehead - designed by the conquered to undermine his superior's good conscience - was actually dressed and adorned by the conqueror himself. Afro-Asiatic languages, the language of the vanquished, did not know how to manufacture and transform this series of paralogisms into a solid philosophical system. The trick was achieved thanks to Greek and Latin, and the use of alphabetic writing, which allow for a sharper focus on word creation and logical-temporal connections, in contrast to the older hieroglyphic means of expression and a less analytical cognitive style.

Pythagoreans and Platonists, lovers of Syrian and Egyptian mysteries, started this old tradition, which can only be called “stupid betrayal”, and turned European thinkers into make-up artists who work for the deconstruction of reality. This is how Thomist scholasticism or Hegelianism, and its by-product, Marxist scholasticism, were created: as a cross between a magical-religious mentality and the scientific spirit.

Thus was also born the concept of "human being", a fortuitous combination of soul, descended from a superior world, and body, belonging to this inferior world. This dual and abstract human being is the cosmic projection of the dual nature of the mestizo, divided between two divergent heritages. The devaluation of earthly goods, the renunciation of bodily pleasure and the retreat from worldly life to reach the purity of the world above is a nostalgic reflection of lost genetic uniformity. The hatred of sexuality is the disgust caused by the original sin, miscegenation. Equating light with good and evil with darkness projects the opposition between the two sides, black and white, of mixed genetic inheritance.

It is in these biological and historical realities that we must seek the origin of the delusional Gnostic beliefs that disturbed the psychological balance of European man for more than two thousand years.

SAW. melancholy and doom

In the case of India, Indo-European speakers entered from the northwest, mixing with or replacing Proto-Dravidian speakers and establishing a caste system with themselves mainly in the upper castes. A 2001 study led by Michael Bamshad of the University of Utah found that the genetic similarity of Indians to Europeans is proportional to caste rank: Upper castes are more similar to Europeans than Asians, and upper castes are significantly more similar. to Europeans than to lower castes.

Despite the caste system, the degree of miscegenation after a few centuries was almost total. The genetic incongruity ended up prevailing and, consequently, producing a deeply pessimistic picture. Indian philosophy is full of denial of life and nostalgia for lost racial homogeneity. Where did the clear-eyed heroes of ancient sagas go, the warriors who rode in the Alai-Pamir ranges?

Classical Indian thought (Upanishads) is permeated by a feeling of slow degradation, an inexorable advance of incoherence, stabilized character traits that are progressively submerged by exotic genetic combinations. Instead of subordinating reality to a superior world, as was done in the Middle East, India opted for an absolute denial of reality. The world was too horrible a place to be considered real and had to be demoted to mere appearance. Here, too, it was Sanskrit, the language of the conquerors, which provided the necessary linguistic scaffolding for the story of the irremediable decline of the eastern branch of the white race.

In their group strategies, Iranian-Semitic (Abrahamism) and Indian thought have many similarities: reformulation of myth as history, projection of traditional wisdom as authoritative law, reliance on the supernatural (magic, miracles), false promise of impossible reward (supernatural ) by conformity, priest castes with status, power, and economic incentives to perpetuate falsehoods, secret knowledge, paying ritual costs for falsehoods.

But while the purpose of Abrahamism has always been to subvert society from within, sapping the aristocratic class with guilt and a bad conscience while agitating the lower classes, the strategy of yoga and Buddhism has been different.

The upper caste Hindu minority created a submissive religion for the populous masses of India, the perfect factory of docile and indolent subjects. For the ever new and bellicose invaders, India's traditional system of government, cloaked in the language of resignation and preemptive defeat, was the perfect tool of domination, and in return the country's native "spiritual elite" managed to preserve its highly inflated social status.

This is why India, although a deeply female civilization, unable to hold a territory or develop a technological civilization, and easily and repeatedly dominated by foreign elites, has effectively maintained the same system of government forever.

Now we can compare the survival strategies of the Indian (I) and Western (W) groups and the results they produce:

• Genetic homogeneity that generates trust /W) vs Genetic heterogeneity that generates distrust (I)
• Maximizing agency through self-improvement (W) vs. Discouragement and escapism (I)
• Sovereignty/Dominion (W) vs. Servitude/submission (I)
• Heroism (W) vs Buddha's begging bowl (I)
• Market rule (W) vs arbitrary rule (I)
• Truth of discourse and science (W) vs Magic, obscurantism and fictionalism (I)
• Reciprocity (W) vs Deception (I)

And as a consequence: wealth, health, knowledge, innovation and progress (W) vs. poverty, disease, ignorance and stagnation or regression (I).

VIII. For those who are awake there is only one world (Heraclitus)

Europe was never really attracted to Indian thinking, but the Iranian-Semitic poison eventually undermined the vitality of the West. Abrahamism in its successive manifestations, with its egalitarian and universalist abstractions, has always traveled and shaped the perspective, discourse and values ​​that today inform Western consciousness. Enraptured by this egalitarian utopia, European man can no longer assume the destiny of the world, nor be the creator of a new future. Ashamed of a past that over time gave it an indisputable superiority, the egalitarian West now wants the “end of history”. He yearns for a return to the static stage of mammalian happiness: to a pre-human Edenic past.

Along with its good conscience, the West has also lost the will to resist the rising tide of the non-Western world. Afro-Thomist and Sino-Marxist propaganda was followed by a decadent postmodern discourse, and, as nihilism and social unrest became prevalent, especially among the young, yoga, an indicator of social dysfunction, and Buddhism , a form of escapism. , can be used as effective spiritual. opiates

The symbiotic relationship between "priests" and "laymen" often becomes one of deceivers and deceived, predators and prey. It might be interesting to recall an interview with Russian defector and former KGB agent Yuri Alexandrovich Bezmenov, in which he recounts the KGB's interest in promoting yoga as a way to demoralize America:

“The KGB took an interest in Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, the Hindu guru, charlatan and sexual deviant whose methods were popularized in the West by the Beatles and Mia Farrow. The Kremlin noticed that influential Americans were visiting the Maharishi's ashram, learning transcendental meditation from him, and transplanting it to the United States . . . get into your own bubble. , forget about the problems of the world... most of the problems, most of the burning issues of today, can be solved simply by meditating. Don't rock the boat, don't get involved. Just sit down, look at your navel and meditate. And things, by some strange logic, by cosmic vibration, will calm down by themselves... that's exactly what the KGB and Marxist-Leninist propaganda want from Americans, to divert their opinion, attention and mental energy. of real problems. of the United States, in non-problems, in a non-world, non-existent harmony”.

Europeans/Westerns need to become self-aware, healthy, physically fit and alert to the realities of this world again. Just like 3,500 years ago, religion and philosophy are an act of war. The story reveals a recurring struggle over the millennia between two dramatically different approaches to life on Earth. In one approach, we see belief in the existence of the external world, self-assertion and agency development. In the other approach, we see the belief that this world is an illusion or of secondary importance, self-denial and dissolution of the personality into the stillness of impersonal and timeless Being. It is the clash of civilizations between the masculine/true/eugenic (aristocratic/European) and the feminine/false/dysgenic (theological/Afro-Oriental). And now we are currently in the third iteration of that conflict.

Most of Western history has been a struggle between these two contrasting attitudes to life and reality. For anyone genuinely concerned with furthering man's upward earth life, the lesson to be drawn from this monumental struggle is that they must support the first approach.

Its weapons cannot be the supernatural, mysticism or fictionalism, but Aristotelianism (empirical realism) combined with Darwinian evolutionary thinking to complete the scientific study of man as an integrated psychosomatic unit.

That is what the Instituto Propertario is after: turning Western aristocratic philosophy into rational, scientific terms: the remnants of the European aristocratic manorial system and classical liberal Enlightenment philosophy combined with our ancient Indo-European instincts for group persistence and property ownership. to earth : dizer a verdade, o juri e o heroísmo.

Roman law, Roman Empire

In general, Indo-European peoples realized the need to preserve their originality, accepting the consequences imposed on them by the expansion of cultural and geopolitical horizons generated by the Neolithic Revolution.

However – and thinking only of the ancient world – only the Romans were able, thanks to the concept of Imperium, to achieve a synthesis of permanence, fidelity to themselves and their origin and full acceptance of the “cosmic commitment”.

Clearly, Imperium and Empire are not to be confused with one another. Indeed, the notion of Empire found its truth and perfect realization more in the efforts that led to the establishment of the Roman Republic than in the post-July maintenance of the Empire.

The notion of Imperium reflects a desire for cosmic order, and it is this order that hierarchically organizes the various "people" who live under Rome's protection. In theory and practice, Imperium is the antithesis of any kind of "universalism". It does not seek to reduce humanity to one; on the contrary, it seeks to preserve diversity in a world that is moving towards unification.

The Romans wanted to keep their own city, their own 'ius': by nature, everything was conceived through rituals and laws. However, such a desire for authenticity logically implied the recognition of the “other”. Therein lay his political greatness.

As an organized and conscious rejection of any sense of universalism – of any reductio ad unum – the Imperium is, however, political in nature: it is realistic, not utopian. It is hierarchical: each member maintains its own ius, its own law; each city is free to run its own city according to its traditional form of justice. However, in relations between individuals from different cities, or between cities themselves, the ius romanus prevails over the ius latinus, which, in turn, prevails over all others. And where neither the ius romanus nor the ius latinus applies, then what applies is the ius gentium, a typical Roman abstraction to identify what could be common, or should be applied, to the iura of all other peoples.

Therefore, within the Empire, Rome enjoys absolute primacy, and this can be explained naturally and with perfect justice. It is Rome that conceived and created, and that organizes and ensures, a cosmos/order where each one receives what corresponds to him according to history (fatum). As the Imperium represents an order consecrated by the fatum, various peoples approached the Romans requesting their admission to the Roman Empire.

"Remember to rule the people, Romans, / to spare the vanquished and defeat the proud." los soberbios.') This is how Virgilio defines the mission adopted by the Romans.

abrahamismo

Judaism was the soil out of which Christianity grew, the flower of slave morality. Although it was a single unified system, it had different emphases for the two groups.

For Jews, the foci were self-pity, ethnic solidarity, the thirst for revenge, the obsession with freedom, hatred of the strong and powerful, and the desire to regain lost wealth.

Christians –through the figure of Jesus– preferred to emphasize the value of the oppressed (“Blessed are the meek”); faith in God to bring justice ('the meek shall inherit the earth'); salvation in the afterlife – and a fixation on love as a means of alleviating suffering.

Athens or Jerusalem?

Tertullian, the father of Latin Christianity and founder of Western theology, summarizes the early Christians' attitude toward science and intelligence:

-“I think because it's absurd"(I believe because it is absurd); y

-“What does Athens have to do with Jerusalem? What does the Academy have to do with the Church? Away with any attempt to produce a Stoic or Platonic Christianity! We do not want curious disputes after possessing Christ Jesus, nor inquisition after receiving the gospel.

What does Athens have to do with the Church?

Aryan myth, Abrahamism and the beginning of European cultural neurosis

TIndo-Europeans introduced not only practical techniques for appropriating the physical and biological world, but, above all, a new technique for organizing socio-political and legal relations. He developed concepts such as 'genos', 'polis' and 'imperium' - in their classical, medieval or modern translations - and this constituted the difference that came to define Indo-European identity vis-à-vis other populations, cultures and cultures. . civilizations

Such a way of organizing society derived from a particular Weltanschauung. This world view, expressed in all fields of human activity, gave rise to a cosmogonic myth, around which Indo-European man understood, explained and organized the universe and history. Its uniqueness is best seen when contrasted with the mindset and culture of the Book of Genesis. This latter narrative, in its religious and secularized forms, continues to haunt contemporary Western civilization.

What most calls attention in the study of Indo-European cosmogony is the solemn affirmation, present everywhere, of the primacy of man. Indo-European cosmogony places a "cosmic man" at the "beginning" of the present world cycle. All things come from him: the gods, nature, living beings and man himself as a historical being. In the Indian world, Rig Veda calls it Purusha; his name is Ymir in the Edda; and, according to Tacitus, he was called Mannus among the Continental Germans. For Vedic Indians, Purusha is the One through whom the universe begins (again). He is "nothing but this universe, what has passed and what is to come". Likewise, Ymir is the indivisible One: and by him the world is first ordered. Its very birth results from the meeting of fire and ice.

Kalidasa's poem Kumarasambhava—one of the pinnacles of Indian poetic reflection on the traditions of the Vedas—beautifully explains the allusions to Indo-European cosmogonic myth. The opposition between Purusha (cosmic man) and Prakriti (roughly corresponding to natura naturans) is revealing. Being able to see without depending on Prakriti for it, Purusha is at the origin of the universe.

Since the universe is nothing more than an indistinct chaos, devoid of any sense or meaning, it is only through the perspective and word of cosmic man that the multitude of beings and things can arise, including man fully realized as such. Purusha's sacrifice is the Apollonian moment in which the principium individuationis - 'cause of everything that exists and will exist' - is affirmed until the moment when the world collapses: the Dionysian end that is also a condition for a new beginning.

The universe does not derive its existence from something that is not part of it. It comes from the being of the cosmic man: his body, his look, his speech and his conscience. There is no opposition between two worlds, between created being and uncreated being. On the contrary, there is an incessant conversion and consubstantiality between beings and things, between heaven and earth, between men and gods.

In such a Weltanschauung, the gods themselves are a quarter of cosmic man. They are superior men in the Nietzschean sense; in a way, they perpetuate the transfigured and transfiguring memory of the first “civilizing heroes”: those who took humanity out of its previous stage – and truly founded, by ordering it into three functions, human society, Indo-European society. These gods do not represent "Good", nor do they represent "Evil". To the extent that they represent sublimated forms of good and evil that coexist, as antagonists, within life itself, they are both good and bad. Therefore, each one presents an ambivalent aspect: a human aspect. This explains why the mythical imagination tends to divide the personality: Mitra-Varuna, Jupiter-Dius Fidius, Odin/Wotan-Tyr, etc. In relation to current humanity, which they instituted as such, these gods actually correspond to their mythical 'ancestors'. and ideal models. The legislators, inventors of the social tradition, are still present, still active. However, they too are subject to the fatum: destined in a very human way to an “end”.

In short, we are not referring to creator gods, but to creatures, human gods who are, however, organizers-orderers of the world: ancestral gods for present-day humanity; gods who are great in both good and evil and who are beyond such notions. On Olympus, says Heraclitus, “the gods are immortal men, while men are mortal gods; our life is his death and our death his life.

Those who are called 'Indo-European peoples' correspond to a society that emerged at the beginning of the Neolithic and whose cosmogonic myth was organized by a new perspective acquired in this historical conjuncture, a perspective that allows reflection on the previous belief system. and its revolutionary reinterpretation.

If the belief in a "supreme being" —not to be confused with the only god of monotheism— was common to "primitive humanity", that is, to the human groups that lived at the end of the Mesolithic, the Indo-European cosmogony is a reformulation of this idea , or rather, a discourse that explores and surpasses the language and 'reason' of the previous period. It is legitimate to consider that, for the Mesolithic ancestors of the Indo-Europeans, the supreme being became nothing less than man himself; it became, more precisely, a "cosmic projection" of man as possessed of magical power. Likewise, it can be concluded that this particular Indo-European idea of ​​the supreme being was not shared by the other human groups that descended from the Mesolithic.

The classical Middle East “reflected” – imagined and interpreted – the same set of Mesolithic beliefs in a way diametrically opposed to that held by the Indo-Europeans. The Judeo-Christian Bible —summa of the Levantine religious Weltanschauung— is situated at the antipodes of the Indo-European view.
Yahweh did not extract the universe by subdivision and "dismemberment" of himself. He created it ex nihilo, out of nothing. He is not the coincidentia oppositorum: the 'Undivided I', the place where all relative oppositions meet, merge and overcome each other. He is not simultaneously "to be and not to be". He is just being, “I am who I am” (Exodus 3:14).

Totally alien to the world, Yahweh is the antithesis of all tangible reality. He is not an aspect, sum, level, form or quality of the world. “The world is completely different from God, its creator”, the First Vatican Council of 1870 reminds us. Consequently, since the created universe cannot be identical with the creator god, the world lacks essence. He just has existence. More precisely, it is a "lower" being, imperfect.

Indo-European polytheism is the complementary “reverse” of what could be defined as mono-humanism or pan-humanism: man is the law of the world (anthropos o nomos tou kosmou) and the measure of all things. Rather, Jewish monotheism appears to be the completion of a process of reabsorption: the reduction to unity of a multiplicity of non-human deities (personified natural forces) operated by Elohim-Yahweh. In short, it is the result of a mental speculation that also reduces the plurality of things to a single principle; not man, in this case, but matter and energy: 'nature'.

As the only non-ambivalent god, Yahweh evidently represents absolute Good. It is understandable that he is often cruel, ruthless, jealous. Absolute Good could only be intransigent in the face of Evil. What is less logical is the biblical conception of evil. Not deriving from absolute good, evil should not exist in a world created out of nothing by a god who is "infinitely good". against the authority of the Lord. Therefore, evil seems to be the creature's refusal to fulfill the role assigned by Yahweh. The power of evil can sometimes seem considerable. However, compared to the power of good (Yahweh), it is nothing like that: the final outcome of the struggle between Good and Evil is never in doubt. All problems, all conflicts are already resolved before they happen: history is pure decadence, the effect of the blindness of impotent creatures.

Thus, from the beginning, the story is meaningless. First Man, the first humanity, made a mistake by giving in to Satan's suggestion. Consequently, he turned down the role that Yahweh assigned him. You took the forbidden apple and made history.

Creator of the universe, Yahweh also played—in relation to "present" human society—a completely opposite role to that played by the sovereign Indo-European gods. Yahweh is not a "civilizing hero" who invents a social tradition. Rather, it constitutes an omnipotence that opposes Adam's "lack" of the kind of human life he wanted to enjoy: a post-Neolithic urban civilization, implicitly mentioned in the Book of Genesis, in the story of the Tower of Babel. However, long before that, the Lord rejected the produce of the land offered by the farmer Cain and “had [only] regard for Abel and his offering” (Genesis 4:3–5). Abel is not a farmer; on the contrary, he is nothing more than a nomad who has given up hunting and survives by raiding. He extends the Mesolithic tradition to a new society, born of the Neolithic Revolution, and rejects the new way of life.

Subsequently, the mission of Abraham —the nomad who had deserted the city of Ur— and that of his descendants, will be to deny and reject, from the inside of the world, any form of post-Neolithic civilization, from its very existence. perpetuates the memory of the 'revolt' against Yahweh. After Abraham, Moses maintains this commitment. Just as the people of Israel managed to escape captivity in Egypt, all of humanity is called to escape the "captivity" of history. The law of Yahweh, dictated on Mount Sinai, is presented as the means of rescinding, once and for all, the transgression of Adam and Eve.

Man, in relation to the "god" of the Bible, is not really a "son"; on the contrary, he is a mere creature. Yahweh made it, like any other living being, just as a potter shapes a vase. He made him “in his own image” (Genesis 1:27) to have his steward on earth: the guardian of Paradise. The power man has over the world is a power by proxy: a power entrusted to him and which he can only use on condition that he does not use it fully. Adam, seduced by the Devil, defied the role Yahweh intended him to play. But man will forever remain God's servant ('And he said unto me, Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will glory', Isaiah 49:3). Man's superiority over the beast is like nothing, because all is vanity. ‘Everybody goes somewhere; all are dust, and all to dust shall return” (Ecclesiastes 3:20).

Man, according to the teachings of the Bible, must inevitably remember that he is dust; that historical existence only has the meaning of what is implicitly attributed to it when history is actively rejected.

'Roman' Christianity, born with the Constantinian arrangement, was from the outset an attempt to establish, within the 'ancient' world transformed by Roma in orbis politica, a compromise between the Indo-European Weltanschauung and the Jewish religion, adapted to the culture imperial .roman. civilization by the supposed efforts of Jesus. The one god became, through dogmatic "mystery", "one god in three persons". The ancient trinity that the Vedic Indians called the Trimurti was integrated and, broadly speaking, these 'personas' took on the three roles of Indo-European. society, now in an inverted, spiritualized way. As creator and sovereign, Yahweh, however, continues to reject the twofold aspect of reality: evil is Satan's exclusive domain. The new name 'Deus Pater', 'eternal and divine father', revered by the Indo-Europeans, replaces the old name given by the Bible. Yahweh is the father of only his 'second person': a son sent to Earth to play a role opposite to that of a 'founding hero', a son who decides to depart from this world the better to show the way to the world beyond, and who , if he gives Caesar what is Caesar's, he does so only because to him what is Caesar's is worthless. Finally, he is a son whose function is not to 'make war', but to preach a zealous peace that will only benefit 'men of good will', the adversaries of this world, for whom the only food of eternity is reserved. : grace administered by the third 'person', the Holy Spirit.

Man, as a creature —and as a created being— is the servant of the servants of God: "excrement" (stercus, as Augustine of Hippo said). But, at the same time, he is also the brother of the incarnate son of Yahweh, which 'almost' makes him a son of God — as long as he knows how to love and deserve, which depends on the grace that the Creator administers according to unfathomable criteria. The day will come when humanity will be divided definitively and eternally between the saints and the damned. There is a biblical Valhalla: the Celestial Paradise, but it is now reserved for anti-heroes (In To Have or to Be? (New York: Harper and Row, 1976), Erich Fromm observes: 'The [Christian] martyr is just the opposite of the pagan hero personified in Greek and Germanic heroes... To the pagan hero, a man's worth lies in his bravery in reaching and clinging to power, and he died happy on the field of battle in the moment of victory.

The others belong to Hell.

This compromise has shaped the history of what is called 'Western civilization' for centuries. For centuries, according to the deepest affinities, 'pagan' and 'Levantine' man could see - in the 'one and triune' god - their own respective divinity. This explains the numerous confusions that have always characterized historic Christianity. The coexistence of two antagonistic spiritualities, often in conflict, even in the hearts of the same individuals, ends up crystallizing in a veritable neurosis of the European mentality.

Today we can safely say that the Constantinian “arrangement” did not foresee anything, and that the day the motto “In hoc signo vinces” was proclaimed had disastrous consequences for the Greco-Roman and Celto-Germanic world. Until recently, the Church of Rome in particular, and the Christian churches in general, remained, as organized secular powers, wedded to the appearances of the old compromise. However, in more recent times they have begun to recognize the true essence of Christianity. Thus, Yahweh, finally taking off the mask of the luminous and heavenly God-Pater, was rediscovered and proclaimed anew. In 1938, Pope Pius XI declared: “Through Christ and in Christ we are the spiritual descendants of Abraham. Spiritually, we [i.e. Christians] are all Semites."

However, long before the churches reached that point, 'profane' (demystified and secularized) Christianity, that is, egalitarianism in all its forms, found its way into accord with biblical truth. This was marked by the rejection of the story; the proclaimed desire to “leave history” to return to “nature”; the tendency to reabsorb human specificity in the 'physical-chemical'; all deterministic materialisms; Marcuse's condemnation of art on the grounds that integrating man into society would betray "truth"; finally, the egalitarian ideology that wants to reduce humanity to the model of the antihero: the chosen one, hostile to any specific civilization in which it wants to see nothing but unhappiness, misery, exploitation (Marx), repression (Freud), or contamination . All this invariably restored – it still continues to restore today, at that very moment when a new technological revolution invites us to overcome old 'ways' – that immovable, 'eternal' (if ever there was) Jewish vision: an unequivocal 'No' ' to any present pregnant with the future.

Saying yes to history —always becoming, always rethinking new fundamentals— implies assuming new forms and contents. Saying 'yes' is creation, a work of art. The 'no' only exists by denying any value to such work. The Indo-European cosmogonic myth assures us that saying “Yes” is always possible. In a different world, arising from the ruins of the old, the mission of the 'civilizing heroes' is eternal and serenely assumes the splendid and tragic destiny of those who create, give birth to and accept, as a condition of any historical adventure, of any life, the idea of its own end.

eastern wisdom (i)

The habit of contrasting the gross materialism of the West with the spiritualism of the East needs to be revised. The great Asian civilizations developed in a pre-logical age; the mind sought truth through intuition, symbol, magic and mysticism. It was irrational. He refused to see the outside world as an autonomous reality capable of being shaped and adapted through understanding its laws.

The West, thanks to the Greek genius, managed to raise itself to the level of rational thought, based on respect for a principle that does not concern the Eastern mind, the principle of contradiction. By associating the Hellenic Logos with Roman law, Europe achieved a synthesis that, despite many tribulations, remains the most miraculous achievement of the human adventure.

Eastern wisdom (ii): Confucianism

The Chinese were a hardworking and practical people. They excelled in cartography and meteorology; they created the science of seismography and pioneered civil and hydraulic engineering. To his ingenuity the world owes the first mechanical watches with escapements and wheels; gunpowder, which they used as fireworks long before they made hand grenades; the compass; paper; silk; and printing with movable letters. However, they did not apply this inventiveness to their industry, which remained essentially unchanged during the two thousand years between the rise of the Han and the fall of the Manchu dynasty.

Why not? Because the Chinese were interested in a different set of values ​​than the West was concerned with. Rather than trying to dominate nature, the Chinese sought to adjust to a natural, human, and cosmic environment. The two essential problems that preoccupied the Chinese were the pursuit of good government and the art of finding contentment in the midst of poverty and adversity.

The first problem concerned Confucius. He considered man as essentially social, and his personal mission was to save a world that seemed to him to be in full decay. His solution involved restoring five essential virtues: good manners, distributive justice, kindness, filial piety, and wisdom.
Confucianism, at once a theory of government and a theory of ethics, produced strong patterns of social ritualism, and China's written language helped to maintain this conformity. The immobility of words, made up of monosyllables, tended to stereotype thinking and freeze social life.

Confucius and his school recognized this when they insisted that the remedy for the disorders of the day was to be found in "the rectification of words." To ensure good governance, everything had to be identified by its true name, and everyone had to behave according to the correct designation of their role. The incorrect use of words was a semantic sin that led to social disorder.

It was important, therefore, that public servants be recruited through competitions based on knowledge of classic books, named and written in an ancient language very different from that of contemporary use, and which required mastery of tens of thousands of characters. For two thousand years, the institution of mandarins attracted the best minds to the services of an administration whose main concern was to maintain a static social order, in harmony with and dependent on an unchanging cosmic order.

Eastern Wisdom (iii): Taoism

Taoism, which predates Confucianism, contrasts sharply with it. However, its results were even worse, as Taoism denied logic and encouraged evasion.

Lao-tzu attributed all misfortunes to man's departure from the state of nature when he tried to control his destiny.

The social virtues advocated by Confucius (justice, good manners, wisdom and kindness) were seen as conventions and obstacles to the natural order of things and deserved only contempt. The laws simply multiplied the number of thieves and bandits.

For Confucius, the good sovereign was the one who did everything possible for his people; For Lao-tzu, the best sovereign was the one who saw that he could do nothing and let things take their natural course. Man must return to his original state of innocence.

Through asceticism, life could be prolonged; immortality itself was possible for one who could absorb himself in the ecstasy of the Tao, an indescribable reality that was everywhere, that had no definite limits, and was the origin and supreme law of things.

Oriental Wisdom (iv): China (completed)

Such mentalities (Confucianism, Taoism) made western-type progress a theoretical and practical impossibility. Before the arrival of Westerners, China was a closed society and considered perfect, with nothing to learn from foreigners.

Withdrawn behind an intellectual and moral “Chinese wall”, the Middle Kingdom could not develop until the arrival of the barbarians, the European and American “devils”.

Chinese mathematical thought was deeply arithmetic and algebraic, but unlike the Greek mind, it never developed an axiomatic and deductive geometry.

Unable to conceive of the idea of ​​natural law, the Chinese did not develop the fundamental sciences until missionaries arrived from the West. Nature was a symbolism to be deciphered, and for that purpose a series of pseudosciences was constructed -numerology, astrology and physiognomy- all of them incompatible with the discovery of physical laws.

The Chinese never reached the abstract idea of ​​a homogeneous and isotropic space like the one that Euclid conceived and knew how to express in geometric terms. His physics became trapped in the metaphysics of Yin and Yang, the five elements and their symbolic affinities. Therefore, his science never surpassed the pre-Galileo level.

Joseph Needham, perhaps the greatest authority on Chinese science, observes:

“When we say that modern science developed only in Europe and only at the time of Galileo, at the end of the Renaissance, we are trying to say that then and only then were the foundations laid for the structure of the natural sciences as we know them. . today; that is, the application to nature of mathematical hypotheses, the full understanding and systematic use of the experimental method, the distinction between primary and secondary qualities, the geometrization of space and the acceptance of a mechanical model of reality”.

Eastern Wisdom (v): India

After an honorable start, India has failed by its own efforts to reach the West's level of technical and scientific competence. As with China, the failure was due to a different way of seeing the world.

East and West started from the same pessimistic assumptions: the human condition is precarious, painful and transient. The theories of Megara, Simonides of Chios, and Greek tragedies cast judgments about existence as dark as those of the Buddha. But the answers were different. In the West, they suggested actions to improve the situation; in India, evasion.

Western man sought to remedy the misery of his condition by dominating the world; the Hindu sought to escape the world by mastering himself, the inner life of the spirit. The Western mind believed in the reality of the external world and was bent on imposing the power of man's will upon it; Hindus considered the external world and the idea of ​​the Ego to be illusory and sought to immerse the personality in the stillness of impersonal and timeless "Being".

The highest wisdom was to escape the wheel of rebirths through the technique of depersonalization, which was obtained by mastering the knowledge of Samkhya or the psychosomatic methods of liberation in Yoga. The purpose in both cases was to enter into an ecstatic fusion with the Absolute (Brahma), which in its positive form is Being itself, and in its negative form is Nothingness, Nirvana.

To this metaphysics, with its negation of the desire to live, is added a compartmentalization of Hindu society that prevented the invigorating circulation of elites who are the only ones who can keep a society healthy. There was no possibility of ascending from one caste to another; there was no "social ladder" to climb. Nothing was done before 1950 to change this situation.

Eastern Wisdom (vi): Islam, Arab Civilization

From the eighth to the twelfth centuries, the Islamic Empire, formed by many peoples, stretching from the Pyrenees to the limits of China, preserved Hellenic science, enriched it with loans from Persia, India and even China, and finally transmitted it to Latinos. West.

Driven out of Europe by the Christians, driven out of Asia by the Mongols, subjected to the Turks in Egypt, the Arabs lost contact with the Persians, Syrians, Christians, and Jews whose presence had played a vitalizing role in Arab culture. Thrown upon themselves, they fell into a long lethargy from which they only awoke in the 19th century and with the arrival of peoples from the West.

How do you explain this dream of Islam?

It was due to the fact that Parsis, Christians, Jews and pagans who accepted the religion of Islam did more to get rid of various onerous taxes than any actual conversion. The scholars who constituted the "Arab miracle" were mainly Syrians, Persians and Spaniards, peoples who were not Arabs by blood and who had nothing of the Arab spirit. Once these extraneous elements were eliminated, the Islamic masses once more fell under the yoke of their fanatical imams.

From the 1200s onwards, a theological backlash swept through Islam. There were no more philosophers - the word itself became synonymous with "infidel" - and only occasionally was there a scholar like the historian Ibn-Khaldun. The Turks, devoid of critical and questioning spirit, imposed their heavy yoke on Islam; and Islam, going back to its sources, paralyzed investigation into a formula that admitted of no answer: "Allah aalam" (God knows best what is).

The traditionalism of Islam is incompatible with the spirit of inquiry and the idea of ​​progress. For the Muslim, all the truth worth knowing is contained in the Koran, dogma and code of faith, whose prescriptions regulate the smallest details of life. Whatever happens is the will of Allah. Everything is predetermined; all you can do is present without complaining.

This fatalism destroys effort, any manifestation of personal will. It expresses the atavistic resignation of the nomad in the face of the emptiness of the desert. Belief in another life, full of sensual pleasures, houris and fresh meadows, comforts the faithful in present tribulations. This mentality excludes restlessness, dissatisfaction with oneself, that constant will to overcome that is the ethical source of the inner life of Western man.

Eastern Wisdom (and VII): Zen

Zen was introduced to Japan in the late twelfth century, five hundred years after Confucianism and Buddhism. It recognizes neither God nor the afterlife, does not emphasize the distinction between good and evil, and has no fixed doctrine or holy scripture.

Zen teachings, which "are not based on words", are transmitted provoking paradoxes and extravagant questions (koans):

"Two hands clap and there is a sound, what is the sound of one hand?"
"Two sisters are crossing the street, which one is the older sister?"
"What is Zen? Three kilos of linen.

Koans are described by Zen masters as indicating "pure awareness, devoid of cognitive activity" without mediation. The only unforgivable sin in a Zen monastery is being too logical. The demon to be exorcised is rational thinking: classification and categorization, conceptual definitions, coherent reasoning. Abstract thinking prevents instant enlightenment (satori). The idea is to remove the verbal restrictions imposed by tradition and, consequently, to destroy the inhibitions caused by crippling shyness.

Pondering kills action, so “If you walk, just walk. If you sit, just sit. Don't swing! and for the terrified victim of traditional Japanese education, it is even advised: "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him!"

Like Taoism in China, Zen should be seen as a counterbalance to rigidly conservative Confucianism. The traditional fear of unforeseen events is neutralized by causing surprises and surprises in the disciple and encouraging him to reciprocate in an equally eccentric way. The koan technique is designed to bring out that side of the person that the social code condemns: "the unexpected man."

Zen's influence on Japanese arts was at one time (16th and 17th centuries) quite profound: in painting, landscaping, flower arranging, tea ceremony, firefly hunting, fencing, archery, judo. He created a unique lifestyle.

However, although originally Japanese Zen emphasized a type of spontaneity that was creative in nature, this spontaneity quickly turned into an automatic and mechanistic spontaneity that, in turn, drained the vitality of Japanese culture. It degenerated into mere routine, dealing only with stereotyped subjects in a petrified style. The koans turned out to be, at best, a hilarious leg-wring, an existentialist farce, and at worst, a web of solemn nonsense: "Ugly is beautiful, false is true, and the opposite is true." This is not Orwell, it was written in all seriousness by Suzuki, the leading proponent of modern Zen.

Zen, originally a cure for deconditioning, turned into a new kind of social conditioning.

Islam and the Arabs

However, as long as Islam was in the hands of the Arab race, there was no intellectual development involving a concern for the affairs of this world. It was different when the Persians gained ascendancy and the Abbasid caliphs supplanted the Umayyads in Damascus. The Abbasids established their new capital in Baghdad and made it the center of the civilized world, while an Umayyad prince escaped to Spain, where he established a virtually independent kingdom. The brilliant caliphs who succeeded one another in Baghdad - Al-Mansur, Harun al-Rashid and Al-Ma'mun the Great, contemporaries of the Carolingians - respected the external rituals of the religion of which they were the heads, but, like the popes of the Renaissance, they dabbled in many other subjects. During the second half of the 11th century, the political power of the Arabs declined with the capture of Baghdad by the Seljuk Turks, the reconquest of Aragon, Toledo and Palermo by the Christians and the entry into Jerusalem by the Crusaders. Driven out of Europe by the Christians, driven out of Asia by the Mongols, subjected to the Turks in Egypt, the Arabs lost contact with the Persians, Syrians, Christians, and Jews whose presence had played a vitalizing role in Arab culture. Thrown upon themselves, they fell into a long lethargy from which they only awoke in the 19th century and with the arrival of peoples from the West. How do you explain this dream of Islam? It was due to the fact that Parsis, Christians, Jews and pagans who accepted the religion of Islam did more to get rid of various onerous taxes than any actual conversion. The scholars who constituted the "Arab miracle" were mostly Syrians, Persians and Spaniards, peoples who were not Arabs by blood and had nothing of the Arab spirit. Once these extraneous elements were eliminated, the Islamic masses once more fell under the yoke of their fanatical imams. From the 1200s onwards, a theological backlash swept through Islam. There were no more philosophers - the word itself became synonymous with "infidel" - and only occasionally was there a scholar like the historian Ibn-Khaldun. The Turks, devoid of critical and questioning spirit, imposed their heavy yoke on Islam; and Islam, going back to its sources, paralyzed investigation into a formula that admitted of no answer: "Allah aalam" (God knows best what is). The traditionalism of Islam is incompatible with the spirit of inquiry and the idea of ​​progress. For the Muslim, all the truth worth knowing is contained in the Koran, dogma and code of faith, whose prescriptions regulate the smallest details of life. Whatever happens is the will of Allah. Everything is predetermined; all you can do is present without complaining. This fatalism destroys effort, any manifestation of personal will. It expresses the atavistic resignation of the nomad in the face of the emptiness of the desert. Belief in another life, full of sensual pleasures, houris and fresh meadows, comforts the faithful in present tribulations. This mentality excludes restlessness, dissatisfaction with oneself, that constant will to overcome that is the ethical source of the inner life of Western man. Once he satisfies the fundamental prescription of the Qur'an, which is to believe in the one God and his Prophet, he is at peace with himself. This results in a quietism which has the outward appearance of noble serenity, but which excludes any effort to improve the human condition. Since Allah has made man's home what it is, why try to improve it with inventions that border on impiety and contribute nothing to man's salvation? Why keep the Roman aqueducts in Carthage? The religion of Islam excludes intellectual curiosity. Umar, burning the books of the Library of Alexandria to heat the Moorish baths, is only a legend, but the words attributed to him are full of meaning: “If these books say the same as the Koran, they are useless; if they say anything else, they are false and must be destroyed."

The Abrahamic or Egalitarian Worldview

Whatever forms it has taken, the Abrahamic or egalitarian worldview has always been eschatological and also reflects an implicit anthropology. He assigns a negative value to history and discerns meaning in historical movement only in so far as it tends towards its own negation and ultimate goal.
According to this view, history has a beginning and must also have an end. It is but an episode, an incident with regard to what constitutes the essence of humanity. The true nature of man would be external to history. And the end of the story would restore, sublimating it, what existed at the beginning. Human eternity would not be based on becoming, but on being.

I.-The Christian Perspective
This episode that is history is perceived in the Christian perspective as condemnation. The story stems from God's condemnation of man—for original sin—to unhappiness, toil, sweat and blood. Humanity lived in happy innocence in the Garden of Eden and was condemned to history because its ancestor, Adam, transgressed the divine commandment, wanting to taste the fruit of the tree of knowledge: to become like God. Adam's guilt weighs, like original sin, on every individual who comes into the world. It is, by definition, inexpiable, since God himself was offended.

However, God, in his infinite goodness, takes care of the atonement. He becomes man, incarnated in the person of Jesus. The sacrifice of the Son of God introduces the essential event of Redemption into historical development. Undoubtedly, this concerns only individuals touched by Grace, but it makes possible the slow march towards the end of history, for which henceforth the "communion of saints" must prepare humanity. Finally, the day will come when the forces of Good and Evil will face each other in a battle that will lead to the Last Judgment and, therefore, to the establishment of the Kingdom of Heaven, which has its dialectical counterpart in the abyss. from hell.

Eden before the beginning of the story; original sin; expulsion from the Garden of Eden; crossing the valley of tears that is the world, the place of historical development; Redemption; communion of saints; apocalyptic battle and doomsday; end of history and establishment of a Kingdom of Heaven: these are the mythemes that structure the mythical view of history proposed by Christianity. In this view, the historical development of man has a purely negative value and the sense of atonement.

II.- The Marxist vision

The same mythemes can be found, now in a secularized and pseudoscientific way, in the Marxist view of history. There, history is presented as the result of class struggle: a struggle between groups defined according to their respective economic conditions. The prehistoric Garden of Eden was transformed into a primitive communism practiced by a humanity still immersed in the state of nature and purely predatory nature. Whereas man in Eden was limited by God's commandments, man in primitive communism lives under the pressure of misery. Such pressure led to the invention of the means of agricultural production, but this invention also proved to be a curse. It implied, in effect, not only the exploitation of nature by man, but also the division of labor, the exploitation of man by man and, consequently, human alienation. Class struggle is the implicit consequence of this exploitation of man by man. Its result is history.

As we can see, for Marxists it is economic conditions that determine human behavior. By logical concatenation, the latter leads to the creation of ever new production systems which, in turn, cause new economic conditions and, above all, ever-increasing misery for the exploited. However, there comes a moment of redemption. With the advent of capitalism, misery reaches its peak, it becomes unbearable. Proletarians become aware of their condition, and this redemptive realization gives rise to the organization of Communist parties, just as Christ's redemption had caused the founding of a communion of saints. The Judeo-Christian notion of 'Grace' finds its equivalent, especially in relation to the Sermon on the Mount.

Communist parties are waging an apocalyptic struggle against exploiters. This can be long and difficult, but in the end and necessarily succeed: it is "the meaning of the story." This will bring about the abolition of social classes, end man's alienation, and allow for the establishment of a communist society. — immutable and classless. Furthermore, since history is the result of class struggle, there will obviously be no more history. Prehistoric communism will be restored, like the Garden of Eden in the Kingdom of Heaven, but in a sublimated form. Whereas primitive communist society was afflicted with material misery, posthistoric communist society will enjoy a perfectly balanced satisfaction of its needs.

Therefore, in the Marxist view, history also takes on a negative value. Originally born of human alienation, it only makes sense to the extent that it incessantly increases the misery of the exploited, finally helping to create the conditions for misery to disappear and, so to speak, 'march' towards its own end, its self-determination. abolition .

III.- The End of History
Both egalitarian views, the religious Christian and the secular Marxist, logically imply that history is determined not by man's action, but by something that transcends him. It is true that Christianity attributes free will to man and thus affirms that it was Adam, having freely “chosen” sin, who was responsible for his fault, for his imperfection. However, it was God who made and willed Adam to be imperfect.

Marxists, on the other hand, used to say that history was made by man, or rather by men, as members of a social class. However, it is true that social classes are determined and defined by economic conditions, and that it was original misery that forced men to enter into that bloody concatenation that is the class struggle. Man is then driven to act only as a result of his economic condition. It is a mere attraction in a game played in nature by material forces.

Within the egalitarian view of history, man plays a dramatic role — in a tragic, shameful, painful farce — that he never wrote and never will. Dignity, as an authentic human truth, is outside of history, before and after it.

Abrahamism: Contesting and Rejecting Aristotle

The three Abrahamic religions had to confront the ideas of the great Greek philosopher Aristotle. Averroes tried to integrate Aristotle with Islam. Maimonides tried to integrate Aristotle with Judaism. Thomas Aquinas tried to integrate Aristotle with Christianity. Everything necessarily failed. Rationality cannot be integrated with faith; nor reason with anti-reason; nor, in philosophy, made with fancy.

By conquering parts of the Byzantine Empire, the Arabs encountered Greek thought. Muslim scholars studied and became fascinated with Aristotle's writings and translated them into Arabic. Avicenna and Averroes were superlative scholars of Aristotle. The Arabs learned the method of observational rationality and, in a true golden age, made magnificent contributions to medicine, astronomy, mathematics, literature and other fields.

But it didn't last. Due to the influence of Al-Ghazali and other theologians who reject reason, as well as a fundamentalism firmly rooted in Islamic culture from the beginning, the faith ended up crushing freedom of thought. Under orthodox Islam, the books of Avicenna, Averroes and other great thinkers were burned in the 12th century. For eight hundred years since then, the Islamic world has been wallowing in a dark age.

When Christians reconquered large areas of Spain from Muslims, they gained access to Islamic centers of learning in southern Spain. In the 12th century, Archbishop Raymund I of Toledo supported Catholic, Jewish, and Muslim scholars in another major translation movement, similar to that in Baghdad three centuries earlier, but this time translating Greek masterpieces from Arabic into Latin, the language of scholars. Europeans. . Unsurprisingly, as it had centuries before, the Church resisted the study of Greek philosophy. In 1210, a church council in Paris forbade the reading of Aristotle's "metaphysics and natural philosophy".

But this time the Church failed. Leading European minds, though still Catholic, were determined to gain a greater understanding of the natural world, and no one, at that point in history, had achieved a knowledge of nature equal to that of Aristotle.

In one of the great and tragic ironies of history, in the late Middle Ages, Aristotle became the patron Greek philosopher of the Catholic Church. Many of the thinkers of the time, the Scholastics, were Aristotelian Christians.

But a critical and often overlooked point is that, in the centuries following Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas, they often rejected Aristotle's method and clung to his specific conclusions as dogmatically as they did to biblical myths. .

The Darkness of the Abrahamic Dark Ages

According to Dutch economist Anguss Maddison, Europe has experienced zero economic growth in the centuries since 500 AD. to 1500. Maddison shows that for a millennium there was no increase in per capita income, which remained at an extremely low level of $215 in 1500. Furthermore, he estimates that in the year 1000, the average baby could expect to live approximately 24 years, and that a third would die within the first year of life.

French historian Fernand Braudel, writing about the pre-18th century era, notes, for example, that although France was, by the standards of the time, a relatively prosperous country, it is believed to have suffered from ten general famines during the 10th century. .century; twenty-six at 11; two on the 12th, and those are estimates that don't even count the hundreds and hundreds of local famines.

European sewer and sanitation regressed to primitivism during this era. Human waste was often thrown out of windows onto the street or simply dumped into local rivers. With the streets covered with garbage and soiled with urine and feces, and with the same terrible conditions that permeated the rivers and streams from which drinking water was drawn, worms and germs and diseases of all kinds, intractable, multiplied by mankind's primitive medical knowledge. day, proliferated. Between 1347 and 1350, for example, the bubonic plague, the infamous "Black Death", spread by fleas that infested rats, devastated Western Europe, decimating some 20 million people, a third of the human population. Norman Cantor, the leading contemporary historian of the Middle Ages, states: "The Black Death of 1348-1349 was the greatest biomedical disaster in European and possibly world history."

Finally, the High Middle Ages saw a precipitous drop in education and literacy levels since the Roman period. In the endemic wars of the time, human beings lost the ability to write and, to a large extent, to read. For example, during the eighth century, Charlemagne maintained that even the clergy did not know enough Latin to understand the Bible or to properly perform Church services.

A related disaster was that classical learning was largely lost in the West. The loss of Greek literacy was catastrophic for civilization, as it meant the simultaneous loss of philosophy, mathematics, medicine, engineering, and science. Andrew Coulson, a researcher in the history of education, points out that while the Greeks were fascinated by the natural world, taking pioneering steps in sciences such as anatomy, biology, physics and meteorology, Christians replaced efforts to understand the world by trying to know the God; observation-based study of nature was therefore subservient to faith-based study of Scripture. Consequently, a decrease in learning affected all cognitive subjects. The limited medical knowledge that Greek and Roman physicians accumulated was supplanted by total mysticism. For example, St. Augustine believed that demons were responsible for disease, a tragic regression from Hippocrates. Scientific work in general declined, as did interest in the physical world.

W. T. Jones, the leading historian of 20th-century philosophy, succinctly captured the essence of the decline and the causal role of Christianity in its promotion when he stated: “Because of the direct indifference and hostility of Christians, almost the entire body of literature and the ancient learnings were lost. So great was this destruction and the rate of recovery so slow that, even in the ninth century, Europe still lagged immensely behind the classical world in all aspects of life. This, then, was truly a "dark" age.
—
Daniel Gurpide: Quotes and data are taken from an article by Andrew Bernstein: “Theology's Tragedy: How Religion Caused and Extended the Dark Ages. A review of Rodney Stark's The Victory of Reason.

