Satyrnalium

My philosophy is open to the world. It turns outward to reveal, and not inward to conceal.
It flows upward, towards the future, divine idea(l), and downward, towards the determined foundation of past, standing upon the presence of the real.

It builds gradually and continuously, every stone tested and tried, constructing probabilities from the vastness of the unknown possibilities.
My positions are solid because they have foundations, and will not yield to a gust of smoke, or a trembling of the heart - they have precedent, connecting to a long chain of experiences, that cannot break with flimsy words thrown around in haste, or shaped to pretend to be monsters.

With every population growth the median drops, and with every drop language has to adjust, replacing more clear and direct expression with more vague insinuating metaphors.
The objective is buried in subjectivity, and language becomes pretentious and mystical.

Temporal Lag
Consequences fall upon individuals long after they have changed their mind.

Modern man worships himself, replacing 'god' with 'humanity', preserving the same implications.
Abrahamism hid its narcissism, offering superficial amends and a lifetime of secret admonitions and guilty self-critiques.
Modern man shamelessly delights in it. He has overcome the last inhibition on his way to hell.

The embedded superstition of the educated man is that logos has an intrinsic power, rather than a psychosomatic effect.
Language merges mind and body, and life, beginning from the species that has power over the symbols it creates, merges with world.
Humanity becomes world through symbols, but its power remains within linguistic limits, and its range of effect remains within the boundaries of associating symbols with actions - requiring training.
This superstition is what confuses the subjective for the objective, leaning heavily towards the subjective, and eventually dismissing the objective altogether.

Fantasies are secret ambitions, and public ambitions are expressions of secret vulnerabilities and unrequited desires.

Iteration is order, and the foundation of what we call life.
What differentiates life from all other forms of ordering, is memory.
Without memory there is no consciousness, no judgment, no will, and consequently no identifiable self.
Self without memory is a vacuous word used by degenerates to comfort themselves in the face of an insulting, to them, continuity of memories.  
Desperate to compensate they project self externally, and sacrifice what shames them to the idealized greater Self, within which they are absolved through the baptismal adoption of more flattering memories - often artificial ones.

For zeros, the nil, a mono-god, a one, is a necessary crutch.
Whether the Christian God, is declared Dead, or his predecessor, the more mysterious esoteric Jewish god of the chosen, named Yahweh, or the younger and more volatile Allah, he cannot be permitted to depart.
The zeros desperately need this one, because without it they know what they are, because they can feel it, and see it in themselves.
They, as zeros, are its 'placeholder', delicately nestling the absolute in the womb of their feminine brains.
Christianity, or whatever new Messiah will name it, will be reborn.
Otherwise the masses will go insane.
State, and Humanity, has already been used, by the Marxist and their post-modern incarnations...so it will be another new and improved positive moniker.
But a rose, by any other name is....?

The herd needs this mythology.
It will go mad without it.
Let us call it Theos, and baptize the noetic construct using any ritual and any symbol.
The one, the absolute....the whole, the perfect...absolute order, truth, love, anything.
Let us use wonderful rhetoric and convoluted word juggling to pretend we are describing something new and profound...we hypocrites, we Moderns....we who by any other name are still cowards.

The same superstitions call forth the same priestly charlatans, and the patterns repeat - hamsters on a treadmill, trapped in a tiny glass bowl.
They feel outside, as they shrink inward, or dive into noetic abysses inside when they display in the shallows outwardly.

It takes a special sort of intestinal fortitude to accept the fact that one's life is at every moment hanging on a delicate string of uncertainty, and that every moment can be the last.
A paralyzing fear grips the mind, trying to shake it off with calming internal dialogues, whispering a tender lullaby, to help them make it to the next moment, and then the next.
The mind grasps at straw, or pulls on its own hair, wanting to keep itself afloat.

Perhaps not even Cioran could have imagined one who unlike himself, among all else, also managed to commit the 'sin' of becoming a father.

