Fatalism

A variant of Nihilism.
Fatalism is a secular form of Abrahamic spirituality.
The terms change but the concepts of 'absolutes' remain intact.

'God', as it is defined by Abrahamism, is converted to 'order', eliminating the anthropomorphic elements - a maturation, advancement, 'progress' of the previous method.
Modernity is an advancement in technologies/techniques.
Post-Modernity is solidified as the continuous 'modern'.  The 'end of history, the 'last man'.

Fatalism: the great depression of the European spirit.
The belief that all is 'written', all has been determined, and all one can do is affirm it, and stoically endure it.

Fatalism begins, after-the-fact, and ends with the justification of all opinions and choices made.  


After an event has become ‘history’ – has been solidified by exiting fluid/fluctuating space/time, called present/presence, it is affirmed as being ‘inevitable’ – part of a grand scheme – absolving the individual of all responsibilities.
A lifetime of errors can be cleansed away in a perspectival act of self-deceit – reinforced by communal agreement: all are sinners wanting to be purified.
Equality is found in the negative.


A variant of Nihilism. Fatalism is a secular form of Abrahamic spirituality.
The terms change but the concepts of 'absolutes' remain intact.
'God', as it is defined by Abrahamism, is converted to 'order', eliminating the anthropomorphic elements - a maturation, advancement, 'progress' of the previous method.
Modernity is an advancement in technologies/techniques. Post-Modernity is solidified as the continuous 'modern'. The 'end of history, the 'last man'.


The ‘Nihilist’ deceives himself by placing the ‘telos’ behind him, rather than before him – the choice itself represents an ‘overcoming.
This constitutes his ‘surpassing’ Abrahamism towards secular forms of the same principles.  
The ‘end’ – telos – no longer encompasses his vision, as a representation of an absolute ‘pulling’ him towards it, i.e., God, but it ‘pushes’ him from behind.
The ‘beginning of world,’ represented an explosive ‘Big Bang’, as it is called, is understood as a singularity, determining all that follows. He has made ‘victimhood’ universal, denying his own explosive complaints of their destructive, and self-destructive, ammo. There is nobody to ‘blame’ and accuse, as there is nobody who acts in accordance with a personal choice – all is determined, absolutely – pre-determined. A sacrifice he willingly makes to absolve himself of all culpability and the ‘shame’ of failing to perceive and to judge accurately – wrong judgments resulting in wrong choices. ‘Guilt’ is not a participant as it demands an external judge, and the modern places nobody outside himself, as the standard – not even his own ancestors. All claims to pagan identity vanish in that fact alone.


Placing the ‘absolute’ behind him, rather than before him, the Modern eliminates the constant reminder, convince himself that he’s ‘advanced’ from his previous Abraham-based nonsense. This ‘proud’ advancement is commemorated with a change in semiotics. The childish one-god, representing the absolute judge and jury – Creator – is renamed one-whole, and tis absolute jurisdiction is represented as ‘order’. The creator factor replaced by determination.


Abraham proved his submission to the absolute, i.e., one-god, by ‘willing’ to sacrifice his one and only son – representation of his genetic destiny – and the Modern surrenders his ‘will’ to absolute-order, as evidence of his ‘acquiescence’ to an inevitable fate.
Fate replaces faith.
The assumed ‘cost’ hides a ‘secret’ ‘benefit’ requiring self-deceit. The actor absolves himself of all accountably – for the Christian this is a matter of surrendering to the one-god’s Will, as a test and testament of his own will’s inferiority and non-existence. In the dark all merges, all distinction vanish – with the nil all observable existence is nullified – unification in one-absolute, nil-absolute.  
The ‘nil’ was a technological advancement – not known to the ancients. The ancient-Greeks had no concept for 0 = nil. Its invention, as a negation of the abstraction, represented as 1 = one, encompassed the binary-logic (dualism) of Nihilism. ‘God’ had to have a counter-part, ‘Satan’, to explain the self-contradictions.    


Since all is determined it follows a path in accordance to a ‘plan’ that does not exist in the coming future or in a ‘beyond’ but in the past, made ‘immanent’ as present – insert Spinoza here. The ‘telos’ precedes the event, directing it from the ‘past’.
There’s not even a pretence of an ‘advancement’ toward the inevitability of an absolute end – represented as ‘god’ – like a child learning to walk towards the outstretched hands of its parent, but there’s a ‘push’ from behind into a state of emptiness, directed from behind, as one would a puppet.

Submission to a one-god, is replaced with a surrender to the inevitability of one’s fate. The sacrifice is evaluated using hedonistic criteria – it feels ‘good’ therefore it is ‘true.’

