Moralfapping is Lame

People have been “purity spiralling” since long before I joined the Internet (November 2015). It’s really annoying and it’s not something you’d do in real life because there would be inhibition towards the impulse to create that much awkward social tension. As we all know, people who “purity spiral” most ardently often also end up being total degenerates themselves.

I get annoyed when people obsess over the actions of other people. You only have so much attention. You should primarily be giving it to yourself. You should give yourself so much attention that interactions with other people are a joyful exchange and not a toxic burden.

Which Brings Me To My Next Point

You should run your opinions by me before professing them publicly if for no other reason than to avoid looking foolish in the future.

lets keep going we passed a point
errrybody needs to chill out

I Am Most Objective, I Am The Best Judge

There is a huge hate cult around me because I always speak the Truth. I don’t mind that, because I am confident that the heat generated by their hatred will burn away their illusions in time. I can deal with a gaggle of deriders: they don’t intimidate me. I enjoy the challenge. Anyone can have a personality cult, but it takes a lot of precision to have a good one. Part of having a good cult is having a permanent source of lulz. I don’t think you want to be a lolcow in my cult.

Don’t Take The Shadow Bait

We can envisage the “shadow self” as the part of oneself that one is unaware of. One is unaware of things because one is in denial. One is in denial because one’s consciousness acts in such a manner as to minimise the pain of ignorance. Ignorance causes pain because it places a burden upon the consciousness to simulate denial of reality. There is often confusion arising from these facts because the ego itself has an illusory nature. In spite of being illusory (in that it cannot be perceived directly), the ego, or “doer” is still a prerequisite for being alive. Celebrities denying this in unison does not change the fact that spirituality does not involve the active suppression of one’s core self. It involves learning about the deepest nature of the human spirit and eventually moving beyond the constraints of barriers of ego. At no point does this involve a fake smile, vacant stare nor concentrated shitty cartoon propaganda campaign.

oh wow, how original. sanctimonious prick!
jim carrey sarah huckabee sketch.jpg
et tu, Jim Carrey?

I don’t take people hating me personally because I understand that it is just a projection of their own self loathing. I have compassion because I understand that self-loathing is a terrible feeling. These people are in such denial about their true nature that their “shadow self” is eating up their non-shadow self. They are being consumed by their own demons and fruiting the putrid karma of interpersonal rivalries and egoic manipulation. Often, the consequence of this is becoming a lolcow.

Many People Fucked Up Bigly Lately

There’s a lot of people that aren’t worth being associated with. People who try to tell me who I can and cannot associate with anger me a lot, because I do religious work and I have to talk to people on a regular basis. If people stop talking to each other, that’s when problems start to fester and animosity builds up. That’s toxic. A refusal to communicate is nothing less than a decision to make peace impossible. Telling someone who they can and can’t associate with (and by association, be influenced by) is nothing short of terrorism when it’s paired with a threat (i.e.: forum censorship). “Doxing” is so general of a term that it can be used to blur the line between reasonable and unreasonable actions in such a manner as to greatly increase the chances of foul play. In fact, noted “polemic” Weev said it was his personal responsibility to “drop dox” because reasons:

As regards recent drama, the narrative that Weev is acting to maintain a monopoly on doxing has more merit than the narrative that doxing is categorically insupportable.

Don’t Punch Right? How About Stop Punching Yourself in the Face?

If we take the recent purity spiral pathetic LARP concerning the doxed Ricky Vaughn, most people virtue signalled by parroting media talking points: “Doxing bad!”.  Is it always bad though? Would doxing a spy be bad? Would accepting $2500 USD per month to shift public opinion in favour of paying candidates be good? Would selling databases of likely donors to politicians denounced as extremists be bad?

Instead of realising that this event is a perfect microcosm of morality in governance, people rushed to disavow, bandwagon hopped and generally chimped out. This is an error; what is good is to ask good questions. Good questions are those that go to the root of the moral values system. This process of inquiry is of central importance.

Should money be able to used to shift public opinion?

This is a nontrivial question.

What You’re Witnessing is a Cult Rivalry

There is an artificial cult of personality generated around Mike “Enoch” Pienovich that has been covered so many times I don’t care anymore. Don’t believe me? Have a look-see here that this group is computationally equivalent to a cult.

youre dissenting sven sontag
um… ok?

This lockstep morality is really creepy. It sounds like a new incarnation of Christianity, which relies heavily on guilt for “original sin” (or some permutation thereof, into which the guilt of original sin is transferred, in this case: “doxing”). You can contrast that with my cult, where it is a semi-joking cult and there are very few rules other than never disagree with me in public without a good reason and respect the origin of Knowledge as Vedic (revealed by God to Rishis and equal to the source and sum of all Knowledge) and that these were composed in the continent of what is called “India” in the modern day, but which was called Aryavarta less than 150 years ago.

