A.N.U.S.

Mailing list:

Search anus.com:

Letters, letters...

It's never quiet out there. Someone's thinking. You can just about feel it. Now, depending on who they are, the thoughts may be complete nonsense or something with vision. We've selected letters, mostly from the latter category, for your enjoyment and the elucidation that real world questions bring to abstract theory...

Me? I'm black.

"Pure" is a difficult concept for me. I'm not sure anything is "pure." I do know that with admixture, however, races lose their unique traits; it's common sense that thousands of generations of selective breeding produce a detailed profile, but when that is hybridized, the offspring has only a partial profile. This is why, "pure" or "impure" or other, racial admixture is destructive to all races involved.

You seem to be mostly Germanic; the northwest Europeans are quite similar, excepting cases of obvious admixture. Call yourself English or nativist American (America was founded by English and Germans), and breed with someone like you. Uphold the cultures of German and English tribes. That's a fair course of action, I think; what do you think?

"Aryan" is a difficult word. It refers to the highest caste of the Indo-Europeans, which was not just white/blond/blue but also spiritually quite advanced. I'm not sure we have any "Aryans" left, but "Aryan" remains a generic term of address for the most evolved subset of the Caucasians, often called Hyperboreans: those who chose to make a Northern pilgrimage for many generations, and thus exerted upon themselves the highest degree of natural selection experienced by humanity. Aryan remnants abound in Western Europe and America. I think we should work with those, and not breed them with other "white" groups including those of pre-Hyperborean (Falisch) or Slavic stock. Those other groups need to breed among themselves to produce the best humans they can. Either way, they have a right to exist on their own, as what they are, and should be protected from admixture and intervention by nutcase (Clinton) Americans.

It's really not very complicated, but the amount of fear the word "Aryan" instills these days precludes rational debate on the topic for most people. More's the pity - one cannot discuss evolution without discussing human evolution, and as soon as these damn pretend Nazis get out of the way, we'll be able to have mature discussions (without namecalling directed at African-Americans, or the fear of revealing that Africans are a lower rung on the evolutionary ladder: in short, without moralizing pro/con the evolutionary status of other groups, including Slavs and Africans) about this topic again.

Mazel tov! Thanks for some insightful questions.

I imagine they're still making execrable music somewhere. There's two ways to view life: if you acknowledge the negative first, you celebrate the positive, where if you always chase after only the positive, you sublimate the negative and it eats you from within. I acknowledge the negative, and realize that the greatest error in this life is to praise mediocrity, therefore I don't write reviews about Children of Bodom, Cradle of Filth, Tool or Killswitchengage. Hypocrisy is covered as is Dark Tranquility, but I left off when the albums fell out of the quality frame of reference preferred on this site. Fair?

I did send that letter to Chuck's mother, briefly interrupting her total pimping of her son's legacy like a drama queen. Whatever you argue, suggesting that she is somehow protected from criticism because her son died is ludicrous. Many people die. Few people pimp. Pimps are bad DNA. They need to be hurt if not outright exterminated. What would we lose if Ms. Schuldiner got stuffed into an oven, impaled on a punji stake, or shot in the forehead? Nothing.

I'd like to ask you to examine your own motivations when writing this letter. Did you think i'd be cowed? In other words, if you disagreed - why write, except to instill guilt or to intimidate? Do you know that's called passive aggression and is a sign of Jewish behavior, including evangelical Christianity or liberalism or neo-conservatism, in the writer?

Change your ways and be loved by all - stay on your current path, and you're part of the problem. Do you really want to act like an Underman?

Good questions. I see National Socialism as a subset of the philosophies of people like Aristotle and Marcus Aurelius, which are a form of idealism in the classic indo-european tradition. The only smart NS organization is www.nazi.org / the rest are too close to bigotry for my tastes. i'm pro- Indo-European, sure, but i'm not convinced that saying mean things about africans helps the cause (even if these things are "true").

Ultimately, I think what matters is acting according to classic IE values. I'm not sure politics could solve our problems. I don't see the old values as "obsolete" at all, however. They're in fact less obsolete than current values, as they're timeless, and that's why we call them tradition.

To understand National Socialism, i would read the FAQ on nazi.org and then some of the NSDAP source documents. You might also find the copy of mein kampf on hitler.org to be useful. My advice is not to get tangled up with most white supremacist, neo-nazi, white power, etc etc type people - they will waste your life and make you alienated, marginalized and depressed.

All in my opinion only.

Thanks for asking a necessary question.

Nihilism is a means of perceiving reality.

Apathy recommends a course of action.

Therein is the difference.

To explain further: Nihilism means a belief in nothing. This leaves one with reality as it can be determined from experiment and perception. One does not pass judgment on it, nor does one try to wrap it in cute little opinions; one simply notes what it is, how it operates, and its structure and context as a whole. At that point, one will be able to construct values systems, but not before. Values systems do not require moral judgment, as most belief systems do; they operate from a simple "I prefer this order to all others" and are in the case of sane individuals derived from observation of the world as whole. Not the human world, only, or the natural world, only, but the entirety of reality ("physical" reality). Only through this do we gain a level ground on which reality and thought can be shown to have a common structural ancestor, and that and only that is the starting point of all intelligent belief, values and behavioral systems.

It's not really a sound bite type of philosophy.

I hope I can live up to that great intro. Thanks for writing in.

This may sound overly simple, but I believe there is no paradox between individual and collective if the individual and society are geared toward the same heroic goals. To have heroic goals is to see oneself as one part of the whole, and to work for that whole on individual, collective and holistic levels. In this sense, there is no division between individual and collective: both are part of something larger, a holistic view that also includes nature, and all potential actions must make sense on all three levels. In other words, if an action does not benefit individual, collective and natural world all at once, it is probably missing something.

Now, there will be conflicts of interest, such as in the case of total fools who "want" greater wealth and "want" to get it through destructive actions. They cannot perceive that what benefits the whole is of ultimate benefit to the individual, and thus while their actions may benefit the individual, and be "OK" by the judgment of most of the fools in the collective, they're not cool with the natural order of physical reality. Therefore, the proposed action, no matter how much they "want" it, fails our test.

Nihilism is an anti-individualistic philosophy that ultimately becomes individualistic. Its individualism however is not absolutist, and derives its power not from pretending that individual is absolute, but from making the individual have clarity of thought and thus be better adapted to reality.

August 3, 2005