Slave Sacrifices
Belief in absolute order is the trembling hope that fears the magnitude of possibilities and wishes to reduce them to more manageable probabilities, even if these lead to the authoritarianism of a singularity - they offer their free-will as a sacrificial appeasement to the gods, on metaphorical alters, and for a moment they stop shaking.

Ancient superstitions are hidden within long, winding sentences, intersperses, like minefields, with modernistic emotional triggers, and dressed-up in pseudo-intellectual scientific jargon.
Its intended audience seeks legitimization of nonsense, and they provide a product carefully packed and packaged.

Metaphysics is the body approaching the world through the mind.
The mind giving its unconscious, intuitions, shape and form.
Idealism is the mind approaching the world through the body.
The minds abstractions being shaped and adjusted by unconscious processes.
Mind body is synthesized through these opposite flows.
One finding in the other an inadequate and often contradicting mediator.

Those who seek infamy direct their words to a different audience than those who seek integrity.
One is motivated by the desire to impress and to be acknowledged by the masses, the other is motivated by a desire to perceive the world despite them.
It's the same difference as that between populism and pop-art, from realism, and true art.

One feeds off the appreciations of others, the other spills forth despite the protests, and threats of others.
One sees humanity as a small part of world, the other sees world as humanity.
One samples from the herd to build fantasies they can all agree on, the other samples from world to build abstractions all can acknowledge separately.

Difference of imagination from fantasy; masculine from feminine disposition.
The difference between slave and master.

Truest are the men who do not do it for fame and fortune, but do it because they could not live with themselves if they did not.

Among the rarest form of the ‘unlovable’ are not those who cannot love but those who cannot be loved.
They see in the other's desire a need they cannot gratify, and do not care to, and are always finding better suitors for misguided affections.
They overflow with all that they require, and suffer the isolation of a mountain channelling a waterfall.

Metaphysics is often mistaken for idealism and idealism for metaphysics by those who have neurologically inverted the relationships and obscured their divisions.
In brief - idealism is what inverts and makes intentional 'mistakes', presenting its ideals as occult truisms, bubbling out of subterranean depths, when all they are is their hopes masked as wisdom, and the insecure reactions to world masked as the world in-itself.

Humanity becomes world and man replaces god as 'world' creator.

Some slaves submit, bending over, while others, like uncle Toms, want to present themselves to their fellow slaves as the master's chosen.
The ones who enter the master's home, forbidden to all but a few; the ones who know of the master's views, his values, his plans - being the master's confident.
When they strut by the slave pens they waste no opportunity to display their 'higher status', repeating the master's words, using the master's accent and mannerisms, parroting the master's sentences as accurately as a slave can.
At night they creep to the master's study to study the master's books, his hidden letters, his mementos and ledgers, trying to memorize them for when the morning comes.
Through association they seek empowerment; intimacy, they hope, with absolute order will rub a bit a noble glitter on their tanned hide.

In a world with no meaning it is you who create one, or adopt one already created, if you like it.
But not any meaning will do.
Unlike Nihilists, Aryans choose to construct meaning from materials found within world.
Their idea(l)s are not other-worldly, or supernatural, or intentionally mystical, to pretend depth where there is none.

A man constructs his home from materials he finds in the area he wishes to claim as his own.
He builds downward, to solidify his structure (metaphysics), and upwards, towards the heavens (idealism), to orient himself.
He does not build castles in the sky, with him as some fantasy lord over an invisible realm.
Children do so, not men.
He does not build mausoleums to bury himself in before his end.
Cowards do so, not men.
Men do not build theoretical homes in their mind, by copying designs they found in manuals.
There is so much planning and thinking you can do before it becomes procrastination.
Men build their own, for their own, and no one else.
Men build extensions to their spirits, additions to their hearts.
Men build because they must.