Will is the focus of a mind on an objective. The objective is determined by the individual’s judgment. When the individual has lost all respect for its own judgements, it surrenders to external authorities – preferably dead ones so as to not feel ashamed. This loss of confidence in one’s self is compensated with hyperbole – over-confident displays of certainty – and with an underlying desire to conceal this in some variant of universality, or uniformity – such as the levelling down of all into absolutes, and the indirect method of implying absolute sinfulness, and/or uniform shame, universal slavery, universal absolute certainty/uncertainty – all degrees are to be imploded into some form of a singularity, within which all becomes part of a one that dissolves the individual into a pool of uniformity.
The individual seeks distinction in performance – utility to other – which is also, according to his own positions, not about him but about a universal.

Those who have little to lose, or little according to their own evaluations, are the most willing to sacrifice what little they do have to a possible reward – see Communism: the impoverished will revolt because they have nothing to lose; the young are rebelliousness because they have less to lose, in comparison to an older individual – that and they have more energies to expunge and can endure the loss of.
This fact applies to all aspects of the human condition. The willingness to lose what is of little worth, so as to gain the possibility of a higher return, is the mark of mind that has a decreased appreciation of himself. A gamble made by a desperate mind.

Of what worth is a gift given without a loss; without a cost?
Christian 'universal love' is a 'whore's love': accessible to all, for a price; deserved by all who show the proper reverence - who sacrifice their ego, their reason, their will.
It is a 'gift' all are worthy of, if they follow the rituals and have paid their communal dues.
Fatalism makes of the gift a predetermined inevitability, the 'giver' must internally come to terms with; with what must be offered.
There is no 'free' offering (potlatch) and so nothing is lost, nothing is sacrificed - made sacred - by the 'giver'.
A man that offers his servitude - his loyalty, love, care - offers something he can keep for himself; he can withhold, otherwise he is simply stoically accepting his lot in life and making the 'best of' circumstances he can do nothing about - he is a slave coming to terms with his enslavement.
Stoicism is what has been integrated into Christianity - along with Platonism.
Christians integrate it as a ploy: the absolute one-god 'gives' free-will to man to be .sacrificed. in accordance with his Will - a none gift 'gift'. In Biblical narratives God 'gives' man free-will to test man's 'faith'... determining his fate.
The option is: surrender your free-will, which was gifted, or else! A non-gift gift.
Man, subsequently pays the price for choosing 'wrongly'....in other words, man exercises his free-will in opposition to god's Will, and 'loses' Paradise. He 'falls from grace, upon the dirty earth'; where he is expects to make amends for his wilful insolence.
Like a visitor bringing a house-warming present, with restrictions on its use.
The honour of hospitality is inverted into an imposition upon the home-owner's generosity.
Christians use the ruse of 'free-will' as a mechanism to facilitate absolute surrender of mind/body to the absolute named 'god'.
In secular terminology this is upgraded to the concept of 'absolute order' - also called determinism.
Universal sinfulness is replaced by universal determinism; one-god is replaced by oneness, the cocnept, wholeness, and/or absolute Order.
Abrahamism is updated, modernized, into secular forms.
Nihilism still underlies the concepts. A defensive need to deal with emerging self-awareness, using ideas, abstractions, represented by symbols/words.

Temporal Lag

Consequences fall upon individuals long after they have changed their mind.
This is experienced as divine providence – often called ‘karma’ – as if the ego had no part in determining its own fate.
A mind’s previous judgements, expressed through choices, will produce fruit that will fall upon it long after it has reversed its judgements, and has practised different choices for a long time. This lag between moving towards an objective and suffering the costs of such a movement, gives the conscious mind the impression that it is under the power of divine retribution, or suffering the outcome of what has been determined. The ego absolves itself of all responsibility, calling its cleansing ‘fate’.

The first and primary context is always survival.
Not survival when it is guaranteed by an external force, or offered as a 'right', from a intervening power.

Everything is in relation to this context...even the choice of placing 'survival' in a subordinate motivating role to some ideal.
Survival is how biologists define 'fitness' - including survival of genes in time, after the end of life.
Nihilists place survival above all other motives, so they are willing to sacrifice integrity, reason, and their own self-esteem for its sake.

Underlying the obsession with the validation of an un-free will is self-preservation.
The individual senses - without necessarily comprehending - that its well-being, its very survival, depends on absolving self of all responsibility, no matter how small.
For a living organism the starting premises is always survival - it is primal and primitive.
From there man advances to the higher motives, called 'noble', where personal survival is secondary to something else - something other than self - which would include offspring that carry a part of self.

For example, the noble spirit places integrity above all other considerations....at the very cost of personal interests.
A noble spirit, for instance, places the ariston, above self-interest.

The Nihilist places his self-preservation above all other considerations: above pride, above identity, above honesty, above everything, except personal, subjective, survival.
This is exemplified in its desperate need to maintain social cohesion and parity, as a means towards its own self-preservation.
There is nothing above survival....so it sacrifices, as evidence of its loyalty and commitment, to this shard fear and anxiety.
Even the desire to be popular, to live in eternal infamy, is a indirect need to self-preserve.
The very psychology of Nihilism is defensive, emerging as a mechanism to protect the ego from an indifferent reality.