Those are very easy rules. They don’t even involve emotional pleas like “protecting privacy”. Is one person’s privacy worth protecting if he is impeding the only person who can accomplish a goal from achieving the power to complete it? I posit that it is actually not that hard to know what is the correct answer to these types of questions, so long as all people discussing the phenomenon agree on a moral basis.

Moral judgements can certainly be made, but different moral paradigms exist. These paradigms are hierarchical, because there is one unique supreme morality. Some people cannot think past their own values and system to the true underlying universal one, but many can. Those that can should speak together to understand all angles of a phenomenon and put forth their opinions for general consumption to the public. That is how we serve mankind. Mandating disavowals using a crummy personality cult is not going to bring you any closer to that underlying universal truth you all crave. This appears to be a residual from the rigid (and often contradictory) morality of Christianity.

I’ve seen this type of transferance before in the female-heavy cult of “Kundalini Yoga” (as taught by Harbhajan Singh Yogiji). People start in a particular religion, in this case: Christianity or Catholicism. They become disillusioned over time, and decide to do something else. However, they carry the essence of their former religion into their new one and taint its practice with their unresolved subconscious beliefs. This dissonance will always happen when one is changing religions, it is unavoidable. Problems will arise however, when one attempts to become a theocratic dictator while still in this impaired state.

I don’t come down too hard on people for making mistakes based on previous illusions. It is not a sin to be an ignorant. It is a sin to continue to act badly when one has been shown better. And that is the difference.

“Fed!” “Shill!”

Glass Houses, Gentlemen

I could make anyone I want look like a buffoon. It is but for the grace of my discretion and desire to do nonharm that I don’t. Believe me, when I denounce a person or an ideology, that is going to stick forever. Since I understand consequences, I only act when I am certain that the harm caused by my inaction is greater than the harm caused by my exposing someone’s true nature.

Just because some bad things happened to you doesn’t mean you can treat other people badly and get a free pass on that. The covert or “bad faith” manipulation of public opinion is loathsome to all lovers of freedom and truth. People using drama to close ranks in respective personality cults are incompetent as leaders because a good leader doesn’t micromanage. Playing the gang-up divine & conquer game eventually leaves you excluded from the very power centre you seek because no one wants to be bound by arbitrary solipsistic protocols. People want a meritocracy where they can fit in, hone their strengths and eventually progress upwards through a well-defined hierarchy. They don’t want years of effort squandered because some “thought leader” decided their opinions were “dissenting”.

A piece of advice to wannabe dictators: “No one would blame you if you found something else to do for a while”.

Thank you

Update April 17th, 2018

Evidence has arisen supporting the hypothesis that the word “doxing” has been made into a bogeyman that will now be lobbed relentlessly without discernment. Establishment “cool guy” Jack Posobiec tweeted the following, using the term in entirely the wrong manner:

jack posobiec doxed hannity.jpg
ugh. no.

Advertisements

Debate Strategy I

I just listened to a recent debate between JF Gariepy and a Christian who sounded like his diet consisted exclusively of soy shakes. I am very much enjoying J.F.’s contribution to the intellectual culture on the “pooblic spayce”.

There is a shortage of good role models out there for young people and J.F. has a talent for conveying complex concepts in a manner which is both engaging and entertaining to the listener.

I am writing this now to help people understand a bit more of the context of what they are undertaking. I have already established that the Theocratic Dictatorship is the structure of all natural organisms, transcending individuality and culture so we will take that as a given and explore the current goings-on in that framework.

slave master computer hard drive
Even this plug has a Master/Slave Dictatorship

The Internet, pre-GamerGate

The Internet was very “ghettoised” in this era. Unbeknownst to the general public, several talking heads on Youtube collaborated behind the scenes to establish a cogent sociopolitical narrative. They all focused on the same themes and ignored the same things. This is a means to control public opinion. Thus these “Youtube Atheists” fulfilled the same function as theocratic dictators, and so comprise the cult of Atheism (i.e.: Atheism is Unstoppable, The Atheist Experience, The Thinking Atheist). In this cult, any beliefs deriving from religion (mostly from Abrahamic cults) is endlessly derided. Thus the public opinion was largely that Atheism was the logical or “proper” position.

Gamer Gate

The phenomenon of Gamer Gate had the effect of radicalising fence-sitters because the manufacturing of narratives (of “sexism” by the “social justice” cult) hit home for them. They watched a resistance movement form online and be gradually undermined by what has become the “Liberalist” cult (led by SarGandhi) who first claimed to promote “ethics in video game journalism” but ended up mainly making videos mocking SJW antics. This caused a rapid increase in cynicism in the “silent majority” of the Internet (lurkers) and further radicalisation.

