The Painful Paradox of Civilization

31 05 11 - 14:33

When a stench "follows" you, you check your pants.

When failure of a pernicious and pervasive type follows you, you check your assumptions.

The paradox of civilization is this: the more successful a civilization, the more it protects and subsidizes the idiots who will destroy it.


It would be a major accomplishment if mankind were to combine a controlled technology with the preservation of Earth. Not only a major accomplishment but a miracle. There are too many humans and everywhere we go to seek peace and tranquility, a hundred others have gone there, too. There was a time when even scientists spoke of the "wonder and glory" of the universe, but we have reverted completely to a mechanistic view, relying on technology to solve every problem which, ironically, it has created in the first place. Can there still be stretches of open land natural wonder alongside hot water and refrigeration? Orion


Here is what you are trained to say: "No, there's no way the two can coexist."

The implication of that is, of course, "let's just keep doing what we're doing, because there's no hope we can change."

I submit another viewpoint: it's not technology, but democracy and mass culture, that does this.

Intelligent people tend to breed less. If they keep the less-intelligent people in check, those don't breed recklessly.

But give those people the vote... well, to them money is magic, and power is magic, and it should all be free. So there can be more of them, of course.

The pile of humans bubbles upward, grows huge...

We can't say no to anyone, because we'd be crushing their hopes and dreams.

In the process we polluted everything, destroy innocence, remove beauty, and make clustered, crowded, filthy, dog-eat-dog cities.

And then we have destroyed our dreams.
 

White nationalism: fail

27 05 11 - 08:27

Way back in 1997 or so, I like many Generation Xers started awakening to what deep doo-doo our culture was in.

All the Beethovens were gone; they were replaced by the plastic shitheads like Kurt Cobain (spit) and a series of "profound thinkers" who were airheads in disguise. The heroes they held up to us were not conquerors who got everyone organized toward transcendent goals, but literal idiots whose main contribution was making people more comfortable, more equal, more complacent, etc. Our idols were supposed to be the sick, lame, perverse and dysfunctional.

Like many who grew up with the homilies of well-intentioned parents and teachers, we knew how evil the love of money, big government, etc could be, but it became clear that the real problem was a chaotic civilization with no goals in common. Hence, we desired culture; but culture, never politically correct, aligns only with ethnic group. You need a sense of identity, a sense of shared purpose, and a shared inclination toward such things. Western Europeans, like those who made the 1970s America in which we all grew up, had those things in common. Eastern Europeans, Southern Europeans, and non-whites? These were heading different places.

Of course, we didn't want to mention such things to avoid hurting our friends' feelings. So what if your Italian buddy is of a different culture? Yet it does have an impact on you, in that now there can be no cultural agreement, thus all we have is commerce, popularity and big government to determine direction. Thus a duality emerged: we wanted culture, but wanted it without throwing our friends under the bus.

Unfortunately, there was and is no option in politics for that. "Left" and "right" are distinct as night and day, and exist in gradients from anarchist through Communist and libertarian through fascist respectively. But neither is giving us the option for non-hateful, rational re-centering of society around culture. The biggest reason of course is that those who claim to be nationalists -- the culture-through-race people -- are confused, disorganized, dysfunctional and/or just sociopathic:


If we want a saner world, those of us who understand why white nationalism is important need to destroy white nationalism.

No, seriously: throw it on a bonfire, pour gasoline on it, and watch it burn from a distance. Destroy white nationalism before it’s too late.

White nationalism is what we call a surrogate, or a fake thing that stands in for what you need. It wastes your time and, because it claims to solve your problem, prevents you from finding the real solution. - "Destroy White Nationalism"


It's true: the biggest opposition to nationalism is the people calling themselves nationalists. Like the crazy fundamentalists who drive people away from Christianity, or the insane trivial hipsters who drive people away from music, or even the bitchy witches who take over school and volunteer groups with their drama, these are non-important people pretending to be important by using ideology, and sacrificing it in the process.

Nothing in the concept of nationalism implies hatred, Holocaust genocide, Day of the Rope or other nutjob emotional reactions. Nationalism just means organization of civilizations by ethnic group so that culture trumps money and popularity. Nationalism doesn't mean "my group versus all y'all," it means that if one group (say, Israel) gets the right to be ethnic nationalists, all ethnic groups should have the same ability.

It's also a giant middle finger to a millennium of egalitarianism. Egalitarianism sounds like everyone is equal; in actuality, it favors the dysfunctional people who cannot create and instead want to demand those things from successful people around them (a phenomenon known as CROWDISM).


Anywhere resources are limited a zero-sum game exists.

(Liberals are fond of pointing out that the economy is zero-sum game, meaning that for someone to be rich, someone else must be not as rich. Conservatives are fond of pointing out that the resulting economic hierarchy is more efficient than Communist egalitarianism, thus everyone benefits, even if not all are rich.)