Whatever methods are used, the ego hiding behind altruism, sympathy, emotion, scepticism, cynicism, linguistics...the motive remains discernible; it is self-preservation. Pure manimalistic [sic] survival, hiding behind pseudo-intellectual rhetoric, attempting to hide its primary motive behind intellectual jargon.

Nietzsche: Secular Saviour, or prophet of an upgraded Modern Messiah
For those born and raised in the western traditions Nietzsche has become a substitute, secular, saviour i.e., a Jesus-figure, coming to earth to liberate them from their Abrahamic shame & guilt, replacing it with a proud surrender to universal order; a depersonalization of shame – through the abstraction of the Divine absolute, converting it from a figure, an idol, to an idea; the ‘powerless’ spirit – renamed from its more submissive label i.e., ‘sinful’ – found worldly ‘salvation’ in its participation within the supreme Will to power. Grateful ‘true-believers,’ could sacrifice their feeble, untrustworthy, ‘will’ to a universal Will, without feeling ashamed of it; they could cleanse themselves of all responsibility, proud of their acceptance of the Universal Will’s decrees, renamed determinations, without the ego-shattering anthropomorphic obviousness. The process was made more subtle, by converting the anthropomorphic concepts – once effective among more illiterate masses – into abstract ideas, all could project their own ideals into – an upgrade of the same mind-numbing mythologies.
For others, born and raised outside western traditions – not belonging to European bloodlines – he was a welcomed prophet pronouncing the validation of their chosen Messiah i.e., money, Will to Earthly power, overcoming whatever guilt and shame that may have lingered in their usury and elitist, more pragmatic, salvation myths.
Nietzsche’s own rebellion against his father’s Christianity became a call for all those born of poor paternal stock, or into environments void of both tangible and intangible father figures – all the growing masses of ‘lost,’ after the demise of the Abrahamic one-God, found in Nietzsche a father-figure, or a brotherly saviour, leading them to absolution.
He left no room for devout Christians to reinterpret his aphoristic prose in ways that could save them, as well. His animosity towards his own father expressed itself later in life, when he turned against his worldly mentors Schopenhauer and Wagner, using them as substitutes for his own coming of age rituals, leaving behind both the spiritual and tangible father-figures. In a post-modern world this, alone, gained him a following, among those – mostly young impressionable males – who found in his suggestive prose metaphors for their own predicament.

Upgrade from Spiritual towards Secular Metaphors - progress from humanity's infancy towards adolescence:  

*Replace the concept of a one-god, the absolute Divine, with the purified abstraction 'one' - eliminating the anthropomorphic 'god' cocnept = absolute Order, the updated cocnept of the one-God.

*Replace sinfulness with shamefulness, implying absolution, a cleansing as a form of 'liberation', independence - empowerment. To not hold yourself accountable to anything or anyone other than yourself - subjectivity of self-esteem.

*Replace the 'salvation' of the ideal, with the salvation of the idea, the abstraction. Salvation sought within - esotericism. Subjectivity of power.

*Replace submission to the absolute authority of the one-god, with the absolute surrender to universal Will.

*Replace god's Will, with just Will.

*Replace god's 'motive' from 'love' to 'power'. The infants need for parental care - return to the womb - is replaced with an adolescent drive to assert itself in relation to the authoritarian parent, gradually admitting that he and the parent are 'one' as a way of re-turning to the parent admitting failure - as adolescents are wont to do.

*Replace faith with fate - determinism. Eliminating the 'face' of the power the mind submits to erases the ego-bruising elements.
A toddler walks towards the outstretched arms of the mother - pulling the child to her; the teenager walks away from the outstretched arms of the father, pushing him onward.  

*Replace 'saviour' with pop-cultural idol/icon, or make it even more abstract i.e. money, or the numerical symbol #1, through which this New Age Messiah manifests through - both offering salvation, liberation from past, or sum of all nurturing i.e. Nature, or offering salvation from shame, finding salvation from ego burdening associations with other, and liberty in shamelessness.
In this binary scheme the 0 is the power of negating, 'evil': absolutely negating the absolute one's presumed perfection.
The basis of identity and distinction - of consciousness - is considered a 'negative' in the process towards absolute integration in the absolute one. The 'Devil' was characterized as a 'liar'....the nil is the illusion of diversity, of consciousness - the evil lie of self. Individuation is an 'illusion' - oneness is the divine 'truth'.
The 'good' is a surrender to universal non-distinct, oneness; submission of the illusion of free-will to absolute the determinations of the one-Will.  

*Replace prophets with socially acknowledged experts/teachers, philosophers, or icons of universal wisdom. The obscurity of the chosen prophets designating the superiority of their prophesies.
The message is 'positive' when it preaches assimilation into the one; it is negative when it preaches rejection of the one.
The New Age prophets are harbingers of one-ness - Abrahamic God's new name revealed to the masses of the lost and desperate.

