All posts tagged memes

Ever get a sense that more and more people are in denial these days, and in much greater degrees?

What do I mean? I mean people are more pigheaded, more prone to lying, and more close-minded than at anytime I have seen, read, or heard about in the past…

What is denial?

I have not checked the exact definition in a while. What I think: self-dishonesty.

Rather that is what it means to be “in denial.”

What are its characteristics?

I do not know for sure; I’m just going to rip through a bunch of thoughts I have on this…

Denying something through rationalizations what one knows—or merely senses—to be true.

Being in denial is more than that, though, I think.

It is denying your part in something; not taking responsibility—blaming others or something else instead.

At its core is a certain self-deception, sure, as well as the act of stubbornly clinging to a falsehood. Have you ever gotten into an argument with someone over something and you knew you were right and what you were saying was the truth, but the other person didn’t believe you, no matter how much sense you made, no matter how many sources you listed—and even after you had to look it up for the person, they still didn’t believe it?

I’ve had this happen a few times—some people have an utterly fanatical urge to be right about absolutely everything. But others, well…


It is also making up reasonable-sounding excuses for what you’ve done to avoid any negative consequences or merely to appear better than you really are. This is on the edge of the camp of denial, too.

It’s not practicing what you preach.


And it’s simply the general inability to become aware of a truth or truths, through conscious effort—read: willful ignorance.



You read about how video games are addictive, scoff at it, and then go play a game.

Buying a lot of crap at the mall doesn’t bother you because you figure that as long as you recycle your wrappers, cans and plastic, there will be no ill consequences.

You see six police officers beating an unarmed and restrained man unconscious, and say he deserved it because he called them “pigs.”

You sneer at smokers for polluting the air and then hop in your car and drive home.

Someone tells you the sky is blue, and your retort is that it’s actually white and blue because the clouds are present. Going out of your way to nitpick something to either make the other person look bad or to make yourself look better—or both.

How is this last one about being in denial?

Well, what do you call the pathological urge to be right 100% of the time? I think such a person is in denial about something…

How does it work?

Memes, I think, are part of it.

What are memes? Ideas that spread from one mind to another, and colonize the new mind, much like a virus. They wedge themselves into areas of the mind and prevent other ideas from getting in. Furthermore, you get a chemical reward (you get a buzz) spreading them around. And you also get a buzz when you receive one.

Yet more than that, I think, is this concept of double-think, which I view as the most extreme form of denial.

What is doublethink?

Doublethink is the ability to hold two contradictory notions in your head at the same time without realizing it—without being conscious—and accepting both of them.

It means that you basically cannot distinguish fact from fiction, a lie from the truth.

Some examples?

I dunno. I’m just gonna take a wild stab at a couple that I find contradictory…

Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

That’s the official name for North Korea, the most ruthless socialist oligarchy in modern history. It has a figurehead monarchy—a single party state in which the figurehead line is hereditary—but it is ruled by elites (oligarchs) in a collectivist (socialist) totalitarian system.

Absolutely nothing democratic about this place or its government.

Here’s another:


Demo = people; cracy = power.

When have—in the entire course of history—all the people had complete power over their lives? In other words, freedom?

Never. The closest we ever came (and I mean from about 6000 BC, including only agricultural civilizations) was in the United States of America from 1783 to the very early 1800s. This was short-lived as the “Indians” were set-up for assimilation or annihilation as the State advanced westward. I said “close” because slaves were still around—during and after the Revolution—all men were not created equal, it seemed.

Anyway, back to denial. Double-think…it’s like believing an oxymoron, seeing only one thing, even though there are two things.

What can we do about this?

Yeah. Here’s the onion…

The more we point shit out to people, the more defensive they get, the more obstinate. The deeper they go into denial.

Occasionally, someone will admit they were wrong; occasionally, someone will agree and see your point. Rarely, though, will someone take responsibility for what they’ve done.

However, it’s slight, fleeting, and sporadic.

Yet never will we stop lying…

Why, for fuck sakes? How long can this go on? Aren’t you sick of the fucking lies?

Why do we populate the world with so much negative shit?

This is our world, right? We are people, right? Seven goddamned billion of us? We’re not bad people—we weren’t born this way, right? What the fuck happened?

Why the fuck are we getting worse?—why, if not for an agenda forced upon us by others who want us this way?


And why the fuck does no one care?

Okay, okay—a few do. I’ll be fair here.

But even smart, decent people are prone to this—it’s an illness. A sickness. And I think it’s deliberate. This never happened before in history—I mean, from the dawn of bipedal man to the first civilization in the Middle East.

Why doesn’t anyone look into this?

Because we’re all in denial about it—about our denial…

The other day I was sitting outside with a friend (who hates the Vancouver Canuck team and its goalie, Roberto Luongo, especially), and somehow we got onto the subject (once again) of Luongo’s brutal death. Yes, my friend wishes him a painful death. He has also expressed what great joy he would feel if the team’s airplane crashed somewhere, killing the entire franchise.

This time he wanted (if I recollect) the goaltender skinned alive (or was it a beheading?—I can’t remember; that might have been a different scenario a different time), and video-taped, so he could watch it over and over at his “leisure.”

And a short time later I began to hear the annoying sound of pigeons (in a nearby yard), and I commenced a slight rant about how I didn’t care for those birds.

And my friend got on my case, saying that wasn’t cool, saying that a bad attitude like that will come back to me—some sort of karma reference.

At that point he started up the stairs, and I, blinking, stunned, and finishing my cigarette, just recalled what he just wished (a horrible death) for a human man. And then it was like a slap in the face, recalling what else he had said before.

I smiled and followed him up, saying, “All this from a guy who wants 50 grown men to die horribly in a plane crash because you don’t like them?”

What just happened here?


I see this shit everywhere, from just about every fucking person I know and have known—and yes, me included. But I’m trying really hard to not be this way. I see very few other people trying at all.

A few summers ago, here, I was hanging out with a guy trying to get off crack—and we were drinking some beers near a duck pond. I started talking about something, and I swore a few times.

“That’s negative,” he said.

I said, No, it was honest expression and I was entitled to say what I wanted.

I said nothing further, but then it occurred to me what this guy had said to not ten minutes earlier—while staring at the filthy, stinking duck-filth pond water, he said, “Yanno, I could just take a syringe and stick it that water, suck it all up, and inject it right into my arm…”

And that isn’t negative?


I could sit here for days and days and write out similar experiences like this—I used to to do it too. And here and there I catch myself still doing it. But I always catch myself. I never have to have someone point this shit out to me—I see it, I know it, and I try harder.

I’m not the only one—I’m not saying I’m better than anyone—I see this, but why do so few other people see it as well? I just can’t understand why…

Not that I blame people—it’s just frustrating that they cannot fucking see it. It’s not their fault, I know.

Why the fucking fuck can’t they see it?

Ego? Immaturity? TV? School? Brain damage caused by food additives and nasty chemicals and GMO corn? The devil? Santa Claus? The giggling Pumpkin People from Sirius?

Or maybe they just don’t care—is apathy the cause?

Perhaps our societies have been engineered to no longer value the truth?

Ugh. I don’t know…

Okay, enough of this…

I know I can’t change anyone, and shouldn’t try…so I just try to point it out (is it not helping someone doing this?—I’m not sure anymore), but, Jesus, it’s so draining…

I do not know the cure for this syndrome. This mental infection that seems to be growing and spreading…

So what else can I say then? Or do?

Fuck all, I guess.

Anyway, stay healthy, people.

Who can you trust?

A short pre-amble: I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything; if you feel the “New World Order” is a myth dreamed up by nuts, well, best stop reading now. This is not for you—I’m not here to persuade you; it’s not my agenda. People need to think for themselves and decide for themselves, hopefully after doing some digging from as many independent sources as possible…but I doubt this occurs very often today. So whichever.

This is for people who have reached a certain level of consciousness, I suppose, or even merely possess an open mind or consider themselves “free-thinkers.”

So, now that no one at all is reading this entry, I’ll continue. The question is repeated: Who can you trust?

If you’ve wisened up, become more aware, you might say, “Well, shit, man, certainly not the fuggin News!”

Aye. Good. That’s good for you, my friend. It’s the perfect place to start.

Once we break free of the State-run propaganda ministry and begin to burst out of our socially engineered shells, the world seems dark and scary. That’s because it is. And it’s supposed to be this way. And this is what adult beings face, adapt to, and endure as fully grown natural forms of life on this planet.

We just never knew it because the “West” has created a nursery for us, a land of fantasy, with as many distractions and sources of pleasure and escape that you could ever conceive; a way of life that the remainder of the world does not know, and has never known. It’s all delusion. It was done to infantilize us. To keep us in a progressively child-like state, so that eventually we would whole-heartedly accept the (Global) State (and those who engineered it) as our parent, our guardian and master, to obey them and have the same respect for them as we would our mother and father. They want to be loved by us—they want to be gods again—and whoever they allow to live will be their utter, unflinching, abject servants. And, fucking hell, it has worked. These fuckers know what they’re doing. They want us to embrace our own subjugation and misery; they want us to help them enslave us. They want to be able to kick us in the teeth a few dozen times, and then have us smile a bloody smile, thank them profusely, and beg to lick their assholes.

