Return to Table of Contents | Previous Chapter | Next Chapter

On one end, labor adopts an alien tool which largely concerns the orders "above" it - technology, meritocracy and property, and aristocracy and hereditary claims. On the other, the sacrifice of the adherent and all the adherent must sacrifice for the evil is a quality of the lowest class, and those qualities of the adherent that were of the lowest class. This is to say, the adherent orients its body, the faculties that were a part of the natural world, towards this particular laborious task. In doing so, the faculties are given religious "life" by labor, only to be expended. For labor, this makes sense. The body, like everything else, is there to be used and abused for moral purposes. It does not in of itself possess any virtue, and a religious tenet that venerates the body and the lowest class will be under constant duress. The laborer claims all of those faculties for labor, and that labor is generally alienable for purposes labor itself deemed worth pursuing. In this way, the sense of alienation was inherent to generally alienable labor. Economically, the distinct labors cannot be compared by any linear arithmetic, and no abstraction can ever consolidate all of those labors into one value, some general utility or general sense of value, that is treated as a singular source of manna. Spiritually, though, labor claims all of the faculties available to it, and has for the moment claimed the tool of religion and technology. This is labor's plaything alone, until there is a force in the world that asserts the other interests of life for their own sake. All of the higher orders execute labor just as the workman in the field or factory does. That much of the actual toil and suffering in any workplace is unevenly distributed is not of any concern to labor. Only the moral purpose of the product, for labor's own sake, is considered relevant; and so, if anyone abases themselves for a spurious reason or a lie, they are fools, their labor evaporates, and it is gone forever, as the utility theory of economics asserts. This act where labor is vaporized is never a fait accompli, as many fags - and they are fags - will assert.^[1] A religious faith that labor exists to be exploited, rather than labor itself being the exploiter of the world, must be inserted, and the abstraction made more real than the actual toil, slavery, and thought game that is played with labor.

If we dispense with the kookery around money and finance, and the screeching of the dumber of the proprietors, what is really alienated is not an economic function labor entails, but a sense of alienating oneself before their religious goals, the goals of their association, to spiritual authority and a chain of command which must be recognized. Nothing about the person or human being is sacrosanct by any law of nature, and even if that were the case, the individual has many rational causes to sacrifice a part of itself for something outside of itself, simply to survive in a hostile world. Simply by contemplating any sacrifice for a crass and subordinate purpose, alienation in general can be contemplated without a great leap of reason. Someone will ask themselves what the point of doing any of this really is. If the needs of life are dangled in front of the adherent in an obvious game of psychological conditioning, where the human is a caged animal and this fact is thrown in its face from cradle to grave, this is clearly a pointless game. If this is what life will be - and the warden of this prison is known to be a filthy human much like itself - then prisoners can think of every way to refuse to cooperate, and have nothing whatsoever to gain from cooperation. Compliance only means more torture and the thrill of torture. Eventually the product of such confinement is denuded to nothing. This, of course, is the entire purpose of the eugenic creed, for the eugenic creed was not premised on extracting any productive utility from labor at all. It was entirely about destroying all possible conditions, to shout exultantly "DIE!" until the word is invoked as a magic spell. This is what we see with the linked video's Austrian School fags, and they are fags who need to gather in groups to reinforce their faggotry, as fags are wont to do. We see in the early 21st century this degeneration of language and the effects of the Satanic cycle, and how it obfuscates what is really a simple situation. The Austrian Schoolers do this not by any appeal to reason or anything in nature truly commanding this, but because they can and have engineered an echo chamber where they can't lose, at least in their super adventure club. No truth, honesty, or force would break such faggotry, nor will there be a moment where those who taste that blood ever return. If it applies to me, it applies moreso to those who commit to it zealously: "Once retarded, ALWAYS retarded." We could play that game ad nauseum, but that is more retarded than the first insinuation that you can do this if you continue to press the reward button. The purpose of playing the game is not to actually believe this is how labor works, but to exhaust anyone who would want anything else. It is specifically deprviation of material goods, and fetishization of the substance of those goods, that has been the overriding objective of those who insinuate that they can do so. Nothing in the world really locks the human being into this misery. We were born in the muck and we will never leave the muck, no matter what conceits we hold about ourselves relative to other people. The muck still has useful nutrients and energy soruces, while the phantom realm where the Olympian gods ostensibly reside has nothing for us. It has something for them, but behind their glorification is the simple reality that the "gods" - who are really skinmasks for aristocracy - stole the world. They stole not a tangible thing, but the very idea of space that is independent of them. This was only possible by a repeated declaration and enforcement of the idea. Any worthwhile engineering project would have to work through mechanisms in nature which operate at all moments. This is just as true of the computer reading a tape that might simulate reality, even if for the computer there is only the reading of instructions from a tape and carrying out its few rules of thumb. The simplest synchronization of these rote tasks is not something that a programming instruction can assert at will. Knowing that, the chief aim of those who would eject the unwanted out of society is to make even the simplest synchronization impossible, and to do so repeatedly until it works. It is simple enough for the haughty bastard who stole the world to reject and shame those they stole it from. It is another thing to ensure that the whole world lines up with this conceit. It is for this reason that "monkey see, monkey do" cannot be improved upon, rather than humans being intellectually too stupid to conceive of any other way we could communicate or teach. Imitation and reverse-engineering are tasks human life are particularly good at, while rationality, spiritual authority, and highly abstract knowledge are not things we could assert without a basis that we would appreciate. By repeatedly teaching a false reality, and intercepting the mind at the earliest possible age - the earliest age they can get away with - such a theft can be made real. It would not do to simply say that the law is this, or the deed declares a proper owner, or that the royal blood really is made of something special.

