The most fundamental fact I’ve gleaned from observing various of my antagonizing crypto-currents over the last year is that none will directly address any of my questions or arguments. It’s almost as if I know exactly the crimes that you can’t say in public. Can’t even bring them up to say they’re wrong, it’s always symbolism, evasion, ad hominem–not even rationalization, note, because that would actually require an answer, and that itself would be a crime, to respond to a crime. Funny idea of crime here, it makes sense though doesn’t it? You’d have to deduce that illusion is the law, it’s illegal to tell the truth, the only thing the informal law allows is falsehood. Or am I wrong? Well, go ahead and answer some of my questions for once, instead of responding to this with the consistent symbol, evasion, ad hominem, etc. Well…?

I know you won’t- wonder why I see a futility in posting.

Well…? All I want is answers. Maybe I’m wrong about all the things I’ve said? Seems if I were clearly wrong you’d be able to answer the questions, yeah?

If only I could be on camera with some of you leftist priests, no symbols or evasions there- at least, then, it’s not so easy.

Well? Make my day, show me why I shouldn’t be so cynical about you. Present-day leftism doesn’t permit any dialectic, any to and fro, any conversation. Don’t you think there’s something rotten about that? About anyone who participates in this non-conversation? I directly respond to the left on a daily basis, and so far from where I’m looking, it’s 1200 or so odd days of having my arguments evaded.

Unexpected Aristotle/Marx mash-up

Ties in with how Aristotle says that slaves can’t be expected to be moral agents.

So many different kinds of false-consciousness, and Marx’s and his contemporary appropriators’ versions are ironically false-consciousnesses unto themselves in deeming their own the most essential of the essential. 2400 years later we’re all still living in a Pre-Aristotelian time. Pre-Platonic too if you think of actually-existing Marxism (3rd-worldist feminism) as consisting of noble lies. What kind of philosopher-king is the cathedral, we deserve better than that.

I still think the slut-problem is the fault of men ultimately, often times young men. They sweet-talk young women into getting into their pants, just for a notch in the belt, a high-five with the bros, and after the women lose their virginity they develop a fuck-it attitude which snowballs. I remember walking down the hall holding hands with a girl in high school, the face of the old Christian math teacher has remained in my memory- pure disgust, and I wrote him off with an ok boomer attitude essentially though part of my conscience knew he was right. It all goes back to Jim’s simile which I would love for someone, preferably a scientist, to refute – from my experience it seems to be true: women are like sticky-tape, stick them on one thing they “work”, peel them off and stick them on something else they stick less, peel them off again! you get the point. Is this false? In sum, the world would be better off with young men who are more virtuous, and Christianity usually does the trick for that.

Because Globalist Realism is systematically locked up in a self-deceptive compartment in the minds of most, brace yourselves for an age of mimesis. The overwhelming statistical evidence shows that the majority of the world is only capable of copying already existing forms, so Brazilification will be at the same time a “Copyization” with any of the rapidly disappearing creatives being persecuted, until eventually the overall genetic stock will be so tarnished that not even copying the prior advanced civilization will be possible anymore. One by one the cognitive activities that most define being human will fall away obsolete and be forgotten, starting with the most complex.

I don’t think Leary is fair to Asia here – I’d speculate it’s closer to 85% – it’s interesting that I can even have this debate with him though:

It’s just a normal day seeing this kind of thought with me, imagine if this started printing out in a high school computer lab, or even college computer lab, or even a corporate office though. Why don’t they want people to be misanthropic about the rest of the world?

One can’t even describe the types of people in America too precisely without catching flak:

The futique minority should migrate to the rainforest for a couple years to become evermore futique, just sayin. Being in the same proximity as these people amounts to a voluntary dimming of cognition.

Let’s think about the mystery of the decentralized zeitgeist, I think that’s the key to seeing what a future regime-change would look like.

It’s necessary to get into the “What is” mood- What is government? (ask yourself that before being primed by my following speculations).

Imagine we’re all living in nature independently and we find each other in some clearing, one by one. Government would be about who is the ultimate arbiter of who decides for the group to prevent it disbanding into nature again into atomized foes. So think about the “decentralized zeitgeist” in this context. What we have in the present is a segment of the population we met in that clearing deciding for us what it is good to believe, and while there’s no formal government that can control this zeitgeist, most of both the gov-based and nongov-based power-nodes are in agreement with each other about what it is that is good for us to believe.

