Two concepts from gnosticism

28 12 10 - 07:38

All really influential words get a lowercase version and an uppercase one. I don't know what Gnosticism is, because I'm sure the people who want power are still fighting over the "official" definition, but gnosticism makes two points among others that are quite clear:

(1) If an all-powerful order pervades reality, it is like a fractal or other pattern that repeats on the micro- and macro-levels. This means it is inescapable and pre-dates us; we are manifestations of it, not the other way around. And if the bigger pattern correlates to the smaller, it means that we as parts of it are as persistent as it is, whether as archetypes, incarnates or individuals.

(2) If reality has a source of creation, which we assume is Good, then we must realize that Evil is not only a product of the same, but serves a role toward the maintenance of Good. While this blows our minds, natural metaphors may help: without predators, silly mice outbreed their supply and drown in overpopulation. Without twisted sick pervert criminals, we lose our ability to kill the bad and protect the good.

Were these two thoughts fully assimilated into Christianity, replacing its nihilism (no meaning outside God, a symbol for the whole that by its very nature appears to be a part within the whole; in language, to noun something is to separate it from the rest) which leads to the insane liberalism of Jesus Christ, who died in pain but at least he DID THE RIGHT THING, GOD DAMN IT!, then we might be able to truly enjoy Christianity. Of course, it would be a Manowar version of Christianity, full of war and murder of the "disadvantaged" while the Down's syndrome kids, ignored, starve in burning hovels. But maybe that's the kind of maturity this self-obsessed species needs.
 

Men's rights means men's responsibilities

28 12 10 - 06:53

We tackle a range of subjects on this blog, but because we deal with the abstract, there's not as much of the concrete example or condition. For example, Men's rights. We talk about rights, the dangers of such thinking, and the consequences of polarizing groups, but never give you the literal perspective.

Today we'll try. In a society based on rights, rights become defensive -- protecting an underdog against some more powerful threat. Otherwise, the rights would not be needed as an act of law. Consequently, rights favor groups perceived as disadvantaged and penalize those who are seen as in power. Men are a natural target, white men a billion times so.

The men's rights movement in the West has been picking up steam as men realize that they are assumed to be in the wrong in divorce court, in any kind of rape case, in child molestation accusations, in domestic violence accusations and of course, in the steady stream of Marxist drivel that oozes from our schools.

My message to men's rights, as to feminists, is the same: "rights" is a fundamentally oppositional term. If you demand rights, you're demanding them at the expense of someone else you assume to be more powerful. That both affirms their position of power and puts you into a mode where instead of thinking of what you do want, you think about what you fear.

Instead of rights, think about a more sane way for men and women to interact. In 1968, we decided that it was casual sex with no consequences and no shame because that way everyone has absolute rights and is most "free." Somehow, that has led to a bad place, which is that women are sluts and men are opportunists.

First concept for men: don't fuck crazy sluts:


One of the women, named in court as Miss A, told police that she had arranged Assange's trip to Sweden, and let him stay in her flat because she was due to be away. She returned early, on Friday 13 August, after which the pair went for a meal and then returned to her flat.

Her account to police, which Assange disputes, stated that he began stroking her leg as they drank tea, before he pulled off her clothes and snapped a necklace that she was wearing. According to her statement she "tried to put on some articles of clothing as it was going too quickly and uncomfortably but Assange ripped them off again". Miss A told police that she didn't want to go any further "but that it was too late to stop Assange as she had gone along with it so far", and so she allowed him to undress her.

According to the statement, Miss A then realised he was trying to have unprotected sex with her. She told police that she had tried a number of times to reach for a condom but Assange had stopped her by holding her arms and pinning her legs. The statement records Miss A describing how Assange then released her arms and agreed to use a condom, but she told the police that at some stage Assange had "done something" with the condom that resulted in it becoming ripped, and ejaculated without withdrawing.

...

The following day, Miss W phoned Assange and arranged to meet him late in the evening, according to her statement. The pair went back to her flat in Enkoping, near Stockholm. Miss W told police that though they started to have sex, Assange had not wanted to wear a condom, and she had moved away because she had not wanted unprotected sex. Assange had then lost interest, she said, and fallen asleep. However, during the night, they had both woken up and had sex at least once when "he agreed unwillingly to use a condom".

