Showing posts with label Anti-Modernity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Anti-Modernity. Show all posts

26 May 2018

Anime As Prophecy, the Case of Armitage III



Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law

I know many of you will be surprised by this, but someone on the Internet likes anime. Now there are several broad categories of anime. The broadest, of course is (1) “What I  Like”, and (2) Crap. However, that isn’t very useful for most discussions, so I will divide the “What I Like” category up a bit. I like anime that makes you think without being preachy. Anime that makes you think is further divided into two categories, Light and Dark. Light, thoughtful anime would include a large swathe of Studio Ghibli (notable exception is Grave of the Fireflies). The other category includes Akira, Ghost In the Shell, Jin-Roh, and Armitage III.

The thing about thoughtful anime is that it brings up questions that retain their relevance over time. The recurring idea of humanity’s relationship to nature, what does it mean to be human, etc, etc.
Armitage III Intro Clip
Armitage III was an OVA put out in 1995. Thankfully, a movie of hacked together scenes was dubbed and released to Americans. This is when I first saw it. This caused me to pick up The Complete Saga, which contains the Original OVA (far superior), the pieced together Poly-Matrix, and the sequel Dual-Matrix.

There are going to be some spoilers here, however, the anime is over two decades old. While I hope you will still watch it, most people won’t.

So, the set-up involves the Human Ross Syllibus and the Android Naomi Armitage. Whenever I see the name Naomi, I have to do a check to see if it's a reference to Jun'ichirō Tanizaki. In this case, it isn't, or at least I don't believe it is. Ross flees to Mars in hopes of dealing with various issues. His partner was killed by cyborgs (or androids) leaving him with a lingering prejudice against both. This is combined with his increasing reliance on various prosthetics as various body parts have a tendency to get blown up in his line of work. This is one of the questions asked by this movie, where is the line between human and non-human. Naomi is the titular character. She is a secret android of a previously unknown type, the Type III (or Thirds). There existence is revealed rather early in the series.

The type III is an android developed with the mental faculties of a human. Actually, from the examples in the Anime, they are actually better than most humans. Their bodies are (ala terminator) flesh and metal. The primary conflict of the series is that someone is killing off the type III androids. These androids had been embedded within society without anyone being the wiser. Those who knew the deceased were shocked to find out that they were androids.

As the story unfolds, we find that a shadowy cabal is doing the killing, Ross gets over his hangups. Armitage gets over hers (”If humans don’t want me, why did they create me?”). They fall in love and they change their names and go into hiding. This sets up things for the sequel.

The shadowy cabal is where it gets interesting. Mars, being a colony, was settled by (mostly) men. Earth had finally achieved the Feminist dream and Feminists were in control. This led to obvious friction between the two planets. Earth had the upper hand however, as without women, there would be no one to bear the next generation of Martians. Shades of "Mars Needs Women", perhaps. Thus the third was invented. Fully sentient gynoids capable of bearing children. It should be noted that they were not ‘enslaved’ nor ‘coerced’. Many were prominent in various artistic and social circles. It seems that none had found mates or produced children (though one of the murdered thirds was pregnant).

As happens with long term projects, things change before they come to fruition. The Martian government came to an accord with the Terran government. The requirement for this reconciliation was the elimination of the threat to the Terran Feminist, the III. The data dump of this is about midway through the fourth and final episode, in case you missed the foreshadowing in the prior three episodes.

Now, I really enjoy the Armitage III anime. As I said, I bought the DVD set. However, what really got me thinking about it was the various diatribes of Feminist anti-Sex Robot rhetoric. A simple Google search will find various opinions on Sexbots and their impact on feminism. MGTOW types view them as detrimental to (latter-stage) feminism, and, given their opposition, later-stage feminism seems to agree.

Now, it has long been recognized that sex is the primary weapon women have over men. It’s been true for centuries. It forms the premise of the Greek play Lysistrada, circa 411 BC. Frankly, men will put up with a lot if the end result is sex. A lot of selfish, self-destructive behavior has been tolerated purely because women decide who they will or will not have sex with. As is common with most socio-political activity, the extreme tends to mobilize the center. Even women who aren’t radical feminists like the idea of more power and authority, so they act in solidarity with the more extreme elements. This has led to an ever increasing set of laws and regulations designed to give more and more agency to women by regulating the one thing men really care about and which they cannot get from anyone else.

Enter the sexbot. Now I remember seeing Real Dolls in the mid/late-90s. I’ve also kept an eye on android research in East Asia. It is rather fascinating, and it was inevitable that these two things would meet. As long as it could be stigmatized as a pet project by low market males that confirms their undesirability, Sexbots could be ignored. However, dissatisfaction with the subjugation of men by women (often codified into law), certain movements (of varying levels of repute) have arisen that called into question whether the refusal to engage in the modern dating game was actually a signifier of low market value. Either way, it seems that, for many men, the limit of what they will put up with for decreasingly satisfying sexual activity has been reached.
"Sex is Boring" clip from Sid & Nancy
So yeah, I don’t really think that an Armitage III scenario will occur within my lifetime, and I doubt that androids capable of reproduction will occur, but I do think that, should the sexbot gain enough traction before the feminists can squash it, it will lead to a radical re-evaluation of male-female relationships. If all a woman offers is sex, sex which can be satisfactorily filled by sexbots, women will have to come up with something else in order to entice men. This may lead to a world where women revert to more traditional roles, or some new expression may be carved out. We may enter a world where high-value men have multiple high value women, and everyone else has sex robots to reduce tensions. Who knows?

To be fair I should probably mention the doomsday scenario. This is the current trend anyway, with sex often being an inadequate substitute for masturbation and the demands of Modernist society (which rates motherhood and children as undesirable) leading to lowered birth rates. There is a concern that sexbots (both male and female) will lead to a world were reproductive needs are sublimated and a viable population is no longer available, in which case, we would stop breeding and the human race will die out. I suppose the question here is how many people are really necessary for a viable population.
Second part of Armitage III intro clip
I Hope you enjoyed these musings.

If you enjoyed this video, please like and subscribe.