Don’t believe me? See ancient Rome. See ancient Sumer, Babylon, Greece, Egypt. It’s already been done. It’s happened before, and it will happen again.

I dont see any evidence of this happening today and we have Bill of Rights and all sorts of things!! u r crazy!!!!!

Patience, child. Just wait . . . just . . .wait . . .

Actually, there is a lot of evidence to be found, but I’m not getting into all that right now.

For folks who have been conditioned to not really think for themselves, it can be a grueling task, sifting through internet media sites which claim to be alternative or independent. It can become utterly overwhelming.

Why? Because there’s no way to know what their actual agenda is. Some are up front about it—they’ll talk about “workers” and the “classes” and so forth, the easily identifiable rhetoric of the Marxist (the elites’ current Useful Idiot of Choice—at least for the last two hundred years). And this should be avoided more gravely than any religious site regarding any religion (with the exception of the Eco-control-freaks, the feminists, and the racists—the anti-Jewers).

But others seem to be completely cool and harmless. When you’ve been confined and guided information-wise for most of your life to accept only what “Authority” tells you, any other source is met with intense and irrational skepticism by default. In other words, a closed mind. And likely some “learned helplessness” as well.

What happens is we—rather than thinking—immediately lunge for some sort of Authority, some symbol, clue, anything, or anyone who will tell us what we’re supposed to believe; what we’re supposed to think. Because we have know idea—when in doubt or when something confuses the hell out of us, we fall back to the familiar…this is no secret—once we lose a belief system based upon lies, we become incredibly vulnerable to even worse beliefs.

Here’s a great measuring stick for deciding whether or not you actually believe in a Force above and beyond our material world—because we only seem to seek out Authority when we actually have no sense of “God” or a “Higher Power” or whatever it may be, something non-material that’s greater than we are. And we get used and abused by facades of Authority which are always based in the material. (Symbols; idols. Stone and gold statues. It’s happened again and again; every movement becomes religion and then becomes a cash-cow (and control grid) for the ruling oligarchs. The institutionalization of a spiritual philosophy.)

When we have this Faith, let’s call it, we are not so desperate to frantically dash towards some illusion of Authority. We already know; we are secure. Plus, I think, our more spiritual memes seem to have more of an immune system regarding the more material memes.

Once we shed certain old memes, we are in many ways like an addict who has stopped a drug—his physiology (specifically in the brain) has been changed and so now he is vulnerable to another drug, or another thing that acts like a drug upon the pleasure center of the brain. So, when we lose our old childhood memes, we are desperately seeking new memes. This is why Christians who have shed their faith or just lost it, for whatever reason, almost always turn to another religion sooner or later. This is how the New Age (old Pagan shit with a new clothes) junk fills the desperate so quickly, and so deviously. New memes enter, and the high has returned. The only way to sustain the high is to recruit new members—every time the meme spreads, the carrier gets high through the process.

[The neopagans are getting revenge on Christians, it seems, since it was the Catholic Church which went way out of its way to gobble up those pagans on the borders of the New Roman Empire; the Mother Church.]

This is also why many people who have quit a certain drug become such fanatics—preaching their new anti-drug gospels is actually getting them high. Poetic…

It’s just part of our biology that gives us chemical rewards for learning, and teaching.

Anyroad, we seek out Authority.

“Oh, this guy’s a DOCTOR, well then, I will pay attention.” The Professional, of course, is an extension of the Authority. (They were the original priests and priestesses who worked in the temples and served their ruling oligarchs, those who claimed divinity under names such as Isis, Kubaba, Ishtar/Astarte, and later the sordid cast of characters that comprise the mythology of all the Iron and Bronze Age empires and city-states.) He or she is a State-Approved mouth-piece, in essence.

And so that’s the problem. You run through a gauntlet of bullshit, of all sorts of people who titter and boast to their friends later that they fucked over someone and took their money. Liars. Cunts.

And if you make it through this meat-grinder alive (without falling for even worse bullshit), you’re left in a jaded, bitter state, and your first instinct is to not believe a fucking thing.

But if you still have an open mind, and your soul has not been sold—nor have you sold yourself—then you might be fortunate enough to come to something that has the most truth in tact. And maybe that’s why you’re reading this right now. I dunno.

What I do know is that all this junk happened to me, and I understand it well.

Myself, I never heard of the New World Order until about 1996 (in a Ministry song called “NWO”—New World Order); I’d never heard any politician talking about it, any professional, any TV station, any movie, any book, no one. I knew nothing about it. Had no idea what it might be, and I didn’t care.

It wasn’t until I began uncovering this feminist agenda (in earnest from 2004-2007), as well as researching the 9/11 conspiracy, that I first heard of the word, “Illuminati.” And, at the time, like most people, I dismissed it as the ravings of the religious.

When I began reading (Rich) Zubaty’s stuff in 2007 (and, dammit, I hope you’re still alive, bro), his truths, new ideas, and right-brained approach to writing really helped clear away many of the old memes infecting my mind, and planting a few new ones (which were really pre-historic ones, not new at all; just repressed and forgotten).

It helped me, first, to forgive women and, second, to realize that they weren’t to blame for what I went through in my life.

Anyway, it wasn’t until I found out that there really was an organization called the “Illuminati” that I began to take this stuff seriously. This was around 2011. It disturbed me, but it didn’t surprise me; I knew for years that JFK was assassinated by his own people (government types), and I had never trusted the Establishment, not even as a kid. But how I was duped in such things as the JFK Conspiracy was that I was convinced it was an evil deed carried out by Republicans (conservatives); given I was an atheist at the time, and anti-religious, it was natural to just assume that Republicans were rich Christians and thus my enemies.

[It was the same way we were duped by the Michael Moore films—Fahrenheit 911 anyone? There’s no inquiry in this film into the real minds behind it all; it was simply blamed on the “neocons” and it was reinforced that the poor liberals were the good guys who cared and shared and wanted the world full of yummy candy and fluffy bunnies. What’s diabolical about Moore’s work is not what he reveals; it’s what he omits. And what he omits is the entire truth. Because he has an agenda, and everything he does is for the furthering of this (not actually his) agenda. He’s a shill. A hypocritical, deceptive fraud. A cunt.]

And shortly after that I began researching it and this “New World Order.” So, I’m really late to the game here. I feel like I’m the last player to dress and arrive out on the field for the big game.

Why was I so late?

I probably would have gotten into it a lot sooner—maybe my mid-20s—but I was consumed in the UFO Conspiracy. Yes, I was a teenage flake. Well, twenty-something anyway, and not really a flake but a believer, for sure. I studied it for years (age 22-27). This distraction wasted years of my life, untold hours of writing and reading, and seeking out more and more information, trying to arrive at the truth. The lack of evidence and bizarre leaps of logic accumulated to such a point that all I had were a million more questions, an addiction to codeine and chronic headaches and chronic depression, and confusion.

Confusion. And that was the goal all along. I began to realize that getting into this shit ultimately lead to despair; what could I do about alien entities in league with power structures of civilization here on Earth? It was out of my control. It was all pointless.Yeah, the aliens have been coming here for thousands of years, and everyone knows about them, and that’s why it’s all a big cover up? There’s simply no other explanation except for alien intervention? Well, the believers never think about anything else; they’re obsessed. They’re religious. You question them and when it reaches something they cannot answer, they turn and start insulting you and attacking you, making claims about you. That’s when you know you’ve just toppled a house of cards. It was built on conjecture, New Age horseshit, and all manner of sketchiness.

Finally, I just quit and decided: there were more important things to think about, such as the dismal, miserable, wretched disaster which was my life.

My final thoughts on this UFO shit…

Show »

Now, don’t fucking talk to me about “oh it’s arrogant to think we’re alone in the blah blah blah.” Alright? I’ve spewed that shit for years. It is irrelevant. It’s like studying the history of sails while the ship is sinking; yeah, it’s interesting, but it’s not helping anyone or working towards a solution for anything. Who is going to benefit from your escape into fantasy? Obviously, only those who constructed this distraction in the first place and have fed it through sci-fi literature and TV and movies.

“OMFG how do you explains all the sightings of ufos and all the people whove been abducted lolol???”

1. Natural phenomena explains a lot of it; experimental aircraft probably explains most of the rest—yes, I believe the technology we have today is old. Everything we see has probably been around for centuries, hidden, because that’s what these people know how to do best: hide shit. It is their only real skill (other than controlling others); they’ve been at it since the Flood. They are members of a sketchy religion surrounding hidden knowledge. What the fuck do you think they’ve been hiding all these years? A found alien spaceship?

Please tell me how in the fuck does a super advanced species (capable of annihilating the entire planet with death rays) not destroy humanity when they’ve had thousands of years to do it?

“OMFG the Annaukizskites want to enslave us!!!’

Want to? So they have not done so, even though they’ve had the means? What’s stopping them? God? Satan? The pink elf people on Planet X? Magic? Superman? What?

And how the fuck do you know their names?

And sticking probes up our anuses does what, precisely? Can’t they scan us somehow? If they can beam us up from above tree-top level, why can’t they beam us up from orbit? Why would they need to descend into our atmosphere at all? Why do they mutilate cattle and make artistic designs in fields? Are these aliens pranksters? Misunderstood artisans? And what the fuck do you expect me to do about it all? None of this makes any sense at all.


