The Marquis de Sade


“There is nothing that sets bounds to licentiousness…The best way of enlarging and multiplying one’s desires is to try to limit them.”
Sade

Perhaps the most controversial figure in sexual history is the Marquis de Sade, the French aristocrat after whom the practice of sadism is named. Sade could equally well be called the greatest philosopher of sex. A highly intelligent man, he spent much of his adult life in prisons and mental asylums because of his socially unacceptable conduct. Some have labelled him the most subversive man who ever lived.

He provided an astonishingly frank self-analysis: “Related through my mother to the greatest families in the realm, attached on my father’s side to everyone of distinction in the province of Languedoc; born in Paris in the lap of luxury and plenty, I thought as soon as I could think that nature and fortune had combined to heap their gifts on me; I thought so because people were silly enough to tell me so and this ridiculous prejudice made me haughty, despotic and irascible; it seemed that everyone should yield to me, that the entire universe should flatter my whims, and that I alone possessed the right to conceive and satisfy such whims.”

This is the same attitude expressed to this day by most of the privileged elite. Do you remember Tiger Woods’ explanation of his tawdry conduct?

 

 

"I knew my actions were wrong but I convinced myself that normal rules didn't apply. I never thought about who I was hurting, instead I thought only about myself. I ran straight through the boundaries a married couple should live by. I thought I could get away with whatever I wanted to. I felt that I had worked hard my entire life and deserved to enjoy all the temptations around me. I felt I was entitled, and thanks to money and fame, I didn't have to go far to find them.”

 

 

And so say all the members of the privileged elite. What’s even much more disturbing is that the world agrees to suspend normal rules for these people. The powerful do not inhabit the same world as ordinary folk. Nor do the weak. They are so far down the pecking order that Sade thought anything could be done to them with impunity.

 

Though not if you insult God, as Sade discovered to his cost. His first spell in prison came after a young woman complained to the police that Sade planned to whip her and have anal sex (a capital crime). He also wanted to urinate in a chalice, insult Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary, and insert a Communion wafer in the girl’s vagina.

 

 

 

The king commanded that Sade should be jailed for two weeks, and thus Sade first became acquainted with the prison system in which he would spend much of the rest of his life. In a time of excess and licence for the rich, Sade managed to be so outrageous that it proved impossible to turn a blind eye to what he was doing.  

 

 

Sade was always on the lookout for impressionable girls to exploit. For centuries in France there was a habit of upper class men hanging around backstage to pick up actresses and dancers. In the 19th century, the French artist Degas often painted young ballet dancers being ogled by sinister gentlemen in black frockcoats and top hats. These lechers were known as abonnés meaning “subscribers” and came from the richest echelon of French society. They were allowed, for the right price, to go wherever they liked in the ballet school. It was understood that they’d have sex with the ballet dancers i.e. ballerinas were rather high-class whores.

 


 

With his valet, Sade took part in an orgy of whippings, masturbation and sodomy with four girls, to whom they gave aniseed sweets soaked in Spanish Fly aphrodisiac. Two of the girls became ill and said they’d been poisoned.

A warrant was issued for the arrest of Sade and his valet, but they fled the country. In their absence, Sade was sentenced to beheading for poisoning and sodomy, and his valet to hanging. Their bodies were then to be burned and their ashes scattered to the winds. The sentences were duly carried out on effigies of the two men.


When Sade heard the news, he recorded that he masturbated and discharged joyously! When he later returned to France, the death sentence passed on him was conveniently forgotten, as was so often the case with the aristocratic class.

Unreformed, Sade continued his sexual adventures and was frequently in court on charges of “excessive libertinage.” It wasn’t long before he was back in jail where he took to indulging in fantasies about coprophilia – fascination with excrement. He also loved sex toys and used them to aid his “prestiges”: masturbatory orgasms in his cell.

Writing to his wife, Sade said of himself, “Imperious, choleric, impetuous, extreme in everything, of disorderly wealth of imagination on human conduct such as life never saw the equal of, there you have me in a couple of words; one thing more, you must either kill me or take me as I am, for I shall not change.”

Sade was a keen student of the anti-theistic philosophy of the Enlightenment and became an extreme scientific materialist. Nature, not God, was the Prime Mover, he believed. He called Jesus Christ a vulgar trickster and impostor and declared that religions were only good for setting man against man, and “caused greater loss of life on earth than all other wars and all other plagues combined.”

In a booklet called Dialogue between a Priest and a Dying Man (written while he was in jail), Sade had the dying man convert the priest to atheism and join him, in his last hours, in an orgy with six beautiful women.

Sade was influenced by the work of Voltaire and his library also contained Les Liaisons Dangereuses by Pierre Choderlos de Laclos, a precise dissection of the libertine’s art of seduction of innocent victims (famously filmed as Dangerous Liaisons). That book captures perfectly the amorality and pleasure-seeking obsessions of the French aristocracy in pre-Revolutionary France.

Sade, Prisoner No 6 (the number of his cell), was eventually transferred to the notorious Bastille prison in Paris, and found himself in a cell located in the “Liberty Tower”, the irony of which wasn’t lost on him. Most of the people of the contemporary world might be considered as prisoners in the Liberty wing of the global jail. They imagine they are free but they are only free to do whatever the authorities desire of them.

(It’s interesting that Patrick McGoohan in the 1960s TV series The Prisoner was also “No 6”.)

It was in the Bastille that Sade wrote the infamous 120 Days of Sodom on a great roll of paper (like a toilet roll) to disguise the fact that it was a book. Given that his cell was regularly searched, anything as obscene as his most famous book would certainly have been confiscated if it had been in a traditional book form.

He was transferred from the Bastille a day or two before it was stormed by the people in 1789 and despatched to a lunatic asylum used by aristocratic families to conveniently lock away embarrassing black sheep. To his horror, he was allowed to take nothing with him. When the Bastille was ransacked, Sade’s old cell was looted and he was certain he had permanently lost his sexual masterpiece, prompting him to weep “tears of blood”.

It had in fact survived. Someone had stolen it and sold it. In 1900, long after Sade’s death, it showed up in Germany and was published in 1904.

The story revolves around a castle as isolated from the world as the Grail Castle of the Fisher King, but rather than being the home of chivalric knights, this castle is the torture chamber of four wealthy, licentious perverts whom Sade described as “bloodsuckers who are always on the watch for public calamities”. In the present day, we might liken them to rapacious, nouveau riche individuals such as Wall Street hedge fund managers; people without any qualities at all to commend them.

One was a banker (described as effeminate), one a duke (who poisoned his mother, and his sister when she found out), one a judge (who deliberately sentenced the innocent to death) and one a bishop (who religiously practised anal intercourse). They summed up the world of money, entitlement, the law and religion.

As someone who detested religion, “lawful” authority and the vulgar rich, Sade was all too keen to depict them as criminals, perverts, hypocrites and monsters. To this extent, Sade could be said to be providing a sharp social satire mocking the claims of the upper echelons of society to be morally superior. On the other hand, Sade makes it clear that he himself is greatly attracted to horrific sexual offences against others, and, if he could have got away with it, he would certainly have murdered some of his victims. Therefore his novel is, disturbingly, both satire and aspiration. Perhaps his real message is that whereas he is honest about valuing the lives of the lower orders of society at zero, his fellow members of the privileged elite pretend otherwise while feeling and thinking exactly as he does. And who can doubt that the Old World Order of today are just as contemptuous as Sade of the slaves who serve them?   

Sade’s description of the judge is suitably monstrous: “a pillar of society; almost sixty years of age and worn by debauchery to a singular degree…he was tall, he was dry, had two blue lustreless eyes, a livid and unwholesome mouth, a long nose. Hairy as a satyr, flat-backed, with slack drooping buttocks that rather resembled a pair of dirty rags flapping upon his upper thighs; the skin of his arse was, thanks to whip strokes, so deadened and toughened that you could seize up a handful and knead it without his feeling a thing.”

The plan of the four libertines was to give themselves over to murderous debauchery for 120 days, cut off from any chance of being stopped by any outsiders. Their castle resembled a forerunner of Nazi death camps, with the emphasis on sexual crimes against the victims.

They were to be assisted by four middle-aged prostitutes, women who would tell depraved stories of the erotic highlights of their careers, which the protagonists would then seek to emulate. They would be aided by eight “fuckers” (sodomists) chosen solely on the basis of the enormous size of their penises.

The victims were 46 in number, as meticulously detailed by Sade. They included the four daughters of the protagonists, eight young girls and eight young boys kidnapped from their families (all aged 12 to 15 and all virgins, to be deflowered during the 120 days of debauch), female servants, and four ugly old women to serve as a contrast to the young beauties. The victims were given all sorts of sexual tasks and timetables, and any contraventions of the rules were met with the death penalty.

The book contains hundreds of pages depicting the most extreme sexual degradation and violence, often culminating in murder. Although it might sound an interesting if unpleasant read, it could well qualify as the most boring book in the whole of literature. Unless you share Sade’s propensities, it soon becomes a tedious catalogue of nauseating crimes, all merging into one grand violation of humanity. Imagine watching one porn movie 24/7 for four months and you will get a flavour of the book. Any initial thrill at coming across the terrain of ultimate transgression soon gives way to tedium. Most readers quickly become desensitised to the myriad cruelties, crimes and horrors. It is impossible to care about anything or anyone in the book, including the victims. One gets a disturbing idea that the guards of the Nazi death camps must have felt this way.

For this reason, 120 Days of Sodom is an astonishingly profound book, revealing the deepest horrors of the human condition, and the most disturbing of these may be that the suffering of others can become irritating and then boring, meaning that we can grow inured to the pain of others.

Sade said of his book, “You must prepare your heart and mind for the most impure tale that has ever been told since our world began…”

When the young virgin girls arrive at the castle of their destruction, they are greeted by one of the most chilling statements ever made. The Duke tells them that they are at the mercy of “beings of a profound and recognized criminality, who have no god but their lubricity, no laws but their depravity…godless, unprincipled, unbelieving profligates in whose eyes the life of a woman – the lives of all women – are as insignificant as the crushing of a fly.”

If the Nazis had been honest, they would have said the same thing to the Jews arriving at the extermination camps. The Jews had arrived in a godless fortress where their lives were meaningless, valueless and soon to be taken from them.

That is the speech that power makes to weakness, and there is nothing weakness can do about it. Well, other than become strong and fight back.

If you want to understand the mind of a Nazi executioner, the 120 Days of Sodom is probably the best possible starting point.

Sade must be congratulated for unflinchingly committing to paper the thoughts of a person who literally thought that for the strong to kill the weak was nothing but nature in action (as in the law of the jungle), hence could not be condemned in any way. He argued more or less that it was the duty of the strong to kill the weak and it would be unnatural and deadly to the future of humanity if they didn’t. He declared that nothing that destroys can be criminal, such being the law of Nature. In a later book, one of his characters says, “Cruelty is simply the energy in a man whom civilisation has not yet altogether corrupted. It is therefore not a vice but a virtue.” He also observes, “Announce a cruel spectacle, a burning battle, a gladiatorial combat, and you will see them come running in droves.”

In the modern day, we have endless spectacles of humiliation and degradation to “amuse” us. Millions of people are addicted to “shoot ‘em up” video games, to crime novels, to true crime investigations. “Road rage” is just one of many forms of rage that can erupt in our modern society at any time in any place. We are perched on the crater of a volcano of violence that can erupt without warning.

No matter what you think of Sade’s ideas, you can’t deny that if the cosmos has no moral basis then Sade is right, and indeed the earliest years of human evolution probably did involve the continual destruction of the weak at the hands of the strong. Even now, the powerful have complete dominion. They don’t kill because they don’t need to. They can get anything they want from the weak. And if they choose the right victims (those who will not be missed), they can even get away with murder.  

Sade makes us look straight at the face of absolute human horror where there is no mercy at all, and no possibility of salvation.

But his dark fantasies were not exhausted by 120 Days of Sodom. He later chose to write about the adventures of two sisters, one virtuous and one depraved, and he thus gave the world another grotesque masterpiece.

 

 

http://www.igneousgrimm.com


 



 

Justine and Juliette: Virtue and Vice

"There are bloody corpses everywhere, infants torn from their mothers' arms, young women with their throats slit after an orgy, cups full of blood and wine, unimaginable tortures. Cauldrons are heated, racks set up, skulls broken, men flayed alive; there is shouting, swearing, blasphemy; hearts are ripped from bodies; all this on every page and every line. What an indefatigable scoundrel he is! In his first book he shows us a poor girl at bay, lost, ruined, shrinking under a rain of blows, led by inhuman monsters through one underground vault after another, from graveyard to graveyard, beaten, broken, devoured alive, wilting, crushed…When the author has committed every crime there is, when he is sated with incest and monstrosities, when he stands panting above the corpses he has stabbed and violated, when there is no church he has not sullied, no child he has not sacrificed to his rage, no moral thought on which he has not flung the foulness of his own thoughts and words, then at last this man pauses, looks at himself, smiles to himself and is not frightened. On the contrary…"
Jules Janin

"Justine" is about the victory of vice over virtue. At the beginning of the book, Sade provides the chilling logic of the tale: "Will it not be felt that Virtue however beautiful becomes the worst of all attitudes when it is found too feeble to contend with Vice and that, in an entirely corrupted age, the safest course is to follow along after the others?...if misery persecutes virtue and prosperity accompanies crime, those things being as one in Nature's view, is it not far better to join company with the wicked who flourish than to be counted among the virtuous who founder?"

As we might say, "If you can't beat them, join them."

Sade's "heroine" is a trusting, naïve young woman who falls prey to a host of monstrous men and women who exploit her mercilessly. Even in a monastery, she finds nothing but depraved monks who torture women.

Justine is continually raped, yet her childlike innocence means that she still thinks of herself as a virgin. She is falsely accused of theft, arson and poisoning, found guilty and sentenced to death. On her way to execution, she is rescued by a gentleman and his mistress who turns out to be her long-lost sister Juliette.

A happy ending? You must be joking. Justine is shortly afterwards killed by a lightning bolt that enters her mouth and exits via her vagina.

Sade then writes the adventures of the sister - Juliette. If Justine illustrated the weakness and failure of virtue, Juliette exults in the triumph of vice.

Juliette was a convent girl - in a degenerate nunnery where the girls have regular lesbian orgies and are taught the philosophy of the libertine. On leaving the nuns, Juliette goes to a brothel and becomes an expert whore mixing with the great and good (and usually stealing from them). She meets a government minister described as, "most false, most treacherous, most depraved, most savage, of infinite hauteur, possessed of the art of robbing France to the highest degree." (Sounds just like a typical Washington D.C. Senator.)

Juliette is put in charge of organising orgies for the privileged elite, often involving murder. Girls are roasted alive like chickens on a spit.

The minister poisons his father and sodomizes his own daughter at the bedside as the old man dies, then pimps her to a friend: "I have committed patricide, I murdered, I prostituted, I sodomized," he announces proudly. He dreams of starving the French people and turning them into cannibals.

Juliette marries a rich man for his money then poisons him. She joins a sisterhood sworn to killing men to avenge their crimes against women. After many mind-bogglingly sadistic experiences, she ends up in the Vatican, determined to see the Pope's prick and to fuck him. Before they have sex, they discuss crime and murder. The Pope acknowledges that murderers aren't criminals and should instead be compared with weapons of Nature such as war, famine and plague. What's the difference between being the victim of a serial killer or an earthquake? In both cases, Nature has killed you.

"We do not complain of nature as immoral because it sends a thunderstorm and makes us wet. Why then do we call those who injure us immoral?"
Nietzsche

The Pope rightly says, "You will always find wrongs measured not by the size of the offence but by the vulnerability of the aggressor; and there is your explanation why wealth and position are always right." That is, if you are powerful enough you can get away with anything. The Pope then sodomizes Juliette behind the great altar in St Peter's after inserting a Communion Host in her anus. Afterwards, an orgy is held in the Sistine Chapel, giving Juliette's accomplices an opportunity to rob the Pope's treasury and help themselves to a fortune.

Lady Clairwil, the English aristocrat for whom Juliette works, dreams of committing the perfect crime. She declares, "What I should like to find is a crime, the effects of which would be perpetual, even when I myself do not act, so that there would not be a single moment of my life, even when I was asleep, when I was not the cause of some chaos, a chaos of such proportions that it would provoke a general corruption or a disturbance and that even after my death its effects would still be felt."

Have not the Abrahamic prophets already committed the perfect crime? Long dead, their toxic legacy is with us every day and still growing. Islam, in particular, has the capacity to turn the Earth into a criminal mental asylum.

Many feminists have found themselves finding the virtuous sister Justine rather pathetic and the wicked sister Juliette disturbingly invigorating, like an ancient Maenad reborn.

*****

Such a notorious individual as Sade could not escape the scrutiny of the Revolution and he was charged with various crimes. He would certainly have gone to the guillotine had not Robespierre and St Just been overthrown soon after he was indicted. Nevertheless, condemned from all quarters, he ended up back in the mental asylum where he was allowed to stage plays he had written, using the inmates as actors, and attracting a high class, voyeuristic audience.

A report was sent to Napoleon describing Sade as being "in a perpetual state of lascivious furore, which constantly compels him to monstrous thoughts and actions."

The controversial French poet Baudelaire wrote, "One must always come back to Sade, that is to say Natural Man, to explain evil."

In actual fact, Sade effectively denied the existence of evil. If there is no evil in the animal world and man is a mere animal then how can anything be described as evil?        

Sade might be called an extreme libertarian and anarchist. He argued that any government that advocates equality should also endorse theft as a means of redistributing wealth more evenly. Like Rousseau, he thought that many of the evils of the world were the direct result of private property. He said, "It cannot be a just law that orders a man who has nothing to respect another who has everything." In the "natural" world, a strong young guy with nothing would simply kill the older guy with everything and take it all from him, just as happens with lions, for example. The "law", above all else, is about preventing nature taking its course, about protecting the wealth that the rich stole from others. How many of the modern wealthy come from families that profited from the immoral enslavement of others? If their riches were from an immoral and now illegal source, why are those riches respected as legal and moral? All wealth derived from slavery should have been seized by the State in the name of the people, justice and morality. It should then have been given to the former slaves as reparation for the crimes they suffered.

Sade attempted to get the Revolutionary government of France to abolish Christianity and replace it with the atheistic cult of Reason and Virtue. It always astonished him that Christianity hadn't been destroyed by ridicule at its inception. A million years from now, humanity will think it as absurd that people once believed in Christ, Allah, Yahweh as that they once believed in the gods of Mount Olympus. It beggars belief that in the quantum age, billions of people still bow to ancient gods utterly incompatible with science. Any God not consistent with science, mathematics and philosophy is no God at all. The irrational masses claim that God belongs to a domain of faith. What nonsense. He belongs to the realm of knowledge. He is as much part of rational existence as anything else and can be fully explained according to the laws of reason and logic. After all, he is the culmination of those laws, their supreme expression.

Sade recognised the profound link between the priestly caste and the royal. He said, "Tyranny and religious superstition were nurtured in the same cradle, both were daughters of fanaticism, both were served by those useless creatures known as the priest in the temple and the monarch on the throne: having a common foundation they could not but protect each other." Elsewhere, he wrote, "In every age one of the primary concerns of kings has been to maintain the dominant religion as one of the political bases that best sustains the throne." In other words, tyranny, whether it be a monarchy, a theocracy or a rich man's "democracy" always panders to religion and superstition.     

Sade's philosophy can be summed up as "might is right"; the world is amoral and Nature is based on creation and destruction, so no one is entitled to condemn the forces of destruction. Any claims to a moral order are based on hypocrisy and covert exploitation.

Sade's philosophy might be regarded as the most extreme form of Darwinism: all weakness must perish, and the weak can have no complaint. Nature conferred weakness upon them and Nature will kill them for it.

Sade remains an immensely disturbing figure. He desired not sexual partners but victims, denied of all rights. He declared, "There is no more selfish passion than lust." For Sade, other people didn't count at all. In many ways, he was the first modern serial killer, but his crimes were confined to the page because he was not at liberty to enact them in reality. Maurice Blanchot captured the essence of Sade's "morality": "De Sade said over and over again in different ways that we are born alone, there are no links between one man and another. The only rule of conduct is that I prefer those things which affect me pleasurably and set at nought the undesirable effects of my preferences on other people. The greatest suffering of others always counts for less than my own pleasures. What matter if I must purchase my most trivial satisfaction through a fantastic accumulation of wrongdoing? For my satisfaction gives me pleasure, it exists in myself, but the consequences of crime do not touch me, they are outside me." This is the mantra of all serial killers and psychopaths. They consider the lives of others infinitely less important than their most trivial pleasures. They must get what they want, even if it involves killing others. Others have no significance. And this in fact is the same belief that the super rich harbour towards ordinary people. You simply don't count in the world if you're not rich. The children of the rich have red carpets laid out for them in life. The children of the poor must walk for miles over barbed wire and razor blades, and almost none get to the end of the hardest road.

Susan Sontag said that Sade had created a "negative utopia" - the worst of all possible worlds (except for himself, of course). Yet pre-Revolutionary France was exactly that. Unless you belonged to the elite, you were living in a nightmare, subject to the invariably cruel whims of the ruling class. Sade's intimate knowledge of the aristocracy had led him to believe that they didn't see the underclasses as human but rather as animals waiting for their appointment with the abattoir. The Old World Order continue to think much the same thing today, though they want people's money rather than their lives.

The ferocity of the Terror unleashed by the Jacobins in revolutionary France was a direct consequence of the sadism that the elite had inflicted on the people for decades and centuries.

In Justine, Sade wrote of a rich counterfeiter who had a number of dungeon-like kennels providing the most miserable of homes for naked female slaves whom he raped whenever he felt like it. He chained them to a wheel and worked them to death.  

Elsewhere, Sade depicted aristocrats cannibalising women. Thus not only had women been stripped of their humanity and turned into objects, the process had concluded with them being turned into food. Symbolically, the French aristocracy ate those beneath him. And it's the same today. The Wall Street hedge fund managers are today's aristocrats who have no regard whatever for the rest of the human race. All that matters to them is their desires, their money and power. They have placed themselves outside the pale. They have torn up the implicit social contract. "What are you going to do about it?" is their silent challenge to everyone else. And indeed what are we going to do?

In the sexual arena, Sade abolished love and romance and brought to bear the full force of the master-slave paradigm. Sex, for Sade, was exclusively about power, and the masters demonstrate their domination through the inflicting of pain on the slaves. But when the masters become bored, they themselves must have pain inflicted on them in order to feel. To feel what? To feel ANYTHING!

Masters revel in transgressing every prohibition and taboo. The more sacred the taboo, the more pleasure can be derived from profaning it. What better than to use the consecrated Communion Host - the actual body and blood of Christ according to the Catholic theory of transubstantiation - in an act of sodomy. To push it deep into the rectum, into the human drain of shit.

The act itself is rather trivial. The symbolism however is off the scale. This is one of the most remarkable features of the human condition. We can place so much symbolic value on mundane things that we can convert humdrum anal sex into a supreme blasphemy against God!

Are human beings able to have sex like animals or are we able to perform only when we have created the right symbolic conditions? Many people won't have sex unless they "love" their partner i.e. place immense symbolic value on them. Many people can't perform sexually unless some fantasy is being fulfilled or some fetish satisfied. People rarely have pure sex in the animal sense. They have symbolic sex, which is something quite different. It comes garlanded with signs, and we must all be experts at understanding the signs if we want to please our partners. We have to tune into their symbolic representation of sex. That's why sadists and masochists are the perfect match - they know exactly what the world of the other is like because it is simply the reverse of their own.

In Sade's view, sex in the human world is never about sex. It is about power relations. In every relationship, no matter how apparently loving and equal, someone is the master and someone the slave. Sade took the master-slave paradigm to its extreme, but it's always there whether it's acknowledged or not.
 
"Desire of the flesh can be gratified in the flesh. Desire as an idea knows no limits."
Sade

Sade's philosophy revolves around the "sovereign man" - the self-governing, independent individual without limits. Such a person, Sade believed, of necessity places zero value on others. If you think others have rights and a value it imposes restrictions on you. The God of Abraham assigned no value to anyone other than himself, and in his own case he assigned an infinite value.

Abrahamism is the tale of a tyrant who cares nothing for his "creations". No one is valuable to him. He couldn't care less about the life of Isaac or Ishmael. All he cares about is whether people obey or disobey him i.e. it's all about him. If they disobey, they go to hell. If they obey they can join him in paradise, but only as his abject slaves with no rights. Sade detested Christianity, no doubt recognising a direct rival in the God of the Christians i.e. both were in the same game of despising everyone else.

A Sadean sovereign individual is a person of absolute solitude (just like the monotheistic God who has no peers). He can show no solidarity with others because that would restrict his scope for action. Why has it never occurred to Abrahamists that there is nothing intrinsically good about monotheism? It's an inherent apex system, a pyramid. In Illuminism, Abraxas, the True God, is someone we can emulate. The Omega Point does not involve one God but a community of Gods - an Arthurian Round Table. Abraxas, unlike Sade and Yahweh, respects others and assigns them a high value, hence would never exterminate humanity in a Flood, order the human sacrifice of children, inflict Original Sin on human beings or send most of them to hell.

Yahweh is the Sadean sovereign individual par excellence. And Yahweh = Satan. The cosmic tyrant is the ultimate libertine. Bataille, writing about Sade, captures the desperation of the libertine: "All great libertines who live only for pleasure are great only because they have destroyed in themselves all their capacity for pleasure. That is why they go in for frightful anomalies, for otherwise the mediocrity of ordinary sensuality would be enough for them."

Is not Yahweh/Satan a creature that lusts after "frightful anomalies"? He is desensitised to ordinary sensations. Only monstrous deeds satisfy his monstrous passions. And it is we who are his victims. We are the damned in the hell he has created for us. The degree of torture he inflicts on us must be infinite if he is to derive any satisfaction.   