Poking the Bear & the Dawn of Internet Blood Sports

Since the SJW cult needs a constant supply of “gnat-sees’s” lives to ruin in order to continue to fuel the narrative that they have the moral high ground, further radicalisation was inevitable. It all came to a head when a popular Youtuber called Kraut and Tea deleted his channel after being ritually humiliated on numerous J.F. Gariepy livestreams and the server he was using to dox dissenters was leaked.

Up to that point, the influence of Liberalism and Social Justice was decidedly waning, owing to constant trolling by Alt Right and 4chan activists. Youtubers increasingly engaged in livestream “bumfights”, reaching for personal insults as frequently as actual arguments in their quest for debate dominance.

So-called “Internet Blood Sports”, a trend that has caught on following the “sacrifice” of Kraut and Tea, involve a rivalry between one or more people being settled in an informal debate-style argument on a Youtube livestream. The atheist Gariepy has thus set himself up as a theocratic dictator: bestowing judgement and prestige upon his subjects.

Next Steps – Analysis of Arguments

It’s important to remember that just because one debater is wrong does not necessarily mean that the other is right. A debate between a Christian and an Atheist about Government is frustrating because both debaters are wrong. However, we can still critique the overall debate and gain wisdom from this.

On Christian Nationalism

The Christian soyboy arrogantly claimed that Europe owes its ‘scientific advancements’ to Christianity. Many anecdotal instances are cited, such as “but so-and-so was a Christian” even though anyone who didn’t submit to Christianity would have been killed in those days (something that would come back if modern day Christians got their way and instituted a theocratic dictatorship, they’d be bound to slay “heathens” by their law). Another idiotic claim is that since a Catholic Priest came up with the idea of the Big Bang, that this means Christianity is validated by science.

big bang einstein catholic priest.jpg
do you trust these greaseballs? I don’t.

In fact, what is more likely is that the Big Bang was promoted in order to stunt people’s understanding of the Universe. The result of presuming the Bible to be true and trying to fit your worldview to that, rather than fitting your worldview to the facts, is always going to be psychotic cultural appropriation. This Christian debater claimed that Christianity originated science, when all evidence proves that Christianity took us away from science, away from our ancestral religion and away from nature.

priest cuts down sacred pagan tree
this is psychotic

The story of Christianity in Europe is a bit like that of Macbeth’s wife in the Shakespeare play of the same name. She cannot stop seeing blood on her hands and begins to wash them obsessively. Christians cannot tolerate the guilt of having slaughtered their pagan brothers, so they constantly wash their hands (so to speak): obsessing over physical cleanliness (i.e.: calling Indians “street shitters”) in an attempt to wash away their spiritual decay. Just like with Lady Macbeth, it never works, because the stain is on your soul. You must look inward to heal, not seek justification for your continued ignorance in superficial propaganda and empty ideologies.

Christians must engage in cultural appropriation in order to justify the violence their ancestors committed in the name of their religion. Perhaps, if Christianity originated science, then it was worth killing all those priests, intellectuals, philosophers and artists? This is not a fruitful path. Without accepting the truth, it won’t be possible to heal from the generations of harm that these cults have caused.

On the Argument that Non-Christians did not Practice Science

This argument is patently false. The knowledge basis of native religions was the Aryan Vedic religion, from which all knowledge originates. My body of work is the proof of this, because I was not able to achieve the Knowledge without guidance from this very body of Knowledge.

8 periodic tables
my religion can beat up your religion.

It is very insulting to lie about the origin of Knowledge. It is much better to modestly pray for guidance as to the deeper truths in the Universe. They will come to you only when your heart is open to receiving them.

On the Argument that Religion is Justified by Fecundity

I understand that some people are in an existential panic about the survival of their race, but more babies is not the solution. In fact, more than 2-3 children per couple is a violation of the r-K selection ideal and thus one cannot claim to support the scientifically validated r-K selection model AND also argue for eugenics to increase fecundity past replacement rate. K-selected civilisation is advanced because it can survive at the carrying capacity. This means no garbage nor toxic waste can be created, no unwanted children can be born and no unnatural (plant and livestock) farming processes can take place. In other words, the White Westerners who argue in favour of r-K selection theory are themselves behaving like r-selected idiots (consuming everything in sight and acting like their actions have no consequences).

A false religion does NOT improve the quality of society, even if it increases fecundity. Those who are born will be traumatised by the false religion and thus suffering will increase. We are not immune to the suffering of others and so this is an unwanted path. What we want is people being born into a society that can nurture them. We want people to be able to find their true path in life and follow it diligently. This goal is not aided by infinity reincarnation deniers who wish to infight about which of the million Christian cults is the correct one.