He builds a house to become one with the planet he was born upon.
He builds a house to venture forth, and then, like Odysseus, return back home.
He builds a house to make his presence felt, and to leave a mark.
He builds his house to keep the unwanted out, and to bring the wanted in.
He builds a house because he can.

Like his house, he gives himself meaning in accordance with the landscape, in harmony with the environment, and his own particular strengths and weaknesses, as well as his own ambitions and desires.
He gives himself a realistic meaning, not an imaginary one.
His ambitions are attainable, not surreal, not hyperbolic fantasies to excuse failure, or to pretend theoretical superiority.
He builds because he chooses to.

An open to the world philosophy is one that begins from nil and then builds outward.
Up, towards idealism, and down, towards metaphysics.

The thinker gradually accumulates data that reinforce one theory, but may or may not discredit another.
He accumulates data to determine what is more and what is less probable, in a world of indeterminate possibilities.
If we take modern cosmology as a guide then space/time is expanding, meaning possibilities are multiplying.
The thinking mind has to reduce this expansion to a set of manageable probabilities.

Now, since I've identified the fundamental unit as a vibration/oscillation, then probability would be how possibility is reduced by order, and interpretation of appearances, these patterns manifest as, is how the organism categorizes and simplifies/generalizes, further reducing probabilities to a manageable, to it, level.
The more sophisticated the mind the less it has to simplify/generalize, whereas it may be forced to in order to integrate more data into more complex mental models.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

A less sophisticated mind simplifies/generalizes the complex by eliminating data ti cannot process and integrate into its abstractions.
This type cannot justify nor fully describe (unpack) its simplifications/generalizations....and most iof them are adopted and regurgitated.
A more sophisticated mind simplifies/generalizes in order to integrate more data into cohesive mental models.
This type can then easily deconstruct its own mental models, and describe, in detail, a particular piece of it.

An open-needed philosopher, with integrity, accumulated understanding, and integrates data into increasingly complex systems, that can be simplified/generalized to the point of making them comprehensible to a less sophisticated mind.
He builds his systems like he builds a structure, casting away what he cannot fit into his models, without risking its stability, and with an eye on its aesthetic harmony.
The model has to not only be cohesive, but symmetrical, proportional - aesthetically beautiful.
Harmonious, in itself, and in relation to the world it is a model of.
Such a thinker does not begin with an end in mind - Top<>Down thinkers do that, and he never completely dismisses any hypothesis.
What he does is render most inoperable, or absurd....or so improbable as to not be worth considering unless new data comes to light.

An idea(l) for such a mind is an ostentation tool - a destination, that may or may not be attainable, but is nevertheless in alignment with the physics and the metaphysics of his model.
Metaphysics are not necessary, but essential for a more thorough model to take form.
Metaphysics, like foundations for any structure, make the theory less susceptible to shifts in reality - because the world is flux, it is constantly interacting - changing.
The idea(l) acts like a laser-guide, directing the construction of both the physical and the metaphysical part of the model.
This may be placed within the boundaries of the structure, making the idea(l) attainable, or beyond it, in some distant space/time, making ti unattainable but offering direction for a larger, broader structure.


Such a mind would accumulate more garbage theories as he proceeds over time.
He would have left behind, as improbable, to the degree of absurdity, a vast amount of theories he's come in contact with....and he may have found in others symmetrical pieces that were perfect in his own mental model - like coming across the perfect corner-stone for your house in an abandoned one.
He cannot chisel the data, the material he is suing, because then he is imposing his will upon what he needs.
The tricky part so to find such material that nobody has shaped or modified. His task is to find the raw, the unspoiled by a human mind.
He finds mentors not to take material from them but to learn how to find and recognize material, from garbage, and to learn how to build his own structure.

So, other philosophers simply point out quarries where materials can be found, or are those who inspire with their won structures and methods.