Truth is found in the Rubble of Falsehood
Love is the law, love under will

Not really a citation, but this site came to my attention before recording this:
https://campaignagainstsexrobots.org/

Armitage III


20 August 2017

Free Speech, Charlottesville, Antifa, Trump (+ Update) (Grab Bag #2) [Video Script]


DWTWSBTWOTL
Well, it looks like the planned video is taking longer than I thought.
  • It is a look at ethics and rights within the Thelemic system
  • It will focus on OZ, Libræ, and Duty
  • I may need to break it up into multiple parts.
This is a little semi-ranty video on
  • Free Speech
  • Charlottesville
  • Trump’s speech on Charlottesville
  • I also pour some hate on antifa
First an update
  • The actual Navy stuff I am in Japan to do will be starting tomorrow.
  • This will undoubtedly impact my free time.
  • Yesterday, Saturday, I went to Yokohama to try and find some CDs
    • Musashi (六三四): Japanese progressive/folk metal band
    • Fushitsusha (不失者): Experimental Japanese rock band
    • Zeni Geva (ゼニゲバ): prog-rock, hardcore, heavy metal and noise-rock
    • Yōsei Teikoku (妖精帝國): Heavy/Goth/Symphonic Metal + EBM, darkwave, neoclassical, ethereal + Goth
  • Finding a CD for my son, who wanted something called “Bump of Chicken” was pretty straight forward.
  • Three separate shops and I only found the Yōsei Teikoku
    • However, I did find an interesting CD with the Crass logo on it. Guso Drop (偶想Drop)
    • I snagged it because I wanted to see what they were doing to my precious childhood memories.
    • I also found a first pressing CD of Current 93’s Dawn. I wonder if it has the original version of Great Black Time.
    • The original made extensive use of a sample from Barry McGuire’s Eve of Destruction.
    • This was removed in subsequent releases, I assume for copyright reasons.
    • Then there are two Japanese psychedelic rock albums: Acid Mother’s Temple & Subvert Blaze
    • Finally, a Japanese Metal Album (it was under Death Metal): Onmyo-za (陰陽座)
  • While looking up the links for these artists, I discovered that Zeni Geva has a Bandcamp. Of course it only has one album on it.
  • Also, I’ve changed my Ending song. Despite it being “Free Music” under the Creative Commons, it kept getting flagged.
    • Sometimes they would release the claim after I submitted the proof, but sometimes not.
    • I am way to lazy to repeat the same actions over and over.
    • So, While I liked Ami Deng’s “A Strange Community”, I am tired of dealing with the hassle of using it.
Anyway, now that I’ve established my music nerd bonafides, Let us move on.
There has been a lot of talk about what is and what isn’t free speech.
  • This is bullshit.
  • People trying to limit anyone else’s ability to speak is against free speech.
  • Those who say we should not tolerate intolerance are stupid.
  • You are being intolerant. You aren’t protecting society, you are just a coward.
  • The people censoring Nazis are less than Nazis.
  • They are hypocrites afraid to admit their own little authoritarian urges
  • The little black Hitlers and Stalins infesting their hearts.
This is one of the few absolutes. Either you support free speech, no matter what is being said, or you do not. There is no middle ground.
That being said, I am already tired of Charlottesville.
However, one of the interesting tidbits was how one of the antifa (or whatever) protesters described the accident
  • He specifically stated that the car slowed down than accelerated into the crowd.
  • Then there are the reports after the guy’s initial capture about it possibly not having been on purpose.
  • Add to this the reports, with suggestive video evidence, that the guys car had been hit with a bat.
    • Suggestive because the actual strike is not shown. The camera dips right before the cracking sound.
  • This would support a narrative that the guy slowed down for the protesters
    • Then his car was hit by antifa and he freaked trying to escape.
    • This reaction on his part makes sense given the events of the day and the history of antifa
  • Not that I am saying that this is what happened, but it is important to keep an open mind.
This is where I put in the obligatory “I am not a racist” disclaimer.
  • Trust me. I view racism as pure laziness. If I hate you, it is because of you, not your race, sex, or gender.
  • I agree with Evola’s distaste for concepts of racial purity. An arbitrary line was drawn and all mixing after that point is deemed “bad”. That is just dumb
  • I also agree with Evola’s concept that the idea is the true Fatherland. Those who share in the idea are the citizens of my state.
    • Trust me, most white people don’t make it either.
I am also going to point out that Antifa (and their related ilk) are some of the worst examples of troglodytes masquerading as humans on this planet.
  • They are worthless for anything but bashing heads
  • Even then, they have a distressing tendency to bash the wrong heads
  • They are the Marxist Lumpen-proletariat: 
    • identifies the class of outcast, degenerated and submerged elements that make up a section of the population of industrial centers" which include "beggars, prostitutes, gangsters, racketeers, swindlers, petty criminals, tramps, chronic unemployed or unemployables, persons who have been cast out by industry, and all sorts of declassed, degraded or degenerated elements."
  • Stalin eventually had to purge them because they were too worthless for the communist society they thought they wanted
    • Not being suitable for work, they could not contribute to the state
    • Being prone to degeneracy and violence, they were a disruption to an ordered society
    • One of the few things I agree with Communism about is that the antifa need to be rounded up and shot.
Anyway, I want to say that I was truly shocked by Trump’s clear and nuanced speech regarding the violence. While it was amusing to hear “alt-Left” rather than Antifa, I do suppose it is more inclusive.
Also, the article criticizing the use of the term “Alt-Left” is bullshit. The ADL guy says it is inorganic, then goes on to specify its organic use and development.
Are people really so stupid that they cannot see this for what it is: obfuscation, lies, and propaganda?
So yeah, I hope this can tide you over until I finish working on the Thelemic Rights and Ethics script.
  • Free Speech, you either support it or you don’t
  • Don’t pretend you are censoring others to preserve our freedoms.
  • You aren’t.
  • Antifa are, and always have been, worthless cowards.
  • It is almost worth having Communism imposed just so these (so-called) “people” would be rounded up and shot.
Truth is found in the rubble of falsehood
LITLLUW

Sources, Citations & Notes
Bands referenced:Musashi (六三四)
Fushitsusha (不失者)
Zeni Geva (ゼニゲバ)
Zeni Geva Bandcamp
Yōsei Teikoku (妖精帝國)
Bump of Chicken
Crass (best Punk Band ever)
Guso Drop (偶想Drop)
Current 93
Acid Mothers Temple
Subvert Blaze
Onmyo-za (陰陽座)

Non-Music:Lumpenproletariat
Antifa: Who Does Antifa Actually Attack?
Trump’s Speech
Alt-Right, Alt-Left, Antifa: A Glossary of Extremist Language

Attributions:Music is from the Free Music Archive.Borrowed without their knowledge for non-commercial purposes.There opinions are their own and the use of their music should not be taken as agreeing with my positions or even as awareness that I even exist.

