“Equality is related to the direct interests of individuals who are bent on escaping certain inequalities not in their favor, and setting up new inequalities that will be in their favor, this latter being their chief concern.”

Many make the mistake of thinking that our current decline and ever-spiraling civilizational death is because of the practical implications of the egalitarian ideology, the leveling of the ancient hierarchical society. Were it only that simple, we might actually have some hope of correcting this error before it consumes our world completely. The egalitarian ideology, so integral to the Cult of Progress and its physical manifestation in what many call the ‘Cathedral,’ does not result in an egalitarian society, any more than Marxism resulted in universal equality for citizens of the Soviet Union.

Put into practice, this ideology creates something much worse. Almost as if the whole of Western civilization has capsized, we find that instead of flattening hierarchy, Modernity in fact rotates hierarchy. Those who once ruled our unofficial caste system, the natural Brahmins and Kshatriyas (priests and warriors) have been replaced. The roles remain the same in general practice, but the spiritual constitution of those filling the roles has been completely turned on its head. Today it is the Harijans, the Pariahs, the Untouchables who wear the vestments of priests and particularly wield the enforcement of law through force.

You had better believe you are under a hierarchy. What should truly shock you is how the worst and most unstable elements sit at its peak. No, they don’t wear the finery and regalia, or bear the impressive titles of the ruling castes of bygone eras. After all, they don’t need your respect or awe (that can all go to the supporting castes of smug scientists and vapid celebrities). All that the malicious snowflakes setting policy require from you is your sympathy for their fraudulent plight, and your fear of speaking out against their protected status.

I wish to reproduce in paraphrase a comment that I read recently posted on the Canadian online publication ‘The Globe And Mail‘, specifically relating to the controversial speaking tour of popular neomasculinist author Roosh V. The comment from Helen I. Scott is a rare, candid display of this faux-hierarchical principle of Modernity in action.

“It’s easy to ignore/laugh at/dismiss a guy with a knife (Roosh) when you’re the one holding the gun (the privileged never-been-raped among us who say “just ignore him”). […] But anyone who is vulnerable (women, children, LGBTQ etc…) deserves the comfort of having society give at least lip-service affirmation (through twitter, “moral outrage” etc…) that it is wrong and that we don’t actually believe that rape is ok. […] Denouncing t-shirts, calling out harassers, and expressing moral outrage at hate speech is categorized as mob rule by some – I prefer to call it direct democracy – where everyone has a voice and (via social media) a relatively equal platform. […].”

To make a factual correction, the ‘direct democracy’ referred to here has also included physical assault, an attempted visa ban, doxxings, false rape threats, and ‘swatting’. However the reason I am presenting this is to show how people who are apparently in this ‘privileged’ group feel about those of the professional victim class. Like so many words twisted by our Modern lexiconographers, ‘privileged’ actually translates as ‘Sudras (peasants) – and deserving of it!’.

What you’ll find if you look into those accused of being ‘privileged’ in our day and age is that they are in fact despised by those with power. Not as badly as the avowed racists, sexists, and homophobes of course, but limited in potential by their own tragically unnoticed bigotry. It seems that Ms. Scott is likely one of these such people, and thanks to remarkable Cathedral brainwashing, she defends her betters with gusto.

In practical terms, the ‘privileged’ are below the ‘vulnerable’. See how language works here on Sesame Street? Could it be any more clear, the direction of this hierarchy, when the commenter actually declares that the ‘privileged’ owe tribute to the ‘vulnerable’ in the form of “at least lip-service affirmation”–in other words, a humiliating declaration of inferiority and fealty. In order to appease this new ruling caste, all of us must flagellate ourselves for our wickedness. If anyone steps out of line to challenge this insanity, then direct democracy must be rallied to crush them, critics crying hypocrisy be damned. It is just too easy for the Canadian people to dismiss hateful bigots, without realizing how damaging they truly are to the highest and most exalted individuals. A dereliction of duty takes place when we fail to pay the tribute to our cultural wardens in the form of an open pledge of loyalty to the new order and brutality towards its enemies.