Enlightenment Now: Voltaire on Abrahamism

Christianity

“Our religion is certainly the most ridiculous, absurd and bloody religion that has ever infected this world. Your Majesty will render the human race an eternal service by extirpating this infamous superstition, I do not say among the mob, that they are not worthy to be enlightened and that they are fit for every yoke; I mean among the honest, among men who think, among those who want to think. … My only regret as I die is that I cannot help you in this noble enterprise, the best and most respectable that the human mind can point to.
(Letter to Frederick II of Prussia, January 5, 1767)

Islam

“”But let a camel trader cause an insurrection in your village; that, in alliance with some miserable followers, he convinces them that he is talking with the angel Gabriel; that he boasts that he was taken up to heaven, where he received in part this unintelligible book, the pages of which make common sense shudder; that, to honor this book, he gives iron and flames to his fatherland; who kills fathers and kidnaps daughters; which gives the vanquished the choice of his religion or of death: this is certainly nothing any man can excuse, at least if he is not born a Turk, or if superstition has not extinguished all natural light in him.”
(Letter to Frederick II of Prussia, December 1740)

Judaism

"In short, we find in them [the Jews] only an ignorant and barbarous people, who have for a long time united the most sordid greed with the most detestable superstition and the most invincible hatred against all peoples by whom they are tolerated and enriched." .
(philosophical dictionary)

the pragmatic enlightenment

Voltaire's political perspective, for example, was emphatically practical and flexible, integrated and directed to the specific circumstances of various European nations. He supported a mixed constitutional government in England, a more popular republic in Geneva and the Netherlands, a strong monarchy in France, and an even stronger centralized one in Frederick's Prussia and Catherine's Russia. Although he generally had kinder things to say about England and Geneva than about France, Prussia or Russia, he did not believe that any of these regimes were simply "the best". Rather, he insisted that such judgments cannot be correctly made in the abstract, that they can only be based on context-sensitive empirical analyses.

The Pragmatic Enlightenment (ii)

Adam Smith's opposition to the idea of ​​moving people "like chess pieces" is seen in his hostility to mercantilism: legal monopolies, rewards, duties, trade prohibitions, birthright laws, etc. On the other hand, throughout The Wealth of Nations, he warns that his economic proposals – his system of natural freedom – must be implemented gradually, with due attention to the inconvenience they may generate.

For example, in the midst of a discussion of import duties and trade bans designed to protect domestic industries, he writes: “Humanity can demand that free trade be restored only gradually and with much reserve and circumspection. . If these high tariffs and prohibitions were immediately removed, cheaper foreign goods of the same kind might be dumped so quickly on the home market as would deprive many thousands of our people of their common employment and means of livelihood" (The Wealth of Nations).

The pragmatic illustration (iii)

Hume conceives of freedom primarily in terms of personal security and independence, protected by the rule of law. He does not conceive of freedom in terms of rights inherent in human nature or the natural state of humanity and which restrict the scope of legitimate political power; on the contrary, he holds that liberty can only be established and maintained by stable, orderly, and effective government.

It is worth noting that Hume includes a citizens' militia in his "Perfect Commonwealth", stating that "without a militia it is vain to think that any free government will ever have security or stability".

The pragmatic illustration (iv)

Throughout his analysis of two different types of freedom, Montesquieu takes special care to distinguish between them and democratic self-government. While philosophers and ordinary citizens alike have often associated liberty with republics, especially democratic republics, and excluded it from monarchies, he says, such a view confuses "the power of the people... with liberty." do povo". In their view, who governs is less important than how they govern.

Montesquieu writes that “Political liberty concerns both moderate monarchies and republics, and is no farther from a throne than from a senate. Every man who has well-founded reason to believe that the anger of one or many will not take his life or the possession of his goods is free.

german philosophy

The Greats of German philosophy (Kant-Fichte-Hegel-Marx-Heidegger, I left Nietzsche on purpose, I know) make up a counter-enlightenment tradition that ends up being distrustful of science and technology, anti-individualist and anti-liberal. All contributed in varying degrees to the authoritarian regimes that developed in the 1900s - the various forms of authoritarian nationalisms, national and international socialisms, fascisms - and the cultural catastrophes called "Frankfurt School" and "Post-Modernism".

Kant (the only painting in Kant's house was a portrait of Rousseau hanging above his desk) reinforced the premodern worldview of faith and duty in the face of the incursions of the Enlightenment: "I found it necessary, therefore, to deny knowledge in order to make room for faith." (Kant)

Hegel explicitly attacks the entire tradition of logic as it has developed from Aristotle to modernity. He wants to believe in a kind of spiritually driven dialectical evolutionary metaphysics that cannot be expressed logically. Deeper views of his are that the self is just one aspect of the collective, that the Divine works through collective self-realization, and that the State is the manifestation of the Divine.

Hegel on the beginning of the universe: “Until now, there is nothing: something is becoming. The beginning is not pure nothingness, but a nothingness from which something must proceed; so that being is already contained in the beginning. The beginning, therefore, contains both being and nothingness; It is the unity of being and nothingness, or it is non-being that is being, and being that is also non-being.” This is a warning from the worst of Heidegger, the 'Nazi' philosopher par excellence who, paradoxically, ended up recreating the Jewish cosmogonic myth (Creation 'ex nihilo').

The Kant-Fichte-Hegel triad is behind the modern German educational system, still active today: a factory of perfect automata devoid of personality, capable of crushing any sign of individualism. Social conformism explains why in Germany today there is no resistance to the suicide program implemented by 'Big Mutti'.

The German philosophers are Lutheran pastors in a new guise. All of them, even Marx. Is he German or Jewish? I'm not sure. Is not Protestantism another bigwig of Abrahamism? Are Kant, Fichte, Hegel, Heidegger Germans or Jews? Is the combination of a German philosopher brought up in an Abrahamic cult or a Jewish thinker brought up in the German school more dangerous?

Wagner e Nietzsche (i)

Richard Wagner can be considered the most magnetic and powerful artistic voice of the 19th century and a profound influence on modernity. From Wagner's death to World War I, composers, painters, philosophers, novelists, playwrights and poets have struggled to come to terms with his strangely vibrant and living legacy. No composer before or since has left such a lasting mark on the course of cultural history. Few artists have so assiduously embraced public life and inspired so much controversy, both in politics and in art.

Wagner's work, especially his Ring of the Nibelung, an epic masterpiece of musical genius, represents a turning point and possibly the conclusion of a parable symbolized by the great European tradition of tonal and polyphonic music, going back to Johann Sebastian Bach. and his contemporaries Mozart and Beethoven, culminating, after Wagner, in Richard Strauss and Carl Orff.

'Classical music', far from being a universal phenomenon, represents a specific geographic and cultural era unequaled by other eras or civilizations. Indeed, even in pre-Baquian Europe, the music that the Church imposed on the Catholic ecumene was based on imitation of the Greco-Roman musical tradition, which was mainly Mediterranean and Middle Eastern in origin and possibly derived from a unique melodic sensibility. .

Soon after the Carolingian period —with the forced conversion of the Saxon tribes that followed the Massacre Verden and the restoration of the Empire— another musical sensibility (in this case the harmonica) began to penetrate the musical universe of the Church, which until then had remained confined . then. to point. What would have been the origin of this new sensitivity?

Musicologists refer to a "pagan residue" existing in the indigenous cultures of northern Europe. Undoubtedly, a tonal system emerged, after a few centuries, from the opposition between the tradition of the Church and that of the indigenous musical culture of northern Europe.

As for Wagner, the Ring, the great fifteen-hour cycle of operatic, theatrical and literary performance, comprising a 'Prelude' (Das Rheingold) and 'three Nights' (Die Walküre, Siegfried and Götterdämmerung), has been described as a 'work of total art' (Gesamtkunstwerk). It is impossible to fully understand it simply by reading the poem or listening to the music in particular. Full understanding requires watching her perform on stage, ideally in Bayreuth's prime location.

Along with Parsifal, the Ring was, until very recently, on the annual program of the Bayreuth Festival, and was conceived by Wagner as a sacred rite in the regeneration of history. He believed that art could redeem a culture, a society and a people. Wagner compared the theater to a temple of Aryan art and mystical rites, and through the Teutonic myth he found elements that would consecrate a greater popular conscience and an ascending path towards the Übermensch.

Only ancient Greece offers something similar. Indeed, Wagner has often been compared to Homer, only for Herbert von Karajan to conclude that "Wagner is bigger and fuller".

The key to understanding this suprahumanist myth lies in a “musical idea” that sustains and structures Wagner's work: the living symbol of three-dimensional time in history.

The key to understanding the suprahumanist myth lies in a "musical idea" that sustains and structures Wagner's work: the living symbol of history's three-dimensional time.

In Wagner, music, drama (that is, tragedy) and myth are closely related. Music, according to him, is an idea of ​​the world: more precisely, “an idea of ​​the world that encloses everything”. Tragedy is born out of music, as if it came out of a mother's womb. He represents —he represents on stage— this “idea” of music, and he does so by regenerating myth, the only form of expression capable of reaching and recovering the original purity, which Wagner calls “the purely human” (Rein-Menschliches ).

Wagner does not explain this idea of ​​the world. Rather, he does so through Wort-Ton-Drama: that is, through association within the dramatic action of word and sound. Therefore, this idea organizes space-time in a radically new way: establishing the historical evolution of humanity in the form of a tragedy governed by the law of recurrence. At any moment, past, present and future coincide. The becoming is there: only the center changes, as well as the perspectives that derive from it. Wagner replaces a unilinear conception of time, which he rejects, with a three-dimensional time: the specific time of human becoming.

The image of the Ring of the Nibelung, the ring from which the tetralogy is named, is the living symbol of the "spherical" conception of history: the music of eternal return.

Always identical, although always renewed, Wagner's discourse is structured around a certain number of “guide images” (Leitbilder): the affirmation of becoming (as opposed to being); the premonition of a "rupture" of historical time (Zeit-Umbruch); the return to a mythical past associated with a leap into the future. These images correspond to different Leitmotives ('dominant motifs'), which constitute their musical transpositions.

The Ring is a dramatic representation of ancient myths of the fate of gods and heroes, the memory of which was perpetuated by the Scandinavian Edda and various medieval German poems. But it's more than that. Wagner's imagination transfigured what until then was a mere collection of literary fossils: the past that he freely chose and reconstituted, the present that he gave to old stories, the future that he projects, all of this structures a new present of human consciousness. From the birth of a world to its disappearance —which is also conceived as regeneration and a new beginning—, an entire history of humanity is wonderfully evoked. Furthermore, this history is at the same time past, current —and future— and is based on an anthropological conception —the Rein-Menschliches— which implies a radical inversion of values. Resurrected from its ancient tomb, the ancient Germanic myth takes on a new dimension and, at the same time, recovers an intoxicating barbaric youth.

It is no coincidence that Wagner chose the mythical material of the Edda to represent his idea of ​​the world. On the contrary, the choice imposed itself out of necessity, insofar as it corresponded to the choice of one past among others: the choice of a deeper past, that of reconquering one's origins and the promise of a longer future. The return to origins, which in the romantic egalitarian and Christian discourse was an apparently reactionary lapse in which pagan unconsciousness was expressed, finds in Wagnerian discourse its own logic and, therefore, its true face.

Structured by and around the 'idea of ​​music', the three-dimensionality of time, and ultimately self-awareness, Wagner's speech is as much an inspiration for a return to our deepest origins as it is a desire to move forward towards a more profound future. deep. : a revolutionary project. . Therefore, conservation and revolution are confused and merged in opposition to a civilization and a society that claims another tradition, the Judeo-Christian, and another egalitarian project.

Wotan, central character of the Ring, is not only the pre-Christian pre-Christian Indo-European god, the unrecognizable noumenon of an extinct and unrepeatable religion, but he is already the new post-humanist god: the New Man, who tragically knows that you have to take care of your destiny, of your own creation. In doing so, he tends towards the superhuman.

Because the tragedy of heroes and gods finds fulfillment only in Wotan's tragedy: in a consciousness that knows and wills. Therefore, since everything is summed up and transcended in Wotan's consciousness, since all the characters in the Ring are aspects of the purely human —Rein-menschliches— embodied in a single person, Wotan, the Ring is psychodrama. Drama, that is, in which Wagner's genius projects all the Leitbilders that precede psychoanalysis by decades. Wotan sacrifices his innermost will, suppressing what he loves most, Brünnhilde, by surrounding her with fire. That fire is none other than Loge himself, the spirit that betrays Wotan and is the very image of declining paganism accepting the fate of the Christian mask. However, his innermost will is not destroyed: it remains dormant. His presence summons the person who will come to wake him; and this is the end that the god awaits: the beginning of a new story: a regeneration.

Wagner and Nietzsche (ii)

There is an intimate relationship between Wagner's work and Nietzsche's. It is important to underline this relationship, as Nietzsche himself carried out an important diversionary maneuver, with the intention of demonstrating – perhaps first of all to himself – that his work was independent and even opposed to that of Richard Wagner. This exercise in concealment strongly influenced the judgment of philosophers and intellectuals, naturally inclined to pay more attention to the "intellectual" work of Nietzsche than to the "artistic" work of Wagner.

As a young man, Nietzsche had prostrated himself before the altar of the "god Wagner", offering in honor The Birth of Tragedy, followed by Richard Wagner in Bayreuth. However, the "wonderful days in Tribschen" did not last. Nietzsche soon distanced himself from Wagner. The fervent disciple has become an apostate: the apologist has become a denigrator and an intransigent adversary. Nietzsche's later works, The Case for Wagner and Nietzsche Against Wagner, give all the appearance of venomous attacks by an old disciple on an old master. Wagner is a 'seducer', a 'corruptor', a 'rattlesnake': he presents himself as the opposite of what he really is. "Schopenhauerian", "enemy of life": Wagner becomes the ne plus ultra of decadence. Worse yet, with the creation of Parsifal, he is seen to have returned to the Christian faith.

Beginning with an attack on Wagner's music, the quintessence of decadent art, Nietzsche concludes by condemning almost all German music for leading inevitably to Wagner. He opposes "pure melody" - described as "Mediterranean" - to "harmony" - described as "Nordic". Exegesis of him often becomes a mere caricature, as when, for example, he summarizes the "intrigues" of Wagner's drama. Sometimes his comments turn downright mean.

Nietzsche's confrontation with Wagner has a tragic aspect. Nietzsche suffered a lot when he distanced himself from the only man he loved. However, this suffering arose from a kind of metaphysical jealousy. Nietzsche wanted Wagner's place in history. He needed, therefore, to show that Wagner was not what he seemed: the creator of a new myth, a regenerator of history, nor could he be, since music itself was a "final art".

Many commented on Nietzsche's jealousy. Thomas Mann addressed Nietzsche's love-hate relationship with Wagner in Pro and Contra Wagner. Stefan George -who blames Nietzsche for having 'betrayed' Wagner- is more positive: "Without Wagner there is no birth of tragedy, without the awakening initiated by Wagner there is no Nietzsche". Cosima Wagner. From the moment of his first encounter with her in Tribschen (May 1869), Nietzsche was fascinated by her. He idealized her in the guise of Ariadne. Wagner was simultaneously the Minotaur and Theseus, a human hero, all too human; he, Nietzsche, was the divine Dionysus. Related to this are many revealing passages in Nietzsche's work, particularly the dialogue between Dionysus and Ariadne in Twilight of the Idols.

Nietzsche saw himself as the only herald of perpetual becoming, eternal return and the superman: he alone had reached the foot of the abyss of decadence; only in him did the beginning find its origin. Only Nietzsche was the true Dionysus. The German public was deceived by Wagner the seducer; Ariadne mistook him for God and married him.

In short, Nietzsche, the philosopher of perpetual evolution, did not support the Wagnerian expression of philosophy in music. Nietzsche established the philosophical myth of the superman (Übermensch). He explained its logic and created a language for it. However, the myth already existed in the form of a Wagnerian opera. Nietzsche simply gave a name to what already existed in music, but he could never admit that.

The structure and elements of the suprahumanist myth are already present in Wagner's "myth of Wotan". Nietzsche and Wagner share the same vision of history, the same intuitive conception of man. Nietzsche's "will to the superman" corresponds to Wotan's "will to regenerate the world". The 'will to accept the end' in Götterdämmerung corresponds to Zaratustrian amor fati, the new consciousness of the 'superior man'. Wort-Ton-Drama, which portrays the tragic history of humanity, takes its name from Nietzsche: 'eternal return', 'linear' representation of the historical sphere of becoming. Zarathustra's "midday" prefigures a similar rupture with time (Zeit-Umbruch), evoked, in the final scene of Götterdämmerung, by the marvelous Leitmotif which had already promised Siegmund's regeneration through his son Siegfried. The 'return to origins' -another essential element of the myth of the Ring- is represented twice in Nietzsche's writings: by the exaltation of the 'blond beast' of the Indo-Europeans and, on the artistic and cultural level, by pre-Socratic Greece. Both are forever lost, "historically unrenewable", and must be recreated just as, for Wagner, the "end of the gods" is a prerequisite for the return of the gods.

In their respective works, Wagner and Nietzsche pursued the same goal: the regeneration of history. Myth prefigures this end and is also the means to reach it. The myth is a "didactic story" that consists of creating the new man with his own words. The kinship between Wagner's musical dramas and Nietzsche's poetic philosophy is comparable to the kinship, within the egalitarian myth, of different Christian theologies and democratic, socialist, and communist ideologies. If Wagner's kinship with Nietzsche seems very close – and indeed it is – it is because both mark the beginning of suprahumanist mythology: the moment of birth.

Wagner e Nietzsche (iii)

The fact that they belong to the same “mythical field” does not imply, however, that in the myth they manifest the same ideological identity. In Richard Wagner in Bayreuth (1876), Wagner remains for Nietzsche a universal genius: simultaneously philosopher, historian, artist, master of diction and mythology, and mythical poet. In fact, philosopher Wagner never managed to extract philosophy from the myth created by poet and musician Wagner. In his theoretical writing, Wagner's style remains that of romanticism; and mythical elements appear distorted by a discourse alien to them. Nietzsche realized this and became aware of his superiority as a philosopher, a superiority that Wagner was happy to acknowledge. Therefore, Nietzsche's opposition to Wagner on the grounds that his theoretical work was a farce was spurious.

However, Wagner and Nietzsche genuinely differed in their interpretations of certain aspects of civilization and the culture it decried. In the triumph of the "Jewish principle", Wagner identified and denounced the essential cause of humanity's decline: the "poison" he claimed was destroying all real culture. For Wagner it was a relatively recent phenomenon. He attributed this, somewhat naively, to the growing social influence of Jews and the consequent Jewish ascendancy in the political, artistic and cultural spheres. Consequently, the different 'forms' of German culture – and also of European culture, starting with the religious form, Christianity – are negative, insofar as they have been 'invaded' and 'perverted' by the 'Jewish principle'. the necessary response to this was to revitalize the "Germanness" of cultural and social forms, and to begin to do this meant eliminating Jewish influence. Inevitably, Wagner's analysis fueled social and political anti-Semitism on his part.

Nietzsche also considered that the 'Jewish principle' caused the degradation of man: that it is at the origin of the 'radical falsification of all nature, all naturalness, all reality'; who started the slave rebellion; and that the West has been in decline since "God became a Jew". , to self-affirmation' - Nietzsche gives a socio-political definition, which he summarizes as the principle of equality. For Nietzsche, however, this is not a recent phenomenon: it began with Christianity.

Christianity cannot be understood apart from its place of origin: it is a consequence of Judaism, a logical progression of it. Nietzsche's anti-Judaism does not lead to anti-Semitism. He doubted the existence of a "Jewish people" as such and believed that Jews wanted above all to assimilate. On this basis, all anti-Semitism is dangerous, as it forces Jews to unite in self-defense. Furthermore, according to Nietzsche, the damage done is in any case irreparable: no preventive measure can prevent the decline of European civilization. Nietzsche's conclusion is that it would be better to speed up the process of disintegration. Only on the ruins of Europe would it be possible to rebuild; only when Europeans become a mass of innumerable slaves resigned to their fate can the superior race emerge from the abyss. In his autobiographical Ecce Homo, Nietzsche confirms that his "attack" on Wagner is also an attack on a "German nation that becomes more and more lazy in spiritual matters, more and more impoverished in its instincts." The "blonde beast" must be "reconceived" in the form of the future "good European" Nietzsche did not entirely give up hope in the German people; he could not see what other people might one day receive the honor of being "Europe's first anti-Christian people". However, his condemnation of Bismarck's Germany, which he said was socialist and democratic, is uncompromising. Wagner's ironic commitment to the Kaiserreich was another source of disagreement.

Wagner and Nietzsche fought for the same cause, but their strategies were opposite. Nietzsche's initial enthusiasm, his subsequent reconsideration, and finally his intensified criticism all took place in the Wagnerian myth alone and can only be explained by it. Nietzsche was aware of and spoke of a Sternenfreundschaft: the friendship of two stars condemned in their eternal course predestined never to meet.

Furthermore, Nietzsche called his attack venomous in The Case of Wagner: “I loved Wagner and no other. . . Needless to say, I grant no one the right to appropriate my present judgment of Wagner." Nietzsche saw his dispute with Wagner as a family dispute: his "anti-Wagnerian" polemic should have concerned only those already connected with Wagner. of superman and the theme of the eternal return.

Perhaps the true reason, the need for the master's "betrayal", is found in the Apollonian commandment to every noble soul, to every "superior man", to discover and fulfill himself. Where the egalitarian precept requires the imposition of a single and absolute truth —and, concomitantly, the adaptation of all to the same human model—, the opposite precept necessarily commits each one to the search for true identity in the solitude of the eagle.

Wagner and Nietzsche (iv)

According to Nietzsche, with the creation of Parsifal, Wagner seems to have fallen back into the Christian faith. A failed attempt to try to denigrate Wagner among suprahumanist partisans, not only because Parsifal, in his declared intention to "redeem the redeemer" (Erlösung dem Erlöser) is simply "scandalous" from a Christian perspective, but also because his portrayal is intended to short-circuit and transfigure the Christian myth in the spectator's mind, to better express values ​​diametrically opposed to those defended by all Christian denominations.

If „Ecce Homo“ is to be believed, in 1878 Nietzsche sent a copy of his book Human, All Too Human to Richard Wagner. At the same time, Wagner sent Nietzsche a verse copy of his opera Parsifal. Nietzsche would write that, upon receiving this text, "I felt as if I had heard an ominous sound, as if two swords had crossed".

This is just Nietzsche's pretext for the polemic.

Wagner read the prose draft of Parsifal to Nietzsche at Tribschen in 1869, two years before Nietzsche wrote The Birth of Tragedy, his most Wagnerian text. In 1877, Nietzsche wrote a letter to Cosima Wagner, dated October 10, in which he stated: "The magnificent promise of 'Parsifal' can offer us solace whenever we need to be consoled." Nietzsche knew about the existence of Parsifal and its content for a long time. Of course, it can be accepted that his opinion on the matter has changed over the years, but the question remains: why did he have to falsify the chronology of these events? I suspect an "too human" motive.

At the center of Nietzsche's critique of Parsifal was the alleged "Schopenhauerian hatred of life" that permeated the opera. Schopenhauer certainly had an important influence on Wagner, but his philosophy is ultimately just one element among others in Wagnerian creation. During the last years of his life, and while working on "Parsifal", Wagner was also positively impressed by Gobineau's "Essay Concerning the Inequality of Human Races". As was often the case with Wagner, he felt that the French diplomat was expressing what he had already intuited. The vision of a degraded humanity caused by the miscegenation of the “noble Aryan race” with “inferior races” left deep marks. Pessimistic views of life and history always impressed Wagner, but both Schopenhauer's metaphysical pessimism and Gobineau's catastrophism were sidelined in Wagner's Weltanschauung. In "What initiates this knowledge?" (1880), he wrote: “We recognize the cause of the fall of Historical Man and the necessity of his regeneration; we believe in the possibility of this Regeneration and we dedicate ourselves to its realization in every way.”

“Parsifal” is a “religion of life”, a “race” religion if you like (but not in the biologically reductionist sense): at the end of the Bühnenweihfestspiel, the spear of Longinus (the phallus), now purified, and the Holy Grail ( the uterus) come together, so that the "sacred blood" flows again.

“Parsifal” is also a paraphrase of the “Ring”, represented this time in a scene that takes us back to the legendary Middle Ages, impregnated, under Christian garments, with pagan Celtic-Germanic symbols.

“Erlösung dem Erlöser” (‘to redeem the redeemer’) forms the core of the “holy festival”. The "redeemer" is Amfortas, who represents a Christianity poisoned with Jewish dogmas, incapable of satisfying the religious needs of the Knights of the Grail. Titurel, his father, represents, according to Wagner's indications, Wotan, the ancient Indo-European religion.

According to the Wagnerian interpretation of European religion, "Parsifal" is closely related to the "Ring of the Nibelungs" (see "Die Wibelungen" and "Art and Religion"). The introduction of Christianity into Europe would not have implied the rejection of the inner essence of the ancient Indo-European religion. It wouldn't have replaced Wotan-Zeus-Jupiter, it would just have put him in a "sleep" state. Jesus, the redemptive hero, is a reincarnation of the pagan Naturgott (Siegfried), but he is stricken with a mortal wound that incapacitates him to fulfill his mission. The wound is the Jewish “infection”: the temptation (Kundry-Judaism), which Amfortas by his very nature could not resist, will be overcome by Parsifal, thanks to the memory of his mother Herzeleide (“the ancestral roots”, “the pure origin ").

In this sense, Wagner also follows Schopenhauer's agenda: “We can hope, therefore, that one day even Europe will be purged of all Jewish mythology. Perhaps the century has arrived when the peoples of the Indo-European linguistic group will again receive the sacred religions of their countries of origin; because they have become ripe for them again after they have been away for a long time” (Parega and Paralipomena).

However, Wagner also considers that the historical necessity that derives from the current religious situation in Europe, in which historical forms of religiosity are depraved, implies not only the "de-Judaization" and the abolition of Christianity, but also the death of the old pagan remnants , to create a superior synthesis, a superior “religion”, in which the human need for “transcendence” will be satisfied by the resacralization of Art. The realization on stage of the redemption-abolition of old religions is also the representation of a sacred ritual for a future community, a first step towards the regeneration of history.

The "possibility of transcendence" for egalitarianism occurs in the afterlife, in metaphysics; for Suprahumanism, on the other hand, it takes place in this world, in meta-history, through the announcement of the “Rein-Menschliches” or “purely-human” (the Nietzschean “Übermensch”).

La Guerra Aesir-Vanir

The domestication of the living world by man paralleled the domestication of the masses by the elite. This historical stage —beginning with the Neolithic Revolution and ending today with the transition to the so-called “Biopolitical Revolution”— is extremely important. It is not difficult to recognize in her what Karl Marx called "the end of primitive communist society", Sigmund Freud "the murder of the original father" and Claude Lévi-Strauss "the separation between Nature and Culture".

Significant evidence of this period has been preserved in Indo-European mythology, thanks to the story of the formation of the society of the gods, as related, for example, through the Aesir-Vanir War.

The Aesir and the Vanir represent two different life forms. During the founding war, which symbolically contrasted the lifestyles of the great hunters and farmers emerging from the Neolithic, Odin-Wotan, as the pre-eminent god of magic, "tamed" the Vanir with his magic and assigned them a harmonious position in the trifunctional organic society, where the 'taming of nature' was completed. This myth signifies the transition from a generic instinctual human subject to a specific conscious human subject who exercises magical power over other men, thus engendering the conditions of social stratification that are the hallmark of all post-Neolithic society.

Society is now organized into two castes, two social groups. One, which is the dominant class, assumes functions of sovereign and warrior; the other assumes the economic function. This structure is reflected in the society of the gods, whose genesis the myth, in its own way, reveals. The new society is constituted by the superimposition and domination of "magic" over religious man, of the predator over the producer. The myth of the Aesir and the Vanir, like that of the Romans and the Sabines, highlights the respective personages of both social groups or families of gods. The first, "predatory" gods who continue the activities of First Man as a self-tamed man, assert themselves by virtue of the binding magic of their chief, Odin/Wotan; the latter, 'producer' gods, carry out the activities of First Man as 'self-domesticated' man. They owe and submit to the former, despite the power derived from their "wealth" (symbolized by Gullweig's gold).

This social-divine dichotomy derives from a particular perception of the world that can be found, notably, in the structure of Indo-European languages, with the clear separation between subject and object. 'Man-subject', who continues to exercise 'magic' over himself (self-control), now begins to exercise it over the other type: 'man-object'. The 'magic' of domestication is exercised on the man-object from the outside - and the canons are established by someone other than him. Freed by this "religious" bond from the need to tame man himself, he can now dedicate himself fully to "taming" nature, that is, to the production of goods.

The coexistence of these two social types in a harmonious society takes place by synecism — contractual agreement — after a "foundation war". The sovereign god among the Indo-Europeans is always at the same time a terrible god -who exercises a "magical" constriction- beneficent guarantor of 'contracts'. Since Indo-European origins there has always been a clear conception of this social contract, which found its maximum expression among the Romans.

The destruction of aesthetics

Multiculturalism also leads directly to the death of beauty in art. Different cultures have very different ideas of beauty. Michelangelo did not produce African masks. Chopin didn't rap or beat hollow logs. John William Waterhouse and Jackson Pollock inhabited very different inner worlds. In a multicultural society, patterns and traditions are abandoned. European standards are necessarily very "Eurocentric"; no group can impose its rules on another, or even maintain its own traditions for long. In painting, sculpture, architecture, music, literature and the decorative arts, there is no longer a "centre". The continuity of thousands of years is broken. There is chaos.

The real danger of art for egalitarians is that it offers ideals and models, and these ideals – in classical European art – are not egalitarian ideals, nor are the models politically correct. If you're trying to prepare students to be uprooted, cosmopolitan citizens of the New World Order, you certainly don't want them to come into contact with the anti-democratic spirit of Homer or Shakespeare.

From all this, an undefined artistic ethos, without offending anyone, doing as cheaply as possible, invades our lives from all sides, along with an avant-garde that delights in the equally empty perverse. Again, when we start living in a society of ugly people, everywhere we look, we see ugly paintings, ugly advertisements, ugly clothes, ugly deformities and body decorations, and ugly buildings. A people disconnected from their own traditions of beauty, a people awash with the bland and the ugly, mixed with the strange, the modern and the ugly, is sick and very debilitated.

Aesthetics and Eugenics

Em 1920, Knight Dunlap, presidente da American Psychological Association, publicou “Personal Beauty and Racial Improvement. “

Dunlap's thesis is that what is called personal beauty actually inspires emotional appreciation of the many qualities that make an individual a healthy, healthy parent to a healthy next generation of his or her race.

Beauty is a measure of racial fitness for the future. Men and women crave this in their partners, even if they don't understand the nature or meaning of that desire. The desire for a beautiful partner is a primordial and ineradicable impulse. It's an instinctual part of us. He guides us on our recently interrupted upward journey to greater intelligence, greater strength and power, and greater awareness and wisdom.

Dunlap asserts that the preservation of beauty is inseparable from the preservation of all civilized values ​​and progress. Losing one is losing the other. Furthermore, Dunlap warns that our civilization is promoting greater human ugliness and such a drastic decrease in human beauty that only a radical and vigorous change can be enough to reverse the process.

What is personal beauty? Dunlap says it clearly varies from breed to breed, "but the type that has the highest value tends to approximate the European type wherever the European type is known."

What is personal beauty for Europeans? There are a myriad of beauty markers that apply to both genders. In some cases, they are also marks of an "advanced" race, from the phylogenetic point of view: characteristics that mean the greatest possible difference from the most primitive forms.

Considering the profile of the face, the facial angle may be noted: the angle, relative to the horizon when a man stands normally, of a line drawn from the largest jaw to the most prominent part of the forehead. The average facial angle of the European race is the closest to the vertical of any human race. Non-human creatures have lower and lower facial angles as we move from more advanced to more primitive. Less advanced creatures (and races) with smaller brains have lower, more sloping foreheads (and therefore less capacity in the frontal regions of the brain). More primitive creatures and races also tend to have larger teeth and larger jaws that protrude forward, causing the facial angle to move closer and closer to horizontal.

A man or woman with a high or "noble" forehead looks better to us than one with a very sloping forehead. We instinctively see the latter as primitive and ugly, whether we use those words or not. The protruding jaw or underdeveloped chin and large nose give the human profile a convex snout-like appearance to European eyes. Therefore, they are barriers to beauty, as perceived by Europeans. We may not be aware of why, but our instincts tell us that the highly evolved is beautiful and the primitive is not.

The expression pattern of the human face may be the single most important factor in personal beauty. Even in classical sculpture, where the European ideal of beauty is literally carved from stone and the entire naked form is revealed, it is still the sublime and spiritual expression of the face that attracts our attention more than any other quality.

The face is the site of the most complex muscular structure anywhere on the body, with complex nervous structure to match, thus giving our faces an extremely wide and subtle range of expression. With so many muscles dependent on structure, health, and current state of nerves, it is not surprising that much can be learned about a man's or woman's temperament, state of health, and intelligence by studying his or her face. The face, and to a lesser extent other parts of the body, provide a constant and multifaceted reflection of the brain and inner nervous system.
Clearly, we find our instinctual ideals of beauty, not only expressed in our sexual selection, but also in our art, when uncorrupted and free, in these respects far exceed reality. Very few embody all these ideals anywhere near perfection. They are, however, our ideals, and to the extent that these ideals are promoted in our selection of who will be the mothers and fathers of generations to come, they will certainly offer a glimpse of generations to come: a glimpse of what it will be like to be; a glimpse of the future.

Aesthetics: European vs. abrahamic

Art is the celebration of life and the exploration of life in all its aspects. If life is unimportant, a mere minuscule prelude to the real life that begins with death, then art can only be of insignificant importance.

Greek humanism was supplanted by Christianity: by a religion that divided man against himself, teaching him to view his body with shame, his emotions with distrust, sensuality with fear, sexual love with feelings of guilt. This life, he taught, was a burden, this world a valley of tears, our endurance would be rewarded with death: the gateway to eternal happiness. This religion was inevitably anti-art and anti-life. Man's alienation from his own nature, especially from his emotional nature; the widespread hypocrisy this gave rise to throughout the Christian era; the devaluation of life and the world, and therefore, inevitably, its dazzle; the conception of man not as a god but as a worm as well as guilty: all this is profoundly at odds with the creative impulse and its theme.

The importance of the desert in biblical symbolism is clear: a desert that erases all representations and rejects them in the name of the invisible and the uniform. The believer in Yahweh must agree to turn the imagination into a desert, and this implies the prohibition of all representation.

Not only are representations of Yahweh prohibited, but so are images of all worldly things, starting, of course, with man, who was created in the "image" of God. It is not difficult to find a clear ugly bias in biblical iconoclasm.

Christian art began as a heresy. Transported to an art-loving people, Christianity became a more artistic religion than it would have been if it had remained in the hands of Judeo-Christians. However, that just came from a long, slow process. In the Christianity of the first centuries, iconoclasm was the rule: the prohibition of the mosaic on the representation of images was widely observed. The idea of ​​the great ugliness of Jesus was also widespread (eg Tertullian, Origen, Clement of Alexandria). Only when the Church, after the compromise of Constantine, became more pagan did the birth and development of a Christian iconography become evident. However, traces of iconoclasm can still be found in Byzantine ritual and Protestantism.

Iconoclasm is also present in Islam, where the rare Arab Muslim thinkers concerned with aesthetics tended to see art only in an abstract way.

The hollowing out of human representation goes hand in hand with the abandonment of human particularity and diversity, as these are images in themselves.

Contemporary extensions and points of comparison with the Mosaic prohibition of representation are often sought, for example, with regard to abstract art, whose birth and development coincide, metaphorically, with those of postmodernism and, experienced in concrete terms, with the ideal. the abolition of borders. A whole aspect of western modernity resonates with the old iconoclastic demand and, from here, thinkers of Jewish affiliation actively intervene at the tip of this modernity to point out where it is going, not really in opposition to it, but before it. ' (Jean-Joseph Goux, The Iconoclasts)

The contrast with the Indo-European world is striking. In the Bible, beauty is not necessarily good and ugly is not necessarily bad. It may even happen that good is beautiful precisely because of its ugliness, and likewise that evil is beautiful precisely because it is evil. Lucifer is an angel who shines with light. The Devil will adorn himself with all the paraphernalia of seduction, while the arms of Yahweh, says Isaiah (53,2), grow "like a root in dry land, without beauty or grace to attract our eyes". However, good cannot be separated from beauty; and this is normal, because good is in the form, in the consummate forms of worldly things. Consequently, art cannot be separated from religion. Art is sacred. Not only can the gods be represented, but art is the means of their representation; and in so far as men perpetually grant them representation, they have full status of existence. All European spirituality is based on representation as a mediation between the visible and the invisible. Beauty is the visible sign of good; ugliness is the visible sign not only of what is deformed or damaged, but of what is bad.

For the ancient Greeks, solemnity is inseparable from visual and tangible representation. It is in the fusion of the aesthetic and the sacred that the religious feeling reaches its apex.

the hereditary school

Lapouge: a pioneer of eugenics

Georges Vacher de Lapouge (1854-1936) was one of the first theorists of eugenics. Once the most obvious fallacies and exaggerations are eliminated, Lapouge's idea of ​​social selection remains interesting and valuable.

Extracted from 'Les Selections Sociales' (1889):

“Changes in the population are possible both through the direct influence of environmental agencies that can modify, step by step, the physical and mental traits of a population; or by selection, that is, by the progressive diminution of certain racial elements* (hereditary) and the progressive multiplication of other hereditary types in the population.

The first form does not directly lead to a hereditary type change, but it can lead to it over a long period of time. The other way can change the hereditary composition of the population very efficiently and in a relatively short period of time.

To show this, the author analyzes the main environmental agencies. It takes education and tries to show that its effectiveness in this regard is very limited. You cannot change the race and inherited traits of the population. You can't turn a naturally stupid man into a talented man; of a born idiot, a moderately intelligent man; or by mediocrity, a genius. The best education can do is raise the mental level of mediocrity a little. But even in this regard, its possibilities are limited. The importance of heredity is shown in the fact that education does not diminish the differences between individuals, but increases them. If mediocre talent gains something from education, hereditary talent gains even more, so that after education the difference between first and second increases, but does not decrease. Education, moreover, is incapable of changing people's temperament, character, and moral traits. Finally, education outcomes are not inherited; therefore, its fruits cannot be transmitted and fixed in posterity.

The most important, rapid, and efficient way to change the heritable composition of a population is not by direct influence of the environment, but by selection that will lead to the survival and multiplication of one hereditary type and the displacement of another type. . Through selection, the proportions of different social classes in a population can change widely and in relatively few generations.
If we imagine two different families, one producing four surviving children in each generation and the other only three descendants, then over the course of about three hundred years the total population will be 93% descendants of the first family and 7% of the first family. . second. This shows how quickly the selection factor works and how efficient it is in changing the genetic makeup of a population. The degeneration or improvement of society was due not so much to the direct influence of the environment as to the factor of selection.

This leads to Lapouge's selection analysis. He accepts Darwin's theory of natural selection and the evolution of organisms through the play of this factor, or through elimination of the unfit and survival of the fittest. Among humans, however, he believes that natural selection increasingly gives way to social selection, with the natural environment gradually being replaced by the social environment. Therefore, natural selection is transformed into social, that is, selection that is carried out under the influence of not so much the natural environment as the social one.

In the following parts of his book, Lapouge analyzes the main forms and effects of social selection in past societies and especially in present ones. Just as natural selection can be progressive and regressive, social selection can lead to a degeneration or improvement in the hereditary composition of the population. Its dominant effects, however, are negative in today's societies.

1. The first fundamental form of social selection is military or war-induced selection. Contrary to general opinion, Lapouge maintains that wars do not decrease, but increase with the progress of civilization. Man is more of a warrior than any animal, and contemporary man is more of a warrior than prehistoric man. With the exception of primitive times, war carries off the best racial elements of the population, the healthiest, strongest, bravest, and most daring dolichocephalans, in a far greater proportion than the inferior, brachycephalic population. In this military manner, the Aryans of ancient Greece and Rome, and the Norse nobility of Gaul and the Middle Ages, largely perished.
2. The second form of social selection is political, carried out under the influence of political factors and political struggles. Its results are also negative. Through revolution and civil conflict, this selection facilitates the extermination of the best part of the population between the aristocracy and the people. To this factor is largely due the extermination of the aristocracy in ancient Greece and Rome, in the French Revolution and in other similar cases. Furthermore, in the past, but more especially in the present, political conditions have facilitated the social promotion of null, subservient, conniving, political minds, while repressing, especially in democracies, the social promotion of independent, creative minds. Through the political struggle of the parties, these people's chances of survival and procreation are undermined. Machinists, demagogues, politicians, who are rarely the best and most creative men, benefit greatly from this form of selection, while the best people, keeping themselves out of politics, suffer from these conditions.
3. The third form of social selection is religions, which are due to religious conditions. Religion leads directly to selection through the institution of celibacy required by various religions; and indirectly, through various religious institutions. In many religions, priests and clergy must be celibate. This means that they cannot, legally at least, leave any posterity. As has been proven time and again, church officials recruited from various social strata are often physically, morally, and mentally superior to other people. The celibacy of this superior group prevents it from leaving a superior posterity. Thus, celibacy impoverishes the base of the superior racial elements of a population and facilitates its racial degeneration. Religion leads to the same dysgenic result through religious persecutions, wars and inquisitions; and for the prohibition of sexual freedom, favoring asceticism, its prohibition of marriages with people of different religion, etc.
4. The fourth form of social selection is moral, due to moral obligations and rules of conduct. It is closely related to religious selection. It manifests itself in phenomena such as the repression and punishment of sexual freedom, as a demand for modesty and as opposition to bodily nudity, which leads us to cover ourselves with unhygienic clothes that prevent free breathing, prevent the beneficial influence of the sun and freshness . air and facilitate tuberculosis and other diseases. Furthermore, through philanthropy and its propaganda, moral rules facilitate the survival of the weak and the procreation of the inferior. In this way, morality contributes greatly to negative social selection.
5. The next form of social selection is legal, being carried out by law and the machinery of law. It operates through criminal law and punishes offenders through execution, imprisonment, banishment, ostracism and torture. Many of these criminals are politicians and this particular form of selection often has negative effects as their victims often include people of superior character. Legal selection also operates through the civil law and its machinery, prohibiting consanguineous marriages between relatives and punishing bigamy and polygamy.
6. The sixth form of social selection is economic, due to the struggle for material needs. For the best racial elements its results are also disastrous, because superior people do not care much about making money and, as a result, successful moneymakers are rarely superior men. Enrichment is usually the result of luck, dishonesty, greed, or machinations and manipulations. In today's societies, the "machines" concentrate wealth. Through wealth, they rise to the top of the social pyramid and procreate, while mentally and morally superior individuals must limit their posterity according to their own conditions. Many of them do not marry. In this way these precious racial elements are lost and the racial base of a society is impoverished. Marriages dictated by economic reasons lead to the same result when a racially superior but poor individual takes a rich but racially inferior man or woman as a partner. In this and similar ways, the current "plutocratic" regime facilitates the procreation of inferiors and makes it difficult for superiors. A regime based on wealth is the worst enemy of racial progress.
7. The seventh form of social selection is occupational, caused by the occupational differentiation of the population. Its effects are again negative. Vital statistics show that more skilled occupational groups have lower fertility than semi-skilled and unskilled groups. As people engaged in skilled occupations are more dolichocephalic than people in unskilled occupations, this means that occupational selection facilitates brachycephalic procreation and harms dolichocephalic people. It leads to the same racial degeneration to which other forms of social selection lead.
8. The next form of social selection is done through urban and rural differentiation. The growth of cities and industrialization provoke a permanent migration of the population from the countryside to the cities. Rural migrants are predominantly more dolichocephalic than those who remain in the countryside. Migrants, as a rule, are more energetic, enterprising, talented and superior than those who remain in the country. The cities permanently drain the best elements of the country's population, and, having drawn them from the country, render them comparatively sterile, either by the vice and disease of the city, or by their own voluntary restriction of fertility for the sake of promotion. In this way, urban selection reduces the possibilities of procreation of a relatively superior and more dolichocephalic people.

Such are, according to Lapouge, the main forms of social selection and their factors. The result of all these selections is negative. They lead to the extermination of the best elements within present societies, followed by their racial degeneration and ultimate decay."

*For Lapouge, 'race' was synonymous with social class.

The suppression of the hereditary school

Vacher de Lapouge was the French founder of a school, anthroposociology, which wanted to apply the new Darwinian science of evolution to the study of politics. Before World War I, he had a following in Germany, Italy, Spain, Norway and the United States.

I don't think Lapouge was ever translated into English, although he had several American disciples (Madison Grant, Carlos Closson at the University of Chicago). I know that he also visited the United States twice (Second International Eugenics Congress in New York in 1921 and a Conference on Family Planning with Margaret Sanger).

Sorokin, professor of sociology at the University of Minnesota, wrote a paper entitled "Contemporary Sociological Theories" in 1928. It contains a chapter on the racial question. The chapter is memorable, because it marks the end of the period when both sides of the controversy (hereditary/environmentalists) were free to present their points of view, and the authors who wanted to give objective explanations of the evidence that appeared in each one of them. Household. Sorokin did not support either side, he only briefly and clearly expressed the views of both sides in the controversy. The book is worth reading today as a reminder of what was possible before 1933.

In France, the main opponent of anthroposociology was ?Emile Durkheim; in the United States, ?Franz Boas. From the early 1930s onwards, almost no one outside of Germany and its allies dared follow the hereditary school, so as not to appear as if they were condoning or supporting the Nazi cause. Anthropology became a strictly "cultural" discipline.

Eugenics: The Applied Science of Self-Directed Human Evolution

miUgenia, that is, applied science for the self-direction of human evolution, is today the object of Freudian and hypocritical repression.

While eugenic concerns can be said to be an implicit constant in most post-Neolithic cultures, the essential question of eugenics arises with the advent of the Darwinian revolution and Mendelian genetics, which has long been considered the same as eugenics. This arose in anticipation of a very real dysgenic risk in modern times that "traditional" selective factors would break down.

Galton, who coined the term, defined eugenics as "the study of all agencies under human control which can improve or impair the racial quality of future generations". The philanthropic motives that encouraged him to develop the new science are indisputable:Man is endowed with piety and other kind feelings; it also has the power to prevent many kinds of suffering. I believe it is within your reach to replace Natural Selection with other processes that are more merciful and no less effective.The path of hunger, death, stupidity, deceit, chance and mere survival - natural selection - is thus replaced by the path of life, will, aspiration and conquest - conscious evolution - not just on a temporary and local basis, as in ancient Sparta, but permanently and universally.

Reproduction itself can be considered a primitive aristocratic technique. However, it was impossible to return to earlier Western social forms based on a hereditary aristocracy that had achieved its position through the military conquests of its ancestors. Thus, in the early 20th century, a current of thought was directed towards developing a natural aristocracy based on intelligence, moral probity and meritocratic social mobility. This was the heyday of eugenics as a common belief system among European elites, both liberal and conservative.