Opening:Kai Engel
Chant Of Night Blades
Deathless: The Renaissance
Download
License

Ending:Keosz
The Charon
ENTITY EP
Download
License

14 August 2017

Charlottesville, Reverse Racism, Privilege, Feelings over Facts (Grab Bag #1)




DWTWSBTWOTL
This is just a grab bag of thoughts and ideas that I have neither the inclination nor time to flesh into stand alone videos.
  • I may do more of these. I keep a list of topics and some just never gain the momentum to become full videos
  • I’ll try to cull them periodically.
  • I’ll comment on 
    • Charlottesville, 
    • The use of violence in protests, 
    • “Reverse Racism” and the “Prejudice+Power” equation
    • Privilege
    • And, Feelings over fact
First, the update
  • Still in Japan.
  • It is overcast and rainy, so the temperature is tolerable.
  • I am from Oregon, so I am content with rain and overcast skies.

  • Went to Shinjuku yesterday and scored a Kannon statue
    • If I priced it correctly on the web, I got it for a great price 
    • About ⅖ of the listed prices on line.
    • Then again, it could be a cheap knock off and I was taken for a ride.
  • This video will be on Vid.Me and YouTube.
  • The script will be on Minds and Blogger.
I was going to let some music play in the background, but it seems that audacity and Google Play don’t play well together. Or the internet just decided to be cranky at that exact moment.

Also, let me apologize for the background noise, the dehydrator/aircon is noisier than I would wish. I tried to remove it with Audacity, but a little remains.

Hard to be sympathetic toward hurt Antifa. According to a CNN article, dated August 13th, the deceased was part of the demonstration (not a random bystander as initially stated). I am not saying she deserved to die, nor am I saying I support the person who drove a car into a crowd of people.


However, the antifa tactics seem to have worked better than normal. A technique that I have seen in action since the 80s, and which I understand to derive from classic Marxist strategy (vis-a-vis the use of violence). Essentially, any protest has three sides. The “Marxists”, the Enemies of the “Marxists”, and the peaceful protesters. Typically, the “Marxists” position themselves so that the peaceful protesters are between them and the enemy. They will then provoke their enemy who will have to go through the peaceful protesters. This radicalizes them into the “Marxist” camp.

Antifa seems to have gotten complacent over the years. After decades of being able to attack whomever they want without repercussion, people have started fighting back. Sadly, it seems to have been escalated by one individual far beyond what antifa expected.

To summarize the timeline
  • Antifa swarms against people suspected of wrongthink, like the nazi skinheads, they tended to attack in groups against individuals.
  • Recently, the people being targeted have started using techniques to defend themselves (shields, squad tactics)
  • Then, antifa seemed to also have shields (though they were more a mob than a squad)
  • Then a guy drives a car into a massed horde of antifa
I can only anticipate more violence.

On another topic, there is no such thing as “Reverse Racism”, “Reverse Sexism”, etc. The use of “reverse” serves no other purpose than to legitimize bigotry. Just call it what it is.

Likewise, the formulation of Racism/Sexism = Prejudice + Power, in addition to being a way for various power brokers to maintain relevancy, also serves to dismiss, discredit, and justify bigotry. Further, it serves as a warning. In no way should we allow these people to have power. They have as much as admitted that the only difference between them and a Klan lynch-mob is the fact that they are powerless.

It is stupid to expect people to accept, or work toward, their own destruction. If you are working toward your own destruction, then you are stupid. Any “white” person eagerly looking forward to the extinction of the “white” race is stupid.

And on a related topic, can someone explain to me what is wrong with privilege? The basic framing is that privilege is somehow “bad”. What we call privilege is the summation of people working hard to provide their children with a better future. I hope and pray that I have managed to give my children greater privilege compared to what I had. They only know what spam tastes like because I’ve mad Hawaiian food. We always had money for Xmas. I have never “whipped” them for misbehavior. I tried to emphasize learning, questioning, and self-reliance.

Now, to inject a little “Social Darwinism” (as technique, rather than justification), our society values certain traits. Those who conform to those traits succeed. Those who have a longer history of modeling those traits have greater privilege. Those who came later would obviously have less privilege, since they have had less time to amass the cultural capital which becomes privilege.

If you don’t like the values promoted by a society, you would need to change them. This would necessitate figuring out what those values actually are (see my earlier video “On Reality”). The SJW crowd wants to change the system — which is fair, so do I — but fail to analyze the values and thus waste their time in moral outrage and contradictory impulses. I believe it was Delsol who commented on how modern man is terrified of certainty.

However, and this is another thing the SJWs miss, you aren’t eliminating privilege, you are merely replacing the method by which one gains privilege. It should go without saying that they are actually trying to impose a system by which they amass privilege.

I don’t mean to rail against the SJWs so much, but it is like they were created to exemplify everything I despise about modern society.

So, I just want to tell all of them, “Your feelings are shit.”

Every atrocity, whether it be the Inquisition, the genocidal and treacherous dealings with the Native Americans, the Reign of Terror, the Holocaust, the Stalinist Purges, the Maoist purges, the Cambodian Killing fields, etc, etc — all of these came from listening to feelings rather than facts.
Or are you going to argue that these things are actions based on cold, logical, and dispassionate facts?
Bigotry is based on feelings. All your cries to prioritize feelings over facts do is render you incapable of critical examination. You become more easily manipulated toward atrocity.

I repeat, “Your feelings are shit”.

So yeah, I hope you enjoyed this. One interesting tidbit, the Google stuff has made me look at all of the alternatives out there. I was worried I would have to become a goat-herding mystic living in a cave just to avoid the pernicious encroachment of our liberties.

I suppose the takeaways would be:
  • Charlottesville sucks, but shouldn’t have been a surprise
  • The regressives are right when they say “Reverse Racism” isn’t a thing, but for all the wrong reasons
  • Prejudice + Power is the clearest argument against granting equal rights that could be promoted
  • Privilege is inevitable
  • Your feelings are shit.
Truth is found in the rubble of falsehood
LITLLUW

04 August 2017

On Hate Speech (Video & Script)



DWTWSBTWOTL

Update:

  • This is probably the last video I will put up before I fly to Japan
  • Two Channels I have been enjoying lately are:
    • Dr Layman
    • Zarathrustra’s Serpent
    • The two of them have managed to cover various topics I was planning on taking on
    • They have also done it as well, or better, than I would have.
    • I am not saying I agree with all of their positions, but if I only interacted with those who agreed with me on everything,
      • I would never grow
      • And I would be very, very lonely… 


[Orwell.Hate Truthspeakers]
There is a trend, pushed by authoritarians, mostly from the left (currently anyway) to "deplatform" Hate Speech.