Atheism is Good

It is also true that a society without a state religion will fail. This is because the highest Entropy state of any social group is a Theocratic Dictatorship. Thus to deny the existence of a theocratic dictatorship is to deny the very nature of all systems of governance. Even in the modern day, cults dominate democracies, albeit in secret. Thus, as a social movement, atheism is always going to denigrate culture, because at its core, it is denigrating government, namely any authority of priests (the rightful leaders of government).

im offended the amazing atheist
unless you count this as culture

Thus a state religion is required, but a false religion is always going to cause atheism. If you want to get rid of atheism, you have to get rid of the cause of atheism. The cause of atheism is a failure of religion to explain universal phenomena. That is why I suggest my science religion be instituted as the global dictatorship. I already have a scientific framework which can answer all questions about causality.

Democracy is Good

There is absolutely no argument to defend democracy. It is mob rule with the most degenerate cult leaders one can imagine. If you want proof of that, just look anywhere.

Literally, anything anywhere proves this hypothesis.

Theocratic Monarchism is Good

Monarchs were defeated by communists in the 19-20th centuries. They were defeated because they were weakened by false religion and decadence. A theocratic monarch is a nice idea, but frankly, no one is qualified for this role. All humans are weak to the appeal of materialism and egotistical gratification. Even my own Priest fold is not immune from the desires of ego. However, when a priest collective exists, it dis-incentivises egomania. That’s because we are all in a competition (of sorts) in the domain of religion. That means we all aspire to move beyond the confines of that which causes us suffering. But because we do not all have perfected consciousness, we cannot always know what causes us suffering. Thus we rely on the Priest collective to check our spiritual blind spots.

Thank you

The Fallacy of Individualism

Is there such a thing as an individual?

Collective identities are archetype systems. For example, Marxism stratifies society along materialistic lines: proletariat & bourgeoisie. The collective identity of Christianity idealises the personality of Jesus, evoking self-sacrifice, patience and generosity in its followers. While they are not always aware of this motivation, members of a collective strive towards the ideal of their archetype system. While we all exist as individual conscious entities, an individual has no distinctiveness without a corresponding collective: archetype system.

Can a patient exist without a doctor? Can a student exist without a teacher? The answer is no, and it is because the former requires the latter to even be defined in the first place. A Doctor can exist without a patient, but not without an organisation which bestows upon him the authority to practice. In fact, all but one archetype requires an associated collective. The archetype which does not require a collective is the archetype which creates all others: the God archetype. The God archetype exists whether or not anything else does.

Religion Creates Culture

I think many people will be resistant to this idea, but I ask that you keep an open mind. Remember that the word “culture” derives from cult (a religious organisation) and so it is logical that civilisations spontaneously progress towards a Theocratic Dictatorship.

This simple fact is why the likes of Sargon of Akkad (debate here and “after party” here)  will always reach absurd conclusions when attempting to place the “individual” as the highest ideal. This strategy will fail because it contradicts the fundamental archetype of God. God alone is worthy of worship, not the ego. Individualism is a form of ego worship. Ego worship causes the consciousness to be directed inward. While everyone has an ego, true spiritual practice requires the consciousness to be outwardly directed in order to experience expanded consciousness.

black sun.gif
don’t get your ego caught up your own ass.

“Individualism” is a Selfish and Unnatural Ideology

“Individualism” is nothing more than self-aggrandisement. In fact, it is a cruel ideology because those of inferior intellect need collectivism. While those of superior intellect can “make do” without collectivism, those lacking a fully formed ego require a rigid hierarchy around which to frame their identity (so that they can actualise their archetype, optimise their archetype and ultimately transcend their (and all) sociological archetype(s)). Traditional teachings have always emphasised the importance of optimising ones adherence to their natural archetype.

The Solution to Shitty Collectivism is Optimised Collectivism

All forms of collectivism should be eschewed in favour of Theocratic Dictatorship. This system of government allows for anyone to join the governing class, provided they are considered fit. When a new recruit is brought on board, an existing priest must stake their reputation on their behaviour. If the new recruit commits a bannable offence (the High Priest Collective decides what constitutes a bannable offence), then the honour of the recruiter is diminished and the recruit is shunned. This system may sound harsh to the uninitiated but remains nonetheless the best defence against . To wield power over others, one must be held accountable and to the highest possible standard. People must be dis-incentivised from corruption to the greatest possible extent.

government gugvernment
where’s the lie tho?

Individuals Will Always Fail Against a Unified Collective

With the exception of the God archetype (who can defeat any opposition), individuals tend to fail when going up against collectives. Collectives contain numerous people and their combined brainpower and physical might usually overpower those operating alone or by “muh individualism”.

The MSM has made such a golem out of the Alt-Right that it has become a type of virtue signalling to attempt to criticise, “debunk” and “take down” this “organisation”. This often proves easier said than done.

Screen Shot 2018-01-11 at 10.12.17 AM
No, you didn’t.