Early the next morning, Miss W told police, she had gone to buy breakfast before getting back into bed and falling asleep beside Assange. She had awoken to find him having sex with her, she said, but when she asked whether he was wearing a condom he said no. "According to her statement, she said: 'You better not have HIV' and he answered: 'Of course not,' " but "she couldn't be bothered to tell him one more time because she had been going on about the condom all night. She had never had unprotected sex before." - The Tuardian


This reminds me of the old stereotype of the high school slut. She's done the whole football team, but she insists you buy her dinner first, because she's not a cheap whore. These women are so drugged out with the Christian-cum-liberal morality of what is "right" and who has "rights" that they've thrown common sense to the curve. As long as they use condoms, they're good people. And those who don't? Are satan.

Second message is for women: if you put your bodies out there as a commodity, and you offer consequenceless sex, you will end up forever alone because men will take what you give, and move on. They no longer have any commitment to making sure you're happy or that the situation turns out well, because they're out the door. The more you polarize gender, the more this will be true.


Another friend told police that during the evening Miss A told her she had had "the worst sex ever" with Assange: "Not only had it been the world's worst screw, it had also been violent."


What a neurotic nightmare, and the sex is bad? LOL, modern society. You're retarded.
 

Most metal Christmas ever

27 12 10 - 09:10



Some guy on Reddit got this from his Mom. We're hoping she shows up to the quilt show this year so we can thank her on behalf of all metalheads everywhere, and maybe ask her if she'll do a Slayer one.
 

In the land of the retarded...

27 12 10 - 07:06

Typical modern situation: discover "problems," suggest "solutions," all without touching the underlying problem.


Hessel's book argues that French people should re-embrace the values of the French resistance, which have been lost, which was driven by indignation, and French people need to get outraged again. "This is an appeal to citizens, young and old, to take responsibility for the things in our society that don't work," he said. "I wish every one of you to find your own reason for indignation. It's precious." Hessel's reasons for personal outrage include the growing gap between the very rich and the very poor, France's shocking treatment of its illegal immigrants, the need to re-establish a free press, protecting the environment, the plight of Palestinians and the importance of protecting the French welfare system. He calls for peaceful and non-violent insurrection. - The Guardian


The French Resistance had a clear-cut goal: resist occupation.

When there's no occupation, you manufacture an occupier so that you can keep that simplistic worldview alive.

Thus, we get typical liberalism: the problem MUST BE the "oppression" of our least fortunate and least competent.

It conveniently dovetails with protecting benefits for all those low-paid people, whose labor mainly benefits the wealthier urban intellectual. But don't mention that.

Never mind asking the vital question: how did such social rot get into place, and how could we redesign society to avoid it?

Enjoy your fallout from 1789, France.
 

Charity: this year, avoid it

24 12 10 - 09:36

It's Christmas time and to show they deserve presents, most of your fellow simians will be busy talking about what they're giving to which charity. I suggest you avoid it and stop giving to charity altogether.

First, charities don't solve problems. Like government agencies, they exist by prolonging problems. For this reason, they prefer to take on problems that cannot be solved. Poverty cannot be solved; there are always poor, because someone is always going to lag the rest or be unable to control their impulses. Similarly, drug abuse, domestic violence, drunk driving, etc. are great windmills to tilt at. In the meantime, they pay handsome salaries for cushy jobs at those charities.

Second, giving to charity is a false altruism. Examine your motivations: you're doing it to feel better about yourself and con others into thinking you're a good person. But this leaves you open to attack. If you only feel good about yourself when giving, you're addicted. If others can give more, or give more showily than you, they get ahead. You need a better method.

Finally, charity is the placebo/red herring of the modern spiritual wasteland. It won't make you actually feel better; it will make you feel that you look better to others. Instead, fix the basic modern problem:


There’s a new disease spreading among American men of intelligence, class and accomplishment, characterized by total disgust of the victim’s surroundings. The victim becomes increasingly repulsed by the pointlessness of his job, the venality of his co-workers, the stupidity of the people he meets on the street, and the boorishness and dullness of the women he is expected to date. He becomes sullen, forlorn, and anti-social, preferring to self-medicate with alcohol and commiserate with his trusted friends. Self-help books and prescription drugs either don’t help or defeat the purpose of helping by destroying the victim’s mind. Vacations to other places, particularly foreign countries, can temporarily ameliorate the symptoms, but every inch of progress made while away is undone once the victim returns home. - In Mala Fide


Modern people are caught in this syndrome: because we tolerate idiots, and demand everyone be considered equal, we have made a hell out of our civilization. It's best at waiting in line for fools to get done screwing up. It subjects you to the rule of morons, and the tastes of morons, because they outnumber you. Your whole life becomes a treadmill race to stay ahead of the blown-out, stupid, violent, ghetto, etc.