Ultimately, the eugenics movement was destroyed; fell victim to the aftermath of World War II, although eugenics was not eliminated from polite society until the 1960s as a result of an energetic campaign by Holocaust-obsessed egalitarian intellectuals bent on striking a blow at their rivals (however, in Sweden , the eugenics program continued until 1975).

However, before being 'damned', eugenics had long been perceived - essentially until the 1930s - as a 'progressive' issue, as it was linked to concerns about the evolution of society in general (and correlated with this latter 'taking responsibility for oneself'), to the point that even Soviet intellectuals and scientists promoted its study.

In Germany, the politically leftist philosopher Peter Sloterdijk has recently argued that, given existing understanding in genetic science, the eugenic dream of "selection" is now within reach. Sloterdijk's use of the word "selection" has, of course, horrified his colleagues, for whom the word evokes the Auschwitz ramp. What most concerned critics, however, was Sloterdijk's argument that this ability should be exploited to create a new generation of human beings. After Sloterdijk's open letter in Die Zeit attacking Jürgen Habermas as a representative of an outdated humanism, it was suggested that he was 'flirting with fascism', revealing the uncertainty and fear still aroused by the theme of 'conscious evolution''. The controversy demonstrates the almost exclusively ideological nature of contemporary discussions of eugenics. This was accentuated by the increasing erosion, due to techno-scientific progress, of the subjective costs of eugenic practices. These costs have plummeted since newborn exposure, and strict parental or community control over mating has given way to chemical or surgical sterilization of individuals with severe mental retardation, as well as birth control. These were replaced by premarital anamnesis, replaced in turn by prenatal diagnosis and genetic screening. These, in turn, will be supplanted by IVF with selection of embryos and gametes; and, finally, by direct therapeutic manipulation of germlines. Indeed, with regard to contemporary and future procedures, the natural empathy for the subjects in question operates in a completely favorable direction, to the point of making the unconditional rejection of eugenics an increasingly shameful and unsustainable posture.

The key question regarding eugenics is which countries will develop it further. Francis Galton had already predicted in 1909 that "the nation which first submits to rational eugenic discipline shall inherit the earth".

postmodernismfrom right to left and vice versa.

I/ Classic liberalism(Enlightenment) seeks to establish aristocratic egalitarianism versus monarchical absolutism. Partial success in England and the United States, but disaster on the continent (French Revolution).

II/Nietzschemakes the first modern critique of the French Revolution (earlier Counter-Enlightenment authors were traditionalists using pre-modern language and advocating a return to the Church and the Throne).

Nietzsche was a brilliant philologist and a perceptive psychologist (rare in a German): aware of prejudices and cognitive antecedents, he clearly identifies the two souls struggling for dominance of the European soul: aristocratic Aryanism versus plebeian Abrahamism.

He was, however, a bad scientist (at times reason and science seem to be synonymous with Kantian rationalism in his writings; and he knows nothing of economics (markets and prosperity).

In short, he ignores the potential of the liberal revolution (science, law and markets) but has a deep insight into its inherent contradictions (an aristocratic republic where slavery is legal, like ancient Greece, proclaiming 'we hold these truths to be ours'). '). . '). -obviously, all men are created equal).

When he poetically outlines his own alternative to Abrahamism (Thus Spoke Zarathustra), he does not know how to escape Abrahamic language and rhetoric.

III/ Conservative Revolution:As Germany is humiliated, defeated and prostrate, a group of German thinkers, mostly inspired by Nietzsche, tries to advocate a modernist return to traditional feudal monarchy, while fighting Bolshevism in the East, liberalism in the West and subversion. but inheriting all of II's faults and adding his own prejudices and resentments:

1. Heidegger: German pilpul (“Germans are chosen”);
2. Spengler: The High Cultures follow an inexorable evolution and do not communicate (“Germany will be the new Rome, not England or the USA”. Once Germany loses the IWW, cultural relativism, the beginning of the 'Multikulti'; Carl Schmitt : Law is synonymous with Power ("German power is law");

1. Ernst Juenger: "Bolshevism can only be nationalist, not internationalist" (Der Arbeiter).

Defeat on the battlefields of the IIWW is proof, according to the III's own postulates, of Germany's error.

IV/Postmodernismrecycles II and III, adding French 'coup d'esprit' (witty nonsense) and cultural Marxism (slave revolt and inversion of values: the last will be first, the strong are weak, the ugly are beautiful, etc.).

V/ Alt-Rightalso starts in France at the same time as IV: Nouvelle Droite & Alain de Benoist. He tries to reinterpret II and III from the right rather than the left, but the historical context (May 68) is not the same as that of the Weimar Republic.

VI/ US Internet Alt-Rightcombine all previous mistakes and add your own; Furthermore, the work is rarely done from the original source, but through elaborations and re-elaborations of IV and V.

Note: Outliers like Dugin and Jorjani share the structure of I IV and V and add a healthy dose of the occult and sheer madness: telepathy, clairvoyance, telekinesis, UFOs, Atlantis, Rudolf Steiner, etc. ('Prometheus and Atlas').

THE SENSE OF HISTORY

— “You are caught in the current of ceaseless change. Your life is a wave in it. Every moment of your conscious life links the infinite past with the infinite future. Participate in both and you will not find the present empty.” — (Osvaldo Spengler)

What is it to be human? What is the purpose of human existence?

Within the limits of current knowledge, reality can be apprehended at four different levels: microphysical (elementary energy), macrophysical (matter), biological (organic systems) and human (self-reflective consciousness). These four aspects of reality interpenetrate; however, they are far from the same.

Man participates in all four levels: he lives, singularly, at their intersection. He is energy, matter and life, but he is also something else. This “other” gives man his specificity.

In the flux in which all things exist, the macrophysical universe, the cosmos, has no history. As we perceive and represent it to ourselves, the universe only changes its configuration over time. As for the elementary microphysical level of reality, it can only be said that it has its own structure, which is discontinuous. Not even life has a history: it just evolves. History is the particular way in which man – and only man – becomes. Only man becomes historically. Therefore, the question of whether history has an end implies knowing whether man, who is in history and makes history, also has an end.

Today, history, and therefore human specificity, is under fire. It is, as we shall see, an ancient phenomenon; but today the accusation is more vehement, more explicit than ever. There is full conviction without appeal. It is said that history is the consequence of the alienation of humanity. The end of history is evoked, proposed, projected — with the preaching of a return to nature; defense of degrowth (décroissance); dreaming of the end of all tensions and conflicts, of a serene and peaceful balance, of a modest but sure happiness: the happiness of other animals. Universal peace, pacifism, prehistoric matriarchy, primitive communism, Edenic paradise: these are other avatars of the same vision.

The idea of ​​an end of history may seem more modern. In fact, it's not like that. Examining things more closely is to realize that such an idea is nothing more than the logical outcome of a school of thought that is at least two thousand years old, a trend that during that time dominated and shaped what we have come to call 'Western Civilization'. ." That current of thought is egalitarianism.

you

Whatever forms it has taken, the egalitarian worldview has always been eschatological. He assigns a negative value to history and discerns meaning in historical movement only in so far as it tends towards its own negation and ultimate goal.

According to this view, history has a beginning and must also have an end. It is but an episode, an incident with regard to what constitutes the essence of humanity. The true nature of man would be external to history. And the end of the story would restore, sublimating it, what existed at the beginning. Human eternity would not be based on becoming, but on being.

This episode that is history is perceived in the Christian perspective as condemnation. The story stems from God's condemnation of man—for original sin—to unhappiness, toil, sweat and blood. Humanity lived in happy innocence in the Garden of Eden and was condemned to history because its ancestor, Adam, transgressed the divine commandment, wanting to taste the fruit of the tree of knowledge: to become like God. Adam's guilt weighs, like original sin, on every individual who comes into the world. It is, by definition, inexpiable, since God himself was offended.

However, God, in his infinite goodness, takes care of the atonement. He becomes man, incarnated in the person of Jesus. The sacrifice of the Son of God introduces the essential event of Redemption into historical development. Undoubtedly, this concerns only individuals touched by Grace, but it makes possible the slow march towards the end of history, for which henceforth the "communion of saints" must prepare humanity. Finally, the day will come when the forces of Good and Evil will face each other in a battle that will lead to the Last Judgment and, therefore, to the establishment of the Kingdom of Heaven, which has its dialectical counterpart in the abyss. from hell.

Eden before the beginning of the story; original sin; expulsion from the Garden of Eden; crossing the valley of tears that is the world, the place of historical development; Redemption; communion of saints; apocalyptic battle and doomsday; end of history and establishment of a Kingdom of Heaven: these are the mythemes that structure the mythical view of history proposed by Christianity. In this view, the historical development of man has a purely negative value and the sense of atonement.

The same mythemes can be found, now in a secularized and supposedly scientific way, in the Marxist view of history. There, history is presented as the result of class struggle: a struggle between groups defined according to their respective economic conditions. The prehistoric Garden of Eden was transformed into a primitive communism practiced by a humanity still immersed in the state of nature and purely predatory nature. Whereas man in Eden was limited by God's commandments, man in primitive communism lives under the pressure of misery. Such pressure led to the invention of the means of agricultural production, but this invention also proved to be a curse. It implied, in effect, not only the exploitation of nature by man, but also the division of labor, the exploitation of man by man and, consequently, human alienation. Class struggle is the implicit consequence of this exploitation of man by man. Its result is history.

As we can see, for Marxists it is economic conditions that determine human behavior. By logical concatenation, the latter leads to the creation of ever new production systems which, in turn, cause new economic conditions and, above all, ever-increasing misery for the exploited. However, there comes a moment of redemption. With the advent of capitalism, misery reaches its peak, it becomes unbearable. Proletarians become aware of their condition, and this redemptive realization gives rise to the organization of Communist parties, just as Christ's redemption had caused the founding of a communion of saints. The Judeo-Christian notion of 'Grace' finds its equivalent, especially in relation to the Sermon on the Mount.

Communist parties are waging an apocalyptic struggle against exploiters. This can be long and difficult, but in the end and necessarily succeed: it is "the meaning of the story." This will bring about the abolition of social classes, end man's alienation, and allow for the establishment of a communist society. — immutable and classless. Furthermore, since history is the result of class struggle, there will obviously be no more history. Prehistoric communism will be restored, like the Garden of Eden in the Kingdom of Heaven, but in a sublimated form. Whereas primitive communist society was afflicted with material misery, posthistoric communist society will enjoy a perfectly balanced satisfaction of its needs.

Therefore, in the Marxist view, history also takes on a negative value. Originally born of human alienation, it only makes sense to the extent that it incessantly increases the misery of the exploited, finally helping to create the conditions for misery to disappear and, so to speak, 'march' towards its own end, its self-determination. abolition .

Both egalitarian views, the religious Christian and the secular Marxist, logically imply that history is determined not by man's action, but by something that transcends him. It is true that Christianity attributes free will to man and thus affirms that it was Adam, having freely “chosen” sin, who was responsible for his fault, for his imperfection. However, it was God who made and willed Adam to be imperfect.

Marxists, on the other hand, used to say that history was made by man, or rather by men, as members of a social class. However, it is true that social classes are determined and defined by economic conditions, and that it was original misery that forced men to enter into that bloody concatenation that is the class struggle. Man is then driven to act only as a result of his economic condition. It is a mere attraction in a game played in nature by material forces.

Within the egalitarian view of history, man plays a dramatic role — in a tragic, shameful, painful farce — that he never wrote and never will. Dignity, as an authentic human truth, is outside of history, before and after it.

Everything contains within itself its own relative antithesis. The eschatological view of history also has its own relative egalitarian antithesis: the theory of infinite progress. According to this, historical movement is represented as a constant tendency towards a “zero” that is never reached. This “progress” can mean “always better”, excluding, however, the idea of ​​a perfect and absolute good. It then becomes the liberal ideology of the Belle Époque, the vision of a certain recycled Marxism, or that of the naive American way of life.

Change can also proceed as "worse and worse" without ever reaching its nadir, depending on the criteria used. This is exemplified in the pessimistic view of Freud, Marcuse and other Freudian-Marxist thinkers who did not see how the reproduction of unhappiness that civilization represents could be stopped. In such conditions, the only possibility that man has of not adding bad to bad is to maintain the reference to the notion of the end of history, even knowing that this will never happen, or precisely because of this. This messianic expectation is considered operative and fruitful. The same conception can be observed in Bernard-Henri Lévy. The attitude that logically derives from such a view of things is hypercritical as a principle: opposing a perpetual "no" to the dangers that lurk behind every "yes." , the neo-Marxist or Freudian-Marxist theory reproduces more faithfully the theory of classical Judaism.

The notion of “infinite progress” – which once played the instrumental role that every relative antithesis has played since the invention of the Devil – today tends to be reabsorbed into its eschatological thesis. The most recent example is Francis Fukuyama: 'What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the end of a certain period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the point end of humanity's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the ultimate form of human government." Fukuyama himself identifies to some extent with Marx, but more strongly with the German philosopher Hegel, through Alexandre Kojève. Kojève argued that the progress of history should lead to the establishment of a "universal and homogeneous" state, likely incorporating elements of liberal or social democracy.

third

It is well established that Nietzsche was the first to reduce Christianity, democratic ideology and communism to their common denominator: egalitarianism. As representatives of these schools of thought generally call themselves "humanists", Nietzschean philosophy, in contrast to egalitarianism, can be labeled "suprahumanist". sometimes in hiding, but with increasing tenacity: the eschatological/egalitarian vision.

Nietzsche wanted not only to analyze but also to fight egalitarianism. He wanted to inspire and dynamize a project contrary to egalitarianism: to animate another will, to give strength to a diametrically opposed value judgment.

Thus, his work presents two complementary aspects. The first is properly critical, perhaps scientific. Its objective is to underline the relativity of all value judgments, of all morals and of all truths that are intended to be absolute. In this way, he exposes the relativity of the "absolute principles" proclaimed by egalitarianism.

Along with criticism, there is also an aspect that could be defined as poetic, in a sense derived from the Greek poiein ('to make, to create'). In his poetic work, Nietzsche wants to give life to a new type of man, who will be linked to new values ​​and will derive principles of action from an ethics different from that of Good and Evil.

To give an image of a society based on the values ​​he proposed, Nietzsche uses the examples of ancient Greece and Rome, or the aristocratic and conquering societies of Indo-European antiquity. This is well known. However, not enough attention has been paid to Nietzsche's simultaneous warning against the illusion that it is possible to "bring back the Greeks", that is, to resurrect the pre-Christian world. This detail is extremely important because it offers the necessary key to better understand Nietzsche's view of history.

The concept of time in history may seem murky at first glance; however, it is a notion that we all have, perhaps unconsciously.

The ancient world held a cyclical view of history, believing that every moment of history was destined to repeat itself. Historical time was represented by a circle: it was linear in nature. With Christianity, a new feeling about the world, man and history is born. The new time of history will remain linear; however, it is no longer circular, but segmental, more precisely, parabolic. As described above, for Christianity history has a beginning, a climax and an end. And it doesn't repeat. The story also has a negative value: caused by original sin, the story goes through a valley of tears.

The suprahumanist conception of history is no longer linear, but three-dimensional: inextricably linked to that one-dimensional space that is the consciousness of every human being. Every human consciousness is the room that a present occupies. This present is three-dimensional, and the three dimensions, given at the same time as the three dimensions of physical space, are reality, past and future.

What, then, is human consciousness like this space of time given to each of us? It is, in the dimension of becoming, memory, presence of the past; in the current dimension, presence of mind ready for action; in the dimension of becoming, presence of the project and the pursued goal, a project that, memorized and presented to the spirit, determines the ongoing action.

The historical development of man can then be conceived as a collection of moments, each of which composes a sphere within a four-dimensional "supersphere", whose center can be occupied by any moment relative to any other. According to this perspective, the actuality of each moment is no longer called the “present”. On the contrary, "present, past and future" coexist: they are the three dimensions of each historical moment.

If the sphere of historical becoming is viewed in one-dimensional terms, history can be imagined as appearing as a straight line to the egalitarian mindset. For the suprahumanist, this line is only that of biological evolution, above which history manifests itself. Since the sphere of historical becoming is experienced differently, as a "gift" to each conscious mind, representations of history are equally different.

This clash between the one-dimensionality of our biological sensitivity and the three-dimensionality of our historicity – the fact that man is not just life, but something else – was somehow intuited in the past. Man has always felt something different from 'nature', he saw himself as different from the animal, asserting his own 'consciousness' - sometimes attributing it to an absolute devoid of all materiality - against the 'unconsciousness' of things and animals. He always felt that he lived, tragically, in two space-times, and he tried to represent this duality through the opposition between body and soul, temporality and eternity, matter and spirit, this world and the kingdom of heaven, human and divine, in each of the which the first member of the couple typically had a negative connotation in relation to the second. This kind of intuition may have been justified in its own time. In ours, it is an error. Nietzsche's assertion that "God is dead" means that we must bring soul, eternity, spirit, heaven, and the divine back to their "place of origin": that is, to a human consciousness that, in doing so, it, it becomes self-sufficient. conscious. to be.

Concepts such as 'regression', 'conservation' and 'progress' lose their meaning in suprahumanist discourse and are sometimes confused with each other. In the unidimensionality in which we project the historical sphere, it forms a circle —an eternal return— where every 'progress' is also a 'regression'. This is the enigma proposed by Nietzsche with the mythemes of the Eternal Return and the Noon. The identical that returns is of a biological order, and the same only from a material, not a historical, point of view; what is historical is, on the contrary, diversity —the appearance of new forms that can bring about the disruption of time (Zeitumbruch)— and regenerate history.

The past does not correspond to what it was, "once and for all", a frozen element that the present would definitely leave behind. Likewise, the future is no longer the obligatory effect of all the causes that preceded it in time and determined it, as in the egalitarian linear view of history. In each moment of history, in each present, the past and the future are, so to speak, questioned, reconfigured according to a new perspective: they configure another truth. It could be said, using another image, that the past is nothing more than the project that man uses to shape his historical action, a project that he tries to carry out according to the image he has of himself and that he tries to embody. . The past then seems to be a prefiguration of the future. In its own sense, it is the imagination of the future.

The Renaissance of the 14th and 15th centuries was just that: a renaissance. This rebirth was not a journey into the past, nor a simple reliving of the past: it was, on the contrary, the starting point of a new spiritual adventure, an adventure of a European soul now triumphant, awakened to itself: the deliberate choice of a future more authentic, harmonious and powerful.

This three-dimensional conception of time is the only one that can logically affirm man's historical freedom. In the view proposed by Nietzsche, man bears all responsibility for historical development. The story is his work. It is equivalent to saying that he carries with him all responsibility, which is truly and fully free: faber suae fortunae. This freedom is an authentic freedom, not conditioned by the grace of God or the limits of an economic, material situation.

It is also true freedom, which consists in the possibility of choosing between opposing options: options that exist at all times in history, and that always question the totality of Being and the future of man. If these options were not achievable, the choice would be false, man's false freedom and autonomy mere appearance.

As man is not only a historical animal, but also a social one, this choice is presented in the form of epochal alternatives: the decisions taken by the groups of men involved will have a political effect on the history of the world.

What, then, is the alternative offered to the men of our time? Nietzsche said that the choice was between the last man —the man at the end of history— and the leap to the superman: the regeneration of history. Ultimately, the outcome will depend on us, European men and women, on the choice we make between these options. For us, the historical decision is always and at the same time a call to attention directed to the past, to a forgotten or lost origin; a decision to rise above a decaying present; and the realization of a future project that until now has never materialized, because it is supra-humanist.

Fire of Prometheus: Aryans, Semites and Science

Today's world is dominated by technology like never before. It's impossible to travel anywhere without seeing some manifestations of the technological wizardry that shaped life on the planet today, most notably the innovations developed at the time of the Industrial Revolution.

A crucial, and often overlooked, feature of this incredible technological revolution is that the great technological innovations that have set the pace around the world are exclusively the product of a small minority of Europeans.

One of the peculiarities of Indo-European languages, already noted in the 19th century by philologists such as Wilhelm von Humboldt and Ernest Renan, was the implicit capacity for abstract thinking, a prerequisite for any type of scientific theory and practice.

Renan was also the first to establish a link between religion and ethnogeographical origin. He compared a “desert psyche” found among Semites “is the desert monotheistic? with a "forest psyche" characteristic of Indo-Europeans, whose polytheism seems to be shaped by a changing nature and a diversity of seasons. He noted that the intolerance of Semites is an inevitable consequence of their monotheism. The Indo-European peoples, before their conversion to Semitic ideas, never considered their religion an absolute truth. That is why one finds among these peoples a freedom of thought, a spirit of critical inquiry and individual investigation.

Techne (technological development) "the appropriation and control of a surrounding environment through technology" can be considered a defining characteristic of what is specifically human. It is an inescapable companion of the progress of human knowledge; however, it also describes something that was uniquely conceived and developed only in the Indo-European context: from the war chariot of the Battle-Ax culture to the lasers and moon rockets designed by Wernher von Braun.

In particular, modern technology is closely linked to the West, to a culture sustained by "compromise". between Europe and Judeo-Christianity. After the Christianization of Europe, Paganism survived underground in various forms. It has survived in popular beliefs and traditions; in â??hereticalâ?? trends within or outside the official religion that extend into the present; and in a collective unconscious that finds liberation mainly in music, science and technology.

In this sense, science and technology can be interpreted as resulting from the impact of the prolonged monotheistic repression of the European collective subconscious and the contradictory process of secularization and emancipation that gave rise to this repression and which began with the Renaissance. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger... Let's recall the names of American rockets and space programs from the time of von Braun: Thor, Atlas, Titan, Jupiter, Delta, Mercury, Apollo. None were called "Jesus", "Forgiveness and Love" or "Holy Bible".

In Man and Technics, Spengler wrote: "Build yourself a world, be yourself a God", that is the dream of the Faustian inventor, and from it sprang all our design and redesign of machines.

The Judeo-Christian tradition and the “great stories” produced are explicit in rejecting the Faustian temptation. Nietzsche points out in The Antichrist that "a religion like Christianity, which does not touch reality at a single point and which collapses the moment reality asserts its rights at any point, must inevitably be the mortal enemy of the wisdom of this world. , that is, , of science.â??

Man must repress his "pride": he cannot eat the fruits of the Tree of Knowledge, lest he create instruments that compete with the perennial nature created by God. It is sacrilegious behavior, as the Golem myths and the story of Frankenstein remind us. As in the past, in opposing dissection, the Church now condemns contraception, genetic engineering, and biotechnology research in general.

It is not hard to see why egalitarianism is anti-Promethean. Every new advance in technology is an advance in the ability of some to control others. If we consider, as in the Bible, Rousseau or Marx, that it is an ethical duty to condemn the exercise of control or power -the domination of man by man- then it is easy to see that a mutation of the epoch such as ours that societies are experiencing will produce a new vertical division between man and man, and between society and society, just as the Neolithic Revolution caused it: namely, (1) differentiation between the body of members and the aristocracies that began to exercise political power, creating forms and directions of community life; and (2) the fact that certain societies come to dominate others.

Any dream of independence and self-determination -individual or collective- of any kind of political, economic or cultural sovereignty- can only be realized through the technical means necessary for such an ambition.

Science is a domain that the European mind has monopolized, and technology a tool that can turn man into a god. These must be especially valued by Europeans if they are to mount a primal Faustian response to life that can recover and transcend the Indo-European perspective of post-Neolithic man.

Fire Prometheus (ii): Environmental Issues

Our zeitgeist is affected by a primitivist attitude: by a generalized and apocalyptic denunciation of the Faustian spirit of European man.

Specifically, environmental transformation is universally terrifying: issues related to ecology or natural resources now arouse atavistic fears. Perhaps the desire for knowledge and conquest is the original sin that will lead humanity to its self-destruction.

The optimism that characterized liberal technocracy and Messianic Marxism has disappeared. The evolution of the means of production and industrial society — a dialectical assumption for overcoming capitalism — entered a crisis. Western liberals (called "progressives" in continental Europe) rediscover Rousseau, the "state of nature" from which man should never have emerged, the ideals of a bucolic-Arcadian life and the biblical curses against science, urban life and the work

Apocalyptic science fiction and futurology, from “global warming” to “catastrophe convergence” to “peak oil”, become successful genres. The idea of ​​progress becomes its opposite: optimism at all costs in millenarianism.

The study of the environment — or rather, environments — in relation to the forms of life it contains and the transformations that occur in it, began at the end of the 19th century. Ernst Haeckel introduced the term "ecology" in 1868.

Ecology, like any other science, establishes its own technique, allowing and creating a situation of man's appropriation and dominion over the object of study, in this case the environment, the ecosystem: nature. By semantic slippage, the term ecology today refers to an ideology: environmentalism, whose defenders are happy to call it “ecologist”. The central principle of this ideology, which is a transposition of Marx's predictions from the economic to the "naturalistic". dominance – could be summarized as follows: industrial society produces a set of ecological contradictions that will necessarily lead to its own downfall in the near future.

Environmentalism makes an old mistake. It is an error based on the false, abstract, and universalistic idea of ​​nature as (1) static, immovable, and forever given; and (2) distinct from – as opposed to – man and culture. Environmentalists tend to ignore man, as a living being, constituting part of nature. The ecological vision leads, necessarily, to a paradisiacal vision of nature: purely intellectualist, typical of those who live in a hyperprotected environment. Furthermore, it tends to deny the dynamic reality of the universe.

The discipline of ecology itself rejects this view and shows how ecosystems evolve and decay: how ecological balance is actually the result of different dynamics that can and often do vary without human intervention. Equilibrium results from the interplay between (1) the struggle of all living species to survive and increase their numbers and (2) the characteristics of a given biotope at a given time. Indeed, there is no pre-established and indefinitely self-sufficient natural balance in danger of being 'disturbed'.

The environmentalist idea of ​​nature stems from the experiences of a world that, millennia ago, experienced the formative intervention of man. In itself, nature is not pure, nor benign, nor suitable for human life, only 'adaptable'. Anyone who imagines nature as a cross between an orchard, a zoo, a garden and a golf course does not realize how conditioned it is by an environment that is already a product of human activity.

Finally, man is an animal species like any other, with the same “right” to participate in the ecosystem as a seal or a penguin. This 'right' to participate according to its own 'nature', that is, its culture, shapes itself and its world, according to a certain worldview, a certain technique: the appropriation and mastery of what the fence. to him.

Such philosophical considerations, however, should not —and cannot— hide the very serious environmental problems that contemporary society faces. The challenge, however, is not to achieve man's dominion over nature, but to bear in mind that every domination must have a condition, which is protection. Being 'at the top' brings with it the responsibility of those below. Any freedom, when offering the possibility of choice, involves a risk. Any domain must carry the corresponding responsibility. Man has at his disposal a hitherto unknown power over the environment. It may also involve an unpredictable measure of destruction.

It should be evident that man needs to preserve the capital that his own environment represents to him – together with the related natural resources – and avoid wasting it within a generation for immediate consumption. Contemporary society is oriented in precisely the opposite direction. The system is constitutionally incapable of realizing value unless it translates immediately in the short term into increased purchasing power. This handicap prevents Western civilization from predicting not only the costs that the "standard of living" may exact in terms of mental health or environmental degradation, but also the same economic costs generated by the lack of an organic environmental policy.

It will not be possible to put an end to this situation and carry out a consciously organic and effective intervention through an (unlikely) social pedagogy program. Only when European society is able to express a political will and once again become the subject —instead of the object— of history; only when political dominance is restored to its rightful place above the current economic and financial dictatorship; Only when these conditions are met will it be possible to draw up adequate policies in terms of the environment, natural resources and energy self-sufficiency.

In fact, the entire cultural milieu shows signs of a profound inadequacy to face the current challenge. The hegemony of determinist ideologies —however optimistic or pessimistic they may be— and the corresponding erosion of the sense of responsibility produced; and the mediocre hedonism that characterizes our societies, represent so many obstacles to adopting a different attitude. The current paradigm tends to environmentally destroy both the past (roots) and the future of the community (territory, capital and ethnic resources).

Scientific progress in the environmental field gives us the opportunity to intervene: not only to protect the ecosystem, but to transform it, according to our intentions, on a hitherto unimaginable scale. Our rejection of both primitivist environmentalism and blind greed and corporate plunder is based on the notion that environmental protection and technological development and expansion are not mutually contradictory, but are mutual preconditions.

Contamination began when man made fire for the first time: when technology allowed the exploitation of energy sources. Since then, technological progress and energy consumption have not stopped accelerating. Until very recently, health conditions and quality of life improved in proportion to the level of energy consumption and technological development. Now, however, a new increase in energy consumption could reverse the process, due to the high levels of pollution and environmental degradation that reduce the well-being of individuals and nations.

Perhaps another hypothesis can be formulated: technological progress and energy production, accelerated and directed by the correct political will, can erase the very disorders and degradations that they cause today and threaten to cause in the near future. With an adequate organic environmental policy and a precise and determined will, it is possible to go much further along the right path.

The first man was immersed in his natural environment; the Second Man (the product of the Neolithic Indo-European revolution) had to consider the consequences of his own presence in that environment; the Third Man lives in an entirely cultural environment: he is fully responsible for his balance, appearance and compatibility with human life; it all depends on him and his choices. Once the 'natural' environment is gone for good - and this is so at least on our planet - a park or a garden becomes as 'artificial' as a factory or a temple, and these can come into being - or be sustained - only on condition that there is political will and technical capacity to implement it effectively.

Environmental degradation and ecological catastrophe are not a consequence of technology development, nor will they be prevented by limiting its use. They are by-products of the transition to the Third Man and the persistent illusion that decisions on such matters can be entrusted to impersonal and "rational" mechanisms of a legal or economic nature.

One can imagine an environmental policy with more ambitious objectives than the mere guarantee of basic conditions for the survival of the human species. For example: the maintenance of biodiversity, or the creation of rich and differentiated ecosystems, for symbolic, affective and/or aesthetic reasons. The extreme limit of such discourse would be terraforming: ancient projects aimed at transforming environmental conditions and creating new ecologies.

We must not forget that our situation as a species in the universe is more precarious than we commonly accept. It is up to us to evolve in knowledge and power, and to ensure dominance of possible environments as quickly as possible. This could involve "genetic engineering" or it could be a by-product of solar system colonization and terraforming.

Environmental problems are real. The question is not who is for or against pollution, environmental degradation or global warming. Nobody is into these things. We need to know whether solutions to the problems caused by the transformation of the environment can be found by moving forward and 'overcoming', or by moving backwards 'backwards'. The 'naturalistic' illusion holds that man must stop transforming the world. The supra-humanist position advocates that man transforms himself in order to take back possession of the world he has transformed.

Nature as an abstract entity has no existence independent of its manifestations: ourselves. Nature is us. Life is an aristocratic pyramid structure. We cannot survive without land, water, air... At the same time, every community, every organization needs leadership. Man as a species is the highest organic form on Earth. Who should rule the Earth if not him? We cannot recognize a superior agency; we have full responsibility for this planet. Environmental problems will not be solved by letting things take their “natural course”, or by trying to return to a utopian “state of nature”.

All questions related to the knowledge and direct manipulation of the landscape of Planet Earth, the living species that inhabit it and, in particular, man himself, can only be effectively faced by a capacity for political projection that involves a greater than a lesser degree of technology and man's control over man and his environment.

The Discontents of Western Civilization

'Roman' Christianity, born with the Constantinian arrangement, was from the outset an attempt to establish, within the 'ancient' world transformed by Roma in orbis politica, a compromise between the Indo-European Weltanschauung and the Jewish religion, adapted to the culture imperial .roman. civilization by the supposed efforts of Jesus. The one god became, through dogmatic "mystery", "one god in three persons". The ancient trinity that the Vedic Indians called the Trimurti was integrated and, broadly speaking, these 'personas' took on the three roles of Indo-European. society, now in an inverted, spiritualized way. As creator and sovereign, Yahweh, however, continues to reject the twofold aspect of reality: evil is Satan's exclusive domain. The new name 'Deus Pater', 'eternal and divine father', revered by the Indo-Europeans, replaces the old name given by the Bible. Yahweh is the father of only his 'second person': a son sent to Earth to play a role opposite to that of a 'founding hero', a son who decides to depart from this world the better to show the way to the world beyond, and who , if he gives Caesar what is Caesar's, he does so only because to him what is Caesar's is worthless. Finally, he is a son whose function is not to 'make war', but to preach a zealous peace that will only benefit 'men of good will', the adversaries of this world, for whom the only food of eternity is reserved. : grace administered by the third 'person', the Holy Spirit.

Man, as a creature —and as a created being— is the servant of the servants of God: "excrement" (stercus, as Augustine of Hippo said). But, at the same time, he is also the brother of the incarnate son of Yahweh, which 'almost' makes him a son of God — as long as he knows how to love and deserve, which depends on the grace that the Creator administers according to unfathomable criteria. The day will come when humanity will be divided definitively and eternally between the saints and the damned. There is a biblical Valhalla: Heavenly Heaven, but now it's reserved for anti-heroes. The others belong to Hell.

This compromise has shaped the history of what is called 'Western civilization' for centuries. For centuries, according to the deepest affinities, 'pagan' and 'Levantine' man could see —in the “one and triune” god— their respective divinity. This explains the numerous confusions that have always characterized historic Christianity. The coexistence of two antagonistic spiritualities, often in conflict, even in the hearts of the same individuals, ends up crystallizing in a veritable neurosis of the European mentality.

Today we can safely say that the Constantinian “arrangement” did not foresee anything, and that the day the motto “In hoc signo vinces” was proclaimed had disastrous consequences for the Greco-Roman and Celto-Germanic world. Until recently, the Church of Rome in particular, and the Christian churches in general, remained, as organized secular powers, wedded to the appearances of the old compromise. However, in more recent times they have begun to recognize the true essence of Christianity. Thus, Yahweh, finally taking off the mask of the luminous and heavenly God-Pater, was rediscovered and proclaimed anew. In 1938, Pope Pius XI declared: “Through Christ and in Christ we are the spiritual descendants of Abraham. Spiritually, we [i.e. Christians] are all Semites."

However, long before the churches reached that point, 'profane' (demystified and secularized) Christianity, that is, egalitarianism in all its forms, found its way into accord with biblical truth. This was marked by the rejection of the story; the proclaimed desire to “leave history” to return to “nature”; the tendency to reabsorb human specificity in the 'physical-chemical'; all deterministic materialisms; Marcuse's condemnation of art on the grounds that integrating man into society would betray "truth"; finally, the egalitarian ideology that wants to reduce humanity to the model of the antihero: the chosen one, hostile to any specific civilization in which it wants to see nothing but unhappiness, misery, exploitation (Marx), repression (Freud), or contamination . All this invariably restored – it still continues to restore today, at that very moment when a new technological revolution invites us to overcome old 'ways' – that immovable, 'eternal' (if ever there was) Jewish vision: an unequivocal 'No' ' to any present pregnant with the future.

Saying yes to history —always becoming, always rethinking new fundamentals— implies assuming new forms and contents. Saying 'yes' is creation, a work of art. The 'no' only exists by denying any value to such work. The Indo-European cosmogonic myth assures us that saying “Yes” is always possible. In a different world, arising from the ruins of the old, the mission of the 'civilizing heroes' is eternal and serenely assumes the splendid and tragic destiny of those who create, give birth to and accept, as a condition of any historical adventure, of any life, the idea of its own end.

Can our people survive while adapting to Christianity?

Is it possible to accommodate Christianity once the veil of ignorance has been torn apart? Is it possible to teach the five basic principles that constitute "ideal group strategy", discard the rest of the nonsense and still call it Christianity? Theoretically yes; in practice, it's as easy as reinserting a champagne cork into the bottle.

Nowhere are the effects caused by the pursuit of the principles of Judeo-Christian egalitarianism more existentially dramatic, as they threaten the very survival of the communities involved, than in the demographic suicide now committed by the West. The West faces massive immigration from the Third World and high fertility rates combined with substitutable white birth rates. As Lothrop Stoddard feared, a rising tide of color is flooding the west; and it is the fault of the Third World that the main cause of mass immigration to the western lands. The comparison with Japan draws attention, as this country in the Far East experiences the same economic conditions as Europe or the United States, but manages to remarkably control migratory flows.

Christianity is a derivative, a heresy, of Judaism, but it teaches Europe precisely the opposite lesson when it comes to ethnocentrism. In Christianity, European peoples cannot, as a people, have a relationship with God: that is only for the Jewish people. Europeans can have a relationship with God only as individuals. Judaism is a religion to survive in a multicultural society. It is a religion to govern the behavior of a Jewish minority in the presence of a non-Jewish majority. Christianity, on the other hand, is a religion to govern the behavior of Christians in a homogeneous Christian society. In a multicultural society, he becomes suicidal.

The original meaning of the Latin word religio, from religare, to bind quickly, was never used until the time of Constantine to describe "superstitio nova ac malefica". represented by Christianity and has nothing to do with the metaphysical or fideistic concepts introduced by monotheism. It is simply what unites members of a political and ethnocultural community. As such, religion has two aspects: the myth, the representation we choose to have of our own past and, more generally, of the universe, in relation to the future, the destiny we want to create; and the rite, the evocation and celebration of our being together with the intention of provoking a general mobilization of the spirits.

Historical consciousness is also part of human agency. It's time to choose!

The third version of man
(Nietzsche em Anglo Scientific Language)

– “My humanity is a constant overcoming of myself.” – Friedrich Nietzsche

the third version
Nietzsche's message was one of evolutionary change, of man's progress toward full consciousness. He taught that the whole value and meaning of a man's life lies in his participation in this progress, in his contribution to it.

Man must not simply be himself and conform to his own "nature". He must still try to give himself a "supernature", to acquire a superhumanity: that superhumanity that the vocation of Judeo-Christian monotheism is to prevent him from acquiring.

The idea of ​​reaching a higher consciousness is to rise to superman. It is also the idea of ​​being self-determined: self-ordained to take full control of the world and oneself and give them a new meaning, a new destiny. The discipline of philosophical anthropology coined the term Third Man to designate this concept.

[CD: The Aristocracy: A Search for Agency: Transcendence. Leaving the animal man behind. However, this is the feminine and Abrahamic strategy: "Don't leave us behind, we will drag you down."]

First version
Seen in this way, the First Man would be identified with the evolutionary process that leads to the development of the characteristics that distinguish hominids from other primates: hominization. Its appearance would coincide with the invention of language, the development of hunter-gatherer bands and the use of magical shamanism, allowing it to mimic evolutionary strategies at work in the surrounding environment, thus compensating for instinctual deficiencies. due to its ethological plasticity.

second version
Several hundred thousand years later, some time after the last ice age, what can be described as the Second Man would emerge for the first time. He is the inventor of the Neolithic Revolution, agriculture and, consequently, sedentary lifestyles and the first human population explosion; the founder of cities and urban life, politics, religion, the division of labor and the development of the so-called "phyric technology" ​​(which implies energy production technologies based on combustion: wood, coal, oil, etc. ) . It is the world of the Hochkulturen Spenglerians - 'High Cultures' or civilizations.

Depending on how the Second Man reacted to the challenges of the time, one can distinguish between:

1. Societies that rejected or ignored any kind of historical transformation, moving more or less deliberately towards irrelevance and extinction. Examples might include Australian Aborigines and non-black native populations of sub-Saharan Africa (Pygmies, Khoisan).
2. Cold societies that tried to petrify the first conquests in the form of endless repetition. Like the famous Aranda of Lévi-Strauss, “faithful to their tradition”, these cold societies became fossils of the history of their ancestors. They only evolve as a result of external and contingent "events", under the pressure of external factors. They are at the mercy of any environmental variation not foreseen in their program. In short, they can only survive on the condition that they never find the train of history they got off of. This is the case with most sub-Saharan and Amazonian cultures: they become "objects of history" - of the history of other cultures - from the moment they come into contact with them.
3. Warm societies that were active but reluctant “prisoners of history,” such as Far Eastern, Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and pre-Columbian civilizations (*). The classic example is Japan, with a history marked by outside influences that were simultaneously welcomed, rejected and originally transfigured into what eventually became Japanese culture, from the introduction of Buddhism in classical times to the Meiji Restoration after the end of the shogunate. . .

And finally;

the third version

Hot societies: they became "subjects" or "agents" of history. Generated by the Indo-European Revolution, they fully assumed the historical dimension of man and began to express his heroic and tragic character with a consciously assumed project of collective destiny.

In this broad panorama, a final comment is in order about the particular role played by the birth in the Middle East of a historical trend – represented mythically by the separation of Abraham and the founding of Israel, and prolonged in a complex way by other monotheistic religions. Judeo-Christian monotheism introduces a division into post-Neolithic society: while remaining immersed in history, it rejects the effects of the Neolithic revolution, this time not from a practical point of view –like cold societies–, but from a moral point of view. It finds driving force in the promise of an eschatological "end of history" and in the constant "demystification" of the creations of history, in particular through the inversion of the concept of the divine. From an instrument and projection of human creativity, and pride in the process by which the Second Man becomes master of himself and the world, the divine becomes a condemnation and “transcendent” relativization of the human adventure.

The essential effect of the religion of the Bible – if not its express intent – ​​has been to obstruct man's ability to fully realize the powers of freedom and creative autonomy that emanate from his own humanization, powers historically reinforced by the Neolithic Revolution and development. of the great cultures.

Precisely at the moment when the Indo-European revolution reached its maximum power and expansion, this messianic trend - based on the moral rejection of history and civilization - infiltrated the Roman world and reached a point of synthesis through the so-called 'compromise'. Constantinian', giving rise to the 'West'. Step by step, it repressed the original European collective unconscious and corrupted the European culture of the time, transforming it into something hybrid. Of the two souls that have lived in the bosom of Europe since then, the Judeo-Christian is evidently the one that today, in its secular and most radical form, celebrates global hegemony.

(*) It is difficult to disentangle the twisted skein of contacts, exchanges and influences that lukewarm cultures originally received from outside. Some have hypothesized a primary role for Indo-European influences and groups through imitation, competition, or reworking. For example, Indo-Aryan influences on Chinese culture and, through it, on Japan; or the complex pattern of contacts between Egypt and Mesopotamia, on the one hand, and, on the other, the different waves of invaders who reached the Middle East from Central Europe at various times. More uncertain are the hypotheses that suggest a connection of this type with pre-Columbian empires. There are also hypotheses, in this case more scientific, about the existence of a 'Hyperborean' Indo-European civilization that had influences on an almost planetary scale.

Transcend man to God

We must have a religion if we are to do anything worthwhile. If anything is to be done to get our civilization out of the horrible mess it is now in, it must be done by men who have a religion. People who have no religion are cowards and scoundrels. If you allow people who are kaddish and irreligious to become the ruling force, the nation will be destroyed, and that's what happens to us.

What I mean by a religious person is one who conceives of himself as the instrument of some purpose in the universe which is a high purpose, and is the innate power of evolution, that is, of continual ascent in organization and power and life and extension. of life. Anyone who realizes that there is such a power, and that his business and joy in life is doing his work, and his pride and honor in identifying himself with it, is religious, and people who don't have that feeling are clearly irreligious, never mind. which denomination they belong to. We can give this feeling many different names. A man may use religious terms and say he is here to do God's work. Another man, who calls himself an atheist, may simply say that he has a sense of honor. But the two things are precisely the same. Any man of honor is a religious man. It states that there are certain things you shouldn't do and certain things you should do, regardless of the effect on your personal wealth. Such a man may be called a religious man, or he may be called a gentleman.

We are gradually getting rid of our idols, and in the future we will have to present to the people religions that are practical systems, which - in general - we can perceive as working in practice, instead of resulting in flagrant contradictions as they are. currently do. But people go from one extreme to the other, and when they do, they tend to throw out the good stuff along with the bad. Therefore, they make little progress. The old-fashioned atheist rebelled against the idea of ​​an omnipotent being like the god of cancer, epilepsy, and war, as well as the good that happened. They could not believe that a loving God could allow such things. And so they eagerly seized on Charles Darwin's idea of ​​natural selection. Darwin did not originate the idea of ​​evolution, which long preceded him, but it was he who introduced us to the particular form of evolution known as natural selection. He grasped that idea with a sense of relief: relief that the old idea of ​​God had been banished from the world. This sense of relief was so great that for a while the horrible void that had been created in the universe was forgotten. Natural selection has left us in a world full of horrors that seem to be explained by the fact that everything happened by chance. However, if there is no purpose or design in the universe, the sooner we cut our throats the better, because it's not a good place to live.

Most men of natural selection in the 19th century were brilliant, but they were cowards. We want to return to men with some belief in the purpose of the universe, with a determination to identify with it, and with the courage that comes with it. As for my own position, I am and always have been a mystic. I believe the universe is drive

n by a force that we could call vital force. I see him performing the miracle of creation, which entered the minds of men as what they call a will. Therefore, we see people who are clearly doing a will that is not exclusively theirs.

Attempting to represent this particular will or power as God - in the first sense of the word - is now utterly futile; no one can believe it. What you have to understand is that one way or another there is, behind the universe, a will, a life force. You cannot think of it as a person, you must think of it as a great purpose, a great will. Furthermore, you must think of him as engaged in a continual struggle to produce something ever higher.

You start with the amoeba: why did it break in two? It's not a smart thing for anyone to do. You can't pretend there's some specific accident in it. You can't see any case that natural selection does. But somehow the amoeba does it. Discover that maybe two are better than one. It splits in two anyway, from where there is a continual push towards higher and higher organization. The differentiation of the sexes, the introduction of the backbone, the invention of eyes, the invention of digestion systems: there is a constant and continuous growth, an evolution of life. There are forces that cannot be explained, and that particular force is always arranging and arranging and arranging. Among other things, it organizes the physical eye so that this mechanism sees dangers and avoids them; see the food and go after it; See the edge of the cliff and avoid falling over it. And it doesn't just develop that particular eye: it also develops what Shakespeare called the mind's eye. We not only strive in some particular way to get more and more power, to develop organs and limbs with which we can shape the universe to our liking: we also continually strive to know, to become more conscious, to understand the meaning of all them.

We must believe in the will of good; it is unthinkable to consider man bent on his own destruction. However, in the pursuit of good, this will can err and release something that is destructive. We may consider the typhoid bacillus as one of the failures of the life force we call God; however, that same life force is trying, through our brain, to find a way to destroy this evil influence. If this conception is understood, an answer is available to those who ask for an explanation of the origin of evil. Bad things are done to do good; but they end badly, and therefore must be destroyed. This is the most important conception for the religion of the future, because it gives us who we are in the present, as well as value and respect for ourselves. It's up to us to work for something better, to talk less about the religion of love—love is a bad subject—and more about the religion of life and work: creating a world that knows a happiness that doesn't have to be happiness. of drunkenness, a world we should not be ashamed of. The world should be made of happy people who are sober at the same time. Today the happiness of the world is like the happiness of drunks. We resort to fictitious life aids. We try to fight self-consciousness because we don't see the consciousness of a mission and ultimately the consciousness of a magnificent destiny.

What will be the end of it all? It doesn't have to have an end. As you've progressed so far, there's no reason for the process to stop. However, he must achieve on his endless journey the production of some being, some strong and wise person, with a mind capable of comprehending the entire universe, and with powers capable of carrying out all of its will.