As a result, we have to say that yes, race relations are a zero-sum game. One group gets to be in power and gets to make the rules. It’s either blacks or whites. No group exists that has the interests of both at hand.

So when someone approaches you saying “I want this and you should give it to me because I’m equal” you can reply with: You know, we are all equal, in the abstract. But this patch of land belongs to me and my kin. If I let you in, that’s less for us. Eventually, that will put your descendants and my descendants into mortal conflict. So you need to find another patch of land, one that’s equally good, and I wish you godspeed.

That way you refuse the double-standard of egalitarianism, which rewards everything to the asker at the expense of the asked. - "Selfishness or self-interest"


And in typical modern fashion, here we are in the aisle of our department store, holding two versions of the same type of object. One is made more sturdily, but more expensive; the other is cheaper and will fall apart sooner, but easier to use. Neither has all of the features we want because if one object had everything, it would dominate the market and that would exclude many other people from making these exciting objects. And thus, despite having trillions of dollars of technology and manufacturing, we the consumers -- the vast majority -- still suffer with an inferior object of whichever type we chose.

The principle remains that nationalism is the answer, but even as far-right parties surge to new success across Europe, we're still waiting for the nationalist party that does more than talk about race -- it combines race and class warfare into one narrative, which is a denial of egalitarianism and "have it your way" in favor of cultural standards, a purpose to life and a desire to always improve ourselves:


I work harder, today, than at any point in my past. Not because I have to, but because I want to. Doing nothing, for long enough, is about the most lethal thing there is, for a human.

Long before the body succumbs, the mind dissolves into oblivion. - "The upside of poverty"


Racial chaos is a symptom of our decline.

Decline of society is a symptom of our decline as people, as a culture, as an idea.

Decline originates in the collision between our wealth, and our resentment of anyone who has more.

It makes us passive, and instead of thinking toward creation, we think toward parasitism.

This is how most of the world thinks, and it's why they live in poverty, have low IQs and are beset by disease and warfare.

Thanks to our prole revolt in the west, we are joining them. They have almost won; liberal democracy is their triumph.

They have one big task left: destroy heritage, and make us all citizens of the global shopping mall, fresh for imprinting without whatever trivial trends obsess them:


If the last century showed us anything, it is that each national group (Jews, Germans, Italians, English, American whites) needs self-rule and a vigilant sense of self interest, or it will be assimilated or destroyed by larger, less sensitive, and less distinctive groups.

It’s the few who rise above versus the aggregate masses.

Jews/Israel and whites/Europeans are a minority in this world and to put it bluntly, the majority hates you guys. It hates you for what you have that it does not.

North Asians and other “favored” ethnic groups also find themselves in this position, but no one is quite as large of a target as Jews and Europeans. When you succeed, you become resented, especially if you don’t have a clear upper hand.

In other words, the only salvation for Jews — and whites — is to embrace the principle of nationalism, which is the idea that each ethnic group rules itself, segregates itself from others, and builds a society based on its own culture and heritage. - "Self-defeat and Zionism"


Those of us who wish to rise above and be exceptional are the only minority.

Every other "minority" is just people in the wrong place.

Those who wish to avoid adapting to life, to not change themselves, but to demand (as if from a parent) things from life under the guise of helping others, worldwide, are the majority.

Humanity is attempting to rise above its majority with an exceptional minority.

Do we beat them back, or do we all just keep on buying tshirts, acting selfishly, listening to angry music and grousing about what could have been?

It's a fair question.
 

I am the Naked Whipper

27 05 11 - 06:16

People get complacent and they need to be poked.

With sharp sticks covered in stinging ants.


Pan-Nationalism is the idea that every ethnic group gains the right to be nationalist if any ethnic group does. If blacks, Jews, Maori, etc. get nationalist movements, so do us whitebread types.


Sometimes, those of us who like the idea of breaking up the inflexible mental patterns and replacing them with more realistic ones, through sheer bloody-mindedness, act as if we are half-troll half ideologue.

And all Devil's Advocate.

The Naked Whipper stands in the doorway, silhouetted by flame... pain is the canvas, blood the paint, fire the audience...


If we want a saner world, those of us who understand why white nationalism is important need to destroy white nationalism. - "Destroy White Nationalism"


Do not think you can escape this life without bondage. You are either the Slave-Master, or the person who steps outside the fray of pleasure to simply be demonic.

From demons come our greatest sufferings, but also, the clarity that necessity brings...
 

"White Identity" needs reviews

25 05 11 - 20:19

I recommend this book to every thinking person who has an interest in the issue of race.

The usual propaganda from both sides -- "Diversity is kumbaya doubleplusgood!" from the left and "Negroes are chicken-eating criminal Kenyan presidents!" from the right -- doesn't factor into the equation. White Identity steps over that to give a practical assessment of the future of diversity in America.