This is 'progress' from an infantile myth, developed to manipulate illiterate undedicated masses, towards a more abstract, ideological myth, developing to manipulate more literate, educated masses with access to information.
Humanity is 'maturing' from infantile mythologies towards adolescent ones.
Each cultural cycle, according to Spengler, reflects organic phases in development - from youth towards old age - but the process is not long enough to achieve maturation, as the organism dies before it can overcome its infantile needs/desires. An individual can live an entire lifetime never advancing beyond a psychological adolescence - still trapped in the concepts his biological parents instilled into him, unable to let go of them by juxtaposing them with the world.
Prejudices are passed no from parent to child, and in the case of missing or substandard parents, the role of parent is taken over by institutions, passing onto the child institutionalized prejudices.
The psychology of the infant, thinking the parent is god-like, to the adolescent, who cannot overcome the parent's omnipotence, prevents the engagement of mind with world, particularly if the mind has failed to make an impact or has lost trust, confidence, in its own judgements, its own focus of will: an overestimation or underestimation of self can produce insecurity, forcing a ego-based compensation.
The lucid part of 'self' i.e. 'ego', defensively reacting to its developing self-awareness, producing self-assessments that are not always flattering.

'Destiny and 'teleology' through the prism of Fatalism:

"Destiny" implies that we are impotent links in a causal chain, and that nothing we do, or say, or choose, will impact the final outcome - perceived as a looking-back upon the past as if it could not have been any other way.
An after-the-fact assessment claiming to have foresight, when all it practices is hindsight.
Insinuated. subconsciously, in fatalism is a 'telos' which is consciously denied. The mind self-deceives itself that it has 'overcome' the one-God, or that it has surpassed the superstition of 'teleology' while also claiming that life, and consciousness are all inevitable steps in a universal ordered, plan, toward an unknown inevitable end.
The individual extricates himself from the causal chain - convincing himself that he is a hapless victim of circumstances he is unable to affect, or that whatever he does is part of a universal plan he is not privy to - his own choices and judgements nothing more than mediating illusions expressing universal conciousness, renamed universal Will.
In this way its own responsibility is eradicated as nothing more than inevitable - no matter how it judges or what it chooses it was always 'meant to be'. A form of self-absolution, no different than the one offered by Jesus to his followers: the self-gratifying rewards for surrendering reason and will to faith.
A comforting idea that implies that no matter what we do or think all will turn out in exactly the way they were 'always' meant to turn out - our historical responsibilities surrendering to personal, shallow, pleasures.
The easiest sacrifice to make, and so the most common, throughout history. It was the only way to integrate the inferior into stable and harmonious social structures.
Abrahamics did not invent this, they merely exploited and manipulated it to build a following and through it to achieve power, through their powerlessness - becoming insidious predators by selling victimhood.
Inverting the world, from real, idealized, into ideal, realized.
The mental virus (nihilism), the psychological infection was not rejected, but embraced and integrated into a redefinition of health. It became symbiotic - a parasite.

With Christianity shame and guilt were not invented. These feelings pre-exist all cultures - but they were exploited and manipulated to produce capitulation - total submission of body and mind, called soul.
They did the same with the feelings (emotions) of love and hate, and with the socially produced moral code of conduct. An evolved mechanism, facilitating cooperative survival strategies, was converted to a mystical, divine, idea - an ideology.

What fatalism implies is that no matter what the quality of judgement, and the outcome of a choice, the consequences are, inherently, 'good' and 'perfect' because it is all part of a universal plan, though they will not use these words but obfuscate and use prose to pretend they are saying something more 'profound' and complicated, something only a few 'chosen' and/or 'saved' or 'enlightened' - depending on what context  they wish to identify and place themselves within - can truly and fully appreciate.
It's the same methods used to sell crap art, produced by questionable 'talent', to gullible fools - under the heading of Modern, or abstract.

Fatalism wants to selectively distance self from its own participation in its own destiny.
It wants to, at once, remain the agency of all 'positive' outcomes, but also remain innocent of all 'negative' ones.
When exposed, it shrinks into itself, sacrificing the 'positive' so as to retain innocent form the 'negative'.
It's own 'principles' force it into a conundrum, just as it often does with all nihilists.
But when pressured, or threatened with exposure they will always seek shelter in a negative - the negation of what may prove destructive to its own self-evaluation.
Remaining unaccountable to others, means they must remain positively accountable towards self. The others pressure the ego to seek sheltering inside itself, in order to remain intact, unblemished.
The 'negative' is externalized, as the pressuring otherness being rejected, and the ego is 'cleansed' in 'positivity' - if not a 'victim', directly, then indirectly a slave to an 'external' entity; imprisoned by it - if not god, then universal order, Will; otherness in its many guises.
The ego wants something to 'blame', to accuse, for its predicaments, and when its motive is exposed it obfuscates, altering its jargon to insinuate a vague external otherness.
Something, to surrender to and not feel ashamed.
Shame is the eternal other judging evaluating, juxtaposing, comparing.
It becomes a God, but it did not start out as such. Shame was the individual through the eyes of the beholding other - emerging in social organisms as a by-product of of their survival strategies.