Perhaps there is not yet a God reached; yet there is a force working to make God, struggling through us to become a really organized existence, enjoying what for many of us is the greatest conceivable ecstasy: a brain, a truly all-conscious intelligence with executive power. force capable of guiding you to a perfectly benevolent and harmonious destiny.

That's what we're working on. When they ask you, 'Where is God? Who is God?' stand up and say, 'I am God. Here is God, not finished yet but always moving towards completion as I am working for the purpose of the universe, working for the good of all society and the whole world rather than simply pursuing my personal goals. .'

We are all experiments in the direction of making God. What God is doing is making himself, ceasing to be mere will or impotent force. This force implanted in our minds the ideal of God. So far we are God's failed attempts. However, if we can get into men's heads the full awareness of the moral responsibility that comes with the knowledge that there will never be a God unless we create him, that we are the instruments through which that ideal is trying to become a reality. we can work towards this ideal until we become supermen, then supersupermen, then a world of organisms that have reached and realized God.

(1. A literary text, a pagan 'religious speech', adapted by me from several speeches given by George Bernard Shaw between 1906 and 1937 George Bernard Shaw)

nationalism

I think 'nationalism' needs to be clarified and put into historical perspective for it to become a truly empowering technology.

Nationalism only makes sense to me if it is understood as a doctrine capable of expressing in political terms the philosophy and vital needs of European man in 2017 (I think not in geographical terms, but in anthropological terms - the white man - and including both the peoples of the continental homeland as well as those of "overseas Europe".

European nations are doomed to emerge from history and merge into a shapeless, faceless global mass, or become the substance of a future nation and people.

It is convenient to distinguish two different ways of posing the "national question": one, developed in France, sees the nation essentially as a construction operated by a State, and linked ab initio to a restricted horizon, a closure: historically, the Closure and separation of the Empire. This attitude cannot fail to raise immediately the problem of fixing national borders: in this case first for the natio francorum exterior; then, by the political and cultural identities within these borders, on which the “reduction” operates. This policy of external self-exclusion (from the Empire) and of homologation and repression of internal identities and differences was followed by French absolutism, and until its final consequences with the French Revolution. It was later emulated by all democratic revolutions in Europe, to the point where all nationalisms based on the “masses” and the exclusion of the “other” necessarily arrived at contemporary world universalism.

Contrary to appearances, the one-world ideology that now pervades the dominant culture and political praxis of international institutions only superficially contradicts the assumptions of the form of nationalism described above. Recollection in itself intrinsically implies the recognition, sooner or later, of equality among nations. The dream of political universalism is nothing more than the re-proposition, on a global scale, of the same process that led to the formation of the Nation-State.

Where the memory of the Roman imperial model persisted, and where the project of a Holy Roman Empire as a restoration of the classical order remained politically active during the Middle Ages, the process of 'national' unification did not take place (except partially and on a small scale). . scale) to the Romantic Era: during the 19th century. It took on a profoundly different guise.

In this case, it is not the State that builds a nation and stimulates a national conscience, but a national conscience that, in its maturity, seeks to express itself politically through a State. Belonging, for example, to the German or Italian nation was not, initially, a fact on which to build national consciousness, but rather an idea (in its political sense): a spiritual attachment to a project that needed to be defined and was linked to an old imperial vision of a hierarchically organized cosmos.

Today, the situation of European nationalism is analogous. Europe – Magna Europa – does not enjoy a real existence. Europe is only the destiny of those who recognize themselves in it. Indeed, it is precisely this “ghost”, this choice of culture, values, civilization (that is, the regeneration of history), this myth, that the faith of the good European is directed. Ultimately, it is also contrasted with the jumble of states and small states that inhabit our continent, together with their skeletal supranational bureaucracies.

There is another reason why European nationalism should be associated with the second model described above: the very idea of ​​Europe amounts to a transfigured rebirth of the imperial vision. The unification of Europe along the lines of the Jacobin nation-state—and in direct opposition to regionalist tendencies (perhaps even forcing linguistic, cultural, and administrative homogenization)—is unthinkable. There is one more reason: the non-existence of the issue of Europe's borders. Europe is not a territory, but a destination offered to all those who find an ethnic and spiritual relationship in it.

This consideration helps to clarify just how anti-European, in this sense, institutions such as the Council of Europe are, an institution of which Turkey is a member today, and perhaps Israel tomorrow.

With the Industrial Revolution, humanity entered a phase of planetization. No one can avoid such a planetary perspective or dream of impossible isolation. Planetary order is inevitable. It's bound to happen, sooner or later.
The Grand Politics of Tomorrow cannot be conceived or realized without a “world order”.

(CD: Hmm. Either I don't understand what you mean or I disagree. I'm not sure. What I see is a vacillation between opening and closing, expanding and contracting, civilizations in response to circumstances, and some have free capital to adapt and others do not.)

Institutionally, we should carefully study three models: Switzerland, the US Constitution (Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton and Adams) and Ancient Rome. My contribution today about Rome:

(CD: 100% agree these are the three 'scales'. Swiss > American > Roman.

The planetization that is taking place demands a “cosmic order”. Will this order be “imperial” or “egalitarian”? Once the future is open, it must remain unknown: we can only commit to one or the other.

The egalitarian solution implies the reduction of humanity ad unum, the emergence of the “universal type” and global standardization. The imperial solution is hierarchical. If freedom in the egalitarian dialectic is an absolute opposed to the other (the negation of freedom), in the imperial dialectic freedom is just a relative proposition directly linked to the notion of social responsibility. Within the Imperium, only the right of the best is absolute, measured according to the virtue manifested by humanity at any given time. However, the Imperium is also, from a planetary perspective, the only means of preserving differences, thanks to the principle of unicuique suum, which implicitly recognizes the fundamental inequality of values ​​and identities.

The Imperium can be seen as the alternative to globalization: strength and cohesion in diversity as a model of planetary organization.

(CD: I see speciation as an opportunity).

Destiny: We live in an interregnum

We must be aware that we are living in an interregnum (post-modernity), a waiting period in which fate hovers between two options: either complete the triumph of the egalitarian conception of the world (the end of history), or promote a historical regeneration.
(CD: Ok)

Will European civilization expand or contract? Certainly, the free capital to adapt is still there; for how long is another question.

But where is the plan, the idea (the myth) that can ignite consciousness? The Instituto Propertario should have the ambition to design this map, capable of taking us to the port avoiding the most obvious pitfalls.

(CD: I think I see that as our purpose, yeah)

If we take a look at some of the most recent “sovereignty and freedom” campaigns among Europeans:

A. Catalan parody: a gang of flea communists who proclaimed the independent republic of Catalonia and, among other things, wanted to outsource the defense of the territory to another European state?!?

B. Brexit fiasco: Nigel Farage, an Englishman with a French name and a German wife, collaborated with Boris Johnson, an Englishman of Turkish descent married to an Indian descent, and Michael Gove, a Scotsman married to a Jewish woman, probably of German descent , to get Britain out of Europe. Also on his team were Priti Patel, who was born in London to an Asian Ugandan family, and Gisela Stuart, who was born in Germany. This dedicated group of 'British people' persuaded the British to "take back their borders" and keep foreigners out. If it wasn't so serious it would be funny. Commonwealth immigrants were entitled to vote in the referendum, but Europeans settled in the UK were not. Britons living in other parts of Europe were also banned from voting. Most likely in the near future: Labor will return to 10 Downing Street with James Corbyn (an admirer of Hugo Chaves) as prime minister.

C. Ukrainian tragedy (Among different intra-European nationalist projects, I have the warmest feelings for Ukrainians): Ukraine should have played the role of a bridge between Russia and the EU. After a series of catastrophic decisions (I don't want to start blaming now), relations with Russia will remain in a tangle for a long, long time, and economic integration with the EU will not be possible for at least 40 years (I think this is the goal end of the Russian military campaign in the East).
The old formulas, disconnected from historical and geopolitical reality, do not work.

(CD: I am very knowledgeable about Ukrainian circumstances and see the Intermarium as necessary, not the preservation of Ukraine as a broken state.)

Europe, despite current appearances, remains historically the only reality with the potential to mobilize the European population. This is much more than with regard to tangible and concrete nation-states, today devoid of any vis politica, or those regional trends that will never come to represent even a vestigial resistance to the formation of already moribund nation-states. In this sense, and contrary to anti-European propaganda, the struggle for the construction of Europe is the most “realistic” political position that currently exists.

(CD: I see a Europe with a weak judicial federation in the old model, instead of a couple in the US. So I see the opposite. The restoration of the European model with a weak federal judiciary (the role that a church plays).

An extension of patriotism is needed, a superior patriotism that proclaims: "I am European and therefore heir to an ancient culture that civilized the whole world." Only then will Magna Europa rule the world, as is its birthright.

(CD: Well, people pay the cost of patriotism when it suits them, either to seize an opportunity or to avoid harm.)

Imperium and Empire should not be confused with each other. Indeed, the notion of Empire found its truth and perfect realization more in the efforts that led to the establishment of the Roman Republic than in the post-July maintenance of the Empire. The notion of Imperium reflects a desire for cosmic order, and it is this order that hierarchically organizes the various "people" who live under Rome's protection. In theory and practice, Imperium is the antithesis of any kind of "universalism". It does not seek to reduce humanity to one; on the contrary, it seeks to preserve diversity in a world that is moving towards unification.

(CD: I guess I can put it less euphemistically, but yeah. The problem is what the incentive is. Or rather, the incentive is intuited by some. But in this interregnum, the market for various incentives has bifurcated.) .

I also see speciation as an opportunity. But this time, speciation will take place by a self-conscious decision, and the entire planet will be its stage. In that sense I am a Nietzschean, as you know. He was the first thinker who, faced with the first appearance of a world history, asked the decisive question and reflected on its metaphysical implications. The question is, is man, as man in his nature hitherto ready to assume dominion over all the earth? If not, what must happen to man as he is, so that he can 'hold' the land and thus recover an ancient legacy? Must not man, as he is, be driven beyond himself if he is to fulfill this task? This thought concerns us, it concerns Europe, it concerns the whole earth not only today, but even more tomorrow.

(CD: This last part requires some work. But I see that the choice of the monopoly world order of increasing parasitism and dysgenics, and the market world order of increasing eugenics is pretty obvious.)

Evolution of religion over time.

Phase 1: Burials > (Possible 1a: Marked as a Monument?) > Phase 2: Sacrifices > Phase 3: Seasons > Phase 4: Politics > Phase 5: Education

Each of these is pretty obvious in the progression as the complexity increases.

What is the oldest religion?

THE OLDEST RELIGION. DEPENDS ON HOW YOU DEFINE RELIGION

What is the oldest religion in the world? What is the evidence for this? The correct question is "What is the oldest political religion?" Because that is the function of all surviving religions of the Axial period. The Sumerians first wrote down their religions in 3500 BC. C. and most political religions evolved out of competition with theirs. We see evidence of organized religion in Anatolia as early as 9000 BC. C., before Stonehenge by 6000 years.

We seem to have developed religious practices (what we call sacred but is more correct, the suppression of all self-interest, sign of status and expression of dominance) no less than 40,000 years ago. There was our first and longest dark age around 20-21k BC. Practices were then resumed around 13k BC.

It didn't take that long, around 8000 BC. C., until farming and farming created popular religions in and around Anatolia still centered on burial.

Around the year 5500 a. C., the Indo-Europeans developed the sacrificial religion and spread it: man then traded with the gods.

And again, around 3300 B.C. C. we see the rapid development of political religion in all regions of Eurasia.

|RELIGION|: Burial > Sacrifice > Political > [Therapeutic]

Every religion is building debt

ONLY THE FIRST RELIGION OF NATURE AND THE DEAD, TRUE.

THE TRUTH

The universe is indeed what the earth has allowed.
The earth is indeed what allowed man.
Our ancestors, in fact, who allowed us.
The Heroes among those whom we imitate.
The Peers among us who remain in your memories.

The only debts we have are:
– nature/planet/the universe. (actually)
– our ancestors, who made us possible (truly)
– exemplary ancestors who made us possible (truly)
— our companions who persist in the gains of our ancestors. (actually)

THE LIE

The Jewish, Christian and Muslim Abrahamic lie: false debt for false crime, with false promise, false reward.

WHY THE LIE?

All gods are lies of those who don't remember worthy ancestors or worthy ancestors of any kind.

WHY WE DON'T NEED TO LIE

We are the gods among men.

And false gods were invented to undermine, weaken and destroy us, which is why these gods command the complete opposite of our rise to gods: ignorance, mysticism, sophistry, pseudoscience, deceit, dysgenics and monopoly. A god would be more like Aristotle Jefferson and Darwin than the god of the Semites, whose thoughts, words, commands and actions are much more like the devil in our oldest myth, our founding myth: the blacksmith and the devil. Or what we know today, wrapped in Christian dogmas like Faust. The Abrahamists' god is evil in thought, word, command, action, and consequence.

When we pray to our god, we are praying to the god of our people. sky father. Dayus Pitar, Dayus Phater, Zeus Pater, Jupiter, Sol Invictus, Sol, the eternal sus that asks us to govern, reign, unite with them. Our heroes and saints dress in the garb of political theater to oppress us and deny our ambitions to join the gods. But we have ours:

|WESTERN CIVILIZATION| Transcendence (Evolutionary Velocity) via Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth and Duty, The judiciary power of natural law and consistent markets in everything. When the militia there constitutes a private corporation and there is no one above them to play the insurance of last resort, each man shows reciprocity by playing the insurance of last resort.

This is a religion of gods. Men who would become gods. Heroes who approached divinity. And the cities that follow them to the deity.

THE MILITIA, THE KING, OUR ANCESTORS, NATURE, THE LAW: RESTORING OUR NATURAL RELIGION

Nothing replaces an initiation in a group of warriors (pack) and a ritual of gratitude among them, a king, the ancestors and nature. Everything else is education, therapy and medication.

THE INDO-EUROPEANS DEVELOPED MAGIC THROUGH METALWORK, THE SEMITIC CIVILIZATION DEVELOPED MYSTICISM THROUGH THE STARS.

—-“In Indo-European civilizations”, writes François-Xavier Dillman, “magic definitely cannot be dissociated from all beliefs, representations, religious rites [...] those that most resist Christianization. The same author points out that runic writing and Germanic magic are often “the same thing”. Patrick Moisson also emphasizes that there is a fine line between magic and religion, but points out that while religion seeks to reconcile deities with sacrifice and worship, magic "constrains divine powers with appropriate rites", which presupposes the existence of impersonal forces and "meant to restrict the supernatural world".

Small differences in large numbers over many years produce large differences.

Religion: what can we do? (mysticism),
Philosophy: What can I do? (sophistry),
Science: What we can not avoid (guarantee).
lei: What you can't do (responsibility).

Why are mythology, oath, prayer and ritual necessary for a political organization? Debt. Payment Agreement.

Three reasons:decidability,opportunity costsytransaction costs.

In a way, we coordinate our actions through clear and deliberate choices. But above all we cooperate with many thousands of tiebreakers who, by default, launch theories of "good": narratives.

In other words, religions provide the means by which, out of those many thousands of options, where no option is preferable to us, we prefer the option that contributes to the advancement of the commons. Otherwise, like Bouridan's donkey, we must find some method of election. This realization is profoundly important. Think of religions as a wishing well into which we throw our choice change. But these choices reflect an evolutionary group strategy. And these strategies are not the same. The small many defeat the great few.

THE CONSTITUTION OF RELIGION
Religion provides us with personal, social, and political rituals to train us in mindfulness (tolerance), forgiveness, and cooperation on ever-increasing scales. It serves as the institutionalization of harmony so that we can tolerate anonymity, the lack of reinforcement, the expansion of hierarchy, the loss of agency, in markets, in the division of labor in exchange for drastically reduced costs of that division of labor.

If you understand this, you will understand the purpose of religion, where it evolved, when and why it evolved, and how and why a religion or any aspect of a religion succeeds or is good, fails or is bad. Religion trains intuition, reason trains us in understanding, negotiation and planning, and skills train us in production in that division of sensation, perception, cognition, memory, defense, negotiation and work.

With Religion we escalate the hunt. Which in turn consists of the phases of the prey drive. What is the eternal cycle of our lives. Search, hunt or gather, gather, feast, celebrate, breed, rest, nurture, want or need, and start over. The religion is a celebration of the life cycle of the reptilian, mammalian and human brain. We can never completely leave the animal behind, we can only tend to its needs so that we can be human and reap the benefits of the division of labor.

DEBT:
Where worship means showing appreciation for the inheritance: debt.
– Cult of nature (debt)
– Worship of relatives and ancestors (debt)
– Worship of gods, demigods, heroes and saints (debt)

CAPITALIZATION:
And mindfulness training:
– Action: heroism – achievement – ​​contribution and competence (cost)
– Reason: stoicism – authorship – tolerance and cooperation (cost)
– Experience: Epicurean – Tranquility and Security (Cost)

AWARD:
And Ritual Fiesta – building community.
– The Gathering, The Fire, The Call (recompensa)
– The parable, the oath, the testimony (reward)
– The Sacrifice, The Feast, The Graces (reward)
– The Celebration (festival), The Sport (competition), The Dispersion (sex, rest, care) (reward)

STANDARDS:
And there are three sets of laws evident in the structure of the universe, whether those laws were made by structural consequence, divine design, or the hand of god.
– The laws of nature. (physical limits)
– The natural law of Sovereignty and Reciprocity (personal limits), overcoming the positive path of love from the Christian natural law to the negative path of the natural law.
– The evolutionary law of man's transcendence into gods. (political borders)

This constitutes the law of religion.

A precise language for the discussion of religion.

We have been misled into thinking that "religion" requires superstition. But this idea is a product of the authoritarian dogma created by the Church under Christianity. Is not true.

Suspicious, religion consists of:

1)Narrative: historical, mythical, supernatural
2)metaphysical judgments: (in many ways)
3)Group's evolutionary strategy: (in many ways)
4)debts: (intergenerational transfer of strategy)
5)costs: (Demonstrations of compliance.)
5)Normative Rules: (in too many ways to persist)
6)Family Accounting Records(birth, maturity, marriage, death)
7)Private and public rituals.: (mindfulness of your forms)
8)Parties, sports, arts and festivals:(in its multiple forms)

Religion Market demand satisfied by:

1 - Provide some variation on 'conscience' in which we can escape the problem of being honest with ourselves, regardless of all our accumulated intuitions and prejudices.

2 – Form associations between the ‘packet responseand group participation, and eliminating the feedback stress problem of post-tribal life, thus extending the bonds of trust between kin groups, class groups and market groups, thus reducing transaction costs of all kinds in all the spheres of life.

3 - Establishmentnormative rulesfor family and interfamily behavior, which has made (and continues to reduce) the natural frictions between genetic variations of gender, class, tribe, race that (frankly) translate into different demands for association, reproduction, economic cooperation and governance, and the quest for status that affects each of these claims dramatically.

conscience

1) Mindfulness refers to thephysical, cognitive, and emotional discipline to control the object of attention in present intent, isolated from distractions whether personal, environmental, or interpersonal.

2) But with a preference for the Stoic method (authorship, virtues of action), Epicurean objective (under your control), testimonial knowledge (scientific), game (ritual) and collective sport, festival and feast (celebration).

3) The Buddhist method, originally practical and insular, evolved into semi-mystical and survived the onslaught of monotheistic Abrahamism, where practical, action-oriented Western schools were purposely destroyed by the Abrahamic conquest and the dark ages.

4) East Asian ritual and Hindu "way of life" also survive. Each of these methods of physical, mental, and emotional discipline reflects local demand, given the local degree of agency during the transformation period. (although Buddhism prevailed in Japan, unfortunately).

5) I therefore use 'mindfulness' to mean that all groups sought to meet the demands of some mindfulness technique of their day in slightly different ways. As Buddhism developed more straightforward analysis of the goal, the terminology evolved into a universal one.

6) But, as in all things, the Stoic method, the Epicurean aim and scientific (empirical) paradigm, and the pursuit of agency (domination) rather than withdrawal (submission), reflect European rather than African metaphysics. Asian. : realism, naturalism, agency.

The constitution of religion

ReligionConsisting of:

|RELIGION| Myths (strategy) > Debt > Repetition (ritual) > Recital (oath) > Feast and Festival.

But so does any other category ofEducation:

|EDUCATION| Mythos (Logic) > Repetition/Ritual (Grammar) > Recital (Rhetoric) > Reward (Recognition of Achievement)

AllEducationfollow the same process:

|LEARNING| Logic > Grammar > Rhetoric > Success by galardón, application or achievement.

Allknowledgefollow the same process:

|EPISTEMOLOGY| free association (+ proof) > hypothesis (+ proof) > theory (+ proof) > law (survival).

Alldue diligencenoknowledge productionfollow the same process:

|DUE DILIGENCE| identity > consistency > correspondence > demonstrated possibility > rational choice > reciprocity, coherence > limits > and completeness.

So we have a rather strange misconception of 'religion' as more than just training emotions in such a way that we intuit values ​​and relationships that are consistent with our evolutionary group strategy (embedded in our myths), which we rarely understand - those the rules of evolutionary strategy are obscured at the metaphysical level. This invisibility makes them more resilient because they are less vulnerable to arguments and criticism and therefore more likely to persist due to the simple imitation of myths and rituals that this strategy produces by exteriority rather than direct apprehension.

There is nothing special about religion. If we look at the hierarchy of choice:

|REACTION| Physical Response (Automatic) > Emotional Response (Intuition) > Rational Response (Reason) > Calculated Response (Calculation) > Calculated Response (Calculus).

…so EACH ONE OF THESE STEPS allows you to increase accuracy in the PRESENCE of knowledge and the FUNNY FAILURE in the ABSENCE of knowledge.

This hierarchy means that for every standard deviation in human mental (cognitive) capacity, there is a grammar (methodology) of decision-making, from the basic animal to the most skilled practitioners.

Human beings are very simple creatures. It's the lies we tell ourselves that confuse us and keep us mere animals, responding by intuition and automatic reaction, rather than possessed of agency and reason of union, calculation and computation, so that we evolve towards the gods we imagine.

Everything there is to understand about religion

Religion consists of a category of education with the purpose of training intuition (emotions), so that we are less dependent on reason, calculation and computation.

As we have:

|ANALOGIES| children's stories, fairy tales, myths, legends > stories for young people > stories > novels > biographies > stories > science and law > mathematics

And we have:

|ETHIC| Imitation of parents > Hero ethics > Virtue ethics > Rule ethics > Results ethics

We also have:

|EDUCATION| Physical Training > Emotional Training > Calculus Training > Knowledge Training > Professional Skills Training

And so we developed these institutions to provide training:

|INSTITUTIONS| Play/Sports/Work (physical) > Church (emotion) > Primary school > Secondary school > College > University

“What I will rebel against, what I have chosen to wage war on, is the cult of lies that originates in theology, is exacerbated under the obscurantist language of rationalism, and aggravated under pseudoscience and propaganda.

I will protect myself and mine from nature. I will protect myself and mine from viruses and diseases. I will protect myself and mine from the beast. I will protect myself and my loved ones from violence, theft, fraud, conspiracy, immigration, conversion, war and conquest. And the most important way to protect me and mine is to punish the smallest infraction of our promise to cooperate: lying.

understand religion

1) Every social order (wisdom literature), whether legal (Western), rational (Chinese), theological (Semitic) or literary (Indian), depends on criteria of decidability and method of argumentation to support those criteria.

2) We can train physical skills, intuition-emotion, reason and transformation skills. We develop ritual, religion, stoicism and philosophy to train intuition, emotion and intuition, and we develop calculus for reason and techné for skills.

3) The Semitic argument consists of the Pilpul sophistry, criticism, false promise, moral hazard, monopoly control of information, using threats of ostracism, disapproval, shaming, gossip, rallying and reputation destruction to enforce a monopoly by suggestion and intimidation.

4) We call this combination of sophistry (pseudo-rationalism), supernatural (occultism), false history (pseudoscience), ritual indoctrination, false promise (fraud) to create a monopoly of compliance with falsehoods "Religion", although this is unique. to Semitic religions.

5) This form of argument, like mathematics, logic, writing, language or any other technology, can be traced through history as the incremental evolution of a technique of deception. It is used to produce natural neurochemical responses (opiates) and works like an addiction.

6) Just as the Romans invented empirical law with the help of Aristotle and Zeno, the Greeks invented idealism and the ideal argument, the Semites invented Pilpul's sophistry and the Critique and threats of ostracism, thus setting up the group's strategy female in the plot.

7) meanwhile, the West produced hero worship, civic ritual, the cult of the empirical law of civil responsibility, reason, rationalism, empiricism, science as the evolution of its criteria of decidability: individual sovereignty, with disputes resolved by civil liability law and a MARKET of ideas.

8) It's not that I don't understand religion. It's just that I understand this completely; how to completely replace your falsehoods; and that the Abrahamic religions were responsible for the dark ages and the destruction of all the great civilizations of the ancient and modern world.

Is religion necessary for the individual?

conscienceit is necessary. Religion gives us mindfulness in the personal, interpersonal, social, and political domains through the use of rituals, holidays, festivals, and myths. There are biological and circumstantial reasons why we need mindfulness in a world that no longer consists of hunter-gatherer bands.

You need a myth (archetypes), a ritual (sacrifice), a festival (festival), and a Law, each of which produces the most ideal commons for your people: mindfulness, co-op discounts, and material commons and institutional.

We all require mindfulness outside of the hunter-gatherer lifestyle, where we know our "place" with everyone around us. We need personal attention. Interpersonal attention. And sociopolitical attention. We evolved like beasts of burden. A strange mix of chimpanzee and wolf. We all yearn for the security of some aspect of the joy, power, comfort, and security of the pack. However, the more advanced our civilizations are, the more isolated we are as individuals. That was the problem that religions solved, and religions solved it by all evolving at about the same time, in response to the need to live in greater numbers with less certainty in our relationships.

We fail to understand that religions are big lies that provide mindfulness. We can achieve mindfulness through intentional discipline, a variety of rituals, participation in feasts, dances, parades, sports, celebrations, and especially prayers, "theatres" and myths.

But we can gain this mindfulness through true, semi-true, or completely false means. And there are profound consequences for anyone, considering which means of mindfulness they choose.

If we all learned mindfulness the way we learn table manners, reading and writing, arithmetic, even if we had to teach it in half a dozen different ways to meet the needs of people with different brain structures, then we would have little . need for religion

It is rare that humans accidentally develop the intellectual agency to react to their emotions as nothing more than reactive changes in the state of the property, given similarly accidentally accumulated uncritical appraisals of that property. It is entirely possible to train humans to develop the intellectual agency to react to their emotions as nothing more than a change in property status for critical property valuations. Just as we teach humans all other forms of calculation that reduce the world to simple and understandable and not magical or mysterious. Just as Buddhists teach the same principle through various forms of nonsense. In other words, it is possible to revive and expand Stoicism, our natural religion. A religion that the Byzantines forcibly took from us. A religion of lies replaced by a religion of truth

As capacity decreases, the demand for intuitionistic fictions increases, and conversely, as capacity increases, the demand for rationally determinable criteria increases. That is, those of lesser capacity require us to resort to intuition, and those of greater capacity require us to resort to reason. This is because those with lower capacity have not been sufficiently domesticated (agency produced) by those with greater capacity.

Literary analogy using archetypes and archetypal arguments (we can list archetypes and arguments) can be broken down into rational terms and tested. Literary analogy allows loading and framing so that individuals can learn by intuition rather than reason (i.e., suggestion). But if we can't break these analogies down into scientific claims, we won't know if they are false, harmful or "evil", as was Abrahamism.

People need a means of calculation (reasoning, thinking) in the broadest sense, and the simplest units of measurement are anthropological. In the absence of tribal feedback, they need what we call mindfulness, but it's better to think of a way to cull and ignore the urges (some of us call that agency). and in the absence of community and tribal dependency, we need festivals and feasts. And to set the boundaries we need an oath. All civilizations direct this spectrum of attention towards the oath, the feast, the festival to compensate for the competition produced by production and the hierarchy that develops from this division of knowledge, work and defense involved in the production of private goods. and public. State. This is because very few of us have evolved enough to survive without institutions to aid our lingering animal intuitions.

Addiction to emotional self-indulgence.

MINDFULNESS IS ADDICTIVE

Mindfulness can be provided truthfully or not. Mindfulness is extremely rewarding. So gratifying that we defended it. Religion provides aaddictionresponse, and the natural response ofaddictedto defend the source of youraddiction.

The purpose of most religions is not mindfulness, butsupplanting it with the vice of emotional self-indulgence.

The purpose ofBudateaching was originally submissive attention.
The purpose ofstoicismthe teaching was mindfulness – the dominant action.
The purpose ofepicureanismit was evidential mindfulness: providing the human being with real demands rather than competition for status.

And while the Stoic METHOD, the current cognitive-behavioral therapy (training), is superior to all others, the Epicurean goal is superior to all others. And this is partly why the countries of Anatolia, Syria and the Middle East have fought so hard to destroy Western heroism and status. gaining status through contributing to the commons (farmers and men) rather than over-consumption of whatever commons are available (shepherds and women) and emotional complacency.

Why? For whereas division of labor offers discounts on production, status offers discounts on opportunity. Thus, if we manage to build a high status (sexual, social, economic, political or military market value), we will have more and better opportunities with more and better people.

The innovation in the Abrahamic religion was to offer competition against aristocratic stoicism, truth, duty and contribution to the commons, with self-indulgence, justification of cowardice and elimination of contribution to the commons, which is what we see in communism. , neoliberalism. and libertarianism: how to consume the commons instead of contributing to them.

The structure of this religion depends on you learning to lie in the face of reality in exchange for the denial of that reality, the denial of truth, duty, common goods. It is a narrative structure that recreates the nepotism and insularity of wandering pastoralists who have no land but live on communal lands, and who preserve their insularity and non-desertion in a condition of permanent competition with others of the same lineage, rather than with the forces of nature.

Our gradual domestication of this religion whose aim was to undermine the aristocracy, converting its women and lower classes, who could not obtain status in the meritocratic order at that time when industrialization and gunpowder had not yet produced force multiples, and everything was still dependent on military participation and combat.

The demand for mindfulness is largely a demand for the means to train our demand for status. As the division of labor increases, classes diverge in ability, productivity, and interest, and as the power distance between those at the bottom and those at the top increases, we find those with less agency seeking status by means alternatives, and a caste of "speakers" who provide status. (success) by alternative means – where alternative does not refer to the contribution of production to the common, or to the defense of the private and the common.

The gods provide a means to gain approval without competing in sexual, social, political, economic, and military markets for status and therefore opportunity.

Mythic archetypes, heroes (pagan male markets), gods and saints (female Abrahamic monopoly), provide a diversity of heroes and interests to serve those with agency in a division of knowledge and labor.

The monotheistic archetype creates an antihero, in which the victim who suffers from his or her lack of skill and agency is heroic in some way. But the goal of this antihero is to undermine those who demonstrate innovation, excellence, competitiveness, production and contribution to the common good, thus increasing the division of knowledge and labor, increasing competitiveness, increasing power distance and decreasing the opportunity to status .on those who lack skill, training, and agency.

The Jesus-hero is a contribution to pagans (ancestors, nature) pagans (heroes, archetypes) when one of many. But a disaster, like Muhammad, and the Jews when a monopoly, because we are equal only in ignorance, lack of will and poverty. We are always unequal in the agency of knowledge and wealth.

It's not that we don't need the Jesus-hero, since there is no equivalent of the female archetype in the European pantheon. and the teaching of forgiveness and love in Christianity is commercially ideal for all peoples. Unless it applies (as Christians do) in addition to our relatives and friends.

There is no better method for training our emotions and intuitions than the Stoic method. There is nothing better to look for in life than the epicurean. And just as we domesticated Christianity into a Germanic folk religion, and just as we manufactured chivalry to lead Aryan men to Christian ends. These are the needs of many common men, while Nietzsche, Aristotle, Alexander, Jefferson and Frederick are examples for those of us who are not common men. And it is only Aristotelianism, Paganism, Paganism and Christianity together that produce a religion for all classes.

We have always been an Aristotelian people (natural law), pagan (nature and ancestors) and pagan (heroes and tribes). With competition between the martial, magical, literary and rational in competition.

Send reply addiction

EXPLANATION OF THE SPIRITUAL

—“What do you say to people who have had very spiritual experiences that they attribute to their religion? Tell them you figured it out? I don't see how that's going to work.” — Mitchell Ryan

They had the experience. They felt it. The fact that it was produced by the imagination is no different from imagining a ghost in the dark, or a car turning a corner that doesn't exist, or an argument with a loved one that didn't happen or could happen. We feel all these things. We experience both the imagination of the context, the imagination of what could happen or is happening, and the feeling of being in it, and we remember it.

Our brains are at work all the time filling with memory or prediction the "blueprint" that our senses are continually composing for us out of meaning, memory and prediction, with continual recurrence of context.

These experiences existed. The conditions that cause them are real or imagined. We have the ability to predict or predict. That is the purpose of memory. We can predict all kinds of outcomes and then "feel" them (imagine ourselves in them).

The fact that you can imagine yourself having a "religious experience" or imagine yourself as King Arthur and feel that experience is just a matter of the context that you imagine and practice.

The most "intense" experience I've ever had was getting really sick with a fever, reading a Conan novel, and experiencing myself instead. It is STILL the most intense experience I have ever had.

Is it a religious experience or is a religious experience just a different story in a different dream?

The question is only whether you are an addict who reinforces your addiction or not.

Most of us don't. Some of us do.

The question is, do you keep your agency (and experience) or do you keep your addiction instead of agency (and experience).

Why teach religion?

WHY? DO WE TEACH RELIGION? COST AND ERROR.

“'Religion is a shitty law, worse literature and bad manners. Paganism is simply thanking each other, our ancestors and nature for bringing us into being. Debts are just debts. Debts as a means of encouraging us to pay them properly.”—

The myth must only be imagined and accepted. Philosophy must be reasoned and understood to be imagined and accepted. Science must be measured, reasoned and understood, to be visualized and accepted.

Myths are easier to teach than measurement, calculation and reason. Myths are false in the sense that they are mere analogies, but having stood the test of time, they produce "true" or "corresponding" actions.

It is easy to make mistakes with measurement, calculation and reason, and difficult with myth. Why? What we convey through myth requires only analogy with experience. What we must measure, calculate, and reason with is, in fact, outside our direct experience. In other words, there is more falsehood but less error in religion.

In the same vein, why do we have these forms of ethics:
instinctive, imitated, mythical, virtue, rule and result?
Responder:Pedagogy.

Why do we have fairy tales, myths and legends, history, literature and philosophy? Reply:Pedagogy.

Why do we teach arithmetic, mathematics, geometry, calculus, non-Euclidean geometry and statistics?
Responder:Pedagogy.

Why do we argue with each other using emotional approval and disapproval, morality, reason, rationalism, historical analogy, empirical evidence (direct), economic evidence (indirect), and empirical-operational-rational argument?
Responder?Abiliity.

Religion is a grammar of cognition

Every language consists of narration (changes of state). We program our generations with stories. We calculate with stories. Each grammar only requires a means of telling a story, a means of disambiguation, a means of internal consistency, and a means of decidability.

The question is only whether the lessons must be false. Germans use fairy tales to demarcate between teaching children to be aristocratic (and therefore desireless). Russian fairy tales teach children to be skeptical (and therefore free from needs). Abrahamists lie to substitute present desires for false future promises, at the cost of the ignorance imposed by the falsehood. Parables that are so obviously just parables are unassuming.

The gods exist as information: a measurement system

The gods exist as numbers, counts, weights and volumes exist: their objective function is to provide a standard of weight and measurement, and to do so for those human values ​​that help us to cooperate in some group's evolutionary strategy.

Such an anthropomorphized standard of weight and measure told in narrative form is intuitive, independent of one's knowledge and skill, and insulated from rational argument, and is therefore an artificial false measure.

While Buddhist rituals, Stoic virtues, deliberate choice of rational philosophy or purely scientific knowledge raise one's demands and increase one's choice.

The beauty of tort law, pagan gods, and Western hierarchical disciplines, all of which provide a means of mindfulness, is that they adapt to the individual and provide a market for individual needs.

The beauty of monopoly gods is that they are very cheap, require little or no understanding, and create a monopoly and relative equality of understanding in the world.

The fact that monotheism brought about a thousand-year-long dark age through monopoly should not be lost on us. While only a few centuries in the ancient and modern worlds market mindfulness through an increasingly complex hierarchy of technologies that, like virtue, rule and ethics of results, or myth, wisdom, literature, reason and science can mature with each of us. .

It is a fallacy to ask whether or not the gods exist. There are measurement standards. The gods are a yardstick. A rich pattern, as numbers are a rich pattern with many applications. Thus, the gods exist as parameters.

Do they exist as in 'persist'? Then no. But neither do the numbers. Not the positions. The universe can't remember, so it can't use positions, only states and forces in time.

Therefore, the gods do not exist in any other form than as a varied set of weights and measures by which we receive mindfulness and decision-making in personal, interpersonal, and communal strategies of cooperation, contentment, achievement, conflict, and warfare.

Now, we humans can talk about constant relations in many different grammars:
from logic to mathematics, to algorithms, to processes and procedures, to models and simulations, to markets and the high causal density of reality, to descriptions, to ideal fictions that lack an understanding of causality beyond internal correspondence, to fictions that inform by analogy or inference, to conflatory fictionalisms that combine magic(technology): pseudoscience, myth(history): pseudohistory, wisdom literature(law): pseudo-rationalism.

And these grammars provide ongoing relationships between the physical universe and the speech that describes our imaginations, or not.

Some of our grammars produce 'stories' that correspond to reality and some do not, some to a possible reality and some do not, and some to parables that correspond or not in some way, and each of these correspondences provides us with attention. full. or not, and agency in reality or not.

Fortunately, we can measure both attention and agency and its consequences.

And in general, like anything else, there's a sweet spot between the twin axes of (a) mindfulness and concern and (b) correspondence and fiction.

And it's pretty obvious (empirically) that it's cheaper to teach mindfulness and allegory through fiction (acceptance) and more expensive to teach concern and truth (ambition).

And that superior intelligence reduces the cost of teaching the truth and inferior intelligence limits us to fictions.

Intuition (analogy) is always cheaper than reason (measurement).

The geometry of meaning: the demand for narrative

From the series:

math/logic > science > philosophy > religion

We can build the series:

physical > mental > emotional,

And the series:

logic > description > fiction,

And the series:

associable > reasonable > calculable > computable.

And we can use them to calculate the series:

lack of agency > potential agency > demonstrated agency

Demand to satisfy our wants

The weak-willed want religion, to defend themselves against the will of others;
The person capable of willing wants philosophy, to defend his will and;
The die-hards want science, to put their will into action;
And the strongest will want Lei:
Because the law is the means by which the strong impose their will.

We all want what our Agency requires.

Can we eliminate religious education?

NO, ACTUALLY NO. BUT THAT STATEMENT REQUIRES THAT WE DEFINE RELIGION AS MARKET DEMANDS AND NOT ACTUAL MEANS OF PRODUCTION.

— “As unrealistic as a goal is, wouldn’t a world without organized religion be the ideal situation? Or is there some benefit of religion that I don't see?" — Dan Hopkins

Religion is just education. that is all. Period. The 'trick' of both the church and the state is to say that the church does not educate, or that the state's education is enough.

We need training in physical fitness, mindfulness, customs-ethics-morals-rituals (commons payments), the laws, the means of calculation that we consider the 3Rs, housekeeping skills, and job skills. .

It does not provide, as before, physical fitness. It provides mindfulness in the personal, interpersonal, and public spheres of life. It provides some of the customs, ethics, moral rituals that are the positive laws of the social order (not negative laws like the law itself). Provides a place to do public procurement (this is my son, this is my promise to the community, this is my partner, this is our property, this person has passed away and his property can be distributed). It is, to some extent, a computational necessity, which means it sucks not to have that mindfulness. He provides children's parables and myths that are no less a form of calculation about action in the world than laws, logic and mathematics. But there is no reason why we cannot have lessons, parables, myths and stories for all classes of people at all stages of their lives, all containing the same messages.

There is no reason why the church, rather than the school, post office or library, should not remain the center of civic life, and why government should not be relegated to the production and maintenance of common material goods, just as we maintain the business. outside religion.

What do we learn from religion?

What we learn from religion can be taught by many methods, and the Abrahamic religions are one of the worst possible methods because they have a history of manufacturing ignorance. Despite being the most literate people in Europe, Jews contributed nothing to humanity for two thousand years until they converted to Aristotelianism (testimonial truth).

Christianity cheaply created order but maintained the ignorance that reduced the rate of literacy, learning and innovation to near zero for over a thousand years. Islam destroyed the accumulated capital of every one of the great civilizations of the ancient world, except India, China and southern Africa, which were geographically isolated from Muslim invaders, and their continued destruction of capital and compulsory ignorance by predetermination imposed by religion.

From the major religions of Abrahamism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Ancestry and Nature Worship and Stoicism, it is quite clear without exception that Nature and Ancestor Worship and Stoicism are the ideal methods. , particularly for the ideal group evolutionary strategy: ethnocentrism and nationalism. In fact, any other strategy is far worse than ethnocentrism. And only ethnocentrism leads to continued beneficial eugenic evolution, resisting regression to the mean by continuing underclass reproduction dysgenesis.

This is not to say that the church (universal education and cults) and temples (banks and personal cults) are not good things. The church (community, lesson, oath, and feast ritual) is a good thing if you're actually streaming temporarily useful content. (Not currently.)

But the lies of the Abrahamic religions are terribly destructive compared to the Trials of Achilles, hero, ancestor, and nature worship, or the continual self-authorship of virtues in Stoicism and Buddhism, and our original nature religions. , ancestor worship (gratitude) and Stoicism (mindfulness) were far superior in creating mentally healthy people who were able to adapt to ever-changing conditions and possessed independent minds: something authoritarian Semitic religions could not tolerate and actively repressed.

Religion is dying everywhere. And it's being replaced by things that are almost as bad, if not worse. The question is how to provide the necessary services of religions in a way that is not constituted by lies that do not unfold in scientifically verifiable and therefore indisputable prose.

The problem is…. We all love our little lies.

And in my world, it's lies that cause all the world's problems, justify all the world's crimes, and encourage all the world's evil.

The problem is that religion is the ABSOLUTELY WORST POSSIBLE way to achieve mindfulness. And of the worst possible types, Abrahamic monotheism is the ABSOLUTELY WORST possible religion, regardless of whether it is Jewish, Christian or Muslim.

the hard problem

RELIGION IS THE DIFFICULT PROBLEM OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCES

Religion is surprisingly the "hard problem" of the social sciences. Every other problem I set out to solve (or at least understand) was trivial in comparison. The truth took me a year. The grammars took me less than six months. And these are very difficult problems. Religion was much more difficult.

People are unaware of the options available to them, and their intuitions have been so successfully trained by the only technique they already have, that they cannot imagine training their intuitions by any other means.

So (a) men need mindfulness, and (b) and men need mindfulness to different degrees, and (c) mindfulness is somewhat dependent on mindfulness genetics (men less than women overall and women in general), (d) personality needs, (e) class circumstances, (f) political-cultural circumstances, all of which generate (or do not generate) demand for mindfulness.

Now this attention can be provided by the Hindu media (literary immersion), the three Abrahamic monotheistic media (organized indoctrination) of low (Islamic), working (Christian) and middle (Jewish) religion; Buddhist means (training); rather 'new age/European' media (philosophy as a substitute for religion); Shinto and ritual means (ritual); or by the cognitive-behavioral education we call 'stoicism' for the context.

And there's a lot to learn just from the ORDER of these training methods: how much infrastructure is needed to preserve the "illusion" of myth x argument x ritual x education. And how much 'skill' given the means of training (immersion in Hinduism through individual education in Stoicism). But that's just a matter of enough WEALTH to pay for the TRAINING means against a given time frame: i.e. producing the mass illusions of ancient religions required an information vulnerability (absence of knowledge and alternatives) that existed only in the past – and no longer does.

Therefore, if one wants to produce a religion that is not made up of lies, it is perfectly possible to do so, with the total absence of religious parables. And instead a reliance on the parables of history and training in the virtues.

Christianity has a very simple set of underlying principles that are made up of just four statements. Islam and Judaism can be too, but this is horrible. The four statements of Christianity are quite simple and will generally produce consistent goods.

There is simply no need to lie to people and train them to be vulnerable to lies, and train priests to lie and politicians to lie by the same means to teach these four rules.

Enough of the lies of Judaism, it degenerates into Christianity, it degenerates into Islamism, it evolves into Marxism, postmodernism, feminism.

No more lies. People need "imaginary friends, parents, leaders" for well-understood reasons: those around them have failed to provide them with positive socialization and empowerment through existential means.

We are capable of teaching true speech (science) and there is no reason why we cannot provide positive socialization and training (mindfulness) by equally true means.

convergence in truth: continuous increase in the accuracy of correspondence between reality, perception, cognition, memory, description, negotiation and defense.

religion your negative

So when you say we need 'religion', we all need theservicesprovided by 'religion' whether we consume them directly or indirectly through others.

The question is whether we need supernaturalism, fictionalism and outright falsehood. The answer is demonstrably no.

On the other hand, more precisely, it means that those of us with a lot of agency don't need it,but we wish its consequences.

This means that those with the pretense of agency, the "atheists", need a replacement and have chosen pseudo-rationalism and pseudoscience.

This means that some of us pretend because we understand the value of religion, but we regard superstition, the supernatural, fictionalism, and outright falsehood as simply an absurd cost of obtaining the good produced by rituals and discipline.

And that means that those who lack the capacity to trust those with more agency than themselves need superstition to quench their emotions, supernaturalism to lend authority to fictionalism, and outright falsehood as a means of insulating themselves from the suggestion of those they would like. . I enjoyed diverting them from the strategies embodied in all of the above.

There is no reason why we cannot bring about the production of a true religion by suppressing a fictitious religion. History replaces myth. Fiction fictionalism. Scientific superstition. It is the natural law of men, resistance against suggestion, deceit and predation.

our natural religions

We had no religion. We had Law, Festival and Myth.

"Perhaps it is misleading to even say that there was such aa religion like paganismat the beginning of the [Common Era]... It might be less confusing to say that the pagans, before their competition with Christianitydid not have any religionin the sense in which that word is commonly used today. They had no discursive tradition on ritual or religious matters (other than philosophical debate or antiquarian treatise), no organized belief system to which they were obliged to commit themselves, no structure of authority peculiar to the religious arena, and, above all, no commitment with a particular group of people or set of ideas different from their family and political context. If this is the correct view of pagan life, it follows that we must consider paganism simply as a religion invented during the course of the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD, in competition and interaction with Christians, Jews and others. - North 1992

PAGÃO VS PAGÃO

Technically, "pagan" is the name of a Christian critique of pagans, the way Marxists used capitalism to criticize the middle class. Pagan means, as far as I can tell, "domestic religion", or more correctly "popular religion" or "religion of nature". While monotheism is a political religion, an unnatural religion.