What is the one sin that recurs throughout all religion? There is only one - that the sinner is uncertain, lost, and not in the place where the sinner belongs. It is not a primordial evil in the same way that evil relies on mechanics that had to precede humans or their knowledge. Knowledge alone would tell even the crudest thinking entity that there was an evil in the world that had nothing to do with any of their deeds or claims to this world. If evil began with Man, it would lead to a religion of trite sayings and koans that turns inward on itself. Many a fag would like to believe the world exists around them, but a child can see through this argument. Sin, as the concept entered our language, has little to do with the primary evil that is the subject of religious inquiry. Evil is, whatever you may think of its fate, potent enough to be worthy of study. Sin and the sinner are particularly human constructs, or they would only be sensical to those who are part of the human family. The animal knows in its way the evil and acts in accord with it. Human beings and their knowledge segregate the genuine study of evil, which is of great importance, from the assignment of sin as a quality of entities like themselves. The sinner is axiomatically weak, fickle, and above all, retarded, and the sinner can be nothing else. Evil worthy of the name is not "sinful". The sinner's crime is not doing evil because evil is wrong, but doing evil the wrong way and transgressing boundaries set by religious law and custom. Religion treats the evil and malevolent enemy much differently than it treats the sinner. The gods never "sin", always held to a different standard no matter how obvious their failure. Only the subjects may be assigned sin, and the first property of the aristocratic priest is to grant itself immunity to sin. The haughtier of them are asinine enough to proclaim this outright. If it goes on long enough, they can sell indulgences for very worldly money. Of course, when the money enters the priesthood, it is no longer worldly and a thing of a the commoners. Mammon in the end is a god, and does not share the commoners' objective with money and commerce in any way. For the cult to be complete, the tokens of superstitious value must be assigned moral meaning, even though it becomes clear that those tokens are held by and issued for the purposes of someone who has no personal need of the superstition of these tokens. The currency the bank concerns itself with is not the currency of the common producers, and this is done for perfectly understandable reasons, rather than a bank being unfair or mean. Money, and things that serve the same function, are valuable precisely because they are made scarce, and would be worthless if the tokens could be counterfeited. They would be even more worthless if a general theory of money arose who laid bare that money could only persist on one basis - the ordering of human society into classes, with social class tantamount to sin or sacrosanctity that grants immunity to sin. All of the merits, aristocratic conceits, and moral vavlues labor would deal with abide the same law - that their labors and the resulting products were never theirs, and never could be left unattended. All that is claimed can be stolen, and this has little to do with any natural law proclaiming that nature is a friend of the thief. Worthwhile study of nature suggests the opposite - that matter cannot steal the energy of matter as easily as human treachery regarding their tokens of value. Even if there were no bank as such, as we believed ourselves better than that, the same problem faces all human societies - that the moment there is an intrigue to tell someone that what they believed was theirs was actually another thing entirely, there is a need to defend against this intellectual dishonesty. Enter the sinner - the hunter who failed, the unsightly, the unwanted. What you, the sinner, did, is not relevant. Judgement and moral truth always concern deeds, but the sinner is always guilty of a crime of Being. The resulting evidence of that crime of Being is just that - evidence to be presented in a very human court. If this were about the judgement of the world or heaven, then humanity is guilty and whatever personal sin or immunity they possess is irrelevant - guilty until proven innocent.