Notice: the application of theory is different from the theory itself.
This is true for all ideologies, political, spiritual, or philosophical.
Pragmatism exposes the ideal to what it must adapt, or die.

In theory, Christianity and Communism are perfect, in practice they diverge into the multiple variants attempting to explain why they failed, or were forced to self-deceive.
But, self-deception is part of their underlying motive, so they integrate new adjustments with ease, incorporating 'patches' to plug intellectual holes, or to prevent the inevitable outcome of their own underlying 'principles', pushed to their logical ends.

In theory, determinism, defined absolutely, provides a self-deceiving mechanism, where the individual looks back at the consequences as if they were always 'meant to be', part of some universal end, though ends they will deny - cleansing themselves from all participation in the effect, by making the cause an inevitability they could have done nothing to change.
Perceiving the world from the distancing after-the-fact' is how divinity is constructed. Distance cleanses the mind from the immediate. From the distances of space and time, all acquire an 'positive' aura.
Does not the heart grow fond of what is not present?
Do not the dead become idealized by the distances of space/time?
Is not the Divine the noumenon distancing itself from the worldly, the apparent, the present? Whether it be projected in some coming immanent future, or projected back to a singular beginning, a creator one, the effect remains the same.

Two psychotic types emerge:
One describing himself in Abrahamic terms, implying a one-god without actually naming him - self-deceiving himself that he is the absent Creator, one-god; the other laughing away the first's self-deception, seeing through the 'Emperor's clothes' into his underlying nakedness, adopting the negating Satanic position in the positive/negative dualities - self-deceiving himself to absolve himself of all connections to the negation, distancing himself from the 'scene of the crime' pretending to be an 'innocent bystander'.
Narcissist & Cynic, the two psychotic ends in this institutionalized bipolarity.
Both change the jargon to distance themselves from failed pragmatic applications of the same methodologies. They repeat what has already failed, or has been exposed as fake and false; both deny their association with Abrahamism - the spiritual manifestation of Nihilism - though they simply change the rhetoric, the monikers, the symbols, but retain the definitions and the description intact.
Vehemently denying Christianity they then proceed to describe their beliefs using tried and tested narratives, easily updating the imagery and storyline to accommodate the modernization of the same concepts.

Except for a psychosomatic effect, what value does negation offer?
The benefit comes at a price. The 'positive' psychosomatic effects are accompanied by a psychosomatic entrapment in a repeating cycle, seeking blame outside itself, because it cannot accept, nor even acknowledge, personal responsibility.

Of what benefit is the denial of race, for example?
Will it change the outcome, or will it bog the mind in its own delusions, failing to acknowledge an error that may free it from a repeating pattern?
Will the conviction that race is a social construct, change the product of race, or of race-mixing, or will it force the individual to escape its mistake in the accusation of others and their 'hateful racism' to explain away the obvious consequences, and preserve the delusional ideology?

Even the belief in a one-god, as the Christians define and describe the concept, has its earthly benefits, but at what cost?
Pascal tried to sweep them under the proverbial carpet, but will denial make them go away?

The 'benefits' of believing in the 'absolute freedom,' and the 'absolute un-freedom' of the will, are multiple, just as the 'costs.'
What comforts also condemns. Is comfort, avoiding stress, not accompanied by atrophying and increasing feebleness?

The Nihilist wants to preserve the benefits, by contradicting his own beliefs. He absolves himself of responsibility, but accuses others for imposing upon him suffering. He pretending to abide by the theoretical philosophy of Stoicism, while thinking and behaving country to its core principles.
Nihilist must deceive, starting with themselves, so as to reap the benefits without paying the costs. They must lie, to themselves, so as to become convincing to others, in order to survive in a world they contradict with their own beliefs. If they dared to live according to their own beliefs they would quickly suffer the consequences, forcing them into a new round of rejecting accountability.

Responsibility begins and ends with admitting one's own participation in one's own fate, no matter how many other parameters can be added or how small one's own participation might be.
Choice, is the expression of will; choice determined by circumstances that the individual contributes to but is entirely overwhelmed by.
This is why consciousness evolved to serve the organism in the dynamic interactive present.
Choice slightly modifying all subsequent choices available to the individual, so that gradually, the individual with cone choice after another, leads itself to consequences.
That's when it rebels,trying to distance itself from the end result, if the consequences are 'negative' or not what it imagined they would be.
It never questions its own judgements, all the tiny little choices, conscious or not, that directed it to this point in space/time.
Looking back, it seems as if someone else was choosing, or, as if, the choices were forced upon it...if, and only if the outcome is undesirable or disappointing.
If the outcome is 'positive' then it readily accept full responsibility, as if ti were all due to its plan, its wilful directions.

Hyperbole is how the mind copes.
The narcissist over-estimates itself, so it must believe that even the 'negative' was part of its plan - it was all willed.
No matter what happens it convinces itself that it was the creator.
The cynic intentionally under-estimates itself - sacrificing the 'positive' so as to preserve its ego from the inevitable 'negative' consequences of its fallible judgements.
In both the ego is in charge of reasoning.
Not ego, relating to world, adjusting and adapting itself to reality, but world has to be adjusted, interpreted in ways that preserve the ego.