—“This process of accommodation resulted in the essential transformation of Christianity from a religion of universal salvation to a Germanic and eventually European folk religion.”—

The West has always been polytheistic because it is polygrammatic

While it is the secret to the West's competitive advantage, we are sometimes misled by our (false) historical narrative: the West never engaged in fusion, creating "a book", so to speak. We always had:

1)lei(limits) for the ruling classes (paternity),
2)Business(pragmatism) for the producing classes.
2)Religion(utopianism) for Science/pseudoscience, philosophy/pseudorationalism and Theology/fraud for Education (kindergarten) classes (church/academy).

And they always maintained the three states of the kingdom using the three methods of coercion:

1)Law/Limits: Strength/ostracism of the movement/resources/own life.
2)Exchange/Utility: Payment / Remuneration / Ostracism of consumption.
3)Religion:Resistance / Undermine / Gossip / Reunion / Shame / Ostracism for tribe insurance opportunity.

Without the Supernatural: Stoicism

Stoicism

Stoicism consists of disciplined self-authorship.
The purpose of Stoicism is to teach mindfulness.
There is no escapist mindfulness, but actionable mindfulness.
Not fantasy mindfulness, but actionable mindfulness.
Not victim mindfulness, but actionable mindfulness.
List a number of virtues (these are open to debate)
Write a plan for your life that includes accomplishments and virtues.
Every day, plan your day. Every night, check your progress.
Repeat this process until you do it naturally.
The aim is to isolate yourself from the opinions, influences and manipulations of others, while gradually achieving your goals, without falling prey to the manipulation, influence and opinion of others.
That's it.
That is all.
The rest is just a novel involving this discipline.
It is the best method we know so far, with Buddhism a very distant and escapist second.

RPO ON STOICISM

Revilo P Oliver was one of the best classicists America has had. It is a pity that, due to his political associations, his name is now almost forgotten.

In several essays, but especially in The Origins of Christianity, one can read:
„...Unlike Epicureanism and the New Academy, which were philosophical products of the Greek mind and expounded by the Greeks, Stoicism was a strange doctrine imposed on the Aryan peoples of antiquity...

„...Stoicism was founded and widely promoted by the Semites, and although it included, by chance or design, much that conformed to the Aryan spirit and mentality, it was a hybrid, a bastard philosophy, because it also contained much that was Semitic. and alien to our race.

This criticism can make you feel uncomfortable. I understand. We all respect Stoicism because it was endowed with glamorous prestige by the great men whose creed it was. We are Aryans, and due to a racial imperative inherent in our blood, much stronger than reason, we admire heroism and strength. Stoicism was indeed the creed of Cato of Utica and many other Roman aristocrats who lived bravely and died proudly, facing their fate with unwavering determination. We instinctively pay tribute to such men and even more venerate women of exemplary worth, like Arria, the devoted wife of A. Caecina Paetus ("Paete, non dolet"). Panaetius made an originally Semitic doctrine a creed which included much that was in keeping with the spirit and mentality of our race.
But however much we admire the great Romans, we must remember that, as Gilbert Murray has pointed out, Stoicism from its origins retained a latent fanaticism in its religiosity and was intended to offer a kind of salvation to unhappy humanity; despite its ostensible appeal to nature and reason, it was a kind of evangelicalism "whose professions dazzled reason." He intended to deduce from biology an asceticism that was in fact fundamentally inhuman and therefore irrational, for example, the limitation of sexual intercourse to the generation of children. Though it was the creed of heroes, we can't help but feel that there was something sickly and misshapen about him.

Furthermore, Stoicism was an intellectual disaster. He carried with him the poisonous cosmopolitanism that speaks of "One World" and imagines that Divine Providence has made all human beings part of the Divine Plan, so that there are no racial differences, but only differences in the Stoics' education and understanding of Truth. . That is why today we so often do not know the race of an individual who learned to speak and write Greek (or Latin) well and received or adopted a civilized name. Our information sources were so confused by the insipid talk about the Brotherhood of Men that they forgot to discriminate…”

epicureanism

EPICURUS AND HIS PHILOSOPHY

Epicurus was an Athenian philosopher who lived at the beginning of the Hellenistic period (341-270 BC) and founded the philosophical school of the Epicureans, called "Garden". Epicurus' teachings are a timeless source of inspiration as the philosopher understood the nature of humans and the universe and described how to achieve a happy life.

He was the first humanist philosopher because he was interested in the happiness of all people. At a time when the Platonic Academy and the Aristotelian Lyceum taught only rich men, the Epicurean Garden taught rich and poor, men and women, prostitutes and slaves. Epicurus was the first existential psychotherapist, according to psychiatrist Irvin Yalom, because he was interested in calming the mental agitation caused by the subconscious fear of death.

He was the first enlightening philosopher because he realized that people could be saved from superstition and irrational metaphysical fears just by observing nature and having objective scientific knowledge. He was the first philosopher to teach that true reverence for the divine is respect and admiration for the wonderful and blissful nature of the gods, while it is foolish and disrespectful to fear the deities or want to use them as servants to satisfy our desires.

For Epicurus there is no pleasant life if it is not accompanied by wisdom, goodness and justice and there is no wisdom, goodness and justice if there is no pleasure in life. Justice is not self-existent in nature, but results from people's agreement not to harm and not to be harmed, that is, the social contract. Epicurus considered any idea of ​​duty or goal that was not anthropocentric (human-centered) hypocritical. A prudent, virtuous, and pleasurable life with relative self-sufficiency can guarantee human freedom.

Before Epicurus, Socrates' disciple and Plato's colleague Aristippus taught that the purpose of life is the constant enjoyment of carnal pleasures. Epicurus completely disagreed with this wild and foolish hedonism of Aristippus. Rather, he thought that the purpose of the prudent human being is happiness (well-being), i.e., the absence of physical pain (aponia) and the absence of mental agitation (ataraxia). Epicurus taught that the blissful state of aponia and ataraxia can only be achieved by using prudence in selecting the satisfaction of natural and necessary desires (e.g., eating when hungry) and avoiding unnatural and unnecessary desires (such as vanity). . Without rejecting the pleasures of the body, Epicurus thought that mental pleasures are superior and that the most pleasant and peaceful life is born from the scientific study of nature and the teaching of a healthy philosophy that promotes people's happiness. According to him, wisdom is the most important personal virtue and friendship is the most important social good. For the Athenian philosopher, making friends is the most important way to achieve a happy life (“we can save each other”).

Epicurus combined the atomic physics of Democritus and the biological ethics of Aristotle, empirically testing and correcting every point of the previous philosophies with admirable consistency. Using a methodology of observation and analogy that he developed, the Athenian philosopher built an extremely coherent worldview without conceptual contradictions. He was the first philosopher who spoke of the existence of chance in nature that allows the existence of human free will. He was the first to link free will with prudence, critical thinking, responsibility, and the pleasurable pursuit of virtue. He was the first to talk about the progress of humanity from the primitive to the civilized era, based on the observation of nature, technological development and the moral and cultural maturation of human beings. Using observational data from different areas of knowledge, Epicurus was able to express points of view that were confirmed in the last two centuries of science: the weight of atoms, the new properties of molecules resulting from their atomic structure, the materiality of the human mind, the molecular basis of disease, the evolution of living organisms, the many worlds of the universe. The witty philosopher even suggested the existence of extraterrestrial life, a notion that modern science is still investigating.

Epicurean philosophy lasted nearly seven centuries in Hellenistic and Roman times, helping thousands of people live happily. With the advent of the Middle Ages, human civilization receded and Epicurus' philosophy was maligned and forgotten for a millennium. During the Renaissance, Roman Epicurean Lucretius's great scientific poem "On the Nature of Things" was discovered from obscurity and influenced many humanists. Two centuries later, Epicurean philosophy was revived by the natural philosopher and Catholic priest Gassendi. This renaissance led to the Ages of Enlightenment and Science that influenced (among many others) Galileo, Newton, Locke, Diderot, the third President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson, Karl Marx, John Stuart Mill, and Charles Darwin.

–“Plato's philosophy was for 'intellectuals'; Plato's ethics is linked to his entire system of knowledge, including politics. Epicurus' doctrines mainly appealed to the middle classes, the bourgeoisie; Epicurus' ethics separates itself from politics and joins only physics (and Aristotle). Jesus' teachings were for the very poor, the lost sheep. The ethics of Jesus is isolated from both the physical and the political and fits into a developmental scheme of salvation.”—

CUrt and I were trying to figure out why the Epicurean philosophy was so easily eliminated after the fall of the Roman Empire. There were never strong Epicurean communities. Epicureans prioritized their small groups and chose not to get involved in politics (a consequence of the civil wars that ravaged the ancient world).

I recently read "Liberalism: Ancient and Modern" by Leo Strauss. The central and longest chapter is his "Notes on Lucretius". He identifies one of the main principles of the Epicurean teaching, that the world we love is not eternal, because everyone is mortal within the eternal universe of moving atoms, as "the most terrible truth".

Philosophers can live with this truth with a calm mind. But most human beings cannot. And consequently, most human beings can only find peace of mind through the "pleasant illusion" of a religious belief that the world of human concerns is sustained by an intelligent and loving designer.

I suppose the temptation of Platonic "intellectuals" to lead the "lost sheep" while isolating the middle classes has always been there.

The anti-European revolution

THE SEMITIC DESTRUCTION

The scariest thing about this story is that it confirms that hell doesn't have the fury of a woman scorned, so to speak. The mob, spurred on by the priests, was as destructive as an atomic bomb.

Democritus, father of modern science, nothing remains. Aristotle, just reading notes. Cicero described his literary style as "a river of gold" that one can only dream of. The Epicurean tradition survived thanks to the discovery of the only surviving manuscript of 'De Rerum Natura'

and the excavations at Herculaneum:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villa_of_the_Papyri

I can easily imagine the mafia in a few decades burning down Monticello.

Christianity

A treatment of the Christian religion.

As I said;

1. Our next expansion of incremental suppression by Natural Law is in large part to extend protection against commercial fraud to all areas of political life. This extension has been necessary to save our people from extermination, due to their genetic, cultural and religious vulnerability to false promises and sophisms (frauds).
2. Our people are currently being conquered by the use of a particular technique invented by the ancient Jews and practiced today: false promise and moral hazard bait, and argued with Pilpul (justifying sophistry) and criticism (critical sophistry).
3. Marxism (working classes), postmodernism (intellectual classes), feminism (women) and denialism (political classes) are simply other means of defeating Europeans in the present, using the same techniques as Judaism (undermining), Christianity (undermining) and Islam (conquering) in the ancient world. And we were only saved in the past by the restoration of Aryanism by Northern Europeans in both the old and new worlds.
4. The Abrahamic religions are a cancer to humanity: Judaism, Christianity and Islam, and they destroyed or almost destroyed (us) all the great civilizations of the ancient world. They are, figuratively speaking, the most dysgenic thing that has ever happened to mankind, with only manorialism, aggressive hanging of protesters, wars and severe winters providing resistance to genetic cultural and institutional regression.
5. Among these lies, however, is the ideal group strategy, which is why Christianity helps primitive peoples develop a middle class:
6. a) that the commons are sacred, that is, not for personal consumption or imposition of costs.
7. b) the eradication of hatred from the human heart.
   c) the extension of kinship love to non-kin.
8. d) the demand for personal acts of charity and personal expenses,
9. e) the extent of exhaustive forgiveness before punishment, servitude, slavery, death or war.

This strategy is logically and empirically the ideal evolutionary group strategy, if limited to the in-group.

6. But Christianity is not limited to the group and universal sense, it is suicidal. The strategy has a very limited range of success, and that's basically the rate at which we produce generations. And therefore, we cannot use this strategy in conjunction with immigration (invasion).
7. But Christianity says we are equal and we are not. Many people are a dead weight or a detriment to the population and it is better to remove them, but since others do the work of expelling Christians, the “hitchhiker” (breaking the Christian rule).
8. But Christians today do not perform personal acts of charity. they do the opposite. They point to virtue. And as such, they are no longer Christians. For without personal acts of charity (not monetary, but interpersonal) one is no longer a Christian, but entitled to the benefits of Christianity, without paying the costs of it.
9. The Churches and Christianity are in decline, impoverished, closing and missing a new generation of members (certain death) for the simple reason: that the only religious group that reformed post-Darwin were the evangelicals. They moved toward Jesus over God, they moved toward mindfulness over submission, they maintained the family, and they emphasized personal relationships and large-scale gatherings. Mormons have an exceptional social order, but they are running out of population to convert, have broken ethnicity, and have not adjusted accordingly. These are common problems for companies that cannot produce results without new products or new customers. Orthodoxy is less political and more ritualistic and seems to have survived simply by not seeking to gain or maintain the political and economic power of the Catholic and Protestant churches. Catholicism shamelessly renounced Europe and Anglo-Saxonism, and today it is an African, South American and East Asian religion because it cannot reform or survive without the economic rents it had in the Middle Ages.
10. I cannot and will not leave a 'hole' in the law for Abrahamists to use false promises, moral hazard bait, Pilpul (justifying sophistry) and criticism (critical sophistry) and the associated straw manipulation (distraction and overload), for the first time Come back and try to harm my people with your deceit. That would mean not solving the problem permanently, and our law must do that for our survival.
11. I have emptied and disambiguated religion into its necessary components. These components have only one purpose, and that is to provide the necessary attention given our prey's response and neuroticism related to the uncertainty of the human scale of cooperation, rather than suffering (bordering on starvation) and disease endemic under agrarian life. and the more so in view of the present problem of the dissolution of the family, the only remaining tribe in which its members can be assured.
12. These components consist of

(a) Some method of gaining mindfulness, through some kind of ritual,
(b) some mythology that provides a common group competitive strategy across classes that allows for conflict-free cooperation toward a shared end among people of great difference in ability, worth, and resources,
(c) ritual of recitation, oath and feast to demonstrate and reinforce and repeat the investment in that strategy,
(d) festival, party, sport and vacation which again reduce differences between classes and reinforce the sense of reciprocity and proportionality which the (purely analytical) subconscious requires to maintain trust.
(c) the intergenerational transfer of family and social debt obligations.

And these religions evolved in this sequence:

(a) to bury the dead (beware of loss due to paying debts)
(b) celebrate victories or hunts (pay debts)
(c) sacrifice (make a deposit)
(d) seasons (payment of deposits and debts)
(e) organization of planting and harvesting (forecasts)
(f) a political religion (organizing a large illiterate society in the form of storytelling)
(g) a weakening religion: reversing evolution and power by undermining the aristocracy with writing and speech.
(h) pseudoscientific religion: waging war against a people with economic promises and false political promises instead of life after death.

A religion is not what it asserts or its doctrine commands or the wisdom literature advises, but the result of its observation and practice regardless of these assertions. A study of the world's religions over time clearly illustrates that while each religious system provides some benefits, it comes at a great cost.

(a) Gypsies and Judaism through the persecution of hosts for their survival by parasitism. They have been parasitic peoples throughout history. gypsies through petty theft and prostitution, Judaism through dispossession, the provocation of moral hazard, alliance with the state and the pursuit of rents against the people, its culture, its norms and its institutions; and Islam directly, under physical threat, indoctrination by force, imposition of submission rather than cunning, manipulation and deceit.

(b) Islam results in internal genetic, cultural and institutional decline (consumption of accumulated capital) and the inability to develop a central government, a bureaucratic class free of corruption, an educated population and a demographic distribution sufficient for literacy and scientific knowledge.

(c) Christianity, vulnerability to deception, vulnerability to military conquest, isolation from scientific knowledge and escapism over action, leaving a minority of the aristocratic class in charge of society to protect it from the same decline as Islam.

(d) the detachment of Buddhism from reality and the encouragement of tolerance rather than action, leaving the aristocratic Chinese-Confucian and martial Japanese parent classes as the fathers of these civilizations. and people in ecstasy rather than decline.

(e) Hinduism is hard to judge but is perhaps the most honest religion yet leaves people vulnerable to conquest by any passing group. Whether this is a result of demography or religion is difficult to understand. But the general order and pacifism of religion and politics, the subservience of the people, the lack of a militia left India vulnerable to divide and conquer politically and easy conquest militarily. Russia has its winters and scale, but India has its population and scale, both of which are hard to beat in the long run for reasons unrelated to your culture or wisdom. Pakistan is the center of ancient India and has been conquered and taken over and is now hostile to the core of the remaining civilization.

In the old world, Indian secular thought, Chinese secular thought, and European secular thought seem to be the only valuable thought in the world to organize a large poor, ignorant, unintelligent, and superstitious underclass so as to produce enough income for them to live on. patriarchal aristocracy. can keep the territory of the conquest. The rest was just habit.

We cannot yet know, but it is likely that groups did then as they do today, practicing allegory grammar at one end and proportion at the other, depending on the median population distribution and what proportion of the secular ascension and scientific population is due to. largely to not only commerce, but also to the eugenic slaughter of classes who depend on superstition and deceit for their survival.

1. The organizing property of the West was common law. The gods were not superior, but those who were to be tolerated or asked for, or to whom we could ascend for heroism. This resulted in a separation of rule (law) and festival (religion) rather than the totalitarian fusion of religion and law. Leave a contest open. The Greeks invented reason and the moral law. The Romans invented empirical law and repudiated Greek idealism, in line with traditional European tradition. Graeco-Anatolians cited Epicureanism and Stoicism as means of providing the middle and upper-middle classes with possible care in the world of reason. The Romans expanded it. as far as I know, Law, Ancestral Thanksgiving, Archetypal Thanksgiving (representatives of Kinship and Nature), and Stoicism are the only "good" religions, free of the vulnerabilities of deceit and the Semitic cancer they bring to all civilizations.
2. So I know how to make our natural religion emerge by combining the good of Christianity with the good of the ancestors and nature-grace (intergenerational transfer of debts), and I know how to use Stoicism, Epicureanism, ritual, feasting and the oath to restore our people . I know how to restore religion (teaching, education) to a central function of the social order. I know that, in time, religions will adapt to natural incentives. But I don't know how to do this without falling for the Abrahamic lie (Pilpul) or forbidding the church to make claims that everything in Christianity is a children's tale or a lie, and that we should draw wisdom from it, despite its falsehood, rather than claim that all of this is true. And yes, I understand that the reason these religions work is that they are producing a natural drug response within the brain's reward system, and that followers experience an addiction response when they feel threatened and defend the source of their damn it. I understand the psychology underlying the disintermediation of fictional characters and the value it holds for the human mind, particularly the weak, vulnerable and undisciplined.
3. Worse, I understand that our history is just that of the gods themselves, for having taken humanity out of ignorance and superstition, poverty and disease. And it is our people, our kin and our civilization in the pre-Christian and post-Christian worlds that did this. And that this comparison between truth and lies makes the Semitic people and their death cults look like the peasants they are, and the liars they are, and the low-confidence people they are, and the cancer they make them out to be. So why submit to evil gods and parasitic and destructive failed peoples who are a cancer to humanity and bearers of ignorance, superstition and the dark ages, instead of thanking (paying the debt) to our own ancestors, our own ancestors? gods (archetypes)? , our own heroes and our own accomplishments, and the beauty, wonder and abundance of nature itself?
4. If we are to survive, we must survive the Semites and their death cults of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and the language of death and deceit we call Abraham: False Promise, Moral Hazard Bait, Sophistry, and Pilpul Criticism. .
5. It is through the window of Christianity and submission that these people lie, bait, blame, invade and destroy. If Christianity is our weakness, then I see it must be reformed from a Semitic death cult to the story of a very simple man, son of a Roman soldier and a Jewish prostitute, with a very simple message of mutual love and an end to predation. in each other. And the rest of Saul of Tarsus' lies must disappear forever. Along with the excuses for these lies we call theology and doctrine, and the long literature of our defeat, conquest, and submission. Rather, the law, science, truth and history, the glory and divinity of our people.
6. So, in the conflict between the future of our people, and their addiction to a death cult and the means to lie within that death cult, and the promise of a new religion that takes the best of everything, and one of the lies, I chose the new one: ours. My people. Our people. The European people, that people who dragged humanity from a victim of nature to its master. Man is now the god he imagined. But it is because of the Indo-European people, and in particular the people of Europe and their strange law in the ancient and modern world, while the Chinese hid behind their desert and walls and left us the hard work of resisting animals. We've been at war with the Semites ever since we crossed the Bosphorus. And they have been winning for nearly a hundred years. It's time to end the war, separate from them and banish them and their ideas from our lands, our minds and our religions. Because the alternative is our extinction or theirs.

The Functional Problem of Western Religion

1 – Separation between education and religion
…….. – The failure of religions to reform in response to scientific enlightenment.
…….. – The failure of religions to reform in response to Darwin.
…….. – The Academy taking over the functions of the church due to the failure of the church to reform.
…….. – The End of the separation of the West and the competition between Religion and State for the adoption of the synthesis of cosmopolitan Judaism and Puritan postmodernism by the State, the Academy, the Media complex to which the current generation of thinkers refers as “The Cathedral Complex”, or simply “The Cathedral” for short.
…….. – The start of the state funded New Indulgences (we call them 'university degrees') which promise upper middle class level of consumption rather than forgiveness of sins and entry into heaven – when the boom The rapid expansion that the consuming class was only a temporary product of the combined tragedies of the Great European Civil War, the destruction of centuries of accumulated productive capacity, plus the destruction and retardation of the expansion of world production caused by the movement we call world communism. (and now, its heir, world Islam).

2 – Academia took control of business education and 'religious' education (liberalism) but failed to take control of family education and more often than not helped the state to destroy black families first, then white families and now everyone. families in order to (a) provide women with child care (education), force them to work (feminism), and then consume all the product of women's labor so that the war generation and baby boomers could retire earlier and lie down on the floor. the labor of the next generation and then the immigration of labor from the third world to provide cheap labor (social programs) that cannot replace the older generation due to less added capacity. The destruction of the family has increased with the attempt to create a mobile workforce and thereby deprive women of the multigenerational support needed to raise more than one child without burning out. And now it's impossible for women to have children again and raise them because of tax demands placed on their income by lower-class immigration and a dependence on the elderly but physically fit enough to work.

3 – The state-sponsored secular 'religion' we currently teach is pseudoscientific (false and dishonest), where the content of the Christian religion (the extension of kinship pardons to non-kin) was 'true' but conveyed by nonsense and authoritarianism.

4 – One of the undeclared drivers of the current conflict in the United States is not only the decline of the white population and the emergence of cities of color, but science has caught up and since 1990 has been aggressively refuting universalist, globalist and egalitarian democracy. secular socialist religion. And those who are aware of this are... angry... and full of conviction that their traditions and intuitions were correct. That's why they feel betrayed and deceived.

Why Our Christian Religion Fails

LANGUAGES, GRAMMAR, VOCABULARY, MEANING, KNOWLEDGE AND MEANING TESTING TECHNOLOGY

It was a long time ago, and the Levant was a very poor and backward ghetto of the empire, and while we had Roman government, law and commerce, and Greek philosophy, reason and mathematics, primitive peoples had only their primitive language. they spoke and did the best they could: they spoke in a primitive language.

Like the few primitive people living today, they had no reason, no philosophy, no science, no mathematics. And so they had to say something was good or "true" because it was ordained by the gods, not because it was reasonably understandable, rationally consistent, philosophically sound, scientifically provable, or mathematically consistent.

They only had 'because the boss says so' to use as 'that's true'. We can, today, say the same things without primitive language and make truth claims using reason, rationalism, philosophy, science and mathematics. But… our words, grammar and pronunciation, are not the only content of the language, but the meaning, values ​​and emotions that we describe with these sounds, to produce these words, using this grammar.

Just as we have a hard time losing our accents and our grammar, we have a hard time losing the ideas we learn to produce those sounds, words, grammar and language. We all have trouble losing our vocalized and intuited "accents", which we call "biases". They are the foundation upon which all our subsequent words, sentences, paragraphs and stories depend.

Just as Chinese sounds very different from one region to another but uses the same character set to write, we can, in the same culture, do the same thing: use the same words and grammar despite very different meanings and values ​​in our minds we describe them. And so, if someone is brought up using English but learns archaic Semitic parables; or someone is brought up in English, but learns historical and biographical parables; or someone is brought up using English but learns scientific and mathematical principles "parables", so these are very different internal meanings using very similar words.

The difference between ancient parables, historical parables and scientific parables is that we can empathize with anthropomorphic parables without much general knowledge, somewhat less empathize with historical parables with a lot of general knowledge, and sympathize with science only if we have very specific knowledge. In addition to general knowledge. Therefore, the cost of learning to speak each language increases in time and effort.

And so we told primitive peoples and children parables of animals, people, gods and heroes. We tell young adults rules that require reason. We tell adults about law that is internally consistent and requires rationalism. We train science specialists where specialist knowledge is needed. And the old and wise among us who have studied all the parables, the stories, the laws and the sciences, can try to give answers to all these groups in languages ​​that we hope one day they will be able to understand.

Once you understand that we use idioms spoken with common, uncommon and specialized terms, by all people in a political system. But within that system we use multiple languages ​​of MEANING. And that each of these languages ​​of meaning is based on this universal spoken language; and that each of these languages ​​of meaning uses a 'validation' or 'truth testing' technology, ranging from the primitive and experiential and anthropomorphic, to historical analogy, to legal evidence, to the scientifically accurate; and that requires a lot more knowledge, and often a lot more intelligence, for every additional level of precision we add to the anthropomorphic.

So you see that although we use the same basic words and the same grammar, we don't use the same vocabularies; and that vocabularies tell us what technology of understanding a person is relying on, the relative inferiority or superiority of that language in solving problems of increasing precision; how much general knowledge is needed for that person to retain that technology of meaning; and the probability of that person's intelligence using that meaning technology. And that's what we do.

We form hierarchies and classes, and each class uses the same spoken language root and grammar, but uses the language of meaning appropriate to its education, its degree of ability, and its degree of accumulated knowledge. So we don't just judge people on their clothes, body language and manners, but also on the spoken language and the language of meaning they rely on. Because these are demonstrated, rather than reported, evidence of the person acting, speaking, and thinking through clothing, actions, manners, and words.

THE CHURCH HAS SPOKEN AND CONTINUE TO SPEAK

How can you defend Christianity as a market good (something people want to believe) when it is so evident that it is failing to compete in the marketplace? What do socialism, cultural marxism and postmodernism sell that people would rather buy than Christianity? What does Islam sell that people would rather buy than socialism, cultural Marxism, postmodernism and Christianity? Even though it is an evil, it fails to compete against more advanced evils. It doesn't protect us from them, but it does make us more vulnerable to more advanced ailments. Judaism to undermine, Christianity to weaken, Islam to destroy.

Why Our Church Failed

THE CONTENT OF RELIGION AND THE FAILURE OF THE CHURCH

Why did the church fail to reform?

- anti-intellectualism.
– superstition rather than myth.
– peasant instead of middle class
– agrarian rather than industrialism
—suffering more than heroism and possibility.
– Semitic instead of European.

Why did the Church fail to produce a reformer?

– Why not Augustine or Luther?
– Why were Smith/Hume/Jefferson insufficient?
– Why not accommodate Darwin, Menger, Maxwell, Durkheim, Nietzsche?

The answer:Lots of change. Thus, the academy took over the church. The academy has defunded the church. The state took all church land.

It might have been possible if not for the world wars and communism. However, the Germans were very close. British traditionalists were very close. The Church could have seized the opportunity, or it could have defeated the opposition: Marxism. But neither does he. He was lazy and intellectually incompetent.

As far as I know, an organized religion must provide:

(a) a communal setting where individual expression is prohibited. (no signal environment)
(b) a very simple set of understandable laws (strategy)
(c) a method of achieving mindfulness and an excuse for it.
(d) recitation of myths, legends, history, heroes
(e) the application of the wisdom of the past to current problems.
(f) participatory rituals (praying, singing, moving).
(g) participatory vacation (rest – vacation days)
(h) participatory parties (special parties - family)
(i) participatory festivals (sports, plays, games)
(j) an institutional means of transferring all of the above across generations. (profession)

Actions matter much more than words. Acts produce experience. The words just JUSTIFY. The Church was so strongly anti-intellectual that it abandoned the people to the profit-seeking academy, the profit-seeking state, the profit-seeking financial sector, and hid among the poor of the developing world.

Why is organized Christianity losing?

Westerners have been naturalists and empiricists since prehistoric times for the simple reason that the first organizing principle of Western civilization is the military and the sovereignty that a military bestows and demands of every individual in it.

The militia was necessary in the vast European plain for the simple reason that there were no river valleys with a centralized organization of irrigation as in the Southeast, India and the Far East, where a small force could earn income from agricultural production, centralize capital and create central governments and parasitic empires, first by priests, second by warriors, and third by their fusion.

Instead, Westerners had horses, cows, pigs, crops and good arable land, and production remained distributed and, because of this distribution, lower populations but more eugenic evolution (suppression of lower-class reproduction).

Thus, possessors of few numbers, but horse, goldsmith and wheel, compensated for the smaller number with technology, risk taking and maneuver – adaptation to changes.

And as metal, the wheel and the horse were expensive, the families provided them (the knights were armed by the families during and after the crusades; only gunpowder changed the financing. It became cheap for field soldiers).

Such a voluntary militia requires sovereignty. The only way in which sovereignty differences can be resolved is through reciprocity, and the only possible proof of reciprocity is the tort.

In other words, Western common law began and remains empirical. Neither authoritative, nor ideal, nor supernatural. But purely empirical and reciprocal. And it was this first organizing principle that set in motion the evolution of reason, mathematics, engineering, Stoicism, Greek and Roman law, empiricism, and finally science. Because debate has always been necessary. Trade growth only exacerbated and reinforced this behavior.

The Abrahamic Dark Age of Christianity/Judaism/Islam has ended and Westerners have returned to their original traditions. The traditions by which they came out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, hard work, hunger, disease, infant mortality and premature death.

There is nothing good about Christianity that has not existed before. And there is nothing wrong with Christianity that was not put there to undermine the western aristocracy so that the eastern empire could rule a land of the ignorant as despots did in time immemorial in the fertile crescent.

In other words: we've always been empirical and back to type.

The priests' lies no longer fall on illiterate ears.

Why is Christianity Semitic, not European?

INSPIRING BEHAVIOR COMPATIBLE WITH NATURAL LAW, BUT THOUGHT, SPEECH, POLICY AND VIRTUE INCOMPATIBLE WITH IT.

What makes Christianity Semitic and Jewish is the method of presentation (fictional history), the adaptation rather than Homeric repetition (justification), the method of argumentation: Pilpul (sophism), the demand for exclusivity (monotheism), the demand for submission (moral slavery), the demand for obedience (law vs. wisdom) rather than respect and tolerance, the demand for expansion (domination), division and demonization (polyeticism, although Christianity is inferior to Judaism or Islam), the primacy of the priests and conformism (positive) rather than law and conflict resolution (negative), maladaptiveness (return) rather than adaptability (markets), genetics (dysgenic rather than eugenic), and the spread of 'sources of ignorance' ' instead of knowledge and innovation. The fact that it has been called a mass opioid is simply a medical truism, as that is exactly what it does (literally).

The fact that people speak and write Greek in the lands conquered by the Greeks does not make them Greek. What makes group membership an evolutionary strategy is its method of cooperating toward a given end. In the case of West v. Semitic, is Truth, Correspondence, Heroism, Agency, Innovation and Empirical Rule of Law, vs Lying, Non-Correspondence, Slavery, Lack of Agency, Stagnation and Fictitious Rule of Law.

The historical problem facing aristocratic Western man in curing himself of the low-class, effeminate infection of the Abrahamic fallacy is that empirical law, commerce, and science are simply being practiced while literature is being debated. Once you understand this, the parallel between Judaism and Marxism, and Christianity and postmodernism is obvious: Jewish pseudoscience and law that are mismatched, and Christian literature and rationalism that are allegorical and mismatched. They aim to achieve, by overburdening reason, framing obscurantism and suggestion, an appeal to the intuition of interpersonal experience, rather than informing us of the limits of personal perception and experience and the use of physical and logical measures to extend it.

Abrahamisms are sophisms - foranalogy, not Measurements - byDescription. Western man measures the empirical to understand and overcome reality. Semitic man fictionalizes to ignore and avoid reality.

Abrahamic fictionalism is the complete opposite of the Western description. They tell fictions. We report events.

HOW WAS OUR NATIVE RELIGION ABRAHAMIZED:

1. Poet:Homer -> Saul of Tarsus
2. Prophet:Aristotle -> Abraham
3. Hero:Achilles -> Jesus, Muhammad
4. Super hero:Mitra -> Moisés
5. Divinity:Undefeated Sun -> Jesus
6. Deus:Dyeus Pater -> Yahweh/God
7. Conscience:Stoicism and Epicureanism -> Faith and prayer
8. Party Ritual:Mithraic Mysteries -> Mass
   — por Yiannis Kontinopoulos

Christianity, Judaism and Islam: moral or immoral?

I ASSUME YOU TEACH CHRISTIANITY AS MYTH INSTEAD OF HISTORY IS GENERALLY COMPATIBLE WITH NATURAL LAW. BUT THE SAME IS NOT TRUE OF JUDAISM AND ISLAM.

If by Christianity we are talking about the content of the Bible and, in particular, the New Testament, then this is different from church doctrines.

1) The Ten Commandments list what we call natural law, or property rights, prohibiting envy, deceit, interfering with others' contracts, theft and murder, thus preserving the value of cooperation.

The nuclear family is the basic unit of social production, and its costs must be borne by all of us in each generation for the good of all.

Invest heavily in creating opportunities and security for others, even in the face of offenses and rejection, treating non-family members with the tolerance and care of family members, in order to increase the number of those with whom we can cooperate with us, just as we cooperate with relatives .

Impulsivity, selfishness, arrogance and arrogance await us at all times and only through the constant practice of patience do we learn enough about the world to avoid impulsiveness, selfishness, arrogance and arrogance.

The state, the aristocracy and our enemies cannot be resisted by the strength of the weak, but the weak can protect themselves regardless of the state: we are weak, but if we are many and treat each other like kin, we will be equally strong in resisting the state. If we do not depend on the state, but depend on each other, we create the power of a stateless state.

Praying regularly for counsel from an omniscient "father" will teach you to be honest with yourself and, once honest with yourself, honest with others.

Set aside regular time to contemplate this law together and seek to apply and improve it in your daily life.

There is no higher law than this. And anyone who says or does otherwise must not only be distrusted, but rejected and, if necessary, punished.

2) Most Babylonian myths are couched in slave language, but still informative. Read alongside Greek myths, they are the lower class version for the weak as Greek myths are for the strong.

3) The lives of the saints tell us how to extend this kinship love.

4) Most of the Catholic encyclopedia provides an exceptional history of Europe.

5) church dogma is reducible to "we'll ostracize you if you don't believe this nonsense as your insurance price by the insurer of last resort: the church". The rest is all nonsense.

6) The content of a religion varies, but the method of building a religion through evoking the euphoria we feel for the response of the flock in all walks of life remains constant. All members of all religions think that it is the content that provides the euphoria and spirituality, but it is simply the package response produced by the rituals.

We can judge the content of the message separately. The content of Christianity tends to be compatible with natural (cooperative) law.

FIRST THINGS FIRST

It is not obvious, but it is quite simple whether changes in capital composition are sought through voluntary or involuntary transfers, fully informed or not fully informed, true or untrue, secured or unsecured.

CHRISTIANITY

Christianity consists mainly of church-manufactured dogmas for the purpose of persisting in authoritarian rule, preserving the ignorance of the populace, but suggesting, directing, and commanding them to act in accordance with natural law among themselves, using readings of the text. This is why, as I understand it, prosperity increases with the distribution of Christianity: the spreading of confidence through constant repetition and the signaling of virtue.

BUT WHAT DO WE UNDERSTAND BY CHRISTIANITY?

However, we are often victims of the fact that the Church almost had a monopoly on literacy and, just as Bede invented a history of England, the Church fabricated a history of its own importance. The reason is that the church/state divide has always been there: a split of the houses of government. Therefore, the Church's message of submission must be kept in the context of the whims, aggressions and violence of the nobility, a constant battle between two extremes.

Since literacy goes through the press, and the Bible is available in the vulgate, and other books are available as competitors to dogma, Christianity is not about the falsehoods and authoritarianism of the church, but about the expansion of Christian virtues. (The so-called "Germanization of Christianity".) These virtues are combined with the emergence of the gradual expansion of the middle-class Hansa civilization and the expansion of the population after the decline of the plagues. The power of the church diminishes. And the number of educated preachers is increasing (my family among them in England). We see the professionalization of the teaching profession rather than the expansion of church bureaucracy.

When I refer to Christianity, I mean the German professional age, not the Latin bureaucratic age. The Latin era I find persistent only in third world countries. Furthermore, the decline of the church has a lot to do with the failure to complete the transition from the priesthood role to professional teachers who not only retain myth and ritual but teach what ordinary people need to learn. to oppose the (bad) religion of the totalitarian state: fitness, virtues, friendship, marriage, parenting, housekeeping, money, accounting, economics, natural law, history, and the conduct of WAR. And provide banking services monopolized by the state against the interest of the people. This is why the church fails to preserve intergenerational relevance, while the state simply “produces skilled labor for the mines of taxation”.

JUDAISM

Judaism is polymoral. In other words, there are different moral standards for in-group and out-group members. The general strategy is to contribute nothing to the commons, nothing to the host, but to extract and keep within the clan (tribe) as many calories as possible. It is perfectly acceptable to create negative externalities, to “cheat”, and it is part of the law that allows and encourages doing so.

Thus, while Christianity tries to increase its numbers by buying low-cost options to build trust, Judaism tries to accumulate capital through parasitic exploitation of the commons and the host.

ISLAM

Islam is immoral. seeks and spreads obedience and ignorance. it does not demand Christian productivity and expansion of confidence for all, and instead of Jewish parasitism, it seeks expansionist conquest and predation: the expansion of compulsory ignorance. And it does so by fascinating means: the promise of respect for submission (not contribution) rather than contribution. Islam spreads the curse of ignorance, stagnation, illiteracy and impulsiveness and weapon breeding. it is not a primitive religion. This is the mistake we made. it is a highly sophisticated means of spreading ignorance through the expansion of an underclass that is antagonistic to any competitor who falsifies its false promise by further blending in with reality.

The next age of domestication

END ISLAM AND THE RELIGION OF IGNORANCE

We are, because we evolved to be, super predators who choose to cooperate ONLY when it is MORE beneficial to cooperate than to enslave or exterminate.

The West advocates meritocratic commerce because, as a more advanced society, it can better compete than others on the basis of merit. Therefore, it is to the West's advantage to champion trade, mercantilism, and consumer capitalism. But if commercial cooperation (or any other method) has become parasitic, then it is in our best interests to govern again. If slavery does not rule. If not enslavement, extermination.

The invasion of our lands by semi-human, ignorant and mystical animals is reason enough to go back to governing, if not governing, slavery, if not slavery, extermination.

Since all societies want to exterminate Muslims EXCEPT the West, if the West stops protecting freedom of religion, then all societies will justifiably exterminate Islam and Muslims.

The Muslim is teaching the Westerner that he should not tolerate religious freedom, because Muslims do not practice a religion, but a law, and a law is a political system, not a religion.

End the Western protection of Islam and we will end much of global conflict. Islam is the source of world conflict. It is a cancer that infects the West, Africa, Hindus and East Asians.

Thus, once literate and escaping the imposition of ignorance and submission by the church against the population, we are left with the current state of these three Abrahamic religions:

1 – Christian (Reformed) expansion of confidence and production.
2 – Jewish propagation of deception and parasitism
3- Islamic expansion of ignorance and predation.

If that's not the damnation of all three, then I don't know what is. But we reformed Christianity a lot. And the only step left is to redirect our churches to their role as professional teachers of intertemporal knowledge, competing with the State's predatory education.

What the church spread was literacy, diplomacy, and finally natural law. The rest was a bucket of catastrophic lies.

What is the difference between the Apostles, the Council of Nicaea, the Pulpit and Booz/Freud/Marx, the Frankfurt School, the Media? Nothing

The Apostles, the Council of Nicaea, The Pulpit, were invented to defeat the aristocracy by using false promises to bring women and children together.

Boaz/Freud/Marx, the Frankfurt School, the media were used to defeat the aristocracy, using false promises to bring women and proletarians together.

Cultural Marxism and postmodernism are nothing more than an attempt to use secular language as the ancients used mysticism: to deceive.

The Western tradition consists of heroism, empiricism, oath (truth not parasitism), the common judge discovered the law, the jury.

We were attacked under duress (after our European civil war) by the same method the Romans were attacked: invasion, new 'mysticism' in the form of pseudoscience. And he attacked the same way the Byzantines were attacked by Islam after its war with the Persians.

Christianity marked the beginning of a thousand years of ignorance. Islam has given rise to almost a thousand, and it is not in sight to stop.

Is there a greater evil than Abraham and his lies?

Abraham's Big Lie

Religion gives advice: wisdom literature.
The policy gives right
science gives the truth

If your religion contains law, it is not religion but politics.
If you love your politics, stay political.
Either your law is compatible with natural law or it is not.
Its laws are not compatible with natural law.
Your religions are not religions, but politics.
As a policy, they are acts of war.
As acts of war, they can and must be fought as war.

There is only one enemy in the world today among all civilized peoples.
It is the great lie of Abraham and all his descendants.

We've been at war since the Persians invaded the Aegean.
We've been at war since the Greeks entered Mesopotamia.
We've been at war since the Romans crossed the Levant.

There is only one enemy for the rest of the world.
It is cancer that drives world conflict.
And it has been doing so for over two thousand years.

The murderous Jews, Christians and Muslims

—“The Greco-Roman world was not…converted to a new religion, but forced to adopt it.” Emperor Theodosius issued a series of decrees or rescripts in the years 341, 345, 356, 381, 383, 386 and 391 CE. The effect of these orders was "to suppress all rival religions, order the closure of temples, and impose fines, confiscation, imprisonment, or death on anyone who clung to the older [pagan] religions." The period of relative religious tolerance in the Roman Empire ended when pagan temples were confiscated and converted to Christian use or destroyed. Priests and priestesses were exiled or killed. Christianity and Judaism became the only permitted religions. In Spain, Bishop Priscillian, who taught some Gnostic beliefs, was the first person to be condemned as a heretic and executed by his fellow Christians on religious grounds. The church used state power to initiate programs of oppression, exile or extermination of pagan and Gnostic Christians. By the end of the century, pagan temples were either destroyed or recycled for Christian use. Pagan worship became punishable by death. But the government's tolerance had its costs. Emperor Constantine and subsequent political rulers demanded more say in church administration and decisions about their beliefs. “—

magical thinking

– “Magical thinking is the attribution of causal or synchronic relationships between actions and events that apparently cannot be justified by reason and observation. In religion, folk religion, and superstitious belief, the postulated correlation is often between religious ritual, prayer, sacrifice, or the observance of a taboo and an expected benefit or reward.

PERSECUTION OF THE PAGANTS BY CHRISTIANS

1. Code of Theodosius XVI.i.2: Prohibition of other religions, 379-395.
2. Code of Theodosius: On Religion
3. Zosimos: The new story. [But then again]

At the end of paganism.

1. Mark the Deacon: Life of Porphyry of Gaza, 5th Century, [full text]

Fascinating account of the Christian destruction of paganism in Gaza.

2. Scholastic Socrates: The Murder of Hypatia.

Hypatia, a noted philosopher, was murdered by a Christian mob in Alexandria, encouraged by Saint Cyril. See also Hypatia's page. Three historical versions of Hypatia's murder are available, which are useful for comparative purposes:

Damascio: The Life of Hypatia, from the Life of Isidore, reproduced in La Suda. [On cosmopolis.com]

Socrates, or Scholastic: The Life of Hypatia, [At cosmopolis.com]

Juan de Nikiu: The Life of Hypatia. [On cosmopolis.com]

The objective of the imposition of Christianity by the Eastern Greco-Levantine Empire was the destruction of the Eastern Roman Empire's way of life, the death of the philosophers who constituted our evolution of religion, the closing of the schools, the destruction of the aristocracy, its art and its literature.

THE BIGGEST CATASTROPHE IN HISTORY IS LIKE THE COLLAPSE OF THE BRONZE AGE

Never in human history has there been such a catastrophe as the dark ages of ignorance brought about by the destruction of Roman civilization, weakened by Germanic invasions, by the Eastern Empire, to limit its competitors and spread Semitic tyranny, mysticism, obedience , and ignorance about the only free people on this earth.

European civilization is at least 5,000 years old and Christianity was its dark age

THERE IS NOTHING IN CHRISTIANITY THAT IS NOT PRESENT BEFORE IT. THE CHURCH “REVISED HISTORY” AS THE MARXISTS AND POST-MODERNISTS DID IN THE CURRENT “DARK AGES”.

While it's hard for us to imagine, there is nothing good about Christian culture that wasn't there before Christianity. Nothing. Therefore, many contemporary thinkers argue that Christianity is a Western religion and the result of Western culture (or at least the result of Greco-Anatolian culture).

The problem is that, as Nietzsche tried to explain in his rather poetic prose in German, we remember our pre-Christian ethic only in our northern European fairy tales and myths, even though it is endemic to the fabric of our thought and our traditions. in our laws.

The Church co-opted, reformulated and stole everything it could and claimed ownership as if it were an invention. Even Bede simply made up a story that didn't exist. The church created and instituted a fictitious (lying) culture.

There is good reason why Christianity was allowed into Europe by illiterate southeastern Europeans, as a means of transferring power from the poorer and more remote aristocratic west to the richer local theocratic east.

I went through the period of anger at Jews for libertarianism. Then Marxism. Then to postmodernism. then to Christianity. Then by Abrahamism. Then by Platonism. Then to mysticism.

Once you see cancer and how it spreads, it makes you furious to know that we were defeated in the ancient world by lies and in the modern world by lies for no other reason than that we have created enough wealth, security and freedom, that priests, Intellectual public authorities, women and lower classes can destroy us.

Why? because each demographic group wants reality to reflect its evolutionary advantage.

The inferiors prefer the lie and the R, and the superiors the truth and the K.

It's not complicated. There are so many layers of lies that are obscured.

Is it possible to eliminate religion?

Yes, but again, it is not possible to deny that religion served as a (very) cheap (simple) universal education (training) (available to idiots) in mindfulness (and sacredness - non-consumption) and in positive laws (good manners, ethics, morals, rituals, traditions) in an age where only the privileged could receive an education.

The only difficult education on this list is mindfulness, and Stoicism was clearly the best of all methods, and Epicureanism the best mindfulness content discovered in both the ancient and present world (cognitive behavioral therapy).

The rest is just common education through repetition (ritual) and profanity (prayer). There's nothing more to it than the act of doing all that repetition and swearing in public. There is some advantage in giving such an oath to a representative (ancestor, king, hero, god) rather than among us, those with whom we have material conflicts.

Just because Abrahamism and the Abrahamic religions are completely bad does not mean that the category of training (education) provided by the religions is not beneficial and, most likely, necessary, because it is as unnatural as reading and math.