And so it goes. On and on and round and round. Madness. The answers inevitably edge into some New Age religious crap. There really is no discussion possible with a zealot; all he wants to do is convert you. And that’s it. And all you want to do is get him to question some of it, just a fucking little. But he never will. He’s gone. Gone. And he ain’t coming back. They have him.

I think these oligarchs have had technology monstrously more advanced than what the masses knew about, and they’ve gradually brought it out when it suited their purposes. This is how their paid stooges in high positions of academia manage to invent such wonderful things, out of the blue; it’s how these people can effect prophecies too. (You say something will be invented, although it already has; then you wheel it out right on schedule, and the masses gape in awe. And offer their support and allegiance to the Wizards. Great Magix! Ohhhhh…they have sway with the gods… I say fellows like Nostradamus were insiders of this hierarchy.)

Anyway, I will admit that some UFOs are simply a mystery and probably always will be. You just have to be humble enough to admit that we don’t know everything; the universe is a fucking big place. If it’s arrogant to say we’re alone in the universe (and it’s arrogant to think that other life forms aren’t intelligent in the first place, that only humans are or could be), it’s also arrogant to presume they’re coming here for us. It’s arrogant, as well, to presume you know what they are and why they’re here. Go check into this batshit crazy shill:

It’s also very limited to presume that the only explanation of an unidentified flying object is alien origin.

Unidentified! Calling it “alien” is identifying it—with no evidence whatsoever. So, it’s not a UFO since you’re telling me what it is, without an open mind; it’s an AFO (Alien Flying Object). You’re guessing and accepting something that has been designed for you to accept; like a child brought to a playground…some distraction while the adults talk. You’re so fucking brainwashed with this shit you can’t even understand what I’m saying and you can’t even come up with an accurate, non-State given name for these things!

2. I think abductions are conducted by covert agencies of governments, and special effects are employed, drugs are given. I don’t know to what purpose except to convince people they’ve been kidnapped by ET.

This can be done very, very easily. They were able to do it even before WWII ended, for crissakes.

Bottom line…

Possibility is not evidence. Probability is not evidence. Anecdotal tales is not evidence. Weird things in the sky is not proof of either alien visitation or alien intelligence.

Government agencies guarding some strange building and allowing “leaks” to slip out regarding what’s inside is not evidence of a conspiracy, necessarily; it’s in fact more evidence of a cover-up based upon disinformation.

Build something, restrict all info about it, and stick soldiers in front of it with guns, and what you get is throngs of people trying to stick their noses into it. What’s in that building? Probably nothing at all; it’s a campaign to lease large tracts of real estate inside your head. The more you compulsively seek the “truth” of bogus shit, the less likely you will be to ever come near the Truth of anything.

As long as you swallow their bullshit, your mind is theirs. What consumes your thoughts controls your life. You are deluded, on purpose, all the while thinking you have touched the truth. Yet all the while you have become a tool for the very forces to which you were initially opposed.

Now, I’ve touched upon this shit before, but I feel it’s imperative to finish the subject. So, onto the Delusion part of this…

So, okay, I’ll just come out with it: every movement based on freedom and truth is infiltrated and hijacked, in order to cause division. Division is necessary because it destroys unity. Those oligarchs in control today have one great fear: us. If we ever got our shit together and became unified, they’d be finished. And they know it. (They’ve seen it many times—obviously, I’m not implying that these are the same folks, that they’re immortal; no, they’re more fanatical than any religious type we’ve ever seen or heard about, more secretive, more connected and organized, as a group…they plan generationally and seem to have inhuman patience, which is why I suspect some believe they are mythical or other-worldly beings. But they’re not, they’re as weak and flawed as we are. Weaker and more flawed, in fact. But that’s another subject.)

How has the Truth Movement been co-opted? The resurgence of the UFO cults, as I’ve already mentioned, the one that got me.

I suspect it was meant to increase the rift between religious members and non-religious members; implying that scenes and writings in various religious texts were the result of alien entities and their various types and designs of flying saucers…well, this means that these religious folks’ beliefs are not true; they’re not “gods” or “God,” just little green men. Little grey men. Blue creatures from other worlds. Whichever, pick a colour and size and invent a name for them and their planet of origin (or say they came through a wormhole), grab your crystals and Taro cards, and you’re on the way to the New Age (neo-pagan) agenda.

So, the hi-jacking of the Truth Movement consists of the following…

I. UFO religion.
II. The Reptilians.
Which is just a tangent off the UFO cults and other paranormal stuff, which is all leading back to neo-paganism, billed as New Age Spirituality. Ego worship, Wiccan garbage, astrology, and similar utter nonsense, sucked up quickly and greedily by weak people.

And I don’t exclude myself as being weak—I fell into shit that seemed to promise strength and brotherhood. It’s easy to get into if you’re isolated and feeling weak, physically, emotionally, spiritually, whatever. So, I’m not putting anyone down.

It’s just Paganism coming back. You atheists think things were bad under so-called Christian Rule, spend a couple years under this new shit coming, and you’ll be fuckin begging to have a Bible-thumper shout at you that you’re going to Hades.

III. Satanism.

Now, I think this was an invention custom-made for Christians (who these elites seem to despise more than any other group), and it was set up a long, long time ago (see Lilith)). Of course it works for Catholics, Jews, and Muslims. But Christians I’ve found seem to have more of a fixation on this figure, and all the demons and angels that go with it.

So, let’s review: we have the group called the “Illuminati,” which is just a name that I suspect merely wink-wink-nudge-nudges towards the view that Lucifer is behind this global plot.

This is what made me first go Pffft when someone mentioned the Illuminati to me. It was designed to do this.

The UFO and Reptile crap is meant to draw in the non-religious, even though it’s full of the religious.

What these three things have in common: the average person can do absolutely nothing about it. What can you do to stop an alien invasion, either by ships or by giant lizards coming out of the earth? What?

And you can do nothing about Satan or Lucifer either—unless you join a religion and band together and pray, and hope for Christ to return and smite this evil entity. Or whatever. But you’re not directly involved…

The intended psychological effect is helplessness.

Okay, I’ll do one more:

IV. The Jews.

This one covers the race angle; the KKK and White Supremacists were set up by the elite cock-smokers for this very purpose: division.

I almost fell into this one, too; it took over a decade for me to figure out what was going on.

So, the Jews are behind everything. Zionists, ZOG, all of that shit. And I think some Jewish people are put in place to fuel this delusion.

Now, what can the average person do about shady figures in the upper strata of society, with big nose noses and evil grins, rolling about in swimming pools full of gold coins?

Nothing. Only their racist leaders know what’s to be done: send all the impure races back to ______. That’s it. That’s the old dead horse they’re still beating. And always will.

But I can’t blame them, really. I never believed in the Star Trek philosophy (again, it took years for me to comprehend exactly what I hated about this show), mixing the races and ending up with one dull, mediocre, light-brown ball of mashed potatoes. What species in nature has ever done this? Why would it?

Tigers don’t work with leopards; coyotes don’t live with wolves; some species of deer will hang out with other species, if they happen to be on the same prairie…but once they’re done eating (it was only tolerated to add a few more eyes—scouting for big cats and packs of wild dogs—in the mix, while they ate), they go back to their own kind. They don’t live together. Even the zebra are wise enough to know not to fuck the wildebeest.

Now, see what I’m saying here: I do not believe in mixing races; every race is unique and cool in its own right; why would we want to destroy that? We piss and moan when the rare three-banded whatever frog of wherever goes extinct…but it doesn’t bother us that an entire people were bred out of existence? And no, I do not think my race is better than anyone else’s (quite the contrary); it’s just different. But we should not be tossed in together, forced to live together, and have our inherent tribalism provoked and aggravated so continuously—to what fucking end if not an inevitable global empire?

Why are we being herded towards this psychotic conformity by people we don’t know, never voted for, and never even met? Who is going to benefit from all this engineering? Us? Have we so far…?

Every time humans are duped into gathering in some city, what we naturally do is separate and stick to our own. This is our deep biology at work; something wants us to be unique and different, and not all the same. I think this for men and women too; we should not be around women all months of the year. The only result of this has been the blurring of genders, the weakening of men, and the strident sense of entitlement and the utter confusion (and sometimes near madness) of women. And members of each gender who cannot stand their opposite half.

This is division, it’s not what I want—which is exactly what we were twenty thousand millennia ago. Freedom and balance was what we used to enjoy; differences and challenges, strength and honour, and the capacity for compassion, humour, and a healthy life in which we understood our place in the world.

What we’ve been forced to endure has been the opposite of this: we’ve been rolled into one amorphous blob, and yet we are more divided and fucked up than at any point in our history. Racism is worse than it was in the 1960s; and there such a rift between the genders that I’m not sure if it will ever be repaired, fully.

Enough of that.

So, what we have is Alex Jones (Lucifer is guiding the elite to create a New World Order) calling David Icke (Reptilian aliens are the elite) a turd in the punch bowl…although he’ll interview David on his show.

Then we have Mark Dice (Lucifer is guiding the elite to create a New World Order) making fun of Alex and calling him this and that, even though they used to work together and now do again.