Nihilism is and always will, be a defensive, self-preservation, reaction to an emerging self-awareness.
How 'self' compares to other; how, and to what degree, self determines its own fate; how self chooses, without having to be aware of it; how the self's judgment determines its choices and the subsequent consequences.

This is the foundation of Nihilism, using semiotics to self-preserve, to protect the sense of self, the EGO.
Nihilism never doubts its own principles, it judges the application, particularly when it involves others.

For example, a Christian never doubts the existence of a one-god, but only ni man's failings and failures to properly abide by his will; the communist does not doubt the principles of Marxism, but only men who failed to interpret and apply them properly; the Modern never doubts his own convictions that race and sex are social constructs, and all is equally subjective, but accuses the world for failing to abide by these principles, and others of being racists and sexists, so as to explain why race-denial leads to negative consequences.

Christianity and Abrahamism did not invent shame and guilt. these emotions go back to the emergence of self to itself, within and in relation to a group.
Shame goes back to the pagans relationship with their own dead. they behaved, keeping in mind, how their behaviour shamed or made proud their own ancestors; they held themselves accountable before their own dead.

A man who feels no guilt, no shame, for a injustice down to another, is not merely a shameless degenerate, he is a psychopath that cannot be trusted, because his shamelessness makes him immune to his own behaviours and their impact.
Psychopaths abound and are multiplying in Modern systems, for many reasons - one being that the system benefits from psychotics such as narcissists and cynics, as it does from institutionalized autism: specialized knowledge and understanding.
It's the only way to deal with increasing numbers of un-invested males, after the demise of Paternalism.
The growing numbers of 'free-radicals' have to be socially sublimated.

Destiny is when the individual's genetic predispositions (genes), and his will (determined by environment conditions - including memes) are in agreement - in alignment, in harmony.
Mind/Body directing the organism by adjusting to random events that contradict its path.
When mind contradicts, or diverts from the body (meme/gene conflict = Nihilism) we can call it 'fate'.

Both can only be appreciated, after-the-fact - as if they were inevitable - part of a grand design - when the individual was a participant in his own destiny/fate.
The degree that the individual was a participant is determined by the individuals awareness and strength, in relation to the forces that confront him.
Chaos - properly defined as randomness) is the only way Uni-versal absolute order can be contradicted by the human will - absence of an absolute means nothing is ever omnipotent, or omniscient. There is no One, other than in the mind where it exists because it is held there in vague insinuating approximation - occultism obscurantism.
The 'proverbial' fragments in the absolute singularity - the one - is the 'nil'. This is why in biblical and in ancient pagan myths the benefactor of man was always depicted as one who broke a rule.
Promethean and/or Satanic.  
Also depicted as a 'trickster' or 'deceiver'.

The absolute rule, or natural order, must be 'broken' or find expression through a fissure in its theoretical perfection.
But this can also deceive man, making him feel a god who can challenge cosmic order, at a great cost.
The degree he exercises his 'free-will' is the degree to which he pays the cost, or must endure a price for the benefit.
In fact, it is man who takes advantage of the absence of absolutes, the fissured/fragments in absolute order so as to gradually impose his own will - with the subsequent collateral effects being unforeseeable.
Promethean 'forethought' exposes the fissures in sequences. In the immediate, all seems to be in accordance to a plan, but from the distance of space/time, subtle divergences can be revealed.
Only man can project, into future, using precedent, and hold a large space/time continuum in his memory, therefore only man can find patterns that direct patterns, but also see them fail in their predictable consistency.

A simpler mind, unable to hold in mind precedent, not the imagination to project it, accurately, or as accurately as possible (superior approximation) is unable to 'foresee' but also unable to perceive how History may repeat, but never in exactly the same way - every repetition slightly diverging from the other.
This slight divergence is what we experience as 'linear time', or a momentum towards increasing chaos - expanding space, tending towards the infinite, the absolute, but never attaining it. The movement/momentum is never finalized - atelιs ατελής - τέλειο = perfect.  The absence of 'telos' is imperfection, incompleteness.
The movement/momentum is never completed, never finalized. The absolute is never attained.  
Another way of saying 'absent absolute'.

What 'great feat' has the Modern degenerate accomplished?
He has replaced the word 'god' with the word 'order', while retaining all other aspects of the implied absolute.
He's replaced 'faith' with 'fate'.
He's replaced 'Will of God' with an undefined 'Will to power', coming from absolute order. Not even this idea is his own - he always adopts and defers, surrendering to other. - call him Jesus, or call him Nietzsche, both prophets of a noetic absolute.
The 'Christian god' is not actually 'dead', but he's only been renamed - the idea remains alive in the mind, where it has been baptised and reborn, in a more abstract form.
Abrahamism, is reinvigorated with an update, and a repackaging...as it always has been. The virus survives, using a new moniker, manipulating and exploiting the same human follies.
"Don't blame the playa, blame the game". Nigger concepts for niggardly minds.
The Jews simply integrate it into a symbiosis, of usury....the Modern is forced to invent new excuses and self-denying, self-deceiving excuses that retain him in a stare of perpetual victimhood.
Denying everything that hints at personal culpability.
He'll sacrifice everything and anything to remain alive, and if this means his own integrity and reason, then he has no qualms about making the sacrifice - like Abraham.