The “Personal Freedom / Rights” Fallacy

People don’t usually know what they are talking about when they invoke the “muh rights” argument. This is fallacious. Human rights do exist, but they derive from God, not man. Laws are man-made and can either reflect the Natural Law or (as is the case in the current system) fight it tooth and nail. The problem with “human rights” as ideals is that one person’s positive “right” will necessarily be a violation of someone else’s “right” wherever resources are scarce. This subtlety is often overlooked by those of lower intellect.

The Proper Approach is r-K Selection Theory

r-K selection theory is a good dual (containing 2 elements) pulveriser function to use as a first pass ideology for genetic migration. This means we can continue to infer increasingly more precise measurements at all orders of magnitude from this system. We just have to make sure that we accurately define exactly what is meant by r and K type behaviour. For this, we always return to the original definition: K-type behaviour is near carrying capacity and r-type behaviour is far carrying capacity. Thus this pulveriser will be accurate as long as it is properly parametrised.

If you are interested in this subject, you can learn more here.

It is also a worthwhile endeavour to learn how to derive the logistic differential equation, from which r-K selection theory derives.

Thank you

 

Fruits of Theosophy

The Theosophical Society has updated their symbolism, either in an admission of failure to earn the title of Truth Religion or as a means of “squeezing out” good knowledge symbols, or both. Anyone with any discernment can see the gradual “unmasking” of their true intention.

Screen Shot 2017-11-04 at 12.00.03 AM
Progression of the seal of the Theosophic Society

The simple fact is that this society has no right to call itself the truth religion. I will now address the Colonel’s Rebuttal from 1882.

Response to Colonel Olcott’s Rebuttal

See rebuttal here.

Though I will address the statement of the Colonel, I don’t need to, given the state of extreme disrepair society has fallen into since the Theosophic Society was given the authority of Truth religion. In my opinion, they have disqualified themselves by their obsequious dilution of teachings, most notably in false equivalences and baseless presumptions of expertise in psychological knowledge.

On the Accusation of Unsoundness of Mind of Swami Dayananda

The Colonel’s rebuttal opens with an ad hominem that doesn’t abate for the majority of the publication, suggesting his position is weak. It is also unbecoming of a supposed spiritual leader to launch personal attacks. Accusing Swami of mental unsoundness is as loathsome as it is unfounded.

While this criticism hurts me more than most, I shall refrain from an emotional response and simply state: upon what basis does the Colonel make this judgement; i.e.: what is his expertise to judge the soundness of Swami’s mind?

Swami sounds perfectly fine to me in his correspondence, unlike the Colonel, who is rigid in his attachment to the belief that he and his associates are owed the honour of leading the Truth religion. Thus it is the Colonel which is likely afflicted with delusions of grandeur & lacks the capacity to see the inherent hypocrisy in his statements.

On Opposition to Secrecy of Knowledge

From the Colonel’s correspondence:

Firstly, I note that the minds of those who have studied and practised Yoga science, are continually oppressed with the conviction that a profound secrecy must be ever maintained as to the esoteric instruction given them. It is the most difficult thing in the world to get a Yogi, or even a Yogi’s Chela (pupil), to say what he has learned, or where, or when, or of whom.

Oppressed?

This is not a bad thing. It is entirely up to the learned masters to decide when/if they give knowledge. Maybe if you actually had some knowledge, you would have more reverence for its secrecy. Giving out secret/sacred knowledge can cause devotees to gain powers. What happens when/if the devotees misuse their powers? These things are kept secret for a very good reason.

Even in the modern day, most teachings remain secret.

 

On the Criticism of a Personal God

This is one of those times where the Colonel and his devotees should have put their emotions aside and cultivated the discipline to understand the teachings.