I suppose the genius of this hierarchy is it creates a kind of victimhood optical illusion to fool the common people into thinking that, even while they are acting as if the ‘vulnerable’ are above them, the reality is that such groups, be they victims of imaginary college campus rape, ethnic minorities, or the LGBTBBQ cartel, are actually the lowly oppressed class who should be defended out of charity. It’s a remarkable, rebellion-proof strategy. How can the people rebel against that which they don’t even realize is ruling over them?

The term ‘kakistocracy’ comes from the root words kákisto (worst) and cratia (rule). While Modern governments take on many different representative forms, this word describes all of them on the meta and hierarchical-descriptive level. All of them have reached or are reaching (though delayed in some circumstances) a ‘Rule of the Worst’. The elements of human society that were yesterday consigned to the gutter (liars, cowards, deviants, and foreign bandits) today have more safeguards around them than any Pope in history.

A slavish devotion by the self-harming majority means there is no need for a 24/7 detachment of Swiss Guard, however. All potential threats to the newly installed hierarchy will be handled by ‘direct democracy.’ Undoubtedly the most tragic element of this is that unwittingly, by serving the will of the worst and catering to their every parasitic whim and wish, the laypeople of Western civilization who thresh the crop, man the industries, tend to the sick, and generate the vast capital that keeps society ticking over, are in fact furnishing their own tomb in many respects. We can save very few of them. But let us hope that when this tomb is finally sealed, those who today are pretenders to the glory of the high castes, are sealed inside as well, to rot with the masses they so vindictively tricked with their legacy of deception.

The post Paying Tribute To The Kakistocracy appeared first on Social Matter.

The races have strengths, weaknesses, different developmental histories, and most importantly, unique metaphysical characteristics that are held in common by the members of that race and influence the kind of society they will build. This has its practical political implications in the adage “people are different and thrive in different systems.” For instance, the failure of blacks in America to achieve any kind of large-scale success is not due to institutionalized racial prejudice, but rather black people’s inability to operate in the kind of society in which they live.

And so, I come to the discussion of what I’ll call ‘racial kryptonite’. What does this mean? Well, because the races are intrinsically different, external factors and influencing agents will have varying effects on the different races. Thus, there are some factors that might be harmless or benign in terms of their effect on one race that when introduced to another become highly destructive; they become racial kryptonite, in other words.

This isn’t necessarily because of the factor’s inherent qualities (although it often is) but has more to do with a negative mix between the factor in question and metaphysical racial characteristics.

Take the question of African Americans. It is without question that at one time in history, this race was in most instances hindered from advancing any way in society by racial discrimination etched not only into the social views of most whites, but also enshrined into law in the southern states. However, it’d be quite odd to claim that this is still the case today, or has been the case since the victory of the Civil Rights Movement.

Today in America, no race gets a free pass like blacks. They are benefited by racial quotas in the public and private sphere, the Affirmative Action program which allows them access to colleges that they wouldn’t be able to gain entrance to otherwise, and a veritable Chinese wall of defense in the form of the supine American media which loves to push a victimhood narrative whenever some thug is shot.

Blacks are not the victims of racial discrimination today.

And yet, they do look like victims. According to the Kaiser Foundation, in every state where poverty is assessed by race, blacks have a poverty rate double that of whites, and in some cases even triple. According to Fortune Magazine, only 4% of Fortune 500 CEOs are minorities, and that includes Asians and Latinos who are likely more prevalent in that 4% than blacks. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, blacks have higher unemployment rates than whites in every age bracket, in some, such as the 18-19 bracket, by a considerable margin. We would expect these statistics if blacks were truly actors on an unfair playing field, slanted against them by racism, and yet there is no such slant. Today, any white person who is even suspected of racism is hounded out of the public square, loses their job, and is vilified by any media that picks up the story. This is not an environment in which a white supremacist hierarchy could survive. So, what is going on? Why are blacks in America failing?

