Imagine if you Bonobos could speak like humans, with a near full vocabulary, but retained their bonobo interests and brains although they were trying to pretend to be the rightful rulers of Earth. In short: Planet of the Apes, the original film.
Then imagine these apes pretending to discuss an item of basic philosophy or religion, or metaphysics. And imagine how you might feel and what you might think observing them.
Any attempt at trying to seriously engage with them on the topic would be utterly frustrating, as you might only get a few basic concepts across before their limited ape brain got them back to talking about bananas and how they are intrinsic to the question at hand. Or how rutting with the nearest female bonobo right then and there was. All the while pretending they are sophisticated philosophers even as they rape the nearest female and shortly eat the banana she was trying to keep for herself.
Would you get angry and beat the male and try and educate him? Would you take the banana from him and at least try to prevent him from stealing it from the other ape? Would any of it be worth doing at all?
Or you might poke at them with a stick or a sentence, to see what they might do. You might get more fond of one or two oft mhm who seemed to have some beginning of a kind of understanding, or more human-like behaviour. But in the end, you would realise they are bonobos.
Arrogant as it will sound, this is very often the case I encounter when I come across the average “theologian on the internet”. They say the most absurd and retarded things, with no basis in the factual information they are pretending to base their opinions on. Literally none.
So, I am often finding myself making comment like this one:
And people think “Oh, what a rude bigot!”
Insofar as they think of anything at all past the nearest fetching female ape with a banana in hand, that is.
But you see, for the half-dozen or so of you that might not be apes who actually read and comprehend… the fact is that I didn’t just become a Sedevacantist (that is a proper Catholic) by chance. I wasn’t born into it. I rejected religion as a whole in general and Catholicism as it was preached to me by the then Novus Ordo (but probably validly ordained) priest we had come talk to us in school when I was 7. I have read thousands of books and probably hundreds on various concepts of physics, astronomy, philosophy, various religions, and metaphysical beliefs. I literally read hundreds of research papers on everything from neurology to ESP testing. I practiced various forms of martial arts and the associated exercises of mental and physical control that goes with them. I have read pretty much everything Milton Erikson wrote on hypnosis and practices self hypnosis on myself for over a year and a half before I tried it on anyone else. I have yet to fail at a single session of smoking cessation done on others and have helped people heal even from clinically diagnosed paranoid schizophrenia that meant they were on mandated medication. I have read enough stuff on neuroscience and tested various practices on myself to know most doctors haven’t got a clue of the level of brain-body-mind connection that exists and how much it is interrelated.
So, when I had a unique, Road to Damascus experience, I didn’t just go “Oh, right, I’m Catholic now!”.
Nope, I spent the next 4 years obsessively reading and researching Christianity, which I had already read up on a lot of stuff before already, but now I went back to the very earliest writings on it and started there. And slowly but surely it became obvious that Catholicism was far and away the closest interpretation of reality as it actually is that exists. And I didn’t just assume this. I tested it. I tested it scientifically with prayer and various methods of belief and so on. And my life radically changed path in ways that are literally nothing short of miraculous.
If you take the approach I did to Christianity, which is to assume nothing, to release all and any preconceived ideas you had and just do the work of researching it from the very baseline, it becomes absolutely impossible to assume that Protestant-anything has any validity whatsoever.
That’s because Christianity absolutely has rules. Which, of course, is perfectly logical. If God is good and loving and logical (the word Logos literally is part of Christianity) it makes absolute sense that you have rules and things you can do and things you should not do. And things that you need to do and things you need to NOT do. Simply saying “I believe in God and Christ is King!” just is NOT enough. Nor would it be enough for anyone even remotely reasonable and good. That level of “belief” is literally identical to the one demons have. They know God is real and they know Jesus is King. Which is why they have to flee before him and people who invoke his name with true faith in our Lord.
And if you study Christianity, you realise that Catholicism IS Christianity. It always was. Infallible Popes and everything else. And you realise the lies told about it and the eternal and relentless attacks against it from the very start. And you also begin to see how the politics and byzantine machinations of the East led them to splinter away for purely human and worldly reasons, even though they recanted their errors several times, even four centuries later at the ecumenical council in Florence. What is more, you see the fruits of Catholicism literally throughout the world. And as you continue to study you begin to realise the evil of freemasonry, Satanism and the Judaic principles behind it all. And you begin to appreciate a lot more exactly what Jesus meant in Revelation 3:9. Or how America came about and who made it as it is, and who controls it to this day.
You begin to see the French Revolution and the so-called “Enlightenment” and the Industrial Revolution in a new light and why they had to happen after the staged Rebellion by the fat German sex pervert, aided by the wife-murdering, impotent, English King.
You begin to understand the absolute majestic heroism of the Crusaders and the vicious lies told about them by Protestant historians for centuries.
You begin to grasp the treachery of the Eastern “orthodox” backstabbers and the further lies they tell about the oh so “unjust” fourth Crusade that sacked Constantinople. Which was eminently just in the scheme of things, and rightly and deservedly so, by the logic of any reasonable man.
Then you read the Code of Canon Law of 1917 and you begin to now really understand why what you always thought WAS the Catholic Church in fact is no such thing and hasn’t been since 1958, when the first fake Catholic, a confirmed freemason named Angelo Roncalli, took over the papcy by an completely invalid “election” with many more fremasons already entrenched in the Vatican. After that foul day on the 28th October 1958, there has not been a valid pope since and almost the entirety of the catholic Clergy became apostate and heretical by continuing to promote the absolute and obvious heresy of Vatican II. Absolute and obvious to anyone who has bothered to do what I did and research the history and the ways of Christianity from the very first principles, without any preconceived idea of what I might or “should” find.
So, you then go and investigate both he fake Bergoglian-led home of pederastry, communism, and lies, and you compare it to your investigation of Sedevacatnist priests and bishops and their congregations. And here it becomes obvious that the Novus Ordo clergy are really Novus Orco. Just new orcs, spouting the same gnostic and satanic lies all attackers of christianity always spouted. They are fake and they know they are fake. Perhaps the very newer and younger priests aren’t aware even of Vatican II, but if that is so, whose fault is it? If I study to be an engineer, do I not learn about bending moments? Catholicism is not magic. It is based on reasons and logic. there is a REASON why it was Catholic monks that invented the scientific method and applied it to pretty much everything.
But the Novus Orco “Church” is fake and gay and pederastic, and the fruits it produces are the same, rancid and abusive. It literally has nothing to do with actual Catholicism, which is now, exclusively the purview of Sedevacantists. Nor is it my opinion that makes it so. It is the same, logic, reason, and scientific method that does so. With he added benefit that it is supernaturally protected from error by Jesus’s promise to always be with “us” that is, the church.
All the rules of Catholicism are written down. And why would they not be for any ACTUAL RELIGION BASED IN TRUTH?!?
It’s not write your own rules, nor choose your own adventure book and if you don’t like the outcome you just choose differently until you get the result you want. A real God that Loves us would have a way for us to KNOW the rules and for them to be clear and simple, and available. Even despite EVERY human being being flawed and imperfect. THAT is the amazing, miraculous thing. If you read the Code of Canon Law of 1917, it is absolutely obvious that a society based on these rules would produce amazingly good results. And we have 2,000 years of proof of it too. Literally no other religion on Earth even comes close to having done what Catholicism has done for humanity. CATHOLICISM. Not some vague and corrupted “christianity”.
And protestantism has brought us, in straight line order:
Contraception, which leads to sex before marriage and sex for entertainment. Which in turns leads to…
Divorce. Which was only accepted by Protestant denominations in Christianity and at first still thought of as pretty scandalous, so they went ahead with…
Fault-free divorce. Which of course led to…
Sex as mere sport/entertainment/pleasure with no connection to marriage, which naturally led to…
Killing babies so they don’t get in the way of having sex just for “fun”. And killing them by the most horrific way possible by sucking them out of the womb in pieces, ripping them limb from limb. And by the MILLIONS. Every. Single. Year.
Gay “marriage” which leads to…
Child trafficking. Because that is literally what adoption by homosexuals is, since they are obviously unable to reproduce naturally. Which leads to…
Transgenderism and the associate child abuse and sexual mutilation.
And so on and so forth. You can scream and shout and tell me that the Novus Orco “Catholic” Church is now heading down the same path led by its “pope” Bergoglio, and I of course agree with you. The Novus Orco is a creation of Protestants and Jews.
So… perhaps now you understand why when some brainwashed protestants, with all the best of intentions, I am sure, gets all shouty about how the Catholic Church is not the Real, One, True, Holy and Apostolic Church, I hover between wanting to bitchslap them le Valette style, until they recant —and I’d probably be happy to do the same 4 months in jail for it if it means every other cretin becomes aware of the reality of behaving like such a retarded ape— or laughing in their face and scrubbing them entirely from my life forever, as I would any annoying and irrelevant insect.
In fact, it is my rather miserly level of Christian charity that keeps me engaged from time to time with the rutting bonobos and their cursed bananas. Because I know, in such efforts, the few who are capable, who can read, who are not impossibly lazy and illiterate, may and do pick up the thread and do the research, and in time, they may get there. And getting there is the important part.
Whether they do so through my books or not is not important, though it does save a lot of time, since I have put a lot of references for people to verify for themselves within them.
I have been told by several people who also happen to admit that on investigation, they really cannot falsify or deny my logic and hence they too should really be Sedevacantists, that one of the things that prevents them from doing so at times is the WAY I present this information. With sarcasm, humiliating examples of people’s ignorance, and ridicule of their sophistry and ruthless exposition of their lies. You can go look at the videos I did on Jay Dyer if you want, to see their point.
But I feel the only point they have is that perhaps, my behaviours in that respect might earn me a little more time in purgatory (assuming I make it there). Firstly, Jesus himself was not averse to insulting, ridiculing and generally making the Pharisees and the idiots look like liars and morons, so, you know, I feel I’m on fairly solid ground here.
But more importantly, the number of people who have written to thank me and have gone on to get baptised, confirmed, married and proceeded to have their friends and family become interested and closer to doing so themselves outnumbers the complainers of my lack of “decorum” by at leasttwo orders of magnitude. That’s times 100 for those of you who are not sure what an order of magnitude is (x 10).
So… if you’re holding your breath for me to become a softer, gentler, kinder Kurgan with the fake Pagans, the sophists, the morons, the Protestants, the “Orthodox”, the liars and especially the fake, Satanic Clergy of the Novus Orco, well… good luck with that.
The largest battleground for human happiness and misery is in the field of romantic relationship between a man and woman.
UPDATE: you can now read how to make the best of the current situation in my book Caveman Theory. Available ONLY at my E-Store as it is too politically incorrect for Amazon. But read the post below to get a general sense of things first. As the book in large part is written to help you navigate the current situation and achieve success in the kind of relationship you want to have.
If you just listen to the first 7 minutes of this podcast on it, the lady in it identifies really quite well the basic issues facing young people today and what I found particularly useful is that she indicates, as does the guy doing the podcast, the specific fact that it is the general zeitgeist of the world to present things as if love itself is not part of the equation any longer. They refer to recent movies, Barbie and apparently Snow White and how the main woke actress in Snow White, Rachel Ziegler, says:
“She’s not going to be saved by the Prince, she’s not going to be dreaming about true love, she’s dreaming about becoming the leader she knows she can be. The Prince in the original movie stalked her.”
Imagine, someone from the hypokrite class thinking this way about the classic story of Snow White. The word hypokrite of course, was the original term for actors in Ancient Greece. You can see why it’s relevant to study the classic, and etymology, yes? Actors in classical times were essentially thought of as basically prostitutes. And while the glorification of whores is also nothing new (The temple prostitutes used to get paid to have sex with any man that donated to the temple and were held in high esteem by mostly Babylonian/Sumerian people, while the Greek Herodotus, in his Histories referred to the practice of forced prostitition at least once as “foul”.
The foulest Babylonian custom is that which compels every woman of the land to sit in the temple of Aphrodite and have intercourse with some stranger at least once in her life.
As pretty much the entire #metoo movement proved, thinking most actors and actresses are essentially highly paid prostitutes is really about the size of it. And in fact, having met a few actresses and also a few prostitutes in my life, generally, a highly paid whore who makes no pretence of being anything other than what she is, in my experience of conversing with such people, are far more honest and interesting than those who fancy themselves as artists that should be venerated. And if you doubt, me look up the term “yachting” when used in the context of famous actresses, fashion models and so on. Having worked as close protection for some wealthy people from all around the world, I can tell you that some world-recognised names of women that literally everyone knows, have, in fact, been bought an paid for to have sex with, like any common prostitute. It just cost more. And while I have no personal experience in the matter, if I had to bet on it I would bet that the more expensive famous whores probably performed worse than the cheaper unknown ones.
But I digress. The point is that the famous people a lot of young people look up to are essentially spouting the narrative they are paid to vomit out of the orifices they use to make their money.
And that narrative, as the man and woman in the podcast state, is that love makes you weak, is some kind of outdated, or outmoded way of being, removes choice and fun from your life, causes unnecessary suffering and is no good at all. And it is a narrative being pushed, as the lady correctly identifies, primarily by people who are undesirable to the opposite sex.
I have been saying for years that I have yet to meet a beautiful woman that is reasonably normal (i.e. hasn’t suffered some genuinely dramatically traumatising event) that is in any way a feminist. Pretty women pretty much can get a LOT of what they want primarily by playing to their straights and those are the feminine qualities. And if they are really smart, they will use those to snatch a quality man who has masculine qualities.
The blue-haired manatees that scream feminism, and the incel-gargoyles that become MGTOW types, along with a few others that are internally as repulsive as the aforementioned generally are externally, are essentially deeply miserable human wreckage and as they say, misery loves company, so they try to drag everyone else down to their level of despair.
The narrative is so pervasive and so prevalent in literally every aspect of life that you don’t even realise in how many multitudes of ways it is pushed on you and at you throughout every single day. If you read my last blog post before this one, perhaps, you might begin to become more aware of how insidiously the lies about reality and ESPECIALLY about relations between men and women are inculcated in you by subterfuge, stealth, unstated assumptions (one of the biggest culprits and methods), and so on.
Reality all around you is narrated and presented in a twisted manner in order to make you think that the current narrative of feminism-über-alles and being a strongly independent woman and an asexual automaton male, are the pinnacle one should strive for. That is, when they are not pushing the idea you should sexually mutilate yourself in order to become a tragic parody of the opposite sex.
So you bet, there are a lot of unhappy young men and women, unfulfilled in any relationship they attempt to get into and so on. Even if one of them has actually seen through most of the fog, finding a partner that has too, or that at least is amenable to being shown the way through the lies is difficult. It requires patience, skill, intelligence, and genuine research that does not collapse into embittered despair.
I have mentioned these type of things over the years a lot, both on this blog and on my Youtube channel, so search through it and see the videos on the topic too, and pluck what you can from it, but in just a few key sentences, as a starting point, please try to keep this in mind:
Male and female brains are physically and structurally different. That has an effect.
Male and female hormones and the female cycle of hormones are wildly different and this affects everything.
Women are far more swayed by their emotions and hormones than men are, generally speaking, and as a result less likely to be objective overall. Their biology demands a certain level of “selfishness” that has served humanity well in the survival of the species. Just like male biology has a tendency to be more logical and objective and (at least until fairly recently) be more prone to self-sacrifice for the sake of his family, has also served the survival of the species well.
Yes technology has made our survival far more likely than it used to, but our biology remains essentially the same and the answer is not to try and modify our biology to suit the machines, but rather to alter the machines to suit our biology. This last point has literally not been understood by any one of the myriad “relationship” experts you see all over the internet and seminars and books. Which should tell you how useful a lot of their other advice is (which they generally demand money for). Well, you read it here first. For free.
Above all, a lifelong marriage for the purpose of raising multiple children in a loving, strong, family, with emphasis on overcoming hardship and sticking by your blood whenever you can, with the ethics that Catholicism has, —that is, the original real Catholicism (sedevacantism now), which includes Just War and the Death Penalty, as well as the DUTY to defend innocents, yes even with violence, yes even with pre-emptive violence— produces the genuinely happiest life you can possibly imagine.
I stumbled into it by never giving up my fight against perceived nonsense from childhood until my late 30s. the Boomer zeitgeist did a lot of damage to my generation (and your too), but I sincerely hope you throw off the mental shackles I got rid of mostly by brutish (yet correct) animal instinct (at least at first) by conscious understanding and reasoned contemplation of reality and truth.
March on brothers and sisters; and win.