It may seem absurd that we are made to consider these aspersions to be moral substance, but consider the political niche of humanity and the world we live in. What have humans done with each other? For the most part, humans exist to make other humans miserable. If we were creatures who could coexist, we would see that the hitherto existing orders of property, institutions controlling knowledge and its dissemination at all levels, and the piggishness of the labor associations and their provincial interests are wholly unacceptable. The infliction of misery, from the first human sacrifice, was the chief property to acquire, more than any result or ulterior motive. The eugenic creed only perfected what was partially followed in the past. In the past, a non-human agency would impose on all religion a truth it could not stand - that the world did not need humans and their fucking conceits about anything, and the world has punished humans for that transgression. "Sin" never mattered in the slightest. To the true power in heaven, the sale of social proof and a protection racket means nothing. Like clockwork, the conceits of a failed and filthy race like humanity meet their inevitable end. I could have spared myself and those around me this, but the beast being what it was and humans being given over to the evil in the main, railing against this is like railing against Sisyphus' rock in Tartarus. This is where a reasonable entity, which humans are not, would seriously ask if their continued existence in this manner is even acceptable let alone desirable. But, the construct of sin inverts this. The righteous make sure that they are always the first to cast the first stone, and anyone who even appears to have stones in their possession to throw back is immediately suspect. The wages of sin are not in a world beyond us, but in this world, and the agents who are invested in the sin market and need to protect that investment with every thought and every deed. If that is what humans are - and history has judged that already - then however absurd sin may be, we abide that this is the power that governs humans, because they will never do anything else. They are a retarded race, a failed race, and we need not say any more on the matter of whether humans can be anything else. What is pertinent for all of us is how to live in a world where such a monstrosity holds dominion. Nothing "above man" will arise from humanity, for it is motivated by the same haughtiness that brought them to confuse this moral aspersion with anything worthwhile. If we were going to be "transhuman" in that regard, we would quickly see that a "transhuman" subject is folly. Humans cannot wipe clean the record of the past and claim it never happened. "Once retarded, ALWAYS retarded." The best such an entity could accomplish would be to judge history and itself for what it is, knowing that it was spawned from something far worse than the muck they are trained to disdain. If we judge human history for what it is, then it would not be a thing dismissed as "bunk" as so many fascist fags would have us do. It would be recorded as an endless reel of sad events, and very likely, those who wanted some goodness in the world would refuse to participate in such institutions at all. They would, in a better world, construct some association and code worthwhile, and among the first rules is that any of the insinuations of class warfare and its associated idolatry means swift and ruthless termination. Since humans are judged guilty of class warfare and social engineering to mandate it, the sentence is clear. It is an unpleasant judgement, but it is one that would be followed if we wanted to avert this from our present standpoint. This would be that all "pleasure", all of the hedonistic faggotry hitherto known, would no longer be granted dignity. So far as our whims and wants are "pleasant" they would become mild sensations. So far as we had any goals or aspirations to change the world, the chief aim would be to prevent anything like hitherto existing human history to exist again, and to seal this demonic race where it belongs - no redemption, no more discussion. This it would have to do on its own power, for the moment humans do this among each other in their temporal associations, they only see it as an excuse for grabbing some resource that will feed a cycle. If we wanted to truly end this tomorrow, we would prohibit outright the pernicious associations, and the damned of the Earth would form the truly final form of government out of necessity. It would be a very grim and lonely world, and the squealing of this faggot race called Man would be far worse than anything eugenism has made normal in this sad era of history. If the aim of aristocracy was to never hear the word "no" again, the right solution would be the most emphatic "no" this sorry race has ever known, and there would be no going back. What would remain? We would have the few things we really could have left in this world, at long last. Maybe some day - and I would not expect it to arrive for many generations - we would find a way that doesn't involve this ridiculous posturing. I doubt it is possible for anything like humans, and the present-day quest to "perfect the race" would be seen as a wrong step to turn back from like we should have a century ago. But, because that step was taken and insisted it could never be wrong, the society we might envision is forever a denuded one. It is more likely, after seeing enough of this, that the survivors of such a campaign would turn away from temporal matters beyond the truly necessary. There would simply be little to do, no more glorification of the hunt or any accomplishment. The thought certainly horrifies the aristocracy and the graspers. For the rest of us, it is the only good life we're going to know, and after seeing what humans turn into when their natural constraints are at long last lifted, we know that such a life is better than any promise we are likely to receive from technology or any so-called "salvation".