“Either we have been especially unfortunate in misconceiving the ideas of our revered Swami Dayanund, as conveyed to us in his valued letters to me, or he teaches a doctrine to which our Council, and nearly all our Fellows, are forced to dissent. Briefly, we understand him as pointing us towards a more or less personal God – to one of finite attributes, of varying emotions – one to be adored in set phrases, to be conciliated – one capable of displeasure….. I cannot worship him in such a guise. The Deity of my spiritual perceptions is that Eternal Principle which I understood you to say, was what the Arya Samaj recognized as contradistinguished from the personal God of the Unitarian Bramhos. Relying upon this view of the case, I united with our Sister H. P. Blavatsky to carry through the Council the vote of affiliation and allegiance. When! along comes the Swami’s letter speaking of a God whom at least Brother Chrisnavarma’s translation points to us as a Being of parts and passions – at least of the latter if not the former, and at once we two are taken to task. Protests from every side, a hasty reconsideration of the former sweeping vote of affiliation, the adoption of a resolution to make the Theosophical Society of the Arya Samaj, a Vedic Section instead of the whole body in a transformed shape, and the consignment to the flames of the whole edition of the proposed circular and preparation of a revised introduction to the “Rules of the Arya Samaj” – these thing followed. Perhaps it as well as it is, for we keep a broader platform for men of various creeds to stand upon, and our work for and with the Arya Samaj, is not to be affected in the least. We will be just as zealous and loyal as heretofore, will send the Initiation Fees the same as ever, and continue to regard the revered Swami as dutifully and our Hindu Brothers as affectionately as though this shadow had not passed athwart our horizon. I wish you would define to me somewhat more clearly just what is the doctrine of the Arya Samaj respecting God and the divine inspiration of the Vedas. I understood you to say (and certainly that is my own idea) that the Vedas were written by Rishis in a state of spiritual illumination and inspiration to which every man may attain who passes by initiation through the several phases of self-conquest and exaltation to the condition of seership and adeptship ……. I must frankly apprize you that you cannot count upon many more Fellows to follow a lead right towards the Orthodox Christian ambuscade from which we have so thankfully escaped ….. What we want to teach these Western people is the ‘Wisdom-Religion,’ so called, of the pre-Vedic and Vedic periods – which is also the very essence of Gautama Buddha’s philosophy (of course, not popular Buddhism). This religion you seem to have taught both in your letters and your books, and I certainly gather from the revered Swami’s defence of his Bhashya against his critics that this is the identical religion he propagates. But this does not agree with the tone of his esteemed letters to me – at least as I have them in the English translation……”

You don’t get to ‘depersonalise’ God any more than you get to ‘personalise’ God. God is God. One cannot appreciate the complexity of a subject as God without fully exploring it. If Swami said it’s 100 names (or some other “personalisation” of God), then you should be thankful of the Knowledge! Denying this would be like saying: “well, I don’t really want to take the time to learn what a parabola is, I will just skip over it.” and then being surprised when you cannot do calculus later on.

The Colonel finds a point in contention with Swami’s “personalising” God yet the Theosophic website today promotes Abrahamic supremacism & neglects the horrible holy wars against Falun Gong, Tibetan Buddhists and ongoing Islamic genocide in India and the world. It opts to replace persecuted religions with “politically correct” versions:

Screen Shot 2017-11-03 at 8.27.48 PM
“secret doctrine”? like wut bro?

It is very clear that Swami did not want equivalences drawn between religions. In trying to equate God to such silly ideas as “Sufism” or Christianity to God-searching or God-consciousness is in bad faith, even if it can be argued to be “well – intentioned”. Intention is less important than results in the domain of religion!

This means you must both posit your hypothesis and validate it. You must also be open to being wrong and later changing your hypothesis. Otherwise you will be stuck reaping the consequences of this bad action until you learn the proper way.

The Theosophical Society Website is Bad Religious Propaganda

This is what the website stands for in the modern day. Seems pretty soyboyish.

Screen Shot 2017-11-03 at 8.27.41 PM
All right well, let’s see what you’ve got?

I posit that you have achieved nothing in these regards, and so are lacking the mechanism by which you could achieve these goals. It is my opinion that you have failed because you have been unwilling to change in the manner one must change before one can receive the teachings.

If we are to have a “universal brotherhood of races”, each race must feel that their distinctiveness is not erased in the process of membership. I doubt you have achieved this in a manner which is not superficial.

The Theosophy Society is not the Truth Religion

Do you dislike “new agers”? Well, you might be interested to learn that they come from the Theosophy Society:

The present-day New Age movement is said to be based to a considerable extent on original Theosophical tenets and ideas. “No single organization or movement has contributed so many components to the New Age Movement as the Theosophical Society. … It has been the major force in the dissemination of occult literature in the West in the twentieth century.”[60]

Other organizations loosely based on Theosophical texts and doctrines include the Agni Yoga, and a group of religions based on Theosophy called the Ascended Master Teachings: the “I AM” ActivityThe Bridge to Freedom and The Summit Lighthouse, which evolved into the Church Universal and Triumphant. These various offshoots dispute the authenticity of their rivals.

pepe detective
mysteries! mysteries everywhere!

How impressive.

I wonder if there’s a connection there.

Swami’s delegate’s statement: “As regards the Arya’s statement about you, we have nothing to say, for we do not remember to have heard Swamiji acknowledging that you yourself knew Yoga Vidya practically.” ought to have caused the movement to dissolve, yet it persists. So it is now clear that its purveyors are not acting in good faith.

Note: if you wish to attain the truth, it must be done by way of debate. If you want to debate, you need to be able to accept criticism / defeat, not recede to a lazy, self-justified laziness.