UPDATE:
Lest you think I am unkind… let me be clear, that even though you may be a gargoyle, it’s up to you what TYPE of Gargoyle you make yourself into.
The Loser, Omega, Poor-me, Gargoyle-Incel:
The “Red-Pilled” All-women-are-bitches, MGTOW Incel-Gargoyle:
Or… The…
I’m a Gargoyle! And I kick all the ass! NON-Incel Gargoyle:
PS: Please ignore the demonic undertones, Gargoyles are traditionally representative of demonic beings, while the unfortunates that look like them are not necessarily evil any more than anyone else is. I hope the images illustrate the point I am trying to make in a sufficiently obvious manner. You can’t help some of the cards you are dealt. But you have absolute authority in how you play them.
Some years back I did a video on the Lies You Are Told in general History, and more recently on Kurgan TV I did a series (which I will pick up again soon, on the more specific lies of history starting with pre-history really and eventually working my way to the present day (all in due course).
And of course, if you read this blog, you are aware that for some 30 plus years, all the supposed “crazy” theories I held have, over time, been proven to be absolutely factually correct. It’s not because I am some oracle, it’s just I pay attention to things, can do basic math and logic and have had to deal with the rabid flying monkeys some people refer to as Journalists and the Mass Media in general.
By now, anyone that trusts a Mass Media Outlet can be considered to essentially be a full-blown Zombie.
You always need to interpret newspapers, TV news, and so on as being the lowest form of crack-whore and deceiver, who probably worships Satan in their spare time. And I apologise in advance to crack-whores for the comparison.
As long as you do that, you MIGHT be able to understand the truth behind their obfuscations, and can then confirm it by researching a topic on your own.
But the problem has been so pervasive and for so long, that people are essentially anaesthetised into believing “official sounding” or “authoritative sounding” or “famous person speaking” or “super rich person speaking” as being “true”.
And not only is there no correlation whatsoever between truth and those categories of people, but if there were to be a correlation, you may find it is negative.
Steven is clearly an intelligent guy and he made a lot of money. I also found out recently he comes from Botswana, which made want to say ‘Hey! Give me five, man!” Since I grew up there. He is a lot younger than I am and a millionaire, so despite the originally smaller group of people that used to live there, I don’t believe our paths or even our parent’s paths ever crossed while I was there. But it’s always nice to know that someone that comes from or spent some time in the same little-known area as you, did well for himself. It genuinely makes me happy for him, and even makes me a little “proud” as silly as that sounds given I had nothing to do with his success and that I don’t know him at all; but it’s still a fairly common human response.
His podcasts are genuinely interesting in-depth interviews with pretty extraordinary people, and definitely entertaining. Steven himself appears to be a very decent person too and although I never met the guy, it is obvious he is extremely well-read and at least a couple or three standard deviations north of normal IQ.
That all said, his guests, which cover a very wide range but are usually experts or wealthy men and women in their field, are, as I said, genuinely interesting, but even so, there is an overarching veneer of respectability that is to a certain extent rooted in falsity.
And I absolutely do not mean to imply with this that Steven is in any way trying to do anything other than get to the real truth of very interesting topics. I genuinely believe he really is interested, and he really is trying to get to the bedrock of truth of whatever he gets interested in. I realise his podcast to a certain extent is also a “performance” and like all of us he has a “mask” to some degree or other, but I have spent enough time watching a half-dozen or so of his podcasts over the last few months that I am confident in saying that if I had to judge him, with a gun to my head, I would say he is likely:
Honest
Principled
Truth Seeking
Interested in People and their well-being
Self-motivated (very much so)
Confident in practice, yet has a core deep down that may still wobble internally
Very intelligent
If I were really pushed I might also say that if absolutely forced to, I would likely bet that he is no stranger to the female of the species, and probably indulged quite a bit before (I think?) apparently settling down with one girlfriend.
I would guess he is mostly (and honestly) agnostic religiously speaking (as was I for most of my life) though I am unaware of his position at all on the matter and if he has said what it is, I have no idea.
So, all in all, my point is that I absolutely and genuinely expect that Steven tries to put out information that is truthful, practical and useful for as many people as possible. I have nowhere near his reach, wealth or effectiveness, and our styles of presentation are probably almost diametrically opposite, and he is without any shadow of a doubt far, far, far more polite and, shall we say: “professionally spoken” than I am, but at core, I recognise the intent is very similar. If we figure out something important or that might be good for other people, we genuinely want to spread it, aside from any money or commercial considerations. Which yes, we may indulge in to some extent or other, but really is not the primary motivator at all. We all have to eat and he does his podcasts for free, and if I had his money, I might even produce my books for free too.
This long intro, is not to suck up to Steven, I am fairly sure he will never have any interest in interviewing me, if he ever even came across me for my ideas. I present it because I want to be absolutely clear in how you are personally being deceived, and how people like Steven have (in my opinion) genuinely ZERO interest in trying to intentionally deceive you, and yet, the zeitgeist of the world is such that deception is baked into the very fabric of almost any information you consume.
Allow me now to use Steven and his (most excellent) podcasts to point out what I mean.
Let’s start with Scott Galloway and the podcast I saw in full of him, here:
Now, before you get all concerned, please don’t worry about me, my sex life is great, as the three children we have had in the last 4 years should prove. But I know a LOT of younger men are having a bad time of it, which is why I get emails and I try to comment on the topic when I can. And why perhaps I have some success at this, since at least 3 young couples in their early to mid 20s that came across my ideas over the last couple of years are now happily married and working towards their first babies. So I thought I’d listen to what some other supposed expert in the field had to say.
And if you listen to the podcast, Scott makes quite a lot of valid points, then at some point (about halfway or so on) he kind of goes completely off the rails by presenting and baking in his viewpoints of politics. He literally says Putin is a murderer, Trump is a criminal and essentially saying parents that decide to give hormone treatments to their children for the eventual sexual mutilation that is known as “transgenderism” are you know… normal, instead of the child-abusing freaks they are. He repeats some of these absolutely insane points along with the idea that Ukraine is winning the war against Russia. I mean, anyone that really thinks Russia is on the ropes and thinks this as of 1 month ago, is clearly either doing a lot of heavy drugs, or is completely delusional.
Once you become aware of this and you rewind and listen to his “good points” you then realise that they too are somewhat tainted. Notice how he says that masculinity needs an update basically. Because you know, things that literally worked and created civilisation for thousands of years are somehow now suddenly “bad” because of technology and our supposedly superior brains of the modern age. That modernism is great theme is one we shall return to again, both in this post as well as in general.
I have already described how the mechanisation of humanity as a direct result of protestantism and the much vaunted “protestant work ethic” which came about due to the industrial revolution is really a Satanic and dehumanising principle. Something Steven instinctually (if not intellectually yet I believe) grasps, since if I remember well, I heard mention of the fact that he has a rule of no meetings before 11 am. Meaning he has already shaped his work as he wishes more or less instead of necessarily as is demanded by “the world”.
So let me make a stark comparison of two hypothetical worlds, and you tell me, if you are a man, which world you’d prefer to live in.
Scott world: You can “transition” your child to a “different” sex by mutilating him/her and giving him/her physical irreversible operations to do so perfectly legally and the zeitgeist accepts this as normal. One parent only can force this on their children and the other parent cannot prevent it. LGBT Pride Parades are a normal part of life and naked, sexually suggestive, adults can take part in these in front of small children without any repercussion. LGBT agenda in schools is considered part of normal education, and transexuals that may be convicted pedophile in drag can always read to small children in libraries, along with possible displays of hardly covered genitals. You are not allowed to respond to ANY verbal statements with ANY physical violence, no matter what. You are not allowed to respond with deadly force even to an attacker, no matter the circumstances, without undergoing at minimum a very lengthy and expensive trial with economic, social and possibly physical (incarceration) effects even in the best of cases. Weapons are limited to ownership or use only by police/military, and thus the use of force is mandated only for specific government employees. Any physical altercation of any nature whatsoever results in automatic assault charges for at least one and possibly both parties. Martial arts are heavily regulated and practitioners are considered as “dangerous”, so if they are EVER in any physical altercation, they are considered as unfairly “armed”. Physical restraint of even a violent home intruder is considered kidnapping and not permitted.
NOTE: EVERY aspect of Scott World is currently a reality in at least some countries around the world. All the LGBT Stuff in most of the Anglo-Saxon world and the gun stuff in the Anglo-Saxon world outside of the USA for the most part.
Kurgan World: Any form of “transitioning” is outlawed, regardless of age. Psychological counselling is offered for people with sexual dysphoria. Homosexuality is not permitted to be taught in any fashion as being “normal” or natural, since it obviously is not. And “pride” parades are not permitted by law, nor is proselytising of homosexuality. Homosexuality itself is not specifically outlawed, nor punished by law, however any public displays of it would fall under an obscenity law (say a fine or so depending on the severity of the display). Any homosexuality performed on anyone under the age of at least 18 (and preferably 21) would also be considered a crime, similar to having sex with an underage person. Any doctor that performed un-needed surgery on people who wish to be amputees, would be incarcerated for intentional grievous bodily harm and mutilation of another, and obviously stripped of their medical licence. Men who chose to settle their differences by unarmed combat are not subject to any prosecution as long as both agree to the fight in front of witnesses and do so away from public areas. In the event that a physical attack on a man is launched in public, for whatever reason, he has the absolute right to defend himself with force. The force should generally be appropriate to the attack, but in any legal disputes on the matter, the erring should be on the side of the victim. So, if a 6’3″ 250 lbs bodybuilder violently attacks and sustains that attack on a 5′ 120 lbs guy, and that little guy draws a .45 colt and places three rounds in the bodybuilder’s head, eh… good shooting Tex, is about all he’d get from the cops. If the last two rounds where after the bodybuilder had already hit the floor and was lying in a pool of his own blood, yeah… maybe Tex loses his gun licence and gets some community service. Anyone braking into your home, armed or not, who gets shot dead or shot wounded and/or crippled is not going to get to sue anyone for anything. Cops do NOT get special treatment for unlawful behaviour, and any citizen can make a proper citizen’s arrest just like any cop, as long as he is following the correct procedure. Concealed weapon carrying is permitted to anyone who applies for it formally and has not been charged previously with some firearm or general violent crime offence. Drink driving results in immediate loss of licence, and have to do community service along with a doctor’s note certifying the man has attended AA like meetings for an uninterrupted 6 months, before he is allowed behind a wheel again, with a licence with a single point on it from then on. Meaning any infraction results in loss of licence and similar situation for a year before he gets it back. Third strike and he’s out of driving for good. Public indecency, obscenity, or extreme vulgarity is punishable by law, as is public blasphemy of the national religion. Persons in position of authority or public officials (government employees) who perform criminal acts are punished more severely (generally double the sentence of a normal citizen at a minimum). The death penalty exists and is swift and efficient for certain crimes (child rape or murder, murder without any mitigating factors, imprisonment with aggravating circumstances [e.g. imprisonment for the purposes of rape, torture, sexual trafficking and so on]). Generally the breaking of agreed upon contracts incurs quite stiff penalties, and the principles of Roman Law apply (Principles guide, specific cases are judged on an individual basis based on their specifics). The murder of a confirmed rapist of a child, by literally anyone, but especially anyone connected to the child by friendship or family relationship, is not considered a crime in itself, but if done in public would fall under the obscenity laws and one may face punishment for it. Unprovoked assaults of anyone, regardless of sexual orientation, sex, religion or ethnicity, is subject to stiff penalties and these are enforced.
Those are your choices. Let’s ay you can only pick one of them and there is nothing in between. I genuinely am not aware of anyone actually male that would pick Scott World. Are you?
You see, there is literally NOTHING WRONG with men resolving their differences with some sensible but brutish violence. In fact, it would really resolve a lot of the world’s problems if that was returned to. It is only the Scotts of this world that disagree with it. And once I heard his take on the whole “transgender” child mutilation thing, I became instantly aware that Scott must have probably been a member of a tribe that seems to think it’s ok to foster that kind of thing on Europeans, although they tend to reject it in their own societies. So I decided to google him. And wouldn’t you know it…
Early life and education
Galloway grew up in Los Angeles, California. His father was a Scottish immigrant to the United States who worked as a sales executive. His mother, a Jewish emigrant from London, England, worked as a secretary.
Yup, just as expected. Yet another Cohen-cidence. That now confirmed fact wasn’t even remotely in the back of my mind while I listened to the podcast with Scott, until I noticed a pattern that is now fairly obvious not just to me, but to most people that are paying attention now, and that is: whom, exactly, pushes which type of narrative.
And the guy is planning to write a book on Masculinity. Yeah. Good luck with that. You might as well read a book on mental health and not being an egomaniacal globalist written by Jordan Peterson. Oh… Wait…
But if you were to just gloss over his trangendersim nonsense, or his absolutely deluded take on Ukraine, or Trump for that matter, given that Trump, like him or hate him has had investigation after investigation pushed on him, and came out squeaky clean every time. While Biden, literally can’t complete a full sentence, is incontinent, has all the behaviour of a long-standing pedophile, has molested children on camera under the guise of… what? Sniffing them? As if THAT was acceptable? Is a known taker of monies from foreign interests he was absolutely not allowed to take money from, is a certified blackmailer, and has covered up for his drug addicted, pedophile son, in every way possible. And yes, Hunter Biden is a pedophile, the images and video from his laptop, which are now confirmed beyond any doubt as being real, even by the fully partisan FBI on his side, demonstrate this without any possibility of doubt. But Trump is the criminal. And Putin a murderer. According to Scott. Right.
Ok, then, that’s sort of an extreme example though right? Not really. Steven does not challenge Scott on any of these absurd points. To be fair he doesn’t agree with them either, but you can see the wisdom of the Romans now surely, yes?
Qui Tacet Consentit – He who remains silent consents.
And that, like it or not, is really the truth of the matter. I have no idea if Steven agrees with Scott on transgenderism, Trump and Putin. I suspect probably and mostly not. But under the veneer of wanting to be civilised, Steven remains silent. Then again, Steven is far more British than I am and I am far more African savage than he is, despite initial appearances. I would have laughed in Scott’s face and forced him to prove his ridiculous assertions with any facts he thought he had, just so as to expose him to global ridicule, not just my own.
My interview skills would be kinda more like this:
Do I mean to say that Steven is allowing lies to propagate if he doesn’t agree with my take on things? No. I am saying that the lies are so enmeshed in the current zeitgeist you need to be consciously awake to see them, because we have started to accept complete nonsense as if it had any basis in reality. Like math being racist. Men being able to get pregnant and “trans women” being real women. Or 2+2 being anything other than 4.
Let’s take now a completely different podcast, in case you are about to start accusing me of being an indefatigable noticer. Let me pre-empt you: I am. I notice. I pretty much always notice, sooner or later.
Let us look now at Bryan Johnson
Bryan is obsessed with immortality. It’s sort of a clikbaity reductionist sentence, but as far as normal humans go, it’s a fair assessment. The man has gone to absolutely incredible lengths to try and figure out how to reverse and slow down the ageing process. From a scientific standpoint it is absolutely fascinating, and he puts all the information out there for free for everyone. Even though the man is a self-made multi-millionaire, it is absolutely clear he is not primarily motivated by money.
In fact, by his own admission, he struggles to get his main point across, which —if I understood him at all correctly— is primarily that our future could and would be so far removed from what we think we know now, that we might as well be Homo Erectus a million years ago, trying to conceive of us and our technology today.
Bryan has done some incredible studies on the human body and brain and created a helmet that gives you instant brain feedback. I sure would LOVE to have one of those, and he has figured out that one of the very best things you can do for your health is eat a tablespoonful of extra virgin olive oil at every meal. I kinda knew proper olive oil was good for you to begin with, but his scientific and obsessive approach allowed him to realise it really is one of the very best things you can do for your body.
And as it happens, my own olive oil, cold-pressed, unfiltered, and without any kind of screwing around with it, literally happens to have been voted the best in the world bar none, for two years in a row.
And I could relate absolutely when he was saying that the stuff you buy in shops is not really proper extra virgin olive oil. He’s right. But he only sells the good stuff. And mine definitely qualifies. So, hey Bryan, if I can be your oil guy in Italy, please get in touch.
Does Bryan lie? Is he deluded? No, I don’t think so at all. I think Bryan is not neurotypical, but then, neither am I. He is absolutely driven and I may be wrong, but I don’t even get the sense that he is necessarily terrified of dying. He might be, I can’t say for sure, but I sense for him it might be more of an intellectual challenge. His main take seems to be: Look, no one knows a damned thing. We are monkeys scratching in the sand. So I want to figure out how it actually works. In a very undeniable way the man is a genius.