Instead of putting up with this shit and then like a dumb sap giving to charity to feel better about your doglike life, do something to change your life, starting with ignoring the charity racket. Put your money to use getting out of the rat race; buy AT&T stock with that extra cash and see your holdings grow. And dedicate your time away from compensation behaviors which make you feel better for ten seconds, and instead throw your effort into reforming this place. That too, starts with denying charity. We don't need to focus on the downtrodden; we need to fix our whole society!
 

Why so glum, chums?

22 12 10 - 03:57

News of the LOLFAIL:


Eighty percent of baby boomers are pessimistic about the current direction of the United States, according to the Pew Research Center's Social & Demographic Trends study released Monday.

The boomer generation consists of adults between the ages of 45 and 64, according to the The Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan think tank.

In contrast, the study found only 60% of millennials -- individuals between the ages of 18 and 29 -- had a bleak view of the way things are going today.

And about 76% of respondents older than baby boomers, also called the "greatest generation," were dissatisfied with the status quo. - CNN/PEW


The headline is: "New study finds baby boomers are in a funk"

The story underneath: of the 1500 people they polled, very few are satisfied with the direction the country is taking.

An interesting hint:


Another theory is that the idealistic boomers experienced their prime during their youth in 1960s when they fought for civil and women's rights. Now, they may be finding they were unable to complete the societal reforms they had envisioned.

"They may have set themselves up for disappointment," Taylor said.


Perhaps millennials and Xers are doing the same thing by following the same stupid ideology as the boomers.
 

Free will or free bird?

20 12 10 - 13:09


What has been long established is that "deterministic behaviour" - the idea that an animal poked in just such a way will react with the same response every time - is not a complete description of behaviour.

"Even the simple animals are not the predictable automatons that they are often portrayed to be," Dr Brembs told BBC News.

However, the absence of determinism does not suggest completely random behaviour either.

Experiments including Dr Brembs' own 2007 work with flies has shown that although animal behaviour can be unpredictable, responses do seem to come from a fixed list of options.

"Free will is not that lofty metaphysical thing that it was until the 1970s or so," Dr Brembs said.

"More and more people are realising that it's a biological property, a trait; the brain possesses the freedom to generate behaviours and options on its own." - BBC


Much of this is simply adaptive: there are very few rational options, so you pick one based on a number of factors.

I don't think "free will" makes much sense anyway as a term. Do they mean choice? Choice without reactivity? Certainly that's possible; video game AIs do it all the time. It's a calculation.
 

In the land of the blind...

19 12 10 - 11:13

Daily humour:


LAWYERS for Julian Assange have expressed anger about an alleged smear campaign against the Australian WikiLeaks founder.

In a move that surprised many of Mr Assange's closest supporters on Saturday, The Guardian newspaper published previously unseen police documents that accused Mr Assange in graphic detail of sexually assaulting two Swedish women. One witness is said to have stated: "Not only had it been the world's worst screw, it had also been violent." - The Australian


Wait, you mean leaks are only good when it's not your own information getting leaked?

So that pithy phrase "just don't have secrets" doesn't apply here?

All that assumption that only bad people have secrets, that was just hogwash?

I guess it's funny how governments say to people, "If you have nothing to hide, don't worry about privacy." Then people say that back to government, which makes no sense as government isn't a person, but a policy instrument. And that's a far more complex field than an individual life. But now we've got Julian Assange saying that he wants some information to be protected from leaks. But he doesn't want to extend the same right to government, even though its task is a billion times more complicated than not raping Swedish women.

What an amusing world.


Why film yourself hitting your wife's lover? Why even hit your wife's lover? No man owes you a vow of fidelity. If your wife cheats, it's on her. (Via ATL.) Attacking the man is infantilizing the woman. Why not punch her? - CF


Summary: boy marries girl, boy gets cancer, girl gets affair, so boy punches out interloping male.

That anyone has any objection to this is a travesty. Of course you beat the cheater. Of course you don't punch the woman. She's your wife. You don't hit your wife. But you can pound the ass of the parasite who decided he'd take advantage of the situation. Clearly he's a scumbag.

In other times, both past and future, people recognize that you either uphold a social principle or you let everything fall apart. When people start doing what's convenient, trust goes out the window, and then so does working together. At that point, society becomes a shopping transaction. There is no other obligation except to make ourselves feel happy.

So we ignore big problems, but one cat gets tortured on the internet, and we're all over that! Because it makes us feel like a big fuckin' MAN to go kick ass on the cat-torturer.