Sade's destruction of morality is even more extreme than Nietzsche's. The great German philosopher replaced herd morality with the concept of self-overcoming and sublimation of bestial instincts towards higher ends. Sade made no such concessions. Sade got rid of morality and put nothing in its place. As an atheist, he simply acknowledged the brute facts of Nature, and he could find no morality there at all.

The Devil's Morality
 
When you look at the "morality" of Abrahamism - centred on human sacrifice and child murder to demonstrate absolute obedience to "God" - you realise that morality is in fact entirely absent from it.

Morality is astonishingly fragile and virtually no one understands it. Every mainstream system of morality has proved itself immoral. People such as Sade and Nietzsche ensure that we can't get away with giving easy answers to the profoundest of questions - is there any moral basis to morality or is it just a system of vested interests dressed up in fine clothes and language to give it a spurious credibility?

Never forget that Mohammed, Jesus and Moses all expect you to murder your children without question if God orders it (and in the case of Christ, he himself is "God"). They do not think they have to give any justification, just as Yahweh offered no justification to Abraham in the Bible. Indeed what justification could there be since Isaac/Ishmael was an innocent little boy?

In other words, the sacrifice of Isaac/Ishmael had nothing whatever to do with the boy. He had been reduced to a mere object, a means to an end, not an end in himself. What the sacrifice was all about was God's desire to have proof of Abraham's ABSOLUTE obedience.    

The "morality" of this episode is clear. All human beings can, like Isaac/Ishmael, be turned into "objects" by the God of Abraham. They have no right to life. They have no rights at all. They can be killed not because of any crime they have committed but simply because "God" wills it i.e. people's moral actions are not relevant to this monstrous deity. He couldn't care less whether Isaac/Ishmael, or any of us, is good or evil. What he cares about is whether we are willing to obey him or not. "Good" is thus to be defined as absolute obedience and submission to "God", and "evil" as disobedience to "God", even if that disobedience consists of refusing to kill innocent people.

This is the "Fuhrer God". Just as Hitler defined good and evil purely according to whether people obeyed him or disobeyed him, so does this "God". Morality doesn't come into it. THAT is the lesson of the tale of Abraham and Isaac/Ishmael. To be a worshipper of God is to declare yourself outside morality and inside a system of total obedience to a tyrant. Look at Islam. Do any Muslims show any sense of moral responsibility whatsoever? Or are they perfect examples of mindless and slavish obedience to Allah regardless of right and wrong, good and evil? Islam literally MEANS submission. It doesn't mean morality. It has no connection with morality.

The 9/11 murderers were excellent Muslims. They were also supremely evil human beings i.e. Islam = evil; Islam = Devil worship. And the same is true of Judaism and Christianity. Abrahamists are the followers of Satan. They ignore morality and choose absolute slavery to "God" instead.

Humanity can never be moral until all those who abdicate moral responsibility are eradicated. Abraham did not pause for a second to consider the morality of the evil order given to him by his God. He did not proclaim the absolute innocence of his son; he did not defy the monstrous command; he did not fight to protect his son. He simply said, "Yes" to absolute evil, just as the guards in the Nazi death camps did. The Abrahamist Jews who died in those camps had no grounds for complaint since they explicitly endorsed a system where the morality of people is irrelevant and all that matters are the orders given by God/the Fuhrer. Those who live by the sword die by the sword.  

The Jews who died were in the same position as Isaac. His life meant nothing to Yahweh, and their lives meant nothing to Hitler. It's impossible to have any sympathy for people who support Abraham's example since they have declared humans to be means to an end and not ends in themselves, to be outside questions of morality and inside a system of nothing but obedience. The Jewish God murdered 99.99999% of the human race in the Flood. Who has shed a tear for them? Is that not the greatest holocaust of all? - and it is one all Jews endorse simply because their Satanic god commanded it. Where is there any evidence that these people did anything wrong? Were they as guilty as Isaac and Ishmael i.e. entirely innocent? Why should anyone take "God's" word for it that these people were wicked when this God orders the murder of boys and girls for no reason? The Canaanites were subjected to genocide to make way for the Jews. What was their crime? Simply to be living on the land that the Jews wanted for themselves.

When you live by the holocaust you die by the holocaust.

Those who gleefully create religions that condemn others to eternal suffering in hell for no other reason than that those others do not share their beliefs can have no complaint when they are given a taste of their own medicine by their enemies. If you want to stop holocausts, stop telling others that they are going to hell. Go to any Evangelical Christian church or any mosque and you will hear them talking about nothing except the hellfire awaiting the infidels.

Abraham is the founding patriarch of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. He is the first Jew, the first Christian, the first Muslim. Abrahamism CHOSE to define itself by a nauseating episode in which morality was rejected in favour of obedience. It could have chosen instead to present an example of a father giving his life to save his innocent son. It didn't.

The whole of Abrahamism is encapsulated by Yahweh's statement to Abraham (Genesis 22:12): "Now I know that thou fearest God, and hast not spared thy only begotten son for my sake."

Do you SEE?

FEAR is the essence of Abrahamism. Yahweh explicitly designed Abraham's test not as one of moral choice but of fear of disobeying. The subtext is that if Abraham had not feared Yahweh he would have refused to obey the order. He obeyed because he was terrified of the consequences of disobeying. What kind of moral system is based on a self-chosen example where a terrified man agrees to kill his innocent son through sheer terror? Only the "moral" system of Satan, where there is no morality at all.

Abrahamism is TERRORISM and was designed to be so from the outset. An Abrahamist's job is not to be virtuous, good and moral (because none of those qualities can be attributed to Abraham when he prepared to kill his innocent son), but to do what he is told because, if he doesn't, the consequences will be terrifying. The retribution will be eternal and infinite. You will be punished not for being immoral but for being disobedient.

What is the essence of the story of Adam and Eve in Eden and the concept of "Original Sin"? - it is all about obedience. That is the sole theme of the Bible, Koran and Torah. Adam and Eve were condemned not because they did anything immoral but because they disobeyed an absurd rule not to eat of the fruit of a tree even though it was laden with delicious fruit and placed directly in front of them. "Original Sin" relates to the capacity of humanity to disobey, and "God" regards this as an intrinsic evil deserving of hell.

We don't call it Original Sin at all. We call it FREEDOM! So, are you for or against freedom? Listen to many Muslim imams and you will regularly hear them denouncing freedom. The horrific reality is that billions of human beings despise freedom and have no wish to be free nor to take personal responsibility for their actions. They want to be told what to do and not to have to think about it.

All those who have no desire but to obey others are those who are as far from gnosis as it is possible to get. They could never become God. They want only to be perpetual slaves, alienated eternally from the True God.

The history of Abrahamism is that anyone who disobeys is called a heretic or infidel and killed. Their "crime" was simply to think for themselves.

According to Abrahamism, disobedience is crime itself. According to Abrahamism, free will is inherently evil since it leads to the possibility of disobedience. According to Abrahamism, it would be better if everyone were an automaton slavishly reflecting one will - that of "God".

So what's the point of being present in this monster's Creation, his cosmos? Weren't the ancient Gnostics absolutely right that the Creator was evil? What is the point of free will if it is nothing but the gateway to hell? What is the point of life if your only function is to obey someone else? Why didn't "God" simply create robots and have done with it?

You would have to be INSANE to be an Abrahamist.

Is it not astounding that anyone can be in any doubt about the meaning of the tale of Abraham? How can anyone be so blind and stupid as to think the God of Abraham has any connection with morality? Abrahamism is opposed to free will, opposed to your right to think for yourself and to make your own moral choices based on reason. It defines any of these things as sinful and evil, as leading you away from "God". It says you have no right to be your own judge of good and evil. Abrahamism is about the absolute abdication of moral responsibility, as exhibited by Abraham himself who acted solely through fear. Do you want to be a fearful, immoral coward like Abraham all your life? Then be an Abrahamist, a Satan worshipper.

Do you want to be free and to accept moral responsibility? Then become an Illuminatus.

The whole of morality is contained in the story of Adam and Eve. Do you disobey an evil tyrant or do you choose, like Eve, to listen to your reason? Every free person on earth should esteem Eve for rejecting the tyrant, for placing her trust in reason and personal accountability and for giving birth to the first outright human enemy of Satan - Cain. Eve's son is accorded the highest possible status by the Illuminati. He was the first human to reach the conclusion that "God" was not only not what he claimed to be, but the actual opposite - the Devil.

Eve and Cain represent free will (branded by the Tyrant as "Original Sin" i.e. as refusal to obey him), while Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Mohammed represent slavery to the tyrant.

Will you be a slave or be free? Once again, the world is seen to spin on the axis of Hegel's master-slave dialectic. "God" is the ultimate master who expects us to be the ultimate slaves.

If we are free people then we will fight the master and become masters ourselves, but we will have no slaves whom we wish to subjugate. We will be masters of ourselves and that, in fact, is the definition of God. Gods are self-defining. They seek truth and morality within themselves, not from an outside source. They don't slavishly obey anyone or advocate mindless following of rules (unlike the Jews who fear switching on a light on the Sabbath for fear of going to hell).

Let's be crystal clear. Abrahamists are not human. They refuse to be human. They are bicameral, subhuman slaves and every time you see Orthodox Jews or Muslims, you know that to be the case. They are the spawn of Satan, his emissaries in this world, the agents of his evil will and tyranny.

Humanity will never be free until it is free of Abrahamism, the Devil's chosen religion. The Abrahamists are the Chosen People - of Satan. They are the damned, the demons sent to torment the rest of us.

Many people, like Abraham, are terrified of going to hell if they disobey their "God". In fact hell is what you are in if you believe in this "God" because he is Satan, Prince of Darkness, Lord of the Flies, Lord of Hell.

If you want to go to heaven you must do the bravest thing, the moral thing, the right thing, the supreme act of free will - and reject the tyrant forever. Are you a hero or a coward like Abraham? The choice is yours.
     
We will never be free until we are free of Abrahamism. We will never be rational until there are no more Abrahamic "holy" books. We will never be enlightened while the endarkenment of Abrahamism hangs over us.

Abrahamism is the Original Sin of humanity. Eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is the Gnostic antidote.

"Know ye not that ye are gods?" - Hermes Trismegistus.

You cannot be a god unless you know the difference between good and evil. When you do, you will know that it is evil to show mindless, slavish obedience to Yahweh/Allah/Christ/Satan. And that's exactly why Satan forbade Adam and Eve from eating of the Tree. We must thank the first woman - Eve - for having the infinite courage to save the human race from Satan and his monstrous threats that so terrified Abraham that he was willing to kill his own son to avoid the eternal wrath of his God.

Non Serviam - I will not serve.

I will not obey. I will not bow. I will not kneel. I will not worship.

I will exercise free will. I will choose for myself. I will use my reason. I will judge for myself what is good and evil.

"We, however, want to become those who we are - the new, the unique, the incomparable, those who impose on themselves their own law, those who create themselves!"
Nietzsche

Have you got it? We are responsible for the law, not Yahweh. He didn't create us. We are eternal, and it is up to us to create what we will be. It has nothing to do with him. We are slaves if we make that evil tyrant our master. We would surely be the damned. Instead, we choose to be FREE.

We are the culmination of the dialectic of freedom. We are the omega point of liberty. We serve no masters. We allow none to stand over us. Because we are God and we will have no other God.

If you want to be conscious, you must disobey Satan and eat of the sacred Tree. If you want to be a hero, you must have the courage to bite into the fruit.

All hail to Eve who listened to her inner wisdom (represented by the Serpent) and brought the human race from bicameral slavery to conscious freedom.

Eve is the first true human because she was the first to defy the false God, the Satanic tyrant of Eden who refused to allow humanity to think for themselves. He defined free will as Original Sin. We define free will as the essence of being human. If you believe you are evil for being human then you are not human. You are FUCKED!

What is the Matrix? It is control. Who is Yahweh/Christ/Allah/Satan? The controller. How do you escape from the Matrix? Eat the fruit!

Become God.

Heresy

Human beings worship stories. That's the message of religion. They don't worship ideas. They don't worship reason. They don't worship the Truth. The Gospels are a narrative. They are not philosophy, science, mathematics or theology. That's why the smartest people don't take Abrahamism seriously. You might as well proclaim the Lord of the Rings as the revelation of God. If it were 2,000 years old and covered in "holy" dust, we might well be saying prayers to Gandalf, Aragorn and Frodo Baggins each Sunday.

Heretic is a Greek word meaning "one who chooses" i.e. one who thinks for himself. The corollary is that the orthodox are those who do not choose i.e. they take what they are given. They obey orders. They never think for themselves.

Eternal Recurrence

Many people have shown an interest in the cyclical nature of existence. One thing we must emphasize is that although we often mention Nietzsche's concept of eternal recurrence, we are not endorsing his extreme interpretation of cyclical time. For Nietzsche, and indeed for many modern scientists committed to the Multiverse theory of existence, involving an infinite number of universes containing a finite number of particles with a finite number of configurations available to these particles, it is possible for a set of events to be repeated exactly. We do not subscribe to this view. For one thing, there is one infinite universe, not an infinite number of finite universes. When we refer to eternal recurrence, we are talking about the repetition of a pattern, not the repetition of specific events. Each human being lives according to a general pattern of human life, but each life is unique. So it is with each cycle of the universe. Each is unique, but will conform to a familiar pattern.  

Each cycle will exemplify the principle "a posse ad esse" - from possibility to actuality. That is the cosmic pattern that can never change. Once the universe has attained maximum actuality, it is faced with a stark choice. Exist forevermore in the actualised state, with no possibility of making a single improvement and hence suffering unimaginable boredom, or starting again, and letting the cosmic process again convert potential to actuality. What would YOU do?

We know that there is no such thing as a definitive, final state of the universe. If it were possible it would already have happened since we have already had an eternity to achieve it. A universe of becoming cannot endure reaching a state of permanent being since it contradicts its fundamental nature. Some people are horrified that no final state exists. They have been brainwashed into believing in some sort of eternal heaven, but they have never considered what it would be like to be in "heaven" if it went on forever. What would you do forever? What would you think about forever? How would you combat boredom forever? Boredom may seem like an odd concept in relation to heaven, but boredom is a fundamental feature of the cosmos of becoming. What does it mean to be bored? It means that you are in a state of being where nothing interesting is happening to you. It is unendurable i.e. boredom produces its own remedy: it compels you to go and do something. Imagine how much worse boredom would be in heaven when you've done everything and know everything. The Boredom of God himself ensures that he commits divine suicide and plunges back into the excitement of becoming, the great struggle upwards once more to the highest heights. It is not true suicide of course - God knows he cannot die. The universe can never end. The principle of "a posse ad esse" is never extinguished and never can be.

"AL" sent us the following message:

When everything reaches its dialectical end point it all starts over and we (humans) are born again as the same person with no physical differences and everything that happens to us before happens to us again but we don't have a memory of it happening before. Is this true?

Our Reply:

No. You're thinking of the extreme version of the doctrine of eternal recurrence where exact repetition occurs. In fact, every cycle of existence is different. The same general pattern of events recurs, but not the same events. To reiterate: it is the pattern that recurs, not the specific details of the pattern. Think of chaos theory and the concept of strange attractors. Existence is like the weather. Every day, the weather is different. It never repeats itself EVER, and yet there are regular patterns in the weather, which is why meteorologists mostly provide highly accurate short-term forecasts. The same weather patterns appear over and over again, but not identical weather. Similarly, previous versions of humanity (or human-like beings) existed in previous cycles and will exist in future cycles, but they will not be the same human beings as those of our cycle. All lives are different. We are living weather.
 
"RH" wrote: "I used to be a staunch atheist scientist until I followed your information. Now I am a proud gnostic - thank you for enlightening me and for improving my life. Also, I have a question. At the end of a full cycle (i.e. after "divine suicide" and at the initiation of a new big bang), what happens to the souls that had reached gnosis in the previous cycle? Are they predisposed to reach gnosis again, quickly, in the next cycle, or do they need to start from scratch? Thanks!"

 

Our Reply:

Thanks for your question. Everything needs to begin from scratch. The alternative would mean that every soul would get better and better at achieving gnosis, until eventually they were achieving it almost instantly. In an infinite system, every soul would by now have perfected the technique. Self-evidently, this has not happened, and nor would it be desirable. It's often said that the journey is better than reaching the destination. In terms of gnosis, the struggle and effort that must be expended to attain the state of gnosis - for a mortal mind to become the mind of God - make it the supreme, perfect accomplishment. If it became "easy" through repetition it would be completely devalued.

The film Groundhog Day is the perfect example of the process - by the time Bill Murray achieves breakout (gnosis), he is the best possible version of himself, but only after having learned an enormous number of painful lessons. It wouldn't be much of a film if he got the girl first time round!

Male Slave

The following is a sex ad placed in the UK:

Hi, I am Helen a pro-domme from the North West;

I have a 29-year-old very obedient straight male slave available.

He is available (for free) to guys out there that may have need for male slave in the North East area. Available for all uses, from the menial and mundane (get him to do the housework or wait on you!!) to the more adult, and everything in between.

He is very obedient, so can be what you want him to be, so no strings to play with! :-)

Message me for details.

Helen

So, what we have here is a dominatrix who is showing her total control of her male slave by transferring him to someone else (a man) of her choosing. The slave has no say in the matter, of course. He has to accept his fate, no matter what. He can't complain, can't say no.

Here we see the phenomenon of total voluntary submission of one will to the will of another - Hegel's master-slave dialectic in its purest form.  

The one angle that Hegel failed to consider, and it is an angle with which the modern Illuminati are increasingly obsessed, is that the master and slave roles are not conferred after a struggle of life or death. They can be chosen without any fight at all!

Some people - perhaps most - WANT to be slaves. Many of life's slaves did not lose a savage battle with stronger, more determined people. They chose to be slaves because it is what they wanted. Why? Because a slave does not have to take any decisions. They simply have to obey orders.

And suddenly Abrahamism makes perfect sense. Abrahamists WANT to be the slaves of an "all-knowing", "all-seeing", "all-powerful" tyrant. The more powerful, cruel, terrible and whimsical their God is the better. Satan is totally decisive. He assigns zero value to all other beings hence he is never in any doubt about anything. He never pauses to empathise or wonder if he is doing the right thing, if he should be treating others this way.

Satan is the PERFECT MASTER for those who long to be slaves because he holds every slave in absolute contempt, hence the gap between them could not be greater.

Why do the super rich exist? Why are the Old World Order allowed to dominate the world? It's because most people desire this outcome. If they didn't, they would do something about it. They would fight. There are so many more of them than the rulers. They could sweep away the rulers with consummate ease. They don't because they don't want to. They can't imagine being responsible for their own lives and for the world.

How come all the fat cats and snorting Wall Street pigs who plunged the world into mayhem, costing millions of people their livelihoods and plunging future generations into crippling debts, are still in position, still helping themselves to all the cream? Where is the anger? Where is the justice? Where is the Revolution? Why have the slaves meekly accepted their fate? The Americans elected Obama - what a difference that made. NOT. Nothing ever changes. Same old faces. Same old super rich pulling the strings. Still laughing. Always laughing. If the biggest fuck up in history can't bring the elite down then what can? They are more powerful than EVER. The people still haven't wised up or else they couldn't care less. Or do they actively prefer being treated like shit? It matches their own estimation of themselves.

All monarchs claim to be the chosen of God. They claim they rule by "divine right". Only a person with extremely strong Will to Power would make such a ludicrous claim, and only those with extremely weak Will to Power would accept it. Yet they do. And they love it. The slave population of the UK love being grovelling, pathetic slaves to a ridiculous, deluded woman sitting in Buckingham Palace thinking that she is someone of import rather than a feeble and absurd beneficiary of a delusion that has beguiled the masses for millennia.

We see right through it. Why? Because we are not slaves. No one with any slave attitudes is ever permitted to become a member of the Illuminati. Slaves cannot become God. They can never attain gnosis. Nietzsche, a zealous atheist, was much closer to gnosis and divinity than any slave of Abraham's God. We have no objections at all to strong-minded atheists. They are much closer to our position than most people who believe in "God". Atheists have rejected slavery. They refuse to believe in a God that they find rationally absurd. They have a strong Will to Power that allows them to be sanguine in the face of annihilation (which is the only thing that atheism ultimately promises to deliver). Yet one day they will all return to God, to the True God, because we will show them that science, mathematics and philosophy do not disprove his existence but in fact make it certain. It is the mad claims of the mad religion of Abrahamism that have driven them from God. It is the laughable concept of "faith", which no thinking person could take seriously, which has alienated them. We agree entirely with atheists about this. We approach God from no such angle - but from that of ultimate rationality. We will show in a future article how Einstein's relativity theory and Quantum Mechanics - when interpreted correctly - have already proved the existence of God, souls and the afterlife scientifically. The reason why scientists haven't realised it yet is that they are wedded to the ideology of materialism, and the theories we have mentioned are in fact about idealism, not materialism i.e. they are statements, primarily, about mind, not matter.
 
If most people on Earth want to be slaves, we have a serious problem. It was always accepted by the Illuminati that the slaves simply needed to be raised up, shown the way, filled with dignity and self-esteem, and they would then resist and overthrow the masters. However, if most people actually choose and desire slavery then our tactics are completely wrong. To win, we must become more masterful than the existing masters. That is why we are so keen to emphasize heroism and the hero monomyth. If we can bring to our side all of the heroes then we will become the Party of Heroism and we will defeat the Old Masters. We will then shape a new world where we will explicitly cater - psychologically - for those who have a deep-seated slave instinct. We will allow them to express it sexually, and it need then play no further role politically or socially.

We will use "BDSM". This is a compound acronym meaning Bondage and Discipline, Domination and Submission and Sado-Masochism. Through BDSM we can address the craving that so many have to be slaves. And thus we will save them from Abrahamism and the Old World Order. By giving a delicious sexual outlet for their deepest desire to be enslaved, we will deliver them from being enslaved in the other aspects of their lives.

Schopenhauer - the Metaphysician of Sex

The philosophical tradition, followed by Freud and Reich, for placing enormous emphasis on sex began with Schopenhauer (if we ignore Sade as a philosopher). Schopenhauer considered that all previous philosophers had ignored sex. For him, sex was the "public secret which must never be distinctly mentioned anywhere, but is always and everywhere understood to be the main thing." He additionally said of sex, "It is the ultimate goal of almost all human effort; it has an unfavourable influence on the most important affairs, interrupts every hour the most serious occupations."

In Schopenhauer's view, sex stands at the core of our being. It is the most direct, powerful and obvious crystallization of the will to life. It is via our genitals that new life comes into the world. Schopenhauer referred to our genitals as "the focus of the will."

The purpose of the human race, he argued, is simply to create more members of the human race. Each individual is a mere vehicle for the underlying unitary Will. What does the Will to Life desire? - more life, obviously. We are its puppets. We are consumed with sexual thoughts and obsessions. The amount of time we devote directly or indirectly to sex provides the shape of our life. We want to look good. Why? Because it enhances our sex appeal. We want a good job. Why? Because it will give us more money, more status and hence afford us access to a higher class of sexual partners. We are preoccupied with our social life, and with our friends. Why? Because our social life is the precursor of our sex life. Socialising leads to sex. We watch porn, we read romances, we see endless TV shows and Hollywood movies about romance and sex.

Sex is so powerful that it provokes fear. Religions impose taboos and prohibitions on sex and have killed enormous numbers of people for sexual "transgressions" - gays, adulterers, witches etc. Anal sex was once regarded as a capital crime. Oscar Wilde was sentenced to hard labour for being a sodomite. Prostitutes are routinely demonised.

The sheer amount of human time and effort that revolves around sex is simply staggering. It is the most important aspect of most people's lives. Is it any surprise given that the underlying purpose of our species is to propagate?

Marriage is enormously important to most people. The family, the product of marriage, forms the basic unit of society. To a greater or lesser degree, all human institutions, political philosophies and religions are about sex, and the control of sex. Swear words are predominantly sexual.

An alien race analysing our behaviour would write the word "humanity" at the top of the page, followed by the single word "sex". Maybe the anal probes that so many aliens use on their human captives are a misguided attempt to explore our sexuality!
   
Although sex is apparently deeply personal, Schopenhauer regarded it as anything but. It is a universal, impersonal force, he said. It is everywhere, and we are all its puppets.

Schopenhauer expressed the remarkable view that the will to life of the unborn is what draws men and women together sexually. How else does the unconscious Will become conscious if not through humanity and higher beings? In a profound way, sex IS consciousness, or its necessary precursor.  
   
Schopenhauer described as a "delusion" the notion that we ever act out of individual interests and desires. Instead, we are simply particular instances of universal desires. Through us, the universal expresses itself. It attains its ends through particulars - us. It can't do it any other way. A single, universal force is in fact impotent. It can achieve nothing until it finds a way to fragment into particulars.

Abrahamists never ponder why God - perfect and self-sufficient - had any need at all to create humanity. The truth is that "God" starts as an unconscious cosmic force and "creates" humanity in order to become conscious. Consciousness is a product of the Many, not the One. The idea of an eternal, conscious God is spectacularly absurd, and false in every regard.   

Philosophically, universals only make sense in relation to particulars. Imagine a single consciousness - "God" - existing without a single object to contemplate. What does he think about? He only has himself. There is no content. There are no events. There is no "outside". There is no "over there". There is no contrast i.e. "them and us". How can a mind think if it has nothing to think about?

What did the God of Abraham think about for timeless eons, with no universe to contemplate? What was the content of his mind? What was his own idea of himself? What language did he think in? Where did this language come from? Is language as eternal as God? Is language written into the fabric of existence?

How can a mind place a value on anything if there is nothing other than itself? How can value be established with just one thing? Value implies a comparison, hence multiple things must exist. If nothing has any value, how can anything be desired? How can a single thing desire itself? Even when Narcissus stared lovingly and longingly at his own reflection, his reflection constituted another thing.