[Clip: Gate Rory : Are you stupid]

The steps to winning any battle are: [Yukio Mishima]
1) Know yourself
2) Know your Enemy

Why would you not want people with opposing viewpoints to freely express themselves?[Massey. Authority as Truth-Truth as Authority]
I want to know who my enemies are
I want to know who I can trust to have my back and who will step away (or worse thrust a dagger into my back)

The Regressive Left seems to feel that if they deplatform these people, their opinions will go away [Consensus = Bliss.jpg]
  • This is so incredibly stupid that I barely know where to start.
  • Obviously, if unchallenged the ideas will never change.
    • Further, you cannot challenge their ideas if you do not know what they are
    • The best you can do is straw man their arguments, which will never convince anyone
      • The phrase “Preaching to the Choir” comes to mind
  • The main way in which we can change or mold opinions is through Dialectic [McDonalds vs Sanders]
    • I am not an expert on Hegel or Marx, so I will  explain what I mean by the term
    • You have two ideas that are in opposition (either to a lesser or greater degree)
    • These ideas meet in the glory of battle
    • The Stronger idea will win
  • Now I admit to some assumptions [Truth vs Lies.jpg]
    • First is that ideas closer to Truth (ie, the actual nature of reality) are stronger than ideas in opposition to the truth.
      • This can be expressed via the biblical parable of the house built on sand (Matthew 7:24-27)
        •  Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it. (KJV)
      • The idea is that things in accordance with the fundamental nature of reality are “built upon a rock”. 
    • My Second assumption is that both parties have similar logical and emotive capabilities. [If Someone doesn't Value Evidence]
      • This one is actually harder for me to justify, but I hold that in aggregate, the groups should be roughly similar in their capability to use logic (whether they elect to do so or not)
      • And that emotive arguments will be equally impassioned by each sides commitment to their ideals.
      • The flaw in this is that the person holding the lesser truth is either missing facts or is not utilizing logic.
      • In that case, their position deserves to die
  • Anyway, If we accept these two premises, then it should be obvious that the dialectic process will move us closer to the truth

We should also point out that “deplatforming” will not stop them from spreading their ideas. [Orwell - Political Speech]
  • Sure, it will allow you to indoctrinate those who feel security in adhering to what appears to be the dominant (or only) narrative
  • However, you will cloak the alternative opinion in the aura of mystery, making it counter-cultural and rebellious
    • Watson is right when he says “Conservatism is the NEW Counter-Culture”
    • And, since they are deplatformed, there are no coherent arguments against what they are actually preaching.

So, we have to ask, why do some people try to deplatform other people? [O Sensei - Wise win before fighting]
  • One reason could be the realization (if even on a subconscious level) of the divorce between their idea and reality
    • They realize that they do not have any facts to support their position and do not wish to risk having their emotive arguments undermined
    • This cognitive dissonance between what they believe and what reality is telling them is painful so they seek to avoid it.
      • Whenever the Regressive Left tells you they are offended or that your words are violence, this is what they are referring to
      • Ludovici, in his book The Child: An Adult’s Problem, discusses this as the conflict between the Pleasure Principle and the Principle of Reality.
      • Essentially, their behavior is just a childish tantrum.
  • Another reason could a general contempt for all other beings. [Hitler. People Don't think]
    • The regressive left seems to feel that other people are generally incapable of thought
    • They feel that they know the truth and that other people are just to primitive to grasp it
    • Further, they feel that the opposing ideas are just to seductive
      • They tell people that they are special and deserve to “oppress” other people.
      • And that other people will fail to critically examine these ideas and be swayed to their service.
    • Simply put, this is all projection on their part.
      • In a rare bout of subconscious self-reflection, they realize that they are like this
      • Since they feel they are more enlightened, they assume everyone else has their flaws but to a greater degree.

As you can see, the desire to deplatform of censor opposing opinions comes from feelings of Fear and Weakness [I am Friedrich Nietzsche und I approve of this message]
  • If you disagree, please feel free to comment with logical alternative possibilities.
  • The feelings of Fear and Weakness derive from the feelings of ressentiment (ala Nietzsche & Kierkegaard)
  • People who believe they are right have no reason to fear opposing viewpoints
  • Now some attempt to argue that the arguments have been made before and “resolved”
    • This is funny to me
    • Isn’t it a tenet of modern thought that we should re-examine and critique pre-existing convictions?
    • They show their religious roots with their belief that it is good butcher everyone’s sacred cows but their own.

So, to all those who wish to censor,
[Rory Clip]

Yes, Rory, I think they are. Heaven help us all.

To sum up: [Voltaire. Who Rules - don't crit]
  • Censorship, or “deplatforming”, is an ultimately self-defeating strategy
  • It manifests the herd morality’s predilection for ressentiment
  • This can be seen in its reactions based on fear and weakness
  • It is also a way to hide from uncertainty & doubt by eliminating the cognitive dissonance which spurs us forward
  • It is stagnating since new forms cannot arise from the process of dialectic
  • Dialectic is the process of annihilating two opposing ideas to see a new idea arise
    • An idea which is closer to the truth

As I have mentioned, I am about to fly off to Japan. [if i agreed with you]
  • It is unlikely I will be able to post another video before I leave.
  • My next planned video is on “Reality”
  • You may have noticed that I referred to it repeatedly in this video
  • Perhaps it would be a good idea to let you know what I mean by the term.

Truth is found in the rubble of falsehood.
LITLLUW

References:
Channels:

Rory Mercury:
From Episode 8 of Gate: Jieitai Kanochi nite, Kaku Tatakaeri
Actual Clip taken from
Gate: Rory Mercury amazing speech Episode 8

Bible:

Ludovici:

Conservatism is the NEW Counter-Culture

03 August 2017

Analysis: To the Cis Person angrily sharing news of the Trump transgender military ban



Display “Fair Use” Screen

DWTWSBTWOTL

I have several streams of information.

  • Many are news from various political perspectives
  • Another is Medium, which is basically an unfiltered op-ed site.


For some reason, Medium decided that I would be interested in an article titled [IMG 1]

  • To the cis person angrily sharing news of the Trump transgender military ban
  • By Angela Dumlao
  • While I will provide the link below
  • Do not harass or otherwise attack this person
  • It won’t do any good
  • It will probably make things worse

The article starts out with

  • Hi. If you’re a cisgender person angrily sharing the news about Trump’s ban of transgender people in the military, consider the following.  
  • First off, note the audience. Why do the SJWs focus on other people rather than their own?
    • Seldom, if ever, do they try to improve their own group
    • Neither do they talk impartially about a topic and let the chips fall where they may
    • Rather they take a classic in-group/out-group position of moral rectitude and certainty
      • Everything my tribe does is good
      • From my position as good, I have the right to preach to you on how to correct your “evil”.
  • Second, note the assumptions of proper moral behavior
    • It is implied that the virtue signaling of outrage is proper
    • And that you should be (naturally ) outraged by the ban
  • Finally, note that whatever you are doing, it isn’t enough
    • This establishes the moral superiority of the writer’s in-group
    • It is also an indicator of the post-Christian orientation of the SJW ideology
      • The concept of original sin has been identified with being “cisgender”
      • As an aside, you’ll find that “sinner” has been replaced with “racist”, “sexist”, or “*-phobic”.
      • Christians classified everything they hated as “satanic influence”. The left categorizes it as mental illness.
  • That was a lot of unpacking for one sentence
    • It’s good to find that I can get some use from my Humanities degree.