This course of action was foreseen long ago, and so it was necessary most of all to cull those who have no interest in playing that game, and to select by whatever mechanisms are available those who would be amenable to the ruling program. It is here where the scholars of the hermits, who were first on the scene to develop this scam, work out and spread by their own pedagogy how to accomplish exactly that. The same sort of people who would need salvation are what we would need to save ourselves from, moreso than the brutish aspirations of warriors, hunters, grasping men of commerce, or the local mafia. All of those groups were spurred to act as classes because there was one class which asserted its monopoly but did none of those temporal functions. They possess only this ingenuious device to manipulate and cajole human livestock, which they can sell to the hunters, the producers, or to the teeming masses who are granted a temporary reprieve from the sin complex. To think this is something wrong does not entail death. Thoughtcrime is death.

If anyone thought they would get ahead as long as they have someone, anyone, to kick down, a child could see the obvious endgame of that. Yet, humans do that and continue to do that, and they can't not. Why would they ever be different? All a novel technology or idea does is grant to their malice a new avenue to play the same game, and this is always what every new technology must become for humans. So too would someone buying their way to "post-human" status - an even greater self-indulgence than the initial indulgence, which at least pertained to a situation most of us did not make as we pleased. The sole beneficaries are those who sit at the apex of the insinuation game. Those beneficiaries will tell you history is not made as you would please, but for them, who possess occulted avenues to influence political efvents, they always make history as they please, because they insisted on it so far as they could. Political history, after all of the theories and excuses, is a history of societies and people whose names and deeds are recorded, whether they consented to the record or not. It is a high form of faggotry to insist that the record belongs to you, but the eugenist and every other intriguer must violently recapitulate this. If they cease to do this, then the social history of the human race is a litany of offenses against basic decency, and not one tribe or association in humanity seems interested in this being any different. If they did, then it becomes not just a political imperative but a spiritual imperative to cast hell and damnation on the transgressor who would end the nightmare.

Original sin was always a eugenic claim to history, rather than a frank acknowledgement of what actually happened. If we spoke of what really happened, who has been at the vanguard of so much misery, and who has reaped all of the rewards? Those who would deploy such a weapon do not do so mindlessly or because they are morally weak or stupid. They - and this is true of any religion that would want to survive in a world where other religions can easily do the same - are doing exactly what "natural law" says they should do, even knowing that this turns on itself. If we spoke of what happened, then the only course of action would be to end the human project once and for all and speak no more of "unity" under such an aegis. Nothing less than a new religion, one utterly alien to any that has been allowed to spread far, would be sufficient. Every time that was about to happen, the transgressors are either sinful, or brought low by intrigues. Failing that, there is the ultimate curse - ritual sacrifice, which always comes back to that one magical word, retarded. No other will work, because that is what the ritual sacrifice was truly for - to say who the "smart ones" are, and to be smart and to exercise this ritual backstabbing are identical for such a purpose.