And like perhaps all geniuses, he might go down a road that really benefits mankind, or that creates unmitigated disaster, no one really knows. I don’t believe Bryan is looking to create a bad outcome for anyone, quite the opposite. I really think he is at heart, a very honest, curious, intense person of probably impeccable integrity. We neuro-a-typical freaks tend to be too interested in our own little projects we obsess over to have much room left over in our ever-spinning brains for deception. And in that sense, I recognise Bryan as a fellow freak. I don’t have his money, perhaps not even his drive, though I think I do, it’s just that mine was in different and perhaps multiple directions, and I achieved different things. He made millions, I learned to disarm people with loaded guns and probably handle myself very well in any physical confrontation throughout most of my life, and hopefully still some way into the future too.
To be perfectly honest, Bryan’s end goal of increasing longevity is only somewhat interesting to me. I like the idea of being physically more able than I have been lately, given my back injury, niggling knee injury and overall decline in health after catching Covid and then two pneumonias. He does freaky things like inject himself with things I am not certain might not impact his genetics permanently, but I would bet money he didn’t get Vaxxed either, just like me. And I would be shocked if I was wrong about that. I like the idea of being able to be fit and healthy right up to the day I drop dead, but I am not particularly against dropping dead. The biggest issue I have with death is that I started to make children late in life and I am curious! I want to know what happens with them and their children and their grandchildren. But if I am right about what happens at death, if there is any way to be, and I think there would be, some part of me will likely be quite aware of it, for quite some time anyway. Aside missing out on more time with people I love, death has never held any fear over me. And I faced it several times in situations I was sure would be the end at the time and I never flinched, so I’m fairly sure I’ll be ok on the day.
Philosophically I also think that death is probably necessary, and ultimately a good thing, in the normal affairs of a good life well-lived. Of course it feels absolutely tragic and unfair and evil when it happens in unexpected ways to people who we are sure had a lot more to offer or had such horrible ends. But my point is not that Bryan is in any way a bad guy or a liar, I am as reasonably sure as a person can be from watching a couple of hours of one podcast of a person that Bryan is probably a very honest and earnest person. It’s just that his whole fascination/obsession, while absolutely valid, as is any topic of genuine scientific endeavour that is not actively harming anyone else (Bryan experiments all his stuff on himself first and one volunteer so far I believe), and while I can be fascinated by the science and details of it, personally, the search for immortality, or even just life extension by a hundred years, is not something that keeps me particularly interested in se.
Furthermore, the people who ARE interested in it are possibly the very worst elements of humanity. Can you imagine another century under the incessant egomania of the Boomer generation? The recurring politicians passing the baton amongst each other for generation after generation, like the Italian politicians did from the close of WWII until their death from old age? It’s enough to send a shiver down your spine and pray for nuclear war or rogue asteroids.
My point here is that the ever-grasping for a longer life at all costs is a mistake. You are FAR better served by reaching for a GOOD life, well-lived. And please understand the Paradox: I believe Bryan IS living his best life well-lived. He is doing what he wants to do and doing it with great intent and passion. As I said, I am not even sure that immortality is really his core goals. I mean, sure it kind of “has to be” because of the topic, but I think the intellectual curiosity is probably the driver. It would be like me trying to create antigravity machines, yeah, yeah, ok, I care about all the sexy physics, free energy, and so on of antigravity technology and aether science, but in reality, it absolutely would not be the core driver. The core driver for me would be to get into such a spaceship and wormhole my way across the Galaxy to go and see all the alien planets and weird creatures and strange civilisations and amazing sights that the Universe has to offer. And I think in a way Bryan’s search for immortality is similar; sure, ok, it would be great to live forever for him (maybe) but really I think he would perhaps be really more stoked to have figured out what our future a million years from now looks like, I think.
And people who don’t get that would be hung up on the longevity thing, and be chasing that with all the anxiety and additional fear of death and therefore wrong focus on the present life they have, which would have long-term, and probably quite drastic and overwhelmingly negative, impacts on their day-to-day existence.
Conclusion
Yes there are the absolutely obvious lies, like, bombing children in Gaza is good and fair and helps the whole West. Or people of a foreign ethnicity, culture, language and religion, being offloaded by the hundreds of thousands and millions into countries that are not their own is somehow good for the natives of those countries. Or equality among human beings being based in physical reality instead of a spiritual intangible relating to souls.
Then there are the subtler lies, like Hitler having been the absolute, worst, worst, most evil man in the entire history of the world. When compared to say Stalin. Or Ted Bundy. Or a bunch of others. Or maybe that hey, people being gay hurts no one and we should stay out of people’s bedrooms. Sure, nice idea in theory. And now we have tranny story hour at the library for toddlers, by convicted pedophiles. Oh and don’t you DARE say there is a straight link between the two things, you dirty bigot.
And then there are the really subtle lies that you are not even aware you believe in and are ruining your life, like the idea that female and male brains are the same or operate the same or even can operate the same (bar physical oddities and mutations that are in no way the norm).
These lies affect your life negatively. And it really is important you begin to consciously pay attention and evaluate things properly. Bryan is kind of right in saying we pretty much know nothing about anything and we are little better than monkeys scratching in the dark. He’s not really wrong about that. However, we CAN know something. And it is our God-given duty (and gift) to be able and willing to try to do so.
And as a final point —that I hope you look into yourself, and that no doubt sounds insane to people like Bryan and Steven— the best approximation for how reality really works, and what is absolutely best for humanity, I advise you to look into and in due time, and after proper consideration, embrace and join, the real Catholic Church.
Which I have to stress every time is the sedevacantist one.
Sedevacantists are the only actual Catholics practicing actual Catholicism as it really was and remains to this day. The Bergoglian pedophile hive of frauds in the Vatican and all those who subscribe to the Novus Ordo heresies are absolutely not a reflection of anything other than Satanic intent to hide, obfuscate and destroy the one institution and organisation that has most elevated humankind more than any other religion or ideology, bar none.
I think you can see why there is no absolutely no fear, or chance whatsoever, that I will ever be invited to appear on Steven’s podcast. I’d probably get his entire channel banned within the first ten minutes and then catalyse an absolute avalanche of cancel culture on every business he is in any way involved with.
And I’d probably make it worse by playing the African card for fun; saying they just want to ban me because I am too light a shade of African, and Steven’s partly white privilege is being used as the excuse to silence my noticing.
Hi Steven. It’s ok, if you ever read this, and want to get in touch, I promise I won’t tell. Nor would you be the first famous person whose association with me I never mention. I am motivated by curiosity and truth you see, not fame or status (other than one very specific type of internally, self-evaluated status, unique to me, that is of pretty much no consequence to anyone else).
To the rest of you, I hope that this post if of some use to at least a few of you and hopefully a lot of you, to help you see the lies, the unintentional ones especially, baked into our very lives, as well, of course, as the more readily perceivable ones.
At least, that is how I would have to describe Vox’s enthusiastic response to my “theological challenge” if I were using the Western’s zeitgeist concerning the war with evil Russia and how they are now obviously on the ropes.
The Kurgan makes his pre-Vatican II Roman Catholic perspective clear in a recently published article; to which I may or may not respond at some point in the next ten years depending upon my time and interest.
As you can see he’s obviously a hair’s breath away from total conversion!
Be that as it may, and probably surprising to many that read his blog, Vox is actually a very subtle writer, and even subtler reader. I think he admitted it himself as being, if I recall correctly our conversation, a “literary snob”.
Which means the man can both read and write at a level that is today rapidly becoming as rare as finding an original Atlantean. So, totally unwarranted, but driven by my ungentlemanly curiosity, I will take a few of the things he wrote and comment on them.
Evil observably exists. Mankind is observably fallen into evil. The world is observably ruled by an immortal being that hates Man, Jesus Christ, the Good, the Beautiful, and the True. Jesus Christ, the Son of God and the Living Word, is literally and observably the only hope of Man.
And that is the full extent of the theology I am willing to assert and defend.
This, is why I have very little issue with Vox’s theology. In essence, his position is really not that different from the one of millions and millions of illiterate Catholic peasants throughout the ages that were in fact good catholics despite their inability to read or write. And yes, I know how this looks based on the previous paragraphs, but I am not actually taking pot shots. On a personal level, my own theology is not far from this either, with the only added point that, as far as I can tell to date, the REAL Catholic Church, has made no errors in dogma or doctrine, and even those parts I personally resist, or dislike, are objectively better for making as a whole to follow and in fact cause no harm in any case.
That being the case, it is absolutely of imperative importance from my perspective, to make as many people as possible (especially the fooled “Novus Ordo” laypeople) aware of the fact that, actually, yes, an infallible Church does exist, as reason and logic demand, and here it is. And yes it was fought against and infiltrated and also comprised corrupt men from the very start, because, duh: Humans. Do you even READ the Bible? Or LISTEN to the actual Church? They been telling you this from the start too. And yet, every single infiltration, usurpation and attack against it has ultimately failed, the doctrine remained unsullied and in fact more explicit and clarified as time passed, precisely to fend off the further and future attacks, culminating in the saintly and to my view obviously infallible and supernaturally protected Code of Canon Law of 1917, which comprised and summarised EVERY bit of Catholic doctrine, rule and law since Christianity began, all the way to 1917. And since the last valid Pope died on October 9th 1958, whatever other writings he pronounced ex cathedra, could also be added to it. I especially like his encyclical, Mystici Corporis Christi even if the link it’s from is from the current Satanic coven pretending to be Catholic clergy, so perhaps save a local copy before they start editing in how sodomy is part of it all.
The point of agreement I think are likely to be valid for both me and Vox are, aside from his above professed theology, the fact that human beings need rules for civilisation to thrive, as a generic but EXTREMELY statistical significant fact. And by civilisation he and I would both mean something both he and I would recognise as civilised and good and beautiful, despite possible minor details being different.
There are another two points he makes that I think can be seen as quite meaningful. The first:
Nor do I take my own occasional contemplations on the subject terribly seriously; I am from the “glass darkly” school of theological thought.
One can hardly argue with him on this point. In fact, it is a very wise perspective to have. One thing we can ALL be absolutely certain of, is that every single one of us is in error.
I think that once one really begins to appreciate the magnitude and type and kind of error you are in, you begin to be far more likely to think that perhaps, St. Augustine, which Vox is not particularly fond of, mostly, if my memory is correct, or at least in part, because of St. Augstine’s habit of referring to himself as the most miserable of miserable sinners and wretches and so on and on. I get it, when you have a healthy self-esteem, or you build one, as the case may be, for most of your life, you’re not likely to look favourably upon some guy grovelling in a manner that appears to you as some kind of worm-tongue looking to not be squished like the maggot he clearly is.
And that is indeed so.
Until you have a moment before a tiny part of the radiance of God. Or as in my case, and/or people Like Saul/Paul who tend to fall off horses and go blind for a few days when it happens. Then, when faced with the true dimensions of your multiple and seemingly endless errors, you begin to start, to have an inkling of an idea, that perhaps, good old St. Augustine, really did know something about reality. And probably a good fat chunk of it more than you or I.
Since we are ALL in error, it makes logical sense to some degree, that any absolute conviction about Christianity (or Catholicism, as it should be properly called, heh!) must be also in error. And absolute errors are bad, so should be avoided. Kinda.
Because far worse than a categorical and absolute error, is relativism. Putting an innocent man to death, or a young woman, in the case of Joan of Arc, is very, very bad (and in her case done by corrupt evil bastards too, so sort of beside this point), but letting all blasphemy and various crimes of ever escalating violence go unpunished, inevitably results in a failed civilisation, as history continues to show.
The difference, then between Vox’s theology and my own, as I suspected, comes down to the precise things he and I would agree or disagree are non-negotiables.
And I am sure there are some. But probably less than he suspects.
The Catholic Church itself has it as doctrine that while there is such a thing as Papal infallibility (explained many times of this blog, so use the Search Me link on the right if you are not sure what it is) and that the Magisterium of the Church is similarly infallible (hence why the CoCL of 1917 also is, since it was put together by the Magisterium of the Church and approved by two valid Popes), the Church itself is NOT necessarily always infallible.
There are doctrines that are deemed to be absolutely and forever unchangeable, of course, known as divine doctrine, as they come straight from God and there really is no question about them, or are evidently simple to understand and extrapolate from such rules (the idea of non-catholics not being valid catholic clergy being an obvious one) but other rules might just be for the running of the Church or apply in almost but not all cases and so on. A deep understanding of Roman law and Catholic doctrine may be required for some of these, but in essence the Church clearly states that ultimately, the only true infallibility comes from God.
Which is not to say that infallible doctrine might be flawed, but rather, that humans within the Church can and do make plentiful errors as well as some making consciously and known heretic attacks on it.
One of the points Vox makes that could be construed as a criticism is this:
My chief criticism of all theology and all theologians is this: they tend to artificially narrow the art of the possible, by which I mean they usually assign divine significance to one of several possible interpretations of a phrase – often a phrase that has already been translated one or more times – and then deny all potential legitimacy to the other possible interpretations.
I don’t really have any objection to this point, and I think Vox may have it possibly as being more familiar with the endless squabbling that goes on amongst Protestant theologians. But in this respect, it could possibly be applied to the idea that Peter was not only the leader of the Apostles but also the first Pope and the Rock upon which the Church is built, and what follows from it, as I explained in my original post from which this one stems from.
But the fact is that as far as I am concerned, the whole “Peter is the Rock” thing is absolutely not limited to one quote from the Bible. This attitude of selecting a tiny piece of text from the Bible and then applying it patch-work style to whatever nonsensical idea your average protestant is trying to defend, is really a Protestant hobby, not so much a Catholic one at all. And when I say Protestant, I include the fully Protestant, satanic Novus Orco Vatican II fake Church.
Peter being the Rock is borne out by not just one or two lines in the Bible, but several passages taken in context, as is the entire 2,000 year history of the Church. Christianity literally would NOT EXIST without THAT specific interpretation of it. And even more stunningly, is the fact that the Catholic Church is literally the LONGEST form of reign that has EVER taken place in the entirety of known human history. All the attacks against it ultimately failed. Including the Arian heresy during which 97% to 99% of ALL then existing bishops subscribed to it. Or as the current era when out of nearly 2 billion nominal “Catholics” there are maybe say a million Sedevacantists. This crisis too will pass. Because either the Catholic Church is true and real and infallible, as it has proven itself to be for two millennia if you bother to really look into it, or it is not, in which case ALL of Christianity is a complete fairy tale. Which happens to be what I USED to believe for over 40 years of my life.
The inescapable conclusion I make, is based not on this one, or that other single scarp of evidence, or quote, or Biblical sentence, or other evidence in its singular form. No, my conclusion is based on the absolutely overwhelming totality of evidence that:
Catholicism created the absolute best conditions for human beings bar none in the entire history of mankind we know of.
Catholicism in the main and almost alone in this was responsible for the creation of the actual, valid, real scientific method that ultimately created science, engineering and so on, and this was done precisely because Catholic doctrine hinges of God being a Loving, Just, Merciful and LOGICAL God. That is, reason is a thing. And that theological concept meant that the Universe could be studied and greatly understood. Protestantism both thanks to the explicit statement of Luther that “Reason is the whore of the devil” and the abundantly clear and obvious evidence presented by Protestants in general, rejects reason entirely. It’s all about the feels and possibly some foggy notion of following “God-breathed” theology, which is unfortunately indistinguishable from pastor-con-man-grifter farted theology.
Catholic doctrine and dogma did this and I can find no flaw or fault in it once I properly examined any specific dogma or doctrine as it actually is, instead of how people might tell you it is.
Catholicism literally is Christianity and “Christianity” that is not Catholicism:
Would not exist at all without Catholicism, since they are all bastardised and corrupted offshoots of Catholicism, first split-off in this specific manner by the fat German maid-raping, nun-banger, Martin.
Secondly has DEMONSTRABLY created a far worse lot for humanity, since it has slowly and consistently corroded Catholicism to the point that now we have accepted as a general, global whole: sex before marriage, contraception, divorce, and ultimately baby killing (abortion). And now have shifted on to “transgenderism” and tranny “bishops” in Protestant Covens oh… sorry… “Churches”.
And that’s just to scratch the surface. Keep in mind about 500 years ago, Jean Parisot Le Valette beat a man nearly to death for blasphemy and he did only four months in jail.
In 1538, while on Malta, Valette was sentenced to four months in a guva (a hole in the ground) on Gozo for nearly beating a layman to death, and he was subsequently exiled to Tripoli for two years to serve as military governor. Upon his return he was punished again for bringing a negro slave not liable for servitude.