And while we were doing that, another 10,000 cats starved to death on the streets, victims of neglect by other selfish people who bought a kitten, found it became too much work, and then just cut it loose.

Humans, the problem isn't our government having secrets. The problem is our little secret: that 90% of us do nothing but go to jobs and leave messes behind. That most people are secretly miserable, but on the surface, are there to tell us how cool they are and make us feel bad about what we don't have. That there's no social order, only a giant tangle of people struggling to get to the top.

While those 10,000 cats starved to death, a few hundred thousand gallons of toxic sludge hit our oceans. Another few hundred million cubic meters of exhaust filled the skies. Landfills pile higher, toxins spread farther, there's less land for animals and so, without a "democratic" voice, they die quietly in unseen places.

The human disease is to always look for something tangible to blame, like God, King, Corporation or Government, when in fact the problem is very simple: we are out of control, and breeding out of control, and no one wants to say NO to the individual and tell them that the rules apply to them too. We're great with attacking "evils" like Government Secrets or a Single Cat Torturer, but we can't face the mundane evil within.

And that is what will convey us back down the evolutionary chain to monkeyness, which is where in spirit, most of these people already are.
 

The return of darkness and evil

11 12 10 - 08:18

From "weev":


irc.gnaa.eu #gnaa

http://www.gnaa.eu/


GNAA returns. Allahu ackbar!
 

Science turns back to Plato/Vedanta

08 12 10 - 12:41

Plato and ancient Indian thinkers alike proposed that the cosmos is thought-correlative and that patterns of thought, not the proximate physical events in which they manifest, determined the causes of things we witness in reality.

First, a little prompting: the idea of entropy:


The second law of thermodynamics is an expression of the finding that over time, differences in temperature, pressure, and chemical potential tend to equilibrate in an isolated physical system. - Pedopedia


Next, the concept of Maxwell's Demon, or a creature which defies entropy by sorting hot and cold molecules out of two containers of equally lukewarm molecules; this demon does this by watching to see which ones move faster than others, and sending them to one side and not the other. In theory, this reverses the entropic process described by the second law. Later observers pointed out that the demon himself uses energy, so not quite, but still... a tempting idea. Now we've recreated that experiment.


In the setup, the staircase was actually made of potential energy and created using electric fields. The molecule had some thermal energy – heat – so it would fluctuate, moving in random directions.

The scientists used a high-speed camera to photograph the molecule. When it happened to be moving up the staircase, they let it move freely, but when it happened to be moving down the staircase, the researchers blocked its motion by inserting a virtual wall using an electric field.

"It's like the particle is making random steps up or down, but only when the particle goes up the stairs, we put some wall on the stairs to avoid the particle falling down," Sano told LiveScience. "This is kind of a Maxwell's demon."

As the particle moved up the staircase, it gained energy because it moved to a location of higher potential – akin to climbing a mountain. Yet the researchers never had to push the particle up the mountain (i.e. do work or input energy) – they simply used the information about which direction it happened to be moving in at any given time to guide the climb.

...

In an accompanying essay in the same issue of the journal, physicist Christian Van den Broeck of the University of Hasselt in Belgium, who was not involved in the new study, called it "a direct verification of information-to-energy conversion." - LiveScience


In other words, information -- patterns -- can contribute energy to a system and reverse entropy. Sounds like a good reason for the formation of life, or the production of new patterns. Even more, while we cannot tell the position of any given molecule, we can tell how molecules will arrange themselves over time; they will consistently hit every possibility. Now we're looking at a reason for life to produce unique patterns, namely that it will expand to cover all mathematical possibilities:


In 1827, for example, the Scottish botanist Robert Brown found out that pollen grains show irregular fluttering vibrations on water drops. This effect is caused by a random motion of water molecules -- a phenomenon known as Brownian motion. Another example is the Galton board, which is used to demonstrate binomial distribution to students. On this board, balls are dropped from the top and they repeatedly bounce either left or right in a random way as they hit pins stuck in the board.

The Innsbruck scientists have now transferred this principle of random walk to quantum systems and stimulated an atom taking a quantum walk: "We trap a single atom in an electromagnetic ion trap and cool it to prepare it in the ground state," explains Christian Roos from the Institute of Quantum Optics and Quantum Information (IQOQI). "We then create a quantum mechanical superposition of two inner states and send the atom on a walk." - Science Daily


How interesting. And how does this shake out? Well, as it turns out, there is a shadow world to our reality -- antimatter is like a negative version of matter that cancels it out, so that even in a world that is completely filled with matter, voids can exist. In this shadow world, matter is recycled, much like energy is, and we don't know what data this shadow world holds -- in fact, it would be mighty convenient for it to hold a lot of data similar to our world, if it doesn't outright mirror it.