Thank you

 

Why People Defend their Abusers

In my youth an associate of mine imparted some ideas after his basic military training in the Canadian Armed Forces. The initiation process was very challenging: many sleepless nights and gruelling training over the course of a summer. At the end, he was successful and was admitted “into the club”. This experience led him to believe that there was a direct correlation  between how brutal the initiation rite is and how much loyalty is inspired in the soldier. His logic was that “no one would want to admit they did a horrific initiation ritual for a bad reason”. The logic is: “the army must be great, or else, why would I have endured such a painful initiation ritual?”. This idea can also be applied to initiations into fraternities / sororities, secret cults and so forth. Rather than accepting the possibility that they have endured/propagated numerous horrors for a bad reason they retroactively justify their suffering through increased loyalty.

Mind Control Slaves

People who have endured lifelong propaganda, be it and Abrahamic faith, materialism, nihilistic atheism, communism etc, will not usually have the strength to leave it. This is because after enough emotional or physical stress, their will is broken. This means they will no longer have the ability to discern truth from fiction and will simply accept everything their masters tell them.

toilet brush lick antifa
Antifa & the Red Army are dangerous goons

One such example is the mentally disturbed “anti-fascist” group. These people have been victimised by propaganda which insists they are “racist” and that being racist is the worst thing possible. This weaponised propaganda eventually breaks their spirit and they are willing to go as far as accepting communism as a means of atoning for their “racism”. This is in spite of the fact that communism has killed over 100 000 000 people in 100 years and has not been shown to decrease racism at all. But the facts don’t matter to the mind control slave. The only thing that matters is continuing their cult rituals (atonement for “racism).

Another example is the longstanding Hollywood pedophile / human sacrifice cult. The only reason Hollywood stars are willing to turn on Weinstein and other perverts is that their own cult powers are severely diminished if they are exposed as not having moral authority. Hollywood is a leftist entity and the power of leftism largely comes from its presumed moral authority (since we all know intellectual authority is absolutely not in the cards for them). If they lose the presumption of moral supremacy, they will also lose their ability create culture. This will render their cult essentially powerless.

The performance of rituals is central to any religion, including secular religions such as atheism, communism, “anarchism” (which is often just another form of communism), even science (the belief that everything can be explained by science). Whether rituals are a net benefit or detriment to society depends on whether the ideology is true or false.

This is why our dictatorship will be banning the promotion of false ideology. It is a cancer on the soul of society.

Compulsive Proselytising

There is a way to determine whether someone has true or false ideology based on how they speak. False ideologues are aggressive and imperialistic. They will not be satisfied until everyone “submits” to their system, voluntarily or not. They will eagerly resort to violence to impose their beliefs on others. True ideologues take a more defensive stance, only becoming aggressive when their way of life is threatened.

Adherents of false ideology can never truly be convinced of the validity of their claims. This is why they must always attempt to convince others to join their faith: they are indirectly trying to convince themselves. This approach is a fallacy of course, just because everyone happens to believe a particular religion does not necessarily make it true. This is most evident in the oft cited cult of democracy. Why would anyone want a democracy? Even if the leaders were benevolent, which they are not, the low-intellect and unproductive members have as much influence as the high-intellect and productive members through voting. In fact, the former group holds greater sway, for they are greater in numbers! Only an ignorant could defend democracy, given the numerous instances of proof that it is an inherently corrupt system.

Why I do not Subscribe to Oppressive Methodologies of Cult Control

kek me you better opinion
I really like this meme

The most loyal members of my cult are those I’ve known since I was younger. They were and still are: my friends. I am not interested in playing mind games in or manipulating my followers to do my bidding. I want them to join and act voluntarily. I know the truth: people are much more effective as allies when they are acting to fulfil their own desires, not when they are paralysed with fear of ostracism.

fully automated luxury gay space communism.jpg
\^v^/

My religion will win the theocratic dictatorship because I, unlike the leaders of rival cults, am able to CREATE culture, rather than just CULTURALLY APPROPRIATE from others for my own ends. I understand science, culture, sociology, psychology & politics because of my religion, not in spite of it.

 

Thank you

 

Guide to Political Labels

Let’s have a look at some modern and historically relevant labels. Note that I go by no label except Gay Universal Gaylord (GUG) and that is because I am a Theocratic Supremacist Dictator (which, according to a scumbag I talked to online, makes me worse than a fascist). Note that Gay = Happy.

Meaning of Political Terms (in Chronological Order)

Comrade (popular for a while, unknown origin): A common term in many identitarian movements, used when referring to another member of the same movement. Often associated with communism, due to the shared root of the word.

Anti-fa (1932, 2017): the paid militia of the communist interest. It seems strange that such an interest could rise in this day and age, given all the failures of communism, but it is not surprising to me. Communism promises an “anti-racist” utopia… This would be appealing to a poor unsuspecting youth, having been told they are “evil racists” their whole lives for their (mostly falsified) historical racial record.