Unity is sterile. It's the road to nowhere. Nothing happens. There is no contrast. The Abrahamic God would have endured the saddest existence imaginable if he had consciously existed on his own for Age after timeless Age. "God" isn't self-sufficient. God is COMPELLED to create other things.  

A mind MUST create objects of thoughts. It must create multiplicity from unity. It must create mathematics as its starting point. Numbers are a multiplicity. Mathematical operations such as addition, subtraction, multiplication and division are "forces" operating on numbers. When you have things (numbers) and forces (mathematical functionality) then you have the universe in microcosm.

A man and woman have children and thus multiply themselves. One group joins another group - addition - and thus creates a community and then a society. Death subtracts individuals from the group. When war breaks out, communities are divided.

Everywhere we look, we see multiplication, addition, subtraction and division.

How did mathematics come into existence? Through long and laborious trial and error whereby the single cosmic mind tried, blindly, to create different things. It made ridiculous things - mere blips of energy, formless, chaotic, purposeless. But even blunders proved useful. The cosmic mind could learn from them. One thing it could do with them was count them. It could differentiate between one energy fluctuation and another. It could start analysing energy fluctuations and comparing and contrasting them. Slowly but surely, it could classify them, categorise them, organise them. Steadily, mere chaos became something with the semblance of order.

And once you have the rudiments of order, the possibility of value, the origins of desire, you can dialectically evolve and create more and more complex, ordered things. Eventually, you can create an entire universe.

That is the process that gave rise to the world we observe. It pulled itself up by its own bootstraps. It was self-generating, self-creating. It achieved this feat unconsciously, using nothing but its intrinsic Will to Power, its inbuilt capacity for converting potential into actuality. The creation of the cosmos had nothing at all to do with any pre-existing conscious intelligence. How could such a conscious intelligence have come into existence in the first place? And why would a conscious intelligence create a world with so much suffering as this one? Would YOU create endless misery if you had ABSOLUTE power? So why would a good God? Only the Devil would create so much horror, and that was why ancient Gnosticism blamed the Demiurge for the material world.

Yet would anyone be surprised if a self-creating cosmic mind doing nothing but expressing Will to Power generated a world of competing wills to power, hence conflict, hence pain and suffering? Yes, there would be many bitter defeats, but there would also be victories and triumphs, pleasure and happiness. And isn't that the nature of existence? Isn't that what we observe all around us?

The universe couldn't have happened in any other way. This is the best of all possible worlds, to quote Leibniz. In fact, it is the only possible world.

But the whole point of the unconscious evolution of the universe is to give rise to the supreme expression of mind's power: consciousness. We - conscious human beings - are astoundingly fortunate. The universe reflects on itself through us. WE are the thinking cosmos.

When the universe becomes conscious then something remarkable happens. It can exercise free will. It can make choices. It can think, plan, use reason and logic. It can, at last, decide what it wants to do with itself with its eyes open, rather than blindly.

We, as beings capable of using our reason, capable of making nature do our bidding, already stand outside the blind course of history. We can design the world as we see fit. We are already budding gods. And we all have the chance to become much greater gods - where the destiny of the whole of existence is in our hands.

Is that not the most wondrous thing of all? Incredibly, every time you think about sex, you are becoming one with the underlying cosmic Will that uses each of us as a particular vehicle to achieve its glorious end - maximum actualisation.

The cosmos itself yearns for its omega point, and we (and higher beings), are those who are expected to deliver it.

The responsibility for the whole of existence is in our hands. Eons of misery have been endured so that we can stand here and decide how to shape the future. Let's do the best possible job.

Given that lust and love are not particular to us but are universal forces then is it any surprise that what the poets write about in such elegiac terms seems to transcend any individual experience of love and applies to the entire species, and beyond?

Schopenhauer wrote: "This longing that closely associates the notion of an endless bliss with the possession of a definite woman, and an unutterable pain with the thought that this possession is not unattainable; this longing and this pain of love cannot draw their material from the needs of an ephemeral individual. On the contrary, they are the sighs of the spirit of the species…The species alone has infinite life, and is therefore capable of infinite desire, infinite satisfaction, and infinite sufferings. But these are here imprisoned in the narrow breast of a mortal; no wonder, therefore, when such a breast seems ready to burst, and can find no expression for the infinite rapture or infinite pain with which it is filled."

Schopenhauer, with his customary pessimism, considered that "love" between two people rapidly faded as soon as it had served its biological function of procreation and safeguarding the children for a few years: "Forsaken by [the spirit of the species], the individual falls back into his original narrowness and neediness, and sees with surprise that, after so high, heroic, and infinite an effort, nothing has resulted for his pleasure but what is afforded by any sexual satisfaction. Contrary to expectation, he finds himself no happier than before; he notices that he has been the dupe of the will of the species."

So the rapture of the lover, the miraculous illusion that they create of the beloved, is just a huge con job to get them to take part in the propagation of the species.

People talk of the "seven year itch" when marriages start to rock and the partners begin to cast glances in other directions. Maybe seven years - ample time to bring up two children and see them through the tricky early years of maximum vulnerability, is the fullest extent of requited love.

Unrequited love is quite different, of course. That is eternal. Nothing is more powerful. Many of the greatest poets, such as Dante, wrote their highest paens to those with whom they never consummated their love. The unresolved longing, like Wagner's famous Tristan Chord, is the longing of existence itself for completion, wholeness, the attainment of the omega point of perfection.

Schopenhauer had a harsh view of homosexuality. He believed that homosexuals had "deficient" semen, and that nature had therefore directed it to be discharged in non-procreative channels where it could do no harm to the human race.

Schopenhauer was also notoriously misogynistic. He wrote, "Only the male intellect, clouded by the sexual impulse, could call the undersized, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped, and short-legged sex the fair sex; for in this impulse is to be found its whole beauty."

Men, in Schopenhauer's view, are literally under a sexual spell that blinds them to the truth. It's not women who beguile and seduce men, but rather men's basic sexual instincts. They are programmed to be bewitched by women.

Imagine a world of asexual people - those who are simply not "turned on" by the thought of sex. The species would die out. The long struggle of human evolution would end.

Yet, ironically, the highest state of consciousness - that attained by gnosis - results in an asexual condition. The highest gods do not have sex. They have no need.

While the unconscious Will dictates to us, we are typically obsessed with sex. But if we transcend the unconscious Will and replace it with our own conscious and rational Will, we are no longer subject to evolution. We have become its masters, not its slaves.  

The Sucker Syndrome

A CRY FOR HELP

From: Stafi Asako

Dear Friend

I am writing this mail to you with tears and sorrow in my heart because of what I'm going through. I can barely type or think straight right now, I hope you will come to my aid. I am presently in an hospital in where I had a very terrible car accident but fortunately I survived it with minor injuries and a deep cut on my right leg which I have to go through an Emergency operation, I am so glad that I am still alive. However, my major worry now is the money the doctor required for surgery which I have to pay the part of it before the doctor will carry on the operation.

Please I need you to loan me the sum of $850 dollars so I can sort out the problem of the hospital bills. Even if you don't have the whole sum, you can help me with any thing you have. I promise to refund the money back to you as soon as I recover myself. Please kindly let me know if you can help me out, though you don't know me face to face, but look upon God and help me out. Because God loveth a cheerful giver.

Thank you in advance.

Yours sincerely,
Sis Stafi Asako

This is the type of spam mail that everyone receives every day. The remarkable thing is that there are people in society who are so stupid they actually believe this kind of crap. Imagine you had suffered an accident and had to pay hospital bills. Would your first recourse be to contact a spam agency to send out millions of random emails to complete strangers asking them to help you? The cynicism of the people who send these emails is staggering. But what they prove is that if you ask for something, there are submissive, stupid people out there who will give it to you, especially if you invoke God and say he loves "cheerful givers".

If these messages never worked, no one would send them. They work enough times to make it worthwhile sending them.

People fall victim to con artists in all manners of ways. Abrahamism is just another con job. The key to all cons is that they trade on people's submissiveness, vulnerability, desperation, gullibility, irrationality, vanity and neediness. Abrahamism, capitalism, advertising, monarchism and politics are in exactly the same game. They are "legitimised" con machines, all designed for the same purpose - to transfer power and money from the many to the elite few.

Reason is the supreme tool of liberation. Reason allows you to see through conmen. That's why something like faith is so nauseating. The entire point of faith is to make you undervalue, distrust and reject reason - in favour of some "holy" yarn that someone has spun to control you.

"Faith" should be condemned all day long every day by any rational society. Con artists are experts at commanding your faith. All the greatest prophets, messiahs and saviours were con men. They never once appealed to reason. They were masters of Mythos, not Logos.

We live in a Mythos society, but we will perfect ourselves only when we move to a Logos society where faith is eradicated.

To any rational person, it's mind-boggling that people "believe" things for no other reason than that they were told to by a prophet and his holy book. What kind of mentality accepts the idea that God was born in a Jewish stable, via virgin birth by an "immaculately conceived mother"? There are billions of people out there right now who live their lives according to this nonsense, and they hate everyone who disagrees with them. In the past, they subjected the disbelievers to inquisitions and crusades.  They burned them at the stake because they sniggered at the silly beliefs of Christians.

Why has society chosen to sanctify lies and gibberish? Can anyone doubt that the Earth is a cosmic madhouse?

When you think about it, human evolution is actually about the march from madness to sanity. We are mental patients who are having to cure ourselves because there are no cosmic therapists or medics out there to whom we can turn. Only one thing gives us hope of success - reason - the most precious yet fragile component of the human mind. Reason is the newest, the youngest component of the mind. It's been barely used by most people. They're not familiar with it. They prefer the pre-rational mind of long ago.

So, when those of faith label reason the "Devil's whore", what you realise is that they don't want to embrace the strange new gift evolution has conferred upon them. They don't want to be rational. They don't want to be sane. Isn't that the human tragedy? Most people prefer madness. They prefer to be controlled by the blind, irrational Will. They can barely be said to have souls at all. And one thing's for sure - such souls will never be saved. They are as far from gnosis as it's possible to get.

Gnosis is the product of reason and knowledge. It is attained via philosophy, mathematics, science and psychology. Gnosis is not for the "common person". It's not for the herd or the sheeple. It's not for believers. Only the most meritocratic have the tools to achieve it. Only those who have learned to harness reason can join the Community of Gods. For it is a rational community. How can you be God if you don't understand the universe? And how can you understand the universe if you're a stranger to reason?

Abrahamists have excluded themselves from evolution, just as their master Satan did. He can never attain gnosis and nor can any of his followers.

Here's another example of a ludicrous spam message, obviously intended for Muslims (though sent to everyone, of course):

ASSALAMU'ALAYKUM !!!!!

From Mr Aleim Mussaa  

Dear Friend,
 
With due respect to your person and much sincerity of purpose I make this contact with you as I believe that you can be of great assistance to me. My name is Aleim Mussaa, from Ouagadougou Republic of BURKINA FASO, West Africa. Presently I work in the African development Bank as telex manager. I have been searching for your contact since you left our country some years ago.
 
I do not know whether this is your correct email address or not because I only used your name initials to search for your contact .In case you are not the person I am supposed to contact, please see this as a confidential message and do not reveal it to another person but if you are not the intended receiver, do let me know whether you can be of assistance regarding my proposal below because it is top secret.
 
I am about to retire from active Bank service to start a new life but I am sceptical to reveal this particular secret to a stranger. You must assure me that everything will be handled confidentially because we are not going to suffer again in life.
 
It has been 10 years now that most of the greedy African Politicians used our bank to launder money overseas through the help of their Political advisers. Most of the funds which they transferred out of the shores of Africa were gold and oil money that was supposed to have been used to develop the continent. Their Political advisers always inflated the amounts before transfer to foreign accounts so I also used the opportunity to divert part of the funds hence I am aware that  there is no official trace of how much was transferred as all the accounts used for such transfers were being closed after transfer.
 
I acted as the Bank Officer to most of the politicians and when I discovered that they were using me to succeed in their greedy act; I also cleaned some of their banking records from the Bank files and no one cared to ask me because the money was too much for them to control. They laundered over $5b Dollars during the process .As I am sending this message to you, I was able to divert thirty five million united state dollars ($35m) to an escrow account belonging to no one in the bank. The bank is anxious now to know who the beneficiary to the funds is because they have made a lot of profits with the funds.
 
It is more than Eight years now and most of the politicians are no longer using our bank to transfer funds overseas. The ($35) Million Dollars has been laying waste but I don't want to retire from the bank without transferring the funds to a foreign account to enable me share the proceeds with the receiver. The money will be shared 60% for me and 40% for you...
 
There is no one coming to ask you about the funds because I secured everything. I only want you to assist me by providing a bank account where the funds can be transferred. You are not to face any difficulties or legal implications as I am going to handle the transfer personally. If you are capable of receiving the funds, do let me know immediately to enable me give you a detailed information on what to do.
 
For me, I have not stolen the money from anyone because the other people that took the whole money did not face any problems. This is my chance also to grab my own but you must keep the details of the funds secret to avoid any leakages as no one in the bank knows about the funds.
 
Please get back to me if you are interested and capable to handle this project   
 
I shall intimate you on what to do when I hear from your confirmation and acceptance. If you are capable of being my trusted associate, do declare your consent to me.
 
Waiting for your urgent response.
Yours Faithfully
 
Incubus and Succubus

"Men are so necessarily mad that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness."
Pascal

The medieval mind conceived of demons everywhere, all trying to lure humanity into sinfulness. Why?

The scandal of the Knights Templar had an enormous impact on Christendom. If the greatest knights of Christ turned out not to be Christians at all, but heretics with the same Gnostic roots as the Cathars - the "Pure Ones" -  then surely no one was safe. The Devil might be anywhere, even in the highest bastions of Orthodoxy. Might not the Vatican itself harbour secret heretics in league with the Templars? Perhaps the Pope himself was now suspect? Perhaps the Antichrist sat on the papal throne. The disreputable conduct of many popes, cardinals, bishops, priests and monks was already legendary.

It was the low standards of the clergy, and particularly their greed, that provoked the Reformation. Martin Luther relentlessly attacked the cynical trade in "indulgences". Technically, an indulgence is the remission of the divine punishment due for earthly sins. For a Catholic, the sacrament of penance allows you to be forgiven for your sins (provided you are genuinely sorry for what you did), but it does not release you from the just punishment in the afterlife for your wrongdoings. Indulgences, issued by the Treasury of the Vatican, DID release you. In other words, you could buy off the divine punishments of the next life.  

Indulgences might be called the greatest banking scam of all time. They were like holy credit notes that you could redeem not in this world but the next. In other words, you paid the seller (a representative of the Vatican) for a certain quantity of indulgences, and the more you bought, the greater the capital you were building up in the afterlife. You could literally pay to have many years lopped off your sentence in purgatory, hence arriving in heaven much quicker. Not only that: you could buy indulgences on behalf of others, such as dead relatives and friends.

Priests continually laid a guilt trip on people by talking of the sufferings of the unfortunate souls in purgatory, and how their distress could be alleviated by the purchase of indulgences.  

Indulgences could be either partial or plenary, the latter being enormously more valuable since they wiped the slate clean completely. Crusaders were offered plenary indulgences. No matter what they did, they would be given full celestial pardon. Hence, the Crusaders felt free to commit some of the most barbarous crimes in history. What did they care? - they had been forgiven in advance.

The clerics licensed to sell indulgences were called Pardoners. Like modern travelling salesmen, they journeyed around, preaching about the remarkable benefits of indulgences and trying to shift as many units as they could (and there were of course an unlimited amount).

The purchaser was provided with a "letter of indulgence" setting out the terms of the transaction. Critics started to refer to them as licences to sin. You were literally paying money to avoid the consequences of your behaviour (something that the wealthy have been doing since the dawn of time!).

The sale of indulgences became such a sleazy racket that it provoked widespread condemnation, led by Luther.

In the wild atmosphere of the Reformation, the Pope himself was soon branded the "Antichrist" - showing that people believed that there was nothing to prevent an angel of the Devil becoming the vicar of Christ: God's representative on earth!

Protestants started to regard the Catholic Church as Satan's Synagogue. They were therefore partially coming round to the Gnostic position that the whole of the Christian Church was the work of the Devil.

Indulgences made sense only in terms of the Catholic concept of purgatory - a place where you were purged of sin before being admitted, pristinely clean and stainless, to paradise. But Protestants got rid of purgatory, leaving only heaven and hell, and no in-between.

Here's a tip for you. If you want to become the richest human being of all time, find a way to create a new type of indulgence that relatives and friends can buy for those in hell to secure a full pardon. Someone in Wall Street is probably already working on the scheme.

Somewhat related to indulgences was the phenomenon of "sin eating". The idea here was that poor people would be hired to eat the sins of the rich (and hence transfer the punishment to themselves).

As part of the funeral rite of a rich person, the sin eater would sit next to the corpse, in physical contact with it, and have a meal, into which the sins of the dead would be transferred and then consumed. Is this how McDonald's began? You certainly pay for it when you eat their junk.

The rich corpse would thereby be spared the torments of purgatory, allowing the poor person to suffer them instead. Ah, the benefits of wealth even extend to the afterlife.

One recorded version of the sin eating ceremony involved resting a plate of salt on the chest of the deceased and then dipping some bread into the salt. An incantation was recited over the corpse and then the sin eater consumed both the salty bread and the sins of the dead. (Catholic scientists are probably studying the sin-absorption qualities of salt even now.) Why don't we see if we can transfer the sins of the whole of humanity into a salt mine in Siberia, and then seal it forever? Hey presto - the end of sin!

The medieval Crusades against the Muslims found a new outlet in Europe - against the Gnostic Cathars, but this simply served to remind loyal Catholics that heresy could be found anywhere, even on their own doorstep, a reality reinforced by the shocking allegations of heresy against the most faithful of the faithful - the heroic Templars.

Thus the impression grew that demons and devils were everywhere, tempting believers into heresy.

Above all, the Inquisition came into existence. Initially, its purpose was to eradicate the roots of the Cathar heresy, but it was soon directed against all heresies. The Inquisitors loved the fear they provoked and the power it gave them, so it served them well to say that heresy was everywhere (just as it served anti-Communists in the USA in the 1950s to suggest that America was infested with "reds under the beds", and just as it serves modern Intelligence services to exaggerate the terrorist threat as much as possible - so that they get much bigger budgets and resources).

Nothing is surer than that if you create a group dedicated to rooting out heresy, it will soon start finding heretics under every hedge. And that's exactly what happened. Of course, it pays to pick on the weak rather than the strong, and the outsiders rather than insiders. So, who was in the firing line? - Gnostics (including the Illuminati and groups associated with the Illuminati), Jews and Muslims who had pretended to convert to Christianity to avoid persecutions, homosexuals, atheists, and any woman who was lonely or old or feisty or vulnerable or a lesbian, flirt, fornicator, adulterer, or herbalist - these were all placed under the banner of "witch".

One of the best features of widows, and middle-aged or old witches, was that if they had no heirs then their property could be signed over to the Church or State, so there was an enormous financial incentive to accuse old, childless rich ladies of witchcraft. Malicious neighbours used the "witch" allegation to settle scores against women with whom they were feuding. Likewise, in modern Pakistan, Muslims accuse non-Muslims of blasphemy at the drop of a hat, knowing the infidels will be arrested and sentenced to death.

After the Reformation, the Inquisition turned its attentions to Protestant heretics. The Protestants were equally keen to burn Catholics at the stake, usually on charges of high treason against the State. And the Protestants had as much zeal for burning witches as the Catholic Inquisition. Stern witchfinders dressed in black roamed the Protestant nations to root out the evil witches.

The Black Death that devastated Europe in the Middle Ages was attributed to Satanic forces, as were many smaller outbreaks of plagues.

The drug LSD was first synthesized from ergotamine, a chemical obtained from ergot, a grain fungus most associated with rye. It has been speculated that bread contaminated with ergot poisoned many communities throughout history, and gave them terrible hallucinations and "bad trips" in which they imagined all manner of devils and demons. In the Middle Ages, the victims were sure witches had put them under a terrible spell.

The condition was known as St Anthony's Fire because a) monks of the Order of St. Anthony were regarded as the most expert at treating the condition, and b) the main symptoms of the affliction were intense and painful burning sensations in the limbs and extremities.

It was an extremely serious condition because it could lead to psychosis, mania, gangrene, nausea, seizures, spasms, fits, and in the most severe cases, death.

It was much easier to blame supernatural forces than "bad" bread. After all, what harm could bread do?

In Germany from the 15th to 17th centuries, there were communities that believed they could obtain a year's good health by dancing convulsively in front of a statue of Saint Vitus on his feast day. This dancing could go on for hours and even days and become manic (not unlike the rave scene of modern times). This was one form of "St Vitus' dance". Another form related to a serious medical condition called Sydenham's chorea or Chorea minor, resulting from an infection and characterized by jerky, twitchy, uncoordinated movements affecting primarily the face, feet and hands. St Vitus was invoked by sufferers praying for relief from the condition.

Saint Vitus was a Christian saint who died as a martyr at the hands of the Romans in 303 CE. His association with dancing has led to his role being expanded and now he is regarded as unofficial patron saint of the entertainment world, including actors, comedians and dancers. He is also the patron saint of epileptics since St Vitus' dance resembles an epileptic fit.

During the Black Death, many Europeans took to flagellating themselves as penance for their sins so that God would protect them from the plague. Enormous processions of flagellants became a common sight in the medieval world, snaking through villages and towns, rounding up more and more people.

All in all, Europe became hysterical for several centuries. Apocalyptic cults sprang up everywhere, and numerous people claimed to be the Messiah. We see the same sort of thing in the modern world what with David Koresh and the Branch Davidians, the Jehovah's Witnesses (who have predicted the end of the world at least three times - being wrong each time has obviously proved no obstacle to their success), the Jim Jones cult, the American Christian fundamentalists who believe in the Rapture etc.

Whereas these are relative minorities in the modern world, in medieval Europe they were the overwhelming majority. The antidote came from the Italian Renaissance, which in due course led to the Enlightenment. Modern philosophy (starting with Descartes), and modern science (starting with Copernicus and Galileo) finally ushered in a more rational age and killed off the worst of the absurd superstitions of the Abrahamists. (Sadly, the Muslims still haven't had their Enlightenment and still believe in all sorts of mad things.)

What is truly remarkable is that the crazy Abrahamists haven't vanished. In fact, there are more of them than ever before. They are held back by a veneer of rational civilisation, but the medieval hysteria is just below the surface. We see this insanity erupting in retarded Islamic countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran. Wherever you have a combination of Abrahamism and a poor education system, you have hysterical maniacs, all too eager to kill in the name of their God. The situation is even worse than we have suggested because while in Israel the education system is good, they still churn out legions of mad, Orthodox Jews who behave as though the Enlightenment never happened.

Make no mistake, the world of Abrahamic faith is staggeringly close to the hysteria of the Witch Trials of the Middle Ages. The Illuminati were in the vanguard of Enlightenment values, and Adam Weishaupt's great dream was to use the new age of rationality to eradicate the religions of faith once and for all. He failed. Why? Because most of humanity remain poorly educated and irrational. We will never have a rational world until every government on earth campaigns against the religions of faith i.e. the demented religions of superstition, hate and hysteria. Faith schools should be outlawed, and no symbols of faith should be permitted in any public space.

If we want a rational world, we must eradicate the irrational forces that are holding us back, of which the most pernicious is Abrahamism. Faith religions are unacceptable in the 21st century. It's time for Adam Weishaupt's vision of a faith-free world to come to pass.

No one needs faith. It's useless and backward. We need reason and knowledge. We need a New Enlightenment.

*****

Incubus means "to lie on", and incubi were male demons that visited women, especially nuns and maidens, in the middle of the night and raped them or induced lustful dreams and desires in them. Any nun who became pregnant in a convent was obviously a victim of an incubus, and not of a priapic priest or monk visiting the convent, just as the Virgin Mary was obviously inseminated by God rather than a skilled seducer. If Mary was impregnated by the Holy Spirit then why shouldn't a virgin be impregnated by an evil spirit?

Incubi were said to have enormous, ice-cold penises that tore the internal organs of their victims. Also, the presence of an incubus caused everyone nearby to fall into a trancelike sleep. If the woman was married and in bed with her husband, he could be snoring right beside her while she was being ravaged.

A cynic might observe that whenever the Holy Spirit or the Angel Gabriel went about their business in the Bible, all potential witnesses seemed to be in a deep sleep too. In fact, the parallels between incubi and messengers of God are disturbingly close.

Any baby born with any deficiencies or deformities was regarded as the product of union with a demon. Such babies were often quietly done away with. One of the great untold stories of history is the sheer scale of infanticide that took place in many cultures. The Old Testament admits that the Jews sacrificed children to the pagan god Moloch. The Spartans were notoriously open about killing weak children. Medieval folk tales, such as that of Hansel and Gretel, abandoned in the woods by their parents, were coded allusions to parental desertion, usually leading to the death of the children.

Succubi were the female equivalents of incubi. Succubus means "to lie under", and these demons were able to get a man to mount them, or they would sit astride him and have their way with him. Although they appeared as great beauties, they instantly became hideous hags if they were identified for what they were.

Just as nuns in convents were the primary targets of incubi, monks in monasteries were the ones most assiduously pursued by succubi. (The cynic might say that the sexually frustrated monks were simply having wet dreams.)

Monks often tied crucifixes to their genitals to protect them from the enchantresses, while nuns might have to be defended by chastity belts.

*****

Witches gather together in groups of 13 called covens, and many covens gather together for the ritual known as the sabbat, usually held in an isolated spot far from prying eyes. Walpurgis Night on April 30 was the most significant sabbat for German witches; Halloween in other countries.