My idea for a regime-change is that there should be a formal centralization so that if the decentralized zeitgeist gets out of whack and decides for the rest of us that we should believe certain things that are not in fact good for us to believe it will step in and adjust it. Just voicing my thought in this clearing like anyone else living under the decentralized zeitgeist.

Government itself is “stepping in” when you boil it down to its fundamental basis. Someone in that state of nature and skeptical agreement decides to step in and say We need to team up, life will be easier for us, and all the better to combat the forces of nature if we work together. “So, here is how I think we should go about that,” says Primordial Government.

In that Know the Enemy thread I tried to demonstrate that what we take for “the government” today is only one of the various nodes. I argue, like Yarvin before me, that what our government is should actually be called the government. Gavel-slams in the supreme courts, politicians gathered together in a room with serious faces, the president himself, are all taken to be government, i.e. the ones who decide. We now know though that lots more outside the government decide for us. What I propose is a government in the original sense of the word that decides for the decentralized zeitgeist which in our day consists of governmental and non-governmental entities alike.

“Nice 700 page book, now make it 800.”

Nah. As with that “Deception” post, one “page” of that contains more thoughtcrime than 10,000 tweets of a given Twitter account, how about you cause chaos for my entertainment for a change? I know, this is asking the impossible from the terminally and shamelessly uncourageous.

Hey why are you still reading my personal journal.

The hottest fantasy I have is telling a girl to go off her birth control. I have to be careful though with the weltanschauung the way that it is. In our climate this is the expected result of that:

Millennials need to learn from their mistakes before it’s too late. I use swear words sometimes because they most accurately describe the reality of what I’m trying to talk about. We need to put an end to the slut-bastard cycle. It creates bad citizens and bad people in general, who in turn… And a lot of us are already products of that cycle ourselves so it’s not all our fault. It should end with us!

I don’t even know why revenge surprises me when all I do is deliberately attack everyone’s way of life. Just try to think about what I say for a moment instead of retaliating thoughtlessly is all I ask.

The essential debate is to be had with oneself. It is about the love of one’s own versus the love of the good. That’s what I frequently see as the crypto-motivation of most. Everyone wants to preserve their way of life even if that way of life isn’t for the best in the grand scheme.

I don’t care what I am, what demographics I fall into, all I care about is the refinement of consciousness to a level beyond anyone’s who is alive today.

We have to breach specific taboos in order for that to happen. Let’s go back to the movie-formalism idea, since even fourth-circuiters will understand that- when you’re trying to determine if someone is worthy of your time, when you’re trying to decide if you’d be able to endure a normal life with them and watch movies together – think concretely here – do you want to watch movies with someone who knows who controls the world and what they’re doing, or someone who is either ignorant or lies about who controls the world and what they’re doing? Lots of taboo thoughts follow from this. The overlords are not trying to bring about the overman. Nor are their minions who don’t deserve to be alive. They’re trying to bring about the opposite in fact. Quasi-people with no moral or aesthetic sensibility, among other things. The unrefinement of consciousness is their initiative. I’d rather be alone than have to spend time with someone who either supports or is blind to this systemic endeavor, this has been a feature of my subconscious throughout my posts the last few years. I tell people what is preventing ascension to the next stage of consciousness and they love themselves too much to accept it, and would rather work toward creating a dystopia than change.

The reason for everything I say, the reason for denouncing the vices of all these various demographics.

What percentage of the population even understands this goal? 1%? Most are content with activities designed for the lowest instincts of this species, why would they care about bringing into existence a higher species? Whether it’s consuming shitposts and unprofound tv shows, or overzealously participating in the democratic spectacle, or degrading their faculty for pair-bonding with casual sex, or virtue-signaling in favor of the nauseating tenets of the state religion, they’re never really giving any thought at all to tomorrow, let alone to the next stage of evolution.

If our ancestors had that attitude we never would have created the so-called 1st-world. The present generation-war focuses on hating boomers when it should focus on how much the generations that brought the 1st-world into existence would hate all the generations alive now.