Next:
  • This is not a future hypothetical in which we need to protect people who want to be in the military.  
  • Actually, unless something new has come out, it is a future hypothetical as no guidance or policy changes have actually been promulgated to the military.
  • Even so, The first sentence is backwards. The purpose of the military is to protect us. 
    • I get what they are saying, but it rubs me raw to imply that the military are weak, emotionally unstable people needing protection.
  • There are trans military serving as we speak. 
  • Yes there are. While it may be implemented in the same way that the homosexual ban was implemented during WWII, staffing problems will probably mitigate any mass discharges.
  • There are trans veterans waking up to this news.
  • This sentence is problematic. (heh)
  • Of trans veterans, this only affects (possibly) those currently serving.
  • I have seen nothing to indicate that their veteran status would be changed or denied.
Now that the author has set up the requisite fear mongering, we move on to the meat of the sermon. 
  • Are you framing your posts with a call to protect trans people? Similar to #ProtectTransKids — while this means well, it also infantilizes the trans community. Stand with trans people. Support trans people who have been fighting for their rights. See the difference?
  • Strangely enough, I actually agree with part of this. As I mentioned in my video on “Goose & Gander”, most SJW activity infantilizes their targets.
  • De Benoist discusses the over use of the term “right” in his excellent little book, Beyond Human Rights.
  • However, it should be pointed out that Military Service is not a right.
    • Military service is an obligation and responsibility, not a right. It is something you give, not something given to you.
  • What do you do to support trans people? 
  • Note the implication that you should be supporting trans people
  • Not that there is anything wrong with supporting trans people
  • But I find the call for an in-group to demand out-group support of their in-group to the possible detriment of those out-group members own in-groups to be kind of insular and stupid
  •  I don’t need answers, but I want you to think about whether you:
  • Actively use peoples’ pronouns both when they’re around and not around. Do you correct other cis people when they misgender someone? Use their deadname?
  • This actually touches on a pet peeve of mine. You do not have pronouns. The language has pronouns. They do not belong to you and demanding other people accommodate your whims is childish.
  • Thelema tells me I am a God, Should I demand everyone refer to me as “my Lord”?
  • Further, I neither know nor care about your gender. I can only recognize the biological sex that you present. If you look like a woman, I will call you her/she. If a man, he/him.
  • I gave up on the TOPY-inspired E-Prime genderless pronouns back in the early 90s.
  • Dead name is just stupid. Oh my god, I am using the name by which I know &/or are accustomed to using
  • Oh my god, I am using the name on your birth certificate &/or Identification card.
  • The horrors are nigh unimaginable.
  • Do you intake media by trans people? TV? Books? Articles? Art? Music?
  • How would I know? Believe it or not, I “intake” media because I like it, not for moral reasons
  • What a sad world where you cannot enjoy something until after you’ve done research to verify that it meets a moral litmus test
  • I can think of one, but generally, I don’t ask people since it isn’t normally relevant to my enjoyment of the media.
  • Do you laugh at jokes like Trump being made up with makeup? 
  • I haven’t seen that one, but I do admit to laughing at Hitler in make-up [IMG Pink Hitler]. 
  • There is the man, all dolled up like Christ.
  • Do you realize this is transphobic? 
  • I think you are doing violence to the language. A phobia is a fear. This is called humor. It relies on the juxtaposition of incongruous ideas & images.
  • This is not funny because trans people are funny, it is funny because we can imagine the discomfort that the person depicted, or those of their idolaters, would feel.
  • With the Hitler image, we are laughing at the outrage neo-nazi’s feel at Hitler being depicted in such a way.
  • It actually doesn’t have anything to do with trans people.
  • Do you perpetuate the idea that trans women are really men, even in the most innocent, subtle way?
  • What does the phrase “really men” even mean? Are you perpetuating the idea that there is only one way to be a man?
  • If you mean “Do they biologically express the condition which is most similar to the male role in our sexually dimorphic species”? Well then yes.
  • Not that I spend a lot of time with it. It only really matters if we are having sex (I need to know where to put it) or trying to make children.
  • [IMG Hitler & Stalin] Yeah, just try to unsee this one.

  • Do you know about the epidemic of trans women of color being murdered in the U.S. and beyond? Do you share these articles? Do you sad react them? Do you avoid them?
  • Nope to all of them.
  • However, I have google.
  • There were 15 killed (HRC Website) this year
  • 2016 statistics puts the number of (self-identifying) Transgendered persons at a little over 800,000.
  • The CDC reports that there are 5 homicides per 100,000 people.
  • For the save of expediency, lets just double the half-year rate to 30.
  • That would put the number of deaths at under 4 per 100,000
  • Your epidemic is below the national average.
  • Your epidemic is actually a statement about how non trans people are being killed more than trans people.
  • You’ll pardon me if I decline your call to rectify this imbalance.
  • Realized that I ran the original numbers for the entire trans community, but I reran the numbers for and they show the same thing.
  • Do you actively use your privilege as a cis person to make the world better for your trans siblings?
  • My only sibling is no more.
  • Sibling, brother, sister, these are all societal roles that incur an obligation on both parties.
  • If you’ve treated me as a brother and I have treated you as family, then I will use any so-called privilege to our benefit.
  • Sadly, I come from a prole background, so my privilege is lacking.
  • I hope I have given my children some privilege by virtue of my accomplishments
The rest of the article goes on to say “Trump Sucks” but you can be better than him. With some more rhetorical flourishes that have been addressed already.

This came about because people seemed to like me talking about the pro-pedophilia site more than they like me talking about the factors causing such things
  • I’ll try to include these from time to time

My son told me that the video about pro-pedophilia was more popular because of his keen sensibilities.

I told him to go back to his room and play with his waifu.

Anyway, this article was chosen as indicative
  • When we encounter this crap, you need to analyze it like this
  • You need to ask
    • Who benefits
    • Are they practicing what they preach?
    • Are their facts correct?
    • How are they trying to sway you?
    • Is there really anything more than whining and guilt-tripping?