The author, Jared Taylor, has asked that those who have read the book contribute reviews at Amazon.com. Mine is right here, and should provide hours of infuriating reading for people on both sides of the divide.

In the meantime, if you've read this book and have five minutes, please write up a short review.
 

Portrait of the Useless Person as an Aging Hipster

24 05 11 - 11:57

Postmodern theory: there exists a public social consensual reality, formed of the desires and judgments of the human ego, which contrasts a world of physical and possibly mystical reality which can only be experienced through introspection.

Public social consensual reality


Lupe Núñez-Fernández’s paintings look effortless, as if the inky brushstrokes rendering pensive humans, curious animals and bleeding landscapes were applied in just a few deft wrist-flicks. But her relationship with art is hardly casual: in addition to technical training, Núñez-Fernández holds a PhD in modern art history, and over the last few years, she has spent time writing about, researching and curating contemporary art for a variety of publications and galleries.

[...]

The video was animated by artist Xana Kudrjavcev-DeMilner, with whom Núñez-Fernández attended undergrad and collaborated in the past on video-art installations. Kudrjavcev-DeMilner collected found materials for the video, then scissored them into a kind of visual stream-of-consciousness that plays on the song’s shimmering instrumentation and Núñez-Fernández’s shy, dreamy vocals. - Design Parasite


Introspective yet External Reality



Tell Me What To Think

My cruel and unusual take on it: these dream vocals are completely directionless variations on a hackneyed and simple theme, played over bog-standard minor key indie rock. The only reason people like this crap is the quality production, entertaining videos and "high concept" band. It's "art" for proles who, unable to make anything profound or even of profound quality, want to hoodwink all of us into liking their hipster crap because they're equal and their point of view just must be valid, too!

Further Cruelty

When I say that modern idiots write in the "NPR style," I'm referring to a certain type of writing that is popular on the National Public Radio in the United States. It features overuse of adjectiveness and a superlative, over-descriptive style paired with an artificial sparseness. Total fucking idiots think this style is "good writing," and in fact most critics of ANUS bitch because we don't write in this pandering, faux intellectual, self-impressed and masturbatory way. Maybe they're just too busy reading all this deft flicking with its dreamy space-out dramatic and self-important agenda. We truly live in the age of salespeople.

The Ideal NWO Man

Adrogynous whiny teenbeat cheeseball Justin Bieber is the perfect archetype of what the NWO's commerce division wants in its people: he's dating someone of a different race, has an incoherent tattoo of "great profundity" in a language he does not understand, and is busy wasting time being vapid and encouraging others to do the same.



Can you imagine a more perfect consumer? Or a less useful person if any natural or political disaster interrupts the grocery stores? Which is less useful, a 400 lb ghettobird or a 92 lb catamite?
 

Rupture

22 05 11 - 07:55

To the old Pagan Religion,
By H.P. Lovecraft

...Olympian gods! how can I let ye go,
And pin my faith to this new Christian creed?
Can I resign the deities I know,
for him who on a cross for man did bleed?

How in my weakness can my hopes depend
On one lone god, tho' mighty be his pow'r?
Why can Jove's host no more assistance lend,
To Soothe my pain, and cheer my troubled hour?

Are there no dryads on these wooded mounts
O'er which I oft in desolation roam?
Are there no naiads in these crystal founts
Or nereids upon the ocean foam?

Fast spreads the new; the older faith declines;
The name of Christ resounds upon the air;
But my wrack'd soul in solitude repines
And gives the gods their last-received pray'r.

Thanks to Þór Einar Leichhardt for the text.
 

Might be Jenkem

20 05 11 - 11:46

The new waxeth amusing on one of our favorite topics around here, Jenkem, or another way of escaping reality:


The crime scene report says, "The room had several dozen containers and a five gallon plastic buckets that all appeared to have contained the offensive material before someone dumped them out onto the floor and furniture in the room."

[...]

As for why the man had so many containers of excrement, officers believe it may have been a little-known and widely-speculated way to get high called Jenkem.

Jenkem is an alleged hallucinogenic drug of noxious gas caused by the fermentation of sewage. However, many insist jenkem use is a hoax . Snopes.com, a website designed to debunk internet rumors, says "evidence that jenkem use is a significant phenomenon in the US or that the substance can even produce the effects described is scant."

Smelly house forces tenants to leave (WPTV, 12/03/10)


I hope it was Jenkem and he got hella high.

As the saying goes:

Jenk 2 Live
Live 2 Jenk


 

False gods

19 05 11 - 20:45

You can make just about anything into a false god; just make it into a universal solution and carry as an article of faith (not logic) the belief that it can be applied as a source of meaning or solution to all life's problems.

Gods can be false gods; science is a false god, since it doesn't know more than it knows but is treated as if it knows more than the gods; sex, drugs, rock-n-roll are obvious false gods; love of money, sure, and love of shiny objects, but even more abstract things can be false gods -- love, peace, compassion and most abused of all, creativity.