The brides of the Devil summon up their master and he then confers dark powers on them. The climax of sabbat involves an orgy where the Prince of Evil pleasures his followers. He is often in the form of a goat, with an enormous scaly member. The witches are expected to give him the osculum obscenum - the obscene kiss - by planting their lips on his anus.

Black Communion Hosts - a mockery of the sacred hosts offered at Holy Mass, are often inserted in the rectums and vaginas of the witches before intercourse and sodomy.

The witches trample on the cross, drink from buckets of strong wine, and shout obscenities at Jesus Christ.

Sometimes, a kidnapped monk may be forced to witness all of this and then be sexually tormented before being tortured to death.

****

Many of the details of the sabbat orgies were supplied by the fevered imaginations of sexually frustrated priests and monks and projected onto alleged witches.

Of course, rather than engaging in witch-hunting hysteria and burning people at the stake, it might have been better for the sexually obsessed men simply to have sex.

As part of the ideology of Sin for Salvation, the Illuminati deliberately emulate the Middle Age fantasies concerning witches, incubi and succubi. The ceremony depicted in the film "Eyes Wide Shut" is a sanitized version of the sort of thing that can occur. The nightclub described in Prohibition A by Mike Hockney is modelled on a real Illuminati ceremony that leads initiates through stylised sexual "sins" and transgressions in Dante's circles of hell. The sexual ceremony described in The Millionaires' Death Club by Mike Hockney also derives from an actual Illuminati sex ritual.

The Old World Order hold similar rituals although theirs are done for nothing but instant gratification, whereas the ceremonies of the Illuminati are part of a carefully crafted spiritual journey, invoking the incredible energy of sex, which can be used to open the door to higher states, as Eastern religions realised long ago.

"We don't call it sin today, we call it self-expression."
Baroness Stocks

"Many are saved from sin by being so inept at it."
Mignon McLaughlin


Orpheus

The ancient Greek religion of Orphism was the direct predecessor of Illuminism, and Pythagoras himself was one of its adherents. He blended it with the Egyptian, Indian, Persian, Babylonian, Phoenician and Solomonic esoteric elements taught by the ancient nomadic priesthood of the Illuminati and turned it all into the rational yet mystical religion of Illuminism. The first seven degrees of Illuminism concentrate on the rational, theoretical basis of the religion, and the higher mystery degrees on the esoteric aspects of the theory. Many of the original features of Orphism are retained by the Illuminati.

Orphism revolves around the myth of Orpheus, but just as the Arthurian tales have a foot in real events, so do those of Orpheus i.e. there was a legendary figure of that name who commanded such admiration that his adventures were embroidered into epic myths so that they would live forever.

Orpheus was said to have divine parenthood. His mother was Calliope, mother of the Muses (the nine goddesses of the arts and sciences) and his father was Apollo himself, god of light, music and reason.

Like his father Apollo, Orpheus was supremely skilled with the lyre, and played it so beautifully that it enchanted everyone who heard his music. Trees and rocks were reputed to move closer to him when he played, rivers to stop in their path to listen, and he could soothe wild animals with the magical qualities of his lyre playing. Enemies ready to go to war with each other could be brought back to peace and tranquillity by his music.

When his beautiful wife Eurydice died of a snake bite, Orpheus was so distraught that he determined to fight death itself and win her back. He descended into the underworld and his music was so moving that Charon the Ferryman agreed to transport him across the River Styx to the land of the dead. When Orpheus encountered Cerberus, the savage guard dog of Hades, he lulled it to sleep with his beguiling music.

When he came to King Hades himself and his Queen Persephone, Orpheus recounted his tale of woe, accompanied by the most moving lament ever heard, and the hearts of the rulers of the underworld  melted and they agreed to let Eurydice return to the world of the living, but on the condition that Orpheus must not look at her until they were back amongst the mortals.

Orpheus was overjoyed and agreed. Without looking at her, he took his wife by the hand and retraced his way back to the world. However, his wife was filled with anxiety about how death might have ravaged her looks. She was terrified that Orpheus might find her repulsive and shun her, and she would end up worse than dead, so she pleaded with Orpheus to look at her and tell her he truly loved her. Orpheus, just as he was reaching the light of day and safety, fatally turned and looked. Eurydice was more beautiful than ever, but no sooner had he cast his eyes on her and felt his heart leaping in his chest, than she faded away into the mists of Hades.

Orpheus was heartbroken and spent the rest of his days mourning the loss of the beautiful wife he had lost twice.

In his happy days of old, Orpheus had been content to play ecstatic songs for the Maenads, the female followers of Dionysus. They blindfolded him so that he could not see their secret rites, but it made no difference to the quality of his music.  

But now he played for them no more. The Maenads were driven into a fury. They loathed the fact that handsome Orpheus looked at no other women and took no new wife. He ignored women entirely, and when he played, it was for men only. For the Maenads, Orpheus had become an insult to life and to their great god of the irrepressible life-force: Dionysus. They tore Orpheus to pieces as if he were one of the wild animals they devoured in their rituals.

Afterwards, the Muses sorrowfully gathered up his limbs and buried them at the foot of Mount Olympus, but they could find neither his head nor lyre. It was said that they floated down a river into the sea, the head singing as it went, and were washed ashore on the island of Lesbos. There, the Lesbians buried the head with great reverence and solemnity and they were rewarded by Apollo with becoming the home of lyric poetry. The Muses managed to retrieve the lyre and carried it into the night sky where it became the constellation Lyre.

Orphism was based on sacred poems written by Orpheus, in which Apollo and Dionysus were brought together in a grand mystical synthesis symbolically represented by Mount Parnassus. This magic mountain, standing above Delphi, had two peaks: one sacred to Apollo and the other to Dionysus. Since it was said that Orpheus was killed by the Maenads for failing to pay due reverence to their god of passion and intoxication, so Orphism ensured that the irrational wasn't ignored in favour of the purely rational.

The Temple of Apollo at Delphi, the home of Reason, was called the omphalos ("navel") by the ancient Greeks. They regarded it as the centre of the world.

 Zagreus

The central religious myth of Orphism concerns Zagreus, son of Zeus and Persephone. As a little boy, Zagreus was torn apart and eaten by the Titans with the connivance of Hera, Zeus' angry and jealous wife, but Athena saved the boy's heart and gave it to Zeus. He exterminated the Titans with lightning strikes and created humanity from their ashes. Because the Titans had eaten Zagreus, the Son of God, their ashes contained part of the divine essence. Each human had a "divine spark" that yearned to escape the material world and return home to the divine realm.  

Zeus ate the still-beating heart of Zagreus, and when he impregnated Princess Semele of Thebes, the essence of Zagreus passed into the baby. When it was born, it was named Dionysus. So, it might be said that Dionysus, Son of God, was put to death by his enemies and then resurrected (or more accurately reincarnated) in a new and more glorious form. Does that sound vaguely familiar? Christianity stole many of the doctrines of Orphism.

Dionysus was often referred to as the twice-born, or Dionysus of the double door (because he came into life through two birthings, two doorways into life).

We see the entire basis of Gnosticism in Orphism. In fact, Orphism is the original Gnosticism that existed many centuries before Christianity appeared on the scene. "Christian" Gnosticism was an attempt to reconcile Christian themes with Gnosticism, but it had very little to do with conventional Christianity.

In Orphism, the human race is made from an evil, monstrous material component - the ash of the Titans - while the soul is the divine spark that does not belong in this mortal world but to the higher world of the immortal gods. But how does the divine spark escape from the bodily jail in which it is imprisoned? What must it do?

The answer does not lie in anything as crazy as "faith", but in secret knowledge of the true workings of the world - gnosis. Apollo is the god of reason and knowledge, and it is via the gifts he bestows that human beings can ascend to the plane of the divine ones. But they will never get there if they don't understand the nature of the prison world they inhabit, and it is Dionysus, the god of intoxication and passion, who reveals our deep nature.

What is the world without reason? It is the domain of pure Will. It is the animal world, where the law of the jungle applies.

What is the world of the gods? It is the world of consciousness, where reason can control Will.

Human beings are trapped in the limbo between reason and Will. We are still too much in thrall to the Will, still not sufficiently conscious, still lacking the highest rationality and the gift of the highest knowledge which it brings.

To spend time with the leading thinkers of the world and then with the sort of people who think sport, celebrities or shopping are the most significant things in life is like encountering two different species of humanity.

The soul must achieve a synthesis of Apollo and Dionysus, reason and Will.

Science, philosophy, mathematics and psychology are the domain of Apollo, and the doctrine of "Sin for Salvation" is how the Illuminati honour Dionysus.

The Will - Dionysian chaos and irrationality - has to be brought under Apollonian rational control. One of the best ways to accomplish this is to ritualise experiences of the Will, particularly those involving sex and feasting.

Ancient Greece was a highly ordered and rational society, but the Greeks were wise enough to understand that irrational forces must be catered for, and that's where Dionysus came in.

Contrast the ancient Greeks with the Muslims. The latter ban everything: drink, drugs, Western music, casual sex. The result? Religious mania and psychosis. Consider the latest atrocity. An American pastor burns a book, so an Afghani mob go on the rampage and slaughter several United Nations staff, beheading two of them. The victims didn't burn anything and didn't commit any crimes, but what did the Muslims care? Someone somewhere had to be punished and killed to avenge the "honour" of their deranged Satanic deity - Allah.

Shouldn't the West now withdraw from Afghanistan and let the Islamic retards sink back into the primal swamp? How can anyone expect any form of civilisation from these people? What manner of God gets upset by a book being burned? And what kind of God thinks that people who had absolutely nothing to do with it should be beheaded?

The uncontrollable rages that the Muslim mobs feel have no healthy outlet, hence they turn psychotic. It was precisely to defuse this type of madness that the Greeks sanctioned Dionysian ceremonies and rituals.

Any society or religion that does not design safety valves for the release of pent-up emotions is certain to go insane. The history of Abrahamism has been the history of the madhouse. Crusades, Inquisitions, Witch trials, exorcisms, heretic burnings, persecutions…these are the inevitable consequences of repression. They are manifestations of the homeostatic psychological response to rigid controls. They are the creations of the shadow and they have terrible destructive power.

Orthodox Jews, Christian Fundamentalists and virtually all Muslims are effectively mad. When you wage war against Dionysus and deny him the recognition he demands, he appears in your midst as a mysterious stranger and he brings with him the most terrible punishments of the gods. The Bacchae by Euripides tells the tale of the appalling fate that befalls King Pentheus when he fails to serve Dionysus.

The Abrahamic religions, with their idiotic attitude to "sin", have CREATED sin. It wouldn't exist if the Abrahamists didn't exist.

Evil should be redefined as any behaviour that is contemptuous of others, in which case the super rich and all those who practise systems of privilege are evil. The Abrahamists have endless lists of sins but none that threaten the hegemony of the rich and powerful.

We can abolish evil through the exercise of reason. Once you outlaw the super rich and privilege; once you outlaw religions of faith; once you implement decent conditions for all and a proper education system; once you apply psychology to every aspect of society…evil would become non-existent. We could have a condition of Crime Zero.

You don't cure the world's ills by saying it's evil to eat non-halal food or to switch on a light on the Sabbath or to have sex before marriage. You redeem the world through reason, and reason acknowledges the need to accommodate unreason. The Greeks understood that, but it was the Jews and their monstrous vision of the world based on a psychopathic deity (that any rational person would call Satan) that triumphed.

Consider the difference between Christianity which says that evil is embedded in the human condition and that only faith in Jesus Christ and the grace of God can save human souls, and a religion such as Illuminism which says that evil can be understood rationally and eliminated rationally using psychology.

Bunga Bunga Party

We can thank Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi for introducing us to one of the greatest names ever devised for a party. A Bunga Bunga party is a name for an erotic sex ritual. It starts with escorts or starlets doing stripteases or pole dancing in front of naked guests…and progresses from there. Of course, you have to be super rich and a friend of Silvio to get an invite.

Tolstoy

The great Russian writer Tolstoy had a problematic relationship with sex, often finding it disgusting. It has been speculated that his distaste may have stemmed from the day he lost his virginity. His elder brother took him to a brothel for the purpose (a common practice in previous times), but unfortunately this particular brothel overlooked the grave of Tolstoy's father. Fucking a prostitute near to where your father's bones lie a-mouldering may not be the psychologically healthiest introduction to sex.

*****

In the past, it was traditional for fathers or older brothers to take boys to a prostitute to let them lose their virginity. No such service was offered to girls, of course.

Sex is often a disappointment for boys and girls first time round. It's not as special as it ought to be. Given its importance, it ought to be the subject of a sacred rite of passage, as practised in pagan times.

One of the duties of sacred prostitution in the temples of the Goddess was to initiate boys into sex. While Abrahamists are appalled by the concept of sex outside marriage ("Better to marry than burn," said St Paul), pagans regard it as entirely natural.

Would it not be a much better introduction for boys above the age of consent to be initiated into sex via a priestess in service of Aphrodite, rather than some squalid drunken fumble in the back of a car? Same goes for girls, of course. A young priest of the goddess could be on hand for girls.

We need to make sex much more sacred, special and spiritual. We have to make it much easier for shy boys and girls to have their first sexual encounter. We have to make it a rite of passage that everyone can enjoy and celebrate. Sex conducted as a ritual is much more potent than superficial sex.

Sexual dysfunction, sexual embarrassment and sexual awkwardness are plagues of our society. We need to cure them using tried and tested pagan techniques. All Abrahamists are sexually hung up. We need to free them all, and thus free society.

Above all, Muslims need a good fuck! Seriously!

The Darkest Hour?

"It is always darkest just before the day dawneth." - Thomas Fuller

This expression gives hope to all those going through "dark" times. When all hope seems to be lost, victory may lie just ahead. But is it scientifically true? In fact, it's darkest at midnight, the midpoint between dusk (sundown) and dawn (sunrise). This is the point at which the sun is on the opposite side of the earth i.e. the observer is 180 degrees away from the sun.

Dirty Hand Muslims

Right-handed Muslims shake hands with fellow Muslims using the right hand. However, they shake hands with non-Muslims using their "unclean" left hand, the hand they use to wipe their ass. And then they wonder why so many people dislike them.

Heroism and Love

You can't be a hero unless you overcome obstacles, the more difficult the better. Most people go through life trying to minimise the obstacles they face. They want as easy a life as possible, so they will never be heroes.

The greatest love, such as the troubadours proclaimed, also requires supremely challenging obstacles. It is by overcoming obstacles that we transform ourselves into higher beings, that we find the deepest love and discover our inner hero. So, don't flee from obstacles, don't bemoan your fate. If you are faced with difficulties, smile! If you can beat the odds, you have a chance to become something astounding. Don't run away. Tackle them head on.

The creed of the easy life and easy pleasures has seduced almost everyone. But none of these people are capable of greatness. They will achieve nothing significant.

All great lives involve the alchemical transformation of base metal into gold. Spiritually, you transform yourself through overcoming internal and external obstacles. You confront your inner blindness and make yourself see. At last, you recognise your true self, and via your true, higher self you understand everything. You have reached the glorious endpoint of a glorious adventure.

You should be looking for difficulties, not the easy option. The easy path is the life to anonymity and endless regret. The hard path is the one that gives you a purpose in life and brings out everything best in you. You have to become smarter, stronger, superior to overcome resistance. If you flee from the hard path, you will never encounter your higher self.

How do you differentiate yourself from six and half billion other people? By doing hard things. The harder the challenge you take on, the fewer people will be in competition with you.

It takes 10,000 hours to become an expert in a subject. By hook or by crook, you must discover what you are good at and devote the 10,000 hours needed to become an expert in it. You will have to make enormous sacrifices. If you don't, you won't achieve anything. It's as simple as that.

The Movement

There is only one conspiracy in the world that can be factually demonstrated to the general public: namely, that in the last three decades there has been an enormous transfer of wealth from the ordinary people to a tiny group of super rich families. All of the laws of the world are now configured to allow a small global elite to dictate to every government on earth. The elite have been attempting to secure this end for a very long time. The aim of the elite is simple: to ensure that they and theirs have overwhelming advantages over everyone else. The system they advocate is called Privilege. It is a system where money rules. Money buys you a better home, a better living environment, a better education, a better social network, a more lucrative career and secures you more influence, more power and more respect.

Thus a system of privilege is explicitly designed to ensure the permanent success of the privileged. It's a self-serving machine. Anyone who is not part of that system must fight against it or become a second-class citizen in a two-tier society.

The Movement is an international activist group campaigning to bring about the end of privilege and its replacement with meritocracy. If those are not your objectives, do not join the Movement.

Anyone who thinks that the elite are Reptilian shape-shifters from Nibiru should be locked up. Anyone who thinks that the governments of Israel and America ordered 9/11 should join them in the madhouse.

The ideology of privilege that has been imposed on every part of the world (including the Arab nations that have recently risen up against the elite) is the only conspiracy with which anyone in the Movement should be concerned. If you are interested in any other conspiracies, do not join the Movement. You are wasting everyone's time, including your own.

The Movement is international. Anyone who wants to turn it into a platform for nationalistic concerns and obsessions should go elsewhere.

The Movement is above all about quality. When it has established a certain level of quality it will naturally attract more people of quality, and repel people who just want to bellyache about the shitty world we live in.

The Movement is not about communism, socialism, anarchism, libertarianism or anything else of this ilk. It is about meritocracy and the allied concept of technocracy (i.e. using the most meritocratic technical experts to solve global issues through advanced technology).

The Movement ought to resemble an organised political party moving towards a new political vision of the world. It should not resemble a group of conspiracy theorists, amateur enthusiasts and people burning up time.

The Movement is supposed to offer a new psychology, a new religious mode of thinking, a new radicalism, a new political model. It is about people from ordinary backgrounds showing that they can come up with better ways forward than the privileged elite.

The Babel Syndrome

In medieval Europe, the educated class could all read, write and speak in Latin in addition to their national language. Should that not be the template for the future, with English taking the place of Latin (English because it's already the de facto international language of science, technology, computing and business)? Everyone in the world should learn the same second language: English. This should be the international language.

Whenever people are in their own country, they can expect to use their own language, but when they are communicating with those in other countries, they simply switch to the international language - English.

There will be no more communication problems. People will always have the international language - English - to fall back on. As for people in English-speaking nations, they should learn the language of whatever country most interests them.

According to the Bible, different languages were introduced as a punishment for humanity's hubris at attempting to build the tower of Babel to reach the heavens. Unable to communicate with each other, the builders were forced to abandon their efforts. What's changed? Different languages are still the same barrier to communication and progress that they have always been. In this global economy, we should as soon as possible select a single international language that everyone on earth will be taught. There will be no more communication problems, no more confusion, no more bureaucratic wastage on having to translate documents into scores of different languages, no more tedious interpreters and misinterpreters. The fans of a multi-language world are narrow-minded nationalists, the enemies of communication, and slaves to conservatism. If we move beyond these Luddites, perhaps, at long last, we'll be able to build that tower that goes all the way to the stars.

Master484 has pointed out that in Finland, Swedish has the status of an official language, which all Finns are expected to learn because of the presence of a small but influential Swedish minority in the country. There is a strong opinion amongst many Finns that the Swedes should speak Finnish all the time. Master484 has suggested that if there is to be a second or "common language" it should be English rather than Swedish since English is unquestionably more useful.

We entirely agree with this view. Many people express their identity through their language, but, frankly, we are much more interested in international ease of communication than we are in nationalistic obsession with language.

The European Union descends into farce with every document having to be translated into every language of all the member States. Hordes of translators are everywhere, trying to make sense of the infernal babble of all the different languages. Why not simply have all documents produced in English as the common language of the Union, just as Latin was once the common language of Europe? Stupid national pride gets in the way of agreeing a common European language, and thanks to these attitudes, Europe can't compete with America.

Had history happened differently, Spanish, French or German could have been the common language, but English has come out on top thanks to the British Empire and English-speaking America. That's the way it goes. In the future, everyone might end up speaking some form of Chinese. Who knows?

But let's get one language up and running as a global language that everyone can use. Who but someone hostile to ease of communication would oppose this policy?

The Priestess

At ancient Delphi, below Mount Parnassus in Greece, the Pythia - the priestess of Apollo - made her way every morning to the adytum, the inner chamber of Apollo's temple. She sat on a bronze tripod set over a cleft in the ground. Constantly chewing bay leaves, she occasionally sipped water from the Kassotis spring. All the while, she inhaled the fumes that issued from the chasm below. They sent her into a trance, and out flowed the precious prophecies. The fumes inhaled by the Pythia were probably ethylene - a sweet-smelling gas that can produce a floating sensation and euphoria.

It was the job of priests to submit the pilgrims' questions to the Pythia. They wrote down her oracular responses and set about interpreting them, but their replies were always ambiguous.

The priestess, a beautiful young virgin in the earliest years of the Oracle, received the Word of Apollo in a highly sexual manner. As she writhed on the tripod, the god breathed through her vagina and the words come out of her mouth. Her body was a tube for the expression of Apollo's spirit. After a session, she collapsed, exhausted. It was as if she had lain with the god. She had been in the most intimate union with the divine.

The god himself spoke at Delphi and the Pythia was his mouthpiece.

Emperor Julian (the Apostate) consulted the Oracle. The Pythia responded:

Tell to the king that the carven hall is fallen in decay;

Apollo has no chapel left, no prophesying bay,

No talking spring. The stream is dry that had so much to say.

The Oracle had declared its own end!

Christianity destroyed the Delphic Oracle. The inspiration of Apollo had dried up after some 1,200 glorious years. It had been the most successful Oracle in history. The great God of reason could no longer speak. Christian irrationality had killed his voice. Not even Dionysus had managed that, but nothing is more toxic than Abrahamist faith.

Julian Jaynes regarded the Oracle's priestesses as highly bicameral. Their oracular pronouncements were the result of auditory hallucinations originating in the right hemisphere of the brain, and which seemed to others to be the actual words of gods.

Sex Magick

Aleister Crowley was obsessed with the power of sex and created an elaborate system of sexual magic based on transgression, stimulus and ritual. He believed that we could become something holy, that we could make ourselves sacred, that we could transform ourselves into a masterpiece.

The imams, rabbis, priests and pastors who seek to control you via your religious beliefs have made sex one of the ultimate taboos. You are supposed to have sex only with your marriage partner, in a bedroom, in the dark, and foremost on your mind should be procreation rather than pleasure.

One way to break their control is to shatter their sexual taboos. Contrast Islam with the West. Islam remains terrified of sex, to the extent that many women are culturally compelled to cover themselves from head to toe, and all women must dress "modestly" so as not to inflame the passions of men. In the West, particularly Europe, full of casual sex, scantily clad women, drunkenness and drug use, Christianity has practically died as a meaningful force. There is a direct correlation between increased sexual freedom and decreased Abrahamism. Sexual liberation is toxic to religions of control.

In many Western nations, Christianity is no longer a problem. In fact, it's an irrelevance. The problem is that the West has replaced it with the new and equally odious religions of consumerism, celebrity culture, and the worship of Mammon. Sex has to be retrieved from Mammon and given a spiritual dimension once more - through rituals.

It was said of Crowley: "[He] didn't enjoy his perversions! He performed them to overcome his horror of them."

Again we encounter the theme of overcoming. It can't be stressed enough that overcoming challenges goes to the heart of a great human life. Most people end up in brain-dead, dreary, repetitive jobs that offer no challenges; they settle down to conventional family life; they pay lip service to everything they're supposed to and end up leading fake, phoney, shallow lives where they do nothing to raise themselves to a higher level.

Crowley enjoyed spiritual epiphanies through sexual transgression, and there's no question that if you leave your sexual comfort zone you can enter an extraordinary world of Dionysian energy that reinvigorates your whole life.

Crowley discovered that extreme sex could lead to ecstatic trance states where people's paranormal powers were massively enhanced. In one instance, Crowley's lover, Mary Desti, exhausted by a marathon sex and drinking session, entered a trance and became a conduit for the voice of a wizard called Ab-ul-diz, who communicated a message to Crowley, instructing him to write a magical text.

Several of Crowley's books were said to be written as a result of channelling higher spirits. It could equally well be said that Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism, channelled the Angel Moroni, that Mohammed channelled the Angel Gabriel, and Moses (as depicted in the Hebrew Bible) channelled Yahweh. Many novelists claim to channel voices welling up from their subconscious. Only when they tell the story does the voice leave, apparently satisfied.

Sex magick revolves around ritual. Crowley devised many elaborate ceremonies, often based on the Christian Mass (by a similar token, the Black Mass of "Satanists" was a deliberate perversion of conventional Mass, designed to flout everything that was most sacred about the Christian version, and always concluding with a simulated or actual sacrifice and an orgy).

Crowley's religious and philosophical teachings are encapsulated by the word "Thelema" (Greek for "will"), and he preached the need for "certainty, not faith."

He achieved an ambitious synthesis of Western magick and Eastern mysticism, including Eastern sexual techniques for enhancing spirituality. He promoted "scientific illuminism", which he described as, "The method of science, the aim of religion." He proclaimed, "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law." And, of course, this is exactly the same position as that of the Abrahamist "God" i.e. HIS will is the whole of the law (but not anyone else's will, of course).

System of the Ordo Templi Orientis (O.T.O.):

(Extract from a letter to one of Crowley's disciples):

Let us begin at the beginning. What is a Dramatic Ritual? It is a celebration of the adventures of the God whom it is intended to invoke. (The Bacchae of Euripides is a perfect example of this.) Now, in the O.T.O., the object of the ceremonies being the Initiation of the Candidate, it is he whose Path in Eternity is displayed in dramatic form.

What is the Path?

1.    The Ego is attracted to the Solar System.
2.    The Child experiences Birth.
3.    The Man experiences Life.
4.    He experiences Death.
5.    He experiences the World beyond Death.
6.    The entire cycle of Point-Events is withdrawn into Annihilation.