Truth is found in the rubble of falsehood
LITLLUW

Original Article:
https://medium.com/@callmethey/to-the-cis-person-angrily-sharing-news-of-the-trump-transgender-military-ban-441862263bd8

De Benoist:
https://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Human-Rights-Alain-Benoist/dp/1907166203

TOPY
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thee_Temple_ov_Psychick_Youth

E-Prime:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Prime
TOPY’s practice replaced all pronouns with “E” 

Phobia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobia

Dimorphism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_dimorphism

Murder:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm
https://www.hrc.org/resources/violence-against-the-transgender-community-in-2017
https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/How-Many-Adults-Identify-as-Transgender-in-the-United-States.pdf

26 July 2017

Pro-Pedophilia Sites, or Conversations With My Children #1


DWTWSBTWOTL

So my third son (age 17) came into my room to tell me about Heart Progress.

  • I have an open topic policy with my children
    • This has been in place since they were very young
    • I just pay attention to when they get bored (i.e. their question has been answered insofar as their interest & ability to follow allows)
    • This has led to some very interesting dinner conversations.
  • Heart Progress is a pro-pedophilia advocacy group
    • Pardon, a Pedosexual advocacy group
    • It is part of the pro-pedophilia movement that has been discussed by others

So he came to my room and asked if I had heard of Heart Progress
  • It sounded vaguely familiar and I told him so
  • He explained about it.
  • It had come up in his Dischord

Now I am fairly libertine in my attitudes toward sex and sexuality
  • I draw the line at sex with children, animals, and public copulation with inanimate objects.

We talked a bit
  • Pedophilia normalization is not new
    • It is just that we are able to hear from them unfiltered due to fewer layers of mediation on their viewpoint
      • I.e., They can spew their bullshit narratives on YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, etc without moderation
      • Not that I am saying they should be censored. I want to know who these perverts are
    • NAMBLA, the North American Man/Boy Love Association has been doing it for decades (1978)
      • Hakim Bey, aka Peter Lamborn Wilson, is said to be a member.
      • He did quite a bit to normalize Pedophilia in 80s Counter Cultural circles
  • While there is no difference made by the Law, there is a difference between Pedophilia and Hebephilia/Ephebophilia
  • Hebephilia/Ephebophilia is the sexual attraction to post-pubescent children, i.e. teens
  • This can be understood as a vestige of biological imperatives 
  • The target is able to breed.
  • I don’t want to get into the legalities and pros and cons, but it is identifiable as a valid biological impetus
  • This does not mean that it is OK, that is a social and intellectual stance
  • We are all born to find, barring other factors, that those who are sexually mature enough to breed are sexually desirable.
  • Pedophilia is the sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children
  • They cannot breed. There is no biological impetus for this desire.
  • This is a mental sickness.
  • If you are born this way, then it is like Schizophrenia (of which some forms are believed to have biological causes) or Autism
  • It needs to be treated and mitigated
  • You are a danger to society and yourself
He also mentioned how the pedos claim that prepubescent children are “sexual beings”
  • This is another case of taking a kernel of truth and misrepresenting it.
  • Children have genitalia
  • Children will often play with their genitalia because, even when underdeveloped, it feels good
  • Children are also interested in what adults do, and thus have an (academic) interest in sex and sexuality
  • This does not make them sexual beings
    • Frankly, I cringe at the phrase “sexual beings”
    • We are more than our genitals
    • We are more than where we like to put our genitals
    • Modern society focuses way to much on these things
    • This is coming from a member of a Solar-Phallic cult and Tantrist/Sex-Magician.
  • None of this means that it is alright to Fuck children
So, yeah, thank you Internet for making my role as a parent so much more entertaining.

Links, as always, are in the description

This video was a spur of the moment affair, and isn’t meant to count toward my Weekly Video update

That video will be on Skepticism and Thelema, covering the Method of Science and the Role of Doubt within the Thelemic system

Truth is found in the Rubble of Lies

LITLLUW

Sources

YouTube For This Script: https://youtu.be/H_MfU_WLEs8

23 July 2017

Goose & Gander (Equality, Merit, Standards + Brief Personal Update)


DWTWSBTWOTL

A quick update:

  • I’ve been sick, this has combined with my allergies to make me truly miserable.
  • I am normally critical of “Big Pharma”, but thank god for modern medical science.
  • I’ve also been distracted by getting my orders and travel ready for my trip to Japan this August.
  • I may do a video montage as a bonus video
  • Being sick may impair my ability to write, but it did give me time to play around with Audacity, hence the intro and outro Music.
  • Also Libre Office Impress for Ending and Beginning titles.
  • I’ve also been trying to figure out my image archive. I have some 20,000 images and I am trying to tag them so I can find them when I want to use them in my videos.
  • And I found some cool stuff on the Free Music Archive, not that I have used it yet.
  • Current Reads: re-reading “Political Theology” by Carl Schmitt. Reading “Aristokratia, Volume 1”
  • So, on with the show


I really like the phrase “What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander.”

  • Evidently it can be traced back about five centuries.
  • It reflects my standards based, meritocratic leanings.
  • It also confuses people who don’t know what a gander is.
  • As the French Syndicalist, Georges Sorel, once said, “There is only one pleasure greater than that of being appreciated by intelligent people, and that is the pleasure of not being understood by blunder-heads, who are only capable of expressing in a kind of jargon what serves them in the place of thought.”


For those of you who do not know, this is a gander….
 And this is a goose.

  • Yes, a Gander is a male goose. There is a verb “gander” which is slang for “look”, but we can ignore that.
  • Just FYI, a baby Goose is called a gosling. 


  • They are so cute before they become tasty.


I did find it interesting that the dictionary reverses the sex order of the saying.

  • A strict reading says “What is good for the (Female) Goose is Good for the (Male) Gander.”
  • However, Dictionary.Com gives: “What is good for a man is equally good for a woman; or, what a man can have or do, so can a woman have or do.”
  • To be fair, Wiktionary.Com does give it in the correct order, and provides a sex-neutral version which points to the essence of the proverb’s meaning.


While the proverb is great, Let us not forget what it is referring to…

  • What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, but in our modern world, your goose is still cooked.

Now, I believe in displayed merit. This means I do not believe in equality.