Under just the right conditions—which involve an ultra-high-intensity laser beam and a two-mile-long particle accelerator—it could be possible to create something out of nothing, according to University of Michigan researchers.

The scientists and engineers have developed new equations that show how a high-energy electron beam combined with an intense laser pulse could rip apart a vacuum into its fundamental matter and antimatter components, and set off a cascade of events that generates additional pairs of particles and antiparticles.

"We can now calculate how, from a single electron, several hundred particles can be produced. We believe this happens in nature near pulsars and neutron stars," said Igor Sokolov, an engineering research scientist who conducted this research along with associate research scientist John Nees, emeritus electrical engineering professor Gerard Mourou and their colleagues in France.

At the heart of this work is the idea that a vacuum is not exactly nothing.

"It is better to say, following theoretical physicist Paul Dirac, that a vacuum, or nothing, is the combination of matter and antimatter—particles and antiparticles.Their density is tremendous, but we cannot perceive any of them because their observable effects entirely cancel each other out," Sokolov said. - UMICH


A pattern system exists beneath the visible world. There goes information, when it is done here, as part of the process of renewing the flow of energy through not just our visible world, but the shadow world. For any of you Platonists out there, it's good fodder. Heremeticists and Vedantists will also delight in seeing modern science reaffirm ancient abstractions and metaphor.
 

So what

05 12 10 - 15:26

To be born after 1968 is to inherit a world in the grips of entropy, a downward spiral that we'd avert except that 90% of humanity are invested in not seeing it. They are bigoted against seeing it, because for them, good times are finally here -- and they're too oblivious to note that consequences for those good times are right around the corner. But until that hits them in the face, they're going to celebrate empowerment/social mobility/political power/lack of rules or oversight and tell us that we're the bigots.

Yet what a mess they leave.


And despite the odd dissenter, the generation that still oddly finds Paul McCartney relevant has made clear its intention to take everything it feels it has coming. It will be up to all who trail in their wake to pay for their privilege.

Common sense, not to mention decency, wouldn’t call that just. But an outsized, over-entitled, and self-obsessed demographic is awfully hard for politicians to ignore. Take Britain’s example. In last spring’s general election, the most effective ad run by David Cameron’s Conservatives was also one of the simplest: a close-up of a newborn baby, wriggling in a bassinet as a music box tinkled in the background. “Born four weeks ago, eight pounds, three ounces. With his dad’s nose, mum’s eyes, and Gordon Brown’s debt,” intoned a female voice. “Thanks to Labour’s debt crisis, every child in Britain is born owing £17,000. They deserve better.” The point was impossible to miss: the time had come to stop mortgaging the country’s future. - AP


But friends, mortgaging the future for the now is the defining characteristic of liberalism. Conservatism is hivemind centered around significance in a vaster historical context; liberalism is hivemind centered around social factors, like who likes you and how high can you climb in social status. It's not about predicting reality, which is necessary for conservatism. It's about denying reality so we can have a party. And of course there's a mess afterwards, but the inherent victim-logic of liberalism says that someone else should clean that up. Someone else has all the money and power and they owe us.

It's this kind of crowd mentality, that unites people in self-pity and hatred for those who are doing well, that produces the kind of dogma that deliberately denies reality in order to score social points. These always leave wreckage in their wake and should you be so unwise as to tolerate one in your country, rest assured that your grandchildren are going to pay the price:


Like Communism, mass immigration was based on a denial of human nature, and an inability to distinguish between what might work in individual human relationships and in society as a whole. Just because people of different groups are capable of getting on perfectly well as individuals, becoming friends and falling in love, it does not mean that a multicultural society (and one as diverse as ours will be multicultural as well as multiracial, whatever the Government does) can become a racism-free paradise; anymore than the willingness of people to give money to perfect strangers means Communism can work.