A good memory is essential for such a mind, and if he lacks that then a good system of storing data.
He cannot completely abandon what he has come across because he can never know if and when something will prove useful, or perfect in building his structure.
Ban structures are analyzed, memorized and then left behind on his quest onward and outward.
He only has a lifetime to build as deep and as high as he possibly can, or to build a structure he can live in, and feel proud of.

There is no end - telos.
There is no absolute.
His design is open ended.
He is constantly adjusting, tirelessly designing, slightly modifying.
In time, and through trial and error he learned some techniques, and has acquires a sense of dimensions so as to measure and evaluate by sight.
he's come across the same failed structures so many times that he eventually becomes good at spotting them and not wasting his time in further analysis.
He looks, in passing, because in every structure there may hide a little perfect piece he may be missing.

A philosophy is never complete, never whole.
What is debated is the symmetry and proportionality, the materials used, and the methods employed, as well as the overall aesthetics of the structure in relation to the landscape.
Like a house has to compliment and be complimented by the environment, so does a philosophy have to be in harmony with the world it is a model of.
The structure, also, says something about the builder, and his relationship with the environment he build his structure in.
The house, like the philosophy is for the philosopher, is a objectification of his subjective relation to environment, and his subjective interpretation of world.
The model is an externalization of his internal reaction and relationship with reality.

Metaphor is how multiplicity, the vastness of expanding possibilities (expanding space/time)) and incalculable probabilities (complexity = continuous interactivity), the counter-intuitive nature of existence (fluidity = randomness + ordering) is converted to a narrative and presented as art.

Language is an art-form.
Art converts the unknown into an insinuation.
It 'transports' the incomprehensible, and imperceptible into lucidity - brings it forth into consciousness.
It does so by translating the counter-intuitive, into the intuitive, by adopting images, synthesizing experiences and then representing them with symbols.

Meaning is given to words and symbols by the world.
Meaning in language is found in its relation to world.
It is not invented in the mind to refer to the mind.  
If it is, it is theory, and delusion - solipsistic and narcissistic.
The word has to connect to external phenomena, otherwise the words used and the way they are used are void of substance and only serve to masturbate or to self-medicate.

The word nihilism was defined by ex-Christians distressed by a world void of absolutes.
They projected into the world their mental fabrications, to self-medicate.
This is called positive-Nihilism: projecting into world abstractions synthesized in the mind that have no reference outside the mind.

These can range from quaint mythological metaphors, fantasies and can reach the extreme of inverting reality so that the mental abstractions are projected as substitutions of what is experienced.
The noumenon negating the phenomenal.

This is the extreme of nihilistic 'positivism'.
It is a mental disorder.
A memetic virus, rooted in genetic feebleness, insecurity, need, desire etc.

The concept of nil, as it is conceptualized by nihilism, is, itself, part of the nihilistic paradigm.
It is a discretion of reality as negative if it lacks absolutes = universal morality, god, meaning, purpose etc.
In fact it is a description of the feeble mind's reaction to a reality that lacks what it desperately wants to be provided to it, for it to be able to survive in the world.

Other than a linguistic insinuation, the absolute is absent from the world.
This is distressing to the feeble spirit.
It has to be given what it needs to cope....like a child.
What it cannot create it seeks outside itself.
What it cannot live without it imagines out there,a waiting discovery.

A world void of universal morality, a god as defined by Abrahamism (singularity), without meaning, purpose already provided for the individual, is how reality is.
It is not a negative but a positive, because it exists, whereas the fantasies of degenerates only exist in their heads.

In fluid time/space the past manifests as present, as presence.
Appearance is how this presence is interpreted by a subjective mind.

Past, therefore, is the determining, immutable....metaphor for God.
To know thyself is a command urging the individual to approach the past, through himself.

But the past does not refer to an indivisible singularity....because even in modern cosmology the space/time point, called beginning and named Big Bang, cannot be approached, and the more one approaches the possibilities shrink tending towards a singularity that is never finalized.