  • Any two people, even identical twins, are not equal. 
  • I do, however, believe in standards and judging people accordingly.
  • After all, this is how we determine an individual’s merit.
  • Some standards vary according to the situation
    • I value the Mechanic more highly than the Physician when I need my car fixed.
    • Likewise, I value the Physician more when I am sick.
  • Others remain fairly consistent.
    • E.g., I always value the truthful.
  • Different standards apply to different classes of people.
    • Politicians, the Military, and Policemen should be held to a higher standard in our society due to their duties and responsibilities.
  • This posits an inherent societally based inequality.
    • Any two groups held to different standards are not and cannot be equal
    • Those who meet a higher standard are intrinsically superior to those who do not, or cannot, meet that standard.
    • Note that an individual may transcend their group if they aspire to, and maintain, a higher standard than is expected of them by society.
Our society does not grant equal rights to children.
  • Neither are they held to the same standards.
    • If a child hits another child, it would be considered cruel to throw them in jail for assault.
    • Likewise, we look on with amusement at some of their more creative interpretations of the world around them
      • I have heard it said that we begin to really possess the capabilities for logical reasoning around age 15 and complete them around 25
      • However studies have shown that neither high schools nor colleges teach critical thinking.
      • I cannot find a link for the statistical age at which logical reasoning skills develop and when the brain structures are fully formed, so feel free to take that statement with a grain of salt.
    • Children are not the equal of adults

Any group to which we give a “pass” for failing to adhere to the nominal standards of civilized behavior is automatically less
  • Further, one could argue that they are being infantilized. 
  • When we fail to hold groups such as BAMN, Antifa, or BLM accountable for acts of violence, theft, or any other violation of the norms of civilized behavior, we are positing that the are inferior beings who just can’t help themselves.
    • Just like when a toddler smacks their sibling in the head for taking their toy.
    • Actually, they are less than the child, since we admonish the child.
    • Full disclosure, I’ve disliked Antifa since the early 90s when SCAR (Skins Committed Against Racism) and SHARP (Skin Heads Against Racial Prejudice) were running around in gangs and beating up the Goths, Ravers, and Street Kids for not being members of their clique. They’ve also ruined several shows.
  • When Feminists allow, even encourage, other women to act out in illogical rants, how are they any different than the caricatures of patronizing men who are believed to diminish women by smiling at their tantrums and saying “There, there” or “Don’t worry your pretty little head about it”.
  • What’s really amusing is how complicit the SJW crowd is at diminishing and infantilizing themselves.
    • A more conspiratorially minded person must wonder if the “movers & shakers” are merely encouraging the SJWs in order to make them more malleable, or whether it is a self-defeating monstrosity, a beast with no head.
The lazy, the loser, the ugly, the stupid, etc etc resent standards.
  • They find their feelings hurt when they realize that they do not meet the standards.
    • Nietzsche and Kierkegaard referred to this as “Ressentiment
    • According to Wikipedia, “Ressentiment is a sense of hostility directed at that which one identifies as the cause of one's frustration, that is, an assignment of blame for one's frustration.” I recommend the article, it is concise.
    • I do like the Kierkegaard excerpt “The ressentiment which results from want of character can never understand that eminent distinction really is distinction. Neither does it understand itself by recognizing distinction negatively (as in the case of ostracism) but wants to drag it down, wants to belittle it so that it really ceases to be distinguished.”
    • Nietzsche points out: “But it is not the same concept [of] ‘good’; on the contrary, one should ask who is actually evil in the sense of the morality of ressentiment. The stern reply is: precisely the ‘good’ person of the other morality, the noble, powerful, dominating one, but re-touched, re-interpreted and reviewed through the poisonous eye of ressentiment.”
  • But I digress, suffice to say that if Nietzsche were a prophet, his accuracy in describing the Modern World would have put other prophets to shame.
Sadly, for these SJWs, the elimination of explicit standards merely results in the impositions of implicit standards.
  • You see this in the way that dissent within the SJW community is vilified. 
    • Thought Criminals, to salute Orwell, or Apostates, to recognize the post-Christian roots of their ideology, are savaged.
    • Much like how the early Church needed Satan in order to bind the sects and factions together, SJWs need the “fascists” (whomever they may be on that day).
      • LaVey explicitly mentions this in his Nine Satanic Statements
    • I plan on discussing the lineal descent of Christianity to Post-Christian society (I.e. Modernity & Post-Modernity) in a later video
  • We expect a certain level of “Otherizing” of their opponents by the SJW community (it is part and parcel of the human psyche).
  • However, the internal infighting of the SJWs really shows their devotion to  Matthew 12:30, “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.” (NIV)
Ursula K. Le Guin authored an interesting work called The Dispossessed.
  • The work portrays an Anarcho-Communist society that managed to be successful enough that they were ceded the moon of their world.
  • The original society and the new society were isolated from each other.
  • While professing to be free, social convention created a set of unwritten laws.
    • E.g., Names were assigned by a computer to ensure they were unique, people had to “volunteer” for the hard labor of terraforming the moon
    • Most importantly, dialog with the original society was restricted, as were certain ideas which risked undermining their ideology
    • The story revolves around contact being made and involves an interesting critique of both societies.
  • Bringing this back to standards, Le Guin is a fantastic Author.
    • She doesn’t need the artificially restricted pool of “Women Authors” in order to stand out.
    • She can be held to, and evaluated by, the same standards that makes any author great
    • She is an adult.
I should also point out that the inherent subjectivity of any given set of standards is a non-issue
  • Even if we bypass the philosophical argument that all things are subjective by virtue of our perception and contextualizing process, and merely go for cultural comparisons
    • We can point out that some standards are actually cross-cultural: don’t murder, don’t steal
    • Also, we are pointing out cultural norms. The sphere of discussion is the culture from which we culturally construct the standards
  • The arena in which we fight is actually pitting those of the current standards against those who seek to lower those standards
  • Standards can be arranged in a hierarchy based upon their difficulty and social cohesion.
    • It is harder to tell the truth and suffer a penalty than it is to lie and gain benefits. 
    • Further, social cohesion is increased by virtue of being able to trust what the other person is saying.
    • Thus the person who generally tells the truth is superior to the person who does not. 
    • Also, those who hold truth-telling as a virtue are superior to those who do not.
  • Another example
    • It is generally accepted that controlling your emotions is more difficult than letting them sway you to acts of violence
    • Randomly assaulting people, even if they are despicable people, lessons social cohesion by interjecting doubts about whether one will be a target of violence.
      • Remember, Barabbas was chosen over Jesus
      • Devadatta worked against Siddhartha
      • MLK was shot
    •  Thus, those who refrain from randomly assaulting people are superior to those who do not.
    • And, those who criticize randomly assaulting people are superior to those who encourage randomly assaulting people.
  • Decrying the subjectivity of any given set of standards is merely an attempt to divert the discussion. It is the instinctual reaction of people’s ressentiment.
So, to summarize:
  • What is good for one type is equally good for another type, despite any irrelevant differences between the types.
  • Standards exist, whether you want them to or not. Eliminating overt standards leads to the creation of covert standards
  • Failure to hold a group to the same set of standards categorically relegates them to an inferior status
  • People can aspire to a higher set of standards than set by societal expectations and this makes them superior.
  • The subjectivity of standards is a non-argument

Links are provided below. My notes will be posted to my blog.