The question is how can we transform the depreciating asset that is our existing religious infrastructure into a new asset that is valuing itself and removing the vulnerability and damage of the past.

no falsehood needed

WE NEED MINDFULNESS, BUT NOT BECAUSE OF FALSENESS

The law says that any religion that is not false, parasitic, predatory or involutionary is a good religion. The problem is, we think religion requires falsehoods, because you've been doused in an ocean of "forgivable and convenient" falsehoods. But this is only because believers have not investigated non-false religions and tried to develop non-false religion. And the reason why you should is that the only way to eliminate bad religions and their falsehood, parasitism, predation and involution. And if you keep these falsehoods and 'Evilness' to yourself, you authorize the 'Evilness' of others.

We all need rules of thumb for cooperation, and we need them in a hierarchy of graceful increase in accuracy and graceful failure, given our skill, knowledge, and available time and resources, from parables to stories to science to calculations.

Not all people have 'religion' in 'made up lies', east asians laugh at those who do, rightly so.

We need your full attention. We can teach true mindfulness, true history, and that is more beautiful than the death cults of primitive desert dwellers rebelling against their Indo-European masters.

In fact, Christianity produces mindfulness, as any religion does and should. And mindfulness does indeed produce agency. The question is whether we can produce the same attention, but much greater agency, if we retain the scientific (secular) content of religion, reform the history, reform the lessons, reform the oath and the sacrifice/feast.

There is only one way out for the great mistakes, of the Abrahamic Pilpul and of the Critics: the truth, the sovereignty, the reciprocity, the markets and, consequently, the transcendence of the man in the gods that we imagine.

NOTHING BETTER – ERGO MI INTOLERANCE

—“Religion breeds multiculturalism among a people who need cultural pluralism.”—Brad Umbaugh

The demons and the devil swim to the left. Any thought system that is not explicitly True and Converse will eventually migrate to False and Converse. Therefore, our mandate of intolerance.

What about freedom of religion?

1. THERE IS NO UNLIMITED FREEDOM

The limit of religious freedom

–-“Freedom of religion as a fundamental right is an incomplete rule and, as such, a mistake. There are no unlimited and unlimited general rules. The limit of religious freedom that can exist as a fundamental right is compatibility with Natural Law. The only possible fundamental rights are those compatible with Natural Law, for Natural Law is the cause of fundamental, necessary natural rights.”—

(…)

religions providewisdomand governments providewith him. If your religion combines wisdom with law, it is not a religion, but a form of government disguised as a cult. Therefore, if your religion contains laws, you are a competitor, not a compliment, to a government. As such, it can be regulated, banned and fought if necessary.

There is no reasonnotprohibit anything false: religion, pseudo-rationalism, pseudo-science. There is no value in fraudulent products, services OR information. Assuming we teach Christianity as myth and not history, it is generally compatible with natural law. But not Judaism. And not Islam.

There is a big difference between establishing a religion and banning a religion. There's no reason why we can't ban religions often.

I'm sorry, but if your religion is not compatible with natural law, then it is not compatible with the rule of law and it is not compatible with the West.

And while we can't control the nonsense you create, we can certainly limit the nonsense you spread and infect others.

Judging a religion, philosophy, or ideology

There are good people everywhere. But it's not the good people we care about. they are bad people. And we must, if we are honest, not measure a philosophy, an ideology or a religion by its goodness, but by its badness. Why? because there are good people who will fit anything anywhere. The question is, how do these philosophies, ideologies or religions banish their bad people? By these measures, Islam and Judaism are the most evil religions of all. The reason is that they justify the very desires that all other religions have evolved to repress: lying.

Good people will be good no matter what. It's whether religions attract or encourage bad people to be bad, that's their measure.

Reciprocity

The Second Principle of Religious Freedom is Reciprocity. Therefore, if a religion violates the principle of reciprocity, it cannot be claimed as a fundamental right, as reciprocity is a necessary fundamental right.

Responsibility

The Third Principle of Religious Freedom is accountability. This is to say that all members of any faith are responsible for heresies within that faith. So, if your faith has members who violate natural law, reciprocity or responsibility, then that religion, by definition, is not a right and does not protect fundamental rights.

Religion is just law... in fictitious form.

Political models like religions

Religions evolve slowly and normatively. Common laws, discovered, evolve rapidly in response to new discoveries of free riding methods. Between enduring religion and tactical law, political models serve only as organizing tools that we use to advance our strategies. In our case, that strategy is freedom.

We are not afraid of freedom. We can compete on merit. Those who cannot compete on merit are those who fear a condition of freedom. So it's rational to say that you "are" a member of a religion, and rational to say that to achieve freedom in the current context, you suggest that we employ one political model or another.

But to give political models the same constancy as religion is to make political models mystical religions de facto independent of world circumstances, rather than operational tools by which we modify world circumstances in pursuit of the political conditions we prefer.

Steady-state political orders are as much a fictional theory as an evenly rotating economy. It does not exist and cannot.

—"The biggest systemic problem is not to separate a church from the state, but to prevent the state from becoming the 'church'... The State, in the vacuum created by the absence of a divine religion, has deified its environmental markets. . The State wants religion." - AT

Homogeneity x Diversity

Diversity not only generates demand for an authoritarian state, but for a supernatural religion. Why? Find an alternative to the RULE OF PARENTING AND THE CULT OF ANCESTORS. On the contrary, homogeneity generates demand for nationalism and ancestor worship.

Institutions

The West has shown that market competition between institutions employing different weapons of coercion is superior to the monopoly of any one of those institutions employing more than three weapons of coercion. Funding, violence and gossip must remain separate. The reason for retaliation against the church in the west against orthodoxy in the east is the Roman church's attempt to function as a government on the Byzantine monopoly model, rather than maintaining a balance between the martial, commercial, and gossip classes.

DEFLATION (Market Competition): Literature, History, Philosophy, Economics, Law, Science, and Mathematics that require reason and calculation

-contra-

CONFLATION (Monopoly): Semitic religion (Theology) based solely on intuition and imitation.

There is nothing about religion (fictionalism) or law (descriptivism) that cannot be taught by deflationary means (honestly) rather than conflatory means (falsely).

There can be no right to spread ignorance and falsehood, regardless of excuse.

Why do you have the right to ignorance?

Well, there's a difference between enjoying the luxury of ignorance at the expense of others and dishing it out with your words and actions.

And there is a difference between general knowledge, which allows us to escape our ignorance, and the means of testing information against error, bias, illusion, suggestion, overload, pseudoscience, and deceit, which allow us to increase our knowledge and decrease our ignorance. . and speak the truth and avoid speaking with lies.

And since the animal man evolved to negotiate and deceive, as well as to describe and inform, and since we evolved to act rationally, that is, morally when it is in our interest and immoral when it is in our interest, the reason why we took thousands of years to develop the truth-telling technology we call 'science', it is because it is not natural for us. We evolved to negotiate, not witness.

Just as we must learn the customs, ethics, morals and laws to access and participate in the benefits of this market of cooperation that we call the 'social order', we must learn the ethics of knowledge: how to eliminate errors, prejudices, illusions, suggestion, loading and framing, overload, pseudoscience and deception.

And we must teach each other manners, ethics, morals, laws, not just defensively: to limit bad manners, immoral, immoral and illegal, but also as an investment: to increase the number of people we have the option to cooperate with in lower and lower costs in the production of private and common goods, services and information for mutual benefit.

Thus, for defensive and investment reasons, we must constantly invest in teaching customs, ethics, morals and law, including the ethical science of interpreting and witnessing: telling the truth.

And, conversely, we must punish those who damage customs, ethics, morals and law; damage the production of private and common goods, services and information.

But how do we punish? By himincremental deletionrude, unethical, immoral and illegal language:

1. Deprivation of the opportunity to speak

First with disapproval, mockery and shame.
(You idiot! What are you thinking? Or are you not thinking?!?)

2. Deprivation of the opportunity to cooperate:

2nd ostracized
(I'm afraid I can't partner with you. You are deceitful and only repeat lies you have been convinced to be true in order to influence)

3. Deprivation of goods, services and information

Third loss of privilege
(I cannot trade with you or offer services on my own!)

4. deprivation of choice

4th loss of freedom
(You are a danger. You lose the ability to make your own decisions. You demonstrate a high risk to the well-being of others)

5. deprivation of action

5th loss of freedom!
(To jail, go to jail! Or to war in the case of the state)

6. deprivation of existence

6th loss of life
(pendant)

What would constitute a true religion?

I have a soul, I can observe it through introspection. It is a complete accountability of my impositions on the interests of others, balanced by a selective accountability of my charitable acts. I know the balance on that account. We all know the balance of that account, even if we're afraid to look at it.

The main value of an omniscient god is as a psychological device that helps us to observe the transactions and balance of that account, without any ability to lie to ourselves.

The main value of confession is publicly admitting this balance and using peer pressure to eliminate any deficits.

Whether that soul is eternal is not an issue, of course it is. We cannot sin or do charity without others to sin or do charity against. Our actions leave a permanent record in the universe. We live eternally in the changes we have made in the universe by our actions. This is what it means to act: to alter the course of events. Every action does. That our simple human minds need to anthropomorphize these ideas to make them easier for the ignorant, the foolish and the faint-hearted to understand is no more surprising than the fact that children need parables, myths, legends and fairy tales to understand basic concepts. using models for concepts. otherwise beyond your experience.

—The practice of sport, the discipline of stoic attention, the sacredness of nature, the ceremonial request for wisdom and ceremonial thanks to our heroes, the gathering of souls in the practice of all of the above, and our dedication to the pack as a means of overcome our small differences and interests.—

As such, I simply prefer the least false set of beliefs and the most constructive forms of ritual. And these are, as far as I know: the practice of sport, the discipline of stoic attention, the sacredness of nature, the ceremonial asking for wisdom and ceremonial thanks to our heroes, the gathering of souls in the practice of all of the above. , and our dedication to the pack as a way to overcome our small differences and interests.

Reduce demand for falsehood in religion

REDUCE OR ELIMINATE THE DEMAND FOR FALSE RELIGIONS

Hierarchy of Political Grammars

1-Legal(complete),
2-Scientific(correlative),
3-Philosophical(justification),
4-Literary(allegorical)
5-Mythological(intergenerational contract)
6-Religious/theological (fictional),
7-Hidden(post-rational).

Each of the Christian churches attend classes (IQ ranges), with philosophy, law, and science above them. The future will continue to consist of churches (religions) segregated by class (intelligence) for the simple reason that the lottery is available to them.

On the other hand, if we eliminate the demand for worship because we teach mindfulness while doing physical exercises, calculations, and skills, the demand for worship will continue to decline.

The only reason the cults have spread is the inability to institutionalize emotion training the way we institutionalize calculus training (reading, writing, grammar, logic, math, physics, chemistry, biology, programming, sensitivity).

Those who cannot innovate try to repeat the mistakes of the past, without recognizing the contextual framework that the ideas of the past require.

perfect religion

— “I believe that history furnishes no example of a priest-dominated people maintaining a free civil government” and “[in] all countries and in all ages, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in league with the despot, complicit in his abuses in return for protection of his own.” —Thomas Jefferson

"The most preposterous notion Homo sapiens has ever dreamed up is that the Lord God of Creation, Shaper and Ruler of all Universes, desires the cloying worship of His creatures, can be swayed by your prayers, and becomes petulant if you don't." . does. receive this adulation. Yet this preposterous fantasy, without a shred of evidence to back it up, pays all the bills for the oldest, largest, and least productive industry in all of history.” –Roberto A. Heinlein,

The perfect religion we also lost

A RELIGION WITHOUT CLERGY – A MILITIA MORE THAN AN ARMY – A GOVERNMENT OF LAW AND NOT OF MEN.

A religion without priests.
A government without politicians.
A market without 'journalists'.

The Cult of Stoicism and Epicureanism (Emotional)

The cult of nature (religion)

The cult of our people (mythology)

The cult of the law (intellectual)

The Cult of the Militia (Physical)

— “The Distributed Dictatorship of Sovereign Men” — Eli Harman

THOSE WHO GOVERN

The theologian-tariat that you are must be governed by a moral religion.
The Politariat says you must respect their judgment.
The Market Commentary-ariat that must be governed by philosophy.
The Economistry that should be governed by consumption.

In practice, you are governed by the Law and everything else is an attempt to subvert it. And in absolute terms, it is governed by men who fight and tolerate the present condition.

We are the men who choose.

So choose.

The cult of the law, in which the law is sacred

THE ADMINISTRATIVE RELIGION OF THE WEST

— “There are (weak) female theologians, (capable) rising philosophers, and (strong) lawmakers. I know what I do. I make laws like Odin did. I do it right, like Aristotle did. Law enunciates Truth, via-negativa, theology enunciates the imagined via-fantastic, and philosophy attempts the via-positive to produce the human action that delivers the results of compromise.”—

The administrative religion of the West is Indo-European/Aristocratic/Anglo-Saxon common sovereign law, and its priests are our judges

Reason, empiricism, science, and now "testimonialism" (the conclusion of the scientific method) all evolved out of Western empirical common law.

There is no reason why our founding myths cannot be taught as "religion" and their contributions celebrated.

1. Homer and the Trial of Achilles
2. Tales of Kings, Princes and Princesses: Germanic Myths, Legends and Fairy Tales;
3. History and life of the great Heroes;
4. History and life of the great Thinkers;
5. The stories of Jesus and the saints;

Religion is necessary for evolutionary reasons, but superstition, pseudo-rationalism, pseudoscience, fusion, and delusion are not.

There is no conflict between science and religion, only between Logic, Reason, Science, Testimony, Natural Law and false religions.

Truth is the most intolerant religion. It is a religion that selects in and out for very good reasons.

Truth is the most intolerant religion. And our ancestors produced the only Cult of Truth and Law.

Choosing divinity as ours

There is good and bad Christianity. There are good and bad Christians. I'm not going to criticize good Christians, at least unless good Christians either (a) violate natural law (unlikely) or (b) seek to use faith in argument rather than faith in self-confirmation (too often). Faith is for believers, literature for infidels. Aristotle for those who don't need it, and science and law for those of us who rule and can't afford it. Give each one what is necessary for each one, and the natural law of men, and the physical law of science to decide the conflicts between them.

My aim is to institutionalize the ideas (habits) of Christianity into scientific prose and provide means of ritual care for those who cannot or cannot tolerate "magic". And a set of festivals we can all participate in.

These insights are (a) the daily discipline of personal humility, (b) the removal of hatred from the human heart, (c) the extension of kinship love to non-kin, (d) the exhaustion of personal forgiveness as a means of training most misguided, and (e) the empiricism of direct personal charity as a means of achieving and proving both, and (f) the political intolerance of those who act otherwise, (g) the limitation of government to the natural law of reciprocity leaving only the harmony of the market and charity for obtaining goods, and (h) the surrender of defense and government to the aristocracy who dominate in violence what we dominate in love and charity.

And I know this is the ultimate strategy for optimal human cooperation because science and logic dictate it.

There is a dwindling percentage of educated people who find value in the parables of lower-class Semitic shepherds, who depend on magic and the afterlife to escape their lack of agency, and a dwindling percentage of people who value scientific exhibition. of the same virtues and historical and mythical ideas of OUR PEOPLE, for whom their 'book' was that of Homer (the ordeals of Achilles), the great Greek and Roman heroes, the pagan Carolingian, Germanic, Arthurian, Scandinavian myths and the REAL conquests of OUR people, starting with the cult of non-submission of those who have free will. Just as the cult of submission is the withdrawal of those who lack it in Islam and Christianity.

There is nothing in the world of faith that is not available to those who practice the natural sciences, natural laws, histories, self-made rituals and festivals of heroes and seasons, except a greater need to trade between different needs and a greater demand for mindfulness in the face of sadness and greater demand for agency and reason to act in the world.

Among the poor, weak and without agency in the world, Christianity is the compromise position between barbarism and science that Augustine intended to make. And among those who increasingly join the prosperous, able, and free-spirited, it is increasingly unnecessary. Among the prosperous, the able, and those with agency, such compromise is harmful. And that's what we've seen.

Morality is fully contained in individual sovereignty, physical and legal natural law and cooperative markets, and comprehensive forgiveness by bringing the immoral into both.

The only people who need comforting lies are those who can't face the one fearless ultimate truth: the universe is a hostile place, we are nothing but a deterministic accident, and we will be the gods who change it. in the Eden we desire.

We should only choose divinity as our.

You could argue that placing the Natural Law of reciprocity of Sovereign Men above all other considerations is just science, or you could say that choosing that science is equivalent to a religion. I wouldn't disagree too much with you if you presented it as a religion.

1. Provides an ultimate goal (transcendence),
2. It provides an evolutionary strategy for the group (quick adaptations across markets),
3. Provides a moral, ethical and legal code (reciprocity),
4. It imposes limits on government actions,
5. it requires a continually incurred cost of telling the truth, an oath and the ritual of oath, the performance of military rituals and festivals.
6. And for Westerners, our story provides an unfalsified myth of continued success in transforming self and man into gods.

so as suchwould be the only true religionfor the simple reason that it would be the only religion without falsehood.

Truth is the only religion that unites good men against a multitude of evils.

Transcendence through Truth is the most intolerant religion of all. … The Most Intolerant Wins.

The Cult of the Law is the Religion of Men as Gods.

The end of the game?

I understand that believers are not rational, they are not persuasive, and they are too wrapped up in a web of falsehoods, so believers will not change except to follow an even larger and safer flock.

As members of cults, we are always in conflict over the legal systems under them, since those legal systems are arbitrary means of advocating different evolutionary cooperative group strategies, all of which, under religion, despite their initial usefulness, evolved to be more of a hindrance than a hindrance. We will.

As members of the Love of Man, of our Peoples, in Nation-States, producing common goods suited to our needs, we are not enemies, but allies in a division of labor that produces the transcendence of man.

If there is a better religion than this, I don't know. A religion of love and the transcendence of man in gods, not subjects of priests and politicians, investors and industrialists.—

The endgame is the culmination of the transformation from Germanized Christianity to natural law under reciprocity, completely washed clean of sophisms (Abrahamism), superstition, mysticism, magic, falsehoods and lies.

The truth is enough.

Instead of inventing a fake insurance company of last resort, we can create a fake insurance company of last resort: our policy. Our system of government in which men are better than the despotic gods we dream of.

Christianity extends natural law

COMPREHENSIVE FORGIVENESS IS AN IMPROVEMENT OF NATURAL LAW

What we call 'Christian Love' means treating others like relatives. Now, Natural Law is reducible to reciprocity. And it turns out that being very forgiving over time is the best possible cooperative strategy. While we develop altruistic punishments for the untrustworthy (reciprocity violators), which means that we retaliate at high cost against the "cheaters" (untrustworthy), it turns out that exhaustive forgiveness produces the most credible policy and, consequently, the most prosperous.

Unfortunately, the limit of this tolerance is in interpersonal relationships and does not escalate ANYTHING. And so Christian tolerance in group politics and evolutionary strategy is suicidal, even though Christian tolerance in interpersonal relationships is extremely beneficial. The reason is that one individual can know another's tolerance limit, while none of us can know the tolerance depletion of those we don't know personally. Thus, all Christian tolerance and charity is limited to the interpersonal, and all political tolerance is limited to reciprocity.

Because the moment we engage in political charity or unlimited charity, we create the very evil that we seek to eliminate through our tolerance. Or in economic terms: if you subsidize any behavior, you will always get more. This is not true on an interpersonal scale, but it is always true beyond the interpersonal scale.

Even worse, there are many people who look for signs of virtue (status) by donating what others have produced. They steal status from others by this means. So tolerance, especially Christian tolerance, beyond the personal scale, where you pay the cost of your charity yourself, simply creates more harm in the world.

For this reason, most Christians are just the opposite. They just pursue virtues of self-indulgence without actually earning them, but instead become bad people themselves and subsidize bad people in politics and subsidize bad people in the community.

As such, Christianity is a failure if it is practiced on a scale other than the interpersonal. So the ideal strategy is "A prosecutor in politics and a saint in person." Christianity became suicidal when it became political rather than merely personal.

Thus, natural law provides us with a balance between the negative path and the positive path: the negative path (law) is reciprocity, while the positive path (wisdom) is interpersonal exhaustion of opportunity for cooperation.

You see, this is why science and scientific law are so important: so that those who pretend to be good cannot create large-scale evil under the guise of moral intentions.

If you pay no costs, you cannot gain any virtues. Period.

And this is a necessary consequence of the natural law of reciprocity.

How is Christianity allowed under natural law?

IF CHRISTIANITY IS NOT GOOD OR TRUE BUT AN ELABORATED, HARMFUL AND FALSE DECEIT, THEN HOW IS IT PERMITTED?

That depends on what you call 'Christianity' and whether you think everything about it is good.

Christianity can refer to the (true) rational-empirical content and the consequences of this (true) scientific content, which, although very limited, we can show that they are indeed good. Or if you think Christianity is all the nonsense that surrounds it (lies).

I have to admit that the theory of the ideal game humans can play is the Christian commandment to love others. I can't get away from it. I have to admit that everything else about Christianity is catastrophically bad, though not as bad as Judaism or Islam.

Now, once we have reduced Christianity to these few rules (ideal prisoner's dilemma rules), the question is whether it is still "Christianity" in any meaningful way.

I would say it's still Christianity, because religions are our means of intuitively training members of politics, nation and civilization to follow the same strategy, hopefully one of interest to them, that allows different groups to cooperate on a large scale.

I think (well, I'm sure) Christianity's short list of rules is great. But I don't think the story of Jesus is good or true. I'm sure God's story is bad. And I believe, like many, that the Christian god is a Semitic tyrant over Semitic slaves and totally against the interests of our people, which is why our people have progressively escaped Christianity and made it ours, as Jews and Muslims have. they just become more obsessed with themselves.

So, in trying to solve the problem of the future, how can we provide the same psychological, social and political functions as Christianity and suppress, defeat or eliminate competitors to these rules - competitors who would throw us back into Semitic obscurity? from which we were saved.

Now we have tools...

Naturalism (reality) < Logic and Mathematics (Measurement) < Science (Due Diligence, Naturalism) < Law and Economics (Decidability) < History (Evidence) < Literature (Analogy, Pedagogy, Theorizing), Philosophy (Extraction from Science) and Theology ( Reason for withdrawal)

… work with.

And I can find no reason to fail gracefully across the spectrum of Measurements, Due Diligence, Decidability < Evidence < Pedagogy, if we provide mindfulness (what we consider spirituality) by equally scientific means (coaching).

And if we have to teach people SOMETHING, why teach a falsehood when we can teach the same content with the truth (scientifically)? And the only answer is to preserve the bad psychological investment of previous generations at the expense of all past and future generations.

I believe that moral education and uniform are necessary, as well as physical aptitude, knowledge of daily survival, ability to calculate and work skills. I believe that personal, interpersonal, and civic mindfulness is a natural requirement of conscious creatures. I think the civic ritual of the church is important: the oath, the historical lessons and the balance between the heroic tragic warrior and the loving tragic saint (Jesus).

One can look at the major religions and traditions and see relatively easily how each tries and succeeds in providing these goods to meet these demands.

It is very difficult to look at Judaism and Islam and say that they are nothing more than a destructive force in the world compared to other religions and traditions, particularly the Hindu, Chinese and Japanese traditions. When we look at Christianity, it was designed and used as a destructive force in the world. And the three Abrahamic religions are responsible for more evil than all but the great plagues.

Our ancestors managed to Germanize Christianity by keeping its good parts and removing its bad parts.

I see my role, and our role as the generation alive facing this remaining problem, as a continuation of the modernization of that "sick, warped anti-civilization blood cult of the desert" into an institution like the Catholic church that once presented itself as a state competitor. , and restore its role in education, but strip it of Semitic delusions and use our own far superior history.

I could fail, but it's my job to remove so many lies from our civilization to defend our highly trusted people against further decline. And if that means the church must be reformed, then that's what it means.

The alternative is not restoration, but that the church, within a generation or more, dies.

If we're going to have a church, so to speak, and a civic religion that is more than just legalism, that includes the personal attention, socializing, and partying that legalism doesn't provide, that makes us invest in each other, then we need a church that provide future benefits to people who are not from the past.

And while I haven't discussed this much in public yet, I think I know at least most of the answer.

We never stop being polytheists. Ever. Just as we are polygrammatical (Marcos, Paradigms). Many heroes are always better than one, as long as they are compatible. We are very different in our abilities, social roles, occupations and responsibilities. There is a foundation upon which the heroic family rests in all its grammars and histories, and that is Individual Sovereignty, the natural law of reciprocity, truth and duty, and yes, charity. And it is Christian charity: exhausting optimism and investment in others, rather than donations or mental fantasies, that forms that foundation.

Is Christianity Reform Possible?

IF YOU TAKE ALL THE FAKES OUT OF CHRISTIANITY, WHAT WOULD BE LEFT?

What would be left?

1. Mass (a lesson, a prayer, an oath, a feast) and parties.
2. The removal of hatred from the human heart.
3. The depletion of interpersonal forgiveness as an optimal cooperative group strategy.
4. The requirement of personal acts of charity.
5. The ultimate Prisoner's Dilemma strategy for any group. Mostly a middle-class politician.

If you replace the afterlife with the good life, persistence through actions, genetic persistence, and the human transcendence of our descendants into the gods we imagine.

Whether he substitutes lessons against aristocracy in favor of diaspora shepherds and instead restores our original mythology of Homer's trials.

If you re-established the feasts with those of heroes, ancestors and seasons (nature).

If you add ethnocentrism (the ideal group strategy), rule of law and markets in everything (the ideal competitive strategy), and stoicism (the ideal mindfulness strategy).

Then you have a religion free of lies.

In general, Christianity is not incompatible with natural law. The whole narrative is. But, otherwise, the basic principle of directly demonstrated charity, exhaustion of opportunity for forgiveness, and reciprocity is consistent with natural law in practice, if not in words.

Pursuing both preservation and restoration

THE PRESERVATION OF CHRISTIANITY AS A POLITICAL RELIGION AND THE RESTORATION OF PAGAN AND PAGAN CULTURAL RELIGION UNDER NATURAL LAW.

Christianity teaches natural law, only evil. Christianity teaches (exhaustive eye for an eye) the optimal IN-GROUP strategy as an extension of natural law, but it errs, and because it errs, it is not limited to kin (it is universalist (out-of-group)) and therefore a mixture of good and bad.

The evidence is that Christianity produces prosperity wherever it goes, but it is in greater demand than Islam, just as Judaism is in greater demand than Christianity. But the fact is that Westerners still maintain legal (Roman), intellectual (Greek), familial (European pagan) and political (Semitic) "cults". And these cults are all reflections of our classes. And all classes make use of which set of cults is needed for cooperation at their level of agency (ability to act).

The purpose of Christianity, Marxism, postmodernism, and feminism was to destroy the empirical, rational, military, legal, and commercial order and replace it with Egyptian, South Semitic, North Semitic, and Persian means of ruling an underclass through false promises (life). after death), false debt ('for our sins', 'original sins') using supernatural frauds in the ancient world and using economic (Marxist), social (postmodern) and political (feminism and multiculturalism) fraud. . .

My understanding is that, especially among those who are going to fight, Christianity must have a place, and the law says it can have a place because among religions it teaches natural law.

Any of our "natural religions" can gain the same cultural, economic, and political centrality once again, providing particularly powerful incentives, including the restoration of education and educational funding for "churches" in the broadest sense (and the end of education). centralized). (In other words, prohibiting falsehood is different from requiring certain skills.)

Under these incentives, our religions will slowly (possibly quickly) migrate from falsehood to truth due to the incentives of (a) simple economics, (b) enormously increasing their influence, (c) fending off the state. In other words, 'let nature take its course', and keep the state out of the Christian faith, and keep the Christian faith out of AFFIRMATIONS OF TRUTH.

This establishes a market for all three categories of religion while providing mindfulness.

A Christian might say: “I regard [xxxx] as a matter of faith, I do not claim it to be true, because what is true must be open to witness, and faith itself is not open to witness. As long as I do not attempt to use truth claims (arguments) in commercial, financial, economic and political matters, I have not broken the law.”

You cannot say that something false is true for the purposes of induction (consequential argument). And in particular (Islam, Judaism, Catholicism) because it cannot be said that there is any other law than the natural law (no competitor). And you can't defend a deceitful religion for that (Judaism and Islam are deceitful and political).

With the banning of Judaism and Islam, the preservation of Christianity due to its natural law, the universal education in Stoicism (mindfulness), and the combination of Christian and European (Pagan) holidays, I understand that we will see our religion return to its natural condition. where the poor are Christian, the middle (pagan) ancestors, and the upper classes, as always, purely empirical and respecting the middle and low through participation in oaths, rituals, and feasts.

So it's not so much that we need to do away with Christianity, but that we need to create a variety of churches (mindfulness, socialization, and education) that cater to the interests of different classes in content, while having the same underlying constraint on adherence to natural law.

In other words, we must make a practical accommodation for faith in those who need faith because they have no alternative to faith to gain the mindfulness needed in a complex society where many of us lack family, social, economic, political means. relationships as well as perhaps genetics to provide value in social, economic, and political markets.

So there is "something for everyone at a cost for everyone" in my proposal. But it's hard to argue against asset collection. We know this because, although people claim they are Christians, go to church, celebrate festivals, take oaths, keep the rules, very rarely, under oath, do they claim that such things are true.

All humans follow interests. They follow interests because it's in their interest. And they use propaganda, deception, argument and belief to justify pursuing those interests.

Christianity needs another reformation or it will continue to die. Neither Vatican II nor the evangelical movements were enough, although the evangelicals were more.

We could restore the church to the centrality of education, require them to teach mindfulness (Stoicism, Epicureanism) and an ongoing program of Stoicism (self-authorship), and return the role of consumer bank and military organization to the church. In return, we could demand that churches that obtain these benefits reform themselves in such a way that they do not teach Abrahamism in any form. (They themselves can determine this reform.)

I prefer that we eliminate all political religions and restore popular religions (family, ancestors, people, nature).

Market pressure for service and revenue will take care of itself.

Christian commitment

I would suggest that all but the most Abrahamic Christians could institutionalize Christianity in the constitution as practicing the five rules of Christianity, the natural law of reciprocity, and that no other religion contrary to it can be tolerated, would give them sufficient license to show that their religion is indeed 'true' when it is taught as a mythology of wisdom literature, and only 'false' if it is taught as history. (Because that's what the smartest people in the world think.)

I am Christian in the sense that it means property rights (ten commandments), the sacred (limits on my rights of speech, action and thought), natural law (reciprocity), and the teaching of Jesus (exhaustion of all possible opportunities). for the pardon of part of the group). members). THIS IS THE STRATEGY UNDER GERMANIZED CHRISTIANITY.

But the magic man nonsense for illiterates and idiots to believe that someone omniscient and omnipotent but never self-evident someone worthy of being worshiped as a slave master loves them despite their low status, low agency and low skill, that's just it . nothing but fairy tales for slaves. tolerate their slavery until death.

So it's really a matter of whether we continue the evolution of our Pagan, Aryan, Greco-Roman, Christian, philosophical, and scientific religions into something we can all commit to, or we can stick with those individual religions and just go along with the scientific. substance behind all our natural religions.

There have been many reforms in Christianity. This is not about abandoning Christianity, but about reforming it further so that it is a European religion of transcendence, not a Middle Eastern or Third World cult of poverty, ignorance and servitude.

Restoring our religions as well as our law

I am trying to save Christianity, which is in rapid decline in the West, and to restore Christianity as the Church should have done, by restating the theological, in philosophical, rational, and scientific terms, and in so doing, putting an end to criticism. and the removal of its status as a state religion.

But you know, if somebody's faith doesn't tolerate that no matter how we hear and follow the message, it's the same message, then I would think that something is wrong with you: that you're not a Christian and you're not a good person.

If one needs an evil and vengeful god to obey, and the threat of hell as a defense against others and against nature itself;

Or if a loving Jesus is needed as a father and guide as a defense against the harshness of reality and to share that love with a community;

Or if you want a set of moral rules that you can demand of yourself and others to create a harmonious society;

Or if someone says that the laws of nature think these moral rules are optimal for themselves, others and politics and put it into law;

So it goes against those very Christian rules to deprive people of what they need to obey those rules. This is not Christian love. This is selfishness and hate. This is Semitic despotism and lies, from which our ancestors escaped, not the European Christian love that our ancestors sought to extract and preserve as the Germanic religion of our people, and not a means of oppression of the European people that kept them in ignorance. , illiteracy, poverty. , hunger, disease, infant mortality and premature death.

Many men have reformed Christianity over the centuries. Many recent men have tried to break up. The modern church needed Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Luther, Locke, Smith, Hume and our founding fathers, and found in their place Jewish communism, Jewish feminism and Jewish postmodernism, and an academy of media and state, under the leadership of our own people. desire for power, and the Jewish and now Islamic weakening, seeking to destroy not only European Christianity, but also European civilization and European peoples, in a great genocide that Muslims and Jews brought to all other great civilizations that existed in the ancient world.

I don't want this job. But we must do these jobs out of duty, to preserve our people and their way of life, the way of life that brought the rest of the world out of poverty, hunger, hard work, ignorance, tyranny, slavery, disease and death and suffering.

We did this through our pre-Christian traditions and laws and our Christian traditions and faith.

And all of humanity is punishing us for our gifts.

So that Christians can help me to adapt and restore Christianity and natural law and Aristotelian reason to our time, as the great men of our past did, or out of pride, selfishness, resentment and envy, bring about by not acting, put an end to not just Christianity. but our entire civilization, our nations and our race.

against atheism

ATHEISM IS NOT A RELIGION. AT BEST, IT IS AN IDEOLOGY.

Atheism is not a religion (and to present it as such is a fraud), it is a statement of science (measurement) and is used as an ideology (political change) and possibly an accusation (fraud and damage to the law).

The only reason atheism is ridiculous is because we haven't restored oath (offering), prayer (request), mindfulness, and ancestor and nature worship (celebration of inheritances). (western native religion).

As such, Critique Without Replacement is IDEOLOGICAL, for the simple reason that intuition (emotions) REQUIRES training, as do our bodies, reason (reason, calculation, computation) and memories (knowledge, skills).

Religion is just one layer of education. The education of our moral intuitions. We can accomplish this education by various means. The whole set of Abrahamic "lies" is not a necessary means. There is no evidence of this.

Close

The truth is a relentless, zero-tolerance weapon.

The truth is ruthless. The truth is the scientific, legal, political, educational and religious means to defeat Abrahamisms. But Truth is not a selective weapon. It is indiscriminate, a zero tolerance weapon. This will destroy their Christianity along with the first generation Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam, and the second generation Abrahamic religions: Marxism (Judaism), Feminism and Postmodernism (Christianity) and Fundamentalism (Islam).

It's no use debating with the faithful

— “You may speak of the law to religion, but you can never speak of religion to the law. This is the law.”—

I don't argue with the 'believers' because realism, naturalism, reason, empiricism, operationalism, science and law are incommensurable with faith. And I argue exclusively in writing because the Abrahamic fallacy and the GSRRM are easier to expose, and the analytical prose easier than believers can intuitively follow.

Just as I don't argue with women, because they defendintuition and proportionalitywhile men arguewitness and reciprocity'the faithful trust in the tactics of the women: they expel those who do not conform to the myth, unlike the men who expel those who do not conform to the Truth.

The only reason the faithful have political value is the number left. Therefore, it is still possible to refuse cooperation in exchange for tolerating evading testimony. Not otherwise. The faithful are historically allied with the enemy, only joining the 'right' after World War II.

This is because the tools for adhering to a false promise, despite the moral hazard of doing so, and using GSRM, Pilpul and Critique (which my work exists for), are the tools for communicating the old world Abrahamic religions and the Marxism, Post-modernity, Feminism today.

So the problem for believers is that the instruments of persuasion with which they build their inner contact for the faith, are used against them, on the one hand.competingnew religion of pseudoscience evolved intoreplace them.

Since we Germanized this Semitic religion for 1500 years, the aristocratic class (law) sustains it solely on the basis of tradition and kinship interest. However, the faithful will prevent the martial class from defeating this pseudoscientific new set of religions.

And while I have found a method of using law and testimony to root out these competitors, our 'traditional' believers, these same believers are clearly not willing to trade "faith for spiritual and law for reality" in matters of discourse. it is necessary to eliminate the competition.

Thus, the only way forward is to massively appeal to the material interests of the majority of the population, who, under the pressure of subjugation and genocide by the new pseudoscientific cults, will follow their material interests.

This means that we simply write the law without concessions and let the interests of faith compete with everyone's material interests; and, as such, we cannot restore education and state support to churches, which they desperately need for their survival and political influence.

And most of the faithful interpreted my question as an attack on the faith, rather than a test of whether the faithful could tolerate such a constitution when my aim was to determine whether it was possible to return the church to its central role.

My first project restored the core functions of education to the church and eliminated public schools, post offices, title registries, banking, and credit, and returned these functions to the church. thus ensuring their survival and the starvation of competing cults.

But this solution requires that the spectrum of 'churches' serve the interests of our people, from the devout to the altruists (like myself) those who prefer our native religions to the foreign ones of community, ancestors and nature).

But one does not reason with faith. Faith is designed to resist reason. And the caliber of people with whom to discuss the “alt-right” isn't exactly helpful in anything other than examining the range of positions of those without agency.

Therefore, in any discourse with 'the faithful', one is obliged to state the truth, which cannot be debated with those who practice the argumentation methods developed precisely to deny the means, the reason and the opportunity to reason. And therefore one must have recourse to the 'call' of the Abrahamic fallacy.

Which is true, but useless with the faithful who deny reality and the tools with which we ensure that our discourse is consistent, corresponding and coherent with actionable reality: reason, empiricism, operationalism and science.

The religions of economics and ethics

(this one will hurt. Hold on to something)

TThere is no existential god other than the information in the mind of man, and the consequences of that information that manifest in human thought, manifestation, word and action. And that god is just the god imagined by the faithful in such a way that they preserve peace among themselves by forbidding variation in strategy, and forbidding debate, and forbidding learning, and forbidding innovation and evolution. It's a mutual contract written in fiction.

I agree that there is value for the believer in the production of psychological care based on certainty, conformism, due to this contract written in fiction. He recreates the safety of the herd for those who lack agency, portraying submission, conformity, and stagnation as heroic.

I also understand that there is value in freedom from emotional baggage, from intellectual baggage, that the rest of us carry on behalf of Christians, who are nothing more than opportunists: Christians walk free in our emotional and mental toils.

The Christian woman perpetuates the female reproductive strategy of worrying only about the security of the nest, while the man strives to transform reality into security and resources that she can spend on the nest, on herself, on her offspring.

However, as Christians demonstrate daily, she maintains her usefulness in hostility for him to break her illusion, because then she would have to acknowledge the debt and offer something in return.

Why do you think Islam, Marxism, feminism and postmodernism make the same promise of equality, in exchange for the same written fictional contract, that they will work together to live parasitically on the emotional and intellectual efforts of 'men': the aristocracy.

Then pay your way.

The Spectrum of Belief Statements

We have been discussing this in my little corner of the universe and I tend to work with the following sequence of terminology:

Faith= the recognition that your position is indefensible, but reports that you have some position.

Belief= a 'mark' in the report that you could rule in favor of the position if it cost you nothing, but that you are not responsible for the position's truth or falsity.

Sabre= which you are not pointing to, but with present knowledge you will defend your claim that you will rule in favor of the office, even if it costs you little reputation to defend it.

Promise= that you are willing to compromise your status and reputation to defend the claim you will choose for office.

Warranty= that you are willing to make a material commitment to defend the statement you will choose in favor of the office.

exhibition= which you chose in favor of the position.

We have a lot of evidence that this cost hierarchy reflects the "selling" an individual is making of the proposition in question.

Belief is irrelevant.

We don't know what you think. We cannot know. We can only judge him by his actions. If you testify to an untestifiable belief, you can only lie. If you lie, then you have a reason to lie. I can only try to find out the reason why you lie. I cannot distinguish a profession of belief in an untestifiable lie from any other lie.

Belief is irrelevant. Either you imitate the works of Jesus or you are a liar, a fraud and another thief.

Keep a diary of actions you do in the service of others for no reason other than love for others and the cost to yourself of doing so.

If you are not a deed, you are not in the service of others, you are not in the service of others for your personal service to them, at their expense, then you are a liar, a fraud and a thief, and your claims to Christianity are not , is different from wearing the uniform of one who served, when he did not, pretending to equal his honor.

Do not. You are just an opportunist. A parasite on the work of others. An opportunist of the few Christians that exist, as well as an opportunist of the few warriors that exist.

truth against lies

Nature worship, or the sacredness of nature, ancestor worship, hero worship, and Stoic rituals that produce mindfulness are hard to call dishonest or false. Praying for wisdom from any of the above is hard enough to postulate as worse than the mental discipline that encourages honesty with oneself.

No more lies. Enough of the utopian lies. No more lies for marketing, advertising and sales purposes. no more lies to accumulate political power. No more lies for the entertainment purposes we call news. No more lies from the political platform, no more lies from the teacher's podium, no more lies from the intellectual media, no more lies from the priest's pulpit. No more lies.

If you are unwilling to pay the cost of giving up your lies, you are unwilling to participate in the exchange that requires others to give up their lies. As such, you are a liar, a fraud, and a thief.

No more lies. It's costly for all of us to stop lying. It is a burden to tell the truth in ordinary matters. It is expensive to learn to speak the truth.

But it was expensive not to kill. do not steal to avoid committing fraud. not to participate in cheating (usury), not to participate in hitchhiking, not to participate in conspiracy, and it is tremendously gratifying for us to be forced to participate in production.

It was expensive for us to learn to read and write. We had a hard time learning scientific thinking. It was very difficult for us to let go of the mystique. All these institutional changes cost us a lot.

The truth is the most expensive commons in the world, which is why no one else does it.The truth forbids parasitism. And most of the world has chosen to perpetuate free riding internally, if not professional free riding externally.

But the benefits of truth will be as great as the benefits of science.

stop trying to lie

There is no theological sophistry that we cannot falsify and expose as attempted fraud or theft.

Man can feel through his nerves, associate sensations into relationships, disambiguate relationships into fragments, fragments into categories, distinguish categories of objects, spaces, scenes and places and associate them, reinforce them through rehearsal and recollection, and sustain one or combination - or a prediction of a combination - in your attention, modify it recursively and in that order, due to your purely physical, biochemical, biological, neurological ability to identify constant and changing relationships between stimuli over time. That's all neurons do: they turn on and off, faster, slower, together, not together, and lock attention to whatever they deem useful enough and free our physical bodies to act if we feel it's useful. all the rest of our brain does is try to keep us alive while you do this.

Give each one to God and Caesar

Christianity has everything to say about family, customs, ethics and morals, and absolutely nothing to say about science, economics, politics and law.

Give to God (Faith) what is His, and to Caesar (Truth) His.

Otherwise we must go to war between the true and the faithful, and though the faithful may undermine and resist, they fight badly, and this is not only because they are poorer, but because they are more feminine in composition and cognition.

“Deliver to each one”it is a compromise between the political-empirical man and the emotionally faithful woman, just as marriage is a compromise between a man and a woman, under which neither reaches his ideal, but both achieve the maximum possible.

Abrahamism – Undermining Specialization, Lying Parasitism

“abrahamismorefers to the argumentative technique of usingA carne(positive way), youCriticism(via-negativa) to buildsophisms(the argumentative equivalent of numerology and astrology) through the use of charge, framing, suggestion, obscurantism, overload, fictionalisms, appeals to reasonableness and false promises, to create dangers.

All three Abrahamic religions, Kantian philosophy, Marxist argument, and postmodern thought make use of this technique of argumentation, often called "dialectics," but which operationally consists of nothing more than Pilpul and the Critique.

The False Promise Technique, Bait in Assurance Absent from Danger;

false promise,Bait in Danger, Warranty Absent;

Examples:

1. If I suggest that you can win the game, it will put you in danger.
2. If I induce you to buy drugs by stating that they are not addictive or destructive. I'm putting you in danger, because the addiction is spiraling, and I don't guarantee it because I can't and I don't want to.
3. If I offer you a loan to get what you want on impulse or duress, but I can charge you interest and then seize your property in restitution.
4. If I offer you what looks like a good deal without informing you of the possible negative consequences, and I don't guarantee that I can.
5. If I promise you equality or socialism when it is genetics that causes our differences, and you act to destroy your civilization, then all that is bait for danger, because it does not and cannot guarantee it; and lacks knowledge to understand the impossibility of Pareto organization, natural distribution, the role of innovation or the impossibilities of productivity, incentives and economic calculation.
6. I promise you power and equality if you undermine the political system (Marx), but I do not and cannot guarantee it.
7. I promise you political equality if you undermine men (feminism), but you do not and cannot guarantee it, and you do not have the knowledge to understand its impossibility.
8. I promise you status if you undermine the status hierarchy (postmodernism)
9. If I promise you salvation in heaven, if you rebel against the government that is trying to create order and prosperity for decades to come, that is causing you danger, but I do not and cannot guarantee it.
10. I promise you virgins in heaven if you die for the cause of destroying aristocratic civilizations, but I do not and cannot guarantee this.
11. I promise you life after death if you obey and undermine the upper classes. (Abrahamism) – but does not and cannot guarantee this.
12. Woman implies access to friendship, affection or sex, which she will never give, in return for her association, money, work, effort – and she does not guarantee – even if she can.
13. I appeal to your morality and pass the Hart-Cellar Immigration Act of 1965, I promise it will not lead to a third world invasion, and I do not guarantee that promise, even if I can.

Those are just the easy ones. These are all lies that lure you into danger (risk and loss) so that I can benefit from your ignorance and then claim innocence or ignorance of what wasn't said and moral justification to benefit from your harm.

In other words, you are entering into a voluntary trade that is not in your best interest, simply because for some reason you are vulnerable to cheating.

Pilpul (Sophism to Advance)- Overload. Divert obscuring Dispute by sheer volume and variety of fallacies to subdue resistance to false and pernicious conclusions. May include sophistry, pseudoscience, fiction, fictionalism, or supernaturalism.

Criticism(undermine to resist or distract)– Criticism of a scarecrow to undermine without proposing an alternative or superior solution open to equal analysis and criticism. It includes carrying, framing, obscuring, suggesting, fictionalizing, denying, misleading, and outright lying.

Plenty of undue praise– Presenting a hero to create an appeal to authority rather than presenting an argument to test whether the application to the context survives.

Propaganda– creator of pure repetition narratives to fill the “ideas market” with nonsense that pleases the gatekeepers who control the broadcast channels and the media.

The technique of hiding under plausible deniability – Escape

(…)

A lie (incentive), a half-truth (distraction), a false dichotomy (choice).

Low confidence people just don't go beyond the tangible. Highly trustworthy people do. Our high trust asset in building commons that yield such huge returns compared to other cities. But our trust (suspension of disbelief) and vulnerability to anchoring, suggestion and obscurantism make our ordinary people easily deceived, manipulated, controlled and trapped.

The Pilpul Technique – Persuasion

THeir to the Pilpul technique: They use an element of truth to create a false dichotomy and therefore frame the issue by suggestion and obscure the solution by anchoring.

• We are always vulnerable to anchoring.
• As we are vulnerable to anchoring, we are vulnerable to framing.
• Because we are vulnerable to framing, we are vulnerable to suggestion and obscurantism.
• Because we are vulnerable to suggestion and obscurantism, we are vulnerable to influence.