In eastern spiritual cosmology this is metaphorically represented with the Yin/Yang...
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]...a theoretical, noetic, representation (art) of a near-absolute cocnept.
In every yin there is a piece of yang....and vice versa.
This is a depiction of binary/logic, pushed to its source - inside the nervous system.
On/Off
We can name the absolute, sue it to accentuate and to qualify, but ti has no reality outside its symbolism, and symbolism, like all language is a simplification/generalization, using vagueness to imply what it cannot show, or prove.
The honesty of the easterners could not finalize in a singularity. The closest they came, without becoming nihilistic, as their modern western contemporaries have become, is to depict it as a duality.
The synthesis is noetic.
its symbolism is that of an absence of an absolute state = immutable, indivisible, singular, whole, perfect....
We can baptize anything using language....one turtle, one tree, a perfect meal, absolutely certain, absolute fact, a complete apple, a perfect moment and so on.....but we cannot find this outside our brains and the language we use to externalize its content.
So these words refer to what?
To abstraction in the brain - to representational, metaphorical, concepts.....mostly held vaguely, mystically, and allowed to be defined in any which way the mind desires - subjectivity.
these are symbols expressing the relationship of the mind to the body...or the subjective mind to the objective world....the ideal to the rel, the noumenon to the phenomenon.

Language is an externalization of a relationship - attitude.
It is rooted in the nervous system, finding its highest known expression in the human brain.
the nervous system connecting mind to body....or mind to world.
This is the difference between esoteric and exoteric.

In nihilism it is inverted.....the mind connecting via the nervous system, using language, back to mind....or connecting to another mind, via text, via words.
The illusion of being an explorer of world when all you are doing is sampling reaction of minds to world, and then formulating your own relationship to them.
This is inter-subjectivity..and philosophy via proxies, through inter-mediating minds.
The mind referring and deferring back into itself - solipsism. That this self-referential inversion goes through an external source, like another's opinion or Scripture, is how the mind tricks itself into believing it is engaging the world directly.
Misers, Abrahamic priests, exploit this by making themselves the conduit of this inversion.
They make of themselves the reflection, against which the other's mind reflects back into itself.
Sometimes, to seem more uninterested, less arrogant, an icon is used.....
An icon which stands in for the reflecting surface and the priests becomes a representative of this icon.
this is what Jesus was, and Buddha, and Mohammed, and many other famous dead people....and what Nietzsche is becoming in these Zombie apocalyptic days.

The individual, afraid of reality, coring to hide or to hide it from self, uses the other, the icon, the priest, as an echo chamber, to reflect back to itself, back into itself, desperately avoiding any contact with reality.

There is no identity without separation of 'I', from 'other'.
No matter how flexible or porous it may be it is a ambiguous boundary that makes the emergence of life, as distinct from non-life, possible.
Without the identification of 'self' as "I am what I am not' as a starting premise of its consciousness that has yet to develop self-awareness, the iterating unities we call life crumble into dust.
Life is iteration, and without a boundary, manifesting as exoskeleton, or malleable skin, or flimsy membrane, there is no organism and without an organism there is no consciousness.  
Nihilist project consciousness as an all-enveloping 'force' to place it outside the organism, converting t, in this way, into a figment of an external mind's imagination. It is Deism.
Life is presented as a toy, in the mind of God., who uses it to deal with his need for distraction, to alleviate his boredom, or for a reason that is too mystical to even consider, therefore 'Believe' and have faith - do not doubt'.
As things stand, when we refuse such infantile emoting, life, as iteration, cannot emerge without a porous boundary, willed as a act of repulsion of otherness, difference, so as to permit sameness to discriminate and choose.