Yep. Creativity is a tool toward an end, not a goal in life. Your life's passion is creativity? Yeah, that's like saying your life's passion is ALLEN WRENCH or PAINTBRUSH. Maybe your life's passion is broil, or belt sanding, but more likely, these are techniques you use to achieve ends which are part of a full life.



Sometimes, we just need to admit that our false gods are boring and pointless. For example, the above pompous image (where I'm from, the kind of people who express such banal and thoughtless platitudes are confined to double-wides a safe distance from freeways that lead to nowhere) comes from Design Sponge, which I (honestly) can't tell apart from Regretsy.

You can see where putting the cart before the horse and making creativity your goal, not a means of realizing your goal, gets you: aimless dicking around with stuff you learned in art school, producing objects your hipster friends will agree are really neat for about two weeks, then pitch into landfills as you leave behind a trail of pointless waste... you never found a goal or meaning to life, so now you're just casting about, as desperate as the businesspeople and other hollow types you love to mock under your latte-stache while riding your fixie through Williamsburg.

DIE HIPSTER DIE

 

Brett Stevens 2012

19 05 11 - 05:15

Brett Stevens for President 2012: We’ve got a new frontier aheadTM.
 

Prozakhistan secedes

18 05 11 - 19:31

When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for the dissolution of illusion, those who accept that consciousness itself causes spaciotemporal reality and is, in turn, a cause of its own physical manifestation must, in the name of greater potentiality and aspiration of the human and other species, declare independence from the materialists and the dualists and others who deny infinity, and instead open the cosmic portal to stare wide-eyed into infinity with hope.



Prozakhistan
 

A new concept of civilization

18 05 11 - 08:26

Instead of stability, which is dysgenic, aim for dynamism:


A patchwork - please feel free to drop the capital - is any network consisting of a large number of small but independent states. To be precise, each state's real estate is its patch; the sovereign corporate owner, ie government, of the patch is its realm. At least initially, each realm holds one and only one patch. In practice this may change with time, but the realm-patch structure is at least designed to be stable.

Of course, Italy in the fourteenth century was anything but stable. Anything like a patchwork needs a strong security design to ensure that it does not repeat the constitutional solecisms of feudalism, and nor will it be subject to the same pervasive violence or meet the same demise. In a worst-case scenario, we could end up right back at liberal democracy! But don't worry - we will discuss this issue in considerable detail.

To be a reactionary is not to say we must reinstall the exact political structure of the fourteenth century tomorrow, although that would surely be an improvement on what we have now. To be a reactionary is to borrow freely across time as well as space, incorporating political designs and experience from wherever and whenever. As Nick Szabo has observed, the most interesting, detailed and elegant European forms are found in the period we call feudal, and thus it is only natural that a reactionary design for future government will have a somewhat feudal feel.

But Patchwork is something new. It will not feel like the past. It will feel like the future. The past - that is, the democratic past - will feel increasingly gray, weird, and scary. - UR


I like the idea, although it obliterates the major value of nation-states, which is concentrating money into R&D and non-failing political objectives. The main reason the patchwork failed in the past was that when Mongols attack, no unity happens and so an attack which could be easily checked in Kiev rages on into Vienna.
 

Message in a bottle (to al-Qaeda)

16 05 11 - 16:01

Dear brethren in the struggle against modernity,

If we must have terrorism, please stop destroying esurient stockbrokers. While they are annoying, and barely know how to dress themselves, they are not the root of the Evil Internationalist-Modernist Regime's (EIMR) power.

Instead, turn your sights to these:


  • Hollywood. American movies and television rule the world.

  • The New York Times. World liberalism is cued by this resource.

  • The United Nations. Lead kumbaya singers.

  • Celebrities. These represent success symbols in a decadent time.



While many of us are upset that you may have killed our friends who work in the corporate hierarchy, none of us will cry if you blow away a few celebrities, fly planes into studios, execute media executives, slaughter leftist journalists, or blast giant flaming holes in the UN in its mission to give cholera to us all.

Let us take inspiration from this great hero:



Bravely, alone, he stalked John Lennon and shot him dead, ending the hysterical hippie binge that had been ongoing since 1968.

With his five victorious shots, he changed the course of history -- and showed the world that the peace, love and happiness morons were not only popular, they were mortal.

Smashing icons is sometimes more effective than killing footsoldiers.

I hope the far right listens to this too and stops harming innocent minorities. Go kill some studio executives instead. Remember to sodomize them as they die twitching.

