Sunday, 6 December 2015

The War on Terror

The War on Terror

I dare say that the words in the title are ones that we have all seen too many times over the last fourteen years or so.

Apart from the obvious meaning that we are all supposed to think of one may suspect that there are other meanings hidden beneath the surface.  The ‘War on Terra’ ~ i.e. War on the Planet is one of the more obvious, as well as the fact that it is clearly as much of a War of Terror as one against ‘Terror’ itself, and we needn’t get into who exactly it is who is responsible for these atrocities.  I hope my readers will be sufficiently experienced with researching material on the net to have spent a little time on that.

But the latest interpretation upon which I have stumbled is a little more recherché than these, and was inspired by my recent encounter with a lecture collection by Joseph Campbell.

One of the many points which stuck in my mind was what he said about how the Universe is terrifying, and that is part of its nature.  I also liked the reference to the Bhagavad Gita which he made, already one of my personal favourites, and in the translation he chose Krishna’s admonition to Arjuna comes out as ‘Whence [comes] this ignoble cowardice?’

Facing as he did his cousins the Kauravas who were preparing to fight Arjuna and the Pandavas to the death, Krishna is urging him to face up to reality and take responsibility for his action in the situation ~ even though it was terrifying.

I have always liked a story I heard a long time ago about how mediaeval magicians and alchemists believed that the best way to master a demon is to look it in the eye and name it, rather than to flee.  Fleeing may be appropriate to some physical dangers, and often is, but fleeing from one’s own inner demons is an example of the ignoble cowardice that Arjuna is criticised for by Krishna.

An insight which grew on me over many years was the understanding that as we grow in wisdom and power we gain mastery over greater energies.  But it is actually the case that the more beyond and outside our own limitations we stretch ourselves, the greater we grow, the more we understand, and the wiser we become.  Within certain guidelines of practicality of course.  But the more we deal with, the more we become.

I recall a key point which I picked up a few years ago when I was going through some upgrades in my skills.  Successful people do the things that unsuccessful people are unwilling to do.

Facing terrifying things is difficult for most people, but magicians and shamans are willing to face terror because it leads them into places where others are not willing to go, and it teaches them things that others are not willing to earn, or learn.

One of the worst things about our modern world is that everything is supposed to be safe.  Not only physical things, I am not against safe toys and machines and so forth, but an absolute unwillingness to engage in any form of risk, even at a level of social discourse.  The pathetic psychological weaklings who need to have trauma counselling because they saw a Confederate flag are examples of this.  People who cannot accept any form of challenge to their worldview and have extremely limited politically correct attitudes and expectations.

And what would they think of the terror of existence?  They would probably consider it politically unacceptable.

So I come to my rather oblique interpretation of the ‘War on Terror’ meme which has been beaten into our psyches.  The Terror of Existence is our friend, because the more we can face it, the greater the challenges and terror we can face and deal with in our daily lives.  But the ‘War on Terror’ which tries to shut down any challenge or difficulty puts those who succumb to it in an utterly disempowered state.

The best way to overcome a phobia of say, spiders, is to have graduated exposure to them so that the fear is extinguished through the learning process that brings down the emotional response.

Now the kind of things which we have associated as ‘terror’ events are of course bad and dangerous, and I wouldn’t for a moment try to suggest that we shouldn’t be afraid of them, as I said above about physical danger.  But it is the mental fear which needs to be overcome.  One may flee from the danger, but one must not flee from one’s own consciousness, must not hide behind emotions that diminish us and turn us into cowering sheep.

So, face the Terror.  This is what Frank Herbert meant in his Bene Gesserit ‘Litany Against Fear’.  I will face my fear.  I will allow it to pass over me and through me, and when it has passed I will turn to see its path.  Where it has gone there will be nothing.  Only I will remain.

It is like that old adage ‘Death Walks Behind You’.  Fear is both Enemy and Friend.  Terror is a rite of passage after which one becomes a stronger and more powerful being.  Campbell says that we participate in the Terror of the Universe, that human existence is Terrifying in itself, in its existential reality.  To make ‘War on Terror’ makes no sense.  One cannot make war on a fundamental aspect of the Universe, one can only manipulate perceptions so that we feel afraid to face that aspect, cower before it, and thus lose the strength and empowerment which it can imbue and endow us with since it is that which can give us self knowledge.  It is a war on our ability to draw strength, to draw courage from that which challenges us, to make us afraid to be wild, to be ourselves.  And so the War on Terror is a war upon the very nature of the human psyche itself.