Some would argue blacks are simply not as smart as white people, but this is about far more than intelligence. My argument is that the game has been rigged against black people since the Civil Rights Movement, but not in the way that they might suspect.

Let me illustrate where I’m going with this via a well-known statistic. Discoverthenetworks.org has an article which outlines the following:

“Economics professor Walter E. Williams writes: “According to the 1938 Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, that year 11 percent of black children and 3 percent of white children were born to unwed mothers.” In mid-1960s America, the nation’s out-of-wedlock birth rate (which stood at 7.7 percent at the time) began a rapid and relentless climb across all demographic lines, a climb that would continue unabated until 1994, when the Welfare Reform Act helped put the brakes on that trend. Today the overall American illegitimacy rate is about 40.7 percent (29.1 percent for non-Hispanic whites). For blacks, it is about 72 percent—approximately three times the level of black illegitimacy that existed when the War on Poverty began in 1964.”

In short, the rate of child illegitimacy which marks the corroding of a traditional family structure began to take root during the 60s, and I would put this down to two factors both intrinsically linked to Modernity’s advance, rather than environmental change or other such phenomena. The first is the above-mentioned ‘War on Poverty’ which cemented the welfare state and set the nation on the path to a Swedish-style social safety net system. The second compounding element is the Sexual Revolution, the effects of which on minorities is often a footnote when discussed.

The reason these changes, while a detriment to whites, were devastating to blacks, is due to inherent racial characteristics. Blacks simply cannot continue to function at any kind of sustainable level when their men have no real need to work in order to survive, and can operate sexually in an environment with no taboos or restrictions, especially those normally imposed by other men concerning their daughters’ virginity. The introduction of the entire institution of welfare has drained from the black socioeconomic life a sense of raw competition, of the violent fight for dominance and survival. As such, they have had to try and re-create this in the culture of gang loyalty and inner city crime. Trapped by an easy excuse for their own laziness and a cultural system that rewards crime, blacks in America can do little else but fail. This of course is a different sort of analysis than offered by the typical conservakin, who denies race differences and places the fault squarely on LBJ for improper policy design. While this may partly explain outcomes, racial kryptonite helps to explain why blacks are hit much harder than other races.

Another example of racial kryptonite can be seen in Japan’s anemic birthrate. In 2014, the country saw this rate drop again to just 1,001,000 newborns. It has been collapsing since the mid-70s, with the results now becoming potentially catastrophic with a rapidly aging population. When and if the obituary is written on the nation of Japan, the tombstone will read ‘Japan – Pornography Killed Her’. By the time the 1980s had rolled around, Japan’s porn industry was thriving with new widespread access to home video equipment, and with the prohibition of pornography ended after Japan’s defeat in WWII, there was little official resistance to the growth of its popularity. The Dōjinshi market also became saturated with pornography which constituted around 50% of its product. Japanese child porn had a boom in the 90s with the birth of the internet, and it may surprise some to know that Japan only criminalized the distribution of child pornography in 2003.

There are today no shortage of articles on the phenomena of men dropping out of the Japanese sexual economy altogether, preferring to stay locked in their rooms being waited on by their parents and playing computer games. The Japanese sexual appetite can be completely sated by pornography, even with the genitals censored. This problem of a dearth in eligible bachelors seeking to start families and live independently marks a new chapter in the worldwide Sexual Revolution. With no mystique around sex, Japanese men have lost interest with startling rapidity. They can easily find what they are looking for in comic books and online. Nowhere in the world have the effects of widespread debauchery corroded a once healthy sexual economy this fast, however the West is not far behind, ignoring the warnings as all Modern states are wont to do.

Japan has suffered an especially grave fate because their racial characteristics show absolutely no withstanding resistance to depravity. Raise an Occidental man on pornography and he’s likely to have sex outside of the procreative familial institution. Raise a Japanese man on pornography and he’s likely to never have sex at all. Thus is written the mausoleum inscriptions for entire peoples.