Just sayin'
 

White Identity: Racial Consciousness in the 21st Century, by Jared Taylor

12 05 11 - 19:48

Clarifying our position on race: there are no superior or inferior races. Nationalism, or one ethnic-racial group per nation forming an organic society which takes precedence over government and commerce, is the only way to have a stable civilization. Nationalism is simply superior to every other option. Mixed-race groups destroy all unique traits and, after one generation of hybrid vigor, end up losing millennia of evolutionary advantages in favor of a mediocre, low-IQ, cultureless, valueless gray race. Internationalism, or demanding that all humans become one race for the convenience of commerce and government, is the true enemy of diversity. We do not tolerate racism, including the type of racism that promotes internationalism. If you cannot understand the distinctions made in this paragraph, you are too stupid to discuss this issue and should go back to something for which you are suited. We recognize that standard leftist behavior (TLB) includes accusing anyone who is winning an argument refuting liberal points of racism, elitism, homophobia, sexism, etc. and recognize that those people are not sane. If you are expecting standard leftist dogma, or neo-Nazi dogma, the path ahead of you is nothing but disappointment; log off now.

Jared Taylor's latest is a masterpiece.

White Identity: Racial Consciousness in the 21st Century explores racial identity in four groups: African-Americans, Asians, Hispanics and whites. Its conclusion is that each group wants segregation, and continued forced diversity/multiculturalism will reduce America to a third-world status nation.


Through meticulously researched content, Taylor proves that (a) diversity is failing despite massive government efforts (b) each racial or ethnic group seeks its own self-rule and identity, and in fact most prefer segregation (c) that racial identity is healthy for members of all ethnic groups and (d) that "diversity" and "multiculturalism" not only are failing now, but portend a future of continued failure that will harm all ethnic groups.

Sleek but not slick prose flows through this readable and engaging text, using numerous examples from both scientific publications and the mainstream news. Arguments are cleanly constructed and stand alone. It is an impressive work that will bring food for thought to anyone brave enough to consider the analysis it offers.



But that's not all!


From a nationalist viewpoint, one race or one ethny is one nation; the nation is not the government, or some lines drawn on a map, or even an economic or political dogma shared by the group. The nation is organic and it defines itself by heritage.

The IQ figures, crime reports, and ethno-political clashes are not the reason for nationalism. The reason for nationalism is, as in all conservative ideals, a pragmatic notion of “real life”: apart from our fancy institutions, and our invented dogmas, human life is a struggle for individuals to find moral clarity, and groups to find purpose.

Jared Taylor has written for years on The National Question, namely: how do we rediscover a national consciousness, and separate and segregate the white race in America so that it can experience self-rule once again? Unlike the odious White Nationalists, Taylor represents a hybrid between a classic liberal and a 1930s paleoconservative like H.L. Mencken. He is a practical thinker.

Unlike most “white nationalists,” Taylor takes a pragmatic view: the problem is not an inherent superior/inferior balance to humanity, but a combination of the need for identitarian politics and the rather radical differences between racial groups. Diversity itself is the culprit, he argues, because it’s a non-sensical feelgood message but not a functional groundwork for a civilization.


 

The mythic domain of the acausal and atemporal

08 05 11 - 17:13

We are nihilists, scientific moderns, and we have to confront the fact that what we know as "science" is a subset of science itself. It is a smaller discipline, boundaried by material expectations of those who may not be the sharpest minds, so that it can be used for political ends. As a result, it is sensible to view "science" with scientific skepticism, knowing that it is a product of human minds at their weakest.


Why are such physical theories bunk? For two simple reasons. First, they cannot explain in any way the fundamental difference between life and inert matter. That is, what, for example, animates or infuses the physical structures of a cell to make that cell alive, and why, for instance, all living matter disobeys the first of Newton’s laws.

Second, they depend on the simple, Cosmically incorrect, notion of a linear causality, as evident in the use of conventional mathematics, and physical ideation, to describe such theories, all of which theories are based on and depend upon equations involving an abstract notion of causal, linear, time – as in differential and tensorial equations involving the variable dt (as in Newtonian mechanics, and in the Schwarzschild and other metrics deriving from the variable ds) – and which linear time cannot even be defined in any satisfactory manner sans causal linearity (as in the definition based on so-called atomic/quantum clocks). Thus, even apparently abstruse notions of Space-Time – deriving from tensorial mathematics, or some other representation – are founded on the simple, cosmologically inaccurate, notion of a causal linearality.
[...]

In simple – exoteric – terms, the acausal is a naturally existing part of the Cosmos, and merely the realm or realms or continuum where acausal energy exists, and which acausal energy is a-causal in nature. That is, propagation of this energy does not, or need not, take a certain amount of causal Time, and does not involve, or may not involve, traversing a certain causal distance. Thus none of Newton’s laws apply, just as causal theories such as those of entropy or so-called “chaos” do not apply.

In esoteric terms, the acausal is the source of all the causal Life we know. That is, it is acausal energy, from the acausal, which animates all causal Life we currently know, and which enables us to change and develope ourselves, acausally interact with other living beings (in one sense – practice sorcery), and do many other things, such as develope acausal knowing, that is, understanding the acausal sanscausal abstractions [4]. In another sense, as intimated above, it is a means for us to shed the illusive apprehension of our finite causal being.