Friday, 4 December 2015

Hundredth Monkey Camp 1995 Map

Hundredth Monkey Camp 

1995 Map 

        Here is the map of the campsite of the Hundredth Monkey event held in the summer of 1995 near the Malvern Hills which can also be found in the book and the ebook or kindle versions.  Because it is small in the paperback and there are also limitations with ebooks I've included this image here which I think should be copyable and then you can enlarge it and look at the detail.

I have aimed to reproduce the layout of tents, domes, marquees, caravans and firecircles as close to how they were at the event, basing this on a number of photographs I was fortunate enough to have given to me by the late Bryony Glass, and my friend Brenda Gabriel who was also there. 

By some brainstorm I originally put the link for this map in my book to this page rather than here                                                  where it should have been.  So now it can be found on either.

        First there is a version sized to this page, and then below a larger version

I hope it will add to the enjoyment of the book as you follow my peregrinations around the field and see where I had my various adventures.

You can purchase a paper or e-book version of my account of my shamanic rite of passage at The Hundredth Monkey Camp ‘Waking The Monkey! ~ Becoming the Hundredth Monkey’ (A Book for Spiritual Warriors) at

 My other blogs

Deconstruction of politically correct material, such as feminism and immigration.

My original blog with full 2014 Leeds Trolleybus Public Enquiry online audio recording links and reportage from most days at the Enquiry and other material.


Monday, 23 November 2015



I first became aware of how people would exploit their victimhood way back in the 1980s when I had a friend who used to joke about how feminists classified people by their level of oppression; so a woman was oppressed but a black woman was more oppressed, and so on.  Nowadays we have endless spiels on the intersectionality of oppressed classes and feminist analysis.  The fact that our society actually funds this stuff, (and gives the people who spout it moral privilege to abuse and vilify) which no other society in the history of the world, ever, did, seems to be a fact that eludes the people who pursue it, perhaps because it doesn’t support their perpetual cries of their victimhood.

But I get ahead of myself.  The situation I seek to analyse, deconstruct and disarm of its weaponised content is that in which in our contemporary western society a person can amplify their status by claiming some kind of suffering or ‘victimhood’.

The first thing I need to make absolutely clear is that I am not promoting making people suffer, or promoting ‘victimisation’ in any way.  This is absolutely in no way the same thing.

The ‘Victim Mentality’ has several different aspects. 

Firstly, there is the feeling that the subject has that they have been a victim in some way.  That’s not difficult, most people at some stage in their lives have experienced some negative experience.

The next stage is the important one.  You could just get over it, or deal with it constructively if it is a larger issue, which might involve taking countermeasures such as legal recourse.  This may or may not be a good thing or satisfactory.  The real negative downturn occurs when someone decides that in some way this makes them unique, that they have suffered more than others and that this is a mealticket, or at least something which can be used to exploit others. 

This isn’t necessarily a conscious decision, it can easily be an unconscious chip on the shoulder that just gets in the way, a grudge that is borne as if it were natural.

What has happened over the last half century or so is that this has become weaponised through the action of Cultural Marxism.  It is my firm conviction that this must be deliberate, at least in those who seeded and promoted these social attitudes.

This is closely linked with empathy.  If someone finds that by playing on their ‘victimhood’ of whatever form, that they can elicit ‘empathic’ behaviour from those around them, then that playing will be reinforced.  Someone recently suggested to me that they believed that Psychology was ‘no more scientific’ than Politics and Sociology.  And yet neither of these forms of social study have anything approaching the strength of learning theory as far back as a century or more, with Pavlov, Watson or Skinner.  If you associate stimuli together, they will be thought of together, and if a response is reinforced with a pleasurable stimulus, a reward, then its recurrence will be encouraged.  The cultural marxists know all about negative reinforcement, because they employ it all the time in their name calling, which is intended to ‘extinguish’ your behaviour, as the technical term goes.

Feminists and teachers of Gender Studies seem unaware of these basic scientific facts, other than the last.

I am simply pointing out that displays of ‘victimhood’ get rewarded, and so become more frequent, whereas they claim that this is just social justice in action.

At the root of this is ‘empathy’.  We are told it is important to be empathic.  Certainly we as human beings have the capacity for empathy, but if we are empathic with every creature in the entire universe, we would never have the mental attention to deal with our own concerns.

In the summer of 1974, I took a tab of LSD, of which there was plenty around at the time.  I remember walking in some beautiful gardens and it was lovely.  I remember thinking that I seemed to have no boundaries and felt that I was one with it all.  When I came down a bit I realised that I had for a while lost any sense of my ego or identity, and whilst it was an extraordinary experience, was not one which it would be very practical to experience very often, or in less pleasant conditions.