As you can see, even back then, Catholicism was way ahead of the rest of the world on even things like slavery.
In short, and to clarify, my position on Catholicism does not hinge simply on Matthew 28:18-20, but on, as I said, a staggering preponderance of evidence, of which the above are really just the highlights.
This is also the reason why I remain interested in further investigating the issue. If I were utterly closed to the concept, as many assume, I would not care to. And in truth, in MANY aspects of “Christianity” I have zero interest left in “exploring” the issue. Not because I am “closed off” but because those particular rabbit warrens have been thoroughly excavated, mined and blasted and there is simply nowhere else to go.
Catholicism (the sedevacantist one, which is the original one) is the truest philosophy of reality bar none that I have found to date. And it is so by many, many, many light years of distance from the next truest thing I had found up to then, which was a mixture of semi-Shintoists, Zen-Agnosticism, with elements of Feudal Japanese Samurai philosophy.
And surprising as the revelation of actual Catholicism being absolutely true AND the best descriptor of reality was to me, it remains the case. And the reason it was so surprising was because essentially, EVERYTHING I thought I knew about Catholicism was actually a carefully crafted network of absolute lies concocted by various “Christians”. What I thought was Catholicism, was in fact “Catholicism” or Novus Orco “Christianity” which is absolute Satanry of the worst sort. And of which, Protestantism was its initial offshoot of evil intended to pervert and twist.
So, there are some of my clarifications.
I look forward with baited breath to Vox’s additional, en passant, coincidental, possibly related, commentary on same, in the next fifteen to twenty years; probably without fail!
I know there are now going to be heads exploding in various gamma hives around the internet as they hope and pray to their slithering nether-gods for a major rift between myself and Vox.
While I am sure nothing of the sort is or will be the case. In fact, many moons ago, I asked Vox if he would be willing to have a friendly discussion/debate on Catholicism vs Protestantism, or to be more precise, my Sedevacantist Catholicism and his specific brand of Protestantism which I believe hinges on the original Nicene creed.
Even back then, somewhat to my surprise, he said he wasn’t against it in principle, but the time required for it (and I suspect utility of it) was not really worth it. Which, in general I agreed with.
That all said, my brain can’t help but want to continue down paths that in my view are likely to increase my understanding of reality. Christianity, is one of those paths that is essentially endless in this regard, so, like say learning to paint, or make music, is a lifelong continuous investigation.
With such endeavours, after a time, there comes a point where your understanding or skill in the topic is good enough to outdo the common men and women in the field and then even the well-known ones. In short, it becomes difficult to find other minds against which you can confront yourself in order to learn more of the topic that interests you. And when you do find one, naturally, at least for me, you’d like to investigate it and push and prod at it and test your theories and ideas and baselines against.
Well, Vox has such a mind. I also consider him a friend and few things in life are as enjoyable to me as philosophical conversation of some substance with a friend. Preferably over a good wine and light meal, or with decent cognac after a good dinner. Alas, distance and circumstance prevents such discourse in the customary civilised fashion I just described. So I find myself limited to this rather barbaric format. Blog to blog. Well, perhaps we might do a livestream on it one day, but be as it may, I will now simply dive into the post Vox put up which prompted this one for me: This is it.
As baseline axioms I think I have the following, which are:
Pretty sure both Vox and myself do not like having human authority over us. I think the generic difference might be that I am willing to go along with it for the greater good as long as the human with “authority” over me continues to follow the correct rules. As far as Catholicism goes, if the priest/bishop does not himself contravene Canon Law (as per Code of Canon Law of 1917) and his advice is in line with it, I will obey. The reason I believe the Code of Canon Law is correct is because at core, I believe that Jesus would not have left a FALLIBLE Church on Earth. He wanted a Church and we are instructed to use reason and logic to figure stuff out, but not that it’s all guesswork. Having read the CoCL twice, while I find rules that personally bug me, in objective consideration, even those rules are civilisational, and my personal preference is the one that is not ideal to building a truly civilised world. The classic example is duelling. I am all for it, but Catholicism forbids it, because, in general, duelling would be a sin of pride. Not really my problem, but if it were widespread you can see that the sin of pride would be what motivates it for most, instead of a burning desire to see justice done.
Pretty sure we both dislike dishonesty in general and especially dishonesty designed to lead people astray spiritually.
One thing I think we differ on is that I think Vox is more prone to the error of Erroneous Loyalty. Something I discussed in Reclaiming the Catholic Church at some length. It is an error I used to live myself for many years, so I think I understand the dynamic well. As an extreme and hypothetical example that ignores human laws for the purpose of the intellectual exercise, I recall a long while back, in one of his posts, Vox mentioned that under certain circumstances, a friend that was guilty of certain crimes would be best served by being handed a pistol with one bullet in it and leaving him alone in his room, giving him the dignity of suicide. I believe he was referencing a supposed “friend” of John Scalzi that had been discovered to be some kind of sexual predator, and if memory serves Vox’s comment was along the lines of what you would do if someone you considered to be a friend turned out to be, say a child rapist. In my case, my loyalty of friendship would NOT prevent me (again, in a hypothetical world of no human laws being present) from helping the man pull the trigger, or even doing it for him. You don’t want to leave these things to chance! In fact, as per my comments many times, I absolutely believe that the punishment for child rape should be the legalised and accepted method of burning at the stake. Suicide is considered a mortal sin by Catholicism and as such, judgement by the community so you burn at the stake gives you the chance to repent while you burn and possibly enter purgatory and eventually heaven instead of eternal Hell. So, in broad terms, I think Vox may be more prone to being loyal beyond the just point. As I say, an error I myself had for a long while in my youth, but that I gradually got out of over several years until I finally realised that the line of Justice is more important than the line of loyalty. Vox may have other theories on this, which I am unaware of but that’s the sense I have of it presently.
Given the above premises/axioms, I will then look at the above linked post critically. And consider that I am absolutely in no way defending the Boomertastic Doug Wilson. I read a couple of his post years ago, before I was even a Christian and the illogic and hypocrisy prevalent in Protestantism made me conclude he’s an idiot and not worth listening to at all.
One more difference between Vox and myself I need to point out, the man is certainly more patient than I am as well as far more forgiving. I remember we briefly discussed Jordan Peterson at the time and Vox stated the man was intelligent. I was astonished and asked why on Earth he thought that, he quite correctly pointed out that in order to spew the level of bafflegarble nonsense he does and fool a lot of people into thinking he is not some absolutely insane globalist with severe psychological issues, takes a certain level of IQ. Personally I evaluated the bafflegarble nonsense and concluded the man is mentally unstable and absolutely wrong and a liar. I can’t reconcile that with being intelligent, but strictly speaking, that is an error on my part conflating ethics and sanity with intelligence.
Vox concluded that Doug Wilson is a gatekeeper but still keeps tabs on him clearly, which is understandable, as I keep tabs on other gatekeepers like Milo and EM Jones and Taylor Marshall and so on. But perhaps does not condemn him as thoroughly as I do, and perhaps, in general he might not condemn the gatekeepers as thoroughly as I do. I may be wrong, but I suspect he is more forgiving than I am on such matters.
Anyway, to examine the post in more detail:
I will first note that this is precisely the same defense that is regularly offered up on behalf of other gatekeepers like Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro, and also of books like the Harry Potter series. Don’t criticize the obvious errors and the demonstrable falsehoods when they are otherwise doing so much good? Don’t you understand that if they tell the truth instead of lying, they won’t be able to reach as many of those who need the truth? Isn’t it better that they read godless tales of evil being portrayed as good than not read at all?
And the answer is no. This is a false, pernicious, and fundamentally short-sighted perspective. It is less a defense than an attempt to negotiate a guilty plea in exchange for a lesser penalty.
And so far we are in absolute agreement. For example, the Catholic Church teaches that it is better to leave aborigines in jungles alone and not instruct them at all than to instruct them with Protestantism. Because as per Church doctrine, a savage that has never heard of Christ might yet enter heaven judged by God on the merits of his own conscience, but one that has taken on a perverse version of Christianity is far less likely to escape the mortal sins of pride and in essence, choosing “me and my way” over “God and His ways”. I have always had the same idea. I met some of the last Khoi San that were free of any influence from so-called civilised men, and I found them to be honest, reliable, friendly, and just. Their society might be very primitive, but within the confines of that limitation they were essentially innocent and good people. Take a couple of generations of essentially Protestant “education” and a previously scrupulously honest primitive people become dishonest, haphazard, unpredictable and liable to suffer from everything to alcoholism to being criminals.
Let me be perfectly clear: No one who advocates equality of any kind, and no one who is a civic nationalist of any variety, and no one who falsely asserts that which is not a sin is a sin, should ever be considered a genuine or reliable advocate of the Good, the Beautiful, and the True, no matter what their other positive attributes might be.
Because liars cannot, and will not, defend the truth. They will always produce one reason or another for refusing to do so. And if you are foolish enough to trust or follow a liar, you will come to regret it, as all of you – and readers here should recall, the vast majority of you – who used to lionize Jordan Peterson and consider him to be a great intellectual champion should know.
Again, I agree whole-heartedly. Although, I realise Vox here was referring specifically to Civic Nationalism and so on, the fact remains that:
no one who falsely asserts that which is not a sin is a sin, should ever be considered a genuine or reliable advocate of the Good, the Beautiful, and the True, no matter what their other positive attributes might be.
And this remains the absolute point for me which I cannot reconcile with Vox’s theology.
Vox, is, after all, a Protestant. A very unique one he might be, but he (as far as I know) does not subscribe to the rules of the Catholic Church as per the Code of Canon Law of 1917 which in essence simple explains/extrapolates from both the Bible and Catholic (Christian) Tradition and has compiled and summarised all the various extrapolations, dictates, and dogma of the Catholic Church into one volume that covers all of those documents from the period of human history up to the year 1917. As a Catholic, you then may also wish to add the Papal ex-cathedra commentaries made from 1917 to 1958. After that we have not had any valid Popes since, so everything else can be safely ignored.
I am fairly sure Vox has not read the Code of Canon Law. And if he did I think the things he might object to are probably not as many as he might envision, but I am (foggily) aware he has some issue with some aspects of Mariology, though I am not sure what they are. I feel fairly confident he is well-read enough to be aware that Catholics do not actually “worship” Mary, but simply ask for her intercession, as we do to various Saints. In essence, the difference between catholics and Protestants is that we don’t stop communicating with our dead friends and people. We pray for them and we also ask them to pray for us.
One of the only times we briefly discussed my Catholicism (sedevacantism) and I pointed out some of the main issues he immediately said words to the effect of “Oh, well, those are Catholics I can get behind”. So again, I doubt the differences between us are huge in terms of theology.
He also agrees with me that in general humans need rules, otherwise they will pretty much eat each other alive in the street, which, to a certain extent we are starting to really see on a global level when Christianity fades.
We are also both smart enough understand that, while perhaps a certain optional rule for people may not really be designed for me or him specifically, we can’t really have rules for thee but not for me. And if there are exceptions, they should be based on sound reasoning, logic, and justice, not personal preference. So, in short, I ask myself:
“Why is Vox not actually a sedevacantist?”
I am presently only aware of one possible hitch which is his specific interpretation of the Trinty. Which I will not attempt to speak for him on as I would probably get it wrong. For myself, I do not pretend to know the intricacies of the Trinity, and I am perfectly happy to act in this regard very much as an illiterate peasant from the year 800. The Church says the Trinity works thusly, and I accept it as a given. I see no possible profit in trying to atomise that concept, nor do I have any interest in it.
While I may atomise the concept of not duelling and understand it very well, and instinctively want to say: “But Bishop, I don’t want to run that guy through with a rapier because I am proud, but because he defrauds little old ladies and steals candy from children, and blasphemes! C’MAWN…Just this one (ok, half-dozen) time?!” But intellectually I understand I must just bow my head and NOT challenge the man to a duel to the death. And if I do confront him, it would be a sin to smack the living crap out of him until he makes amends. I know that. Which makes it a bad sin. But… y’know… I’m only human. Maybe next time I’ll give him a warning first. You know, if I really see the error of my ways. Otherwise all I can do is really try to work on it over time. But in the meantime: no duels have been had. #winning.
So, it might be an intellectual disparity, perhaps the things that interest Vox to dissect are so different from the ones that interest me that it causes him a problem with Catholicism. And this, THIS is the real interest to me.
What are those details? Is he seeing something I am not, or is it vice-versa? Or is there a third possibility that we are both missing?
Such conversations, or investigations, if you prefer, are what fascinates me, and the ones that I think help us to see more truth when done with an intellectually honest person that is also curious enough and interested enough to examine such details.
I seem to recall for example that Vox also labelled Once Saved Always Saved as a retarded concept (he may have been more polite about it) and I would expect he similarly considers Sola Scriptura as absurd, but I never asked him the question. I also seem to recall that his generic approach to the Bible was not that this or that version was “better” but to just read one and go with it as best you can, which is “close enough” for really about 99.99% of people.
I suspect that his avoidance of hardcore Catholicism is linked to what he believes are “lies” or untruths that the Catholic Church has as various dogmas. What these are, however I am unaware, and it is my experience that most such ideas are usually rooted in some Protestant fake news about Catholicism. Several aspects of which, honest historians like Rodney Stark have pointed out even though they are not Catholics.
At any rate, I would certainly be interested in looking at what the differences between his and my theological philosophies are.
I suspect he doesn’t have the time, but the invitation is open.
UPDATE: A reader pointed out I have not explained the absolute point that anyone who advocates that a sin is not a sin should not be trusted. As often happens with me, I thought the point was obvious, but I failed to realise it is not as obvious to many as I think. So, to clarify, The very concept of Protestantism that each man can interpret the Bible as he wishes, is a pernicious sin of pride. Even the sola scriptura retards must know that man is perfectly honest, clean and good as well as smart and reasonable. It very clearly states this in Hebrews and elsewhere if memory serves.
Secondly, it is just as obvious that a good and loving God would not leave a DYI kit for interpreting His Will and what the rules He wishes us to follow are. Because given the fact we are all a bunch of retards to one degree or other, we are guaranteed to screw it up. And the idea a flawless and loving God would leave us a flawed theology is equally retarded.
Therefore, a FLAWLESS theology MUST exist. And there must be a way to know which it is. As it happens, there is. Jesus Appointed Peter as the Head of His Church, instructed the Apostles to teach His teachings and Paul tells us also that we are to reject things that are not as per their teachings as given to them by Jesus (that is, Apostolic succession, is a thing).
All of which would still screw up if it were not for the fact that Jesus also told us He would be with us to the end of time. Now, if Jesus is with us always to the end, and He commanded the Apostles to teach what He taught them, then their teachings cannot be in error. Not because even the Apostles are flawless, but because Jesus is.
That is the whole point of Papal infallibility. It’s not due to some superhuman characteristic of Popes. There have been plenty of greedy, power-hungry, deviants as Popes, but they did not teach erroneous dogma when speaking ex-cathedra because of the supernatural protection due to Jesus’ promise. Who can speak erroneous or wrong doctrine? People who are not protected by Jesus’ promise and who is that? People who are not the foundation on which the rock is based, which has two parts. The non visible supreme one, Jesus, and his vicar on Earth, which is the man holding the position that Peter held as leader of the Apostles.
18 And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.
19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.
Priests can lie or be wrong. Bishops can lie or be wrong. Popes can lie or be wrong. But valid, legitimate Popes talking officially for the entire Church on matters of faith and morals, that is the foundational principles of Christianity, cannot be wrong. Again, not because they are infallible in and of themselves, but because Jesus specifically said he was specifically with them to the End of the World. And Jesus cannot be wrong, nor is he a liar. And what He taught the apostles is true and He also specifically stated he would build the Church on Peter,, renaming him from Simon to Peter, which in Latin, Aramaic and most Latin languages literally means Rock.
Regardless of whatever brain-twisting Protestants come up with to try and say Jesus didn’t mean or say what he meant and said, even a child can understand that if someone says, to a guy called Simon:
“Hey buddy, come here, gonna run a little test by you…”
And he does, and Simon passes, and the guy says:
“You know what buddy, I’m gonna call you Rock from now on, and on this rock, I will build my church.” It’s a fairly clear point that Good old Simon/Rock, is now the head of the Church. Seriously, a child gets it. You need to be indoctrinated into lies from birth not to see this as it is.