For it is causal abstractions that obscure the nature – exoteric and esoteric – of the acausal, and thus obscure the nature and reality of sorcery.- Anton Long


Let's dial it back a bit from sorcery and the artificial science/philosophy/religion split, and look at instead what people mean when they say "science."

They mean cause/effect derivations that are:


  • Linear. A produces B, if we perform this experiment in a contextless lab setting. This works for many things, such as chemical or electrical reactions. Linear means that it involves one (1) factor, no context, and is exclusively temporal to achieve causality.

  • Material. We are comfortable with looking to material causes of events, but blind to patterns or other amaterial causes. For example, we can enjoy the thought that chemical A produces chemical B, but would freak out if someone talked about rhythms, or patterns of magnetism, inducing the same result.

  • Observable. Perhaps the biggest limitation of science is that it is limited to studying details. X event produces Y event, in a lab. What about the progress of history, or other complex interactions? We are blind to those, which is one reason science is a guessing game at broader prediction.



Beyond that narrow concept of logic -- science is a subset of the study of logical relationships -- we are left with a new realm, one in which we cannot posit time and space because, as we learn from our own science, time and space are relative, meaning they are created through the interaction of objects.

This means that there may be more to reality than than which we can express as time, space and material.

When we think about relativity in its purest form, it means that no object is known except through its relation to other objects. And then what about the whole of existence?

Until we find objects to place in it, we have no idea how big it is or how it works. We need to thrust in a probe, or otherwise interact with it, to get feedback. Sort of like bouncing a laser, sonar or radar signal off a distant object.

Imagine the earth in an infinite void. What would we see? Darkness... with no clarity as to whether it extended for 40 feet or infinite space beyond our atmosphere.

We have no idea what exists beyond material, and it scares the crap out of us. Materialism may have its rough sides, like utter insignificance, but it is at least tangible, finite and mentally conceivable; the acausal and atemporal, or that which exists beyond our linear notion of material interaction, is intangible and could be just about anything. We have zero control over it and so it makes us mad monkeys who throw feces at it.

But thinking broadly, if linear interaction creates time and space, it likely creates material existence including energy as well. If we discover and create time and space by moving through it in interaction, we are then tiny viewports in a much broader field of data. This field of data contains the material world we consider the whole.

We might be like deep sea explorers, aware only of what we bump into in the depths, and oblivious to all else that moves beyond our touch.

Where religion becomes ignorant with its statement of dualism, or that the material world is all in this world, and another "perfect" world exists that is both material and not of this world's material, we can see how monism makes sense.

In a monist view, this world is all -- but matter and energy are one of many interfaces to the underlying reality, which is thought-like or at the very least, another form of data. Data that does not require temporality and spatiality to exist, but manifests them when interaction requires it. After all, for iterations to occur there must be time; that is the basis of causality. For differentiation to occur, or a form of parallel processing in which events branch, there must space. These are products of an informational nature to reality.

The underlying monist substance may be something like thought, emotion, or a blind struggling Will (sensu Schopenhauer).


New Forms are constantly being made, and older ones are dissolving; but all are shapes assumed by One Thing.

There is no limit to the supply of Formless Stuff, or Original Substance. The universe is made out of it; but it was not all used in making the universe. The spaces in, through, and between the forms of the visible universe are permeated and filled with the Original Substance; with the formless Stuff; with the raw material of all things. Ten thousand times as much as has been made might still be made, and even then we should not have exhausted the supply of universal raw material.

[...]

The Formless Stuff is intelligent; it is stuff which thinks. It is alive, and is always impelled toward more life.

It is the natural and inherent impulse of life to seek to live more; it is the nature of intelligence to enlarge itself, and of consciousness to seek to extend its boundaries and find fuller expression. The universe of forms has been made by Formless Living Substance, throwing itself into form in order to express itself more fully.

The universe is a great Living Presence, always moving inherently toward more life and fuller functioning.

Nature is formed for the advancement of life; its impelling motive is the increase of life. For this cause, everything which can possibly minister to life is bountifully provided; there can be no lack unless God is to contradict himself and nullify his own works. - The Science of Getting Rich, by Wallace D. Wattles (1910)


And another view of the same:


22. Even as a man casts off worn-out clothes, and puts on others which are new, so the embodied casts off worn-out bodies, and enters into others which are new.

23. This (Self), weapons cut not; This, fire burns not; This, water wets not; and This, wind dries not.

24. This Self cannot be cut, nor burnt, nor wetted, nor dried. Changeless, all-pervading, unmoving, immovable, the Self is eternal.

25. This (Self) is said to be unmanifested, unthinkable, and unchangeable. Therefore, knowing This to be such, thou oughtest not to mourn. - Bhagavad-Gita


Our question "when did the universe start?" inevitably decays to asking how physicality started.