It seems unlikely that sadistic glee could precipitate regret.

They (falsely) believe that a “communist revolution” will put an end to the potential of being labeled “racist'” (which they fear). They also fear defying the communists because communists are extremely cruel to apostates. Communism has killed over 100 000 000 people in the last 100 years. That wasn’t for nothing. It was because communist footsoldiers (i.e.: Antifa) are low-intellect & aggressive while their masters are cruel and sadistic. Once they get into political power, there is nothing stopping them from killing anyone they decide is a threat to their system.

Screen Shot 2017-08-20 at 6.49.54 PM.png
source

MK Ultra (since the 1950s): A mind control program used on US citizens. Has several active “Manchurian Candidate” type figures in modern politics, making the movements inherently dangerous.

Alt Right (2008, 2016*): Although the term “Alt Right” was started by Paul Gottfried in 2008, its definition seemed to change over the course of its usage, since so many people tried to give a personal spin on it. Wikipedia now equates it with White Nationalism whereas CNN defined it as ” a loose collective of right wing trolls, including anarcho-capitalists”. It was an ironically all encompassing definition, given that most rational people reject mainstream conservatism (unless they are benefitting from such) yet so few are willing to wear the label “Alt Right”.

Alt – Left: This term appears to have been coined in 2016 (mainly by facebook shills) to dilute the anti-semitism of Pepe the Frog. Following the violence perpetrated by Anti-fa at the Charlottesville “Unite the Right”, it was popularised as a catch all term for leftists, specifically violent leftist extremists. Many sympathetic to leftism/communism did not like it, because it placed them into the same tent as admittedly doomed to fail violent extremists (who are now attempting to make an alliance with Juggalos).

Thank you

Sociological Archetypes

Although it may not seem like it, there is something out there which is worth living for. That precious thing is what we are building today.

The current ideological system based on false concepts about sexual identity & exalted victimhood. It is nothing short of a violation of Natural Law. Many wish to engender a cult-like status by having an offended-off: whoever gets the most offended is the “Queen”. This is degenerate.

varna
General Natural Law Class System

We have come so far from Truth dictating policy that some believe emotions ought to dictate policy. Whose emotions exactly are more important? How can we tell? Aren’t we all equal (i.e.: shouldn’t our emotions factor into policy not at all)?

Inverting the Natural Order (as by bestowing false authority) has numerous negative consequences. One of such consequences is that, rather than getting the numerous blessings of my wonderful and perfect objective science basis of reality, the existing Order (cult) endures the humiliation of being usurped by myself and my global order of Priests. I can tell you that if you dislike me, then you will probably not like my GUG Priests either. Funnily enough, I actually don’t care about that.

The rival cult may have started these hysterics, but I am ending them. If you don’t like my method, and attempt to reproach me for it, you might just catch me on a bad day and you probably, really, seriously, don’t want that.

crow of judgement.jpg
never talk to me or my babies ever again.

Sample Sociological Archetypes

One of the most precious sciences is social science. Being social animals, we enjoy each other’s company and derive satisfaction both from designing and ascending socio-cultural hierarchies.

In order for people to (start to) learn this knowledge, here is a sample of archetypes of people in the movement.

The Statesman

grandiose, compassionate, emotional, practical, strong inner fire

Screen Shot 2017-08-11 at 10.45.37 PM.png
Left: US President Donald Trump, Right: Christopher Cantwell

Donald Trump and Christopher Cantwell are both Statesman archetypes. Being older and more experienced, Trump is more restrained than the young buck Cantwell. The result of this is that while both are passionate, Trump is more measured/vengeful & Cantwell more impulsive/forgiving. Trump’s ego is also more externalised (evidenced by his numerous commercial successes) while Cantwell’s is more internalised (evidenced by his recent meteoric rise in knowledge / rhetorical efficacy).

The Memer / Dreamer

enjoys solitude, introspective, complex, creative, anguished

Not necessarily a content creator, but certainly an avid & discerning consumer, this archetype is often lost in the world of ideas. They have the potential to access higher teachings through their imaginations, but must be careful not to get carried away in flights of whimsey. While useful, their perfectionism can cause inaction & neurosis.

Most of my assembly fits this archetype.

wanna start a cult oyster
something like that

 

The Pillar

contemplative, inhibited, caring, measured, strong, committed

Though not a big talker, the Pillar archetype listens and internalises very well. Their emotions run deeper than average. They are a loyal companion and dedicated friend.

me smiling in bedroom
I am beyond many archetype systems, but not all.

Conclusion

These archetypes are a starting point for self-understanding (within our cultural context). The goal is not to limit ourselves to any particular archetype or system, but rather to study all archetype systems. This is how we can know ourself, independent of archetype systems.

Thank you