For the Occidental, we witness our own destruction under our ‘Enlightened’ rulers, but this has been a slow death. It seems that we have not yet found our own racial kryptonite which will reduce us to total deprivation or annihilation in the time-span of only a few years. However, be sure that it exists, and as with the examples given above, Modernity will be the key that turns in this deadly lock.

The post Racial Kryptonite appeared first on Social Matter.

“Reactionaries are no different from liberals, because they support social engineering. They want to forcibly change how people think, while conservatives just want people to be free from big government.”

Well, the first thing to be said here is that the conservative is essentially jacking a libertarian argument for his own uses. Conservatism, as I have pointed out previously, is not the same thing as libertarianism and instead can be likened to liberalism’s shadow, preserving its advances by validating them as a baseline from which no person may venture any further to the right.

Imagine a road spanning leftward, with the liberal marching along it at a leisurely pace. The conservative is the dutiful construction worker a few feet behind him putting up cones and signs in his own wake saying, “Road ends here!” “No further right!”

But let’s be generous and say the conservative is genuinely concerned about human freedom from tyranny, and that what aspects of social conservatism he supports is mainly because they are conducive to keeping society free. Typically this is couched in arguments to the effect that a strong family-oriented culture reduces the need for welfare in a society, and thus prevents the government from growing in size and scope.

The problem here comes from the first assumption, namely that smaller government and more individual liberty is a prime utility that must be promoted at all costs–or at least emphasized far above alternative justifications for the family. Where did this concept come from, beyond stating that it is libertarianism’s gift to conservatism?

We come back to the philosopher John Locke, and to a nearly equal extent the earlier works of Thomas Hobbes. Both declared the past existence of something called the ‘state of nature’ from which we have evolved, though they disagreed on what this natural state actually looked like. According to Hobbes, the state of nature was bleak and hostile, virtually unlivable, and so man created ‘society’ in order to survive. According to Locke however, the state of nature was far less unlivable, but was insecure and so required ‘society’ in order to safeguard natural rights.

Both of these men viewed society as an unnatural form of contract, a necessary vice for which we sacrifice some of our liberty (the prime utility).

This is a profoundly ignorant view of human nature. Human society is no less natural than the beehive or the anthill. How we construct our homes, our agricultural facilities, our industries, and our seats of government, are no less natural than the honeycomb and the labyrinthine network of chambers within a termite mound. It’s not something we build to compensate for a crippling deficit, but rather something we do because we are human.

The natural state of the human being is in society. The stable family, the legal structure, and the church are not essential because we must begrudgingly accept them in order to live comfortably. Far from it. These are the things that make us live in the first place. We would cease to live truly human lives without such wondrous structures. It would raise eyebrows to find an ant that had gone ‘rogue’ and now foraged for itself as a traveling bachelor. This state is just as unnatural for us.

With this in mind, you might be wondering if the conservative or libertarian has any case at all. Perhaps the ‘big government’ he rails against is in fact the natural state? Not so. The theme of a functioning society with both its simple and intricate support mechanisms (the biggest of which being the governing authority) is not analogous to every facet thereof or a metastasized component inherent to.

Julius Evola describes the nation state that is in accordance with the World of Tradition as the ‘organic state,’ that is, the general kind of society that humans are naturally predisposed to create. So no, this doesn’t include the Environmental Protection Agency, or your nest of Cathedralite professors we now call a college. It includes the structures fundamental to our flourishing: the marketplace, the temple of divine worship, the seat of power, the modest home and hearth.

In seeking the revival of the organic state, new elites must necessarily be committed to altering the frame of mind of the populace, so that they accept and build this condition for human life. As it stands, at least in the West, they do not exhibit the mindset that would allow such a society to exist once more.

Does this make us social engineers?

If you take that term in its most general sense, then yes, but in this sense it even manages to encapsulate the most ardent libertarian. After all, he must want to prime society so that a libertarian environment can be sustained, even if he doesn’t often think of it in those sorts of terms.