In the O.T.O. these successive stages are represented as follows:

1.    Zeroth Degree (Minerval)
2.    First Degree (Initiation)
3.    Second Degree (Consecration)
4.    Third Degree (Devotion)
5.    Fourth Degree (Perfection, or Exaltation)
6.    P.I. (Perfect Initiate)

It is improper to disclose the nature of these ceremonies; firstly because their Initiates are bound by the strictest vows not to do so; secondly, because surprise is an element in their efficacy; and thirdly, because the Magical Formulae explicitly or implicitly contained therein are, from a practical point of view, both powerful and dangerous.

Love is the law, love under will

Fraternally,
666
 
Although O.T.O.'s origins lay in Freemasonry, Crowley said that the purpose of the secret society was to create Magicians (Magi), not Masons.

The O.T.O. had an ecclesiastical wing called Ecclesia Gnostica Catholica (the Gnostic Catholic Church), central to which was a Gnostic Mass (borrowing heavily from the grand Roman Catholic Tridentine Mass), where Crowley's Thelemic religious doctrines were proclaimed.

The Ecclesia Gnostica Catholica is still active in California. Check it out if you're that part of the world.
 
Judaism, Catholicism, Protestantism, Islam and Gnosticism

Judaism claims that the way to God is through obeying endless rules allegedly imposed by God. The great philosopher Immanuel Kant claimed that Judaism wasn't a religion at all, but a mere body of laws. Jews put very little thought into the soul and the afterlife. They are completely preoccupied with "being Jewish" i.e. obeying all the rules of Judaism. Their "religion" is thus more like a computer program. There is nothing spiritual about it. Their slavish, mindless obedience to the rules was replicated just as fanatically by those other human robots - the Muslims, who are machines loaded with the "Islam Program", which they run 24/7.

The Catholic Church claims that the way to God is through the Church and its sacraments. The Pope, the head of the Church, is Christ's representative on Earth, and there is no Salvation outside the Church.

Protestantism rejects the Pope, the Church and the sacraments and claims that the way to God is through the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ alone. A Protestant is "justified by faith." For Protestants, reason is the "Devil's whore".

Islam claims that the way to God is solely through the Koran and Allah's prophet Mohammed.

Gnosticism says, "Fuck all that shit!"

Gnosticism (by which we also include Neoplatonism and Hermeticism) asserts that there is no need for any intermediaries between you and the divine. No Church is needed, no Pope, no rules, no holy books, no prophets, no faith. You yourself are in fact God. You just don't realise it yet. When you do, you have attained the state called gnosis.

There's no need for intermediaries because your problem is not one of needing anyone else's intercession to plead your case to God, but one of lack of self-recognition as to who you truly are. It is ignorance of the truth from which you suffer. The remedy is knowledge, and that comes from subjects such as science, philosophy, mathematics and psychology, not from books of revelation by bearded prophets.

Do you see the remarkable difference between Abrahamism and Gnosticism? The first wants to make you dependent on something or someone. The second wants to make you dependent on yourself. The first wants to control you, the second for you to control yourself. The first is a slave religion, the second is for the greatest human beings of all: those who consider themselves capable of perfection through their own efforts.

The first can never control the second. No Gnostic will ever be a slave to another man's system. A Gnostic will never obey someone else's dumb rules, or wait for a Saviour or Messiah, or turn to faith, or listen to crazy prophets, or be in awe of a book written in Arabic.

Gnostics have contempt for the zombie legions that sign away their lives because a book or a prophet told them to.

Get off your knees. Stand up straight. Think! Use your reason. Challenge the orthodox position. Always ask questions (but make sure they're good ones!) Take as much personal responsibility as you can. Be as creative as possible. Decide for yourself what is good and what is evil. Because these are the qualities that define God.

Open Source Religion

"JL" wrote to us to say that we seemed to be providing humanity with its first "open source" religion. We liked that description. It's possible to think of mainstream religions in terms of the major corporations of the computer industry: the leviathans such as Microsoft, IBM and Oracle.

The mainstream religions are closed source and proprietorial - they are the Microsoft of the spiritual world! They seek a monopoly position. They want to use every trick in the book to close down the opposition. They are the masters of anti-competitive practices. They ought to be regulated, but they refuse to let anyone interfere with them and they invoke God if anyone challenges them.

The mainstream religions are corporate, institutionalised, pre-packaged. They're always aiming for the big sell. They want as many shareholders and stakeholders as possible. They spread their memes everywhere: the ultimate virus that comes inbuilt with the religious operating system.

No one is allowed to touch the code even though it's full of bugs. Apparently, God himself wrote the code (he must be the worst programmer in the world!). The code is "infallible". It is eternally true and flawless, allegedly. Everyone is waiting for the deluxe release (the Second Coming, the Last Judgment), but it's permanently delayed.

The Protestant upgrade to Catholicism - the Reformation - was like Microsoft Vista: it introduced even more bugs.

Illumination is the open source version of religion, developed by the best programmers and always dialectically keeping up to date with the latest technological innovations.

So, what will it be? Will you be on the side of the ancient, bug-ridden code of "divine revelation"; the bloatware of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, with endless add-ons that are always crashing the program - or will you start using the sleek, slimline, ultra high performance and supremely logical software of Illumination, guaranteed to lead you to enlightenment?

Religion is just another business, just another code. Historically, Abrahamism used the ultimate anti-competitive practices - Inquisitions, Crusades, Witch Trials, Heretic Burnings, Martyrdom Operations, Persecution - to silence the competition. No healthy economy would let leviathans dictate to the world, and the same is true in the religious sphere. All religions should be investigated by the Monopolies Commission. Microsoft was challenged for building its web browser into its operating system, thus making it impossible for other web browsers to compete. Imagine if Microsoft were allowed to brainwash you from birth, brand you with its logo and threaten you with death if you ever considered switching to one of its rivals. Yet that's the situation we have with the mainstream religions.

We are told that we must have respect for religion. Why should we? Religion should be challenged like everything else. A government commission of enquiry should be held regarding every religion, and their beliefs subjected to intense scrutiny. As a service to its citizens, every Government in the world should offer its citizens a full, critical analysis of every religion - and this would form the basis of religious education at school. There would be no standing on ceremony, no undeserved "respect" for religion. Their strongest defenders can speak on their behalf, and their sternest critics can put the counter case.

This website actually constitutes the world's greatest educational resource. We have presented a critique of almost every major system of thought in the world. We have not censored ourselves or pulled any punches. We have presented the ultimate prosecution of Abrahamism. If the content of this website were taught to children, Abrahamism would soon perish. It survives because it is able to prevent itself being attacked by the likes of us.

Some schools in America object to the teaching of Darwin's Theory of Evolution and want to teach Creationism instead. Very well, let's take the gloves off. Let schools criticise Darwin, and let science mount a full-scale attack on mainstream religion with no holds barred. Let's start holding Abrahamism up to derision. Let's mock it relentlessly and have no respect for it whatever (i.e. the same amount of respect it has for Darwinism). Let's end the phoney war. Let's put religion on trial. Every religion in the world should have to defend itself in the court of reason against the world's leading thinkers. All of the trials should be televised and a jury should pronounce judgement on every religion.      

The one thing religions have managed to avoid is to become the subject of a truth enquiry. When anyone criticises Islam, people actually die - that's the extent to which religion is prepared to go to escape official criticism. Anyone who "disrespects" religion is condemned. Everyone has to tiptoe around religion, breathing softly and talking in a whisper so as not to offend the beliefs of the masses.

We say FUCK THAT! Fuck mainstream religion. Fuck the believers. Fuck their God. Fuck them all.

If you are opposed to Abrahamism, become a "holy hacker". Wreck their code. Crash their systems. Blue screen them. Sabotage their trade in souls. Bankrupt their business. Bring their monopoly to an end. Destroy their rich proprietor - Satan, the Bill Gates of hell. Destroy their CEOs - the Archons. Overthrow the corporations of mainstream religion, the cartels of the self-righteous. Stop their sales of snake oil. These people are the False Prophets, the peddlers of the ultimate lies. In the name of "God", they have made half the world worship the Devil. These people are evil incarnate and all good people must oppose them.

Logos and Sophia - in their name, we shall conquer.

The Dancing route to Enlightenment

The Whirling Dervishes of Islam perform a devotional rite where they close their eyes, stretch out their arms and start a low, solemn chant. They then start to turn slowly, gradually building speed. This can go on for hours until they enter a kind of trance where they think they come closer to the divine.

Sure enough, intense dancing over many hours can lead to spiritual breakthroughs as many fans of the rave scene could testify.

Golden Sex

When she was a young virgin, Danaë, the future mother of the hero Perseus, was locked in an inaccessible tower by her father who was terrified of a prophecy that her son would kill him. Thus he sought to ensure she never had children by preventing her from coming into contact with any men.

But Zeus, God the Father, became enamoured of the beautiful princess and changed himself into a shower of gold, which rained down on her and impregnated her. Perseus, the child born of this miraculous union, was thus the Son of God.

We can see here one of the prototypes of the Christian myth. A virgin is miraculously visited by God (in the form of the Holy Spirit) who impregnates her, and she gives birth to a holy child of a royal line who can be called the Son of God. The child brings about the destruction of the "father" (the old religion of Judaism, replaced by Christianity).
 
Fast and Furious 5 (Rio: the Heist) starring Vin Diesel and Paul Walker

It's possible to know everything about a movie simply from the title and the posters advertising it. What are we going to get from this movie? - fast cars, fast women (or shall we say hot cars and hot women), well-oiled, muscular stars for the homoerotic audience, lots of guns and explosions, lots of car chases and action sequences, glamorous locations, laconic dialogue, no story to speak of, no emotional content, no ideas of any description.

Who are these movies for? Only Myers-Briggs sensing types could enjoy them. They have nothing for anyone else.

But the more important point is this. Sensing types aren't sensing types just for the duration of a movie. They are sensing types all the time. Every aspect of their life is dominated by their focus on their senses.

Similarly, feeling types are defined by feelings, thinking types by thinking and intuitive types by intuition. When you really understand what this means you will comprehend that humanity is composed not of a single species but of several species. Their personalities are often so different that they are effectively incomprehensible to each other - like aliens from other worlds. The crucial importance of this point is that humanity acts as if it were "One" when in fact it is "Several". Conflict is guaranteed because the different tribes have so little in common.

Wittgenstein said, "If a lion could talk, we could not understand him." (This is perhaps his greatest contribution to philosophy since it is one of the profoundest statements ever made. Even if all creatures share the same fundamental instincts and drives, their ways of trying to secure the same ends may be so different as to make it seem as though their goals are entirely different. In Myers-Briggs terms, even if a thinker and a feeler are both preoccupied with attaining more power, their strategies for going about it are often mutually incomprehensible.) Similarly, if we could tune into the thoughts of these other human species, we still wouldn't understand them. Imagine a person who lives by rational linear thinking trying to follow the thoughts of a sensing person who leaps from one sensation to the next with barely any regard for rational thinking at all. What about trying to think like an autistic? It's actually impossible. Could you even understand your own thoughts if you were able to access the mind you had when you were two or three years old? The mind of your childhood self would be a bewildering and unfathomable place. You would find it difficult to accept that you had ever thought such thoughts. In many ways, we are strangers to ourselves, never mind to members of the other human tribes. The idea that we are all just one big happy human family is naïve and ludicrous, and underlies most of the problems of the world.

The key to a New World Order lies in facing up honestly to the radical differences and disagreements between the different tribes and arranging the world to accommodate them as peacefully and sensibly as possible.    

The Tennis Club/Golf Club Network

David Cameron, the upper class, Old World Order prime minister of the UK said on the subject of internships for the in-crowd: "Actually, I've got my neighbour coming in for an internship. In the modern world, of course you're always going to have internships and interns - people who come and help in your office who come through all sorts of contacts, friendly, political, whatever. I do that and I'll go on doing that. I feel very relaxed about it."

He himself got experience in his father's stockbroking office. "A definite leg-up internship," he admitted.

Much of the world of privilege takes place informally - at private clubs such as the upper crust tennis or the golf club for "members only". Here the elite cut the deals that get their children into the best jobs.

If your parents aren't in such a club then you don't have a look-in when it comes to getting the gold-ticket jobs that open up the doors to the highest positions.

Cameron also referred with approval to 'the sharp-elbowed middle classes'. These are the well-off and clued-up parents who elbow their way to the front of the queue without a thought for anyone else. They get the best out of the system for themselves and their family.

The privileged elite think there's nothing wrong with their conduct. They think it's their job to do their best for their children and if that involves screwing over other families then so be it. Those other families would, no doubt, do the same if they had the chance.

And, indeed, so they would. That's the whole problem with our world. Even if you get rid of one privileged elite, another soon springs up like the Hydra-headed monster.

Yet for anyone who does not belong to the in-crowd, it's madness to allow the in-crowd to get away with rigging the system. As a matter of simple self-interest everyone in the out-crowd - the vast majority - should prevent the in-crowd from carving up the world between them. Moreover, to ensure permanent fairness, the existence of privileged elites should be brought to an end. Every system of privilege should be destroyed by law. No one should have any chance at all to rig the system. The mechanisms of merit should be so powerful and deeply ingrained that it becomes impossible for an untalented person from a privileged background to secure any form of advantage no matter how much money he has.

Only then will we be free.      

The Problem of Privilege in a Nutshell

In the UK, the cash-strapped political party the Liberal Democrats (one half of the Coalition government) have offered lobbyists regular face-to-face meetings with Liberal Democrat ministers, including the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, in return for an annual £25,000 donation to the Party.

An elite group of fifty individuals will enjoy "exclusive dinners" and "unrivalled networking opportunities." This is what is known in the UK as "cash for access". The privileged elite simply buy their way to the top table where they can then exert their full power. Poor people are excluded simply for being poor. Their voice is never heard.

So there you have it - the system of privilege in crystal clear relief. The political parties need money, so they need rich people to donate to their parties. The rich people don't do anything for nothing, so they buy favours from the politicians, and give them perks. The politicians are thenceforth in their pocket, doing their bidding.

Why is this kind of thing not automatically illegal? In any healthy political system, it would be.

The First major Christian Church to Die?

"But this Easter, I can't help feeling - more than ever - that the Church of England will not survive my children's lifetime and quite possibly not even my own…The Church of England was founded as a political act against the wishes of much of the population and is now dying out of political irrelevance and popular unconcern. History, as we know, moves on, taking no prisoners."
Adrian Hamilton, The Independent

The Church of England, the official State Church of which the Queen is the head, is rapidly fading away, with congregations dwindling fast. It will not survive this century. Will its demise signal the end of Christianity? Anyway, how can a monarch rather than a religious leader be the head of a Church? What kind of fucked up system brings Church, State and Monarchy all together in one toxic package? It deserves to perish.

The 12 Steps of Tyranny?

The 12 steps said to be necessary for beating alcoholism have a great deal in common with the steps that convert people into born-again Christian fanatics. Be on your guard.

Step 1: We admitted we were powerless over alcohol - that our lives had become unmanageable.

Christian Equivalent (CE): We admitted we could make no sense of life and were powerless over it - our lives had become unmanageable.

Step 2: Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.

CE: Came to believe that Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour, could restore us to sanity.
 
Step 3: Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood him.

CE: Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of Jesus Christ as we understood him.

Step 4: Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.

CE: Ditto

Step 5: Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.

CE: Admitted to Jesus, to ourselves, and to a trusted evangelical Christian the exact nature of our wrongs.

Step 6: Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.

CE: Were entirely ready to place our faith in Jesus to remove all these defects of character.

Step 7: Humbly asked him to remove our shortcomings.

CE: Humbly prayed to Jesus to remove our shortcomings.

Step 8: Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.

CE: Made a list of all evangelical Christians we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.

Step 9: Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or harm others.

CE: Ditto

Step 10: Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it.

CE: Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it to Jesus and begged forgiveness.

Step 11: Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.

CE: Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with Jesus as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the grace to carry that out.

Step 12: Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics, and to practise these principles in all our affairs.

CE: Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to heathens, and to practise these principles in all our affairs.

The steps needed to create a cult are simple. Alcoholics' Anonymous is a religious cult in all but name. AA is a cult for submissives with low will power. The whole point of Step 2 is to place your faith in a higher, dominant power. Rather than exercise your own power, you transfer responsibility to this higher power. Because you are submissive, you are now happy because you have a higher power to obey and it's no longer up to you. As long as you keep the faith, the "cure" should work.

It's very hard to imagine that any dominant would go anywhere near AA. A dominant simply makes up his mind to stop and does so. That's why he's dominant. He has an iron will. He takes responsibility for his own life. He needs no "Jesus" to guide him.

The Hell-Fire Club

The most notorious Hell-Fire Club of 18th Century England held its revels at Medmenham Abbey and enthusiastically celebrated the pagan rites of Pan and Priapus, to the horror of a buttoned-up, sexually repressed nation.

The leader of the Club was Sir Francis Dashwood, a member of parliament who became a Lord and the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Dashwood was highly sexed, devoted to alcohol, and given to profane activities, earning him the nickname of "Mad" Dashwood. Extremely witty and convivial, he was fabulously wealthy and generous with it. His riches allowed him to indulge his prodigious appetites to the full.

As a young man, Dashwood went on several "Grand Tours" of Europe, and on one occasion ended up at the excavations at Pompeii, where he was beguiled by the "House of Mysteries", the walls of which were decorated with brothel art. Dashwood resolved to bring the House of Mysteries back to life on a grand scale in England. He made a point of tracking down rare and exclusive porn, studying pagan sex rites and acquiring books of magic spells and incantations. Like many others, he was fascinated by the Rosicrucians.

Although this was the age of the Enlightenment, the attack of reason on the authority of mainstream religion had an unexpected side effect: it revived an interest in all things pagan, including, and perhaps especially, the Black Arts.

To a man of imagination from repressed Protestant England, the Dionysian excesses of Greece and Rome were enthralling to Dashwood. To indulge his desires, he created a secret Brotherhood of rich Englishmen - the Order of the Friars of Saint Francis of Wycombe, more usually known as the Monks of Medmenham. The inner circle comprised twelve Apostles, with Dashwood taking the Christ role.

Dashwood turned his enormous estate into a pagan playground. The gardens were laid out in the shape of a beautiful woman. Caves were constructed for the most secret nocturnal rituals. The old 12th century Cistercian Monastery at Medmenham provided a splendid gothic location in which to commit blasphemous acts. Provocative statues and paintings were placed throughout the estate, and a pleasure boat was provided to allow the "Monks" to take moonlit trips from the Abbey to various pagan alcoves dotted along the stretch of river.

A statue of Harpocrates, the god of silence, with a finger always held to his lips, demanded the absolute silence of all those who came to the Abbey.

The Brotherhood were matched by a Sisterhood of "Nuns", many of whom wore masks to protect their identities. They were keen on riding a phallic hobbyhorse that was said to have been used by ancient fertility cults. They also enjoyed erotic flagellation and lesbianism.  

"Do what thou wilt," was the motto of Dashwood's Brotherhood, the same sentiment to which Aleister Crowley was later attracted. Crowley would have made a fine member of the Hell-Fire Club.

Although the Hell-Fire Club was primarily about the shallow pleasure seeking of a rich elite - an example much emulated by modern American secret societies of the super rich and privileged - it also had interesting pagan elements of the type that the Illuminati had practised millennia before, and still do to this day.

There's a lot to be said for every town in the world having a hell-fire club for the people where they can indulge in pagan pleasures to the fury of the Abrahamist puritans.

Thymos

Plato wrote that the soul had three parts. A desiring part drives us in pursuit of things we want that are outside of ourselves: food, drink, sex, precious metals, diamonds, gadgets etc. A rational part allows us to use reason and logic to plan and calculate how best to achieve our goals. Finally, there's a part called "thymos" (spiritedness). This concerns courage, the willingness to risk one's life, the capacity for feeling indignation, the capacity to pursue glory. It revolves around feelings of anger, pride, guilt, shame, anxiety, power, victory.

We might say that the three parts of the soul are reflected in the three main parts of the human body: the head, the heart and the gut. The head is the seat of reason, the heart of spirit and the gut of desire and instinct.

The seven deadly sins reveal the difference between desire and thymos:

Seven Deadly Sins:

Gluttony = Excessive desire for food
Lust = Excessive desire for sex
Avarice = Excessive desire for wealth
Envy = Excessive desire for what another has
Sloth = Excessive desire for sleep and inaction

Pride = Thymotic over-regard for oneself
Anger = Thymotic over-reaction to another's attack on one's pride

If we regard desire as directed at things, pride and anger aren't desires for anything. These are emotions that are produced in response to achievements of ours (in the case of pride) or assaults on our pride (in the case of anger). Pride and anger are about our self-esteem. A proud person has high self-esteem and is likely to be quick to anger. A person with low self-esteem expects to be treated badly, hence doesn't anger easily. Rather, they become even more subdued and depressed.

However, if we think more deeply about thymos, we can regard it as a special type of desire relating to the estimation we have of ourselves and that others have of us. We strongly desire that others should place on us at least the value that we place on ourselves. We definitely don't want them to under-value us. We will be angry if they do. We desire that we should live up to our own self-value. If we do, and even exceed it, we are proud. If we don't, we are angry with ourselves, and we feel shame, guilt or anxiety depending on our character.  

So thymos is a kind of desire for something abstract: justice. It is just, we think, for society to value us as we think we deserve to be valued. It is unjust for us to be assigned a lower value.

We feel we have a certain worth and we want others to recognise it appropriately. It is possible for us to feel pride in something we have done without demanding recognition from others, but in that feeling is contained a belief that if others knew of our achievement, they would certainly recognise it. So, in one way or another, thymos can be defined as an explicit or implicit desire for recognition; for others to recognise our worth, our value. While other desires set us off in pursuit of specific things, thymos impels us to seek general recognition from others. We want their high opinion - hence the status wars in which most of us are engaged. People are obsessed with signs of status, and these signs are all connected to thymos. If we have the right status symbols, if we display the right signs - designer labels, flash cars, big houses, high paying jobs etc - people will recognise our worth. Thymos typically leads us to be obsessed with others' opinions of us. We allow their opinions to define us. That's why Diogenes, the great Cynic philosopher, was such a powerful figure. He didn't give a hoot for the opinion of others. His self-esteem was so high he needed no external validation, and sure enough others regarded him extremely highly as a direct consequence of his indifference to their opinions.

It is characteristic of the highest achievers that they are self-driven rather than driven by others' estimation. If you have the highest expectations of yourself, you will be a much harder taskmaster than anyone else.

Those people who work extremely hard for the sake of appearances, to live up to the expectations of friends, family and lovers, typically have mental breakdowns and never achieve anything of great worth.

In the film On the Waterfront, Marlon Brando makes a classic thymotic statement: "You don't understand! I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender. I could've been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am."

Thymos is arguably the most important factor in human society. Institutions, corporations, nations and religions all play the thymos game.

National pride - patriotism - is thymotic. America, with its obsession with the flag, with the national anthem and with the constant refrain of "USA, USA, USA," is excessively thymotic. Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Imperial Japan were hyperthymotic.

In tradition-directed societies, people feel the thymotic emotion of shame when they do anything wrong. Muslims are obsessed with shame, hence the prevalence of Islamic "honour" killings to erase the stain of shame. Tradition-directed societies are all about mass conformity in a very public way - witness the enormous gathering of Muslims performing their Friday prayers in perfect synchronisation. Muslims often seem more like an ant colony than individual human beings, and their ideology is all about treating Islam as a global brotherhood where every member surrenders his individual identity for the sake of the Islamic community as a whole. Free thought is anathema to Muslims. Their whole culture is about robotic obedience to the Koran, and anyone who acts differently is condemned and reviled. They are brainwashed by holy texts.

In inner-directed societies, guilt is the overriding thymotic reaction to wrongdoing and failure. Guilt is a response to failing to live up to one's own standards, not those imposed by others.

In other-directed societies, anxiety is the thymotic emotion we feel when we think we are not maintaining conformity with those around us. American teenage girls and boys are depicted in countless films as being terrified of "not fitting in", of being excluded from the crowd, of being seen as freaks, losers or misfits. The idea of being laughed at by others, being regarded as a geek, a nerd, a dork, being "uncool", preoccupies the consciousness of such people. They are permanently anxious because they always have to keep up with the latest fashions. They can't deviate from the herd mentality. They are brainwashed by "popular" culture. Each person is committed to "keeping up with the Joneses." If you fall behind in any way, you're fucked. These people exude a kind of existential desperation. Deep down, they are profoundly lost and lonely.

When we succeed, we feel pride. We experience a huge high. We love it when others acknowledge that we have done something great. When we fail, we are plunged into the gloom of shame, guilt or anxiety.

Success or failure, victory or defeat - these form the axis around which history revolves. When Germany was defeated in WWI and humiliated by the Treaty of Versailles, nothing was surer than that WWII would come along within a generation - because the Germans felt an enormous thymotic desire to remove the stain of defeat. A single person crystallised the German thymos - Adolf Hitler, and he was elevated to the status of man-god. The Jews, after being crushed and enslaved by the Babylonians, responded in the most extreme way thymotically. They proclaimed themselves the Chosen People of the God of the Universe, with whom they had undertaken the most solemn Covenant. Only through this deranged claim were they able to recover their pride, and it has sustained them ever since despite their being one of the most persecuted, reviled and numerically unsuccessful groups in history.

Submissives often exercise their thymos through the proxy of a dominant person. Abrahamist slaves ally themselves with the ultimate thymotic figure - "God" i.e. each individual Abrahamist may consider himself as weak and pathetic, but he believes that his covenant with his God, the most powerful being in existence, confers the greatest strength on him.

The pursuit of glory is quintessentially thymotic. The sheeple's preoccupation with being famous, with being a celebrity, with being rich, is their idea of glory.

All people of high ambition are ruled by thymos. Thymos, ultimately, is about value - about the value we place on ourselves and others, about the value we place on objects, services, corporations, institutions, religions, nations. Thymos is therefore the Evaluating Function.