There were other comparisons with Communism: thought crimes were created, and eventually passed into law; dissidents were made public enemies (it was Scruton who published Ray Honeyford’s article about multiculturalism in Bradford, for which the headmaster was victimised and vilified); history was rewritten to educate the next generation in the new realities of their multicultural history; and children were indoctrinated “to embed a culture of equality in our schools and communities“. Even the language was changed, so that holders of non-revolutionary opinions could not express their opinions without becoming outcasts. - The Telegraph


Multiculturalism is the easy target to pick. What about equality -- which as resulted in us suiciding our competitiveness by punishing those who deviate too far from the mediocre norm? What about democracy, which encourages people to vote for their own interests at the expense of the whole? Or big media, which relies on constant hype and drama to keep us all watching, which then creates a kind of entertainment culture where we need intensity, but expect none of it to be real? What about consumerism, and letting lots of clueless people have political voices, which guarantees that smarter oligarchs will manipulate from the background?

Our society is built not on lies, but on moderately bad ideas that over time simplified themselves into horrifically bad ideas. But as with all things in history, you have to wait a long time to see the consequences of any bad idea. So just now we're feeling the fallout of the postwar period up through the 1960s. Painful long wait, isn't it?

The result is a wasteland of ugly commercial establishments, all of which pander to the lowest common denominator and that which demands instant gratification of the basest desires -- a phenomenon called prole drift. Our jobs are frustrating because they are designed for blockheads, and for making blockheads collaborate, which means that all are dumbed down to the point of imbecility. Our streets are designed for utilitarian purposes, as are our public buildings, which results in all of us living in constant states of anti-grace. Our culture is dreck. Our leaders are whores who somehow are managing to give us the shaft. We can patch it up for another day, but for how much longer?

The result is further fragmentation. Since the peasant revolutions demanded equality, we have created a true enterprise of Social Darwinism, where our job is to prey on each other. And does nature have a voice? No... and what about the poor? They have a voice and in fact most of society is mobilized to help them. But they're still going to flip our burgers for $8/hour.


Hostility towards minorities and the poor has increased significantly among Germany's middle and upper classes, a development likely stemming from the global economic crisis, according to a new study.

Supposedly open-minded, highly-educated people with above average incomes exhibited similar levels of racism, xenophobia, and homophobia as the less well-off, the research found. - The Local


Instead of a sensible world based on social order, we picked a world based on ourselves as individuals, and now we suffer for the lack of social order that exists when any one person being left out, offended, inequal or otherwise inconvenienced can sabotage the whole process. When every opinion is valid, logic goes out the windows; feelings and impressions take over. When we are all equal, no one is praised for their real traits like loyalty, honor, whole intelligence, wisdom, grace -- but we all have a dollar sign over our heads, and that and our social prestige is how we rank each other.

The right thing to do is unite the 2-5% of society with functional brains around a new idea, like a kind of modern feudalism with a monarchy and a cascading government of laws that govern according to social position, but you won't like that so much as if I go on some crazed pseudo-anarchist rant. Fires in the streets, bodies heaped like tryptophan victims on Thanksgiving, infernal sodomy in the churches and all copies of Das Kapital used as toilet paper... So what? Anarchy, mayhem, death. Or you could just take the middle path and debunk these dogmatic lies.
 

HAIL SATAN

04 12 10 - 19:28

It's hard to be a nihilist. As deniers of anything other than the real, we are mainly prejudiced against human notions which do not have an antecedent cause in reality. At the same time, we're aware of things we cannot yet explain, and by denying false human notions, open our minds to the possibilities of the cosmos.

In this way, it seems to me that nihilism is the only true gateway to any form of spiritual practice, cultural belief, or even honest political dialogue. If you want to be conservative, first become a nihilist. Worship of reality will make you cast aside all but long-standing practices, and impel you to discover why the ways of the ancients really are superior to our modern disposable ways. By throwing out the human ego, and the demands and desires of the self, you can see clearly where we all must stand, if we are to be honest.

In contrast, the modern union of individualism/atheism/entitlement/consumerism/utilitarian/materialism produces nothing but neurotic boredom. You see nothing beyond a stretch of days in which you can act; to that end, you act to please yourself, because you are constantly aware of how fragile and short your life is. As a result, you try to please yourself, and end up falling into narcissism, which means you cut off the world outside of you to the point where you can never take affirmation from it, and so you remain low self-esteem, searching for "rewards," neurotically trying to re-analyze yourself to see where you went wrong.

Metalheads, nihilists and other modern dropouts need to consider a simple fact: ours may not be an outrage at religion itself, but at instances of religion that have been corrupted by social pressures, making them unrealistic and manipulative. Religion without guilt, and without blindly absolute rules, but with a common-sense method of guiding us toward intelligent time-honored goals, could well be a different animal than the please-everyone-in-the-crowd mass Christianity that has been shoved down our throats. However, the fact remains that we dropouts are more "religious" or concerned with the topics of religion, namely how to revere life and understand it, than the idiot masses who only care about their next pleasure and know nothing beyond themselves.