So, the first lie is to tell people that to not be Catholic is not a sin. It is. You’re ignoring God’s Will. And the entire retinue of sins that follows from anyone following that advice is literally endless. And frankly, it ALL stems from pride to begin with. Some German fattie with a penchant for sexing up nuns and raping maids and swearing and calling reason literally “the whore of the devil”, comes along some 1500 years after Christ and the Catholic Church which has been the ONLY valid Christianity to that point and he FIXES everything? It’s moronic. Jesus didn’t say:
“Oh, by the way, all the people for the next 1500 years or so that call themselves Christians, and all the Popes which everyone agrees for that long are the main dudes, yeah, well, forget about all of them, they are all wrong and Pagan worshippers that ask my mother and a bunch of dead guys of no importance whatsoever to put in a good word for them with me. Anyway, all those guys? Going straight to Hell. Only when that rotund German with the beer and all the sex comes along will AKCHUAL Christianity be fixed. And he will do it by changing the Bible before he says it’s the only thing you should refer to at all. But only the one he changed, not the one everyone used for 1200 or so years and that was put together by the same Catholics who got it all wrong. And oh that Bible that the German guy changed, which was also changed by the Pahrisees, you know, the guys who had me killed, for 700 years before him, that’s the good Bible, scrap that other one. And oh, oh, one more thing: The best Bible, it’s the one with 33,000 translation errors ordered to be put together by a flamingly homosexual English King. Jimmy boy, that’s his name. He also starts up the Freemasons, which are Satanists, but don’t let that bug ya, seriously, his version of the Bible is the best one.”
I have criticised the boomer Karl Denninger before. Here, and here.
And now I will do it again, but on an entirely different basis, which actually ties in with a MUCH larger picture I have been trying to explain to other people for a long time.
In fairness to him, I think his overall point is not necessarily that high IQ, K-select people should not have children, as many have accused him of doing. I am quite sure he is merely pointing out why it is unlikely that they will. And insofar as his boomer level of analysis goes, he is “right”. That is, the average NPC will think and “reason” much along the lines Karl indicates. So my critique is not really with his observation of all the negative facts he points out. In the main he is “correct” about his individual examples of reasons why people are less likely to choose to have children.
The desirable people he and I both mean, that is, high IQ, K-select, generally honest and responsible, and reliable people with a good sense of justice, common sense and the ability to do at least decent levels of logic, math, writing and reading comprehension.
But as usual, Karl is missing the big picture. As is typical of the boomer mentality, that thinks primarily in terms of me, me, me, and even when describing global events is guided by their perennial laser-like focus on how anything affect them in the specific, he seems largely incapable of the very concept of synergism.
It is a rare skill generally, but it happens that some of us (mostly GenX) are naturally talented at it, so allow me to point out the errors of his thinking, starting from the exact opposite direction that boomer thinking begins at: that is, the REALLY big pictures frames first. The ones that ignore us, that is you and me specifically completely. Here we go:
1. Nature doesn’t care about you specifically
In the big scheme of things, those who do not reproduce sufficiently die out. Nature is pretty brutal about it and tends to operate on the principles of large numbers. And exceptions to that rule because of different large numbers.
It may just be humanity’s lot that we go the way of mouse utopia aka Universe 25. In which case, we’re all doomed and so are all our children. And if so, why worry about it. Worrying about it would be a total waste of time. Besides which you do NOT know this for certain, so assuming it off the bat is an error. So, as a function of reason and logic, this specific idea must be ignored.
Treating it as valid or true can only lead you to depression and misery in a situation where your irrational belief in a “certainty” you cannot possibly know is a certainty, becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. This point alone, the Universe 25 possibility, should make it obvious that similar thoughts that lead down similar (if less total) outcomes are also to be ignored.
So for example, the idea that “all white people will soon be extinct” or “high IQ people do not breed together because there is not enough of them” or the more common “marriage and children is a loser’s game because all women are whores and will divorce-rape you” and all the various variants of that kind, are in essence self-fulfilling, loser’s bets on life. The fact that your specific marriage may turn into a hellscape, or your specific life becomes a dead end is not relevant to the entire sub-species you represent.
Yes nature does not care about you specifically, but you specifically can and do affect nature. Make 15 children and chances are most of them survive. If they all too make 15 children from age 20 on, like you did, guess what the landscape of your tribe looks like 100 years from now if you just start out with you and your wife as Adam and Eve? On that basis, starting with you and your wife having had 15 children by the time you are both say 40, if all your children and theirs and so on do the same, meaning that every 40 years they all have a batch of 15 children each, if you lived to be 140, you would have over 17 thousand descendants. 17,275 to be exact. And if the average age of death was say 80, then almost all of them would still be alive, since the first iteration (at year 20) is only 135 people. And that’s only ONE family. Imagine if you have ten such families in the same area. You now have a small nation after one century. Which in the scheme of things is not so much time. And if the genetic serums actually sterilise and wipe out most of humanity, you will not only be a small nation, you will be the majority within it. And it might not be such a small geographical area after all. Now imagine them all of the same religion that takes no crap from depopulationist satanists like Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates and their pedophile friends.
“But people don’t make 15 children each, and how do you feed them all, and send them to college?!?”
Patience grasshopper. People who bought the lies and live in clown world no longer make 15 children. But people did do that for centuries in Catholic countries. And that was before the internet, and Amazon deliveries, and often before indoor plumbing and central heating, and certainly before electricity and tractors and industrial fertilisers and automated harvesting machines… so let that sink in a little and park it in your brain somewhere while we continue to look at reality and possibilities instead of the ghosts boomers put in your head.
“But even if smart white people with good ethics, strong Catholic religious beliefs and enough money/land/whatever start reproducing at that ridiculous and unrealistic rate, they will still be outnumbered by the millions of dumb, brown, evil, people!”
First of all, even if things were reduced to that simplistic level of thinking, realise that the number of white people on the planet always was a minority when compared to the number of non-white people. And probably always will be.
Remember when I said nature doesn’t care about you specifically and operates on the principle of large numbers, with the exception of other large numbers? White people, and the Japanese, are two such examples, just to pick a couple. Despite not being a majority, white people have managed to secure lands and space for themselves very successfully over the millennia. A combination of strong imagination, higher average IQ, and religious beliefs that fostered high-trust and co-operation, served them well when they ejected infiltrating and noxious tribes, ethnicities and behaviours, which they did in the past with ferocious attitudes.
Similarly the Japanese have retained a really quite unique culture on this planet by similarly ruthlessly avoiding to entertain the admixing of their population with the teeming masses.
A perhaps even more shocking example is Catholicism itself, which around 400 AD or thereabouts, when it really was a dark time on pretty much all fronts for humanity in general and Catholics (i.e. the only Christians that ever existed) in particular, St. Benedictine decided to retire to some apparently godforsaken regions and start monasteries. And some 600 years later, the Catholic world was (and remained for a long time) the utter pinnacle of human achievement in everything from the arts, to the courage of men, the safety of lands that were previously the domain of brigands, the ending of women and children as chattel, and generally the betterment of humanity as a whole while being perfectly capable and able to fight back against less civilised barbarians that hounded them.
And keep in mind that Catholic monks do not even reproduce at all! But just by their influence, they firstly created self-sustaining monasteries, then spread the gospel and civilisation all round them, so much so that they even converted the Vikings that used to raid and murder them mercilessly, by giving them lands and asking for their protection. And after a couple of centuries, those same blonde giants were off to the Crusades to defend Christendom. All this was supposedly impossible if you accept Denninger’s base premise which is simply that basic math has all the answers.
Basic math has a lot of the answers, but life is always more interesting that that. As I wrote almost 30 years ago, in original version of The Face on Mars published in 1995, when dealing with math and reality, the theory looks like 1+2=3 or perhaps x+2=3 so we can figure out x easily. In theory.
Better scientists realise that things are a bit more like x+y=3 so both x and y can have a wide range of values. And synergists like me realise life is most accurately described as x+y=z, where both x and y and even z have ranges of probabilities and while computers can in theory predict things very accurately (if the input data is very accurate) they cannot and will not ever be able to account for human nature and reality as a whole. Because the fly in the teleporting machine, the asteroid against the dinosaurs, and the “crazy” St. Benedict, or the iron minded King Leonidas, will throw your entire large number theory set right out the window. And in fact, a human mind that can see these patterns of relationships and figure them out analogously, usually has a better chance of getting it right than any computer prediction of the future.
So. The realisation from point number one is that while nature does not care about you specifically, you specifically can affect nature. Crazy as that sounds. And the main item required for you to have a chance to do so? Unreasonable belief that defies current “popular” thinking, but is based in sound synergistic principles, like large number theory, persistence, and of course, the most successful human belief system ever used by humans, actual Catholicism.
2. Becoming that different large number.
If you want to avoid becoming the leaf in the stream that just ends up being compost, and if your entire tribe, way of life, family, looks like it is just being carried on by world events, guess what, you need to become one of those large numbers that is the exception to the large number concept that you will become extinct. How do you do that? Simple, really, if you think about it.
By being utterly passionate, unreasonable, counter-intuitively absurdly dedicated and persistent, over an equally absurd, unreasonable and “crazy” length of time. St. Benedict didn’t just decide to try his hand at monastery creation and life for a few years. He spent the rest of his life doing it. Relentlessly.
The reason I have achieved so many different things, visited so many places, speak three languages fluently and a couple or three others haltingly, and learnt so many different skills at a high level enough that I could reasonably be considered a professional at several very different endeavours, is because I simply put in more time, more effort, more obsessive thought and action into those things that interested me than most people do, and even than most supposed “professionals” in that field do in many cases.
So, if you want your DNA to make it, you need to go counter to the zeitgeist. Which is healthy in any case since the current “Western” zeitgeist is that you should submit to different cultures and ethnicities than your own. That the family unit is evil, marriage terrible, and making children a very selfish thing unworthy of civilised people. Oh and you should also be gay. Or a cross-dressing, self-mutilating tranny. And make your kids, if you were so unwise to have any, become gay, underage drag queens too.
Really, regardless of your intentions, going 180 degrees away from the current zeitgeist in the West is healthier than not doing so on any scale. But if you want to go the whole hog, then peruse this blog and the various articles I wrote on farming, beating clown world, and so on, and above all realise two things:
Yes it’s hard. Very. Get used to it. It’s just how it is.
Win. Build it. Find the impossible way. Keep getting back up and keep saying “Fuck them”. Eventually everyone dies, so make your life here count.
You overcome the statistics of nature by becoming your own large number anomaly. So git to it, you unreasonable madman.
3. The black pill is a lie.
All fear is a lie, ultimately. And the black pill of doom and gloom is pure fear-based poison. It doesn’t matter what type of fear it is. Fear you will not have a job. Fear you will not have enough money. Fear you will hate your life. Fear you will be a bad parent. Fear your kids will suffer. Fear you can’t do it. Fear you will fail. Fear.
Well, let me reassure you: You will lose your job. Somewhere along the line, if you haven’t yet, you will. You will never have enough money. Never. Elon Musk still doesn’t. Just ask him. Your life will have giant events of major suckage in it. Everyone’s does. You will fuck up multiple aspects of parenting. Everyone does. Your best bet is to keep the damage to a minimum and try and ensure your children understand reality and still love you when they are all grown up. Your kids will suffer. Everyone does. You will fail. Multiple times, at multiple things. You will feel fear in your life. Many times for many different reasons.
There. Got all that? Good. Now get off your ass and go do all those scary things anyway.
No one learnt to walk without falling down. A lot.
No one learnt to read and write without scrawling and misspelling first. A lot.
No one has achieved great things without persistently improving on his or her own screw ups. Failing is not the problem. Quitting is. So, as I explained, become your own large number anomaly. And if God is gracious he will give you enough of a brain to realise the miracle point of when it is not worth bashing your head into the same rock and when, instead, doing so, will eventually form a thick enough skin and skull that you will break the rock and break through to a better place.
Life is hard. Bad shit happens. People die. Evil exists. And on and on. So what? You can whine and bitch and cry and hide in a corner and try and have someone, anyone, everyone, feel sorry for you, or you can get up and become a large number anomaly. Them’s the choices, and no one gets a free ride. So pick one. I picked mine long ago.
4. Being afraid of 10 things means you miss the big opportunity.
If you do go and read the whole long litany of fear compiled by Denninger, you might get depressed. You might think he has valid points and they stack. Let me present just one case or two of his flawed theory.
Then you think about the child getting older. He or she is rather bright and would perhaps like a college education. You see the bills pile up on those who are there now, and the growth of that price over the last 20 years. You see $100,000 or more in debt larded up on someone who studies gender or black history and a “professor” who claims that capitalism is horrible — while pulling down a six-figure salary and forcing your child to pay the next kid over’s tuition in Calculus class because you, not your child, have more money than his parents do. You think “oh, my kid is a math whiz and will study programming” which sounded great 20+ years ago but then you remember the many H1bs that multiple large firms brought in to replace all of their American citizen programmers, forcing said Americans to train their replacements before being fired in order to get any severance at all! Thus that $100,000 taken on in debt to go to college, you realize, can be rendered worthless by said corporations even if your kid makes good choices as soon as someone from India will do the work for less money. This wild escalation in the cost of an education is not by random luck either, which would be a risk everyone has to take — three decades ago there was no Internet and colleges were the only real place you could learn a lot of things. Today anyone can learn anything from literally anywhere with nothing more than a $50 cellphone, a $200 laptop and $50/month for Internet service so why has the cost of learning and proving it at a college level of competence gone up by five or more times in the last 30 or so years instead of costing almost nothing to simply take a set of proctored tests and prove competence? Reality is that all of this is due to the deliberate policies and actions of universities, governments and corporations which will screw your child without any possibility of redress when he or she grows up — and there is no evidence that it is slowing down or will be stopped.
So he points out that:
College/University is stupidly expensive
They don’t even teach anything useful in most cases
You can learn most things to a decent level by doing your own research on a $200 laptop
And yet he’s really SOLD on sending kids to college.
Can you see the boomer level thinking? Screw college. Learn how to distinguish and grow the plants that can be used to make tinctures and remedies for various things and sell them only to people who you know. I guarantee you that when the next load of mRNA crap embedded in food, “normal” vaccine shots, or anything else comes along, the people with a still functioning brain will not care too much about your lack of a PhD if the stuff you use on yourself and your loved one works for them too.
Do you really need a degree to be able to put plumbing pipes together, or learn the principles of electrical wiring? Sure, insurance and such is a thing and if you screw things up, or even if you don’t you might be sued into ruin.
Yes, these are real problems, and sometimes have good reasons for being there. I certainly don’t want a pedophile like Oprah’s John of “God” cutting into me or mine as if he were a surgeon. I’d like to know that anyone that needs to actually do a surgery is competent and properly trained; and can in turn be sued into poverty if he screws up because he is not.
But the problem is that over the last 4 years these supposed paragons of ethics have in the main been mass-murdering bastards who lied and lied and lied to your face. Like good old Fauci and his buddies did. So… while I am not really keen on the local witch-doctor’s bone-throwing, the local GP dispensing covid genetic serums is certainly not higher on the totem pole as far as I am concerned, thank you very much. Which means what? It means that firstly I will try to educate myself better. Without the use of google, thanks, because mostly google is also a lie now. And secondly I will go only to people I know, whose work I can personally verify and see for myself by meeting their clients, whatever their field might be.
Denninger hasn’t realised that the entire idea of college is dead. Why would you participate in it other than for a very few and very select reasons, and even then, who knows for how long? Clearly homeschooling and learning your own trade is the way.
Here is another and more “total” point he makes towards the end:
I could go on for hours with this but I think you get the point. People don’t choose to have fewer or no children because “that’s how it is” as technology improves. Technological improvement adds choice but society molds opinions and incentives — for good or bad, like it or not.
People make the decision to not have children not because they’re “selfish” but rather on an entirely-rational basis because they look back at their childhood for the baseline and then forward in time and what they see is not improvement but impoverishment, not prosperity but privation, forced compliance and costs shoved upon them while the mandating parties are immune from consequence even when they’re later proved wrong or worse, someone is injured or killed, rampant illegal immigration and destruction of the common person’s standard of living without boundary along with a documented history of forcing the voluntary costs taken by others down their throats along with myriad scams across the board. When projected forward 20 years they recognize that any child they produce today is highly likely to be screwed blind and has a very low probability of having a good life, say much less a better one than they had.
Indeed if they judge that their childhood sucked they may well expect their kids’ childhoods to suck worse and nobody who actually cares about a child they’re contemplating bringing into the world voluntarily signs them up for that.