Then you have the really serious religious types (who probably believe absolutely everything told in the Bible; giants, people living 900 years, talking animals, and all manner of magic and miracles and God talking and so forth, none of which happens anymore) calling Alex a shill because he won’t claim that the Jews are behind it all. Like Bill (Lucifer and UFOs are behind it all) Cooper fanboys. And because Bill died, now they reason that because he died (because he knew too much, or something), and Alex is still around, Alex must be a fake.

And then you have Alan Watt, who I suspect might be the closest thing we will get to someone who (a) knows a fuck of a lot about all this stuff, (b) is not falling all over himself to make a truckload of money out of this, or gain fame and celebrity status out of it, and (c) appears to be telling the truth without an intense and blatant agenda like so many others.

Yes, Alex Jones has an agenda aside from the obvious; I sense he’s sincere about the ’cause,’ but he is a Christian and all this fits neatly into the “End Times” scenario that most religious people have been conditioned into believing, and I suspect this Apocalypse story was designed for this reason. And these elites put their plans into action, in the last couple of centuries, they’re fulfilling the requirements as well for the End of Days stuff.

Alex also makes a lot of money off this stuff; his set-up is very professional looking, and his face is everywhere, on everything. I’m always suspicious of this behaviour—Mark Dice is the same. Nice clothes, smiling face seen everywhere, and lots of things for sale.

Buy my book and learn the truth! Because we need your help…but only if you’ve got money. Poor people no welcome.

So, if this is their philosophy, how precisely are they different from these “elites?”

Why are any of these guys still alive, if the NWO is so powerful and so close to completing their goals?

And I’ve already given Icke more attention than he deserves. He can fuck a duck. I’m 99% sure he’s an insider douche.

I don’t trust Dice. He might be alright, but he just rubs me the wrong way.

Alex Jones? I dunno. Still wondering about him. Sometimes he’s got me convinced; sometimes, I start asking myself questions. I’m about 85% sure that Jones is the real deal (maybe 50% for Dice).

Jesse Ventura is another guy I like, but I’m still not 100% sure about him. I’m maybe 90% sure he’s one of the good guys.

Rich Zubaty, I’m about 95% sure he’s the real deal.

Alan Watt, maybe 90%. I’m not sure of his religion, and so I’m not sure about his agenda.

All of these folks have an agenda outside the conspiracy business and conspiracy culture.

But don’t we all have our own petty little agendas?

What is the result of all this?

Consider: say you find 99 people who are aware of the New World Order coming. Now, together you make 100, and that would be quite a force, a great beginning. But say you were one of these evil elite whack-jobs…how would break up this force.


Get 30% of them to believe it has something to do with UFOs. Get 5% to believe that it has something to do with Reptilians. Get 20% to believe that it’s all just a big Jewish plot. And get 40% to believe that it’s the End of Days and this is the way the Anti-Christ is coming to claim “his” empire.

What’s left?

Five percent.

Five people out of every hundred who is not distracted with fucking fiction (not to mention that only one person out of a few thousand would actually believe any of this anyway; so the numbers might look like 5 out of 5,000 of the regular John Q Public). While everyone else fights among themselves until it’s too late, you and your small force is simply insufficient to do much. Besides, two of the five won’t fight because they believe in peaceful protest only.

Yep. Math really is fucking merciless.

What does this equal?

Doom. Division equals doom.

This is why I don’t think these globalists will be stopped (or even can be stopped at this point) even if we could get our shit together, which we just won’t; only through a truly united resistance will we eventually prevail. And I’ll fight with them (the types of people I’ve mentioned above), Christians and atheists alike, since our only goal at that point will be freedom, even though my kind of world “disorder” or natural society will never happen. If I survive the shit hitting the fan, and survive the resistance, if we win before I die (of old age), I’ll be back on my mountain by myself, I expect. Once more, I will not fit into the civilization they will either take over or rebuild.

And then it will start all over again, because we will never eradicate the planet of every member of these globalists…like a cockroach, they hide and creep back in when the lights go out.

The only way to be sure is to prevent the technology from progressing—more and more I understand the minds of those men thousands of years ago, those men who came up their one male deity, and the laws and stipulations they had to try to enforce; they’d encountered these evil cunts before, they lived through what we’re going through now.

Anyway, it’s tough to find sources truly independent and not infested with some goddamned agenda.

How can you tell? Hmm? How do you tell who’s the real deal?

Well, you can’t. Like anything else, there no absolute certainty. It’s never 100% and so you have to take a chance—I’ll use the unpopular word, faith, here, because that’s what it is.

Well, considering the techniques of the powers that be, and their current level of technology, well, I’m not sure one could be 100% sure the person they’re watching on YouTube is “good” or “bad” or just one of the money-grubbers cleaning up on the fear that permeates all society as the shadow of the Globalist Agenda ramps up.

How do you know?

Ask questions. (And ignore the little yipping trolls everywhere seeking to discredit someone just to jam their own demented version into your ear. Beware the “_______ is a shill” or the “________ is disinfo.” These fucking little twats never back up anything they put forth; they either drop their tiny speck of feces and run away, or they parrot what someone else said. They’re the fuckin shills. They’re the motherufckers creating division. Ignore these tools.)

What is this person saying, and why is this person saying this? What is motivating this person?

What the person is saying must be researched and checked out; if you can check out and confirm 55% of it, odds are the rest is right on too. I’ve done this with Zubaty (checking out maybe 80% of what he said) and Jones (about 75%), and so now I know most of it and don’t have to look up much that someone like Alan Watt is saying.

In fact, I’ve never heard anyone who thinks along the same lines as I do and has said/written so much of the same things as I have…than Zubaty and Watt. The three of us have invented our own wheels—of course those two are many years ahead of me.

I discovered Zubaty in 2007; Jones in 2011, along with Dice; Icke I’d heard about back in 2008, but I never got into that shit. Alan Watt I had not heard about until less than a couple weeks ago, so, 2014.

More questions to ask:

What are their family connections? Have they ever worked for a corporation or government? How much money do they have?—because the more they have, the less you should trust them.

How much of what they say they know do they share? Do we need to buy their book to know “the whole story?” What’s the context with which they share this?

Why, if they are so sincere and desperate to stop this hideous plot, would they not share the knowledge and not profit from it? What it their real agenda—money?—an inevitable Christian State?—or a free and open society in which, above all else, people have the inherent and inalienable right to be left the fuck alone?

Who is their real enemy—these globalists, or those whose religions differ from their own?

Above everything else, trust your own instincts.

Take me for example. If I had “my way,” we’d all be hurled back into the Stone Age. And no rulers, no organized religion, no business. Just trade and barter, and living how you want. People could believe what they wanted, but no organization, which was always meant to convert and consume outsiders; assimilate. We’d be nomadic hunter-gatherers. There would be few rules or laws; I’d like to redevelop the conscience of humanity somehow, to its original state, so these things would be givens again and no formal law would be necessary; but one big rule would be about technology—come to a point and stop, for fuck sakes. I’m not anti-tech; I’m anti-Progress. I’m anti-insanity. Like “God and Mammon,” as Jesus warned, you cannot serve two masters. You can’t serve a natural way of life and Progress at the same time. It’s one or the other. One’s always material; one’s always spiritual.

And you always have a choice, and the time to decide.

When you have a great way of life, getting “better” is not needed…and in fact becomes the opposite of what was intended. Would there be a place for gays? Sure—they could go far away from us and start their tribe somewhere. Do as you like, just stay away from our tribe; I don’t hate you guys and gals, I just want to live among heteros only. Sorry, I guess I’m a dinosaur.

Et cetera. Pure fantasy. It will never happen. But if I had “my way,” that’s what I’d do. Free us all. Regress back to a sane state.

Realistically, without god-like powers and time-traveling ability, if I had my way I’d just live in the mountains somewhere, as naturally as possible. I’d have a mate and children, and I’d have a few neighbours nearby, and we would be nomads who perhaps winter in the same spot. The men and the boys would take shifts being away from the females on month-long hunting trips, so that the genders weren’t constantly squished together. Materialism would have to be out-lawed, I’m afraid, if we could not agree on a philosophical mode of doing things. This would be the only area I will never compromise. Never.

Everything else is basically fine.

And I know this wouldn’t work either. Which is why I’m no longer an idealist—if you’re looking for a blue-print for the perfect utopian society, keep looking. I don’t have it.

Hmm. How about this: first, a planet like Earth would have to be confirmed livable and uninhabited; second, a massive ship would have to be built; third, a few thousand Natives would be darted, tranquilized, put into suspended animation, and the ship launched for that planet; lastly, after the Natives were removed by drones and set into the new nature (regaining consciousness on some sort of time delay), the drones would destroy the ship and then self-destruct into a billion microscopic pieces.

Then the Natives would wake up, without knowledge of the machines, and begin their new life. Meanwhile, every nuclear and biological weapon on Earth would be activated, detonated; all sources of water poisoned, all of the atmosphere obliterated; all complex life destroyed, including all of us.

There. We’re taken care of; the evil we do cannot escape and infect other worlds, and yet the best of our species will survive. And eventually life would return, over a few thousand years, with the planet being left alone to recover, in God’s good time,  as they say.

So, go ahead—attack my agenda, but that would be mine if I ever had means to do it.

Which is impossible, so my only real agenda is just living free and being left alone, either by myself, with someone else, or in a small group.

Anywhat, it’s always good to challenge shit, and not to dismiss something in haste. Give it a chance, look into it, and then decide.