Here's one interesting fusion:


The EFC believes that our pre-Christian ancestors had a good perception and understanding of God. As such, it teaches that our ancient myths and stories are important sources of this understanding. It also teaches that far from being the devils that early Churchman called the old gods and goddesses, these are immensely important spiritual beings akin to angels assigned specifically to our folk group as tribal guardian angels or wardens as they were once called. It is noteworthy that the Anglo Saxon Church acknowledged their reality, but was at pains to fit them into an alien belief system and portray them as evil. The EFC believes that dishonouring our ancient gods as devils has been the greatest deceit the Church has forced on our folk. We do not deny the existence of malign spiritual entities such as demons, our ancient tradition tells us of these too. But to include our ancient gods and goddesses with these is a travesty both to them and to us.



At the heart of all reality is God; eternal essence and uncreated energies. God’s eternal essence transcends the created cosmos and exists outside of time and space as we know it. But the divine uncreated energies are immanent in the created world, existing within and throughout all matter and reality as we know it.



The English Folk Church is not Trinitarian in the usual meaning of this doctrine. It certainly does not see the Trinity as a ‘father, son and holy spirit’ in any literal sense. However, it does see the divine in terms of a Trinity of sorts. God is eternal essence and uncreated energies, a single entity without division. And yet, the manifestation of the divine energies within our world as spirit and thought does take on the appearance of separate entities. This is a little like considering a human being. That person is a single entity – a single person. But that person’s body, mind and spirit may at times appear to be different and act independently. This is where we get the old saying ‘the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak’. Another analogy is where our heart (spirit) tells us one thing but our brain (mind) tells us something else. We are single beings, but there are different energies at work in this being that make us what we are. As an undivided part of God, the Christos and Logos existed before they were manifest in our world and they continue to exist today and speak to us still.



The English Folk Church also talks about the underlying nature of God, which is made up of attributes such as love, order and creativity. These are the principles by which creation has been brought into existence and by which it is ordered. The Church refers to God’s nature as Wyrd or Orlog, which literally means the primal law. It is the underlying nature of God which governs the cosmos. The way we interact with God’s nature affects the unfolding of creation, both positively and negatively. In this way, our past actions collectively and individually affect our present and what will unfold in the future. It is our spiritual and moral duty to align ourselves with God’s nature and act positively to help the evolving of creation. Our actions, as individuals or as societies, also have consequences and will affect the unfolding of our futures. - English Folk Church


A cosmicist nihilist might look at this and think, why not substitute Godhead -- an impersonal cosmic force, like gravity but operating on the transaction between information and energy -- for God, and recognize all prophets/demons/archetypes/saints as manifestations of different forces recognizable in nature, like the pagan Gods were? In turn, a good nihilist would remove all dualism and say that Godhead is a pervasive order, not a force per se; when the right combination of factors exist, the order arises, much like if you stack fuel and flame with oxygen you get a fire, even though there was no 'fire-ness' present there before.

Well, it's fuel for thought.
 

A society spinning down into a shrug

04 12 10 - 15:38

One of you loyal readers forwarded this little gem to me, an article about the irony of symbols for selves:


"The more diverse naming styles become, the more we are going to read into somebody's name," Wattenberg said. She analyzed baby name statistics from the U.S. Social Security Administration to calculate a measure called "Shannon entropy" from the field of information theory. This measure is used to describe the information contained in a message — in this case, how much is communicated by the choice of a name.

The concept of entropy is associated with the disorder and chaos in a system (the second law of thermodynamics states that a closed system will always move toward higher entropy). Shannon entropy describes the relationship between how much disorder or uncertainty is associated with a certain variable, and how much information is stored in a message. The more diverse and uncertain the field of possible messages, the more information the message will contain.

Wattenberg calculated a sharp rise in name entropy over time. She found that this measure of the information carried by names has risen as much in the past 25 years as it did in the full century before that.

That means that meeting a baby named Mary today tells you a lot more about the girl's parents than meeting a baby with the same name 50 years ago would have. - MSN


Without a social order to give context, each thing we do reflects on us personally. That sounds empowering until you realize that you've just made ever mundane aspect of life a competitive requirement, in which you either show off or lose social status. This causes people to stop believing in anything but themselves, so they no longer work toward a happy society. They work toward whatever benefits them at the moment, and shrug off the rest.