Abrahamism is, presumptuously transcended, but it is never overcome, because it isn't a 'thing' it is a attitude.

Consider Fatalism, in the light of the recent air-plane crashes.
If all is determined then nobody is at fault, because all is according to some divine, or universal ordered, plan - an inevitability.
The air-plane mechanics, pilots, designers, engineers can claim it.
But if they lose a family member then they demand someone pay, and that someone be held accountable. They seek the cause, the point where a wrong 'choice' resulted in a dire, for them, consequence.

Fatalists are crypto-Abrahamics....or to be more precise: the types of minds that thought up, and were seduced by the implications of the dogmas - their core principles and values - are the same types that will be seduced by an updated version - a more scientific, abstract, philosophical, version of the exact same implications, delivered and served in a different language.
The exact same types of minds that found Marxism irresistible, because of what it 'promised' will be the exact same kinds of minds that will find post-modernity similarly irresistible, and promising, but also superior to Marxism because it is updated.
An update incorporates some of the ideas that contradicted and eventually destroyed the original, just as a virus that survive the autoimmune system, or any medications used to bolster it, will be more resistant to medications and to human autoimmune systems - they become super-viruses.

Christianity is integrating Nietzsche's critique to be reborn as a new and updated version of Abrahamism - super-Christianity, let's say...only it'll have a more 'sexy' moniker attached to it, representing its update, its 'progress'.
'Ironically...'What does not kill, only serves to make stronger...'

The Abrahamic one-God, has been 'reborn' as a pure abstract idea - more abstract than Jesus could ever have been reborn as. An idea that lacks all physicality, all tangible, corporeal anthropomorphism, and yet retains the core principles that made it viral among the slaves of the Roman catacombs, and the sick, and desperate across the globe.
It's really of little psychological importance if the absolute is imagined as a Male, with a beard, that imposes his Will upon you, or if he is converted to an 'it', a concept, an idea, with the exact same impositions.
The effect is the same, with slight modifications.

While re-watching the movie Castaway I remembered something the YouTube poster Black-Pilled had said when he analysed Forest Gump - somehow Tom Hanks is always involved - or American Beauty, exposing the political agenda being pushed by Hollywood.
It came in towards the end of the film, when Tom Hanks, having lost everything, but survived, stands on a crossroads - a theme that is often repeated.
The entire film is about how utterly and completely 'helpless' man is; how impotent to do anything but endure his own fate.
The free-will question.
Hollywood promotes this return to the pre-primordial sin age, of lost paradise - before man, in Biblical terms, lost the Garden of Eden because he pissed off God, i.e. absolute order.
See, in the Abrahamic canon 'free-will' is used as a ruse - a trigger, to exemplify man's helplessness before the absolute one - see Abraham and what he was commanded to do to his own son.

Christianity believes in family just as much as it believes in free-will. Man's will, is the 'problem' for Nihilism - it must replace god's will, as the absolutely divine, or it must become absolute submission, a mere shadow of the one-god.
There is no in-between degree, i.e. there is no reality when the world is an either/or absolute.
The absolute is the negation of the real, whether it be defined as absolute ONE or absolute NIL.
It is why these minds speak as if they've discovered finalities, ends....even while denying that they believe in theologies.
Their demented hypocritical, self-deceiving belief systems are entirely about ends and beginnings, in the absolute sense of the concepts. They always express finalities, absolute truths about this or that. Everything has a completion in their mindset.  
But I digress...
This Hollywood propaganda - subtle and repeating - is partly to blame for American indifference in the political process - a motive is found - because if you believe that nothing you do can change the inevitable, you cease participating - you become a passive observer of events.You know 'life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what's you're gonna get', the expression of fatalistic thinking , man as recipient of his fate, oblivious to its contents but forces to unfold and taste each morsel, one by one.
Shame and guilt were sued to enforce submission directly, overtly, but now it is used to enforce it indirectly - a return to 'innocence' concerning the consequences of one's own actions is a declaration of surrender to the Other.
The massage is that 'nothing can de done about anything' so why even try?
The mantra of the cynic who can only laugh as others struggle when he passively sits by waiting for things to happen to him.  
What is lost is spirit....dignity, the sense of responsibility and accountability  to revert to a child-like state of innocent joy; what is sacrificed participation in one's own fate.
They chisel at the human spirit, first convincing it to not trust its own senses - what is perceived is illusory or superficial, not real, i.e., male/female, race, appearances are all irrelevant; then they chisel away at man's confidence in his own judgement, i.e., nothing can be accurately judged, everything is doubtful; then they chisel away at man's will to power, i.e., all is pre-determined, will before-hand, man is God's minion, his reflection, his pawn.