You might think that the high and mighty with such a weapon would not hesitate to use it. But, clever minds understood the insinuation as a knife at the throat of every damned member of this failed race, and that a knife perpetually at the throat of the condemned reaps greater rewards and purpose than following through on slitting the throat. If the throat is slit, the cattle will not grow and produce milk, eggs, and the bounty of flesh that was desired. But, this ulterior motive is secondary to a greater one - that holding the knife at the throat is the point, for it presents tangible worldly power over a world that did not want nor need the "human" or any of its filth. The greatest imperative is that this situation never end. If it did, all of the moral values the human race has held dear would have been for nothing. More than that, there would be no guide or way forward, and none really would be possible. The objective of the class struggle is not to "win" it. It is to ensure that the losers lose it forever, and keep losing, generation after generation. It was never any other way at its core. The only way it could appear to be a series of stochastic and discrete events is due to the weakness of human institutions and states to impose the class struggle on the world and the genuine history of people. The conditions of primitive society which worked against any large and overbearing institution were never overcome, nor can they be overcome. Civilization sets for itself an insane and self-contradictory goal, and this goal it set because at its core, the civilized is no more than a slightly more elevated barbarian. There has been no concept of a social order other than civilization or its barbarous counterpart, and inventing a "new idea" does not change why civilization could do as it did, or why civilization created ripe conditions for this malice to continue. Any new idea would have to pass through a filter that no one alive has come close to passing. Since that potential of an establishment on wholly new grounds is far removed from the present topic, I leave the reader to think of what a very different world would be, even if we have to work with humans as they are and they know they will never be anything but shameful shit and a stain on the universe. But, "sin" never had to be what it became. The rank hypocrisy of this fucking demonic race was always unnecessary, pointless, and it began in the first instance because it was fun and because, at least in enough instances, no one would tell them no. If humans had any decent nature about them, the entire enterprise would be so loathesome that there would be no "teaching the controversy" as if there was one. Humanity is guilty, born guilty, made guilty, and the guiltiest have told us of their greatness.

The way in which the insinuations spread is a hallmark of this disgusting race called humanity. It is never a thunderous rage to bring down the unsightly for any cause that requires the insinuator to give a single thing. That would be counterproductive, and if such effort were spent on such a foolish cause, it would be a very queer thing to say the least. No - it is always the snide comment, the snark, which have been worked out as a whole science of malicious communication and perpetauted first among the creed's faithful, before they are mandated and made "default". Conspiracy, gossip, and a disgusting sneer and aura around the most devout of this filthy fucking race in pursuing it, and done not because they are efficient or effective. They are done because, just as the ritual sacrifice and the evil served itself and Abomination served a greater existence still, they were the point. Whether the conspiracy works or costs too much is beyond the point. If any moderation of this vice were required, it is treated as the most onerous imposition, even though by any objective metric, the whole world would be better without such games. The reward is the torture, and always was. The curse of this era is only that this force, which has always been at the heart of the human project, became first the dominant trend which asserted that it alone commanded "historical progress", and then zealously extirpated anything that would stop it. It did ont do so because its technology or ideas are paramount or natural. Far from it, nature and dire necessity press the technology of the oppressor to advance ever-further, yet always laggard compared to the potential they knew a century prior. If I told you that the entire medical establishment was designed to shorten human life spans and militarize the profession, and that there is no good excuse for easily treatable heart disease to kill and disable so many in humanity, that is inadmissible in the current world-system, yet all evidence has made this clear. In the 21st century, technologies that were in use for a century prior, that could become common knowledge and were often rediscovered, are zealously denied. Eugenist "ethics" insinuated, and then made real, what health and "wellness" were to be in their world order. The thrill of torture is maximized in the doctor's office, all at exorbitant expense to society. Far more expense is made to place barriers between technology and its user than is spent developing anything that would mechanically serve what we would want. The further logic of the dominant ideas is that this is itself "value", and it can be no other way. When has it been different? Humans do not want good things. They can't. Every time we would circumvent this, the hobgoblins that must move history in the ruling ideas will be summoned - and they are summoned by a long history of the evil, which is enabled by these insinuations. To approach this creed as a policy of anything that would be a stable state would appear so monstrous that it would become a dire necessity to abolish such a state, and this is exactly what the eugenist aristocracy wish - to goad and repeatedly goad the damned to lash out. The pattern preceded eugenics, for it was at the center of aristocratic religion and its civic religion counterparts. No particular religion or establishment of a name would be better than another, for the manner of acting is common and would be reverse-engineered by its ideologues. It is one of the few technologies humans really cared about. If humans were a primarily technological race, their entire society would be very different, and very likely the very idea of a cartel of banks commanding private life in the way that has become common would be so intolerable that any officer suggesting it would be summarily executed to restore some decency to the hcamber. But, humans are not that. They are jabbering, hedonistic apes who have to be told repeatedly to not start this shit, until they insinuated that to refuse their malice and sadism is not just sinful. It became insane to suggest that this entire futile enterprise not just be stopped tomorrow. Yet, we all could do that. We could stop pretending this filthy race is anything but a Satanic race worthy of extirpation, and that too is what religion generally and the eugenists in particular understood at the start of the modern mass insinuation campaign. Its historical precedents were mere trial runs, and the world to come under the eugenic creed and its successors has no endgame. There is no way out. Only then are the conditions of eugenics established. Only then does the myth and superstition of the state and class society reach something that resembles the conceits of social class historically. In doing so, class struggle is made permanent and unchangeable. Before, the struggle of the orders was a contest between relatively few men and the soldiers temporarily in their employ. The only "class interests" that were persistent were those of aristocracy. The proprietors only saw in each other rivals to fear and enemies around them. The commoners and labor would only rise as aristocracy wished it. So far as there was a genuine struggle of classes, it was between the magnates of the proprietors and their priestly allies, who brought the commoners into the fold since aristocrats and warriors do not produce a single thing, and the material goods they covet were never the souls of men but the technology they fashion - convert to "dead labor" - and the energy their souls generate, best extracted when the knife is held at their throat and exultant shouting typical of this filthy human race can begin in their great ceremonies. The prelude to the orgies and dedicates to the fertility cult is always the insinuation, and the thrill of surprising the condemned and keeping them in doubt - in "sin". This becomes a ritual which takes on a substantive power all by itself, rather than being seen as the sign of a sick race worthy of extirpation, after which we speak no more of their rituals and we are all better off.