Truth is found in the rubble of falsehood.

LITLLUW

----

Music Used in This Video:
Swans - Better Than You (Intro)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylo6w-Umy0c
Ordo Equitum Solis - Father of Incantation (Outro)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BW18XT-x39o

Current Reading:
Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty by Carl Schmitt
https://books.google.com/books/about/Political_Theology.html?id=MXPs7149s9sC
Aristokratia edited by K. Deva
https://books.google.com/books?id=ENsFmgEACAAJ&dq=Aristokratia&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi524r6-p_VAhUEzGMKHe3lDHUQ6AEIKDAA

Links:
Proverb Definition:
Dictionary: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/what-s-good-for-the-goose-is-good-for-the-gander
Wiktionary: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/what%27s_good_for_the_goose_is_good_for_the_gander

More on Geese than most would want to know:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goose

Critical Thinking:
https://www.criticalthinking.org/https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/the-state-of-critical-thinking-today/523

Ressentiment:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ressentiment
(Essay on) http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/genealogyofmorals/section3.rhtml
Hell, just read Genealogy of Morals
(PDF) http://www.inp.uw.edu.pl/mdsie/Political_Thought/GeneologyofMorals.pdf

Nine Satanic Statements 
http://www.churchofsatan.com/nine-satanic-statements.php

Matthew 12:30 (I used the NIV)
http://biblehub.com/matthew/12-30.htm

The Dispossessed (Wikipedia)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dispossessed

Credits:
Goose, Gander, Gosling:
Pixabay
https://pixabay.com/en/goose-bird-animal-canadian-nature-35856/
https://pixabay.com/en/goose-top-hat-politics-politician-41344/
https://pixabay.com/en/gosling-chick-goose-fluffy-spring-810541/

Roast goose in yat lok restaurant
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Roast_goose_in_yat_lok_restaurant.JPG

04 June 2017

A Factor Infinite and Unknown

Also reason is a lie; for there is a factor infinite & unknown; & all their words are skew-wise. (AL II:32)
There is a belief, an underpinning of Modernity, that it is possible to know everything. This belief seems to underline scientific inquiry. Faith in this idea is what empowers Scientism (by which, I refer to the faith-based reliance on science that dominates US Society). Logically, this goal is only possible if there is a finite universe containing a finite number of things and that time (or more accurately, change) is also finite. If any of this is false, it renders it impossible to know everything. Infinite space would mean that there are always new areas to discover, new places to learn about. Infinite things would also give us an eternal source of new things to discover. Finally, infinite potential for change would mean that even those things which are understood now could, and probably would, change so that they are once again, in whole or part, unknown.

However, this should not be taken as an injunction against knowledge, merely as a caution that what we know is not, nor could it ever be, the sum total of all knowledge. Neither should this be taken as a disincentive to understand what is traditionally held to be unknowable. As an occultist, we are constantly dealing with the unknown, with the hidden. Understanding of the known gives us the tools to understand the unknown.

In the mathematical formula x2-4=0, x is unknown. -4 and the factor 2 are both known. These can be used to determine the unknown element x. We know that x2-4 = (x+2)(x-2), thus x must equal (-2,2). We assume that this is true because, if we put either value into the formula, it resolves to true. I.e., (-2)2-4=0 and 22-4=0. Likewise, we can assume that if our premises for the unknown are correct, they will integrate well with that which is known.

This is why the Magus must be learned in Logic and familiar with the basics of science and various other branches of learning. This is why Crowley cautions us against mysticism, and why we are enjoined toward skepticism (q.v. Book of Lies, especially NA & ME). These tools and attitudes provide us with the basic blocks for crafting a coherent and consistent worldview from which we can utilize the unknown to martial the known toward the manifestation of our will. This allows us to bypass the worst vagaries of both Religion and Science.

I would like to conclude with some practical advice. Learn Logic. Unless one has formally studied Logic, it is unlikely that one can utilize logic. What passes for logic in Modern society contains little of actual logic. Also study the practical division of logic known as Critical Thinking. As with Logic, this is another area where people believe they know it, but fail miserably. There was even a scientific study that demonstrated this fact. One should analyze both one’s beliefs and reactions. Extreme reactions toward challenges to one’s beliefs are often indicative that it is faith-based rather than a knowledge-based. Likewise, an inability to explain one’s beliefs indicate that one is unaware of why one hold said belief. Finally, realize that all of these things are provisional. Just as science is always overturning hypotheses and theories, so to should one be open to having one’s premises overthrown. Remember that nothing is gained by clinging to falsehood, and that every overturned falsehood brings you one step closer to the truth.

28 April 2015

Dystopia as Critique of Modernity

Another work from my writing project, this one limited to 418 words.

 Dystopian settings are inherently commentaries on society. They take elements of “normal” society and amplify them until they reach horrific proportions. This is true in hardcore dystopian settings and those where the dystopian vision is a discordant thread. Examples of the former include 1984, Brave New World, and Psycho-Pass. Examples of the latter include Ghost in the Shell and Time of Eve.

One should note that dystopia is not always a source of terror. In 1984, the cruelty and tyranny of Big Brother is blatant and brutal. However, the dystopia of Brave New World and Psycho-Pass are ordered societies seeking to promote the happiness and welfare of its citizens. In Ghost in the Shell, even the heroes are a part of the dystopian vision where they exploit the oppressive nature of their society in order to curb the excesses of other elements within the dystopian order. Time of Eve has a storyline built around a classic theme of dystopia whereby society benefits and is promoted via the suffering of the other, which is played by the android. This theme is also found in LeGuin’s The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas.

Fantasy and Science Fiction requires dystopian elements. Their scope is far reaching and the heroes must fight against world spanning corruption. More important is how these elements are manifested. If we take the thread and trace it back to the root that is invariably present within modern society, what is the critique that can be found? An early manuscript of l’Engle’s A Wrinkle In Time has  surfaced where the root of her dystopian vision is spelled out in clear terms. The blunt description was removed as an editorial decision, but it indicated that Camazotz came about not as an imposition, but as an encroachment in the name of safety. A look at current trends within the United States indicates that this critique of society is as valid today as it was when A Wrinkle In Time was written.

Dystopia provides a convenient tool for any critique on modernity. This is not to say that the authors of dystopian works are against modernity. However, we can take these critiques of society and expand on them to see that their worries and concerns are a logical expression of current trends within modern society. Since modern society is an expression of modernity, dystopia is a useful tool for showing how modernity may play out. We need to investigate how the forces of modernity resolve into such dystopic vision.