So, I dunno. Take what information you can, find allies (even if, like me and the fellows above, we don’t agree on everything), and for the love of all that’s green and good in the world, think carefully before joining groups.

As far as protest goes, well…

Let’s just say you’re taking your chances. I wouldn’t recommend it—protest is utterly pointless at this stage of the game. No change will be effected—the only potential outcome would be opening the eyes of people who do not know what’s coming and-or do not care.

As for signing petitions, no. For fuck sakes, no! You do know your name gets put on a list, right? You do know you’ll be treated as a “terrorist,” right? You do know that this system is all a fucking facade and nothing will result except the eventual incarceration of you and probably other members of your family?

Just don’t do it. Your kids are going need parents.

Anyway, be careful of groups. They are always the first thing infiltrated by the establishment. If the foxes have invited all you chickens into their little club to fight some common enemy, well, that’s how the devious operate, and if you remain in a suspiciously alert state of mind, you will be able to sniff them out. Keep your senses sharp, folks. It’s going to be tough fighting through all this rubbish, all these distractions; fighting each other; and fighting our own conditioning and mistrust to try to get involved somehow and fight for freedom before getting fucked up before the battle starts…when all the while we should have been fighting the real enemy, the engineers of our demise.

I really hope people start smartening up regarding this “peaceful protest” horseshit; this isn’t Vietnam. They don’t need our support, our votes, our permission; they don’t fucking care; in fact, they don’t need us any more at all. The hippy movement is dead; you’ve been brain-washed to angrily beg for shit, but all that’s all over.

It will not work!

Start stashing weapons and stop using your real names online.

It’s not “Wake up, people!”

(Waking up is not enough anyway. You can be “awake” with one eye shut, yunno?)

It’s Grow Up, People!

Only adults can reach solutions and take action; children merely cry, scream, and beg for help.

Stay healthy, folks.

“It’s become a dangerous country, Sir, when you cannot trust anyone any more. When you cannot tell the truth.”

—Jim Garrison.

    Peace, Love, & Happiness

Part One

The Cult of Peace

Now, before I am accused of being a violent war-monger, let me say first off that I am not “pro-war.” I despise war, but not for the obvious commonplace reasons most people do—I am against materialism, corporate greed or unnatural greed, and the slaughter of men: this is why I am against war. I’m not a soldier, or a warrior, or a pacifist. I believe in self-defense—of my own person, and I believe that anyone can and should defend him-or-her-self—as well as any group of people being able to defend themselves against the hostilities of another group of people. I do not believe in attacking people for no reason. But I am not against violence itself.

(I also strongly believe that women in particular should toughen up (and smarten up) and defend themselves—and that men should stop protecting them; this only perpetuates the poor helpless little girl mentality that most women have. Men should only protect children, not women, who are weak and pathetic because they choose to be, because they gain so much out of being provided for and protected. But this is a different tale…)

“Peace” is a cult. And like all cults, it has its surface, its public face, and it has another hidden face, its true face.

The difference between Peace and Pacifism is that Pacifists will not even defend themselves or people they care about or are supposed to protect. A true Pacifist, when threatened, will allow himself to be harmed or killed rather than fight back; a true Pacifist will, if his family’s lives are threatened, let his family be harmed or killed rather than defend them. If someone points a gun to the child of a true Pacifist and says, “Agree to punch me in the face and I won’t kill your child, but if you do nothing I will shoot” the true Pacifist will allow his child to die.

It’s hard to express the disgust I have for the true Pacifist, the complete and utter lack of masculinity, but I’ll try not to let that interfere here. I just see no “high ideal” at work but rather an obvious manifestation of “survival of the fittest,” for anything in the natural world that cannot or will not defend itself gets attacked, killed, and eaten. Period. Any species that employs any degree of Pacifism in the natural world…well, they will be extinct soon enough. Natural selection?

Absolutely. Pacifism, like homosexuality, is the expression of an overpopulated species sensing (or carrying out an inner directive that) it should no longer reproduce or protect its own life. It is species suicide. Or rather a form of suicide that occurs in the absence of actual predators which exist to (violently) keep the herd’s population from getting out of hand…

Even plants—“peace-loving” plants—defend themselves. Thorns, spines, poisons, acids, et cetera, are developed to deter attack and protect themselves. One might argue that a plant has no will or intent to harm or injure, but what does that really matter? It does harm and injure, it must, else there is no threat, no deterrent, if the attacker does not know that harm and injury will result. The intent is defintely to harm, that is how a deterrent works—the creature remembers the pain, remembers the violence perpetrated against its body, and thinks twice next time.

Besides, plants eat insects, killing them in traps and draining them of life slowly, violently. Plants also directly and indirectly kill other plants. All plants kill in some manner. The competition for sunlight and water results in untold deaths in the plant world, at the “hands” of other plants. This struggle for survival itself is violent.

Every natural creature on the face of this planet wants (a) to reproduce and ensure that its offspring survives, (b) to defend its own life and survive, and (c) to extract from its environment what it needs to continue existing. There are no Pacifists in the wild. No survival technique would work, no species would last if trying to employ some sort of strategy for Pacifism. It’s unnatural. It’s ridiculous.

Back to Peace, then.

The cult of Peace seems to be composed of two principles:

A. an anti-war doctrine
B. an anti-violence doctrine

The Anti-War Doctrine

I mentioned Pacifism above because it often gets confused with having a basic instinct for self-preservation—paradoxically. During the Vietnam War, from 1963 and 1973, well over nine thousand men were arrested and processed through the courts for refusing the draft by the United States Army. Many more left the country to escape this fate—and time spent in a cage for wanting to stay alive rather than be slaughtered like lambs on behalf of rich people.

Could there be more to it? Could it be that they did not want to kill poor Vietnamese farmers, aside from or even instead of, wanting to preserve their own lives?

Sure. Only disturbed individuals and fanatics want to kill people, especially people who pose no threat to them or anyone of their social group.

Having said that, that does not mean these men were automatically Pacifists. Not wanting to murder people and wanting to stay alive does not equal Pacifism, as I stated above. These men, a great percentage of them, would defend themselves if attacked and would defend their families if they were threatened. This is a “live and let live” mindscape, not Pacifism.

But let us ask something right now…

What is war?

In George Orwell’s Nineteen-Eighty-Four, “war” was described in Goldstein’s book as “the destruction of human labour.” And that it is never meant to be “won” but to be continuous. Also, that the war was waged not on any foreign threat but on the citizens of the nation itself.

In a way that’s quite true. Today, war is really big business. Corporations make a killing in war torn regions; jobs for women are available because so many men have died, and women also get majority voting control if the area is conquered by a “democratic” nation. All sorts of cash-generating things happen before, during, and after the war is over…

But it’s also the destruction of humans themselves. In particular, the destruction of a large segment of the male population.

War is state-sanctioned murder; the killing of a group of men by another group of men, both brainwashed to hate each other or simply given no other choice than to fight one another. Doesn’t matter what the rationalizations or justifications are for war, the result is always bloody horror, destruction and the sacrifice of men.

At times, though, it isn’t: thousands of years ago defending one’s village against another attacking village was a necessary conflict—the defense of the village was right and necessary. Does that mean the attackers were wrong?

Well, it depends. Hyenas in Africa will chase away a pride of lions from their rightful kill, stealing it by intimidation and at times by force. Small conflicts like this occur in nature quite often, and it’s impossible to moralize it, to deem it right or wrong: it simply is what it is, with animals doing what they do.

Ants and termites have a war going on that has lasted millions of years.

However, these natural conflicts are about survival, not greed. The only creatures in the wild who are seemingly greedy are the ones that must hoard, plan ahead for a winter of near starvation; squirrels and bears, for example, show increasingly “greedy” behaviour as the winter nears. Bears eat “like pigs” to increase fat reserves that will sustain them as they slumber, nearly hibernating, for the alternative is starvation and death and extinction of the species—their food sources are absent in the cold winter months, thus there is nothing for them to eat. They must be greedy in order to survive.

Squirrels are similar, except that they do not eat everything in sight and build up fat levels. Instead, they hoard food, large stashes of food, for consumption during the months in which their food sources are also absent in their environment. They, too, must be greedy in order to survive.

Obviously, these creatures know when they have enough; sometimes not (bears, for example, have been known to awaken in their dens and begin eating whatever’s around them—dirt, dried moss, even their own fur), but mostly they do know. Species that have survived for so long living in the same manner that they had done for hundreds of centuries or thousands of centuries (or hundreds of thousands of centuries) obviously have a good strategy for survival going, and they got things going well. Nature has all kinds of sublte and blatant checks and balances, so that even a few greedy species do not upset the overall balance.

So, why do humans need to be so greedy? Rather, why do modern humans? Since primitive “savages” took from their environments no more than what was needed, like the rest of the animals, the question becomes: what the fuck is up with civilized humans?

Well, what is up with them is agriculture. When humans adopted farming, they deviated from a strategy that worked well for thousands of centuries. Since I’ve covered farming in other entries, I will only touch upon it here.