This means that we become public citizens whose choices are used to judge us, where previously, a social role would have explained both what we could expect and limits on what was expected of us:


Figlio got names from millions of birth certificates, and then broke down each name into more than a thousand phonemic components. He analyzed the names for letter combinations, complexity and other factors, and then used a statistical analysis to figure out the probability that the name belonged to someone of low socioeconomic status.

"Kids who have names [that] from a linguistic perspective are likely to be given by poorly educated parents, those kids ended up being treated differently," Figlio said. "They do worse in school and are less likely to be recommended for gifted [classes] and more likely to be classified as learning disabled." - LiveScience.


You are your lifestyle, your possessions, your name, and your job. Because you sense you might be able to gain some importance from those, you like that idea. If you act like a billionaire, maybe you'll become one (most likely not). But in the meantime, chaos reigns because there is no check on bad judgment, which prompts more of the shrug-and-ignore-it approach to social decay.

One such story, from The Empire of the Shrug, which since 1222 has demonstrated vastly inferior capabilities of reasoning to both Europe and China, its genetic originators:


Infidelity in Moscow has become "a way of life," as another friend of mine put it—accepted and even expected.

...

But by 1998, a study showed that Russian men and women led their peers in 24 other countries in their willingness to engage in and approve of extramarital affairs.

...

When Christianity arrived here, in the 10th century, it landed in a peasant, agrarian culture that treated sex as a natural barnyard phenomenon. Russia's expanse was notoriously hard for the already disorganized church to govern, and so, when it came to sex, a sort of dichotomy of word and deed persisted well into the 19th century, more than in the West.

...

This was the perfectly explosive mix that greeted the overnight arrival of market capitalism and the oil boom of the last decade. Suddenly, there was no one to forbid anything or to admonish anyone. Everything that could be had, was; one needed only the will to acquire it. All of this has thrown Moscow into a consumer-driven hedonism that would make an American mall rat blush. Everything is available and everything is for sale. Sex is just another pleasure product, like a bottle of Moet.

...

Accepting infidelity doesn't neutralize the harm it can do, however. Three of my Russian girlfriends, all attractive women under 30, are caught up in the attendant misery. One friend has a boyfriend who has lived with her but vacationed with his wife and kids for years. When she first found out he was married, he proposed divorcing his wife and marrying her. He didn't do it. When she brought up the subject, he said he'd been joking. Years later, she has given up on kicking him out or fighting with him. "I don't even know what I want anymore," she told me. Another friend dated a man for months who said he was single. When she discovered he was married, he too said he'd get a divorce. This time, the guy meant it, but my friend soon found out that he was getting remarried in two days' time to a different woman. - Slate


What an awesome future this portends: no faithfulness, no social order, just the individual trying to socially climb by picking the best meme. It sounds like some kind of video game, but for morons.
 

This World AIDS Day, don't celebrate AIDS. Criticize it.

01 12 10 - 08:53

AIDS is a metaphor for our time. It's what happens when a clueless person engages in a lot of risky sex, IV drug use, or otherwise shares blood with other people engaged in clueless behaviors.

To a sane person, AIDS is nature clearing the deck for new arrivals.

To everyone else, it's a great tragedy -- those equal people were enjoying their freedom after all -- and a good chance for us to all cry together and feel so alive.

(emo sigh)

Yet AIDS, you're lagging it.


Data from the 2010 global report by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) shows that an estimated 2.6 million people became newly infected with HIV, compared with the estimated 3.1 million people infected in 1999.

Also in 2009, approximately 1.8 million people died from AIDS-related illnesses, compared with the roughly 2.1 million in 2004, according to UNAIDS. - CNN


Dear AIDS, this is... pathetic. Seven billion people, and you've knocked out under 2 million per year? While we're young, AIDS. While we're young. Why don't you just get the lead out already?

This World AIDS Day, don't celebrate AIDS like the others. They are celebrating how they feel like victims because AIDS is out there killing someone somewhere for his or her bad decisions. They like to "feel" strong emotions like sadness, but really, all their emotions boil down to self-pity. So they celebrate AIDS all while badmouthing her behind her back.

We at ANUS, on the other hand, celebrate AIDS. There are too many damn people. Most of them (90%) do nothing but make messes and blame others for them. We got that 90% idiot rating because we were unable to kill off our idiots by ourselves. So they reign.

AIDS, however, is lagging and it's time to stop celebrating AIDS, and start criticizing it. Pick up the pace, you lazy retrovirus.

Related: Happy HolidAIDS!