It was insinuated that capital arose as a secret of primitive accumualtion, as if this process were not planned until someone stumbled accidentally on the novel invention of "capital" and stock as we know it today. As a history of how capital and the tradiing company came to exist - how enclosure and expropriation built the fortunes of the bourgeoisie - it is a reasonable reconstruction of what happened. Landed property gave way to commercial enterprise, but from the outset of voyages to the New World or East Asia, there would be a rough map of where this leads, and men who were aware of their part in a great game. The true heart of this has less to do with material wealth or the entries in ledgers. The powerful can always vote themselves free money, and this is effectively what the powerful did to bring about the liberal order - they "voted themselves free money", legalized usury, and made common cause with commoners who would gladly facilitate this in exchange for promotion. A republic will vote itself free money any time it wants - that's what republics do. The key for this is that the money is always human suffering, and axiomatically, the suffering must stop somewhere. If this were not the case, then the ruinous game of insinuations backing currency would be abandoned the moment any better technology for record-keeping and motivating labor - by promises or outright enslavement - were developed. If we were concerned with the flow of natural resources and management of logistics, that is a trivial problem in any era - not so trivial that it would be automatic and it is always a problem that allowed every intriguer to shit it up somehow. But, we could simply abolish the right of such insinuations to be made. There is a law against slander and libel, one which is abused as laws always are. Any such abolition would question the legitimacy of not just the state but the dominant religions of humanity and their lurid rituals, which have never changed over the centuries. It would be a cruel world and, to the sensibilities of these filthy apes, "horrifically despotic" for doing things that would have been basic if we were freed from the intrigues. The reversal of the solution reaches its apogee with fascism, where the state presents such a horrific despot who serves all of the vices of a republic and the fags who enable the worst of it - and therefore, a Hitler or a Trump is an antidote to someone or something that would lay low the beast at its source and do what should have been done a long time ago. Just as there is no way out of the insinuation machine when it is active, there is no way out of the solution. Free association is really just a pretext to continue the basis for all of this stolen wealth - primitive association and the conniving common to this disgusting race. The unicorn that is promised to the woefully naive - that you could have friends and social life and belonging - never had the appeal its ideologues believed it did. What argument existed for any association was dire necessity, because of repeated intransigence of rulers who stole the world not by doing something useful, but by insinuating that we "have" to follow any of this faggotry.