If we are given an incentive to justify this influence, we can be controlled, forBlockourChanceyMotivationfor seeking the truth.

All three Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) produce recursive ignorance by BLOCKING our search for truth.

This is how PILPUL is used to deceive, and this is why math, logic, science, economics, law and testimonial truth are such an important defense.

The Athenian Art of Truth Versus the Jerusalem Art of Lies

Pilpul is a craft. It is 'the art of lying'. It is one of the oldest written arts. The art of justifying anything. The art of loading, framing, overloading and suggesting. The art of building mind-loaded relationships so that a justification can be found for a desired action. It is the art of overloading the human mind with the stimulus of language so that the stimuli of experience cannot compete. Because in the quest to understand one is open to suggestion – at first – to deception. It is the source of the transformation of the western law of the past century from a descriptive science that prohibits involuntary transfers and preserves peace, to a system of moral justification by which people can enter into political conflict so that political power can be obtained by the power. from the government

Marx's "dialectical materialism" is just an application of Pilpul. The great expansion of pseudoscience during the 19th and 20th centuries was achieved through the use of the technique whereby it is possible to justify anything if you seek justification through "meaning" rather than correspondence with existence using internally consistent and externally corresponding language.

In the West, we use the opposite technique: existential operations. We did this because of the Roman conversion of Greek Platonism to empirical law. Because if you want to justify something using "meaning" instead of existential operations, you can find or create that justification. This is the meaning of hermeneutic interpretation. The study of texts and language to help you in the free association by which you can justify anything that conforms to that text.

And this is why strict construction and operative language, identity and non-confusion, external correspondence and internal consistency, complete accounting, parsimony and boundaries, and objective morality are required of us if we are to speak truthfully. and not harming others by lying. speech. Westerners invented the truth and we tell the truth. We are so indoctrinated with trying to understand each other, and so used to trusting each other, that we have forgotten how to detect lies. Our empathy, our trust, is just what is needed to naively train our minds through suggestion.

We stop teaching logic and rhetoric so the left can spread lies. But even when we teach logic and rhetoric, we teach rhetorical fallacies of construction. We don't teach you how to combat loading, framing, overloading, and suggested lies. Neither do we teach (or learn about) our cognitive biases, which are now the central canon of psychological study, or our genetic biases, which must become part of that canon. Even in our rhetoric, we assume that others are simply wrong, not that they intentionally lie, seek justification and deceive. We have been trusting for so many thousands of years that we don't know the art of lying. We become naive in our trust.

Pilpul is the training that educated the great mistakes of Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor, Mises, [even some of Popper], Rothbard and the Frankfurt School: (Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse, Pollock, Fromm, Kirchheimer, Löwenthal, Neumann , Disgusting man). Christianity and Kantian rationalism are the training given to the great continental liars who still persist in both the German rationalist tradition and the American postmodern. Creators and propagators really don't know they're lying, just as women who engage in ever-present and inescapable, but often unimaginable, feminine illusions know they're lying. But if enough people agree with the lie, it's just as good for them as if we discovered some fundamental truth and spread it around.

It is the technique by which scholars, Jews and women have used their weakness to create a new religion as mystical and deadly as the last one that took us into a dark age for a thousand years, from which we will emerge for the next thousand through the use of truth under the name which we surreptitiously call 'science' so as not to accuse the church and academia and the state of lying. Science is the discipline by which we practice the art of speaking the truth. The fact that we have to call it anything other than truth-speaking is an indictment against the rest of society by the few who practice truth-speaking. Reason, reasonableness, and science (rather than philosophical rationalism) have been attempts to create expertise in telling the truth without threatening religious, moral, and legal leaders.

Our law was converted from an empirical science to a moral-religious form of Jewish mysticism in the course of the 20th century by the constant use of the PilPul tradition. The law identifies and lists the methods by which humans take advantage of each other and prohibits them in the future. Law is a purely empirical study. But the Talmud is not a vehicle for the science of truth-telling. Anglo-Saxon Indo-European law is one such vehicle. The Talmud is not empirical, it is justification. It's an instruction manual for lying. And pilpul is the technique by which one learns to lie. The ancient battle between Athens and Jerusalem is between science and truth, justification and deceit. And governments are pragmatic. They will use truth or lies as it suits them.

Notice how rationalism in philosophy and legal relativism evolved together. Philosophy has been used as much to lie as to tell the truth. Legislation is not law unless it is also legal. Legislation consists of some combination of law (science of free riding), contract (exchange between parties) and Mandate (exporting costs), and predation (bureaucratic free riding). But the law is a very simple thing: an empirically accumulated record of the methods of parasitic action and the methods of restitution for having committed them. The only Western philosophy needed is and always has been our common law. The rest is an attempt to gain power, or an attempt to justify the separation of the pursuit of truth in the form of science, from the discipline of lies in its multiple forms, particularly the religio-moral forms.

We are in this position because only Darwin and Einstein were fully successful in their disciplines. Spencer failed philosophy because it was not cotemporal with Popper's forgery. Popper failed in epistemology, an irony for history. Mises, Hayek failed economics. Brouwer failed math. Bridgeman in Science. All our sages have failed in the law, first because Western law is practiced as a cult of law, not as a science of involuntary transfer prohibitions. And Tesla and Turing and programming were slow to instruct all of the above in solving strictly constructive and operative language, limiting the discourse to existential terminology. It fell to my generation to stand on the shoulders of great men and look back on their failures, understand why they failed and how to restore truth to our discourse.

When we reached the age of enlightenment, we had to solve the problem of cooperation at scale, with different people from different nations. But our entire moral discourse for intertribal and international cooperation has been built on myths and mysticism. We had to invent the economy. Not as 'truth', but as a separate discipline so as not to offend our elites. Just as we had to invent science and reason as separate disciplines so as not to offend our elites.

We've spent millennia trying not to offend our elites, who govern with lies. To solve this problem for good, we have to punish our elites for using anything other than the truth.

Humans can organize around truth, morality, and correspondence, or we can organize around falsehood, immorality, and correspondence. By constructing these great hoaxes, the Jewish Enlightenment did tremendous damage to Western civilization. Although ALL lightings did. Look what France has become? See what England is becoming. Look at all of Europe. The lie of Rousseauian France. The lie of Kantian rationalism. The lie of the British aristocracy of all. The free-rider lie of Keynesian economics: that we can increase employment without consuming all other forms of national capital in the process. That between Keynesian pseudoscience and Jewish pseudoscience, our civilization has been destroyed and we are on the brink of extinction.

What is the difference between the immediacy of a gas chamber and the slow process of extermination by a new process of conversion and gradual suicide? What is the difference between gradual suicide and immediate displacement through immigration of non-kin and competitors? If we give the Chinese heroin and ruin their civilization and they kick us out for good, they're right. If we give others the good lie of democracy instead of the truth of common law and science, they are right to reject us. If the Jews and the Germans, and the French and Anglo-Saxon enlightened thinkers give us intellectual heroin and we like it very much, hyperconsumption is a natural heroin for human beings, and it produces exactly the same effect as heroin for longer periods of time. It surpasses our reason. The hyper-consumption of our genetic, territorial, physical, traditional, cultural, normative capital has been stimulating, just like heroin. But neither is it an objective good.

I think we forget that Jewish verbalism and female verbalism have the same cause. This Jewish argument and that female argument have the same cause. This Jewish group's evolutionary strategy and the female group's evolutionary strategy are identical: gossip, rally, shame, and frame through repetition, in order to survive, no matter which group of men is in charge of them. Women act like it. Jews act like such. Jewish women are more masculine and Jewish men are more feminine than competing orders. Westerners, on the other hand, LOVE to protect the weak as a sign of status. We love to prove our male superiority by embracing the weak more. However, we simply invite those who conspire against us. The female encourages consumption to increase her reproductive rate. This is her strategy. He has no mind or reason. flocks of men He manages his flock. He manages his territory. Manage the balance of each. He fights against competitors. Expand your territory. In doing so, it captures the genes that allow it to do so.

END THE LIES. NOT JUST OF THE JEWS BUT OF ALL THINKERS OF THE ENLIGHTENMENT.

Return west, returning us to our martial fundamentals: Truth, Reason, Science, Testimony, Jury, Common Law, Rule of Law, Universal Position, Natural Law necessary for rational voluntary cooperation.

THE TRUTH IS ENOUGH.

The Criticism Technique: Lying Undermining and Destroying Reputation

(mining)

TThe female competitive strategy (herd) avoiding the discussion and the contract for the truth;

by the use of;

undermine, poison the well, destruction of reputation

By use of;

(G) gossip (S)haming, (R)allier, (R)ridicule, (M)oralize, (P)psychologize, (U)undermine, (R)destroy reputation. and resolve by (F)ace or consent– instead of the male strategy (package) through factual arguments that resolve the truth regardless of face or consent. In other words, female "feelings" use rejection or approval versus male "reals" of truth or falsehood.

complete list

(D)it is good
(D)is approving
(O)outrageous,
(R)ridiculing
(S)happiness,
(METRO)oralizing,
(STILL)psychologizing,
(R)ally
(GRAMS)eavesdropping
(STILL)clothes
(you guys)mining,
(R)reputation destruction.
...and resolving to...
(F)such as, approval or consent, rather thanTRUTH.

The nerf takes the form of these stealing attempts:

• Fraud– promising benefits that will never be delivered at costs that will never be disclosed.
• Slander (oral) and Liber (written) Defamation– Malicious lies designed to slander, marginalize and dehumanize rivals or critics.
• Obscenity– Transgression of taboos for purposes of subversion, demoralization and/or parasitic profit.
• Blasphemy– Attacking the sacred with the purpose of subverting, undermining, destroying intergenerational wisdom and eroding necessary and useful moral rules.
• false alert: relentlessly instilling fear and sensationalizing imaginary threats as a means of obscuring/justifying real ones.

METROIn general, make an argument and let the argument do its work. Men use shame, if necessary, in response to Minar. Whereas the female cognitive strategy is to rely completely on Minar as a means of denying or suppressing the argument rather than refuting it.

The illegality of mining in European history

youIn Western history, undermining of shame (GSRRM) was largely illegal or punishable by direct violence between men during mourning. And the laws against "mumbling" — gossip and the undermining of women — were enforced to keep the peace.

During democratic, Marxist and postmodern movements, when women demanded political power, they undermined these laws of mourning, libel, slander and rebuke, under the guise of freedom of speech rather than true factual freedom of speech (testimony) . Marxism, postmodernism, and feminism consist largely of sophism, pseudoscience, and denialism espoused by the GSRM.

GSRM, like outright denial, is one of the dishonesty means of avoiding arguments, while the dishonest construction of argumentative deception is carried out by Loading Framing Obscuring Cherry Picking, Fictionalization, Sophistry, and the Fictionalisms of Idealism, Supernaturalism, and Pseudoscience.

The reversal of the illegality of mining in recent European history

(…)

Psychoanalysis (Psychologizing)– pseudoscientifically pathologizing legitimate disagreement as a means of gaining and exercising social control and marginalizing and silencing dissenting voices and points of view.

female coercion– Prompting, shaming, gossiping, disapproving, moralizing, mocking, ridiculing, berating, berating, and vilifying to increase the emotional and social cost of disagreement and dissent without addressing their causes.

Every Abrahamic argument is a lie

1 – Or do we dedicate ourselves to
… …productive,
… …fully informed(real),
… …guaranteed(game skin),
… …voluntary transfers(exchanges),
… …free of chargeregarding theproven investmentsof others by externality,
… …limited to our ability to carry outrestitution(investment),
.. or we are not.

2 – Eachforced transferit is amissed opportunityin exchange for mutual benefit, even if it is an exchange of good (resource), by rule (behavior).

3. In other words, all demands for goods independent of exchange are simply the use of threats ofdissociation (boycott)as a means ofextraction (rent-seeking).

CThe criticism is simply the technology invented in the Levant with the purpose of 'selling' monotheisms to the lower classes as a revolt against the great civilizations of the ancient world, but this time in a pseudo-scientific (Jewish Marxist) and pseudo-rational (Jewish Marxist) way. and postmodern French).

We are all genetic machines, so to speak, and our agency depends on knowledge, reason, urgency, and skill. Hence why the language of science (due diligence) and natural law (reciprocity) are so important to discourse, and why literature and literary argument are always and everywhere, like most of history, intellectual attempts at some form of fraud.

The complete definition of Abrahamism

abrahamismo: consists of False Promise, Pilpul (positive sophistry), Criticism (negative undermining), parody, and heaping undue praise, to force you to appeal to your intuition rather than reason and evidence.

abrahamismo(substantive)

1. say or imply afalse promise, (to escape the laws of nature)
2. Without the provision ofWarranty, (in-game skin)
3. In order tobaitnoMoral hazard, (taking advantage of your glitch)
4. where you canprofitFrom others'loss, to
   1. Murder,
   2. Violence,
   3. Robot,
   4. Fraud,
   5. free driving,
   6. Socialization of Losses,
   7. privatization of the commons
   8. Conspiracy,
   9. statism,
   10. Conversion,
   11. Immigration,
   12. Conquest
5. Persuaded or Argued by “A carne"which consists not
   1. Sophismsof:
      1. Loading,
      2. framed,
      3. Suggestion,
      4. Fusion (!!)
      5. false dichotomy
      6. false equivalence
      7. double standards
      8. cherry picking
      9. Obscurantism,
      10. overload,
   2. it's himfictionalismsof:
      1. arithmetic
      2. Idealism,
      3. pseudoscience
      4. "Magic"
      5. supernaturalism, you
      6. mistaken,
6. Attractive for:
   1. NAXALT('not all x's like that')
   2. Optimisms or pessimisms as medians (outliers)
   3. Reasonableness (limited to interpersonal)
   4. Morality (limited to global)
   5. Face (Status, Reputation, Honor)
   6. Norms (what others do)
   7. Authority (action, law)
7. Rather than:
   1. truth or falsehood
   2. Rationality vs. irrationality (self-interest)
   3. Reciprocity or Reciprocity
   4. Probability or Improbability
   5. Possibility or Impossibility
8. And defended byCriticism", that consists of:
   1. Bursting men head-on with undue praise (positive)
   2. Straw Manning review (negative),y
   3. poisoning the well(Contamination of common information)
   4. yGSRRM (denial, disapproval, ridicule, shaming, reputation destruction),that consists of:
      1. denial
      2. disapproval,
      3. embarrass
         1. ridiculous,
         2. embarrass,
         3. moralizing,
         4. psychologizing,
      4. reputation destruction
         1. meeting,
         2. gossip,
         3. yreputation destruction–
9. demonstrating
   1. mistaken,
   2. Distraction,y
   3. disapproval
10. Rather than:
    1. Argument true or false
    2. Fully informed agreement or disagreement
11. This way
    1. anadvancing a falsehoodon the one hand, and
    2. attacking the personrather thanargumentin the other.
12. With the end ofDark:
    1. placed on,
    2. unfaithful,
    3. stealing, andirectlylie, cheat, steal or
    4. baitin whose dangers they may
       1. lie cheat and steal under the cover of
          1. ambiguity and
          2. the pretense of ignorance and
          3. the claim of innocence for the damage caused.

The spectrum of:

1. false promise,
2. without youtWarranty,
3. baitnoMoral hazard
4. where you canprofitFrom others'loss

Includes:

(list here…………)

Common Techniques in Abrahamic Deception

1) Resubmission ofMitolike story
2) Traditional projectionWisdomas authoritative law
3) Dependence onsupernaturalism("Magic", "Miracle")
4)Monopoly(exclusivity) and the threat of loss due to default.
5)Fake promissesand Impossible Conquest Reward (supernatural, natural).
6) Use ofA carneyCriticismIn defense of falsehoods.
7) Varieties ofpriestswith status, power, and economic incentives to perpetuate falsehoods.
8)secret knowledgeand, or Prohibition of Contradictory Knowledge, or Denial of Contradictory Knowledge.
9) Entry costs:
... Oath to a falsehood. (phrase)
... Payment of Ritualistic Costs to Falsehood. (rituals)
...Payment of 'gifts' (fees) to the priesthood (tithes)

The rebellion against truth, reciprocity, productivity, markets and eugenics

Abrahamism is a grammar of dysgenics and deceit

HimRevoltagainst the invention ofTRUTHDuty Aristocracy Meritocracy And Eugenic Evolution.

abrahamismo=
….A carne(positive) +Criticism(negative) =
…. …. …. …. (undermine, overload, frame, overwhelm, suggest,
…. …. …. …. obscurantism, propagandism, fictionalism) =
….. ….Gossip(mining) =
…. …. ….girl group strategyto mine alphas =
…. …. …. …. Ffemale reproductive strategyadvance your high investment
…. …. …. …. …. …. …. descendência independentemente do mérito =
…. …. …. …. ….dysgenic parasitism.

The evolution of the art of the Abrahamic lie:

• Abrahamism v1:Judaismagainst the aristocracy of Babylon
• Abrahamismo v2:Christianityagainst Western aristocracy.
• Abrahamismo v3:Islamagainst the aristocracy of the ancient world
• Abrahamism v4:Marxismagainst the aristocracy of the modern world.
• Abrahamismo v5:FrenchPostmodernism against the aristocracy of today's world.
• Abrahamism v6:Islamagainst the aristocracy of the whole world.

[graph goes here]

The Abrahamic Strategy

• abrahamismo=authoritarianism(submission) +A carne+Criticism+fictionalism.
• twoserve as a systemcalculation(decidability) by the most primitive means (anthropic comparison).
• Abrahamism is incompatible with Western reason
  • Universalism, Monopoly, Authority, Justificationism(placed on), polymoralism, fictionalism, deceit and parasitism;
• …are very different from…:
  • Nationalism, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Markets, Counterfeiting, Reciprocity, Guarantee, Truth and Productivity.

This is why the Abrahamic (Jewish in particular, or Semitic in general) means of countering the Greco-Roman-European argument using false promises, baiting, pilpul (sophistry) and criticism (undermining) are so effective: it's how our women talk with us, and because of our high trust, we are genetically or culturally vulnerable to it, whereas less trustworthy people are not. And we are easily harmed politically and academically because our women naturally find a greater "affinity" with Semitic non-argumentation (religion, postmodernism, feminism, denial) than with the testimonial of the truth of the European science of reason.

Propaganda

PAGropaganda is an intentionally defective product, produced for power purposes, delivered with the intent to persuade through deception, using rhetorical devices including: confusion, loading, framing, overload, obscurantism, front men, outright lies and reliance on repetition as a means of creating confirmatory "evidence," to produce an intuitive rather than a rational response.

The traditional consensus argument is that we are all smart enough to dismiss the propaganda, to learn to distrust the arguments, but history says this is not true. Instead, we seek to confirm our moral prejudices. Not just because it's in our reproductive interests, because those biases reflect our reproductive interests, but because we're so invested in our biases that the cost of training our intuition, the intuition we rely on to ease the burden of reasoning, is simply too high. In the kaleidic universe, without prejudice (bias) decisions are not decidable. WE MUST trust intuition, we have no other choice.

The various pseudoscientific and rationalist movements, from Marxist 'scientific socialism', Freudian psychology, Keynesian economics, Franz Boas anthropology, Frankfurt School absolute inventions, postmodern philosophers, American feminism and political correctness current. – all have relied and continue to rely on deception through the use of confusion, accusation, framing, overload, obscurantism, frontman, outright lying and built on the use of critique: confirmation-based frontmen as vehicles for the critique of opposing propositions, heaping undue praise, heaping opponents with false arguments and repeated chants of falsehoods through the media.

All of these groups make use of the constant repetition of misstatements consisting of various uses of fusing, charging, framing, obscurantism, scarecrows, and Marxist "criticism" to stimulate our intuitions and generate confirmation bias through conscious awareness. normative rather than rational persuasion. by real means.

In other words, it is a very complex and innovative form of deception using suggestion, to confirm our moral cognitive biases, rather than education and persuasion by reason. It is an organized, intentional and systematic war against truth, reason, science and morality aimed at establishing control of our thoughts, actions and resources and justifying robbing us by consuming our historic commons.

We call this war by many names: counter-enlightenment, postmodern movement, socialism, Marxist criticism, pseudoscience. But these names provide a morally neutral judgment on what an objectively immoral activity is: cheating for the purposes of control, theft, and virtual servitude. The true, rational, scientific name for these movements is "deception."

undermine a policy

"Alinsky's Rules for Radicals"

The female method of warfare:

• reputation destruction,
• alliance Destruction,
• trust destruction,
• Social Destruction.

RULE 1: "Power is not just what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have."

Energy is derived from 2 main sources â?? money and people. The "poor" must generate power of flesh and blood. (These are two things that are in plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a hard time attracting people, and often do so almost exclusively for economic reasons.)

Curt Doolittle:
The only material power is violence. Everything else is tolerance of the powerful. If you cannot use violence, you are not really powerful. If you can use violence and you don't, then you are not worthy to rule and are simply taking advantage, parasiting or conspiring. What does this teach you? Master of Organized Violence. Use it with zero tolerance.

(Video) #NEW | THE ABRAHAMIC HOUSE | #INTERFAITH & #KUFR | Ash-Shaykh Al-Imam Ahmad Musā Jibrīl (حفظه الله)

RULE 2: "Never leave your people's experience."

This results in confusion, fear, and withdrawal. Feeling confident lengthens anyone's spine. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don't address the "real" problems. That's why they avoid things they don't know about.)

Curt Doolittle::
The straw envelope is only effective if we are tolerant of the straw envelope and avoid the core issues at hand. The only reason not to engage in war, destruction, enslavement and servitude of the various kinds available is true and productive discourse on the central themes. If we cannot discuss the issues, then either we wage war if we can, or we will be destroyed if we cannot. Therefore, the only power is violence.

RULE 3: "Whenever possible, get out of the enemy's experience."

Look for ways to increase self-doubt, anxiety, and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Note how many organizations under attack are blindsided by seemingly irrelevant arguments they are forced to address.)

Curt Doolittle::
Again, straw giving is particularly effective because those who specialize in truth, duty, sovereignty, reciprocity, voluntary exchange under natural law, and markets in all aspects of life develop the expertise and habit of doing so. Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Nietzsche (and me too) and the Great Generals do not tell us how to wage war. They are telling us that we must not be 'Christianized' by our own moral rule. This is one of the secrets of the West's success outside of the Abrahamic dark ages: rule by warriors ensures that we are not victims of in-group morality extended to out-group conflict. It is also one of the reasons for Islam's success: it is a continual call to war against the aristocracy, by every living soul, to reverse the aristocracy and restore dysgenic herding.

RULE 4: "Make the enemy abide by his own rulebook."

If the rule is that every letter gets a response, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with it because nobody can obey all their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The beleaguered entity's credibility and reputation are at stake, because if activists discover it is lying or failing to deliver on its commitments, they can continue to reduce the damage.)

Curt Doolittle::
Criticism is a powerful means of avoiding the act of providing a solution that "on the whole" is more

(need to understand how they seek reciprocity)

RULE 5: "Ridicule is man's mightiest weapon."

There is no defense. It's irrational. It's scandalous. It also functions as a key pressure point to force the enemy to compromise. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear).

Curt Doolittle:
Ridicule is not discussion, debate or argumentation... it is admitting that there is a lack, and as such it breaks the incentive to non-violence necessary to negotiate. Thus, all instances of ridicule that are tolerated are nothing more than avoiding the cost of policing the commons against those who mine, exploit, parasitize, and attack.

RULE 6: "A good tactic is one your people like."

They will continue to do this without warning and come back for more. They are doing what they want and even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different than any other human being. We all shy away from "not fun" activities, but we revel in and enjoy those that work and get results.)

Curt Doolittle:
tolerating the enemy's small victories only gives them positive reinforcement. If you are practicing truth, duty, sovereignty, reciprocity, natural law and markets at all, the only goal people can have is falsehood and evasion of duty (debt), reciprocity and not sovereignty. , arbitrary rule and parasitism and predation . , and in such cases they are almost always unwilling to exchange their improved behavior for the common goods and consumption that result from their improved behavior.

RULE 7: "A tactic that goes on too long becomes a drag."

Don't become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So, to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)

CD: …

RULE 8: “Keep up the pressure. Never give up.

Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition dominates an approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the shaky organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover, and redefine strategies.)

CD …

RULE 9: "The threat is often more terrifying than the thing itself."

Imagination and ego can generate far more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations are always inventing the worst possible scenario, something that may be far from the minds of the activists. The result is that the organization will spend a lot of time and energy creating in its own collective mind the worst possible conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)

CD …

RULE 10: "If you push the negative hard enough, it will come out and become positive."

Violence on the other side can make the public side with you because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (The unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit noisy] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th century drew the ire of management, often in the form of violence that eventually drew public sympathy to their side.) .

CD …

RULE 11: "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."

Never let the enemy score points because you are stuck without a solution to the problem. (Old saying: If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda and their strategy is to have a seat at the table, to have a forum to exercise their power. So they have to have a solution . of commitment).

CD …

RULE 12: “Choose the target, freeze it, customize it and polarize it”.

It cuts off the support network and isolates the target of sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people suffer faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule work.)

CD: …

Undermining Institutions: The Ten Pillars of the Communist Manifesto

1. Abolition of private land ownership and application of all land rents to public purposes.

The courts have interpreted the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution (1868) as giving the government far more "eminent domain" power than originally intended. Land management property taxes and "environmental" excuses, private property rights have been greatly diluted, and private ownership of land, vehicles and other forms is seized almost every day in this country under the "sunsetting" provisions of the state statutes. RICO and the so-called War on Drugs.

2. A strong progressive or graduated income tax.

The 1913 16th Amendment to the US Constitution (which some scholars claim was never properly ratified) and various state income taxes created this great Marxist coup in the United States many decades ago. These taxes continue to drain the blood of the American economy and greatly reduce the accumulation of capital desperately needed for future growth, business start-ups, job creation and wage increases.

3. Abolition of all inheritance rights.

Another Marxist attack on private property rights manifests itself in state and federal inheritance and other inheritance taxes, which abolished or at least greatly diluted the right of private property owners to determine the disposition and distribution of their property after their death. Instead, government bureaucrats get their greedy hands involved.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

We call it government seizures, tax liens, "confiscation" Public "Act" 99-570 (1986); Executive Order 11490, sections 1205, 2002 granting private land to the Department of Urban Development; the imprisonment of “terrorists” and those who speak or write against the “government” (Criminal/Terrorist Act 1997); or the confiscation of property by the IRS without due process.

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, through a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

The Federal Reserve System, created by the Federal Reserve Act of Congress in 1913, is actually a "national bank" and politically manipulates interest rates and has a monopoly on legal forgery in the United States. This is exactly what Marx had in mind, and it fully meets this plank, another great socialist goal. However, most Americans naively believe that the US is far from being a Marxist or socialist nation.

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.

In the United States, communication and transportation are controlled and regulated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), established by the Communications Act of 1934 and the Department of Transportation and Interstate Commerce Commission (established by Congress in 1887), and the Administration Federal Aviation Administration as well as Executive Orders 11490, 10999, not to mention various state bureaucracies and regulations. There is also the federal postal monopoly, AMTRAK and CONRAIL, fully socialist (state-owned) companies. Instead of free-market private enterprise in these major industries, these fields in the United States are semi-cartelized through the government's industrial regulatory complex.

7. Expansion of state-owned factories and production instruments; the putting into cultivation of unoccupied land and the improvement of the soil generally according to a common plan.

While the US does not have large "collective farms" (which failed so miserably in the Soviet Union), we do have a significant degree of government involvement in agriculture in the form of price support subsidies and acreage allocations and land use controls. The Desert Entry Act and the Department of Agriculture. As well as the Department of Commerce and Labor, Department of the Interior, Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Mines, National Park Service, and IRS control of business through corporate regulations.

8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

We call it the Social Security Administration and the Department of Labor. The national indebtedness and the inflation caused by communal banking forced a family with two “incomes”. Women in the workplace since the 1920s, the 19th Amendment to the United States Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, various socialist unions, affirmative action, the Federal Public Works Program, and of course, Executive Order 11000. And I almost forgot… Equal Rights The amendment means that women must do all the work that men do, including military work, and since its passage would make women subject to conscription.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country through a more equal distribution of the population in the countryside.

We call it the Planning Reorganization Act of 1949, zoning (Title 17 1910-1990) and Corporate Super Farms, as well as Executive Orders 11647, 11731 (ten regions) and Public “Act” 89-136.

1. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of child labor in factories in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. etc.

People are paying taxes to support what we call 'public' schools, which train young people to work for the communal debt system. We also call it the Department of Education, NEA and “Outcomes Based Education”.

The left's "debate" strategy is not to debate, it is to undermine

Duplicity, irrereciprocity, honor in deceit, profiting from incitement and exploitation of moral hazard, false promise, justifying fallacy (Pilpul), scarecrow fallacy (Criticism) and disapproval, shaming, mobilizing, moralizing as a substitute for argument is a strategy cultural .

Abrahamists institutionalized this method of 'resistance' to the male (Aryan) method: reciprocity, honor in truth, duty and sacrifice, suppression of moral hazard, limiting promises to what is true and possible, using falsification (instead of justification) . ) , stick to the central argument and avoid disapproval, shame, mobilization and moralization, limiting costs and benefits.

Consumption (leftists)= female reproductive strategy, associated cognitive biases and associated brain structure: "The herd". Use the threat of ostracism from the pack through disapproval, ridicule, shaming, gossip, moralizing, mobilization, not discussion. I listed the steps of the technique.

Capitalization (rightists)= Male reproductive strategy, associated cognitive biases and associated brain structure: “La Manada”.

The left (female cognitive bias) lacks agency. The law has agency.

It is so easy.

the european strategy

?????????

european man– Truth about face, regardless of the cost.
man everywhere– some degree of face about the truth.
woman everywhere– almost universal face of truth.

Yet it's the truth about the face that's the reason the 'western miracle’ – why the West is so different from the rest: our rate of innovation and adaptation.

Our own Christians and women remain our vulnerability

This is why Christians are the current vulnerability of Western civilization: their religion developed to attract women's attention and attract GSRM. Religion is asserted and argued with false promises ("salvation"), provoking danger (cultural vulnerability to conquest), using pilpul (excuses) and criticism (fraud), and the fiction of the supernatural.

Judaism to undermine, Christianity to weaken and Islam to consume and destroy.

The Middle East uses thefemale reproductive strategyand the Far East andthe west uses the male reproductive strategy, with the far east using face over truth to defend hierarchy and the west using truth over face to defend the nobility market. And the Middle East today as in the era of the Greeks, just lying and shaming all the endless truth.

The world is not complicated. It is oursliesthat make it look that way.

Due Diligence Guarantee

(…)

Ignorance is no excuse for due diligence failures

TThe fact that one has become accustomed to a medium of deceit (philosophy and continental conflationary literature) rather than one of transparency (Angloanalytic deflation, i.e. science and law) and therefore advocates the profoundly dishonest and immoral out of cultural habit, it has nothing to do with whether someone INTENDS to argue immorally; it simply means that one's CULTURE is endemically immoral. Which is just an argument from ignorance. This does not absolve you of a lack of due diligence for the consequences of your display, speech or action.

Reciprocity (morality) demands that the person do nothing (by Show, Word or Deed) that he cannot reciprocate; otherwise you are externalizing the risk to others (performing theft). And some costs are impossible to pay. For example, what has been the cost of pseudosciences and pseudorationalisms and pseudohistories, of the French (Derrida, Rorty, et all) and Ashkenazi (Marx, Boas, Freud, Cantor, Adorno (et all), Mises, Rothbard, Leo Strauss ) – all due diligence failures against the immorality of their habits (cultural assumptions and argumentative grammar)?

If you can't make an operational argument in economics and politics (that means a procedural model) that supports your theory, then you don't know what you're talking about. These people made Rousseauian (false) assumptions about human nature and economic possibility, especially since Rousseau was a deeply immoral (irreciprocal) man, and all French and Ashkenazi, and part of the German intelligentsia, produced a warped reactionary movement. as 'the enlightenment', as people in armies, or in the diaspora, always do, in search of 'freedom' and therefore without the 'sovereignty' of Scandinavian navigators. They tried to deflect the church's demands on others (appeals to the common good) against the British intellectual (Anglo-empirical) revolution (markets in everything).

In law (conflict resolution through reciprocity testing) and war (conflict prevention through reciprocity testing), we do not look for excuses for ignorance: ignorance and indiscipline (lack of due diligence) are just means to reduce costs and outsource risks. about others. That's what these people did. They were liberated (no thanks to them) by the Atlantic transport, land and industrial revolutions and argued that they were "kept" and politically liberated, rather than havingsexual, social and political market value, and that with greater productivity they could not consume much more of everything and create a little market value, despite their previous lower market value.

Crimes of Jews, Christians and Muslims

The Essence of Europeanism in Abrahamism

“'Our ancestors took great men and made them into gods so that we could follow their example and govern ourselves. Abrahamism has taken God and anthropomorphized him so that we are better able to follow his commands and be governed.” —Andy Lunn

The slaves and shepherds of the Middle East under the despots of the flooded river valleys versus the European militia under the chosen kings of the planters and farmers of the forests and plains.

NO MORE LIES. Europa Juris: The Supremacy of Natural Law, and Sovereignty, the cult of non-submission.

The Abrahamic method of destroying civilizations

I refer to Abrahamism as a group (Judaism->undermine, Christianity->submit, Islam->conquer) because the analysis of any SINGLE sub-religion obscures the function of the group of Abrahamic religions as a force of destruction.

Because these are the three stages of Abrahamism's method of conquering the aristocratic peoples through the conversion and conquest of women and the lower classes (those who are not yet 'tamed into will').

Level 1– The small external population (vanguard) harms the main one through criticism and ridicule of the organization and its categories, relationships and values ​​(Judaism – GOSSIP: Destruction of Reputation)

Stage 2– The population is subjugated by selling a false promise – the verbal equivalent of a physical drug (Christianity – FRAUD: Selling a false promise).

stage 3– Larger external population conquers the subject through assault on trade routes, immigration, conversion, and population conquest and replacement. (Islam – STRENGTH).

The consequence is the reversal of hierarchical herd civilization and the restoration of egalitarian herd primitivism.

Only western sub-Saharan Africa and the Far East were able to withstand the regression due to lower-class reproduction rates and inroads into the aristocracy (Judaism), culture (Christianity), population and economy (Islam).

Understand the ancient enemy of mankind.

Fear of being left behind > False Promise > Sophistry > Criticism > Pilpul > Supernatural.

Females are the most vulnerable because they have evolved to be irrationally dependent on pack "cover". The subclass too. the least capable classes per utility. The middle class takes advantage of this and the upper class replaces it with a priesthood (fraud) rather than a military one (science).

It is a very simple process once understood.

The Enemy's Technique

destruction of civilization from within;
instigate the construction of internal spirals of rivalry, consumption and destruction of capital;
Bait in Danger (certain risk);
Those who are ignorant or lack agency;
For use of False Promise (evasion of reality);
Under the persuasion of sophistry (pilpul);
Justified by criticism (lie, criticism, deceit)
Under cover of Moral Pretense (lie);
Under the cover of plausible deniability (lie);
For profit (for damage)
From the consumption of accumulated capital (mining):
… truth, reason, delay of gratification, manners, ethics, morality, traditions, class cooperation, class organization,
Not specialized in
… The production of innovation in information services of goods, both private and common
... guaranteed
By Specialization in areas that allow Risk Export
And Absent Warranty
… Gossip to undermine (entertainment, media, news, opinion)
… Informative Destruction (Academy)
… Government (Conflict Facilitation)
… Legislation (Shake, Facilitate Conflict, Facilitate Dissolution of Norms, Traditions, Customs, Moral Ethics, Free Riding, Capital Exhaustion)
... Rent-seeking (special interests)
… Corruption (influence)
…Missing the law (specializing in undermining the constitution through the courts)
… Law (coercion specialty)
… Finance (free riding and entrapment)
… Tax and accounting (evasion)
… Marketing and Advertising (scams and undermining)
…Sales fraud
… Commercial trade in physical, service, and informational staff
… Black market goods, services and information.
… cashing checks
… Usury
… bets
…Pornography
… prostitution
… Drug trafficking
This way;
…creating conflict,
… destroying trust,
…generating refund request
…generating demand for authority,
An authority that recursively issues another iteration of
... false promise,
...bait in distress
Causing a spiral of continuous conflict
And the Tragedy of the Commons (Conflict over consumption)
until all accumulated assets:
… genetics,
… cultural,
… normative,
… artistic,
… economic,
… institutional and
… political;
they were consumed;
due to the conflict between classes and interests
and by the expansion of the lower classes;
whose number, invasion, reproduction, consumption, agitation, had previously been limited by;
…productivity, property, market, law and natural aristocracy;
… And the surplus comes from production dedicated to the production of common goods;
… Provide the asymmetric returns of these commons.

Abrahamism as a Fabrication of Ignorance: Informational Dysgenics

We tend to look to the Ashkenazi's demonstrated verbal superiority, their long history of literacy, writing, law, hermeneutical interpretation, persuasion, and consequent success in occupations that require a combination of estimating the abilities of others, accumulating textual information, and the exercise of persuasion ( or coercion).

But we forget that your group's success depends almost entirely on eugenic reproduction, where the community contributes money to the teacher (rabbi) to have more children, and the community excludes members who cannot perform at the same level. standard level and reduces reproduction rates through poverty of those who cannot perform to standard. Just as the European nobility redistributed to the middle and upper classes, the production of the lower classes, the Ashkenazi, redistributed the production of host peoples to their superior genetic classes. And both the Ashkenazi and the Europeans specialized in self-transcendence through the (beneficial) suppression of the reproduction of the lower classes and the redirection of energies to the higher classes.

However, let's take a look at what the Europeans (Aryans) achieved when they became literate, and what the Ashkenazi (and Jews) achieved when they became literate. Or ask it another way: what did Aryans and Jews achieve when they practiced Abrahamism, versus before the adoption and after leaving Abrahamism?

Or, put another way, what Aryans and Jews achieved under Aristotelianism (European Arianism), versus what they achieved under Abrahamism.

Also, what did North Africans, Levantines, Byzantines and Persians achieve before Abrahamism? What did they achieve under the long-term effects of Abrahamism?

Let's bring the Indians. What did the Dravidians (hrappans) achieve before supernatural Arianism? What did they achieve after Supernatural Arianism? What have they achieved since the introduction of Aristotelian Arianism?

What did the Chinese get by never finding supernatural Aryanism or Jewish Abrahamism?

What happened when the Chinese resisted Aristotelian Aryanism? What happened now that the Chinese finally embraced Aristotelian Aryanism?

The Jews literally achieved nothing, despite being the most literate people in Europe. The Islamists achieved nothing more than the selective importation of classical, Persian and Indian thought, and consuming those parts of those civilizations that they could consume, they quickly descended into even less confidence, even more ignorance after 1200, even as they invaded Europe for centuries. and spreading the Islamic ignorance from which Spain and southeastern Europe seem challenged to recover due to cultural and genetic involution.

We tend to make excuses justifying intentions. But if we look at the historical record, supernatural Aryanism was used to educate, if not subdue, the ignorant, and allowed for the eradication of supernatural Aryans (Iranians).

There is no greater crime than Abrahamism in human history. There is no greater source of ignorance and delusion than Abrahamism. There is no greater source of poverty. There is no more severe limitation to transcendence.

There was no greater source of murder, death, famine than the combination of third-generation Judaism in the form of Marxism, socialism and the first Jewish empire: the Soviet Union and its French reform in postmodernism and the reactions necessary to include fascism; Nor and the Second Generation of Arab Abrahamism (Islam), in which the Arab expansion tactics of Arab Abrahamism (Islam) which relies on the intellectual seduction of the lower classes and women, the assault on capital and commerce, and decentralized warfare , to gain enough power to carry out conventional warfare internally and externally, to impose Abrahamic Ignorance on the people and make them more and more ignorant and unintelligent.
Just as free speech must end and be replaced by true free speech. Freedom of religion must end and be replaced by true freedom of religion.

That's the lesson of history.

The Jews and Their Deserved Reputation

Why do so many cultures think Jewish people are nefarious?

—- "Why don't you like Jews?" —-

Fools talk about the usual six or sevenjustifications, all of which amount to claims of insubstantial difference, or mere psychologism, but as usual, people write justifications (fictions) instead of stating the inconvenient truth, which is always and everywhere, a matter of costs: normative, economic , cultural, institutional, political and military.

Stated causes (psychologisms):

1. CompetenceBetween Religions (Rules, Traditions, Laws)
2. Bank officer(Usury)
3. Separatism(Preservation of Identity)
4. Success(Success + Separatism = Competition)

The material causes are parasitism, predation and undermining:

People everywhere dislike, dislike, or have persecuted Jews for the same reasons that all groups in Christendom who dislike Jews have and do:

1. Separatism(violation of the norm), and the consequent Competition (predation and parasitism),
2. political(immorality) – Specialization in Profiting from Hazard Creation, Privatization of Commons, Socialization of Losses.
3. evasion of the truth(Truth is what works regardless of consequences, not what is true including consequences, what we call externalities)
4. the big lies, and the method of constructing them: The development of the Fallacies ofA carne(I am sorry ifCriticism(Gossip, ridicule, shame, rally) and its use in the creation of Supernatural Abrahamism (Judaism, Christianity and Islam - and the creation of the Abrahamic Middle Ages, Pseudoscientific Abrahamism, Marxism (Marx, Boas, Freud, Singer, Lenin, Trotsky, Mises , Rothbard, Strauss, Adorno and the Frankfurt School).
5. Specialization in Parasitism and Mining: Moneylendering, Black Market, Slavery, Taxation, Pornography, Advertising: Judaism is hostile to the commons and trust, while Westerners specialize in the commons and trust.
6. youreciprocal nepotism: condemns European nepotism while practicing Jewish nepotism. (politicism)
7. special foundation(propaganda) to cover up politics and free riding.
8. Alliance with or use of the stateagainst the people

Fools read what was OPINION about history. The sage reads about data produced in history, not what people think. The data produced in the story consists of DEMONSTRATED, not REPORTED behavior. By examining demonstrated behavior, we can determine the incentives people followed when they took advantage of opportunities of one type (moral or immoral) while not taking advantage of opportunities of another (moral or immoral).
Books:

• The Fatal Embrace: The Jews and the State: Benjamin Ginsberg … Ginsberg will go into historical detail of how the Jews organize with the state against the people until the people rebel against them.
• 200 years together: Alexandr I. Solzhenitsyn (This book is actively suppressed in the West, but what is translated from Russian can be found easily on the Internet.)
• A people who will dwell alone: Judaism as an Evolutionary Group Strategy with Diaspora Peoples by Kevin MacDonald
• The culture of criticism: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Participation in Twentieth Century Political and Intellectual Movements by Kevin MacDonald
• Tribes: How race, religion and identity determine success in the new global economyby Joel Kotkin. His analysis of superior tribalism and how certain tribes are more successful than others in the global economy.

The economic, legal and technological evidence (advertisement):

However, I will add my research to these criticisms, which are the result of evidence from legal and economic history, not propaganda.

Jews specialize in those occupations that host civilizations determine to be immoral (because they are). Immoral Meaning: Unreciprocal. The various ways to avoid risk, avoid cooperation, and avoid regulatory costs: tax collection, law, finance, advertising, media, entertainment (gambling, pornography, organized crime, and, most commonly, slavery). , privatization of the commons , or socialization of losses), where there is little or no accountability for promises made explicitly or implicitly. (Westerners specialize in reciprocity)

This is because Jewish law (their religion) is (a) polylogical and (b) political (what's good for us is not necessarily good for them) rather than (Western) reciprocal, fully informed, and productive (their code of law). ethics does not require productivity and allows for blackmail, for example), (c) requires only voluntarily on the spot and unjustified, ("only two people to make a deal") rather than a guarantee against retaliation (they can hide behind our law). (Westerners specify monological universal law and ethics)

They use nepotism to concentrate the profits of specialization in immoral pursuits (parasitic, predatory, creating moral hazard and externalizing risk) to concentrate capital in investments that are not productive (rent-seeking): Same industries as above, but particularly those that create risks. finance, predatory finance and banking, moral hazard finance, land ownership and leasing and other real estate investments that are exploitable under the difference of their ethical model and western ethical models. (50% of specialist propagandists are Jews and leftists). (Westerners specialize in meritocracy over nepotism)

They use the profits and influence of finance, investment, and rent-seeking to fund groups that deliberately undermine American constitutional law, the Germanic (reciprocal) Christian ethic of the churches, and Westerners' demand for loyalty to the citizenry. . , as a military (self-defense) people of the sea, river, jungle and steppe. It is a common interest conspiracy, rather than an overt conspiracy, to 'make the world safe for Jews' despite the fact that 'making it safe for Jews' means destroying customs, ethics, morals, laws, institutions and traditions. , and even metaphysical assumptions that make high-confidence (unique) Western civilization possible. (Westerners specialize in complex, high-cost, high-trust commons.)

They use the profits and comforts of surviving in the host to produce propaganda that either covers up their actions or harms the host society. The most obvious example is Christianity and Marxism, (a) the rebellion against Western aristocracy in the ancient world and (b) the rebellion against Western aristocracy in the modern world: the reassertion of Reformed Judaism (Christianity) from the supernatural to the Marxist pseudoscientist : '

Yahweh = Dialectical Materialism
The Messias = Marx
The Chosen One = The Proletariat
The Church = The Communist Party
The Second Coming = The Revolution
Hell = Punishment of Capitalists
The Millennium = The Communist Community'
– by Bertrand Russell

Y:

The reaffirmation of the Roman conquest of Judea and the Diaspora as the Holocaust. The reassertion of Mesopotamian slavery and liberation as the Conquest and the Diaspora.

However, it never seems to have occurred to leading Jewish intellectuals that the reason they lost their territory, were enslaved, lost it again, and were continually persecuted and almost exterminated everywhere except in the West, is that (unlike ) do not pay for commons, particularly defense commons, and (b)a safe world for Jews is a world of immorality that repeats the failures of Jews as owners and non-owners. You cannot specialize in immorality (predation and parasitism) over a people who practice Reciprocity and Productivity (material production) without them retaliating. That's why the Ukrainians did what they did to the Jews once the Germans invaded. What Russians did to Jews in the late Soviet and post-Soviet era, what Germans did to Jews in WWII, and ongoing anti-Semitism in the West.

It is not an accident or some form of psychologism that has led people to regulate, abandon or persecute Jews throughout history, but the difference between Jewish propaganda, teaching and preaching and the economic means by which they persist through relationships parasitic and predatory in a person. The Jews used superior verbal intelligence to create Pilpul (Justification) and Criticism (Ridiculous, Gossip, Shame, Clown), which are two very elaborate fallacies (the equivalent of how Socrates undermined Athenian culture with unanswered criticisms that inevitably somehow they would be better, and how Plato used idealism rather than realism to propose totalitarianism, which the Jews copied in the argument and the church referred to as an institution. Meanwhile, it was Aristotle and the Stoics who made Alexander the empire, the reason, Roman law and paved the way for us to modern science.) They used Pilpul and the Critique to promote pseudosciences: Boasian Anthropology, Marxist Economics, Freudian Psychology, Cantorian Ensembles (you won't understand this), Misesian Economics, Critique of Frankfurt School (anti-Westernism), Rothbardian ethics, Lewontin's genetics and Gould's evolutionary theories. They are also responsible for transforming our government from a republic to a democracy, the main influence on the Immigration Act of 65 by which they hoped (succeeded) to undermine our rule of law through the immigration of lower classes who would support socialist policies. And the foundations they support have actively pursued cases that strained judicial discretion, thus circumventing the constitutional amendment process. In other words, the Jews produced theology (pseudo-wisdom literature), pseudoscience, pseudo-rationalism, as propaganda, and distributed them through oral tradition, written tradition, print, and now, mass media.