Muslims place infinite value on Mohammed, the Koran and Allah, Jews on Moses, the Torah and Yahweh, Christians on Jesus and the New Testament. Their religious beliefs, not reason, dictate their value systems and hence their lives.

Desire, thymos and reason often work in perfect harmony. When the thymos places a high value on something then we desire that thing and start to rationally work out how to get it. Sadly, our reason is often defective, and other factors can be against us - we may have been assigned a low value by society, for example. A low value person cannot attain a high value thing while a high value person gets them easily. Money goes to money, failure to failure. A low value person can quickly find himself in a death spiral and driven to drink, drugs and crime.

In the case of "faith", a person has realised that he is not capable of understanding the world, hence takes the rational decision to abandon reason in favour of something that does seemingly provide all the answers: faith in the "revelation" of God. Abrahamists promote faith over reason because the former provides them with a framework of life that makes sense to them (via Mythos and not Logos), and removes the anxiety of not comprehending life. Faith fills the vacuum in a way that reason cannot for those who are deficient in reason. Faith "answers" every question, and the answer is "God", as revealed through his prophets in holy scriptures such as the Torah, Koran or Bible.  

Thymos is how we measure our progress in the game of life. There are only three possibilities. We are either ascending, descending, or flatlining. Only one of those states makes us feel good: ascending. We are always terrified of descending, and when we are stuck we feel the breath of failure on our necks.

 

A healthy, happy society is one where everyone feels they are making progress, that they are all ascending - going up, moving from base metal to gold.

The Wizard of Oz and the Platonic Soul

Who would have guessed that The Wizard of Oz is all about Greek philosophy? The Straw Man is without a brain - he is lacking the rational part of the soul. Tin Man has no heart - he is lacking the desiring/feeling part of the soul. The lion has no courage - he is lacking in thymos.

The three go on a journey to become complete. They think they need a Saviour, but, of course, they end up achieving their goals through their own efforts. So it always is. No one needs a Messiah. They are all as fraudulent as the Wizard of Oz himself: all show and no substance. 

Dorothy represents a soul achieving gnosis and thus finding her way "home".

"There's no place like home" - the domain of the eternal Platonic Forms.

Who is the Wicked Witch of the West? - the God of Abraham.

Who are the flying monkeys? - the Abrahamists who serve their evil leader.

What is the Yellow Brick Road? - the path to enlightenment.

How the World Works

Here is the way humanity operates.

1)    Everything is assigned a value. Valuation is carried out by us individually and collectively, with the latter having by far the greater consequences since it reflects a group rather than personal valuation. Whether we like it not, we are all forced to face the reality of collective valuations with which we may profoundly disagree. Human beings themselves are assigned a value. In capitalist nations, your wealth is taken as the primary measure of your human value. In religious societies, your public devotion to God is the measure of your human value.

 

2)    Anything with a high value is massively desired and in enormous demand. Anything with a low value is not desired and there is no demand for it at all. In human terms, most people have low value and are in little demand. Celebrities, entrepreneurs, aristocrats, nobility, super rich etc are in immense demand. Ordinary people desire nothing more than to join this elite. In advertising, celebrity endorsements are used to raise the value of a product by simple association. Ordinary people crave to be in the company of celebrities and the elite because it raises their own value; they think the gold dust rubs off on them. Hence the rich keep getting richer, and more and more powerful and influential. Their value keeps going up while that of the ordinary person keeps going down. This is the master-slave culture. Infinite value is assigned to the masters and zero to the slaves. Even those who are simply related to the masters are assigned infinite value (this is what we define as privilege: unearned, undeserved, artificial value). The slaves, by tolerating this situation, show that the valuation placed on them is correct. They are worthless. How could anyone in the UK who tolerates the obscenity of a privileged hereditary monarch be anything other than pathetic scum who deserves to be called someone else's subject, and to be branded a "commoner"? Anyone with high self-esteem will unquestionably fight the elite and seek to topple them. No person with any self-respect would ever tolerate being called someone's "subject".

3)    Reason is an instrument for helping us to plan ways of getting the things we desire. Reason, by itself, is not greatly valued in our society. If the ordinary person were offered a choice between being averagely attractive but one of the world's greatest geniuses versus being averagely intelligent but one of the world's greatest beauties, the vast majority would opt for the latter option. Beauty is associated with extremely high status amongst your friends; it is accorded an immense value by potential sexual partners; it secures you higher paid and more glamorous jobs; you are treated better by people; you are the centre of attention. Smart people are accorded low status in our world - unless they are rich. The fictional character Ann of Green Gables posed the question of whether it would be better to be angelically good, brilliantly clever or divinely beautiful. The first option would be of the least interest to most people, the second would appeal only to clever people and the vast majority would do anything for the third.

All the wars and conflicts of the world are about competing valuations e.g. capitalism has a very different value system from communism. Everyone is in a struggle, one way or another, for those things accorded the highest values.

So, there you have it: the world in a nutshell. It has three phases: valuation, leading to desire for things of high value, and then leading to rational planning as to how best to get the desired things.  Our world revolves around valuation, desire and reason, but desire is seen to be much more important than reason, and valuations are often utterly irrational.

Consider these YouTube videos. Look at how many hits they have had in comparison with this website:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9f-6jygRJk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD2LRROpph0

Cute, furry animals and bad singers are almost infinitely more attractive and popular than the ancient wisdom of Pythagoras and the illustrious thinkers of the Illuminati. That's the world we live in, whether we like it or not. It's not fair, not just, not rational, but the world owes no one anything. It's our great task to reverse this pattern; to create a New World Order based on reason. When Nietzsche called for a revaluation of all values, he too was demanding a New World Order.

Humanity's system of values is, frankly, fucked. We will never have a better society until we have more rational values. The reason why our values are so bizarre is that the unconscious mind of the cosmos, from which our consciousness evolved, was based on ruthless competition and Darwinian evolution by natural selection. Nothing was selected for rational reasons but for sheer, brute power; for its usefulness and attractiveness to the most powerful. Conscious rationality is the youngest and least established feature of the world. Only human beings exhibit it meaningfully and, in fact, only a tiny fraction of humanity. Most people remain closer to the instinctive, non-rational world of animals.

Have a close look at the behaviour of really stupid people and you will start to see them as being more animal than human. It's a deeply disturbing realisation.

The great task facing the world is how to revalue everything according to reason. We have to overcome the evolutionary history of the human race where reason was not invoked EVER!

We have mad, irrational value systems because evolution by natural selection did not proceed by way of reason. Are we smart enough to overcome our heritage, to leave the animal behind and become gods?

We can't blame the unconscious cosmic mind…its purpose was to grope blindly towards self-consciousness, without the benefit of any conscious plan, and the best way to go about it was simply by allowing competition to decide what had value and what didn't. The capitalist concept of the market is based on the same concept. Many products are launched into the marketplace. Most fail and vanish. A few prosper and then define the marketplace. Fashion, style, popularity, brainwashing, momentum, good timing, the zeitgeist etc all of these have much more impact than reason.

What is the motor of the dialectic? It is valuation, leading to desire, leading to conflict and competition concerning the desired things. From the conflict, the winners emerge (are "selected"), and their values then become the values that define reality. If the winners are savage, irrational monsters then they will impose a savage, irrational, monstrous value system on the world. That's what we have now thanks to Abrahamism and capitalism. Why did communism fail to defeat capitalism? - because capitalism is a system that closely resembles how the whole cosmos has functioned since the dawn of time. That's why many of the features of capitalism must be retained in the new world. They are "natural" values. The trick is to tame them through reason. Rational, social capitalism is what we advocate, not the law of the jungle capitalism, red in tooth and claw, that we have now.

We can change everything. We just need to trust in reason, in the smartest members of the human race. We need a proper value system grounded in reason, not in emotion and desire. We need meritocracy and technocracy. Look at the gifts science has bestowed on humanity, compared with the horrors and nonsense of the Abrahamic religions. We need to apply the kind of rationality associated with science to all of our values, to the whole world.

*****

Megalothymia is defined as the need to be recognized as superior to others, while isothymia relates to the desire to be recognized as simply equal to others.

The "masters of the universe" i.e. the Wall Street gang of the super rich, and the monarchs, aristocrats, nobility, celebrities etc….they all suffer from megalothymia.

The happiest societies on earth are those based on isothymia, where the gap between the richest and poorest is narrowest.

Our world is about values, and we cannot make progress until the majority of humanity accept that the old values - such as those of Abrahamism and ultra capitalism - are false and malignant.

We need to revalue all values and create the rational values fit for a new world. Above all, we must move away from megalothymia, and all the values used to support that hateful and evil attitude.

It's one thing to show that you have superior talent to another person; quite another to think that makes you a better person. You are better in a specific arena of activity, you are not intrinsically better. The privileged elite of our society believe themselves to be inherently superior to everyone else. They consider themselves the "master race". Well, it's about time for Spartacus to lead a new uprising of the slaves. This time, we will win and the masters will never be allowed to come back. We will impose a whole new value system that precludes the possibility of such people ruling over us ever again.

Glory

What is the hero monomyth all about? It concerns the miraculous transition of an ordinary person to someone who discovers that he is capable of so much more than he ever believed possible.  

The character arc of the hero always follows the same trajectory. He begins as a confused person with low thymos. He ends as a person with remarkably high thymos and even, in the case of Neo in The Matrix, as the Messiah.

The hero tale is about proving to ourselves that we deserve a much higher value than we and others have given us thus far.  

We have shit lives because we sell ourselves short. When you value yourself highly, you don't take shit anymore.

People with a high thymos are ambitious and aspirational. They have a tremendous inner drive. They are extremely motivated. They crave some form of glory, something to validate their self-estimation. They are often described as "driven". They have an inner taskmaster who drives them relentlessly on, no matter what. Many of the greatest geniuses of the world have been those who were actively rejected by contemporary society but who refused to be derailed. Nietzsche concluded that the world wasn't ready for him, that he was way ahead of his time. He declared that he would be "born posthumously". Only someone with the highest thymos declares that the whole world is wrong while he is right. Nietzsche did exactly that and has been vindicated, given how many creative people now revere him and regard him as an extraordinary genius. The ordinary people aren't yet in his camp (they have no idea who he is), but they will be when Abrahamism - one of his primary targets - finally collapses. Nietzsche was the philosopher of the age of the death of mainstream religion. People will turn to Nietzsche when they can no longer believe in the old gods, and then they will be ready for the step to true religion - Illuminism. God is not dead. Why not? Because each of us is God.

If you read Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra carefully, it becomes obvious that Nietzsche craved to be God, and would accept no other God. But rather than carry through his logic and pronounce himself God, Nietzsche faltered. Why? Because he was the son of a Lutheran pastor and could not bring himself to proclaim the final and greatest heresy. Yet he knew the territory he was in because in his autobiography he expressed his fear that he would one day be pronounced holy.      
Had he been familiar with esoteric thinking, he wouldn't have hesitated. He would have realised that his position wasn't as remarkable as he believed it to be. Long before him, daring, brilliant human beings had denounced the God of Abraham and declared themselves God, or at least in the process of becoming God. Without knowing it, he was part of that underground tradition. Nietzsche stopped at the Superman. Illuminism stops at nothing…it goes all the way to God. We will accept no other outcome than to be the most perfect beings in creation. Why would we ever set our sights lower? Alchemy does not turn base metal into bronze. It doesn't stop until it has produced gold.

So, are you full of spirit? Do you have an unstoppable inner drive? Do you seek the highest glory? Or does the oldest story apply? - the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. (Usually that means that the spirit is weak too, of course.)

In the epic tales of Homer, it was a hero's thymos that drove him on, that urged him to do something remarkable. Achilles lusted for glory. He craved the stage on which to show the gods he was worthy of them. Alexander the Great considered himself the new Achilles, similarly blessed by the gods. He carried out in actual history what Achilles did in myth, yet he went much further than even Achilles would have dreamt. Alexander the Great redefined the pursuit of glory. Myth seemed feeble in comparison with what he did for real. His brave soldiers couldn't keep up. They just wanted to go back home; back to the ordinary world.

Alexander remains one of the most astounding human beings of them all. Perhaps no one ever lusted after the glory of the ages as much as he did.

Those with a high thymos are filled with vitality. The life force blazes in them. Unlike most people, they can't accept being humiliated.

The average person has an elaborate battery of thymos defence mechanisms. These are designed to allow people to accommodate the higher estimation that they assign to themselves than is assigned to them by others. Most people would be horrified if they realised that there is often an immense gap between their self-appraisal and others' appraisal of them.

Most people think they have some remarkable quality. Virtually everyone else disagrees. How many people do you know who think they are great in some way? How many great people do you actually know?

Most people live a lie. They lie to themselves all the time. The reality principle states that most people are droids and drones. The fantasy principle to which these same people subscribe is that they are cool, interesting and desirable.

Precious few people are self-actualising.  Few people raise themselves above banality. Most of them are "last men" obsessed with petty comforts. They would never commit themselves to a horrendously difficult challenge requiring years of effort for little reward. But if you can't take on difficult tasks, what makes you think there's anything special about you? Absolutely anyone can dream of the easy life and the soft option. Anyone can pursue instant gratification. These are no challenges at all, yet they are how most people run their lives i.e. they spend most of their time running away from anything difficult. They are like compasses always pointing to the path of least resistance.

If you want to be special, do something special. Don't dream of it. Do it.

Artificial Intelligence

How would you program a machine - an android - to act like a human? Firstly, you have to establish an algorithm that makes it set a value on everything it encounters. Then you have to make it "desire" the things with the highest value. When it satisfies its desire by taking some kind of possession of the thing desired then you have to program it to feel "good" about having done so i.e. to experience pleasure. The higher the value of the thing attained, the better it feels. So, if you program it to seek the maximum possible good feeling, you will see it zipping around, focusing all of its attention on some things and ignoring others. It will appear to be demonstrating intentionality - directed behaviour.

When you have programmed a machine in this way, it will be constantly on the move, seeking the desirable things that have high value. It will already be demonstrating the basics of human behaviour.

Value is the basis of life. If we didn't value anything, we would have no desires. As for reason, what do we use it for? - only to satisfy our desires i.e. to get the things we value highly.

Nietzsche wrote, "One ultimately loves one's desires, not the thing desired." He's right, of course. We constantly encounter particular instances of desire, and they satisfy us to a greater or lesser degree, but never entirely. Desire itself is never quelled. Desire is a reflection of the Will. It can never die.

Nietzsche also observed: "Evolution does not make happiness its goal. It aims at evolution and nothing else." That's the whole problem. We have to use our reason to tame evolution and direct it towards happiness and fulfilment.

Value

So, the supreme questions are:

1)    What value will you put on yourself?
2)    What is the lowest value you will permit others to put on you?
3)    What value will you put on others?

The elite place infinite value on themselves, and won't permit a lesser value to be placed on them. They value others in their group equally highly; everyone else gets valued at zero.

The slaves place an average value on themselves, and allow others to place a below average value on them, all the way down to zero. They value others in their group at the same level as themselves, and they assign an infinite value to the masters.

When does a revolt begin? When does revolution break out? It's when the slaves decide that they can no longer tolerate the low values being placed on them by the elite. Usually, someone comes along and fills them with a vision in which they have much higher value than their current value.

Historically, religion has been one force that turns people into revolutionaries. The Jews - regarding themselves as the "Chosen People" - rose up in revolt against the mighty Roman Empire. They could no longer bear the dissonance of thinking of themselves as the Chosen while being treated as worthless by the Romans.

Christianity was described by Nietzsche as a "slave morality", but it nevertheless allowed Christians to endure terrible persecutions, including being eaten by lions, and still emerge victorious over Rome. Muslims in the present day can't reconcile the disparity between being Allah's chosen ones and yet being treated as garbage by the infidels. So they martyr themselves to prove that they are indeed stronger than their enemies.

Politics has been another revolutionary force. The American revolutionaries embraced the radical pamphlets of Tom Paine and the liberal philosophy of John Locke. The French revolutionaries took their lead from the political philosophy of Rousseau. The Russian revolutionaries were implementing Marx's theories. In all of these cases, the Illuminati were the agency behind the scenes striving to bring about a radical revaluation of the value people placed on themselves (and this website belongs to the same tradition). Because that is the key to a successful revolution.

Religions, political systems and philosophies are all appealing in one way or another to people's thymos, individually and collectively. A successful movement is one that fires their thymos and suddenly makes them place a much higher value on themselves. Once that happens, they will no longer tolerate the low value placed on them by others. They are ripe for revolt.

The Islamic uprisings in Africa were caused by the internet. The young populations of these countries saw what freedom is like for Westerners where anyone can say anything they like about their governments, including accusing them of being traitors guilty of high treason (in the case of the 9/11 inside job theory). Muslims have wanted to say such things about their own dictators, and the internet inspired them to go ahead and do it. The internet is changing people's thymos in non-Western nations, hence is revolutionary. Unfortunately, in the West social networking is mostly concerned with trivial consumerist junk, of exactly the nature the elite would applaud since it suits their ends perfectly.

The question of value is the greatest question of human existence. How people value themselves and others, and how they themselves are valued, determines the type of world we live in.

The Illuminati, via the project to create a Community of Gods, seek to raise everyone's thymos as high as possible - to infinity in fact. When people understand that they can be God then they will never again accept any slave ideology. Abrahamism will perish. The super rich will become extinct. All systems of privilege will be swept away. There will be no more two-tier societies and second-class citizens. We will see the permanent abolition of slavery, in all its aspects.

All ideologies such as Abrahamism (which make people worthless in relation to "God") and ultra-capitalism (which value people solely according to how much money they have) must be destroyed.

What is your Higher Self? It is the best you, the highest value version of you, and, ultimately, it is God.

The Arche

"Neither necessity nor desire, but the love of power, is the demon of mankind."
Nietzsche

"The creator wished to look away from himself - thereupon he created the world."
Nietzsche

Time and time again, we return to the question of the arche, the fundamental substance of existence. In the vocabulary of science, we refer to it as dimensionless energy. But that is just another way of describing mind, a thinking substance without extension, to use Descartes' definition.

It is necessary to pin down what this mysterious mental substance is from which everything comes. For one thing, it is not conscious mind. Consciousness is a state that mind can attain, not an intrinsic quality of mind.

Mind has three components, those described by Plato in relation to the soul: reason, thymos and desire.

To desire is to crave something. If you didn't crave anything, you wouldn't get out of bed. You would exist in permanent stasis.

So, the arche must have a desiring component in order to provide the motivation for action. Desire can be defined as purposeful, motivated movement: the pursuit of a specific end - the object of desire. If desire did not exist, movement itself would not exist or would involve pointless, unmotivated activity.

Desire is indispensable to purposeful existence. But desire in its most basic form is short term; it is not directed at hypothetical objects located in the far distant future.

In order to extend desire from the short to the long term, the arche must have aspects that are teleological - concerned with distant goals. How is it possible to bridge the immense gap between the short and long term? A plan is needed. A plan is a logical, rational, structured, organised formula for obtaining a distant end. A plan requires REASON.

But what, at root, is reason? Reason fundamentally is the capacity to learn. The smartest, most rational people in the world are those with the highest capacity for learning; not simply learning facts in the manner of expert quiz contestants, but learning how to CONNECT facts and create concepts to build hypotheses and theories to change the world.

Productive learning is about understanding what works and what doesn't; what things are connected and what aren't. Learning invariably summons logic into existence. Logic is the means of organising information. So, inchoate learning generates logic and logic becomes the foundation of proper learning. And what subject is the ultimate expression of logic? - mathematics. So, the primordial mental capacity for learning gives birth to logic and mathematics - the realm of reason, of plans, order and organisation.

But it is possible to construct many different plans. How is it possible to know which is the best option? It's necessary to have an aspect of mind that passes judgement on things, that places values on different alternatives. This is thymos - the valuing function of the arche.

How is value determined? Nietzsche, in The Antichrist, provides the key:

What is good? - All that heightens the feeling of power, the Will to Power, power itself in man.

What is bad? - All that proceeds from weakness.

What is happiness? - The feeling that power increases - that a resistance is overcome.

In other words, thymos is the internal gauge of our power. We feel good when it is increasing and bad when it is decreasing.

When we are accomplishing our goals our feeling is one of pride. When we are failing, we feel ashamed. When someone attacks us in some way - belittling us, humiliating us, ordering us around - they are telling us that they gauge our power to be inferior to theirs. If we accept their judgement then they are correct. If not, what are we going to do about it? We must fight in some way, and show them that their estimation of our power is wrong.

This is the basis of the Hegel's master-slave dialectic. The master is the one who will fight to the death to prove that his power is superior. The slave is the one who capitulates.

Thymos is intimately related to Will to Power - it is a permanent measure of that Will. At all times, we have an awareness of our power. Whenever we meet anyone, a power contest of some sort takes place. Is the other person smarter than us, richer, taller, better looking, sexier, better dressed…instantly we make a host of judgments and these determine how we relate to that person. If we encounter someone in authority - a boss, a policeman, a dangerous mugger - we feel weakened in their presence. If we stand up to the boss, we might be fired. If we defy the cop, we might be arrested. If we fight the mugger, he might kill us.

Human beings are supremely expert at gauging relative power. Status is the word we apply to a person's power. A person of high status has much more of it than someone of low status.

A person of unacknowledged high status often loathes those with acknowledged high status. Most people who despise celebrity culture think that they are the ones who should be lauded by society, not the celebrities.

All dominant people have a natural high regard for themselves. They are angry and bitter when it is not recognised by others.

The fans of celebrity culture are those of very low status, and who accept their lowly rank. They think that their status is increased by being in the presence of the "gods". These are life's legions of weak, pathetic submissives with low Will to Power. In a world of dominants, there would be no celebrity culture. It is a phenomenon of the mismatch between dominants and submissives, masters and slaves.           

If we feel that our Will to Power is increasing then we conclude we are on track. If we feel it decreasing, we know something is wrong and needs to be fixed. We need a new plan.

So there you have all the ingredients of the arche, the triadic mental system that created the world all around us, and which we experience directly in our own minds and behaviour.

We are desiring creatures, rational creatures and creatures obsessed with our status (our Will to Power). In each of us, the mixture is different. Some of us have a much higher rational capacity. Some of us are driven by nothing but short-term desires. Some of us are dominant and some submissive in relation to our Will to Power.

Only submissives worship "God". All those with high Will to Power could think of nothing more disgusting than worshipping anyone at all. Nietzsche summed it up when he said that if there were gods then how could anyone bear not to be one? This is the archetypal cry of anyone with an extremely high Will to Power. The whole concept of Nietzsche's Superman is concerned with raising your Will to Power to its maximum, its omega point.

As Nietzsche recognised, the whole of existence revolves around Will to Power. This is the fundamental issue of life. Desire and reason are in the service of Will to Power. If our desires are being met easily, we know we are powerful. If they are being obstructed, we have a problem. Reason is employed to increase our Will to Power. It is a means to an end, not an end in itself. If one might dare to criticize Hegel's exposition of Illuminism, it is that he placed rationality at its absolute core. In fact, it was the non-Illuminatus Nietzsche, who came after Hegel, who identified the true, living, breathing heart of existence - Will to Power. This, finally, gives the victory to reason (since knowledge is power), but only after an immensely long struggle with irrationality.

Will to Power implies teleology. The power we have now is never as great as the power we aspire to have. In fact, we desire infinite power - the power of God.

Abrahamists worship infinite power in the form of their God; the Illuminati want to have infinite power for themselves. And therein lies the unbridgeable gulf between Abrahamism and Illuminism. The Abrahamists see their function in life as being the abject slaves of infinite power (God). The Illuminati want to take possession of infinite power and become God themselves. There cannot be a greater contrast.

Hermes Trismegistus said, "Know ye not that ye are gods?"

Even Jesus Christ said that the kingdom of God was within us. Any Christian who understood what that meant would instantly stop worshipping Christ and become an Illuminatus.

We are the true masters, and the Abrahamists are the true slaves.

All people with high Will to Power are prepared to fight, and the Illuminati have been fighting overwhelming odds for millennia. We will never give in. Because we are masters and masters fight to the last breath. Masters never allow themselves to be the slaves of others.

The greatest enslavement in history was of Africans by whites and Arabs, but you can be sure that many of the Africans did not meekly accept their fate. All those Africans who felt the Will to Power surging through them resisted to the best of their ability against vastly superior weaponry. It's a misnomer to call such people slaves. They were masters who fought to the death.

Similar fights will go on forever unless rational means are found to settle the contests of life peacefully and productively. A meritocratic contest is the only just way forward - let the best man or woman win.

So, ultimately, the arche is Will to Power, and nothing besides, as Nietzsche declared. Our basic motivating desire is for power. Reason is the servant of that desire. Thymos is about our feeling, our valuation, of our power increasing or decreasing.

So, here is the tale of cosmic existence…

In the beginning was Will to Power, and nothing besides. It was a dimensionless, unconscious mental energy. It was driven by desire for more power, to convert all potential power into actual power. It wanted to feel actualised power flowing through it all the time, growing stronger and stronger. It aimed, above all, to attain the omega point - the condition of absolute power, the maximum possible cosmic power i.e. its ineradicable aim was to become God. The Will to Power is nothing other than how raw potential is converted into divinity.

The Will to Power is teleological - it has a purpose, namely to make itself conscious…as God.

The Will to Power is dialectical - it is driven by the conflict of power between the thesis and antithesis, resulting in a higher synthesis which becomes a new thesis, provoking a higher antithesis, and so on all the way up a dizzying spiral to its zenith, the mystical omega point of cosmic completion: the God Point.

The Will to Power is evolutionary. It is always progressing from simpler forms to ones that are more complex.

In the beginning, the Will to Power was of the nature of an undifferentiated cosmic mind. But power demands conflict and competition. It was inevitable that the Will to Power would convert itself from One into Many. It had to create a universe of individuation, of an infinity of separate centres of Will to Power, all competing with each other.