The associations of a mafia or a nation of believers are not themselves going to make this particular state, or anything like "the state" as we have known it. It is how that mafia conspires which makes the state a strategy for it to operate, and the strategy is not a uniform one. The crudest core of insinuations and rot are as common as the muck - a type of muck peculiar to humans and foreign from the muck from which we rose and in which we live, but in so many ways far more unsightly to the senses and any goodness we might have known. It is that which is really at stake - not the idea of "the political" as a monopoly, but one strategy and one institution claiming the world for it, adapting by way of superstitious and religious operations, and meeting its rivals. It is then declared that this is "human nature" or "natural law" and some quasi-scientific explanation is imposed on history to make it conform to this narrative. No one really has an alternative to state society that isn't another form of such. Had we wished to mitigate the state, it would require the people, each one of them for their own reasons, taking back their land, their wealth, and freedom in a genuine sense, and this would be a terrible retribution unlike any hitherto known. But, the state's existence was never seriously at stake. One state is displaced by another in short order, and so-called anarchy is the preferred operating condition of aristocracy and the rites and rituals it cherishes. Expecting the state to be stable - to be any sort of "state" as envisioned - tragically misses the point of any of this. It is not done for property or any ulterior motive but itself. The justifications, and the term "justice" itself, are tertiary consequences barely acknowledged when humans deal with what they consider valuable. If you spoke of the injustice of something so stupid and ruinous, they would laugh at you in an uproar that most of humanity unconsciously learns to avoid like a plague. Given humanity's willful embrace of its rituals, it could be nothing but exploitative, and it will live forever with what it is, no matter what form it takes. The only thing that is possible for such a filthy race is to mitigate them in whatever way we can, individually and, if we can ever be allowed this, in whatever interactions we have with one another. Towards other humans, it is prudent to expect little of any of them, even the paragons of their race.

That humans are exploiters is a foregone conclusion, and there is no making the evil into the good. Here we might ask a simple question - how long does it take for people to give up? There is no hope. There is no end. That point for most of us was broken a long time ago. It is among the rites of this filthy race - the boot stamping on our faces forever, the litany of atrocities against us and against each other, since a failed race will never know anything else. There is no "other system" regarding this which fails to make a religious argument, and all of the tendencies of humanity are thoroughly evil by this stage of its history. There is little remaining in humanity that speaks of the evil as something to avoid or combat, and there was never much. Only that which was necessary due to the weakness of human states mitigated it, as if by the blessing of heaven.

Nothing about a singular despot would, by some personal probity, put a stop to this, or settle the "oneness" that is to rule this filthy race. Very often the despots' interests have little to do with this question, and they have accepted long ago that humans are incapable of changing and will never be governable for much else. At least in this, they are honest. There becomes only one solution - to see the world as something apart, forever apart. The reversal is now complete - aristocracy destroyed the world for its cause, and does so every day. Its proclamation of vast arsenals, war machines that will never be used in a battle, is a celebration of this destruction of the world. The thing they replaced it with is this faggotry, this shit, and like any child abuser, they instruct the child - you - to believe "this is what you are". A despot - a tyrant - occasionally arises because this filthy race can't stop making messes and kicking them down to social inferiors, and forbids the inferiors from any control over their life. Exhaustion from the regime of insinuation repeats in miniature the rituals that stole the world and made this happen. All of our contest, then, has been little more than the same sad story, which all are left to behold, despite it serving no one and no thing.

There are no solutions in spiritual authority to this, for it is settled. History and the world have judged - failed race. We might be able to depart it for a time, claw back something, and make a world apart if we can keep it. It is here where the hermit breaks for good from humanity and the world, even though the world properly speaking was theirs. There was never anything for us in this project which has claimed the world, and even if we won temporal power, what would we do with it? What would we do with anything this society has to offer? The world will go on without us, and without humans altogether. The modern eugenist nightmare weaponized this understanding and turned the hermit's proclivity and desire to be left alone against it. The conditions of eugenics made total and absolute what had always been at the spiritual core of the human project - that there would not be another idea. Only then could "race betterment" proceed along the lines Galton set out - not that this would make any organism better by any metric we would appreciate. Only because humanity is a Satanic race did this abomination prevail, and that is a settled matter.

Return to Table of Contents | Next Chapter

Return to Table of Contents | Return to Chapter Start