The people you want to bring children into the world are those who value children and have reason to believe their children will have at least as a good a life as they grew up with and enjoy now, with hope for even better, never mind a belief that their kids will have a fair shake and rational odds of success if they choose to apply themselves.
All of the policies of the last few decades of both government and industry have demonstrated beyond doubt that none of this is likely to be true and thus only those who don’t give a wet crap about their children’s future, or are so rich they believe they can guarantee it even if everyone else has their standard of living go straight to Hell, choose to reproduce.
About the only truly valid point he makes here is the very first one:
society molds opinions and incentives — for good or bad, like it or not.
That is essentially true. And as I have already pointed out, “society” in general today is very sick. That’s the problem. So what’s the solution? Simple: Firstly, realise, as I have been saying often and repeatedly since age 16, there is no such thing as “society”. It doesn’t exist. What you have is a large number of individuals and the large number probabilities that they produce. In reality you have a large number of in-DUH-viduals, which makes the illusion that such a thing as “society” exists quite realistic, but it doesn’t.
You have essentially zombie hordes. And zombie hordes are easily manipulated and pushed into this or that direction or over this or that cliff or fire-pit. So, as a first step don’t be a zombie. Don’t associate with them. Don’t surround yourself with them.
Secondly, begin the process of isolating yourself from zombies and building up relationships with other human beings. This in itself acts as a already quite a good “wall”, or defence from the zombie hordes, but over time, don’t be shy to build literal walls to keep the zombies out of your areas. And the more humans you have in your community that help to built them, the better.
Thirdly, do not let zombies in at any time. Exclude them and exclude anyone who allows them in the village. This sounds harsh, but is basic survival and also basic game theory. St. Benedict “won” precisely because of this point. He allowed in only Catholic monks that had dedicated themselves not only to Catholicism, but his even stricter rules added to the already rather strict rules for Catholic monks. That unwavering zealotry kept the monasteries pure and therefore effective. A bunch of men who spend all their time, praying, meditating on scripture, and working, will soon produce extremely functional communities. And in fact monasteries became wealthy, for they had a surfeit of food or other things they made, so that they became rich enough they became favourite places for the Vikings to raid. So the Catholic monks co-opted the Vikings too, and now Catholicism also added fearsome, pious warrior types to their ranks, alongside thoughtful, intellectual, pious, and studious ones.
If you refuse to allow any people into your midst that don’t subscribe to your general tribe’s zeitgeist (ideas, religion, world-view), then you cannot be corrupted, And over time, your converting of others increases your number. This is basic game theory and works in the natural world as it does in the abstract one of math. It works because it is again based on the principle of large numbers. A persistent, unexpected, but resilient statistical anomaly, becomes its own statistical normality.
Alongside with not rejecting “society” or if you prefer, forming your own, Denninger is (typical for a boomer) preoccupied with the hypothetical suffering of hypothetical children.
Well, guess what, the very vast majority of human beings, including the ones with really terrible lives, still prefer existing to not existing. We know this because aside from the odd cult, or recently mutilated confused teenager that has been indoctrinated into the child abuse ideology of transgenderism, most human beings don’t commit suicide. So, bad as it might be, life still seems to have the win over non-life. Pretty much for everyone. I know for a fact that every one of my children prefers to be here than not having existed. And it is that way for most people. So suck it up buttercup. Remember how I told you life is hard and everyone suffers? It’s true. But it still beats being dead or non-existent by a couple of light years, never mind country miles.
Finally he tries to justify his own weakness, cowardice and fear by appealing to your own sense of concern for your (hypothetical) children. In a most ridiculous manner if you have followed the discussion up to here; that is, by telling you if you really cared about your children, you wouldn’t have them, because they might suffer.
No Karl, no. They absolutely will suffer. And they will cry and feel pain and heartbreak. And then they will dust themselves off, get up and carry on. And make children of their own and if they need to fight off some evil bastards in the future that I didn’t manage to get to myself before I dropped dead, well, so be it, they will have got as much as they can from me in terms of learning how to do that.
Because guess what, you fragile and egomaniacal boomer, my grandparents went through two world wars, massive economic depression and yes, even lack of food. And they made children too. Otherwise I would not be here. And my children wouldn’t be here. And if I had continued believing the horse-shit your generation still shovels around a bit longer than I did, I might not have had any children at all. Instead now I have five of them. And my own daughter, off her own ideas, with no prompting from me on the matter, because she’s still young for me to discuss such things with her in any detail or seriousness, already has it as a pretty solid idea that she wants to have two children by her mid twenties. And if her babysitting of her younger siblings is anything to go by, she probably will, and be a really good mother at it too. And the smaller ones love each other even as they fight and argue and then play and hug a few minutes later.
Because what you missed Karl, in your ranting and raving at the injustices of the world, is the simple fact that yes, things are bad. And yes they could be better, and yes there is wild evil about, but… on one level or another, it has always been this way. Do you think the Spartans and Athenians about to be wiped out by the Persians had an easier life than you do? Or me?
And they would have been wiped out if it weren’t for a “crazy” guy who took his personal bodyguard to the Hot Gates and held off perhaps up to a million Persians for three or four days.
You Karl, with your fears and your impotent rage, ultimately, are more like a whiny, mostly fake, mostly gay Athenian. Me and mine are more like the Spartans that went with Leonidas. And yes, I include my wife and children in that, because she can keep up with me, which is rare and courageous beyond most women, well-beyond certainly all the normies out there worrying about their pedicure and whether they can land a guy with a six or seven figure salary if they just slut it up enough. And my children are on the same path, which can already be seen by the steps they take and the way they relate to the world and themselves in it.
And am I a lone voice in the wind? No. Not by a long shot.
Every sedevacantist family I know has multiple children, at least 4, and counting. And even we Sedevacantists are not even the only ones.
The current Mrs. USA for 2023 has 7 children and lives on a ranch. This is what she said at the finals for her beauty contest:
“When have you felt the most empowered?”
Mrs America 2023: “I have felt this feeling seven times now as I bring these sacred souls to the earth… after I hold that newborn baby in my arms. The feeling of motherhood…is the most empowering feeling I have ever felt.
So go on Karl, invent all the reasons why no one can have multiple children and then whine and whine and whine about it. Meanwhile, Catholics over two millennia created the best civilised nations on Earth by going precisely against every “point” you made, and under conditions that were almost certainly harder than any most people face today. Especially if you remove the conditions created by our own deficient reasoning, Karl.
Reasoning like yours is the real problem. The rest, human beings have dealt with successfully for millennia. And it won’t be the insipid Bill Gates and Klaus Schwabs of the world that will stop me and mine from being here another now and in the future too, a few millennia from now.
My friend Tony sent me a link to this article, which is a very decent and short, to the point, article on Catholicism today. He deals well with the whole Sedevacantist and not sedevacantist issue.
In essence, and much more politely, it is not far from what I have been saying for years now.
And in case you are not aware, in summary, my position is this:
ANY clergy of the Novus Orco are NOT Catholics, nor valid clergy at all, and not members of the Church. If ordained before 1958 (or 1964 if one wants to be extremely charitable) they are apostate heretics that have defected from the faith, as per canon 188.4 of the Code of Canon Law of 1917. If they were “ordained” after 1964 at the latest, then they are not validly ordained to begin with and in any case the charge of non-catholic, either because knowingly and intentionally heretic or never-was catholic/Freemason/Satanist, or heathen pretending to be Catholic through INEXCUSABLE ignorance. Which all results in all the same thing: They are ALL, without exception, to be treated as heretics. Should ANY ONE or more of them, confess, publicly, repent and accept the true Catholic position, then, as per Cum Ex Apostolato Officio, they should spend the rest of their days sequestered in a remote monastery in perpetual penance and with authority over precisely no one.
Any layman that subscribes to the Novus Ordo (Orco, I say, ORCO!) in abysmal ignorance and laziness of their own purported religion, is guilty of laziness and ignorance, but is not, in such cases, a heretic and in his or her genuine innocence, remains, in fact, by virtue of their actual ignorance, a member of the Catholic Church. HOWEVER, if you have read this far, that no longer applies to you. If you have heard of the controversy of Vatican II, of sedevacantists now being the only Catholics, and so on, it is incumbent upon you to research and satisfy yourself of what the truth is, and where the actual Catholic Church is. So, while ignorance might be “bliss”, wilful ignorance is not. At best, such people who refuse to educate themselves once the facts are presented before them, are definitely guilty of wilful ignorance, wilful laziness (sloth) and probably a good dose of pride. While these people might still be considered Catholics, they are in definite error and wilfully so, and should be shunned and shamed, as one would a perpetual fornicator, adulterer, habitual drunk, and so on.
Sedevacantists are the only genuine Catholic left.
Disagreements amongst sedevacantists are not “schisms” but merely personal opinions they may hold, of which some will be in error and some will be less so. Humans are always in some degree of error, as we Catholics know, so this is nothing new or a reason for trying to label the other as a “schismatic” or heretic. And generally, the lay-people of Novus Orco “Catholicism” are also merely ignorant and/or lazy, but can be considered Catholics, though in error. There, are however, among them, definite wolves in sheep’s clothing, so SOME of these lay people can in fact be heretics and/or (more likely) Freemason/Satanists intent on leading the masses astray. Case in Point, see the degenerate Milo. Or any of a bunch of Opus Dei funded grifters.
In general terms, the article says the same sort of thing, except that I have two objections, a major and a minor one.
My “major” objection, is one that I well understand can be used by enemies as pointing to my “arrogant self-determining authority” (it is no such thing. I can simply read and do logic, just like insisting that 2+2 is 4 is not arrogant, regardless of how many fools say it is 5) and by idiots to become protestant in their “interpretation” of canon law, (the 2+2 = purple brigade) so one must tread carefully when voicing it, but in essence, it is this:
Whether a Pope is valid or not may not ALWAYS be absolutely and immediately obvious, but, logic, and God, demands that they eventually become so. Because Catholicism is the TRUTH and as such, sooner or later it reveals itself. And when it does, it does so unambiguously. Because the truth, like math, is not subject to opinion. And canon law is, like math, eternal and not subject to opinion, only error by those not adequately possessed of the faculties required to understand it, just as math is not subject to opinion, but only error in the same way.
In this regard then, I object completely to the idea that is initially expressed along the lines of “well, if everyone goes along with it (Bergy the Oleous being Pope) you gotta as well”. I no more need do this than go along with 2+2 being recognised as being 5 by an overwhelming majority.
Truth is not decided by a majority but by the laws of nature, reality, and God. End of.
And a second objection: quoting this or that doctor of the Church is irrelevant in trying to make a definitive argument. It is really merely a distraction. At best it can just be supporting evidence to further elucidate the only thing that matters: dogmatic, canon law.
In this regard then, while I understand, and appreciate the writer’s intent, and it is a very noble and good one, and I do not wish to detract from his fine points, well and succinctly explained, I must point out that, if one is careful, observant, and follows the rules of Roman Law (which are essentially reason and logic turned to the human condition) there is no ambiguity as to whom is or is not a valid Pope, and, as I have detailed in my works, from 28th October 1958, that is, from Roncalli on, we have not had a valid Pope to date.
While the “criticisms” on the last two posts were entirely predictable, the interesting emails were actually from younger men that managed to see pretty much what I was hoping they would.
Here is a small extract from an email by a reader:
As much as I like some of Schopenhauer’s thoughts on women like, “women are inferior to men in matters of justice, honesty, and conscientiousness. [redacted the rest of the quote as it’s kind of irrelevant]
unless I didn’t read his full thoughts, there was never a “but it’s worth it.” Your article was an objective and promising “here’s what we’re dealing with, now go flourish.” All wrapped up in that frank, Filotto manner of speaking that people either love or hate 🙂
I explained to him that Schopenhauer was an idiot, and it is a mystery to me why anyone took anything that bitter goblin of a “man” said as being meaningful. Same thing with Nietzsche, really. Why anyone thinks those two Germans were great philosophers is explained only by professor Cipolla’s first law of human stupidity: There are always more idiots than you can possibly imagine.
This led me to think about the primary issue with young men today and what they are being sold as a bill of goods and “true”.
Keep in mind that today’s young men, by and large, have either no father figure or a feminised neutered version of one. They are taught usually by women in school and/or pink haired sexual deviants with a sodomy agenda. Normal masculinity is labelled as “toxic” and so on.
If one had to try and pinpoint the single most damaging lie that most deeply affects the correct development of men today, it would be quite the challenge to select just one, however, if properly understood, I would say the most damaging lie is that “violence is never the answer”.
It is an objective lie in multiple ways, but, given modern levels of bullshit and brainwashing, it may take a little explaining for even the above medium intelligence people to get it. So, let us first list the objective points, the see how the positives of it relate to normal men in general.
Firstly: Violence is always the answer.
What they don’t want you to realise is that the people who do and use violence, want total exclusivity. Government and their lackeys are the ones who want to have exclusive use of violence. You pay your taxes because of violence. You follow the rules imposed on you because of violence. And nowadays you will even have violence done at you for tweeting the wrong thing. Scratch that. In fact, today, in the UK you will have violence done to you for praying silently in your mind. Or making a simple observation of fact that a specific policewoman looks like your own lesbian grandma. Apparently this last offence is a “hate crime” too, which confuses the crap out of me. Is saying someone looks like a lesbian a hate crime? Are lesbians illegal now? Or are lesbians especially evil and toxic to the point mentioning someone looks like one is so offensive as to be a hate crime? I am just not sure. And the seven police required to arrest the 16 year old autistic girl who simply made the observation, didn’t seem to explain it either. And, as anyone who understands the most basic aspects of autism knows, it is simply how they do things, express themselves as objectively and naturally as things appear to them. Much like small children, autists are very bad at lying or making things up. They simply call it as they see it. But apparently that is now worthy of having some good, old fashioned, monopolised, state violence on you.
I mean, the UK cops are promoting LGBT and protecting pedophile statutes at the BBC and making sure Alfie could not be removed from the hospital by his parents and taken to Italy to continue living. So I don’t understand… shouldn’t this policewoman be proud of being told she reminds a child of her own loving lesbian grandmother? It’s all so confusing. Not to mention tiring.
The point here is simply this: violence, for good or for evil, is, and always has been, and continues to be, and most likely will continue to be (at least until the return of Christ, as far as any religion/mythology/concept any humans have ever come up with to date goes) the final answer.
All the problems humans face, individually, as a group, etc when they become intractable enough, serious enough, and dangerous enough, can come to a violent resolution. And usually do. Please note this says nothing about right and wrong, justice or injustice. It is just a fact.
Which, since we need to spell it out to some retards that read this blog, this does not mean violence should always be the go to response or that it is always a good response. Nor that it is or should be always necessary. The point being made here is that any issue that becomes intractable enough by talking, understanding, compromise, or some other form of dispute resolution, in the end, throughout human history is resolved by violence. And the government, as all thieves already know, hates competition. And as Lysander Spooner correctly stated, all that government is, is a group of people that use violence or the threat of it, to get what they want, who in the normal course of human affairs inevitably band together and get organised. And eventually call themselves government. See especially Chapter III, part II. The entire work is only 8 pages when printed in PDF on A4, so go on, read the whole thing, not just Ch.III pt.II
Secondly: Equality is a lie.
At every level and in every way. Men and women are not equal and never will be. Even twins are not equal. And you certainly are not equal to government. Are you allowed to own a fully automatic weapon and a tank? How about an attack helicopter or a jet with nukes? An ICBM with nuclear tips? No? Sounds crazy? I tell you what sounds more crazy to me. That a pedophile, dementia patient that stole an election as obviously as any banana republic on the planet, who an’t string together a coherent sentence and regularly shits his pants, apparently has all of those things, and can use them. By the the thousands. As well as the fact that every corrupt government on the planet (all of them) has them. And no, it doesn’t make me feel better it’s really his handlers and butt-wipers that have those.
I would most certainly trust my neighbour and friend, who is a factory worker, more with all that stuff than I do my current nominal leader and confirmed occult-practitioner since her early twenties, Giorgia Meloni.
So, you are not equal, to anyone else, no one is, and you have varying degrees of hierarchies that you belong in and that compete against each other. Just a few examples should suffice:
Socially acceptable vs. Honest.
Good father and husband or good mother and wife vs. Politically correct social “norms”.
Objectively protective of your family in an extreme situation vs. Not in jail.
