Islam Will Win

They have the will to power and our civilization does not. The Catholics and other squishy Christians, however devout, have clearly not absorbed enough of their own teachings to intuit the scope of the problem. They have no excuse. To the fire with them.
The rootless cosmopolitans, the multinational corporatists, neoliberals, Jews and the like, they also have placed their bet on the order which needs much assure the victory of Islam. Their economic and ideological versatility provides them all the accoutrements of a sort of de-facto nobility.

Status markers, hereditary wealth and advantageous genetic traits, these are dominant reference points which guide our instincts with respect to safety. Yet their influence is sufficient to instil an illusion of safety – safety is indeed very relative to the frame of reference. All things are evanescent, and we are only safe as far as the extent of our concerns.

The Muslim has preserved it’s eschtalogical ambition as the heart of their conception of value. Among the left and the cosmopolitan class, this sensibility appears almost entirely absent. Evidence of this can be found in the readiness to regard a climatic warming trend (that is, apart from the intensity of Solar radiation that will eventually desiccate the earth) as a cataclysm rather than heralding new evolutionary possibilities. It’s apparent that the Muslim have retained this “large view” far better than have the Jews. The latter’s sense of insecurity is at least evidence that it still informs their intuition, but wealth and position has eroded that sense of danger and misdirected it. They’re worried about shit posters and their apparent vendetta against Europe more than they are about Islam. The prophet Mohammed was wise enough to neuter them with facile assurances that they would be the last to die.


Human Rights as Immutable Characteristics
As we see, in the article, churches removing images at the drift of political winds would logically disqualify them from religious protection. I am more intransigent about my choice of tea than these churches are about their principles.

I do not believe that freedom of religion is “carving nature at her joints”. It is natural for religions to be in conflict. Religions, like any organism, must command resources to survive over the course of events. Legal precedent that is not the preservative of religion. Those which anchor themselves to the law in order to survive have left their fate entangled with that of the law.

After Hours, reading Henry Miller’s Tropic of Capricorn

In the crepuscular flow there is the wealth you know. In the future, the richest and wise will buy silence to avoid the torrential flood of useless information, like evading a blow.  The erection of tremendous cacophony of cognitive pornography will be sold to buy silence.

Oh dear God, Schumann has been streaming silently in the background on my computer.


I really don’t like Schumann. In fact he rather gets under my skin. I don’t care for that German. I blame the Jew. If you buy my euphemism, you simply make the down payment on the interest – decadence.

Oh fuck it, let’s keep it simple. Since we are all different in our elements, detonate the hydrogen bomb. The whore a Babylon needs a good delousing. This way we become fungible and our ills mutable.

A Letter to Anonymous Conservative

My rambling, nonlinear intellect (understandably) rankles. As with schizophrenics, I am despised as incoherent to an unjust extent.  I would, however,  like to share my observations on one of his posts, since he(they, we) has the discretion over what to publish on that blog.

I encourage you to read the blog post on the relationship between the breakdown of gender dimorphism and civilizational collapse.

“AC, I know my eclectic, even chaotic sensibility does not jive well with your libertarian sense of discipline. But trust me when I say I have been very well warned that without discipline I have no hope.
I have variously been skeptical of your theories as an idee fixe and compelled by their logic. I cannot, however, ignore them. My instincts tell me that this is beyond the correlation of historical accident – which is essentially the null hypothesis in evolution.
I see r-type gender bending (of the nature of the cuttlefish who die annually, and among whom the transvestite is sexually desirable) *emerge* among those who have been under the sustained influence of dopaminergenic drugs. Perhaps this is why young strong men have been particularly susceptible to the opiate crisis. They are vulnerable to addiction as anyone. In absence of role models like Jordan Peterson and Col. Grossman, they seek to salve the existential pain in opioid solitude.
As it stands, there is no escaping the fact – for reasons I only partially understand – that I will be among the first the mob will recognize. They know I am an enemy, however kindly and liberal my sentiments, conformity is beyond my capacity. The only ones who can possibly tolerate me are those for whom discipline is more important than agreement in the formation of alliances.”