If we narrow the definition, we can say that social engineering is defined as ‘activities pursuant to the aim of priming people for an existence in an imagined societal condition for which they currently are not accustomed, and may not be naturally accustomed.’

The kind of society the reactionary proposes is one that a human being, unmolested by our current and very deliberate liberal social engineering, would thrive in. The aim of this political project is not to lead man further out to sea and yet in a new direction to horizons unheard of, but rather to bring him back to the shores from which he waded. Our modes of society are the straight and narrow path from which man deviated during the ‘Enlightenment,’ and on which he had traveled for the most part unflinchingly up to that point.

To demonstrate this, we only have to take a cursory look at history. The traditional ideal emerged spontaneously across vast geographical distances, over untold centuries uninterrupted, in cultures completely isolated from each other. Modernity can make no such claim. It has its roots in Europe, and can be traced from point to point with stunning accuracy from there with the onset of globalization, like tracking how a viral infection spreads. Tradition is the natural state of human beings. Your nation shouldn’t need a Frenchman arriving on a wooden boat to tell you about it.

My works will always advocate the abandonment of this rather unhelpful paradigm created by liberals and conservatives, that is, the power of the state in tension with the power of the people. Politics should not be viewed in in these terms; they are only ancillary to a greater struggle: between good governance and bad governance, between stable society and entropic society, between tradition and modernity. That is a truer political dichotomy.

For their part, the modernist has had to struggle, fight, kill, lie, cheat, steal, and demolish in order to bring into the world with great labor pains this festering cultural virus that now serves as their ideology.

We never had to do any such thing for our world to be realized in the beginning. It came with us, it was a part of us, wherever we were on the globe, God given, and worthy of being defended to the last man.

The post Are We Social Engineers? appeared first on Social Matter.

To expand, this adage is to say that people will be unawares of deep structural problems in their society, even as said problems metastasize to a choking largess, because they will be according undue praise to technological advancement as a measure of civilizational success. In other words, similar to how it is prophesied in the Hindu Doctrine of the Ages that the measure of men will become their wealth, the measure of the society at large will be its level of technological development.

During the Cold War, a distinction was made to divide the world into three camps.

1. First World countries: aligned with the United States and participant in capitalist economic structure

2, Second World countries: aligned with the Soviet Union and participant in communist economic structure

3, Third World countries: non-aligned typically adhering to what were perceived as lower, undeveloped forms of economic structure

Not many people actually know this is the origin of the ‘World’ classifications for countries, mainly because it has little relevance in the post-Cold War era. However, the terms remain in popular usage, particularly ‘third world’, which has simply come to describe any country that has lower levels of technological development. For example, Laos would typically be described as a ‘third world’ country, despite the fact that it has been second world since 1975. It’s one of the few states to remain (albeit as more of a title than anything else) a declared communist, and therefore second world country.

Increasingly, this is the metric for how functional and healthy a given society is. So it makes sense that if a country is experiencing greater technological advancements, this will overshadow any other problems that might previously have been recognized and addressed. So long as we’re not scraping in the dirt like those poor brown people, then our society must be a success with a positive trajectory going forward.

This is fundamentally wrong. The technological advancement of any society, beyond a certain point, is completely irrelevant to that society’s health, and to the degree that it does have an impact, it is that untempered it is a decay accelerant.

When all of man’s ills and petty desires can be cured and secured with the push of a button, the flick of a switch, or the swipe of a screen, he ceases to be engaged in any kind of struggle. Struggle is an essential part of manhood in particular and so without it, you end up with varying degrees of feminization amongst men. Why be an ascetic when you can just watch Deepak Chopra on DVD? Why be a hero when you can just play on the joystick with a predator drone? With no counter or substitute to the paths that led man to his true virility in these dual qualities, he simply doesn’t achieve them. The level to which he fails is largely determined by his socioeconomic status, with the faux Modern elite proving the best example of full wussification. In his article, Perry points out the popularity of sodomy and other sexual deviancies in the upper echelons of our society. This is a marker of the declining health of what was already an illegitimate aristocracy.