This last one may need some explanation, but in most of Europe, if an armed intruder shoots at you and your family in your own home and you somehow manage to shoot him back and kill him, you will have plenty of legal problems. Can anyone explain why this should be in a way that makes sense from a point of view of justice? No. No one can. It makes perfect sense, however, when you understand that the point of it is to neuter the natural instinct of any man worthy of the name. The last thing any government wants is a bunch of able bodied men that have an acute interest in actual justice (see all the text you will ever need to be proficient in this in only 8 pages, here) who are also willing to ensure justice becomes the norm in the land, instead of the exception. How long would any government last if thousands of able bodied men who truly understood and wanted justice as the primary law of their land, suddenly decided to act on that wish? Elections would suddenly become initially absolutely done away with, while the tyrants are removed and processed for their various crimes in accordance with actual justice, and later, would become fair, since men would man and ensure those ballots were physically secure. And when violence was done to them for ensuring that fairness, violence would be returned to the thugs that tried to impose it. And so on. Imagine what the thousands of fathers that had children abused by the rape gangs in the UK could have achieved if they had banded together and demanded, not asked for, demanded, justice. The entire police force of those areas would have been turfed out on their ass and the related politicians too, if not jailed for criminal negligence. Again, to be clear, I am just making observations of fact.
Thirdly: The most violent almost always win.
Even during justified (as opposed to CIA manufactured) regime change or revolution, the people that end up taking over, are usually the most brutal and able to do violence on others. It is almost an extinct species of man who is able to do massive, justified violence, yet steady his hand and his passions and emotions and refrain from it when it is not called for. The last men able to do that were the Crusading knights of old, the Spartans, some Roman legionnaires, the Samurai. And even then, it was not an attribute shared by all those of those classes, but rather a virtuous, and rightly admired for it, part of them.
The art of learning to master your emotions as a man, and learn the science of justice, as well as the ability to do violence when required, used to represent the natural formation of the male human. Obviously not all men are constitutionally prone to this, but many, most, are. But you have been fooled into thinking that none are, and, more importantly, that none should be.
So who ends up being a policeman or a soldier? The men least likely to be able to have those virtues. Instead, those jobs are now filled by the thuggish types who are too stupid to become viable criminals without government sponsorship. Are ALL cops and ALL soldiers thuggish scum? Of course not. Are a majority of them practically useless, ill-suited for the job of enforcing justice, instead of pedophile ruler imposed “laws”? Yes. Absolutely. And do some of then even look like someone’s lesbian grandmother? Undoubtedly. Though apparently it’s illegal to point this out in the specific.
The point remains however. The thuggish idiots, more willing and able to do violence than the normal man today, get to impose absurd and obviously unjust “laws” on the better behaved and less violent members of society. It always has been this way and always will be. The only thing that ever changes that, is groups of organised men willing to do violence that have somewhat better sense of justice than the current despots. Such has been the way of humanity since the dawn of time. And periodically that process results in large scale bloodlettings of one kind or another.
In Conclusion:
Given that the above three points are undeniable facts, borne out by all of human history as well as the current state of things all around you on a daily basis, what do you think is best?
Training men to be able to work and organise themselves cooperatively and objectively. Train men to be capable of doing violence in a just manner when required by the ideal needs of justice, whilst learning to control their emotions so as to act with objectivity, logic, and fairness to that very concept of justice. Train men to reject falsity, dishonesty, unbelief in objective reality and relative morality.
Or
Train men to never aggregate with other men on any serious matters. Keep all other men as mere acquaintances but never face challenges that may create bonds of friendship that would extend to even dangerous or unpopular situations in defence of ideals of justice and fairness. Train them that violence is always wrong, never the answer, and to simply submit to whatever dictates of the ruling government and their hired thugs is the order of the day regardless of how unjust. Train everyone, that truth is relative, that objective reality is false and that a biological male can ever become a woman, or vice-versa.
It depends, of course, on which team you are on.
The current Satanic pedophiles running everything from the media to government offices, or, Joe Normal who’s slowly and gradually —and more recently quite suddenly— being trained to be corralled into 15 minute cities with regular gene-altering injections, digital currency that allows you to purchase only what your betters decide is good for you, eating insect paste, wearing only three sets of clothes a year, own nothing, live in a pod and do as you’re told, all while being scrubbed of your history, your nationality, your heritage, your rights and your freedom.
If you have not done so yourself, learn some form of martial art or system. Make sure your sons do. Move to a place or country where you can be as free as possible to live freely and build a community of like minded people.
Some things cannot be predicted with precision, but can be known to occur at some point as a certainty.
A gigantic economic crash is absolutely inevitable. It may happen tomorrow or it may take up to a decade (I’d be very impressed and surprised if it takes that long, but then, I misjudged the 2008 crash by assuming it was at most 5 years away in about 1996). And when that happens, those men who have not been subjected to the brainwashing that the Europeans have been subjected to, will revert to violence.
In fact it’s already happening. Literal hordes of looters in broad daylight, be it in various American cities, or in Oxford Street, London, which I used to walk down regularly 15 years ago and though it was a fairly clean, orderly and pretty area of a large city, as far as that goes anyway.
So yes, it is already taking place. You can get assaulted by 15 underage thugs with knives and get killed by them, but should you lash out and in your own or your family’s defence hit three or four of them hard enough to crack their skulls, you’ll do time in jail. The fact they were trying to stab you or your loved ones to death, will be summarily ignored.
And now, we await the predictable criticisms from the mouth-breathing morons about how I am “advocating violence” or “armed revolution” or whatever other nonsense.
So, to be clear: I am simply advocating for you, as a man, to learn and be able to have the skills to act in self defence, of yourself or others, and/or under the Catholic principle of Just War. Both of these aspects are actual dogmatic duties of any Catholic, especially men. And of course, Catholic means Sedevacantist. Anything else is just Churchianity.
Vox has made several posts ovr the years, and more recently, concerning how the malaise of this world is now, more obviously than ever before in our lifetimes, due to spiritual evil, which determines material evil, which in turns determines the practical and day-to-day evil we confront in various degrees and levels of intensity.
His last point on this was particularly interesting as it captured in one image, exactly how this system works, as well as the reality that it is a most ancient knowledge, that people from all cultures across the Earth, from different times and geographical locations, all understood in one way or another. I re-present the image he put up at his blog here, though I encourage you to read the whole thing there.
For the purposes of this post, it is assumed that the reader not only accepts, but also understands that this is in fact the reality of the situation. If you do, you may want to skip directly to the heading OK, but Why Catholicism? further below. Although I suspect the writing between here and there is probably useful for most readers.
If you still think that the Universe happened by chance, that spiritual entities of great power of both good and evil, do not exist, that there is no God, and so on, then this post is probably beyond your ability to draw anything good from it.
If, however, you accept that this is generally the situation, then as any reasonable person would think, it makes sense for you to know how to best protect yourself from this situation, as well as how to counter it. Depending on your psychological, spiritual, and even material situation, you may also lean more towards one or the other of these two aspects. Most people,, will lean heavily towards the finding the way to be protected or shielded from the worst of the evil that is directed at humanity in general and each one of us in particular. Only a few will lean more towards the replying in kind, and causing damage to the ranks of the spiritual enemies, yes, the material and Earthly ones, but even more importantly, their masters behind them, which means, ultimately, attacking the spiritual entities that are the real originators of the evil that men do.
Given the above premises, summarised here below:
That we exist in a Universe where, spiritual evil is the originator of material evil, as per the diagram above.
A loving and just God, who, because the love is real, allows free will, necessarily has to permit evil to exist, yet, being loving, also allow for two very important points to exist as well:
A way to achieve ultimate salvation from this evil even if we might not escape it here in the material world, and
Restitution/Justice for the evil we suffer AND the evil we do ourselves.
Which necessarily must mean that while the Restitution/Justice can take many, many forms, both here in the material, as well as in the afterlife, or in the presently spiritual world, the route to salvation should be available to all who choose to take it and everyone should have the opportunity and/or ability to find/seek/take this salavation.
Understanding the above, we then can realise that the option of sitting on the sidelines, was never a real option, and in the present day, the fact that ultimately we only have a choice to either side with the evil or with the good has become far more obvious.
Now, aside form tall the fedora wearers, there are huge majority of people who would describe themselves as some kind of believer, that will still take great exception to the above summarised model of reality. It is a little tedious, but in the interest of wanting to do my best to bridge the IQ gap, I will list here below a few of the obvious “objections” such people may have and give a brief explanation of why that objection is nonsense. These are bullet-point style levels of data, (to try and keep this post under novella size), so if you have a particularly strong objection to some of these, I encourage you to begin your research using my shorthand notes as your starting point, and dig there, instead of to try and support your erroneous a priori “conclusion”.
The Objections
1. If God were really Good and Loving…Shhh. Free Will. Learn the consequences of it and learn why it is an absolute axiom of a Loving God. As is Justice. For True Love cannot exist without free will and justice. I explained this in BELIEVE! in more detail.
2. Not EVERYONE has knowledge of your legalistic explanation for Salvation! True, but everyone has the possibility of Salvation, by those very same “legalistic” (aka true and so absolute) rules. Yes they do. In one of several ways:
Direct access to the Gospels, The Bible, Catholic Tradition and Dogma, studied, researched and acted upon.
Indirect access to it, which leads to direct access to it through actual study, seeking of the origin, truth and reality of the situation
God’s Mercy for Invincible Ignorance.
God’s Mercy by simply observing the natural world objectively and as it is and as a result following one’s pure and good conscience (this is admittedly a very hard route given we are all born with sin).
God’s Mercy allowing any one of us to be eventually saved by purification in Purgatory to remove any/all stains from our souls before entering the Beatific Vision in His Presence.
God’s Mercy ensuring that no one is condemned other than by their own free will choice of which path they choose.
3. What about all the people that died BEFORE Jesus. He literally went down to Hell and saved the ones that deserved it from it (hence also yet another clear evidence of Purgatory being a thing, as if the relevant Bible verses were not enough).
4. But… The Catholic Church is a hive of pedophiles, liars and con-men. No. The Impostor Church PRETENDING to be the Catholic Church is, and worse than that too. The only Catholics left are Sedevacantist Catholics. As explained very briefly in BELIEVE! and rather thoroughly in Reclaiming the Catholic Church.
5. But… If Catholicism was the Way, it would not have been infiltrated and reduced in glory to a mere remnant! Really? Do you read your Bible at all? This is PRECISELY what we have been told will happen. Are you honestly unaware that the Road to Hell is paved with good intentions, AND is wide, and well-travelled? But the road to Salvation is hard and narrow? Why do you think we are told that, yet you think you’re perfectly fine skipping along on a road followed by the great masses of “christians” that are in reality just Churchians, and are merely paying lip service to their “christianity”? And do so in whatever really sincere format they prefer, that gives them the most internal sense that yeah, I’m one of the good guys. But in reality, if faced with a gun to their head and the option of dying so as not to denounce Jesus as Lord would fold, there and then?
6. You’re just a zealot trying to brainwash people to your cult! I honestly am doing what I can to present the truth before you so you will hopefully see it and choose well. I do this because it is my duty as a Catholic. Personally, if God allowed me to be exempt from this and I could simply sit in my little life, write my books, (on plenty of other topics that interest me) play with my kids and enjoy my days with my wife, I’d be perfectly happy to never utter a word about Catholicism again. The fact is though, that THE TRUTH, yes all in caps, is the most important thing for people to know. And that cannot avoid Catholicism. It is true that Catholics (and non Catholics too) have become very good friends and have and continue to help me in many small and large ways. But, firstly, I always had such friends in my life, and secondly, I believe I give back to others as much as has been given to me, and if I can, more. In any case, I try to ensure whatever exchange happens is based on genuine friendship. I have absolutely no wish to lead a bunch of people, however, I know from past experience that at times such duties are thrust upon people like me. And if I need to lead an army of Catholic Zealots, well… so be it. My personal “profit” from such a venture, if it ever comes to it, will never be anything that I would trade my personal free time and freedom for, if I had any decent alternatives to avoid it. But… if you believe in truth, if it means something to you beyond your own personal happiness, freedom, or comfort, then, you cannot help but take up that mantle sometimes. And personally, I would really rather it is someone else, but since so far, all the supposed “Catholics” turn out to be grifters like Emo Jones, Milo, Tay-Tay Marshall, Michelle Voris and so on, I guess I have to keep telling you the truth. And if you think I am trying to create a cult of personality as a result of The Kurganate, well, you go on believing whatever you want sunshine, and feel free to depart from me and my writings.
7. Any Other Objections. Feel free to put them in a comment, but read the rules of commenting here first so as not to get spammed forever if you violate them.
OK, but why Catholicism?
Even if the objections have been answered and even if you are intellectually grasping the point, I understand that there is an emotional, instinctive component that can (and usually does) hold one back from saying something as absolutist as: “Yeah, ok, I get it! Catholicism it is. Baptism, here I come, and Holy Mass with Sede Priests only and no divorce, ever, np contraception, and make as many children as possible and let God take care of all my problems!”
Especially given that you have marinated literally ALL your life in a world of lies and fake religion from literally birth.
The path to truth has been so over-filled with lies, false prophets, nonsense, scams, con-men of every stripe and each has and does take a toll on you, spiritually, emotionally, intellectually and physically.
People have given away their time, resources and opportunities to false people, false beliefs, false idols if you prefer. So why and how, should this “Catholicism”, which is supposedly being represented by an obvious pedophile protector in the form of a fake Pope, who literally has performed demon-worshipping rituals in the Vatican (Pachamama) be the One True Way?
Well, the answer, is surprisingly simple… sort of. I mean, you would have to know quite a lot of history and how things actually were and what actually happened. Which is best done by referring to first-hand accounts of things written not necessarily by the big players of the time, but the mere chroniclers of events, be they simple peasants, or soldiers.
If you do this, with respect to christianity, it becomes relatively obvious, and relatively quickly (a year’s worth of study in such matters generally suffices) that several rather astonishing points are true, despite being absolutely counter-intuitive and counter-to all you have been taught. Here, in summary note form they are. And I encourage you to look every one of them up.
11 scared men and 4 women went from being terrified of being crucified for their having followed Jesus, to 10 of them at least being martyred in His name.
Even more astonishingly, they went on to create the start of the largest and longest lasting, continuous Human organisation (call it empire, call it, religion, call it what you will) that has ever existed on this Planet. The Catholic Church has existed, Popes and all (including absence of valid Popes too) for literally almost two millennia.
From a tiny flame in the Middle East, the very centre of this religion became the world’s then most powerful city which was a persecutor and absolute enemy of it. Rome. The Navel of the World.
Despite gnostics, impostors, heretics, occultists, of all kinds, the church managed to survive and re-emerge from its supposed “ashes” (supposed because it was never fully vanquished) to become only stronger after every attack. Our present day times might be compared to the Arian heresy, which saw almost every single Bishop buying into it, only to have that monstrous lie, fully reversed, against all odds. This situation, of the Church prevailing under the most unlikely situations recurs many, many, many, times throughout history.
In practical terms, the incredible achievements made by the crusaders, when fighting in ratios of being outnumbered in over 100:1, are also a reflection of this.
Catholicism was literally responsible for incredible advancements in both social and scientific terms, to name merely a few points:
The use/invention of the Scientific Method.
The raising of the value of women and children from essentially property to cherished mothers and wives, and the progeny of the future.
The principles of meekness (controlling one’s power in mercy and charity until it is sinful to avoid action as required, in which case, however forceful a response as is required is acceptable).
The essential eventual abolition of slavery.
The principle of Justice, fairness in all things and the equality under the law of all men.
The recognition that ordered and safe societies require a hierarchical structure.
The abolition of divorce and contraception, thus returning sexual relations between men and women to the natural order of procreation being the primary objective, avoiding all manner of perversion and degeneracy that flows from sterile coupling for mere entertainment and pure hedonistic pleasure, as such trends degrade society as a whole as is now abundunatly obvious to anyone not in full immersion and the clutches of such behaviour.
The greatest advancement in beauty in architecture, painting, sculpting, and the arts in general that the human race has ever seen. A level of mastery of artistic expression to elevate and inspire the human need for beauty and spiritual enlightenment that has yet to be duplicated.
A level of belief in mercy, forgiveness, truth, sacrifice and family that created the greatest civilisation/s on Earth. The Western world was literally created by Catholicism in its multiple and myriad ways. A man would be ostracised if not beaten within an inch of his life for blasphemy. Ferocious warriors tempered their undeniable ability in war by bending their knee in service to God and the principles of mercy, compassion, honour, courage, beauty and peace.
In short, Catholicism, has not only stood the test of time, but if you merely scratch the surface of reality, you will see it has undeniably created the best ways of living on Earth that this planet has ever seen. that literally no other religion, no matter how “christian” they profess to be, has come even remotely close, be it the “Orthodox” with their insular ways, or the Protestants with their hydra-like spouting 40,000 heads and TV evangelists.