Christianity was not overcome, it was renamed and repackaged....as was Judaism....and the same will happen to Islam. Watch how Islam will be re-marketed as a religion of love, tolerance and compassion, and only interpreted erroneously by 'terrorists'. They did the same with Communism - it was not the Communist ideal that was in error, but only wrongly understood and applied by conniving imperfect humans.      
Ya see....when you accept the absolute as one, whole, perfect, then you indirectly imply man's imperfection, in relation to it - God's will, is better than man's will, ergo surrender to whatever He has in store for you....He knows best...and ther's nothing to be done about it.You saw what happened to Adam & Eve when they challenged divine order.
But was this not also part of God's 'plan'? The only thing to do is surrender your will to an otherness, an absolute other, and let things happen.
A mechanism to mentally castrate, keeping sheeple corralled with no fencing; a way to lobotomise manimals, and keep them working and content, resolved to accept whatever is done to them. It's how 'soft-power' manufactures consent, and affirms its hegemony over the masses that serve it - beyond blood, it only bleeds money.
Herd psychology....slave morality....fatalism.
Ha!!!

The cynic will have us believe that existence is a big repeating joke, with the same punchlines.
He would have us believe this so as to not face the realization that his bad choices, his feeble mind, is partly to blame for his/her circumstances - that the first one to 'accuse' , if one aspires to nobility, is himself/herself.
He would rather laugh than cry.
Because what would it say about him, and his lineage, if he was to admit that he is a decisive factor in his own failures, and in his own suffering?
No, he would rather describe a universe, an enclosure (veritas), as a state of incarceration, where all is regimented, controlled, organized with meticulous precision; where none are at liberty to do nothing other than what has been determined - to count their prison time, awaiting escape....not from imprisonment, but from the experience of it.
He would rather imprison everyone than face the responsibility of his own predicament....because, the comparison hurts too much.
This is why Nihilism protects the mind from its emerging self-awareness - to help it cope with what it is, in relation to what it is not, and can never become; this is why the Left hates its own kind more than the alien other. Its own kind is a constant reminder of what it could have been, what it 'ought' to have become....but did not, could not; a constant reflection reminding the mind of its own imperfections; this is why Nihilism is so seductive, so attractive, so irresistible an ideal to deny, for the average mind.
Without chaos, properly understood as random energies, there is no 'free-will' - no personal culpability; the absolute offers absolution, whether it is imagined as a bearded old man, or as an abstraction, a oneness, a complete, perfect, whole.
For the individual immersed in herd-psychology it is preferable to be a slave, among slaves, than to endure the presence of a free-spirit, risking the wilds, accepting the consequences, measuring itself, against the unknowable.

Biblical allegories describe the 'loss of absolute order' as a 'falling from grace' - an awakening to choice, delivered by an 'evil trickster', i.e., serpentine Satan.
But then they advise against it describing it as a ruse - nobody can ever escape God's will, and the attempt is punishable with eternal damnation - that's the message in the narrative.
Abrahamics want to be imprisoned in the 'garden,' dismissing freedom as a demonic trick they will never succumb to.
Man in god's image, is replaced by man as a cog in God's machinery - absolute order describes universal incarceration, i.e., spiritual totalitarianism.
If there is 'eternal return' it is not an absolute copy....describing a universe as a skipping record, repeating the same verse, over and over.
Hindu Yuga describes a process, not a repetition of the same - a multiversity, where each cycle is slightly different than the one before and after, i.e., in some cycles life never emerges, the forces slightly imbalanced, slightly different, making it impossible; in another phase in the cycle your parents have you but you are not the same sex; or they never meet and another is born; or they are never born etc.
Each phase a slight modification of the one before and after.
We see this in our own experiences. No twins are absolutely alike, not even clones are so; no car coming from the assembly line is an absolute perfect copy of the other; no historical event is the exact repetition of the one before, even if the similarities are enough to use history as a predictive tool.
This means that our choices determine the course of events - we are not hapless victims, impotent actors, but participating agencies, adding our own influence to the cosmic flow; we are not helpless bystanders, audience members of our own life's comedic/tragedy - we are improvising actors contributing to the outcome, determining with our every choice the choices that will be subsequently presented to us - to whatever infinitesimally tiny degree; a degree determined by our individual talents, traits, strength of will, judgement, constitution etc.
A plant has significantly less freedom than a mammal, and a human more freedom than a cow.

Feeding into the psychology of the fatalist – i.e., hard determinist – requires the same motive as convincing the modern that there is no human nature – that all behaviour is a product of social circumstances. It makes their manipulation inconsequential.
There is always someone other than a willful agent to accuse and to blame for their predicaments – a sacrifice to preserve the ego’s righteousness. Post-modern retardation; perpetual infancy.
All are “innocent’ before an abstract culprit who will forever stand accused and never brought to trial. It is how the feeble find strength in fatalism.