This process is not requires in the case of lifeless congruities of patterns sharing a rate of vacillation/vibration.
Such congruities can be visualized as ocean currents differing from the ocean in temperature, or rate of vibration, flowing inside fluidity, and differentiated from other currents by its difference in temperature, creating a boundary of temperature/temporal porousness.
This is what we interpret as matter/energy, projecting our own will into its will-less flow, along the path-of-least-resistance.
This flow is a relation of forces that cannot divert, wilfully, but only follow the path laid out by its relationship to environment, like a ocean current can only flow inside a liquid environment determined by temperature differences which is another way of saying faster and slower vibrating water molecules.
This difference in vibration, like a centipedes legs, push the warmer and faster water, through the slower, colder water....as if it were a river within the ocean.  
This is how particles, or patterns we perceive as points in space/time, are distinguished within the flux of (inter)activity.

This same process is what may produce life, as iterating fluidity that eventually evolves preference, or choice.
A basic presupposition for this to occur is for the iteration to produce a energetic boundary between inside and outside, the building blocks of genetics - I/Other, is an extension of 1/0.
On/Off.
This preference, choice, is what is called Will.
To direct the aggregate unity towards what is attractive, despite resistance. Here path-of-least-resistance does not apply to the degree that it does with lifeless congruities.
Will is a word we use to describe the ambiguous boundary where iteration merges with Flux, creating the porous yet distinct boundary we perceive as skin, or the outer perimeter of an organism.
Without this distinction there is no life, and without life there is no consciousness, as consciousness is discrimination.
If we keep the metaphor we can use it to define what 'self' is.
Self is the iterating current, flowing within Flux, that maintains a connection to its entire past. It carries forward its entire past, in memory, and it this memory that affects its direction.
Past is never left behind, by an organism, by a life-form....it is past made present. If it is not that, then it is not life.
Here is where the metaphor of the zombie can be used to describe the nihilist. He is the living-dead because he refuses to acknowledge memory, or his past.
He is both dead and living, because his conscious acknowledgement is not necessary. He stumbles forward, animated, because his genetics are memories that do not need conscious participation, but he is also dead because he consciously dismisses memories, rejects the past. He is a contradiction, ergo positive Nihilism is a contradiction founded on a lie.

Light is what aids in perceiving differences, whereas darkness is what blurs them, merging them into assumed uniformity.
We can appreciate the symbolic divinity of light, as that which separates, and makes life possible.
Identity as we are experiencing it in our Nihilistic Age, is now becoming clear.
The nihilists are exposing their desire to disappear into uniformity with their positions on identity, and the conflict between I and Other.
The psychosis underlying this is becoming evident.

Nihilism is the death-wish, expressed in humans in the two ways I've described
Pure, or authentic nihilism - The desire to obliterate self.
Inauthentic, hypocritical, or positive nihilism - a contradiction?
No, a lie.
The coward wants to disappear, die, but he is too afraid, so he invents this fantasy abstraction where he both dies and lives eternally in other, through other, or as other.
Positive nihilism is the ego afraid of letting go and dying, in accordance with its own desire to escape existence.
It forces itself into a conundrum which it deals with using schizophrenic methods of compartmentalization, or mind/body divisions.

Consciousness IS discrimination...the perception of divergence from one and the other - juxtaposition.
To deal with any subjective corruptions this end result is then juxtaposed with a reality outside the minds of both 'I' and 'other.
The frame of reference is the world, not the personal subjective, nor the imagine alien subjective.

This is called empiricism, and is part of the scientific method.

An opinion, a theory, is therefore debated with another, with a different opinion (perspective) but the deciding factor is neither his or my preference...but the world we both occupy.
We weed away subjective corruptions by comparing our competing theories with a world that is indifferent and independent from both.

This establishes the harmony of self with world outside self and that of other.

The idea(l) of there being only subjective perspectives of a nothing, and so no way to determine which perspective is more probable than another, is a post-modern invention.....trying to protect a feeble, insecure, feeling that it is inferior to all others.
The first line of defence is deferring and referring to some external authority, some consciousness outside the brain of the participants.
This can be an imagined idea(l), called god, or some icon, some famous dead idol, geld as being god-like - because genius seems so to the feeble minded.