The only real point to touch, however, is that modern warfare developed out of two new “needs” of modern humans:

1. defending the farm
2. acquiring resources from neighbouring regions

Later, a third reason (later to be known as “the Police”—the civil military) came about:

3. defending the ruler’s wealth and property of the land owners (the hoarding instinct employed—but instead of seeds and nuts, it’s about riches)

It is for all these reasons that hunters were turned, perverted, into soliders to defend and to attack, to secure the towns (and then cities) from invaders or raiders, and to steal “stuff” from less-armed peoples in regions close by.


Because a farm is essentially a great hole in the world, in essence and in function: it sucks in all surrounding material until there’s nothing left, so it must keep expanding and growing in order to sustain its level of consumption. And when this occurs, civilization encounters other people that are living in the regions which house those much sought after resources. And what happens next is war.

In the Epic of Gilgamesh, written thousands of years before Christ, we find a group of people being demonized (as a monster that the hero of the story kills) so that their cedar trees (current-day Lebanon) can be cut down for a city in Sumeria (in current-day Iraq). The people were butchered and the survivors became slaves, and the invading state became richer.

Some things never change.

This pattern for “war” remains basically unchanged to this very day. All that is required is convincing men to do the fighting, convincing the public to support it (and pay for it), and coming up with the reason, the cause, including the demonization process to justify the murder of fellow human beings and theft of what they possess.

All for greed. But not natural greed, as we have seen. This is farm greed and is about more and nothing besides. This is pathological when nations abuse one another in this way for no good reason except to make some richer (and many, many more poorer). The nations were well-off to begin with. They are not squirrels, hoarding frantically to get through a lean season; they are not bears needing to fatten up for a long slumber in which little will be eaten.

This is an unbalanced system—this is a feminine system with only very tiny masculine components, which have been twisted and perverted.

Yes, I’m going to get into this here, too. Truth does not recognize sacred cows. It tosses them on the grill and feeds the whole tribe…

Women naturally lean towards a sedentary existence—this is no big secret since they have been gatherers for many dozens of millennia before farming, plus they get pregnant. Being pregnant means you have to stop.

When a small mobile, nomadic group needs to stop, things change a little bit: like a city, as stated above, resources get used up faster, and Nature cannot replace them as fast as they are being used up; this results in having to go further to get what you need to keep the tribe going. Women have a natural hoarding tendency due to being weighed down with small children and being pregnant—in such a sedentary and vulnerable position, they need, much more than protection, assurance that they will have enough resources to support the offspring. This is similar to the squirrel gathering seeds and nuts and storing them all in preparation for a lean time ahead. Women are quite good at organizing and planning and scheming precisely because they had to do this, they had to hoard, to prepare for a time when sitting still meant using up a lot of resources. They had no idea when they would get more of it.

(I’m willing to bet that many times this simply wasn’t enough; areas were hunted out, resources were depleted, and the threat of starvation loomed over the tribe. So, some small-scale farming was the answer. Even hunter-gatherers (the women) planted seeds when they could, but what the difference between this and proper farming was that they didn’t settle the area to become fully sedentary—they moved on and let the area recover. They understood Nature very intimately and knew that continuous farming was disastrous for any environment. But, back then, men were respected and when they said it was time to go, the women packed up and they were off.)

Men, on the other hand, being the hunters and not being tied down to the earth in regards to infant care and pregnancy, have always had a different approach to life in general. Men are pack hunters, carnivores in essence, while women are more herds of herbivores. Men have no real need to hoard (it is not part of the true male set of memes), since it is useless weight to carry. Best to travel light. Besides, they knew where to go to get more stuff. There’s no danger in running out of anything as long as you keep moving and know your environment. Back then, nearly everything a tribe needed could be gotten from big game—food, clothing, shelters, weapons and tools, et cetera.

So, what’s the point?

The point is that war came about due to many factors, all of which are relevant today as they were ten thousand years ago. The point is that war is based on an unbalanced, unnatural material greed that stresses hoarding, as if everything will run out tomorrow. The point is that this is a feminine system of infinite expansion in a limited space and war is fucking inevitable.

So, the ultimate point is: why be “against” war while supporting the system that absolutely necessitates it and even depends upon it?

This is my main issue with the “anti-war” sentiment—it is short-sighted to such a point as to be pointlessly absurd. Absurdly pointless. I am not so much against war as I am against the system that creates war.

Thus I am not really “anti-war.” I am anti-materialism, anti-corporatism, anti-greed, and anti-male-sacrifice—and these are the causes for war which are inherent components of any agricultural system, which has never been able to survive without these components.

The Anti-Violence Doctrine

The doctrine of non-violence has to be one of the most fairy-tale-born ideologies in history. It’s basically anti-Nature or anti-natural. But underlying all of its high-sounding, touchy-feeling rhetoric is a cold, controlling scheme to subdue any masculine behaviour and try to reform it into feminine behaviour.

A non-violent doctrine stresses words over action, self-restraint over self-expression, psychology over physicality, manipulation over force. It is shame dependent. It’s essentially supportive of a feminine way of living and oppressive to a masculine way of living. It is therefore a form of misandry, if we must be technical.

It’s also intensely hypocritical.

Now, I’ve made a lot of accusations here, and I will address them all soon enough. But first we must ask one important question…

What is violence?

The World Health Organization says that violence is

“the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation”

This basic premise is anti-Life itself. All forms of life are violent. All of them. Life fucks and kills and eats itself in order to give birth to itself and feed its offspring—and anything that denies this basic truth is simply anti-Life.

To be clear, I am not refering to some stereotypical brute violence—some deranged gorilla of a man waiting in the shadows to pound the living piss out of you and then run off. All for no reason, other than some obvious mental defect. I’m not pro-psychosis. I’m not pro-frustration-and-rage-until-it-explodes either. But I am a supporter of violence in its natural form and for its own natural sake.

“So if someone hits you, you’ll beat them up?”

No, I doubt I would do anything at all. Why would I?

“Vengeance?! Is that not pro-violence?”

I can’t say I’m pro-vengeance either (or the state-sanctioned version: justice). If I’m walking down along a hillside path, and suddenly a rock rolls towards me and hits my leg, what happens?

Pain, firstly. Then anger—but why? Why the anger? It must be a reaction to pain, perhaps propelling the body (and-or mind) of an organism to motivate itself to make sure another incident (which causes pain, which is a signal to the organism of injury) does not happen.

The anger comes out of pain in order to motivate you to prevent more pain—ultimately to prevent injury. Get you alert and ready for anything, to protect yourself. Noting gets you going like anger, nothing else quite motivates you like pain and anger. There’s a damned good reason for it, as I have just stated. (If you doubt this, stick your hand in a wasps’ nest for a few minutes and come back and tell me how unmotivated you were…tell em how you calmly walked away, no rush, no worries, no elevated heart rate, no sweat, no nothing. Then I’ll call you a fucking liar. Because you’ll be one.)

But what are the odds another rock is coming? And, anyway, I’m aware enough to know that this rock that just bruised my leg was simply rolling down a hill, probably for no other reason than gravity.

Why be angry at it? I wouldn’t be, I don’t think. Some people might pick it up and hurl it somewhere, pissed off. And I might have done that before, too. I’m not so enlightened that I have not gotten angry with inanimate objects, even though the rock never “meant” to hurt me…

For that matter, why be angry if it were someone throwing that rock? And where is that anger directed anyway? At the rock, at the pain, or at the person? And why?

“Well, they’re trying to hurt me. I don’t like being hurt, so…it pisses me off.”

To motivate you to stop it from happening again. If it continues, you either try to stop the person, or run away. Either case is something that’s basically good for you: you’ve been challenged, motivated, and forced to adapt to something, all in a very short period of time. You just became a stronger, wiser human being in a few minutes, all because you reacted to someone throwing rocks at you.

“But I have the right to be free from harm!”

No, you don’t. You have “the right” to go away from harm, defend yourself, or adapt. You don’t have any “right” to remain a little kid and have big strong adults defend you from everything. Jesus…

Yet so few people are apt to view this as a good thing. We have our thinking…a wee bit fucked up, I think. We act like children, spoiled children who are obsessed with some false sense of entitlement for safety, comfort, and overall protection. Anything that hurts is “bad.” Anything that feels remotely like pleasure is “good.” Why? What makes us judge these?

How can we ever really grow as people this way? Our thinking now dictates that we always take the easy way out, never challenged, always having choices and rarely forced to adapt to anything—instead we demand like petulant little girls that everything suit our “needs”—read: wants. Do we actually grow up anymore in this yummy-sunny non-violent politically-correct female-friendly world?

Let us, for one moment, take ourselves out of the narrow bubble vision of civilization and look at a bigger picture. As we do so I will address the shocking points below…

1. Words over action.

2. Self-restraint over self-expression

3. Psychology over physicality

4. Manipulation, diplomacy, persuasiveness (passive-agressiveness) over force (aggressiveness) or directness (assertiveness)

5. Shame dependent

6. Controlling male behaviour

Now, I’m not doing these in any order; they’re all related anyways. Also, I must quote Zubaty here—he’s thought and written more about this shit than I have or most of us have:

“Words are not facts or truths. Words are symbols: broken, bumbling, desperate attempts to capsulize fragments of physical or metaphysical reality. Words are the very things which create the dualities, the rip in the fabric of unity among all things, that spiritual teachers constantly warn us against. Krishnamurti said, with good reason, that words are violent. They tear up perception. Deborah Tannen claims men speak 2000 words a day and women speak 7000.”