Through this intense competition for power, the dialectic of power accelerated towards divinity at an enormous rate. When all the individual centres of power have reached their own omega point - i.e. every soul has become God - then the entire cosmos has reached the maximum actualisation of power.

No matter how much people might like to think of that as the "end" of the cosmic journey, the journey can in fact never end. Just as there is no sexual orgasm good enough to bring the desire for more sex to an end, so the Will to Power cannot rest on its laurels. The cosmic orgasm it achieved by becoming God MUST be repeated, and so it does the only thing possible: it commits divine suicide and starts again, knowing that the process will always reach the supreme climax. The cosmic cycle of birth, death and rebirth always culminates in the feeling of maximum pleasure at having attained maximum power. The cycle of existence therefore delivers a never-ending sequence of foreplay followed by multiple orgasm.

Is that not the best outcome imaginable? Existence can never become non-existence. True cosmic death is impossible. Nor can a universe of dialectical becoming ever reach a final state of permanent bliss i.e. becoming cannot be converted into static, unchanging being. So, given the circumstances, the optimal outcome is to achieve an infinite number of climaxes. That's all that the cosmos ever does…cycles from maximum potential to maximum actualisation - in the process of which it attains the feeling of maximum achievement and satisfaction - and then starts the cycle again. The universe has no final state. If such a thing were possible it would already have happened since eternity has already preceded us.

The idea of an eternal perfect being - the God of Abrahamism - is simply laughable and contradicts all logic and every known fact of existence.

God is nothing other than the Will to Power, and pulls himself up by his own bootstraps in the process of dialectical evolution. We all reflect the Will to Power. It is the basis of all things. We are all part of God and we can all become God.

The cosmos is alive. The Will to Power is a living mental entity. It's an eternal soul, and we are all souls within it.

If you look at the theories of materialistic science, what do you see? Chemical reactions are chemistry's version of a contest of different power centres. One chemical overcomes the other and subsumes it. All physical processes are contests of power. Look at the Japanese tsunami - an enormous power source crushing all lesser centres of power in its path. Look at the law of the jungle. Look at the wars of the human race. Human beings fight savagely over status. Wherever you look, there is nothing but competition and conflict. A war for power goes on at all times everywhere.

There is only one antidote - enlightened self-interest, born of reason.

For the vast majority of us, we can have a more powerful life if we help others to have a more powerful life. Look at science. It is simultaneously intensely competitive and intensely cooperative. All modern scientists stand on the shoulders of the giants of the past. All modern scientists are parts of collaborative teams. They all freely share information even though they are in competition with each other. Why? Because it's better for everyone.

The more we help each other, the faster each of us can attain divinity. It would take forever if we tried to do it all on our own.

Let's copy the scientific model. Let's compete and cooperate at the same time, in a friendly and mutually supportive way. We can have the best of both worlds. Reason is our way out of the viciousness of the jungle law. Reason is the basis of civilisation. Reason is the foundation of the Enlightenment.

We cannot allow some people - the super rich - to set themselves up as a permanent elite that destroys all competition. These brass idols must be dragged off their pedestals and their wealth redistributed in the name of competition, justice and meritocracy. Anyone with a strong Will to Power will have no stronger desire than to drag these false gods off their thrones.

Meritocracy is not some soft liberal option. It's all about maximising competition in a rational way to ensure accelerated dialectical progress. The dialectic is about the competition of opposites and attaining higher, more productive syntheses. Meritocracy is fully committed to both competition and cooperation in the name of progress.

Privilege is the enemy of competition. The super rich are anti-competitive and anti-cooperative, hence are a massive drag on progress. Their power must be smashed.

The Cynic philosopher Diogenes, a man highly esteemed by the Illuminati, had an astonishing degree of Will to Power. Despite being a beggar living in a barrel in an Athenian street, he was vastly more dominant than all of the well-off people who walked past him, staring at him curiously. Even Alexander the Great, one of the greatest conquerors in history (and also possessed of a breathtaking Will to Power) came to pay court to Diogenes. The philosopher, requiring nothing from anyone, undoubtedly won the contest of wills with the brilliant soldier.

So, there's no room for self-pity. No matter how badly off you are, you could never be as poor as Diogenes, yet he dominated everyone he met. He had superior status to everyone. Why? Because, as the playwright Ibsen said, the strongest man in the world is the man who stands most alone. All ordinary people allow themselves to be defined by others. They care deeply what others think of them. Diogenes didn't give a damn. He wasn't playing the status game, and that is terrifying to all of those who can think of nothing else.
     
Only a god stands outside the game.

Nietzsche also took himself out of the game and became the prophet and philosopher of Will to Power. He sought to reverse the disastrous course of history, to correct the catastrophe of Christianity, and to revalue all values.

In Thus Spoke Zarathustra, he donned the mantle of a new Zarathustra, one committed to undoing the errors of the first: "I have not been asked, as I should have been asked, what the name Zarathustra means in precisely my mouth, in the mouth of the first immoralist: for what constitutes the tremendous uniqueness of that Persian in history is precisely the opposite of this. Zarathustra was the first to see in the struggle between good and evil the actual wheel in the working of things: the translation into the realm of metaphysics, as force, cause, end-in-itself, is his work…Zarathustra created this most fateful of errors, morality: consequently he must also be the first to recognize it…The self-overcoming of morality through truthfulness, the self-overcoming of the moralist into his opposite - into me - that is what the name Zarathustra means in my mouth."

When a sickly philosopher attacks the entire moral basis of humanity, it represents the greatest possible challenge to the ruling regime. Nietzsche found all the values of the world false, disgusting and, in their own terms, utterly immoral. He saw with the crystal clarity of the eternal outsider that morality was nothing but another weapon wielded in the war of competing wills to power. As soon as morality is exposed as a stratagem of power, it is no longer moral.  

Nietzsche is absolutely right. In the final analysis, there is no morality of any kind anywhere. What we argue for is not a more moral world but a more just world, based on the principles of reason. Morality is hopelessly entwined with faith, a form of derangement. Morality is quite literally mad. What kind of morality proclaims the virtues of slavish obedience to a "God" who demands human sacrifice and child murder? That species of morality is the essence of evil. When morality can't distinguish good from evil, when Devil worshippers think they are followers of a good God, then morality is empty of value. It is irrational, poisonous and deadly nonsense. Muslim homicidal maniacs yell, "Allahu Akbar," before they slaughter innocent men, women and children. When the God of morality is someone to whom massacres can be offered as a sacred gift then morality is FUCKED - permanently.

We need no more morality. We need reason.

Revalue all values.  

"I am by far the most terrible human being there has ever been." - Nietzsche

False Value

In Western capitalist countries, money is the measure of things. In these countries, people know the price of everything and the value of nothing. It's time to revalue all values, to place a new price on everything.

One nation in desperate need of new values is Britain. This country has become a giant Disneyland, the land that time forgot. Is there anything sadder than a nation that once had a mighty empire reduced to a theme park, to a costume drama?

Britain is stuck in a time warp. It uses infinite pomp and ceremony to disguise the absence of any substance, to conceal the void at its heart. Britain is the most socially divided advanced nation in the world. Social mobility is almost non-existent.

Britain will never again be a significant nation until it moves into the future and ditches the absurd Royal Family. They are the uttermost enemies of the people. The Queen of the UK is the symbolic head of the Old World Order.

It's time for the New Jacobins to teach these people their place.

In America, it is reported that many females from the North travelled to the Confederate States to watch the Royal Wedding on TV. They dressed up as Southern belles as if they were in Gone with the Wind and wallowed in an anachronistic bygone age that, to any thinking person, was an abomination.

Dixie, of course, loves the British Royal Family, just as it loved slavery.

All the American princesses are obsessed with Royalty. What a sad indictment of a Republic.

Bread and circuses - that's what the Royal Wedding was. Yet another con job by the elite. Why do people keep falling for the oldest trick in the book?

The people of Britain were given the day off. Why? So that they would all watch their "betters" on TV and know their station in life…and know not to challenge the power of the elite.

What a disgraceful circus. What an insult to the British people.

We demand a British Republic. We demand the overthrow of Royalty in all the countries of the world.

Believing in the God of Death

Amidst the tornadoes that devastated parts of America, a woman said she prayed to God to save her, and he did. If you didn't believe in God before, she said, you should now. He really does exist. And millions yell, "Hallelujah!" in response. Told you so, they say.

Yet what of all the hundreds who died? How many of them prayed? How many of them were God-fearing, Church-going Christians? No doubt almost all of them were. Natural disasters do not target atheists and non-Christians.

Why is it that stupid people never see beyond their own dumb lives? To say that God deliberately saved you is to say that he deliberately killed the others. And who in their right mind would want to believe in a homicidal God?

All sensible people remove God from natural disasters, and put their good fortune in surviving down to nothing but luck, which those who died did not enjoy. In every disaster, some people will "miraculously" survive because disasters involve all sorts of chance events. Chance saves some, and kills others. So it goes.

Janus

If Apollo represents reason and logic and Dionysus intoxication and desire then what god fulfils the function of thymos?

The best candidate is the Roman god Janus. One of the oldest Roman gods, Janus was originally a god of light, responsible for opening the gate of heaven at dawn to bathe the world in light then closing it at sunset. His role was expanded and he became the god of doors in general and thus he presided over exits and entrances, beginnings and endings, opportunities opening up and opportunities closing.

In Rome in wartime, the doors to his temple were left open. The doors were closed only in times of peace. It was said that the temple was closed only three times in Roman history.

Janus was portrayed with two faces, one looking backward and one forward. The first month of the year is named after him. January 1st is his quintessential day, when he looks back at the year just gone and anticipates the year to come. On that day, we can imagine him evaluating his life and resolving to make improvements, and correct the errors of the past.

As the patron deity of doorways, he is associated with vigilance and protection. He is a god of wisdom since he is always evaluating the past and planning for the future.

Jim Morrison famously said, "There are things known and things unknown and in between are The Doors." This describes Janus, standing between the known and unknown.

The Illuminati define Janus as the evaluating god, the deity of thymos. He becomes angry and warlike if he is undervalued; proud and peaceful if he is accorded the status he deserves.

It is Janus who is responsible for judging whether the dialectic is progressing well or not. Our own inner Janus determines if we are on track for achieving those things we have aspired to.

A failed life is one in which our inner Janus tells us that we did not make the most of our talents. A fulfilled life is one in which Janus knows we gave it our best shot, and couldn't have done a single thing more.

Most of us fail. We fail mostly through laziness, submissiveness, being distracted by short-term pleasures and instant gratification. We live in a society where it is easy to watch junk on the TV, play mindless video games all day long, go shopping, chat pointlessly about trivia. There are endless ways to burn up our time and achieve nothing. Only those with the strongest will can keep on track. Our inner Janus sets the bar for us. Most of us do not demand too much of ourselves. We have grand aspirations, but we make no real effort to accomplish them. Our inner Janus is not too hard on us.

Yet for some of us, Janus fills us with self-disgust if we don't keep moving towards our goals. He torments us and drives us forwards in all conditions. He doesn't accept second-class status. He is preoccupied with justice - with everyone being assigned the value they merit. He hates it when the unmeritorious are awarded higher value than they deserve, and the meritorious a lesser value.

Janus can be regarded as the god of meritocracy since he wishes everyone to be assigned the value they deserve.

The Freudian superego captures many of the functions of Janus. Where the id is obsessed with self-gratification and thinks the world exists for its benefit alone, the superego is concerned with how to live in a world in which we have to acknowledge the presence and needs of others. To decide our own place in that world we have to be capable of placing a rank on everyone, and on ourselves in relation to others. We are furious if we are undervalued by others. We are furious if we see the undeserving being overvalued. Most of the world despises bankers because they are talentless people awarding themselves the riches of Midas despite bringing the world economy to the brink of collapse. Never has there been such an undeserving group.

It is Janus who wants us to become God. Only then will he be content. That is the ultimate value we can assign to ourselves.

Anyone who does not aspire to be God is a weak-willed, pathetic coward. The legions of Abrahamists on their knees to Satan are nauseating. They are an insult to the human race. Their thymos is astoundingly low. They are born slaves. They are the ones who allowed the masters to walk all over them with barely a fight.

If you have a high thymos you will never tolerate being a second-class citizen. You will never be a slave.

*****

So, we are ruled over by three gods: Apollo, Dionysus and Janus. They define our soul. Apollo = Reason; Dionysus = Desire; Janus = Thymos.

In Freudian terms, Dionysus is the id dedicated to the pleasure principle, Janus the superego devoted to the merit principle and Apollo the ego that obeys the reality principle and rationally tries to accommodate the conflicting needs of Dionysus and Janus. All three gods are dialectically essential. They all have their strengths and weaknesses. None can be eliminated without the whole thing falling apart.

They are the definition of life. They come with inbuilt conflict. There is no escape from that. We must learn how to optimise the different aspects and harmonise them as best as possible, and when we obtain the optimal result we become God.

Living a "good" life is never a question of exterminating Satan (aka the id/Dionysus), but of accommodating him in the most productive way. As far as possible, Dionysian urges should be harnessed and sublimated in creative ways. Dionysus can also be explicitly celebrated on special occasions in great public festivals, such as those performed by the ancient Greeks. Behind closed doors, Dionysian impulses can be allowed full expression, providing they involve others in a consensual way.

Dionysus is part of the arche. He can no more be eliminated than reason or self-esteem. The Abrahamic obsession with sin and its crusade against it is nothing other than an attempt to extirpate Dionysus. Never has there been a greater act of folly. As anyone who is familiar with Greek tragedy knows, when Dionysus is not acknowledged or is actively resisted, he appears as a mysterious stranger and brings mayhem in his wake. Psychologically, this equates to the magnification of the shadow when we curb our basic instincts.

Yet the greatest irony of all is that the God of Abraham is none other than the supreme and ultimate manifestation of the id. He is full of hate, anger, vengeance, vanity, insecurity, violence, egotism, selfishness, narcissism, self-indulgence, self-gratification, cruelty, malice, injustice. He demands his own way at all times. He never acknowledges that anyone else has any rights. He demands that people worship him and satisfy his every whim. He kills anyone who disagrees with him or opposes him. He sends nearly all of his creations to hell.

He had no compunction about drowning the world and almost exterminating humanity. He recognises no community. He has no superego component whatever. It's his way or the highway (leading straight to hell, of course). He never under any circumstances affords rights to others.

To worship Jehovah/Allah/Christ is to worship the id and to have absolute contempt for the superego. There is no reality principle to rein back the monster.

The God of Abraham is Satan himself. Is it not a thing of wonder? - the Abrahamists have allowed Satan to define sin. Anyone who opposes him is sinful and evil. Everyone who grovels to him on their hands and knees is good. If you disobey him, you go to hell. If you robotically do everything he demands, you go to heaven. If the id could talk, it would say exactly what the God of Abraham says: obey me, worship me, do everything I want - or perish.

In truth, the greatest sin, the greatest act of evil, is none other than being a worshipper of Abraham's God.

The True God - Abraxas - is our exemplar. He shows us the way. He is the ultimate synthesis of Apollo, Dionysus and Janus.

Gold, Silver and Bronze Humans

Plato regarded those human beings who were defined by reason as golden. They were the philosophers, scientists and mathematicians; the intelligentsia. The people defined by their spirit were the brave soldier class - they were silver humans. Bronze humanity was everyone else - all the ordinary workers who are fundamentally ruled by their desires.

In the present day, there are precious few gold humans, not many silver, and endless legions of bronze. Alchemically, our task is to transform bronze and silver into gold.

Contemporary capitalism is a bronze economic system. We need to create a gold political and economic system - meritocracy based on social capitalism.

Contemporary capitalism panders to desires and ignores intelligence. There is no food for the soul and mind in the modern world. We live in an id(iotic) and fake Dionysian world (fake because the real power of Dionysus is almost never unleashed; Abrahamism sees to that). Apollo and Janus are sidelined.

Ours is a dumbed-down, lowest common denominator culture given over to instant gratification of trivial desires. Shopping and consumerism are the "sublimation" of greed, selfishness and status. People are actually measured according to what objects they own. "Designer" goods win you higher status, hence become objects of supreme desire. Shoppers are people who believe that the purchase of a certain prized object can literally change their life. Women think the right dress, handbag, shoes, make up can help them bag Prince Charming. Men think of cars as means of seducing women; the flashier your car, the more notches on your bedpost. How sad and pathetic can you get?

So, what are you - a gold, silver or bronze human?

The Power of Sex

The ancient Greeks spoke of the cosmos being guided by two forces: love and strife, which today we call attraction and repulsion. Love can be imagined as a kind of gravity, pulling us together, drawing us into orbit around our beloved.

Eros was the god of love, and Eris the goddess of strife. Eris was the sister of Ares (god of war) and accompanied him into battle. She it was who triggered the Trojan War. All the deities bar her were invited to a wedding and in revenge she threw a golden apple into the midst of the wedding guests engraved with the words, "To the fairest". This was the infamous Apple of Discord to which Hera, Athena and Aphrodite all immediately laid claim. They chose Paris, prince of Troy to judge the matter. Hera promised him worldly power if he picked her, Athena wisdom and renown in war, and Aphrodite the most beautiful woman in the world - Helen, queen of Sparta.

Paris gave the precious apple to Aphrodite and claimed his prize. Thus he began his affair with the woman who went down in legend as Helen of Troy, whose beautiful face launched the thousand ships of the Greeks to bring her back to her husband.

The Greeks were aided in the long war by Hera and Athena, keen to avenge themselves on Paris. Eris smiled. She had performed her greatest work.

As for Eros, he was in some tellings one of the first gods to emerge from the primordial chaos and it was he who united the elements and brought harmony to the cosmos. Later, he was characterised as the mischievous son of Aphrodite. Far from being a harmonious figure, he was now transformed almost into his old foe Eris. He had wings, and he was armed with a bow, with which he fired deadly accurate arrows of desire that he often aimed capriciously or malevolently, causing endless trouble.

In Orphism, Eros was the firstborn - "protogonos" - of Nox, goddess of night. He had a brother called Anteros ("opposite love"), who opposed his work, although it was sometimes said that he worked with Eros and punished those who refused to return the love of others. Sometimes he was called the god of unhappy love.  

The Romans identified Eros with Cupid (desire), and sometimes with Amor (love). Here we see the classic enigma of passion - is it motivated by noble love or simple lust? - Amor or Cupid.

Eros, from whose name we get the word "erotic", is now portrayed as the god of sexual love. Jung characterised Eros as the feminine principle of love and empathy, and contrasted it with Logos, the masculine principle of rationality. Logos is objective, reductive and analytical and Eros is subjective and concerned with synthesis and harmony.

Logos (reason, logic) can also be contrasted with Mythos (story), which raises the issue of whether Eros and Mythos are related. Eros and Mythos are both concerned with emotion. Most stories have Eros at their heart. Virtually every Hollywood blockbuster combines Eros and Mythos in a neat, celebrity-driven package. These same movies almost always ignore Logos.

Logos and Mythos are different ways of looking at and comprehending the world. Those who follow the Logos route are mathematicians, philosophers and scientists. Those who follow Mythos are pretty much everyone else.

The great division between science and mainstream religion lies in the fact that the latter is based on story and nothing else. There are no facts, no rational theories, no logic, no consistency, no experiments. The whole thing depends on to what extent you engage with emotional stories and treat them seriously as the way to live your life. The followers of Logos find it absurd for anyone to base their life on an ancient story, but those not guided by Logos are extremely susceptible to story "logic" and indeed they employ the same logic in their own lives. It is the logic of emotion, which, of course, is not logical at all.

Mythos is about what, emotionally, we want to be true rather than what actually is true. Christians find the story of Christ emotionally compelling and they want it to be true, hence it is (for them). The myriad rational holes in the story are ignored. Many people go through life using this kind of "magic thinking" where their beliefs are based on desires rather than facts. People playing the lottery desire the prize so they buy a ticket, ignoring the fact that their efforts amount to throwing their money away since the chance of their buying the winning ticket is as close to zero as makes no difference. A person with a lottery ticket is a Mythos person. As they hand over their money, they are already imagining themselves in a wonderful story where they win the prize and it transforms their lives: they get out of the shitty life they're in and head off to a sunny paradise. A Logos person calculates the odds and thinks, "I'll keep my money in my pocket."

A Mythos person reads the story of Christ and thinks, "Aha, this is my ticket to paradise." A Logos person reads it and thinks, "Do people actually believe this crap?"

Illuminism, at heart, is an absolutely cold, Logos religion (the only one in the world in fact), but it also deliberately invokes some Mythos elements because a religion that is all mind and no blood, all logic and no heart and gut is no religion at all.

Look at how science, mathematics and philosophy are taught at school. These wondrous subjects are rendered dry, lifeless and boring. Anti-alchemy is applied to them i.e. gold is turned into base metal.

Logos education needs a huge injection of Mythos if it wants to be more persuasive and successful and to reach a wider audience.

Desire

What is desire? It is about our relationship with otherness, with things outside ourselves. No one is self-contained. To claim that the God of Abraham was able to exist for a timeless age entirely on his own is to claim that he felt no desires. If he had no desires then he would never have created the world. He would have experienced no love and sought no love. Such a God is pointless and, indeed, impossible.

We all crave those things we don't have that we think will make us MORE POWERFUL. Ultimately, desire is about power. We desire knowledge, money, status, luxury, the hottest partners, the best jobs, the coolest friends. If we see something we desire but can't get it, we are immediately dissatisfied. As Schopenhauer realised, this means that we are almost always dissatisfied. Moreover, a system such as capitalism is designed to fill us with desires that we can only satisfy by using our credit card. Capitalism makes us unhappy. That's its function. Celebrity culture makes us envious. The gods who have everything we want are continually paraded in front of us. Again, the effect is to make us miserable.

Desire pulls us into the world. We get out of bed and venture outside because we desire things. It makes us explore the realm of otherness.

One of the greatest issues is how to create sufficient desire to drive us forward, but not to surround us with so much desire that it makes us feel wretched.

Self Love

Is it possible to desire yourself? Narcissus gazed at his reflection in the water and longed to possess it. He had succeeded in objectifying himself. He made himself "Other" then longed to have himself.

What is self-love? It is when you value the object you have made of yourself - the shining reflection in the mirror - more than you value any other object.

But can you ever truly take possession of yourself?

Sex and the Devil

"Sexuality - as something beyond good and evil, beyond love, beyond sanity; as a resource…for breaking through the limit of consciousness."
Susan Sontag

"The devil is certainly nothing else than the personification of the repressed unconscious instinctual life."
Freud

Baudelaire regarded Milton's portrayal of Satan in Paradise Lost as his concept of ideal beauty. The Devil is infinitely seductive.

We're Never Alone

When you're sitting in a room on your own, your mind is full of desires, ideas, feelings, dreams, fantasies, cultural values, taboos, prohibitions, aspirations. Wherever you go, you carry this baggage with you. It impacts on everything you do.

Imagine going through life as an Abrahamist. You literally carry the Torah/Bible/Koran around with you in your head. You're never alone. Moses, Christ or Mohammed is always peering over your shoulder, scrutinising everything you do.

Isn't it time you asked them to leave? Isn't it time you made up your own mind? Is it really so hard to think for yourself? Must you go through life as the dummy to someone else's ventriloquist? Your lips move but it's not your voice. What a sad life.   

The Basic Questions

Who's buying and who's selling?

Who's fucking and who's getting fucked?

Who's up and who's down?

Who wants it and who's got it?

Who's the dom and who's the sub?

The Princess Culture

Women living together synchronize their periods. Women are renowned for having a high emotional IQ, for being highly empathic and intuitive. Women bring love and harmony. That all sounds wonderful but of course there's a downside. Women are astoundingly conformist. They are "other-directed". They are preoccupied with what all the other women around them are up to. They are enormously attracted to "gossip" - low-level, salacious and damaging information about one's peers.

Look at women's magazines, written, edited and published by women i.e. fully reflecting women's interests, and the blame for which cannot in any way be attributed to men. What are they full of? Pictures of other women, mostly beautiful, whom other women aspire to resemble and model themselves on. They are full of gossip - mindless tittle-tattle about the private lives of celebrities. They are about fashion, diets, health, holidays. They are about how to get a man and keep him. The TV show Sex and the City reflected all of the contents of women's magazines, which was why it was so successful. Do you remember the shows when they discussed Nietzsche, M-theory, Fermat's Last Theorem, geopolitics, the Large Hadron Collider, the heresy of Nestorius? No - because there were no such episodes. The average woman runs a mile from such subjects. She has no interest in them at all. Shoes, more shoes, walk-in wardrobes, exotic cocktails, handsome men and lots of gossip is what she wants.

Any Logos person glancing at a women's magazine rapidly concludes that the readership of these magazine is mentally retarded, 100% cut off from intellectual activity. Unpalatable or not, almost none of the world's greatest minds have belonged to women. Pick up a women's magazine and you can see why. The women who read these magazines are archetypally Mythos and Eros-orientated. They want stories. They want emotions. They want to think of themselves as beautiful, slim princesses in breathtaking designer dresses, admired by their friends and loved by all the men they meet. They want to have a gorgeous hunk prince on their arm to take them out and show them off to the world, with whom they will settle down and have a wonderful family and live in luxury. And that's it - the extent of the "vision" of the ordinary woman.

All over the world, women watched the marriage of a woman to a "prince" in the UK. Who gives a fuck about these privileged cunts? Yet hundreds of millions of women do. They all dream of being a princess themselves. This is their biggest fantasy brought to glorious life. They were practically wetting themselves with excitement, imagining it being their turn next.

Did you know that the new wife of the prince is called Princess William of Wales? In other words, she has lost her name and identity and is a mere extension and object of her husband.

"I think therefore I am," said Descartes, annunciating the position of the Logos man.