If you can grasp a real sense of history, if you take the time to look at it, from a bird’s eye view, you cannot escape the very simple reality that:
In a world under the dominion of the Prince of Evil Spirits, the only religion that has created a flourishing human happiness, complete with safe villages, happy wives and happy children —cared for by modest men who nevertheless were absolutely capable and willing of being warriors as and when required, without hesitation— has been Catholicism.
In short, it is literally the one tried and true method, that has stood the test of time, when considering how to fight against evil, be it material or spiritual.
As a consequence, it is the reason that I myself became a Catholic, and the reason why I push it as hard as I can to anyone that will listen, without trying to force it down anyone’s throat. You can read my views here. You can buy my books if you want to. And if you come to my home, and you ask me or you want to, we will and can talk about all this stuff and Catholicism in particular, in as excruciating a detail as you want, as long as your baseline level of understanding at least approaches the minimum requirement, and that is, I admit, a shifting line, because while I was fine arguing with retarded protestants who think Catholics “worship Mary” or “banned the Bible” or a hundred other outright lies about Catholicism, and willing to do so to the tune of 800 comment long threads, that ship has sailed. You should at the very least be if not conversant, at least curious about the baseline principles of Catholicism versus the other fake “Christianities” on some level. But in any case, short of you asking me, even if you are sitting at my dining room table, I am not going to force my Catholicism upon you. By the same token, I will also not keep quiet if you begin to speak some utter nonsense. Be it the flat Earth, or how trans women are “real” women, or how the Sun really rises in the West.
But why do I assume that the details, that the rules, that the rituals of Catholicism are so important? Simple. Because they are. Because they literally ARE what created the Western World in all its good aspects. And the things of it that are its worst aspects are all, without exception, running COUNTER to Catholicism.
That’s pretty strong evidence.
It’s also the major failing of the strategist, be it in war or in economics, or really any human endeavour dealing with large-scale human behaviours.
The strategist dismisses to some degree or other, the importance of tactics and the small-team or even individual actions that can, and do, have a butterfly effect. While many of these are absolutely unpredictable, the most successful endeavours are those where the strategist is very much aware of the importance of the tactics.
Large scale, bird’s eye view of things tend to imagine that humans will act somewhat rationally, or at least somewhat selfishly, and thus be “manageable”. It is an almost total lie. The human monkeys are about as rational as a macaque on crack. And the evil ones understand this to a very high degree, that the “good guys” seem mostly oblivious to.
Why do you think the whole covid farce, and the upcoming climate change farce, and all the other farces went so well for the evil puppets being puppeteer by their spiritual leaders? Because they lay the groundwork tactically. They spent decades brainwashing you into a mental sludge of laziness, comfort and crappy food. They spent decades making you afraid of your own shadow. And they co-ordinated patently and trained the foot soldiers in academia, in churches, in government offices. they trained and trained and trained them relentlessly to be the cogs that operate exactly in this and that way in the machine. And they kept adjusting and correcting so as to make the natural human impulse for freedom die a small death every day in a million ways. And only after 70 or 80 years of this absolutely intentional, absolutely precise training, dedication and effort to the Satanic ideas, did they launch their main assault. And Covid was just the first of them. Next they will squeeze and squeeze and squeeze, until the resistance is crushed, demoralised and poor. And only then they will launch another crisis. And that crisis may even take the mask of a “salvation” of sorts. Why, of course we will give every one of you your own, free universal income. Sure it’s not enough to actually make you survive in any kind of dignity, but it’s a big help! Right? And it’s free! here, take it. And then they will gradually shrink away the other options even more and restrict what you can and can’t do with that “free” income once you are hooked on it. Just like a pimp and drug dealer.
And what reserve of mental, emotional, and spiritual strength, do you have left in you?
Especially as a secular humanist that doesn’t believe in a True, Good, Loving and Just God? Because your own pain surely hampers your ability to even imagine such a God. The dystopian reality you are in prevents you from even considering such a God. And that is exactly the plan. Once you have zero ability, willingness or interest in even looking for the Catholic God, that is, the true one, then they have won. And they don’t mind at all if you believe in a fake one. In a rainbow painted one that says pedophelia is just another sexual orientation. Or any number of false “gods”.
What chance does a secular man have of resisting the current onslaught? I would say close to none. I think of myself before becoming Catholic and how would I face the current world, and while I would never have bent to it, it most likely would have broken me. And I never felt that level of pressure even at my worst times. It would have broken me because without God, the entire thing really is absolutely insane. Without God, and only a materialistic view of things, nothing, not greed, not money, nor earthly power, can explain what has and what is and what will be happening.
It is literally the experience of living in a mental asylum with literal mass murderers running the show and no way out at all. Nor does it explain at all why things are this way or why they would be. There is literally no reasoned explanation that makes any kind of sense.
And that leads one to actual insanity. Both in terms of how the world is, and ultimately, how you will become, because no sane person can exist in a mental asylum with no way out and also not eventually lose their mind or kill themselves to escape it.
And that… again… is precisely the plan they have for you.
IF, on the other hand, you consider the Catholic God, and The Catholic Church, the real one, that is, the sedevacantist one, as it is the only Catholicism left, and you study it, you begin to notice three or four things, of absolutely extreme importance:
The evil of the world and its madness suddenly makes sense. Everything fits and you now understand why things are as they are, and why the seeming insanity is actually very well-reasoned out behaviours. They seem illogical because they are so evil, and ultimately, yes, illogical too, because choosing evil over good in a Universe owned by a Loving God, is going to be a losing proposition anyway. But aside from that fundamental error, the in-between state, between the current day and judgement day, makes sense from the evil beings’ perspective.
Because it makes so much more sense it doesn’t hurt or touch you nearly as much. An evil understood is an evil you can largely prevent or at least prepare against.
Inspiration and hope arise. Even if you are broken, single and lost, if you become aware of the true existence of God, and commit to it, properly, in the true seeking of Him, then miracles will eventually begin to happen in your life. I know because they did in mine and in everyone who has truly committed that way.
Purpose arises. Whether it is to bring the church back to its former glory, whether it is to get married and start a family, or whether it is to simply resist the evil and add to the good, you will find a new and better way to fill your days and hours, and months, and years. And over time, you will build foundations that are unshakable and your effect in the world will become a source of spreading light, love and goodness. And this seemingly small, inexorable change, will continue to grow and spread in ways you can’t even imagine and touch a much larger number of people than you can possibly imagine.
None of these things arise or come to be with a “mere christianity” type of C.S. Lewis, British style, wishy-washy-ness. You need good, solid, Chestertonian hardcore Catholicism in your face like a shouting sergeant, followed by a sharp kick in your backside, a shot of espresso and a GLORIOUS MORNING that makes the expected 50 mile hike with full kit to rush the enemy a rare moment of living joy! And not because you’re some poor Ukrainian bastard hopped up on meth laced with moly, but because it’s real.
If you think a generic, “non-denominational” (which really means without rules) “Christianity” will save the west, or even just you, you are sorely mistaken. You really need to think a little better and a little harder. You really think if a Loving God exists that He doesn’t have very clear and specific rules? And you think that that set of rules is the same one that applies even to demons, and only that (Jesus is King)? Come on. Wake up.
And why do you think we would need rules? I mean… have you even looked at humanity? Have you seen what they get up to when there are no rules for them to follow and no one to enforce them? Because if you have not seen it yet, then you are not reading this; as obviously you live on a remote mountain, sealed off from all digital information and other human beings.
Humans need rules. The question is only which rules are best. And we have 2000 years of history that tells us without any equivocation or doubt, that those who follow the actual rules of Catholicism (not the presented ones, not the ones impostors tell you are the rules, not the fake ones given by fake clergy or fake or ignorant laymen, but the actual ones, codified in the Pio-Benedictine Codes of Canon Law of 1917. Which are all based on Biblical and Catholic Tradition and dogma, and have remained unchanged from the beginning (The divine rules. The worldly rules can and do change as required to manage the church structure).
So it’s up to you, ultimately, as Catholicism teaches, no one can or should ever be forced to convert. It must be chosen. But I would say that the evidence that Catholicism creates the best situations possible for human beings is overwhelming and lasting, and continues to be true today.
So I hope you’ll join us.
To counter the degeneracy of John Lennon’s imagine.
Because, think: The Church was finally almost fully collapsed and thoroughly infiltrated by 28th October 1958, when the first of the current fake Popes sat on Peter’s throne.
And by 1969, a mere decade and a few days later, the boomer generation had been released on the world with their “free love” faked Moon Landing, the Beatles, and a completely ego-driven belief that only they mattered and only they knew how to enjoy life and nothing else mattered. Degeneracy on every level began to pour out into people’s lives via television to a degree and on a level never before experienced. Ancient customs and traditions of honour, courage, and virtue were replaced by “new” actions of greed, deception, and narcissistic egoism. Do you really think it is a coincidence?
If you have read this far, you have at least demonstrated the ability to read relatively long passages, which is a very positive thing. it means you have the baseline ability to at least educate yourself about history and the various topics I mention above. If you want to save yourself a lot of time, you may want to read some or even all of my books, which summarise the things I learned in each topic over a period of about 20 years per subject, roughly speaking (concurrently to some degree in all cases not sequentially). But it’s not a requirement. You can, and should, do your own research. I just happen to have travelled that road before and probably longer and deeper than most people ever would, so I wanted to share what I learnt. But you can certainly find your own way without nay more prompting from me than possibly this blog post.
May God guide your path, friend. And may you become a Catholic soon. There are many more of us than you imagine, and more coming every day, we’ll be here when you decide to get stop swimming, lost, or hanging to the side of our ancient, damaged, but still and always viable ship, and instead decide to climb abroad, and join us in sailing over this sometimes dangerous and treacherous ocean, but always in the Glory of God and the Light of Truth.
An obviously Polish man, just as Polish as anyone born in Warsaw, starts to molest two young girls in public.
A member of the public instructs the “new Polak” in the correct etiquette concerning this sort of thing.
Notice the very calm expression after the lesson has been concluded. This is not a man acting out of uncontrolled anger. It is the calm and conscious choice of a man that is still worthy of being called a man.
I am also certain that since this happened in Poland, there were no negative repercussions to the educator. The same might not be true for the “new Polak”.
Sex and Relationship Lies
The largest battleground for human happiness and misery is in the field of romantic relationship between a man and woman.
UPDATE: you can now read how to make the best of the current situation in my book Caveman Theory. Available ONLY at my E-Store as it is too politically incorrect for Amazon. But read the post below to get a general sense of things first. As the book in large part is written to help you navigate the current situation and achieve success in the kind of relationship you want to have.
If you just listen to the first 7 minutes of this podcast on it, the lady in it identifies really quite well the basic issues facing young people today and what I found particularly useful is that she indicates, as does the guy doing the podcast, the specific fact that it is the general zeitgeist of the world to present things as if love itself is not part of the equation any longer. They refer to recent movies, Barbie and apparently Snow White and how the main woke actress in Snow White, Rachel Ziegler, says:
“She’s not going to be saved by the Prince, she’s not going to be dreaming about true love, she’s dreaming about becoming the leader she knows she can be. The Prince in the original movie stalked her.”
Imagine, someone from the hypokrite class thinking this way about the classic story of Snow White. The word hypokrite of course, was the original term for actors in Ancient Greece. You can see why it’s relevant to study the classic, and etymology, yes? Actors in classical times were essentially thought of as basically prostitutes. And while the glorification of whores is also nothing new (The temple prostitutes used to get paid to have sex with any man that donated to the temple and were held in high esteem by mostly Babylonian/Sumerian people, while the Greek Herodotus, in his Histories referred to the practice of forced prostitition at least once as “foul”.
The foulest Babylonian custom is that which compels every woman of the land to sit in the temple of Aphrodite and have intercourse with some stranger at least once in her life.
As pretty much the entire #metoo movement proved, thinking most actors and actresses are essentially highly paid prostitutes is really about the size of it. And in fact, having met a few actresses and also a few prostitutes in my life, generally, a highly paid whore who makes no pretence of being anything other than what she is, in my experience of conversing with such people, are far more honest and interesting than those who fancy themselves as artists that should be venerated. And if you doubt, me look up the term “yachting” when used in the context of famous actresses, fashion models and so on. Having worked as close protection for some wealthy people from all around the world, I can tell you that some world-recognised names of women that literally everyone knows, have, in fact, been bought an paid for to have sex with, like any common prostitute. It just cost more. And while I have no personal experience in the matter, if I had to bet on it I would bet that the more expensive famous whores probably performed worse than the cheaper unknown ones.
But I digress. The point is that the famous people a lot of young people look up to are essentially spouting the narrative they are paid to vomit out of the orifices they use to make their money.
And that narrative, as the man and woman in the podcast state, is that love makes you weak, is some kind of outdated, or outmoded way of being, removes choice and fun from your life, causes unnecessary suffering and is no good at all. And it is a narrative being pushed, as the lady correctly identifies, primarily by people who are undesirable to the opposite sex.
I have been saying for years that I have yet to meet a beautiful woman that is reasonably normal (i.e. hasn’t suffered some genuinely dramatically traumatising event) that is in any way a feminist. Pretty women pretty much can get a LOT of what they want primarily by playing to their straights and those are the feminine qualities. And if they are really smart, they will use those to snatch a quality man who has masculine qualities.
The blue-haired manatees that scream feminism, and the incel-gargoyles that become MGTOW types, along with a few others that are internally as repulsive as the aforementioned generally are externally, are essentially deeply miserable human wreckage and as they say, misery loves company, so they try to drag everyone else down to their level of despair.
The narrative is so pervasive and so prevalent in literally every aspect of life that you don’t even realise in how many multitudes of ways it is pushed on you and at you throughout every single day. If you read my last blog post before this one, perhaps, you might begin to become more aware of how insidiously the lies about reality and ESPECIALLY about relations between men and women are inculcated in you by subterfuge, stealth, unstated assumptions (one of the biggest culprits and methods), and so on.
Reality all around you is narrated and presented in a twisted manner in order to make you think that the current narrative of feminism-über-alles and being a strongly independent woman and an asexual automaton male, are the pinnacle one should strive for. That is, when they are not pushing the idea you should sexually mutilate yourself in order to become a tragic parody of the opposite sex.
So you bet, there are a lot of unhappy young men and women, unfulfilled in any relationship they attempt to get into and so on. Even if one of them has actually seen through most of the fog, finding a partner that has too, or that at least is amenable to being shown the way through the lies is difficult. It requires patience, skill, intelligence, and genuine research that does not collapse into embittered despair.
I have mentioned these type of things over the years a lot, both on this blog and on my Youtube channel, so search through it and see the videos on the topic too, and pluck what you can from it, but in just a few key sentences, as a starting point, please try to keep this in mind:
Above all, a lifelong marriage for the purpose of raising multiple children in a loving, strong, family, with emphasis on overcoming hardship and sticking by your blood whenever you can, with the ethics that Catholicism has, —that is, the original real Catholicism (sedevacantism now), which includes Just War and the Death Penalty, as well as the DUTY to defend innocents, yes even with violence, yes even with pre-emptive violence— produces the genuinely happiest life you can possibly imagine.
I stumbled into it by never giving up my fight against perceived nonsense from childhood until my late 30s. the Boomer zeitgeist did a lot of damage to my generation (and your too), but I sincerely hope you throw off the mental shackles I got rid of mostly by brutish (yet correct) animal instinct (at least at first) by conscious understanding and reasoned contemplation of reality and truth.
March on brothers and sisters; and win.
UPDATE:
Lest you think I am unkind… let me be clear, that even though you may be a gargoyle, it’s up to you what TYPE of Gargoyle you make yourself into.
The Loser, Omega, Poor-me, Gargoyle-Incel:
The “Red-Pilled” All-women-are-bitches, MGTOW Incel-Gargoyle:
Or… The…
I’m a Gargoyle! And I kick all the ass! NON-Incel Gargoyle:
PS: Please ignore the demonic undertones, Gargoyles are traditionally representative of demonic beings, while the unfortunates that look like them are not necessarily evil any more than anyone else is. I hope the images illustrate the point I am trying to make in a sufficiently obvious manner. You can’t help some of the cards you are dealt. But you have absolute authority in how you play them.
You might be interested in the following posts:
By G | 18 November 2023 | Posted in Actual Science, Brain-Mind Functionality, Freemasons, Impostors and Frauds, Increasing Happiness, Relationships, Sedevacantism, Social Commentary, The Enemy Within, The Jews