The Depravity of Anti-Discrimination Laws

The “Alberta Human Rights Act” in Canada has enshrined multiculturalism as government policy. Their policy of discrimination covers any representation of discrimination which:

Section 3 (1):
a)Indicates discrimination or an intention to discriminate against a person or class of persons.
b)is likely to expose a person to hatred and contempt.”.

The language alludes broadly to “a” “class of persons” but it dodges the most important questions: Why are some forms of classification legitimate and others illegitimate and why is their application legitimate in some circumstances and not others.

Contradicting itself, the bill goes on: “Nothing in this section shall be deemed to interfere with free expression of opinion on any subject.”(1) The legislation seems to suggests freedom consists only of acceptable behavior. With this underlying supposition, it’s not hard to see how they would slip into the apparent position that prejudiced opinions are not opinions at all.

The document repeatedly lists specific protected group, but never modified the suggestion any “class of persons” might not also fall under it’s purview:

“Race, color, ancestry, place of origin,religious belief, gender, gender identity, gender expression, physical disability, mental disability, age, marital status, source of income, family status or sexual orientation.”*

The parochial bigot can be opinionated – the degree to which he is opinionated that causes offence. According to the law, if it is his opinion there is no violation of the act. Yet at the same time, saying anything about “group membership” or using inferences based on such information is illegal. One can express themselves freely – only if such expression involves neither action nor speech.

We can anticipate to some extent, for instance, the results of adopting such approaches we saw in Europe. As Europe sought to avoid provocation with a silent media and aloof government, the result was the opposite: The threshold of provocation fell for Muslims, any excuse serving as legitimating acts of violence.

The legislation seems to speak not so much to harm but the legitimacy of the intention . It’s not at all clear that a criterion like membership at a golf club would be considered discrimination – even though there is no logical reason it not be enshrined. (Have you ever met sports fans? I thought religion was protected…)

A friend was to read his poetry at show of local artists hawking their esoteric wares.. It came to someone’s attention that he had written in defence of the free speech of an unpopular individual.. The Canadian indoctrination kicks in, a Social Justice crusade is speedily mobilizing the Dead Poet Busters. In this event they hotly insisted the bookstore owner ban the unfortunate poet. The store owner caved, and the poet was legally silenced.

Anti-discrimination laws are profoundly immoral, and I deny the legitimacy of these laws. They imply perversion,  do evil and portend tyranny. 

Free Speech Absolutism

By construction, our minds rely upon landmarks, reminders, correctives.  Many such functions are embodied in authority.  So much so that we must sometimes be reminded that it evolved as an adjunct to underlying regularities, not their source. Established authority is not the sole source by which we orient ourselves. The phrase “free thought” introduces the subversive idea that it should not be so.

In this free thought blog, there is an interesting discussion on the controversy related to Google’s political culture.

I’ll explain the bank robbery next time

I was lambasted for incoherence by some populist. I suppose there is nothing more shameful than ambiguity.

(until it’s time to undress, yes?)

As my shame worn out by overuse…. I will make an eminent son of nameless misattribution:

It is the spirit in which the song is written that imports, and not the topics. praises wine, roses, maidens, boys, birds, mornings, and music, to give vent to his immense hilarity and sympathy with every form of beauty and joy; and lays the emphasis on these to mark his scorn of sanctimony and base prudence. These are the natural topics and language of his wit and perception. But it is the play of wit and the joy of song that he loves; and if you mistake him for a low rioter, he turns short on you with verses which express the poverty of sensual joys, and to ejaculate with equal fire the most unpalatable affirmations of heroic sentiment and contempt for the world. Sometimes it is a glance from the height of thought, as thus:—“Bring wine; for, in the audience-hall of the soul’s independence, what is sentinel or Sultan? what is the wise man or the intoxicated?” And sometimes his feast, feasters, and world are only one pebble more in the eternal vortex and revolution of Fate:—

“I am; what I am
My dust will be again.”