Words are violent? Now there’s a revolutionary idea! There’s something fucking controversal…

The non-violent or anti-violent doctrine favours girls and women because that is their way of life. Choosing to be weak and helpless, women have snagged themselves many hundreds of generations of male providers and protectors, securing their way of life and making sure they were taken care of and kept safe and comfortable.

Women tell their young boys to “use their words” instead of using their natural physical abilities. Men are not designed to be talkers. Males aren’t. Males are the goddamned Yang, the active force, the masculine energy, the spiritual-nomadic doer.

Most of the “violence” that occurs between male and female mammals is about dominance, with the majority of mammal species having an alpha male. And the alpha male gets to breed. Most of the forms of violence between male mammals is due mainly to mating—fighting for the right to mate with a female. In essence, we fight almost entirely over females. In human society, today, it is only legal to fight if you’re making someone else money (UFC, boxing).

But animals are physical with one another in many ways that would be considered “illegal” if human males did it.

“Says George Gilder:
What is happening in the US today is the steady erosion of male socialization. From the hospital, where the baby is abruptly taken from its mother; to early childhood, where he may be carted off to daycare and placed in the care of a woman; to the home, where the husband is frequently absent or emasculated; to the school, where the boy is managed by female teachers and excelled by girls; possibly to college, where once again his training is scarcely differentiated by sex and he is often bludgeoned by feminist agendas; to a job, that is sexually indistinct; through all these stages the boy’s sexuality is subverted and confused.

The man discovers that society offers him no distinctive roles. Society prohibits, restricts, or feminizes his purely male activities. It is increasingly difficult for him to hunt or fight or otherwise assert himself in a male way. Most jobs reward obedience, regularity and carefulness (female traits) more than physical strength and individual initiative. If man attempts to create rituals and institutions and secret societies like the ones used by similarly beleaguered men in primitive societies he finds them opened, by law, to women. If he fights he is sent to jail. If he is aggressive on the job he may be fired or accused of sexual abuse.”

Watch boys play, or remember back when you were a boy—that is, if you were not one of those who sat inside the house and rarely interacted with other kids (if so, please find a Fight Club somewhere or join some team sport, or even just get into martial arts). Point is, they’re physical, always pushing each other, challenging, competing, bringing out the best in each other, making one another stronger. Testing for weaknesses. Helping each other grow up in order to face the hard life ahead as a man, even if they have no clue what they’re doing or why they’re doing it. It’s instinctual. And violent.

That is what “play” is supposed to be for males in just about any species of mammal—watching human boys play is like watching wolf pups play. They do the same things for the same reasons. This is how masculine creatures grow.

If this world ever “needed” anything, it is the total masculization of all human beings who are not so right now. Including women and girls. Why not? We’ve been feminized for ten millennia and emasculated for the last 40 years, and look where the fuck it’s gotten us? Before that there was a balance. How about pushing “the feminine” to the margins for once? How about total fucking masculization of humanity? (I bet you never even heard that word before…I haven’t.) I don’t know about you, but I’m sick and tired of hearing how us guys need to be “more like women.” We’re barely men as it is—fuck off already. It’s time women got in touch with their “masculine sides”—has any woman in the history of the planet ever done this? who was she? what happened?—and left us alone to be men again…

For a woman to break out of her psychic stew of verbal props must be as frightening as leaping off a bridge into a misty bottomless canyon. It is not part of her experience; she has nothing to hang on to. Women are biologically disposed to expressing life with words. It is not a fault per se, but neither should men feel inferior because we don’t reduce the vastness of our right brains into words that women understand. That’s expecting an elephant to fly. We’re not made for that. We have other strengths.

According to Patricia Cayo Sexton in The Feminized Male: The feminized male, like Kennedy assassins Lee Harvey Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan are “nice guys; quiet, controlled, dutiful sons–whose male impulses are suppressed or misshapen by overexposure to feminine norms.

Though run at the top by men, schools are essentially feminine institutions from nursery through graduate schools.Women set the standard for adult behavior and favor those who are polite and clean.

And what of the male teachers? Undeniably there are many fine men and there need to be more in a country where 85% of all teachers are white women, but, a man who is less than a man can be more damaging to boys than a domineering mother. And the chance of hiring feminized men in schools is fairly high because those eligible and willing are those who made it through a feminized school system in good standing without conflict or failure. Methods of school instruction require little more than passive receiving and repeating. Learning is passive and feminine. The boy sits, listens, reads, writes, repeats and speaks when spoken to. School bores some boys and feminizes the others. They are rewarded for hewing to female norms. Boys who are boys have a troubled time in school.

Most boys have friends and hang out in groups. Gangs of boys are 300 times more common than gangs of girls. Boys clubs seem to know more about how to educate boys than teachers, schools, or child study experts. Boys learn by doing. They solve problems by being “in” them. Boys are united in flocks. It is almost impossible for them to avoid teamwork. Girls seldom get together in groups above four whereas for boys a group of four is almost useless.”

Says Jules Henry in Culture Against Men, in boys’ groups the emphasis is on masculine unity; in girls’ cliques the purpose is to shut out other girls.

School is the place where boys go to be shamed by girls. It’s never happened before in history. Schools set boys to competing with girls in subjects like handwriting where girls have, as we have seen, a biological fine-motor advantage. Girls aren’t required to pass baseball, where boys’ visuo-spatial aptitude gives them the advantage, but boys have to pass handwriting.

On a Sioux Indian reservation, Says Sexton:
“The misconduct condemned by authorities is a badge of honor for the boys.By the time he finishes eighth grade the Sioux Boy has many fine qualities: zest for life, curiosity, pride, physical courage, sensibility to human relationships, experience with the elemental facts of life, and intense group loyalty and integrity — none of which were learned in school. Nor has the school managed to teach any of its values: a narrow and absolute respect for “regulations” and “government property”, routine, discipline, diligence.”

What is the future of these vital human beings? Menial jobs and alcoholism, while women and manholes plot their grief on computer screens. We are making the American man and the Native American man obsolete.

We are killing off the very people who led their families across the land bridge from Asia 12,000 years ago as well as the men who took the ancient Greek ideal of Democracy and made it live again in a New World after 2000 years of dormancy. We have been invaded by the meme which asserts that the more organized society is the better it is. The better for whom?

Women and manholes.

College is the haven of middle class culture and feminized behavior, says Sexton. Boys who survive college are the ones who have been successfully feminized:

“A preschool boy grabs toys, attacks others, ignores teacher requests, wastes his time, asks for unnecessary help, laughs, squeals, jumps around excessively, is more tense at rest, stays awake in naps, breaks toys, rushes into danger, and handles sex organs more than girls. [No doubt the periodic onslaught of male hormonal secretions has something to do with this hyperactivity.] The preschool girl is more likely to avoid play, stay near adults, dawdle at meals, suck her thumb, avoid risk, fear high places, refuse to eat, twist her hair, and be jealous.”

An obvious feminist bias in the classroom is the meme that a physical blow is sinful or uncivilized whereas humiliating people and assaulting them with verbal blows and shame is perfectly OK. Any male would rather be punched than shamed. The punch goes away, the shame doesn’t.

Women turn emotions on and off like tap water. A woman can scream at her husband an hour after dinner and send him off to get drunk, watching TV in his room — then be ready to “give him some sex” a half hour later. These digital emotions belie how shallow the feelings are to begin with, and constitute a daily variety of emotional abuse. Men simply don’t do this to each other. If you taunt the opposing pitcher, he’ll throw you a beanball, not go off and get drunk in his room. We learn that in second grade. Women have ensconced vast cultural and judicial memes to prevent us from attacking them physically, but they think nothing of abusing us verbally and emotionally.

So, that’s a lot to take in. See, I could not have gone through all that stuff in under twenty pages. And I have nothing to add to it.

Next—and finally:

Conversations with women are abominably one-sided. We are supposed to adjust our raw perceptions to fit their mental precepts, their pigeon holes, their TV psychology buzz words. It’s like trying to talk to a gorilla about how to drive a car. If it isn’t yellow and sweet like a banana he doesn’t get the point.

It’s maddening to “talk” to a woman. That’s why a vast territory of intimacy is reserved for silence and sex. Sex is the main form of male intimacy. Why? Because it’s action. It’s something you do. I just got a massage which was a remarkable form of intimacy. Why? Because it was something she did. Men learned long ago that women’s talk about feelings has nothing to do with intimacy and everything to do with control. Our male bodies are tough and our minds don’t work in words.

A firm handshake means a lot, a mushy handshake means you’re dealing with a flake. A slap on the back is even better. It’s a jolt of energy. Tossing verbal darts at each other’s egos is another form of male intimacy. Men who spend too much time around women don’t have much of a knack for any of these intimacies. Ever kid a woman about her hairdo? Ever kid around with a judge about the law? Have you ever seen women slap each other on the back? Have you ever gotten more than a two-fingered, limp-wristed wiggle out of a woman who condescended to shake your hand? Touch, sex, and ego-puncturing are staples of male intimacy.

Have you ever seen a wide receiver get torpedoed ass-over-eyeballs by a linebacker–and then watched him get up and slap the linebacker’s shoulder, saying, “Nice hit”? He respected it. It “touched” him. Men touch each other. Women touch their kids, and, on a good night, their lovers.