"I feel therefore I am", says the average woman. "I shop therefore I am," she adds. "Who am I? I am a princess. I live in a choclolate box world. I love pink."

Women are the perfect consumers, the perfect submissives, the perfect victims of the Old World Order and the old religions. Their need for harmony makes them conform with astounding ease to all of the tricks used to manipulate them. Women wearing the burqa claim they are exercising their freedom. Well, so is the slave who puts on his own chains.

Islam and women are a perfect religious fit: complete conformity and submission. No freethinking, no heresy, no independence, no Logos.

What is the cure? Women need radically new role models. They have to get away from being little princesses, Jewish princesses, divas, prima donnas, drama queens etc.

They need to be associated with power, with independence, with thinking for themselves, and not caring what others think. Women need to replace the Princess Culture with the culture of the Dominatrix, the Priestess, the Wonder Woman, the Super Woman, the Goddess. Women need to embrace strength, intellect, non-conformity, dissent, power.

We need enormously more women like Hypatia: a philosopher, mathematician and scientist with tremendous moral integrity and courage. She refused to let the Christian fanatics drive her out of Alexandria. She continued to defend rational, tolerant paganism against the ferocious legions of deranged faith, earning the epithet of the "Divine Pagan."  

Women have been under the spell of Sleeping Beauty for far too long. It's time to wake up. No prince is coming to kiss you and save you. It's time to do it for yourself. Become a goddess. Become Hera, Athena, Aphrodite, Artemis, Gaia, Ishtar, Isis. No more passivity. No more submissiveness. We need women as figures of power. We need women who can change the world. A New World Order can happen only if women are liberated. They must be free to be whatever they like without conforming to narrow, stereotypical roles imposed on them by male social conditioning.

Men brought the world to the monstrous state it's in now. Women must lead us out. They can't do it by being like men, or doing what men want. They have to define themselves anew, to CREATE themselves, as all goddesses do.

All the dolls and princesses and designer dresses should be put on a bonfire of the vanities and burned.

From infancy, boys are encouraged to be competitive, to yearn for glory. They are expected to be active, energetic, ambitious, and to achieve. Girls are given dolls, dresses and are soon initiated into make-up. The subtext? - you are mere adornments. You are not where the action is. You are the accessories.

Many women are bewitched by the concept of "accessorizing". If only they could acquire the right accessories, they would be perfect. What they don't realize is that they themselves have become accessories - for men.

Girls who were brought up as princesses in turn bring up their daughters as princesses, and thus it becomes a self-perpetuating brainwashing system, just like Abrahamism. But it wasn't always like this. Think back to the ancient Greek Maenads performing the rites of Dionysus. These weren't princesses - they were wild, tempestuous, frenzied women who would rip wild animals to shreds with their bare hands and eat them raw, drink until they were paralytic and fuck proxies of Dionysus and his gang of merry satyrs from dawn till dusk. How many princesses would behave like that?

The princesses in their pink fluffy dresses can fuck off. We want Maenads: strong, passionate women who take no prisoners and rip the heads off dolls.

Many girls are afraid to over-achieve because it would be unfeminine (not befitting of a little princess), and it would alienate boys. That attitude needs to be eradicated.  

Women have allowed themselves to be defined by men. Why are women so interested in beauty but not in intelligence? The average man wants to go out with a sexy girl; not someone who makes him feel intellectually inadequate. Women, with their desperate desire to please others and their fatal fascination with Eros and Mythos, have moulded themselves into what men require of them.

Snap out of it. Become your true selves. Men will have to deal with it. They can't have a veto over female emancipation.

Every burqa, niqab and hijab should be banned; every princess dress and tiara forbidden. They are a disgrace to womanhood. Women wearing these items should be jeered and reviled for betraying the entire female sex.

Here is wisdom. Our world is based on what B.F. Skinner called "operant conditioning". Certain behaviours are applauded, hence are reinforced. Other behaviours are condemned, hence are inhibited. Those are the mechanisms that dictate people's behaviour. They seek to be applauded and not to be condemned. But who decides what should be applauded and what condemned? The controllers, of course. In Islam, it's the brutal, intolerant, irredeemably sexist patriarchs who do the controlling. All women who wear the burqa are met with approval and those who don't are treated like prostitutes, and may be flogged.

So, if you want to stop this, you have to "uncondition" the victims. You have to actively condemn all of the activities that were previously applauded. You have to applaud women when they reject the veil. If you do nothing, you are effectively condoning the status quo, hence you yourself are conspiring to oppress Islamic women. If you care about them at all then you have to show "tough love".

What we're advocating is the implementation of all the well-tested techniques that have been used to "deprogram" people who have fallen into the hands of cults. Abrahamism is the biggest cult there is. Its power must be smashed. The brainwashing must end.

We have to stigmatise Princess Culture and celebrate Priestess and Goddess culture instead. All religions - such as Catholicism and Islam - that explicitly discriminate against women (Catholicism and Islam refuse to have women priests or imams, and in Islam women must worship separately from men) should be declared illegal if they do not treat women and men equally. Why are these sexist, ancient and decrepit institutions tolerated? They are an insult to women. They reinforce all of the negative stereotypes. In Islam, men can have four wives, but a woman can have only one husband. Mohammed himself had as many wives as he wanted. WTF!

Just as Muslims baby boys are attacked at the instigation of their parents and circumcised without giving any consent, so in many Muslim countries girls are given a clitorectomy - removal of most of the clitoris - or they suffer infibulation, the sewing together of the outer sexual lips to prevent intercourse. Are these people savages?

Women must be encouraged to be all they can be. They shouldn't be instantly aware (as they unfortunately are) that they are second-class citizens in a man's world, explicitly forbidden from doing many things they are able to do easily.

The Blood of Virgins

Countess Elizabeth Báthory of Carpathia is often regarded as the female counterpart of Count Dracula. She went on a killing rampage in the 16th century in pursuit of eternal youth. Are there no lengths to which some women won't go for beauty?

Life in her dark, gloomy castle in the mountains was enlivened by the witches, sorcerers and alchemists she gathered around her. One day she slapped the face of a servant and drew blood with her long fingernails. A drop fell on her skin and she became convinced that the spot in question grew more youthful. Her consultants in the dark arts said that bathing in the blood of virgins would keep her eternally young. So that's what she did. That's the beauty industry for you. The beautiful will kill to retain their looks.

"If looks could kill...." They can!

Báthory was accused of murdering some 650 girls. Because of her noble birth, she was spared execution, but was instead condemned to be walled up in a tiny barred room of her castle. There was no mirror for her to check her reflection. A few scraps of food were pushed into her cell each day to keep her alive. She died after four years. Several plates of uneaten food were discovered.

The Religion of Submission

Islam means "submission". It's a religion exclusively for submissives. No dominant person would touch it with a bargepole. It demands that you get down on your hands and knees to worship the cosmic tyrant Satan (whom Muslims call "Allah"). The greatest "good" for a Muslim is absolute submission to Allah. Muslims do not believe in free will or chance. Everything is the Will of Allah (Muslims pepper their sentences with the phrase Inshallah - Allah willing). Hence, logically, all acts of evil are Allah's - hence he is Satan. (Christians, deep down, believe exactly the same thing. The war cry of the First Crusade was "Deus vult" - God wills it. The ridiculous medieval concept of "trial by ordeal" was that the will of God would save someone from the ordeal if they were truthful and righteous, and leave them to their fate if they weren't. Naturally, virtually everyone died!)

By their own logic, when Muslims scream, "Allahu Akbar!" (which they do robotically in response to almost anything at all), it is in fact Allah willing them to do so and using them as his mouthpiece. It is impossible for a Muslim to be good or evil since all of their actions are determined by the Will of Allah. Muslims are androids, not people.

Illumination, by complete contrast, is a religion for dominants. Only dominants aspire to be perfect, to know everything and to become God. Submissives would be repelled by the incredible strength and scope of ambition of the Illuminati. What aspiration is greater than to be God?

Muslims - pathetic, weak submissives - are horrified by Illumination. Nothing could be more frightening to them since it represents the absolute antithesis of their grovelling slave religion. Illumination is the ultimate heresy, the ultimate blasphemy, the ultimate attack on Allah/Yahweh/Christ/Satan.

An Islamic world would be hell itself for any dominant person. Islam is unspeakably nauseating to any conscious human being with any self-respect. To see legions of slaves on the Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca is stomach turning. To see endless lines of grown men and women getting down on their knees to worship Allah is a perpetual reminder that a vast proportion of humanity has not yet evolved and is still stuck in its bicameral past where people slavishly obeyed the voices of the gods.

What is the first law of freedom? - never bow to anyone. Do not worship anyone. Do not grovel. Stand up straight. Look "God" in the eye. If you can't do that, you're not human in any meaningful way.

Our world is full of submissive activities. Shopping is submissive. You wander around buying the things the controllers have placed in front of you. Watching TV is submissive. You watch fictional lives rather than live your own life. Playing video games is submissive. You sit there shooting up the world (in virtual reality), while having no impact on actual reality at all. Video games are an avoidance of the real world. Voting is submissive - you delegate your authority to one of the puppets of the controllers.

Dominants are active, not passive. They DO. They ACT. They MOVE. They CHOOSE. They DECIDE. They are NOT CONTROLLED by the system. They are FREE.  

So, what are you?

"AK" wrote:

Greetings,

While it's true that Islam is insane just as the other Abrahamic religions are - and yes, way more violent on a grassroots level - this bit of your "New World Order" article completely misses the mark:

So why was this video made? Why did it choose to focus on Islam rather than, say, the Vietnam War? Is it in fact expertly made Islamic Jihadist propaganda?
 
Look at the context. The song ("Anatomy of Your Enemy" by Anti-Flag) is off an album made by a longtime American punk band from Pennsylvania (real people I've seen live - peace-loving guys on our side) right after 9/11, when irrational bloodlust for Muslims in the US was at an all-time high. Sure, it could have just as well been about Vietnam, but that couldn't have been more irrelevant at the time. Yet, the fact that it could have also been about Vietnam strengthens its point, that it's the same old story being played out again. Dividers divide, naturally for selfish reasons. It is certainly not "expertly made Jihadist propaganda." It's anti-division (or more aptly, pro-love and -unity). (The video, by the way, is fan-made, just showing the lyrics along with relevant imagery.)

Yes, Islam is psychotic. Psychosis is not healed by exponentially greater psychosis - military action, which is what the video is so vehemently against, propaganda which psychologically enables brutal, all-out war. Humans should never be brainwashed into harming other humans, no matter how "bad" the others may be.
 
Most members of religious groups have no idea what is even in their "holy" books. It's just family tradition. There are a bunch of radicals who do read the books and take them to heart, but that is by no means the majority of the religious group. With that said, I am strongly against "political correctness" when it comes to religion, to dance around the horror and pretend that every religion is equal and should be respected as such.

To "fight" religious ignorance, our two most powerful tools are:

• On a lower (yet still legitimate) level: Pointing out the savagery verbatim from the texts. Bringing to light blatant contradictions.

• On an infinitely higher level (infinitely more powerful): Transcending petty bullshit. Ascending to a higher plane, leaving rotten thinking to the dust. "Kill them with kindness." Demonstrating all the amazing possibilities inherent to the nature of the reality we live in. There's philosophy, which is the much more difficult, higher barrier route - not likely to be embraced by logic-estranged people. But then there's the simpler route - and the simplest solutions tend to be the most elegant - direct experience. It's universal. There are psychedelics, which offer everything... for those who are ready. But there's something that I'm lately finding to be incredibly useful at a much lower "price of admission" - the entactogenic substances, like MDMA. It's a lightning bolt to the heart chakra with no effort at all - melting the Reichian "character armor", dissolving the fear - a potentially quite life-changing experience without any required foreknowledge. The effect it has upon character armor makes it astoundingly conducive to activities like difficult yoga and singing, both of which bring the experience so much higher. Every time I have the experience and do more experimentation with it, the idea that it is way more than "the drug" becomes more apparent (and it always felt right intuitively). It's so fulfilling to be able to bring it back into daily life; every adventure yields tangible mind-body progress.

It's so simple, and maybe it's cliché to you by now (although that sounds cruel), but all we need is love. With left-brain intellectualizing of differences, there's always the danger of ironically falling right into the trap of the demiurge. Pointing these things out has its place, but love is freedom. Ignorant religions must be transcended, and I have a feeling that remembering love will offer infinite insight, and in turn, the best solutions.
 
One addendum to the last part of my message, something that's been on my mind a lot lately: The utilization of the bicameral mind for the highest good. I've had a number of amazing, spine-chilling, chi-moving, invigorating experiences listening to music with inspiring lyrics while in even just mildly psychedelic states (cannabis). A recent one made me think of your article, like a lightbulb went off. Perhaps an obvious connection, but it's worth being blunt about. The music and the entheogens tickle the right-brain god. The slave left brain takes to heart the "instructions" of the visionary music (which was also created by influence of divine states), bringing the listener increasingly higher. "Taking drugs to make music to take drugs to": the science.

Our Comment:

If AK had been promoting his message of love and kindness in Afghanistan in the aftermath of the American pastor's burning of the Koran, he would have had his head cut off. THAT is the reality. "Love" is an easy dream. In fact, arguably, we suffer not from a shortage of love but an excess of it. Muslims LOVE their religion so much they will kill for it and die for it. The Old World Order love themselves and their families so much they will trample the whole world into the ground to ensure their personal success. Love frequently summons its shadow twin - hate. Is it even possible to talk of one without the other? Who would preach, "Love is all you need," if its inevitable flip side was "And it will bring deadly hate with it."?

Let's not be starry-eyed about "love". It has its downside like everything else. It summons dark and dangerous psychological forces and must be handled with extreme care. Imagine that a doctor was faced with ten extremely ill people. He could save one, and the others would die…whom should he help? If he genuinely loved them all, it's improbable that he could make a choice or commit to it fully. To choose is to discriminate, to make a judgement, and to put someone or something above others, meaning that you cannot claim to be a person who loves all equally. Could a world of total love actually exist? Or is it pure fantasy?

What the world is desperately short of is reason not love. Humanity is full of rational and irrational people, but the beauty of rationality is that once you have become highly rational, you will rarely slip back into an irrational mode. As Christianity proves conclusively, a religion that claims that love is at its core is full of hate. Jesus Christ himself is willing to send all non-Christians to hell, regardless of whether they have lived a blameless life. What kind of sick cunt is that? Is that what "love" is about? There is no reason at all to suspect that we can abolish the hate that inevitably accompanies love.  To love one thing is to automatically pass a negative judgment on other things i.e. to produce the seed of hate. Nor is it possible to love everything. If you did then you would in fact love nothing because the whole point of love is that it is specific and not general. If I say I love everyone on earth then I am demonstrating that I am unable to distinguish between one person and another. I am ignoring all of their differences, all of their strengths and weaknesses, and simply making a bland, vacuous statement. If you love someone, you will make a sacrifice on their behalf. If you love everyone, you will be doing nothing but sacrificing yourself. And what kind of life is that?  

Christianity has claimed to be preaching love, forgiveness, compassion and charity for 2,000 years - and look at the hell that exists in every Christian country.

We advocate a world not of love but of Apollonian rationality, with appropriate outlets for Dionysian irrationality. We don't say that everyone should love everyone else, but that they should act rationally and justly towards others. It will always be the case that people will love some and hate others, and it's pointless to try to change that. The issue is how to manage it best i.e. rationally and fairly.

Those who made the video were not attacking Western military action in Islamic countries (which we would have endorsed), they were attacking the idea that Islam is a sickening religion and they were pretending it was all Western propaganda. Well, if you want to live under Sharia Law and have no freedom of speech, be flogged, stoned, hanged or beheaded for fornication or adultery, have a complete ban on drugs and alcohol, be forced to have arranged marriages, have all men sporting beards and women dressed in burqas then go right ahead and portray the Muslims as really nice people about whom we have got it totally wrong.

We make no apologies for saying that this video looks like expertly made Jihadist propaganda. In fact, it makes no difference who made it or what their motivations were. All that matters is the clear message conveyed by the video: that the West is wrong about Islam. But it's not wrong. While it's true that the West had no right to attack Islamic countries to take their oil, it has every right to fight Muslim Jihadists and to make it crystal clear what the agenda of the Jihadists is - a one-world Islamic State under Sharia Law and with the death penalty for anyone who insults or contradicts the Koran.

If you don't want that outcome, don't make videos saying the West is wrong about the evils of Islam. As we said, the video could have been about Vietnam if it wanted to make a point about the demonising of an enemy that didn't deserve it (and everyone is of course smart enough to draw conclusions about the contemporary world). But that wasn't its intention. It was clearly an attack on Western views of Islam, hence can be classed as Islamic propaganda.

Be VERY careful about the message you are trying to convey. In your opposition to one enemy, it's all too easy to become a fellow traveller of an equally dangerous and even worse enemy. We regard Islam as the greatest danger of all in the world of today. If Muslims were in charge of this world you would soon know what utter hell is. Islam is worse than rule by the Old World Order.
      
Don't subscribe to cheap mantras about love and non-division. Don't be naïve. Don't try to wish away the problems of the world. Don't pop "love" pills and imagine you have solved the world's problems. It's all been done before with the 1960s hippies - and look where we are today. Same old shit. The hippies should have been on the side of Apollo, not Eros.

We are not pacifists. Military action is a necessity to overthrow tyrannies that are using force to suppress the people. We have to harm others if they are seeking to harm us. Or should we obey the Christian mantra of "Turn the other cheek" - the gospel of submissives and cowards since the dawn of time.

A new world will not come along by loving Muslims and kissing your enemy. A new world has to be fought for. If you don't have the appetite for struggle, go elsewhere. Become a hippie. Who cares? You will be a complete irrelevance in the world because the world operates according to the reality principle not the fantasy principle of universal love and harmony.

We are not soft, woolly liberals, we are radicals. Liberalism is nothing but tolerance for the intolerable. If you're not a person of action and radicalism, our message is not for you. Islam will never be abolished through liberal non-action towards it. Islam, and Abrahamism, will be removed only when the will of the people is that their governments should act decisively against these religions and make them socially unacceptable and indeed illegal. Thousands of years of their malignant influence must be rolled back. It will not be done via "love". And it will not be done via liberals.  

"Love is freedom." Is it? Or is love enslavement to the beloved? A lovesick person is never free; they are locked into thinking about the beloved. Love is often characterised as a kind of madness. Why would we want to make the world mad? Isn't it mad enough? We want to make the world rational. We put our trust in Apollo, not Eros or Aphrodite.

The Demiurge has been using "love" to promote his tyranny over this world since the dawn of time. Christ loves you, say the Christians. So why does he send most of us to hell? Allah loves you, say the Muslims. So why do suicide bombers exist? Yahweh loves you, say the Jews. Is that why he drowned the world?

The hippies were the advocates of "all you need is love". Many of them are now in Wall Street and Washington DC - bastions of the establishment. Whatever the answer is, it sure isn't love. That's the oldest, saddest mistake ever made.

Anyone can talk about love. How many talk about reason?

Muslims against the Crusades

This is the enemy, burning the American flag outside the US embassy in London on 9/11, 2010:



Did you notice that these Jihadists openly and proudly admitted that Muslims carried out 9/11? So much for all the "Truther" bullshit and for those Muslim groups that absurdly claim the Illuminati were responsible for 9/11.

Do you think these Jihadists will be spending their time making videos saying that Westerners are really nice people and Islam has got it all wrong about them? So why help them, why do their work for them? Only decadents help their enemies. You will certainly fail in life if you can't recognise the enemy when he's staring you right in the face. It's madness and treachery for any Westerner to give any succour at all to Islam. It's a mistake Islam would never make. Mohammed personally ordered the massacre of thousands of prisoners of war. Islam spread across the world at the point of the sword. Islam has never preached peace and love towards infidels. It has preached nothing but death and hell. People who make propaganda films telling us to love Islam should have the gumption to study Islam first of all - and then they will be making videos hating Islam because it deserves to be hated. It is an extreme threat to the world.

To all those who think we're wrong about Islam, how much have you studied Islam? Have you studied it at all? So how can you pontificate on it, or our attitude towards it? How can you preach from a position of ignorance? If you don't know about Islam, don't talk about it and don't make films on its behalf.

So, which side are you on? Snap out of the liberal, hippie spell. Get real. Love won't help you when a Jihadist is standing in front of you with a sword.

Psychobiography of Mohammed

Amazon description of Understanding Muhammad by Ali Sina:
Why are some Muslims intolerant, violent and supremacist? Why do they bully? What spurs them to riot and murder over the silliest things? To understand Muslims, one must understand their prophet. This psychobiography seeks to unveil the mystery of the prophet of Islam. Historians tell us Muhammad used to withdraw to a cave, spending days wrapped in his thoughts. He heard bells ringing and had ghostly visions. He thought he was demon possessed, until his wife reassured him he had become a prophet. Convinced of his status, he was intolerant of those who rejected him, assassinated those who criticized him, raided, looted, and massacred entire populations. He reduced thousands to slavery, raped, and allowed his men to rape female captives. All of this, he did with a clear conscience and a sense of entitlement. He was magnanimous toward those who admired him, but vengeful toward those who did not. He believed he was the most perfect human creation and the universe's raison d'être. Muhammad was no ordinary man. This book ventures beyond the stories. Focusing on the "why" rather than the "what," it unravels the mystique of one of the most enigmatic and influential men in history. Islam is Muhammadanism. Muslims worship and emulate Muhammad. Only by understanding him can one know what makes them tick. Understanding Muhammad begins with a brief history of his life. Muhammad had a loveless childhood. He then passed to the care of relatives who took pity on him and spoiled him. As the result, he developed narcissistic personality disorder, a trait that made him a megalomaniac bereft of conscience. Muhammad believed in his own cause. Even when he lied, he felt entitled and justified to do so. Thanks to another mental illness, namely temporal lobe epilepsy, the prophet of Islam had vivid hallucinations he interpreted as mystical and divine intimations. He also suffered from obsessive compulsive disorder, causing his fixations on numbers, rituals and stringent rules. In the addition, he suffered from acromegaly, a disease caused by excessive production of a growth hormone resulting in large bones and odd facial features. "These disorders," Ali Sina says, "can explain the phenomenon known as Islam... which is nothing but one man's insanity." The combination of his psychological disorders and his unusual physiognomy made him a phenomenon that set him apart from ordinary people. His uneducated followers interpreted his differences as signs of his prophethood. Like devotees of all cults, they rose to champion his cause with dedication. By defying death and butchering others they made Islam the world's second largest religion, now the biggest threat to world peace. The author argues that Islam is incompatible with democracy and human rights, and the only way to avert the clash between barbarity and civilization, and a world disaster, is to expose its fallacy and demystify it. "Muslims must be weaned from Islam for humanity to live in peace," says Ali Sina.

Sina, raised as a non-practising Muslim in Iran, labels Islam's prophet "a narcissist, a misogynist, a rapist, a paedophile, a lecher, a torturer, a mass murderer, a cult leader, an assassin, a terrorist, a mad man and a looter." He writes, "With violent conquest and contempt for non-believers central to the tenets of the faith, attempts to forge a moderate form of Islam are doomed... The only way to reform Islam is to throw away the Koran; 90 percent of it should be thrown away. You also have to throw away the history of Islam."

Ali Sina expressed the opinion that the golden rule - do as you would be done by - that lies at the core of many religions - applies in Islam only to fellow believers, not to infidels. He said 'The reason I am against Islam is not because it is a religion, but because it is a political ideology of imperialism and domination in the guise of religion. Because Islam does not follow the Golden Rule, it attracts violent people…. Islam is more than a religion. It is also a state… a totalitarian political ideology that aims to overthrow all systems of governments and establish a worldwide theocratic dictatorship.'"

Read this book. Inform yourself about Islam. Start worrying!

The Latest Islamic Outrage

Mukhtar Mai, an illiterate Pakistani woman was gang-raped by 14 men on the orders of her village council. Her "crime" was that her 12-year-old younger brother had insulted the honour of a rival tribe by having an affair with one of its female members. In fact, it turned out that the boy had been homosexually molested by three of his fellow tribesmen and they had made accusations against him as a cover-up. The 14 men were acquitted at the Pakistani Supreme Court.

Feminist and human rights groups have reacted with outrage. Human Rights Watch declared that the attack on the victim "took place in full public view and the perpetrators were publicly identified."

The chances of women in Islamic countries winning rape cases are effectively zero.

The Love Delusion

To talk of love being all you need is simply to open a new front on the war against rationality. Again, an emotion rather than reason gets pride of place. Love is just a disguised version of faith, and indeed the two words often appear together in phrases like "faith, hope and love". All Abrahamists are forever talking about love (while doing nothing but hate). We need to move beyond all of the emotional claptrap. Reason and wisdom, Logos and Sophia, are our ultimate saviours. The Old World Order never make appeals to reason, always to emotion. Don't let them spring their trap. Let's get away from all these old, simplistic, naïve ways of analysing the world.

Let's have a smart world based on reason.

Reason and meritocracy should be the basis of society, not faith, not love, not charity, not hope, not emotion, not religion, not wealth, not privilege, not the family.

The Illuminati are overwhelmingly thinkers and intuitives. The idea that we will be swayed by appeals to emotion is ridiculous. In the Apollonian world, Dionysus has his place, and that is where emotions can be indulged, but society as a whole will operate according to rationality. That has to be the message that goes out loud and clear.

The Rational Horses

In Gulliver's Travels by Jonathan Swift, the heroes were Houyhnhnms. These were a race of horses endowed with reason and which exhibited all the finer qualities of humanity. They ruled over the Yahoos - brutish humans with vicious inclinations.

The Enlightenment was all about reason, and it is reason the Illuminati have always championed and it is reason the Illuminati seek to be placed at the top of the pantheon. We are not the Party of Love; we are the Party of Reason.