The answer is that some state must enable physicality, and that it is likely that such a state does not exist in the condition of spaciotemporal arrangement:


The concept of time as a way to measure the duration of events is not only deeply intuitive, it also plays an important role in our mathematical descriptions of physical systems. For instance, we define an object’s speed as its displacement per a given time. But some researchers theorize that this Newtonian idea of time as an absolute quantity that flows on its own, along with the idea that time is the fourth dimension of spacetime, are incorrect. They propose to replace these concepts of time with a view that corresponds more accurately to the physical world: time as a measure of the numerical order of change. - PhysOrg


Time and space are relative to that which moves through them, whether observer or object.

At the extremes of time and space, such as the event horizon convergence of a black hole, the rules go out the window and we realize that our universe belongs to some "meta-verse" or plural form:


Is our entire universe a tiny island within an infinitely vast and infinitely diversified meta-world? This could be either one of the most important revolutions in the history of cosmogonies or merely a misleading statement that reflects our lack of understanding of the most fundamental laws of physics.

[...]

The multiverse is no longer a model; it is a consequence of our models. It offers an obvious understanding of the strangeness of the physical state of our universe. The proposal is attractive and credible, but it requires a profound rethinking of current physics.

At first glance, the multiverse seems to lie outside of science because it cannot be observed. How, following the prescription of Karl Popper, can a theory be falsifiable if we cannot observe its predictions? This way of thinking is not really correct for the multiverse for several reasons. First, predictions can be made in the multiverse: it leads only to statistical results, but this is also true for any physical theory within our universe, owing both to fundamental quantum fluctuations and to measurement uncertainties. Secondly, it has never been necessary to check all of the predictions of a theory to consider it as legitimate science. General relativity, for example, has been extensively tested in the visible world and this allows us to use it within black holes even though it is not possible to go there to check.

[...]

A much more interesting pluriverse is associated with the interior of black holes when quantum corrections to general relativity are taken into account. Bounces should replace singularities in most quantum gravity approaches, and this leads to an expanding region of space–time inside the black hole that can be considered as a universe. In this model, our own universe would have been created by such a process and should also have a large number of child universes, thanks to its numerous stellar and supermassive black holes. This could lead to a kind of cosmological natural selection in which the laws of physics tend to maximize the number of black holes (just because such universes generate more universes of the same kind). - CERN


What we think of as reality is a subset of the groundwork of reality.

What we see as physicality is produced by something that is non-physical.

All the rules change; all the old myths are new again.


Philomythus to Misomythus

You look at trees and label them just so,
(for trees are 'trees', and growing is 'to grow');
you walk the earth and tread with solemn pace
one of the many minor globes of Space:
a star's a star, some matter in a ball
compelled to courses mathematical
amid the regimented, cold, inane,
where destined atoms are each moment slain.

At bidding of a Will, to which we bend
(and must), but only dimly apprehend,
great processes march on, as Time unrolls
from dark beginnings to uncertain goals;
and as on page o'er-written without clue,
with script and limning packed of various hue,
an endless multitude of forms appear,
some grim, some frail, some beautiful, some queer,
each alien, except as kin from one
remote Origo, gnat, man, stone, and sun.
God made the petreous rocks, the arboreal trees,
tellurian earth, and stellar stars, and these
homuncular men, who walk upon the ground
with nerves that tingle touched by light and sound.
The movements of the sea, the wind in boughs,
green grass, the large slow oddity of cows,
thunder and lightning, birds that wheel and cry,
slime crawling up from mud to live and die,
these each are duly registered and print
the brain's contortions with a separate dint.
Yet trees are not 'trees', until so named and seen
and never were so named, tifi those had been
who speech's involuted breath unfurled,
faint echo and dim picture of the world,
but neither record nor a photograph,
being divination, judgement, and a laugh
response of those that felt astir within
by deep monition movements that were kin
to life and death of trees, of beasts, of stars:
free captives undermining shadowy bars,
digging the foreknown from experience
and panning the vein of spirit out of sense.
Great powers they slowly brought out of themselves
and looking backward they beheld the elves
that wrought on cunning forges in the mind,
and light and dark on secret looms entwined.

He sees no stars who does not see them first
of living silver made that sudden burst
to flame like flowers bencath an ancient song,
whose very echo after-music long
has since pursued. There is no firmament,
only a void, unless a jewelled tent
myth-woven and elf-pattemed; and no earth,
unless the mother's womb whence all have birth.
The heart of Man is not compound of lies,
but draws some wisdom from the only Wise,
and still recalls him. Though now long estranged,
Man is not wholly lost nor wholly changed.
Dis-graced he may be, yet is not dethroned,
and keeps the rags of lordship once he owned,
his world-dominion by creative act:
not his to worship the great Artefact,
Man, Sub-creator, the refracted light
through whom is splintered from a single White
to many hues, and endlessly combined
in living shapes that move from mind to mind.
Though all the crannies of the world we filled
with Elves and Goblins, though we dared to build
Gods and their houses out of dark and light,
and sowed the seed of dragons, 'twas our right
(used or misused). The right has not decayed.
We make still by the law in which we're made.