Watch children play:
A boy is bending over his dump truck in a sandbox making BRRRBRRR noises, lost in a powerful, satisfying meme of the moment. A little girl comes over and sits on the edge of the box. She smoothes her curls and begins telling him that someday they are going to get married and live together in a big house and have a little baby, and they’ll each have their own car, his so he can get to work, and hers so she can go shopping and pick the baby up from daycare and–

He picks up a handful of sand and throws it at her. She runs off screaming to “teacher” that he hit her for no reason. What has she done to him?

1) She has destroyed the sacredness of the moment by involving him in some futurist plot which instinctively revolts him and threatens his freedom of action.

2) She has yanked him out of the imaginary world of his right brain and thrust him into a left brain verbal construct that leaves him gasping for meaning. She is not considering a single one of his intimate needs in her plot, and his gonads have not yet started raging to the extent that he actually buys into this shit. Finally he needs to shut if off. He throws sand, which no boy makes much of an issue about. She accuses him of wife abuse and he isn’t even five years old yet. Women are always trying to get men to be sensible — that’s their problem.

As time passes she will gain skill and become subtler in her approach, and once he no longer has mommy at hand to affirm him with praise he will be a walking wound in search of a bandage, a weary eagle looking for a safe place to land.

Okay, okay, I’ll end there. Rich Zubaty’s What Men Know That Women Don’t.

It seems I end up quoting that book in every other entry, but there’s so much in it that applies to so many different things.

Anyway, so it seems this exalted “talk culture” we have is really just something else that has another face, an ugly one, that isn’t shown on the text book covers.

We’ve become so entranced by feminine ideals (that is, our minds are so polluted by feminine memes) that we do not touch each other any longer; it’s like we’re afraid to. Well, for good reason: it’s virtually illegal. Watch the movie Demolition Man sometime—there’s our future.

Any activity in which a female touches you is utterly controlled by her. The only impulsive jolt of energy (negative energy?) you get from a woman is an elbow when you’ve said something she didn’t like.

I’m surprised there are no “designated touching areas” yet. Women go to “designated learning areas”—classes, “designated waiting areas”—standing in an organized fashion to wait to do something, “designated freak-out and movement areas for primarily pre-mating rituals”—dance clubs, they send their children to “designated play areas”—playgrounds—and arrange play dates, which are “designated play times with appropriate and pre-approved children.” Want to see your chick? Well, better make a date—a “designated meeting place for good-feeling social interaction and relationship talk.”

Ever get the feeling that women want everything possible organized and controlled, like furniture in a living room? Are the contents of their heads neat and tidy with all the furniture in the right places, all colour-coordinated, too? It certainly seems so.

Ever get a sense that women have no spontaneous impulses or creative energy or imagination whatsoever?

I was lucky; when I was a kid I played wherever the hell I wanted—the woods, ponds, fields, abandoned farms and old deserted houses, just about everywhere but a playground. My friends and I only went to the playground to chill out, to wait for whoever (used it as a meeting place), or to plan some trouble to get into when we were bored. We never actually used any of the silly junk there to “play” with. We were only 9 years old yet we considered it for babies. We had our imaginations and came up with tons of stuff way more interesting and fun than that lame crap. Sometimes we were on the swings, but this was, as I said already, just chillin’ out, and I only recall a handful of times I ever sat on a seat of a swing.

In a way I feel quite spoiled, because my childhood was awesome, when I look at boys today growing up under Mom’s heavy, controlling thumb. Especially stuck in a city, where creative options are extremely limited and so much is controlled, ruled, regulated utterly.

Almost everything—aside from making crank calls, playing video games, drawing wacky pictures, or making our own radio shows on cheap tape recorders—we did was physical. And yes, we got hurt, because some of it was dangerous. So? We learned. We learned to be more careful. (Telling a kid not to touch something hot does not teach the kid anything; he’ll only learn by burning his finger. Then, instead of fearing and not wanting to get in trouble with Mommy or Daddy, he actually respects it. He learns best through experience.)

We never rode our bikes with helmets, and we wiped out a few times but never hit our heads. I think I only grubbed out about five times in my life. Which is amazing considering all the crazy ass shite I did with my bike (s). Still, the places for crazy shite was seldom on pavement—only one painful and bloody wipeout on concrete was enough to teach me to stay on dirt and trails for that.

However, where I grew up there was lots of space, away from city life, before the great pedophile hysteria and paranoia that was to come, where there were no gangs or creeps or drug dealers. There were millions of places to go to get away from moms and adults’ watchful eyes.

It was a great childhood—and yes, I do feel really lucky that we had the freedom to be boys—to be masculine kids. School was exactly the opposite of this freedom.

Back to violence. In later years, we sparred with each other as we got into martial arts, played rough team sports, et cetera, all of which made us tougher and taught us more than we ever learned in school. And there were bullies. I hated bullies at the time, but later it dawned on me that they made me stronger and tougher than anything else did. Wiser, too. You can get pretty creative when avoiding bullies. And you learn a lot about yourself when you just have to fight someone. Now, I never liked fighting, but it taught me a lot about myself—from no other place or person could I have learned it. Even a bully has a purpose in the life of boys.

It was a violent childhood I had, and it was awesome.

7. Hypocritical.

The last point: anti-violence is inherently hypocritical.


Because life is violent.

We all “commit” acts of violence, every day, and yet we seem to recognize only pre-selected types, determined by others for the most part, and make a strong point to condemn them—all in the name of political correctness. Every time we take a shower, we’re violently killing life that’s on our bodies; every time we brush our teeth, the same; every time we eat something, we approved its violent destruction for our own selfish purposes (meaning our survival). Those creatures (that life) we just ate were killed against their will, all of them, even the plants, whose purpose is to survive and not be eaten, which we just did, and to do something so harmful against one’s will is obviously fucking violent.

Plants and trees strangle one another, moss and fungi grow all over them, and creatures use and abuse and lay eggs in and devour these plants and each other. Not one of them asks permission before it does what it does; not one of the natural forms of life on this planet talks nicely to you before they try to eat you, claw you up, lay eggs in your brain, crawl across your skin, steal your blood, eat your food, infest your bed to dine on your flesh during the night. There’s no discussion, no accounting for how you feel about it. You either defend yourself and prepare—and adapt and learn—or you are fucked. Extinct.

This is how life stays strong and continues. Through force. And force is violent. Life is violent. Sex is violent. It’s all violent. A brief, cursory look at Nature and you might think that it’s all lovely and at peace, but you’d be wrong. Everything is trying to kill or get away from everything else, and if not then everything’s trying fuck everything else.

Rains pours down, flooding rivers, bursting lake shores, soaking your head and back and putting you at risk of hyperthermia. It does think to ask if it’s okay with you. It just does it. Violently.

The winds blow and rip trees out of the ground, sending them crashing upon a bird and its clutch of eggs. The wind never apologizes. You better adapt to it or it will fling you off a cliff without remorse. You are forced to adapt to the weather, which is violent.

Lightning zaps down and thunder crashes, hurricanes roll and tear everything asunder, tornadoes churn and rip the earth to hell, lava sprays up and burns things alive and mountain tops explode, meteors become fireballs plummeting to the ground and shatter apart and start firestorms and evaporate portions of the ocean into steam…suns implode and explode, and none of them smile before they annihilate you.

This world, this entire fucking universe, is one big violent place. Chaos meeting order and battling forever, matter and energy constantly struggling with each other. There’s no compromising with a black hole. You get the fuck out of its way.

One looks at a cute bunny rabbit and might think it is a harmless creature.

Nothing could be further from the truth: it is a creature which violently rips living plant matter and eats it alive. It doesn’t ask permission or even give thanks, and makes no apologizes. It devours living things alive, and they perish as they are burned alive in its stomach acid after being shredded by sharp teeth. Those plants it ate are no longer alive: it just killed them.

Herbivores (and this includes the self-imposed “vegetarian or vegan” kind) kill the same as any other creature. They take by force what they want and eat it alive, not giving a shit about the form of life they’re munching into little bits. They need it; too bad for it. Survival comes first. Same as carnivores—but at least human meat eaters are more honest about what they’re doing. And they don’t try to appear saintly for killin this type of life as opposed to that type of life—nor do they guilt trip others for not following their cult. (And I’m not even going to get into the honour of hunting compared to the despicable and cowardly act of enslaving and controlling utterly a form of life in neat little rows for processing, profit, and human consumption…)

Just because the plant doesn’t scream as it’s being torn in half by a huge set of teeth—just because it doesn’t have legs to try to run away—it doesn’t make this killing any less violent. It’s as violent as a lion crushing the neck of an antelope before devouring its flesh. “Sucks to be you: I must eat,” think the herbivores, carnivores, and omnivores, as they kill….

Pretending it is something else is pure hypocrisy.

To think otherwise is rationalization and deep self-delusion. It is horrendous hypocrisy, and all vegetarians and vegans are hypocrites. It’s a little girl’s mind-set. The “prettification” of the vile, bloody, sticky, smelly, gut-splattered reality of the struggles of life. Pretend if you must, remain a child if you can’t handle the real world, stay a zealot of this Peace Cult if you have no strength to be something other, but face the fact for once in your lie-ridden life:

Life is violent. All life is violent. And so are you.