Once this is forced upon the other, as a starting premise, then defending the idea that all is subjective, or a produce of some external consciousness, named God, or some collective evil named society, or whatever, is easy.
The Modern tries to impose this starting proposition, as a premise within which this victory or a stalemate is inevitable. He wants to evade total defeat, or ridicule, or being exposed as the liar and pretentious hypocrite that he is....because this is also a line of defence. Beneath the fake arrogance and the pretence, lies the cowering spirit of a coward that knows how feeble and inferior he or she is.

The individual's choices are rooted in his experiences...but the outcome is indifferent to both.
The individual's experiences, his upbringing, do not change the consequences, only the choices.

If the individual's fails to understand how his choices were wrong, he will repeat the same choices, accusing everything and everyone but his own judgment.

Sheltering adds to this.
A protective upbringing, shelters the individual from the severity of his erroneous judgments, and accentuates the benefits, making it inevitable that the individual will repeat them and expect the same consequences.
But this is dependent on the sheltering factor, because when it diminishes or no longer intervenes the individual will be faced with the entirely of the consequences and he will wonder what changed.
Unable to accept accountability he will blame everything and everyone, but himself and his own judgments.  

Let's say he is raised to believe that science is evil and religion can heal.
He will die.
Something less obvious...let's say he is raised to believe race is a social construct and he marries a black female and has children.
When his kids fail to compete with other kids at school he will blame everything and everyone, but the idea that race is a social construct.
That he will never question.
He will pass on this conviction to his kids who will repeat the same mistake, because nature does not care what a human believes or was raised to believe.
If the system is sheltering then his belief will be affirmed by institutions that tell him that they are to blame for his kids under-performing.
To correct themselves they will lower the standards that evaluate intelligence or make the curriculum less challenging to accommodate him and others like him.
Reality would not have changed....so the system will collapse under the weight or its own prejudices and erroneous convictions.

This is not a hypothetical example...it has already occurred.
It is going on  I type this post.
It's part of cultural Marxism.
They've been trying to raise the average scores of negro children in the USA for decades...with no success.
If anything the gap is widening.
how do they explain it?
do they question their underlying premise?
No.
They accuse themselves, and the entire culture of systemic racism.
Meanwhile other visible minorities, like the orientals and Indians are doing well.

Many such examples...another is the Soviet union.
It field, but it did not diagnose its failing in its own dogma....it simply imploded convinced that the reason it had collapsed was because of capitalism.
Another example is the christian....he continuously fails to live up to his own dogma's principles, the Church has invented an entire system of absolving the believer of his sins weekly....but does he blame the dogma itself?
No...he blames Satan, or the primordial sim that makes him unable to be a good Christian.
He blames invisible forces....not the dogma.
He will pass on this error to his children and raise them to be convinced of its veracity....condemning them to a lifetime of errors.


The idiocy of the parents is passed on the the children...both genetically and memetically.
A collective of idiots produces an idiotic meme.
Meme reflects the genes that it emerged from, and is an extension of.

Do not fight arrogance.
Let it take you to its inevitable humiliation.

Uneasy Alliance
When two alphas cross paths they test each other for weaknesses.
An unspoken truce is established, each believing to be superior to the other, but afraid to test this hypothesis, and of the costs that would ensue.

The superior may give way to the inferior if there is a greater goal than dominance.
The strong often follow the weak if no intimacy has not made things obvious. If it has the weak may reluctantly accept the lead but will continuously be looking back to the one that follows.

A criminal returns to the scene of the crime when he isn't completely sure how he managed to escape detection.
His doubts turn to vanity and he succumbs to curiosity thinking he can repeat the feat, but ignorant about how he succeeded he doubles the odds of his failure.

Most scavengers follow sensing weakness and imminent death.
The clever ones follow sensing strength and an imminent kill.