The more man is provided for not by his labors, duties, and a spiritual/mental sustenance, but by technological comfort, the more he comes to attach the meaning in his life to this telluric source, the material wealth that he can accrue. This does not only become the means by which he lives his life, it becomes his life in and of itself. We see a very direct warning of this in Scripture.

“Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions—is not from the Father but is from the world. And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever.”

– John 2:15-17

In the book by Marty Glass ‘Yuga: An Anatomy of Our Fate‘, the Hindu Doctrine of the Ages is examined, and the following is said about the Dark Age that we currently reside in.

“In the Kali-Yuga we ‘get the job done’, as never before; but ‘we’ are machinery, ‘Technique’, and a machinery has nothing to say about itself, because there’s no one left to know anything and to know: there’s no one there, it’s dead. Titanic, inexhaustible, ceaselessly moving, shaping, tearing down, building up, creating and achieving. But nobody’s home. In more than one sense.”

The soul of man is entirely absent in this age, as is any connection to its origin in the Divine Realm prior to man’s Fall. The society is now enthralled to “the world” and as such reaps the consequences with eyes wide shut.

Alas, the elite caste in any given hierarchy face the same peril. They must parry the fancies of the flesh lest they be consumed by materialism and the dedication to the finite rather than the infinite. If there be three divisions of the elite caste, then they must employ methods of combating the telluric urge, even in the face of great technological prowess.

1. The priestly class must suffer the grueling trial of the ascetic life, drained by a zealous commitment to the Divine forces that they mediate to on behalf of man. They must be forever aware of their subordination to higher realms of being.

(Undermined in our age by ‘health and wealth’ spirituality focused on the success of man rather than giving glory to God. Our priests, by in large, do not fulfill the Traditional priestly role and not only in the political sense of that role)

2. The warrior class must have an eternal heroic character, tested by external threats and the constant critical eye of the aristocratic class as well as the pressures of strict masculine meritocracy.

(Undermined in our age by the creep of affirmative action in the military, and the mechanization of war which first turned conflicts into an apocalyptic battle against crude machines where the gladiatorial heroism of the past was destroyed, and then later managed to turn the art of war into a video game in which the warrior became totally detached from combat)

3. The aristocratic class has the hardest trial of all. Lacking the inherent ascetic and heroic virtues of the roles given to priest and warrior, yet with the grave responsibility of high governance, these men are at the greatest risk of corruption by the materialist strain. This can be combated through intermingling with the warrior class, high sport and hunting traditions, as well as the universal rejuvenation brought through the ‘great threat’, whether imagined or real.

(Literally everything undermines this class in our age, in fact its safe to say this class doesn’t exist. It has been usurped and replaced with demotic powers (politicians) and a depraved artistic elite represented by the modern celebrity)

I challenge the notion that atheism leads to materialism in a society, rather I think materialism leads to atheism instead, in addition to other societally degenerative tendencies which unfortunately rot the head of the fish (the elite) first. The greater we become technologically, the more incapable we are of seeing the problems that surround us. First man becomes blind to the spiritual world, ceasing to harness its power against chaotic forces, and then he becomes blind even to common sense. Obviously terrible things are allowed to occur in the name of progress, because technology has become our metric, our material well-being the be all and end all, and it will indeed end all.

In becoming a society centered around the merely physical virtues of techno-materialism, man has ceased to struggle in almost every aspect of his existence. He has plunged himself into a drowning pool thats warm waters provide the comfort that his aching limbs and mind crave, it is in essence a return to the safety of the womb with these liquid confines bearing the hallmarks of the usurping feminine principle, but water is water and we are no longer unborn. Unless we somehow manage to surface, such depths will be the death of us.

The post Techno-Materialism as a Drowning Pool appeared first on Social Matter.