Yes! 'wish-fulfilment dreams' we spin to cheat
our timid hearts and ugly Fact defeat!
Whence came the wish, and whence the power to dream,
or some things fair and others ugly deem?
All wishes are not idle, nor in vain
fulfilment we devise -- for pain is pain,
not for itself to be desired, but ill;
or else to strive or to subdue the will
alike were graceless; and of Evil this
alone is deadly certain: Evil is.

Blessed are the timid hearts that evil hate
that quail in its shadow, and yet shut the gate;
that seek no parley, and in guarded room,
though small and bate, upon a clumsy loom
weave tissues gilded by the far-off day
hoped and believed in under Shadow's sway.

Blessed are the men of Noah's race that build
their little arks, though frail and poorly filled,
and steer through winds contrary towards a wraith,
a rumour of a harbour guessed by faith.

Blessed are the legend-makers with their rhyme
of things not found within recorded time.
It is not they that have forgot the Night,
or bid us flee to organized delight,
in lotus-isles of economic bliss
forswearing souls to gain a Circe-kiss
(and counterfeit at that, machine-produced,
bogus seduction of the twice-seduced).
Such isles they saw afar, and ones more fair,
and those that hear them yet may yet beware.
They have seen Death and ultimate defeat,
and yet they would not in despair retreat,
but oft to victory have tuned the lyre
and kindled hearts with legendary fire,
illuminating Now and dark Hath-been
with light of suns as yet by no man seen.

I would that I might with the minstrels sing
and stir the unseen with a throbbing string.
I would be with the mariners of the deep
that cut their slender planks on mountains steep
and voyage upon a vague and wandering quest,
for some have passed beyond the fabled West.
I would with the beleaguered fools be told,
that keep an inner fastness where their gold,
impure and scanty, yet they loyally bring
to mint in image blurred of distant king,
or in fantastic banners weave the sheen
heraldic emblems of a lord unseen.

I will not walk with your progressive apes,
erect and sapient. Before them gapes
the dark abyss to which their progress tends
if by God's mercy progress ever ends,
and does not ceaselessly revolve the same
unfruitful course with changing of a name.
I will not treat your dusty path and flat,
denoting this and that by this and that,
your world immutable wherein no part
the little maker has with maker's art.
I bow not yet before the Iron Crown,
nor cast my own small golden sceptre down.

In Paradise perchance the eye may stray
from gazing upon everlasting Day
to see the day illumined, and renew
from mirrored truth the likeness of the True.
Then looking on the Blessed Land 'twill see
that all is as it is, and yet made free:
Salvation changes not, nor yet destroys,
garden nor gardener, children nor their toys.
Evil it will not see, for evil lies
not in God's picture but in crooked eyes,
not in the source but in malicious choice,
and not in sound but in the tuneless voice.
In Paradise they look no more awry;
and though they make anew, they make no lie.
Be sure they still will make, not being dead,
and poets shall have flames upon their head,
and harps whereon their faultless fingers fall:
there each shall choose for ever from the All. - Mythopoeia, by J.R.R. Tolkien


When we consider a metaverse, in which idea predominates before matter, we must consider that we are also products of this metaverse.

Our minds are arrayed like its mind, and our thoughts, like its substance (even though such metaphors are weak):


We know, furthermore that we have actually been born from space, since it was out of primordial space that the galaxy took form, of which our life-giving sun is a member. And this earth, of whose material we are made, is a flying satellite of that sun. We are, in fact, productions of this earth. We are, as it were, its organs. Our eyes are the eyes of this earth; our knowledge is the earth's knowledge. And the earth, as we now know, is a production of space.

Obviously, if anything of value is to be made of them at all (and I submit that the elementary original idea must have been something of this kind), where those bodies went was not into outer space, but into inner space. That is to say, what is connoted by such metaphorical voyages is the possibility of a return of the mind in spirit, while still incarnate, to full knowledge of that transcendent source out of which the mystery of a given life arises into this field of time and back into which it in time dissolves. It is an old, old story in mythology: of the Alpha and Omega that is the ground of all being, to be realized as the beginning and end of this life. The imagery is necessarily physical and thus apparently of outer space. The inherent connotation is always, however, psychological and metaphysical, which is to say, of inner space. - Cosmology and the Mythic Imagination, by Joseph Campbell


Things for good nihilists to think about: the world may not be as small as we think it is.

It may be ignorance to reduce it to material.

We don't need moralists to say YEA or NAY to this; we need brave explorers who can adventure within it, without losing a sense of logic and sensibility.

Who among us is ready?