We are in an age where, because of the mass media, being articulated and articulated quickly is a priority, more so than at any time in history, not because information is scarce but because it is overwhelming. And that disproportionately benefits the Jewish people. In other words, we are in an era where Propaganda distributed by entertainment, media and academia is the MOST effective in history. And the Jewish people specialize in propaganda (gossip) by pilpul (positive), criticism (negative) and whatever technological means of distribution are available.

In other words, although unintentionally, Jews use the Women's Group Evolutionary Strategy (Helplessness, Submission) to gain women's benefits (Tolerance) while relying on women's techniques (gossip, gathering, shaming, ridicule). , propaganda), to undermine the norms, traditions and institutions of the population (dominant males), while getting the benefits of women (trying to force the tribe to pay for them and their children), without offering the benefits of women (care and reproduction) . Note that this technique and feminism are identical. Sophistry, victimization, undermining, appeal for tolerance, and then a growing understanding of current genetic, morphological, reproductive, developmental, endocrine, and psychometric information, is that Ashkenazi Jews utilized selective breeding favoring feminine verbal traits and memory traits. in men (reading, memory, recitation, argumentation), to transfer feminine to masculine verbal traits – at the cost of doubling (or more) rates of homosexuality. If this is correct, this explains the 'Common Interest Conspiracy' among Jews, who simply sense, like women, their evolutionary group strategy – and repeat it wherever they go. But once you are aware of the difference between male and female cognition, male and female methods of argumentation, male and female means of aggression, female general verbal superiority, and female moral intuition (devotion over fidelity), it becomes quite It is obvious that the Jews specialized culturally and genetically in "weaponizing" the female reproductive strategy.
that is to say: they do not conspire more than women. They are like the rest of us, following their intuitions. But they have a competitive advantage because they have reached (albeit at a cost) Modern Age levels of European IQ (we have lost par with the Jews through lower-class reproduction). And you can't match them in verbal acuity without an even higher IQ. This trait analysis is an illustration of how much we can learn from the genetic differences and consequent expressions among the three elite groups: East Asians, North Europeans, and Ashkenazi Jews.Important: The evolutionary excellences of groups can only be expressed as norms, institutions and achievements when the lower classes are reduced. The main reason for the success of elite cities is their removal of lower class drag so that competitive excellence can be expressed. Therefore, it is not so important to develop high intelligence as it is to express existing traits and facets, eliminating negative traits and facets. This is counterintuitive, but it is how we domesticate plants and animals.

Some of us study this technique: the militarization of female strategy. I'm probably among the first because I specialize in Western ethics (reciprocity, natural law, human rights) and legal, economic, cultural, and genetic history. And the group's Jewish ethic and competitive strategy are the opposite of the Western one, and the stark contrast helps us understand each. But it has become abundantly clear over the last few centuries that for Russians and Germans in particular, and for Westerners generally, our "years together" are, as always, beneficial to Jews but detrimental to host civilizations.

The truth is the truth and the truth is painful. Westerners carry the burden of colonialism, but as a result they have dragged humanity down with kicks and cries of ignorance, superstition, poverty, hunger and disease, in both the ancient and modern worlds. The Jews are burdened with undermining all host civilizations throughout history and having to pay the cost of that, and then creating propaganda under the guise that they were persecuted for no reason.

However, the proof of a culture is purely empirical: despite being the most literate peoples in Europe, until they were integrated into Western empiricism (Aristotelianism), the Jews did not contribute anything to humanity for two thousand years, apart from Judaism, Christianity and Islam, by which ALL the great civilizations of the ancient world were destroyed by the lower classes, and by which they are destroying Western civilization today. Small contributions that are not unique do not make up for the destruction they caused wherever they went. 1B dead from Abrahamic religions and 100 million dead so far from communism and leftism worldwide: Abrahamism created the Abrahamic Dark Ages.

So we can all be cursed for our mistakes in history, but not recognizing and correcting them is evidence of malice.

The reasons are, always and everywhere, political, economic and moral, and obvious. Just move from advertising to the actions that people take, which are recorded in law, economics and publications.

Transparency: For reasons I didn't understand at the time, I worked exclusively for Jewish organizations early in my career, and later successfully investigated and sued three Jewish companies for extortion, turnover and fraud, and I did not accept The Hour. prosecuting a quarter As a consequence, the accounts collected of the ways in which Jewish ethics justifies criminality primarily on the basis of moral hazard, a form of fraud whereby we trick people under disadvantageous or opportunistic circumstances into taking risks they shouldn't in order to gain access legal to your assets. without reciprocal productivity. So I've been working on this problem for decades.

Unproductivity record, parasitism record

(…)

The Jewish Century:

Marxism-socialism, libertarianism, postmodernism, feminism, neoconservatism and the facilitation of our invasion by Islam.

The counterrevolution against Anglo-Saxon legal empiricism and German rational science
Utopian Promise to Achieve Monopoly Consensus + Scarecrow + Pilpul and Criticism:

Rousseau (Feminine Subjective) + Schopenhauer, Hegel et al (Conflationists) + Kant (Masculine Analytical)
-vs-
Marx, Cantor, Freud, Adorno (working and marginalized classes)
-vs-
Mises, Friedman, Rand, Rothbard, (classes medias)
-vs-
Foucault, Derrida, Rorty (Higher Middle Priestly Female)
-vs-
Friedan, Firestone, Dworkin (Feministas)
-vs-
Strauss-Neocons (Political/Military-Male – Higher)

Indictment:
marx(economy/history),boas(Cave/Soc.),freud(Psychoanalysis),cantor(mathematical Platonism),Frankfurt(Norms, Traditions, Habits, Institutions), Frenchpostmodernists(Reason itself) sought to use the age-old techniques of overload (lie) of pseudoscience (Marx et al) and sophistry (Derrida, Foucault, Rorty, Heidegger) to build a disinformation campaign with Critique: Poisoning the Well with Critique of Straw Man ) to perpetuate a fraud (theft) attacking Poincaré, Maxwell, Darwin, Menger, Spencer, Nietzsche and the eugenicists who sought to reaffirm the successful group evolutionary strategy of Western civilization (transcendence: by adaptive speed) using Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth and Duty, Jury and Liability, and Markets (empirical evidence of reciprocity) in everything that includes association, cooperation, reproduction, production, production of commons, politics and defense (war), in scientific terms (The only language of truth). Discourse, under the Single Law of Reciprocity).

The gradual attack on aristocratic civilization from below.

Recidivism in previous crimes
Compare with the sequence:Judaism > Christianity > Islam.It's the same technique, the same false promise, the same catastrophic consequences.

Undermining knowledge with quibbles, pseudoscientific arithmetic, denial and lies

Booz (contra Darwin)

Freud (as opposed to Nietzsche and Spenser)

Marx (against Menger)

Cantor (against Poincaré)

Einstein (contra Hilbert)

Keynes (contra Hayek)

adorno

Derrida

Rothbard

(neoconservatives)

The opium of the envious

1. Marxism (Boasianism, Marxism, Freudianism, Frankfurt School) is a **pseudo-scientific** revolt against the sovereignty, reason, markets and meritocracy of aristocratic European civilization, and is simply a reaffirmation of the Jewish, Christian religion and Islamic **supernatural** TURNS against the great aristocratic civilizations of the ancient world – this time with a false promise of prosperity in search of power, just like in the ancient world, a false promise of an afterlife or paradise in search of power.

2. Postmodernism is a **pseudo-rational** reformulation of the Marxist REVOLT (Boasian, Marxist, Freudian, Frankfurt school) against the markets of reason, meritocracy and eugenics resulting from this merit. This time, abandoning both the supernatural, the pseudoscientific, and simply engaging in gossip, meetings, shaming, ridicule, disapproval, in pursuit of power to resist meritocracy (eugenics)

3. Therefore, whether using the **supernatural** Semitic Abrahamic religion, the **pseudoscientific** Marxist reform of the Abrahamic religion, or the postmodern pseudo-rational justification, the same *Pilpul* argumentative **sophisms** * justifying**, and **critical criticism ** are used to escape reason, appeal to intuition.

4. Why? We are, due to our genetics and the intuitions that result from it, of different interpersonal, social, sexual, economic, political and military market values. This market value is generally classified as "class". Due to genetics, we physically possess the physical brain and physicochemical intuitions that reflect our class and gender. And just as female reproductive strategy (herds) evolved to maintain their genes regardless of the merit of their offspring, and men evolved to maintain their genes (herds) through their own merit and that of their male kin, classes evolved to express either strategies of female dysgenic or eugenic male groups. Our differences in moral perceptions are the result of these axes: cognitive gender bias and cognitive class bias, and the degree of group neoteny that has evolved in our relative geographies.

5. So, to some extent, just as religion is an opium for the lower classes, philosophy provides an opium for the middle classes and a pseudoscience for the upper middle classes: the upper classes need no more opium than the rewards. of its position in the market (desirability). Why? we want the hope or promise of elevating our interpersonal, social, sexual, economic, political, and military market value. Because, after all, that's what drives reproduction and what drives all of our behavior.

6. The lower classes are not oppressed. They are only six times worse for politics than all the good people. Markets cannot lie. They contain lottery effects. And the lottery effect gives us the incentives (hope), just as religion, philosophy, and pseudoscience give us hope. I hope we get the benefits of having a higher market cap than we have. In other words: status rules us.

7. The duration of a Democracy is determined by the time it takes to redistribute and spend a windfall, whether from war, conquest, technical innovation or an accident of nature. We are rapidly running out of industrial profit (oil), just as Athens has run out of its silver mine.

8. A mixed economy ruled by an authoritarian, oligarchy or "party" - differing only in scale - is all that survives, with the necessary fascism in war and the luxury of social democracy possible with windfall gains.

The Psychology, Biology, and Genetics of Leftism
by Apartment Rosenborg

Cultural Marxists are all structural and agencyless ("everybody talks and doesn't walk"). I find it very telling that the proponents of structuralism and post-structuralism tended to be completely degenerate and depraved idiots; the most obvious examples are Michel Foucault and Jacques Lacan.

Those of us with agency simply cannot imagine the amount of time those with female cognition (who don't have agency) think about inequality or status or being left behind. We simply cannot imagine the obsession they encounter at every turn. Your frame, constantly reinforced by some kind of rejection or other signal, or the interpretation of some event as 'being left out, or left behind, or less, or not rewarded for your contributions'.

They can't imagine how we can be so rational (they assume we have their psychological problems), but we can't imagine how obsessed they are with their inability to get from others what they could get from their parents by childish display.

Both purely r-selected and also utterly obsessed with the idea that humans in general lack agency and that human subjectivity is nothing more than a function of some prior structure (linguistic or social). They are projecting their own constitutional and biological lack of agency onto humanity at large. When a post-structuralist says "humans lack agency" I say "speak for yourself hypo-frontal-cortical wojack!"

I see Cultural Marxists as being highly open to experience with their concomitant divergent thinking + dopaminergic sensation seeking + Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS, intense negative effect), so they are driven by their passions like a kite in a hurricane, with nothing like that with a bona fide agency. , and simply project their own pathology onto the rest of humanity.

Sensation seeking + intense negative affect + high verbal IQ = almost bonobo Derrida/Foucault degenerate reader. Hyper-feminine, eloquent but talkative, schizophrenic spectrum, borderline personality with unstable sense of self (which they project onto others), borderline psychotic, very diffuse and chaotic thought patterns, histrionic, a desire to be seen and wanted rather than a desire. create and/or conquer through brilliance or the authentic power wrought of discipline.

Conquest of our city

This attempt to steal a continent we conquered...

I mean, I don't care if people want to form their own little socialist (authoritarian and dysgenic parasites) or democratic socialist (consensual and dysgenic parasites) countries of their own, I'm just not going to let them continue to extract me and mine. And this attempt to steal a continent that we conquered by conquering immigration is simply not going to happen.

WEST: "Agency, sovereignty, reciprocity, rule of law, truth, duty, and markets in everything: association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, politics, and war."

Crimes of Conspiracy of Common Interest and Intent

(use the same voice that threatens the state – first person)

Conspirators at the Academy

conspirators not state

foundation of lies

(...Darwin, Women's Strategy. Weakness. Inability to Produce Policy.)

The Myth of Oppression

Nourished Nature - Solved

Gender differences: resolved

Agency - Settled

EMOTIONS AND ITS INFLUENCE ON PREJUDICE AND AGENCY

1- Emotions reflect changes in property states in-toto.
2 – We use reason (a skill we can improve with practice in deflationary comparisons) to compare properties, relationships, consequences, and valuations.
3 – We use free association to define properties, relationships, consequences and evaluations.
4 – Our free association efforts are impossible to unbias, because our experience accumulates in both interest and intensity in response to our biases.
5 – So it is more accurate to say that it is very difficult to learn to think in a deflationary way enough that our emotions do not influence our reasoning.
6- to say that many of our emotions - the ones I understand - occur in the reptilian and mammalian brains, and that our cognitive biases occur more often in the human parts of the brain and that the more primitive they are, the more difficult they are (often ) to get around, but the easiest ones are the ones to understand. Many cognitive biases are difficult to detect in the first place and are more subtle.

So generally speaking, the less skill you have, the less you will have, the more solipsistic you are, the harder it is to escape the emotions that result from your biases.

The more skill you have, the more you will have, the more autistic you are, the easier it is to escape the emotions that result from your biases.

AGENCY AND AESTHETICS

— “Enlighten the intellect, the will will follow. Aesthetics seems to be the means of aligning a person's passions and emotions with reason.”—Rafael LaVerde

Remove sources of inadequacy, lack of character (virtue), lack of resources, sources of normative and institutional resistance, sources of ignorance, error, prejudice and deceit – all impediments to Agency, and Agency will result. Then select a philosophy, a means of decision by which one can achieve one's ends, and an aesthetic that values ​​one's passions in accordance with that philosophy.

AGENCY AND GRAMMAR

From the series:

math/logic > science > philosophy > religion

We can build the series:

physical > mental > emotional,

And the series:

logic > description > fiction,

And the series:

associable > reasonable > calculable > computable.

And we can use them to calculate the series:

lack of agency > potential agency > demonstrated agency

Therefore;

Himweak-willedthey want religion, to defend themselves against the will of others;
Himcapable of willthey want philosophy, to defend their will and;
Himobstinatethey want science, to put their will into action;
It's himobstinatethey want Law: because Law is the means by which the strong impose their will. The only question is whether their will advances sovereignly and reciprocally, producing transcendence, or not.

Because we all want what our Agency demands.

Responsibility - Resolved

People ARE 100% responsible for their successes and failures TO REACH YOUR FULL POTENTIAL in the skills market.

1) Any attempt to achieve more than your relative ability to reach your full potential must be obtained by stealing from others who are more competent and doing policy damage thereby.

2) There MUST be the Pareto rule: 10% makes 50% of the value, 10% of those 10% makes 50% of the value, and 10% of those 10% makes 50% of the value, and so on. Which means that most people below a certain threshold are relative dead weight for society and humanity.

3) The difference is that conservatives want and enjoy hierarchy and don't care about "doing the duty of their office", while liberals only think that others are superior to them in position, and they are by competition.

4) Where competence means genes, ability, personality, morals, ethics, values, manners, habits, speech, appearance.

5) Classes exist. Every seven points we vary in vocational ability, and every 15 points in social ability, and every 430 points, we are nearly different species, with common language producing the illusion of compatibility.

6) We all are and should be rewarded for the benefits we bring to others when they cooperate with us.

7) And the results of this competition are a Pareto efficient lottery with few winners. That, if they make good choices, they can create an intergenerational family that persists in their state, something that requires selective mating to avoid regression to the collective milieu.

Equality - Solved

The last word on equality

We are no different from any other domesticated animal. We control the reproduction of domesticated animals and develop them to cooperate with us (use by us). We control the reproduction of human animals and make them evolve to cooperate or not.

The difference between the groups is mainly sexual dimorphism, sexual maturity and underclass size relative to the upper middle class. In other words, our upper and upper middle classes do not differ because they converge in neoteny, dimorphism, intelligence and temperament, and are less dependent on their peers for knowledge and decisions. Our working and lower classes differ in less neoteny, bias dimorphism, less intelligence, and less civic temperament.

Like the anna karinnena families, and like the variety of domesticated animals, producing a "human" requires a lot of genetic things to work right, and if any of those things go wrong, then we're less human and more animal. As such, we have domesticated each other and ourselves through millennia of demanding ever more complex forms of cooperation.

We consider that humans are defined by communicating using language, but this is just a complex form of signaling. rather, the definition of human versus animal is AGENCY.

Equality does not exist. Even when we say it's a necessity under tort liability dispute resolution, it's our property that's treated the same, not us. As such, it is the equality of our property that exists under the rule of law.
Everything else is dishonest, pseudoscientific and dysgenic. And defending dysgenics is just a means of war and conquest in a longer timeline.

We are producing agency (humans) or reducing agency (animals).

Superiority and inferiority are purely empirical measures

Inferiority and superiority are simply a measure of the Agency. They are purely empirical assessments. Either one has the agency of the self, the group, the environment, the universe, or not. The inferior cannot compete. The superior can This competition, whether internal, interpersonal, political, environmental, or physical, is the only empirical test of superiority and inferiority. Evolution and entropy never stop. They are incessant. The superior evolves, adapts, increases its agency, and the inferior does not, and dies, and evolution and entropy continue their battle. This is not an opinion or value statement, it is a description of all processes in the universe.

Economic oppression - resolved

—“The elites developed the industrial revolution, not the peasants in the fields or sitting around the dinner table. As always, the elites create innovations and the masses follow. They weren't tricked into doing it, any more than the elites were tricked into making things up. It's natural. The idea that there is some kind of intrinsic abuse of workers by elites assumes "generational agency" on both sides to get where we are, it doesn't exist... off the top of my head." - Mike Harvey

Poverty - Solved

ITS POVERTY AND ITS LACK OF AGENCY

You are poor because you lack an insurance agency. But you know, even if we remove obstructive institutions, and even if we create institutions to invest in overcoming your initial circumstance, we're still stuck with the fact that we can't change YOU and that YOU may not have Agency for your own information, intellectual. , emotional or physical reasons. We know for sure that you cannot know whether you are capable or not. We don't like to choose whether you're capable or not, we could be wrong. All we can do is invest in removing impediments so you can SHOW whether or not you have agency and ability.

Anyone who says they're going to import more money is just lying to you. You are poor because you lack Agency, because you or your parents or your ancestors lacked intellectual, emotional, or physical CAPACITY, as well as informational (ignorance) or institutional impediment.

Suffering – Resolved

Life is just suffering for those without will (low and developing). It is the only structure that motivates them to face it (life, suffering). One must have (develop) the capacity for heroism to endure tragedy as a plausible noble outcome.

The world "just happens" to those who lack real awareness. Therefore, they fail to realize the responsibility they must assume.

Dysgenic Reproduction - Solved

1 – Dysgenic reproduction (regression to the mean) is almost impossible to reverse in modern times.
2 – Current rates of IQ decline even in China are on the order of 0.5 per decade. Loss of total demographic advantage in 100 years. Higher western rates.
3 – The average ideal human IQ seems to be 105+15=120, which means 2/3 of the population between 105 and 135. This produces almost zero resistance to education, training and retraining, preserving some office workers and artisans. works. And it produces very low visible crime.
4 – We can roughly measure the value of an IQ point per GDP.

Resolved Integration: Failed

(…)

Resolved Heterogeneity: Diversity is bad.

Homogeneous cultures use people for entertainment and are prosocial. Heterogeneous cultures become insular and dependent on family careers and now consumption as entertainment. People are slowly going crazy living in fancy boxes, with fake TV and social media friends, with fake careers and alone. Consumption does not replace family, friends and civil society.

Determined Ethnocentrism: Ethnocentrism is ideal.

1 – Ethnocentrism is the ideal evolutionary group strategy, if only for secure reciprocal trust and investment without sacrificing kin selection. There is no competitor at all. People are more sociable with their own and more redistributive, less afraid of political competition, because all competition is internal and by class or faction and not by tribe. Traditionally, the problem has been that many ethnic groups failed to amass enough capital to create self-government, or had to be captured to avoid being captured by others, or posed a sufficient danger to the neighbors they ruled. (The exception is people further down the ladder looking for allies against their superiors, and having "someone below them" seems very important to humans.)

2 – Ethnocentrism eliminates conflicts between races and tribes in repressing the expansion of the lower classes through soft eugenics (paying the unproductive so that they don't have children). There is no value in internal competitors. nor.

Compatibility – Resolved: Separation

We were splitting into regional human groups when we discovered agriculture. We were forced to compromise with each other during farming. Farming is over and we are now rich enough to pursue our genetic biases (interests, strategies), so we need to separate ourselves into male (suburban and rural hunters) and female (urban gatherers) and there is no reason not to. .

We can simply pay for specialization.

It's time to go back to speciation and stop fighting our instincts like different animals going back to speciation now that the agrarian age is over.

European uniqueness

“Europeans must stop making this mistake: we must stop thinking, wishing or expecting other groups (including our own women) to be like us, they are not. We are atypical."

Ttheir error has already plunged us into long dark ages. Let's not do this again. Let's learn this lesson once and for all.

We are unique.

WE ARE THE CONTINUATION OF THE EUROPEAN CIVILIZATIONAL ARC

1. Western Indo-Europeans fought submission to nature in all aspects of the social order: nature (technology), family, politics, and religion. They invented the Agency of Man. The application of the mastery of metallurgy, the horse, the wheel and war to all aspects of human experience.
2. Aristotle was fighting ignorance in all disciplines, including religion, custom, and politics. He invented empiricism: the transfer of testimony in a court of peers to all aspects of human experience.
3. Galileo was fighting the supernatural and denial in the physical sciences: physics, chemistry, biology. He was a leading advocate of Science: Restoring Evidence Using Mathematics in a Court of Peers for All Aspects of Life.
4. Darwin was fighting the supernatural in the biological sciences. He was the leading proponent of realism and naturalism in biology: the restoration of naturalism in the biological and social sciences.
5. Proletarians are fighting pseudoscience, sophistry and denial in the human sciences: language, psychology, sociology, politics and group strategy: The conclusion of the social sciences: The application of testimony using the measure of reciprocity.

That follow? We will only save ourselves and humanity from another dark age if we do not make the mistakes of the Greeks, Romans and monarchists: the optimism that other men are equal in ability and interest to European men.

Race - Solved

My position on race friction is that democracy and multiculturalism cause conflict between them. And may nationalism, aristocracy, paternalism and local separatism improve everyone.

My position on the cause ofsignificantdifferences between the races is the degree to which the lower classes suppress reproduction over long periods of time.

My way of criticizing other groups is whether their group's evolutionary strategy is objectively more or less moral than some others.

My demand for change is not to place it on others, but to change our weaknesses so that we are no longer subject to the harm of the less moral, but can reap the benefits of the more moral.

I really like my friends who are not family. I want to help them raise themselves and their families, as every aristocracy must help other aristocracies raise themselves and their families.

So I really don't want to lose these friends because you chose to criticize other successful reproductive strategies instead of criticizing and repairing your (our) own failed reproductive strategies.

I do not practice racism. I can agree or disagree with you on one or another criticism. But my goal is the evolution of man. I prefer all tribes to evolve together, not one tribe to be subsumed by another. I want to see a world of many tribes, many aristocratic extended families, creating their extended families. I do not seek to dominate others, only to preserve my tribe and advance it and the tribes of humanity on the long journey to becoming gods.

racism, racist

Racism, as I understand it, refers to four behaviors:

1) the process of treating an individual by the properties of his class (race) rather than waiting to determine the properties he himself demonstrates. In other words, stereotype. Unfortunately, stereotypes are the most accurate measure in the social sciences. So this is hard to combat outside of business interactions.

2) the process of criticizing a class (race) for the costs it imposes on its class (race) rather than taking action to prevent a class (race) from imposing costs on its class (race).

3) the process of denying that there are aggregate class (race) differences in abilities, prejudices, preferences, and behaviors.

4) the process of waging a genocidal, political, economic, and kinship war by denying that there are differences in abilities, prejudices, preferences, and aggregate class (race) behaviors.

Racism cannot refer to any of these four behaviors:

1) Observe, decide, discuss and promote that there are differences in skills, prejudices, preferences and aggregate class (race) behaviours.

2) Observe, decide, speak and promote that people (like all creatures) favor their class group (kinship, tribe, race) for the simple reason that, except as outliers, it is in their social, reproductive, economic and political interests to do so.

3) Observe, decide, speak and promote that people vote in democracies primarily by race, gender and class, thus competing for the EQUAL political vote rather than unequal economic, intellectual or military means.

4) Observe, decide, speak and promote that people wage an informational and political war instead of an economic and violent war, denying differences in skills, prejudices, preferences, behaviors, intentions and goals.

This is just empirical science. And to argue against that is simply lying.

Why career?

The right answer:

1. The evolutionary necessity of social domain hierarchy.
2. The primacy of status in this hierarchy of domination over all other values. Our aversion to loss of status is our greater sensitivity to loss of access to partners. Any creature that cannot compete in your dominance hierarchy will see its group die.
3. Primacy and necessity of kin selection (any kin group that fails to do so will be driven to extinction).

Because race, sub-race, tribe, and class are significant and successful means of identifying kin, and the vast majority of us associate, work, vote, breed with kin, and the outliers (15%) are at the extremes where their sex market value is either much lower or much higher than the average for their kin group. And it's good that everyone does. Diversity (mixture) is extremely bad for genes, except at the margins (low sexual and social market value). Because they cannot be easily corrected through internal selection.

All accusations of racism are just forms of gossip and shame to obscure the quest for political power without obtaining it through market means. Disapproval, shaming, gossip, rallies, protests, and propaganda are means by which the inappropriate attempt to reduce the sexual, social, economic, and political superior market value of their superiors. It is the media industrialization of pubescent girl politics, employed by child minds incapable of assuming the responsibilities of adulthood.

Give up on equality. It's an evolutionary dead end. Make the most of what you have to work with. We are richer than at any other time in history, but each of us is less important than ever before in history. This reduces our risk, but gives us near-zero status rewards that are in our control, as well as consumption signals.

That's why people are driven to consume.

And that's why the poorer you are, the more inclined to consume.

That's why the Buddha and the Stoics taught what they did.

That all human groups act in their own interest. Let people vote racially. They work in racial groups. They live in racial groups. They mate and marry in racial groups. They speak in racial groups.

All racial groups convey status because some groups are more desirable than others. That all those who manage to escape the lower classes of their racial groups rationally want to join white culture for a better life and, as such, want to limit racial discrimination. And that the white lower and middle classes want to preserve their privileges by preserving the status of their competition elites.

That race, religion, culture, tribe, gender are part of life because they are significant differences because people act in their best interests at all times, and race, religion, culture, tribe and gender bring different advantages.

Causes of the racial conflict

Proximity. That's the answer. That's the only answer that matters. That said, let's solve the problem.

All that happens in mestizo cultures is that castes replace races. I cannot find anywhere that has worked that has not resulted in the total collapse of civilization. When you increase the policy size, you get classes. I am really sorry.

This is for the simple reason that some people are genetically more desirable in every way than other people, and this is what social class means: reproductive desire, associative, cooperative, economically cooperative, politically cooperative, militarily cooperative.

Each of us has a social market value, and that social market value is what we call our class. We have a greater within-group sexual and social market value than between groups, except at the extremes. The suitability of different subraces is well documented and is determined by proportional ratio and degree of neoteny.

The only way around the problem is to **segregate within the states or separate them into separate states.**

The science is quite simple:

1-Races and subraces havesubclasses of different sizesydifferent distributionsapproximately average in personality traits that are genetically determined and largely unchangeable: a) intelligence, b) industriousness, and in rates of sexual development and depth of sexual development, and retention of those characteristics that illustrate the retention of childhood characteristics. (we have been domesticated like other animals. We are no different. Some groups are more domesticated (lower testosterone, less impulsiveness, lower and slower sexual development, and therefore more agency (self-discipline of our emotions and impulses)).

2 – Due to these differences,we need to produce VERY different common goods(Customs, ethics, morals, norms, traditions, laws, institutions, education and training in the intuitionist [what we call religion], in physical training and in skills training and in occupational training.) The median (mean) ( 66 % majority) determines the demand for formal and informal institutions (listed below).

3-Proximity creates animositydue to different status signals within and between groups, and different rates of development both genetically and culturally. Groups that are content with their separate status become hostile in proximity, more hostile in cohabitation, and more hostile in political competition.

People think and speak racially conscious because they act racially conscious.

1. People vote as racial blocs. And therefore strong political competition for status and rent seeking.
2. People associate in racial blocs.
3. People work in racial blocks.
4. People reside in racial blocks.
5. Large differences in reproductive desirability between breeds. And people mate in racial blocks, except on the margins.
6. Huge differences in the eugenic elimination of the bad underclasses of the 80's between racial blocs.
7. Large differences in crime between racial blocks.
8. Significant differences in the abilities of racial groups due to the inability to suppress reproduction in the lower classes.

We are different. People are rational. They act rationally. Humans practice kin selection. They should. Or those who practice kin selection will replace them.

Cooperation between families and tribes is only beneficial if each perceives a benefit. Otherwise, instead of arguing against racism, one simply wages war over a substitute religion, rather than war over religion or violence.

This is true everywhere on earth.

4 – Due to these differences, we need tovery different political orders– from the very liberal high confidence of northern Europe, to the very disciplined one we see in religious regions, to the almost military necessity in others.

Trying to eliminate races always and everywhere produces acompete to the end. Creating many small nation-states that are little more than corporations catering to the needs of their kin group and distributing that kin group will produce a **race to the top**.

There's a good reason why Europe evolved faster than the rest of the world combined, in both the ancient and modern worlds: Small, homogeneous states.Monopolies are always bad.. They are even worse in federations and empires.

For a number of reasons:
1) Mating selection is determined by genetic markers (physical properties) and status signals (social properties).
2) There are differences in desirability between breeds due to different morphological attributes, despite the almost universal human preference for a set of attributes.
3) There are different DISTRIBUTIONS of certain talents between races. (Linguistic intelligence and spatial intelligence in particular.) This difference in distributions causes different norms and preferences to develop within groups, which in turn alters the complex signals we observe and send out.
4) Because of this signaling economy, 'within-group' status signals are less costly than 'between-group' status signals. (Partly because we have just become more familiar with the group.) Each of us is more likely to receive more positive and less negative status signals within the group than between groups. And these signals are richer and more complex.
5) These signs affect our relationships and the trust that can be developed in them. Where that trust is needed for relaxed interaction, goal setting, task coordination, and risk taking.
6) In the working and lower classes, outside racial groups often work for less money or displace them in their purchasing power and therefore also deprive them of status signs. Racism is a means of building political solidarity among themselves, as well as with their elites, in order to preserve their advantage or gain their advantage.
7) In the middle and upper middle classes, racism is a vehicle for maintaining political power (law) and social power (norms) and assets (their own accumulated status signals) for themselves and their groups.

This set of facts is demonstrated by our demonstrated universal preference for working (largely) and living (largely) with people who share our same ethnicity and social class. The data illustrate this preference several times. In simple terms, we are more easily “judged” and therefore more easily included among those with whom we share physical, intuitive, conceptual and habitual similarities. However, at the extremes, the very successful and prosperous tend to form a world class and the lower classes more opportunistically seek mates, and there are social signaling benefits for certain racial groups (mating between a white female below the average age and an above average woman). the average black male can increase both social status and partner quality, so the racial norm is a median majority preference.

Although there is a notable increase in inbreeding between Asians and whites, women still seem to show an extraordinary preference for men of their race (men are less demanding) of over 80%. But that preference is a middle-class statistic gleaned from dating sites. And it becomes very difficult to make the same claims about the lower classes outside of what is reported in the census (about 15% of mixed marriages). The reason is that some races are

Differences in the sexual, social, economic, political and market value of races in relation to each other

1) The distribution of physical desirability for mating, demonstrated impulsivity and time preference behaviors, aggression and demonstrated intelligence vary between individuals. (TRUTH)
2) Social classes are organized by these distributions due to reproductive desirability, status utility, and cooperative (economic) utility. (TRUTH)
3) The races present different relative distributions of these classes. (TRUTH)
4) Racial groups demonstrate kin selection in mating, neighborhood, friendship, social organizations, and business organizations. (TRUTH).
5) The norms demonstrated by the racial groups reflect an average behavior (true). This means that the least intelligent and least trusted groups must compete against the norms of the most trusted and intelligent groups. (TRUTH). It also means that the group that holds the dominant political power and bends to its norms determines the economic speed of the entire political organization (true).
6) Racial groups demonstrate kin selection in voting (true).
7) The INABILITY to use the state for rents and privileges limits political competition and conflict, while the INABILITY to use the state for rents and privileges increases political competition and conflict. (TRUTH)
8) Economic wealth reduces dependence on relatives for mutual insurance under kin selection. (TRUTH). Economic stress increases dependence on kin for mutual insurance through kin selection. (TRUTH)
9) The difference between the economic, political, social, reproductive and status success of one race or another is due to the distribution of superior talents versus inferior responsibilities of members of these races, in addition to normative factors, the most important being group trust , and the second is the degree of parasitism suppression. (TRUTH)
10) Therefore, the only reason for racism is reproduction rates between classes. And the only possible means of achieving equality in all cases is to suppress the reproduction of the lower classes of the races whose distribution is weighted down.
11) It is not rational to treat unknown individuals who are visually indistinguishable by properties different from those of their peer groups. (true) (which is what people do). One cannot demand rational action, defend praxeology and deny this claim.
12) Equality is achievable and desirable in just four generations. But it is upward reproductive redistribution that must promote downward economic redistribution for equality to be possible. If China can do it, so can the rest of the world.

Otherwise, it is not rational for people with higher reproductive desirability, lower impulsiveness, lower aggressiveness, and higher intelligence to tolerate political competition from those who are less desirable and, on the web, parasites, just as it is politically preferable to compete through parasitism. if one is less desirable at the bottom.

Human beings are not unique and precious snowflakes. It's just that contempt for life is a moral hazard. The fact that mothers MUST believe their dysgenic children are precious is an evolutionary convenience, not a provable fact.

Often, the purpose of science is to force us to acknowledge uncomfortable truths. Equality is not a problem of belief (lie) but of fact (truth).

Try not to lie. It hurts humanity.

Just tell the truth - Disgusting

— “The leftist tendency is to confuse the right's disgusted reaction to various things as phobias. In other words, the Left confuses Revulsion with Fear.”—

TYou're right, he's too polite to say:

“It's actually because we find their ____________ behavior disgusting and disgusting because it's a genetic defect and harmful to the tribe.

I mean. Why can't we just say it?

"You know, we don't like dogs dragging their anuses across the rug or ___________ doing ________."

Genetic defects are repugnant to us. And you are defending genetic defects that are disgusting.

(We have an instinct for purity. They don't. Hence women's fascination with discussing bodily fluids and infant droppings.)

Increased sensitivity to disgust

Conservatives (empiricists) have a higher level of sensitivity to disgust. Conservatives are the people's means of detecting and purging the damage: the white blood cells of the social and political order. Progressives (consumers) have low sensitivity to disgust, but high demand for consumption, novelty, experience and fear of being left behind.

This is not to say that our sensitivity to disgust is always right. This means that we must test whether this damage actually exists by testing for reciprocity.

— “There is a distinction between endocrinological and neurological conservatives, driven primarily by disgust, who tend to be within one SD to the left of the mean, and market (agency) driven conservatives who recognize cost over longer time horizons and are able to to organize a body of laws to facilitate cooperation and trust, necessary for the operation of the company. The first group is right for the wrong reasons and the last group is right because of initiative and incentive.” — Ferdinand Pizarro

Can't we just tell the left the truth?

1) Our civilization was successful because it was always eugenic, until the industrial revolution.

2) we found youdisgusting.
3) and it's because you areimproper.
4) and you are not fit becauselack of agency.
5) and you lack agency because you are stillnot domesticated.
6) and as yet untamed aanimal.
7) and goneComplicatedwhat is it.

8) we can'tcooperatewith you inequal termsmore than we can cooperate with any other animal: you don't have theagency.
9) We do not grantbarn animalsequality, that's why we don't give youequality. And we don't want barnyard animals in our homes, businesses or common areas.
10) That's what we mean when we want toseparatefrom you.

because you'redisgusting.

class conflicts

Classism vs Racism? (GSRRM): Markets are the solution.

Classes vs. Races European Iranian Semitic Indian E-Asian SE-AsianOut of Sight TopBottom TopUpper MiddleBottom MiddleBottom BottomBottomOut of View

HorizontalClass compatibility and common interest over power distance
VerticalCompatibility and common interest of races and nations for power distance

Not a problem either.Both are inescapable evolutionary, reproductive, social, economic, and political realities and needs. Humans organize themselves, this is our primary ability, and our intelligence has evolved only for the purpose of increasing the complexity of our cooperation, including between genders, families, clans, classes, tribes, nations (in the genetic sense), subraces and races.

Classes demonstrate different genetic, social, economic and political abilities. Unfortunately, everyone in the bottom quartile is six times more expensive than all the top two quartiles can make up for (the third quartile appears to be neutral or at least a tolerable loss).

Those tribes, nations, subraces, and races, unable to limit the reproduction of their underclasses (as Europeans and East Asians did through extraordinary lordships or persecution), drove out their underclasses (Ashkenazi) or managed to concentrate enough capital to attract people in. malthusian (population) and dysgenic (distributive) permanent poverty.

Those tribes, nations, sub-races and races unable to limit the reproduction of their sub-classes, and who did not engage in martial, legal or economic (manorialism), ended up as the Levant, India, Southeast Asia and now South America. . , with subclasses so large that they cannot be organized into a voluntary production organization capable of producing marketable goods.

real problems

Worse yet, in the present age, as the lower fruits of petrochemical power, mechanical technology, and now computational utility have been captured, labor has evaporated as a market commodity, mechanical capital has sharply depreciated as a market good, and , in actual calculation work (what we call clerical and administrative work) is depreciating as a market good. And without markets to provide us with information, we cannot cooperate on a large scale. And there are few, if any, multipliers in service delivery.

All technology can be implemented quickly and easily and the marginal competitive advantage between groups is eliminated.

Thus, as the world continues to embrace the inventions of Western civilization, including Aristotelian (scientific) reasoning, Anglo (Germanic) natural damage law, and Italian (Templar) banking, the relative standard of living of people will decline. . , because the only competitive advantage that a population has is genetic.

The main competitive advantage that does not produce a regression to Malthusian and dysgenic poverty is genes. And the difference in one standard deviation is so profound that it is the HIGHEST POSSIBLE PERFORMANCE for any group, as well as for all of humanity.

Data is available. The 20th century experiment with social economy and political pseudoscience is over. We've wasted that capital to reverse at least 1,300 years of improved genetic, cultural, and institutional human capital.

There are three known magic bullets. A battery with the energy density of gasoline. The downsizing of the lower class through one-child policies for the lower classes and the development of artificial general intelligence, which means that the one with the most capital and the least population wins.

The individual human being is rapidly approaching not only Malthusian and genetic equilibrium, but also political, economic and social harm. We have outgrown nature's productivity and turned to agriculture. We outgrew the productivity of agriculture and turned to industry.

We overcome industry productivity and turn to information. There is nowhere to go but information and, as such, the only gains will come from reducing negative human capital.

Via-negative in all things to scale. Once you've maximized returns from any set of operations, the only possible improvement is to eliminate costs and defects.

More is not better. Fewer people with more is better than more people with less.

This is unavoidable.

our options

racesthey are a good thingsubquadrothey are a good thingTribethey are a good thingclansthey are a good thingfamiliesthey are a good thing

You can choose between kinship group status or corporate status. You can choose between very different small states or large homogeneous states. You can choose between collapse under political monopoly or rapid progress under political diversity. Because on the spectrum from dictatorship to the Anglo rule of law, you have to have increasingly optimized demographics as you move from dictatorship to freedom.

The only scale value is military conquest..

The value of homogeneity is psychological, not real.

The effect of diversity on a policy that has access to political power is always the same: collapse.

The best countries to live in havesmall homogeneous populationswith a lotsmall subclasses, medium highintelligenceand well developedI did not say anything, without hostilitycompetitorson its borders.

The only reason why one is behind the other, or any other race, is the difference between class spawn rates. Just as my race is behind or ahead of other races due to our suppression or lack of suppression of base birth rates. That's it.

Then fix it. Because until you do, racism will persist, and it should. Because any other behavior is illogical. It's not the color of your skin or the shape of your nose, but the percentage of your population in the bottom half of humanity.

Human life is not universally sacred. It's just that anyone who shows such disrespect for human life is a potential risk and threat to the rest of us. But just because disregard for life is dangerous doesn't mean it's worth redistributing it or even consuming oxygen. You're just a moral hazard to the rest of us.

If you or your children can't find a way to participate in production without outsourcing your costs, then you're not a precious snowflake. You are a moral hazard and a burden to humanity and the planet. It is the source of demand from a political class that exploits productive people to finance the dysgenic and unproductive.

You cannot deny this argument without also demonstrating your racial bias.

So control playback. A woman has no intrinsic right to have a child, and a man has no intrinsic right to be a father.

That is the only way to achieve equality. Equality in fact, not false.

And I agree: equality is a moral ambition. But not dragging others down, but evolving everyone to greater heights.

Feminism

Pandora's Box – Gender Differences

WHY DO WOMEN SUBMIT CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE, INSTITUTIONS AND MEN?

—“… what kind of evolutionary pressure would create a desire to undermine the in-group. All the plausible explanations I've seen have to do with the abuse of female impulses that evolved for completely different purposes..."—

Females undermine the concentration of power in alphas to preserve some control over their reproductive choice and access to resources and resources provided by males, including defense. that is: women can trade attention, effort, care, and sex if they are in control of the attention economy. This is why women are so conscious (and gay men show it) of attention, approval, and sympathy.

Just as women operate in an economy of status and attention, they struggle within that economy: disapproval, shaming, ridicule, gossip, moralizing, reputation undermining and destruction.
And decreasing the number of females isn't necessarily self-sacrificing, so literally killing other females increases the remaining female market value, so that's the strategy females go after: chickens.

Undermining males ("shit-testing") is useful both at the level of ensuring males' "fitness" to defend them, preserving their capacity for choice, helping them to expose "cheaters" (at which females are terrible and excellent men) by maximizing the cost of (the return on) their attention, care, and sex.

The only problem here is that women still sexually select men as if we were in those hunter-gatherer conditions. And this explains women's attraction to more primitive (less domesticated) groups of men with less agency, despite the fact that the female condition depends on those of us with more agency, innovation and adaptability.

Hence the need for more domesticated males (greater agency) to defend in-group females from conquest or even exposure to males with less agency and greater aggression. (FWIW: Late marriage gives women greater reproductive certainty and therefore greater selection and greater genetic caste formation and therefore greater speciation, hence white people.)

Males, on the other hand, operate in the physical equivalent of a war economy, where the loss of males weakens the herd, and the dilution of the male genes of the herd weakens male reproductive (evolutionary) persistence as well as reverses domestication ( agency evolution).

THE PROBLEM OF FEMALE AGENCY

The female of our species, or more correctly, the female mind of our species, is extremely susceptible to individual psychosis and solipsism, and even more so to herd panic, prejudice and consensus; and verbalizing these behaviors through drama, outburst, disapproval, embarrassment, ridicule, mobilization, gossip, and reputational destruction that never ceases.

This is the reason why women's testimony has been dismissed throughout history; why the cancer of Abrahamism has spread among women; why women have defected against their men and their civilization once again, towards postmodernist-feminism; and why there are continual calls for “women to be heard”; and then, unsurprisingly, against all evidence that "women are to be believed." The female lacks the degree of male agency because she depends more on pack panic than on pack hunting.

It is quite obvious that, once emancipated under the presumption of agency, women vented their anger on the church in Europe and on men in America. It is quite obvious that just as Marxism was designed to attract and gather men from below, feminism and postmodernism were designed to attract and gather women like Christianity. It is quite obvious that women's desire to snuggle and groom themselves is easier to manipulate through advertising and media marketing.

But the truth is the truth. The female mind lacks agency, regardless of the gender of its wielder. And we cannot preserve our civilization, which is the creator of truth, reason, science and everything that comes from it, by submitting once more to the herd of women of the modern age, as we did in antiquity.

"Herd Panic" and "Consensus Herd", as well as the series solipsism, psychosis and disapproval, shame, ridicule, outburst, gossip and reputation destruction as a means of obscuring the truth through lack of will and fear of falling. out of sync with the pack, must become part of our conscious vocabulary and reasoning in such a way that we bring to the fore the distinction between lack of agency, falsehood, and fear, versus agency, truth, and reason.

Lack of agency means that you are not yet human and therefore not worthy or capable of reciprocation any more than a child, but you need to be nurtured.

It is true that in modernity we have greater prosperity and, as such, greater capacity to absorb the damage of the female mind than in the past. But this deposit is not unlimited.

However, that same prosperity leaves us with a choice: we can oppress each other, or we can rebel and separate, and develop (failed) female dysgenic orders and return to animals and another dark age, or competing male eugenic orders, to continue . our meaning.

It's time to choose which of these consequences to pursue.

Just use the word: infantilization

Just state the obvious, that the female reproductive need mind leans heavily towards what it can control:infantilism. And that's why women are so fascinated by babies and prefer that their children be born with properties that make them flexible, and that their "friends" are very successful competitors. Because women must be strong and have agency to raise those who are strong and have agency. And women who are weak and lack agency want children they can control despite their weakness and agency.

Abrahamism, Marxism, feminism, postmodernism: they defend infantilism. Because your followers have childish minds. And I suspect that, like everything else, it's because in 80% of cases they have childlike brains.

And that during the great transformation Buddha approached, but only Epicurus, Zeno and Aristotle got it right. That is, living in correspondence with reality without submitting to it, making the mind as strong as the body, ether for Achilles/Alexander (aristocracy), Zeno/Aurelio (middle class) or Epicurious (working class), but never abandoning the reality. to a fictionalism (subclass).

These are the adult ages. Agency. Whether for the powerful, the influential (middle class) or the valuable (working class). And just as we can train people in reading, writing, mathematics, accounting and physics, we can train people in Stoicism, Epicureanism and Heroism. But this is contrary to the infantile: because they all require agency, and the infantile is still an undomesticated animal, neither genetically capable nor trained enough to be included in that label of sensitivity and agency that we call 'human'.

The child is equal to the animal.

Female Mental Illness

The degree of feminism demonstrated is determined by four factors: (a) decreasing value of the sex market and (b) decreasing agency. (c) degree of dislike, (d) the demand for virtue signaling in the virtue signaling market.

developmental defects

Nature Nourish

Freedom of expression

intentionally defective product