Empathy is like that.  We see images of people suffering on our screens.  Images, which in a world before photography, newsreels, tv or internet we simply would never see.  Now, all of a sudden, millions of people are looking at images of some poor starving child thousands of miles away.

This brings the opportunity for guilt tripping in a big way.  The media manipulators are then on to us all to guilt us into how we should be ‘doing something’ for these people, while they are entirely selective about which suffering children they show to us.  The suffering homeless of our own people are rarely shown to us in such a way, or the children of some state that is out of favour with the power elite.

‘Victimhood’ is paraded before us, and yet, because it is only on a screen, there is nothing we can actually do, but feel bad about it, and perhaps reach for the credit card to make a donation.

Now this weaponised guilt and compassion extraction has been ramped up with ‘white guilt’, ‘privilege’, all manner of vilifications against men and European culture and peoples.  But here we see the point where it diverges from its source.  The suffering of others may be something we can or can’t do something about, should or shouldn’t do something about, but the weaponised form shoots its barbs right into your entrails, because, whatever you do decide, you are guilty!

This is a kind of ‘Original Sin’ which White people especially, and White Men most particularly, are apparently guilty of.  You may belong to an ancestral group which has never had any association with colonisation, slavery or exploitation of other peoples, but the very fact that you live in a prosperous, well ordered and law abiding culture is in itself cause for attack, because you aren’t suffering like the Victims!

It is based on having to give way to someone else’s pain and suffering.  This may have nothing to do with you at all.  Or it may be self inflicted, or the result of living in a culture where these things are commonplace.  The causes are irrelevant.  The only thing of importance is that people are made to feel bad about themselves, so that they give away their power to those who claim to be victims, or more likely, those who falsely claim to act in their interests.

A brief aside here.  I have always thought it strange, perhaps just because I understand the meaning of words, that when a child dies prematurely, you often hear that ‘tributes’ are given.  Tributes, are ‘a sign of respect or admiration, an award to honour a person's accomplishments. A famous director receives a lifetime achievement award as a tribute… etc’
This displays something of the inappropriate mindset of the victim mentality, which has to give a kind of worship or applause to the sufferer.  To give ‘Tributes’ to a child who has no accomplishments, however much it might be loved, is just an inappropriate concept which places value on someone simply because they have suffered, and for no other reason.

So this valuing of suffering, regardless of how or why it occurs, as some kind of personal achievement which puts the subject above others who have not experienced that suffering, has become a moral right in our society.  Even if someone dies while seeking to illegally enter another country they are lionised as martyrs, though they might have caused the deaths of others at the same time.  It is as if every single person on the planet were somehow deified like Jesus for having suffered in some manner or other.  And meanwhile, this is used to disempower that person who has not suffered, or apparently not.

The conditioning has been going on so long that it is lost in the background.

And as with all Cultural Marxist conditioning, the true values are upside down.  Sure, there are occasions when apologies or reparation might be of some help, but the real triumph is in the hearts of those who can put their past defeats behind them and go forward with neither bitterness nor resentment.  The SPLC earns no plaudits for its endless victim exploitation after forty years of Affirmative Action, and massive black on white crime (I was astonished when I heard the figures).  Muslims in Britain whine about the ‘oppressive’ history of the Crusades, but manage to forget the 1,400 year Jihad against freedom and the civilisation of the West.

These people are cowards who cannot win on the truth, so they have to work on disarming the minds of their opponents.  Although Sun Tzu, the author of the ancient text ‘The Art of War’ might approve, since he recommends that to win without fighting is the goal.

But the proponents of the Victim mentality are essentially sore losers whose only recourse is to shout ‘No fair’ and the trouble is, that we are so fair that we are disarmed and we stop defending ourselves in order to get into self examination and doubt and start questioning whether we had been unfair.

As Stefan Molyneux brilliantly demonstrates in this video, empathy given to someone who does not reciprocate is wilful collaboration with the enemy.  They will suck you dry, as you give your all to convince them how tolerant, open minded and multicultural you are.  They don’t give a flying ****.

I posted this video on a cultural marxist thread I was commenting on, and I got a response which really made me want to throw up, because it was the typical ‘this is how you become empathic and if you don’t you are being inhuman and cruel’.  If you aren’t empathic all the time, you are a bad person.

So we should be empathic with our murderers and enslavers it seems.  If we aren’t then we are racists! We have been led down the path and deceived.

I would suggest that you look up John Woolman, a 17th Century Puritan who felt intense guilt that he cared more for his own children than for some unknown child who might (or might not) be starving on the other side of the world.  This is a kind of neurosis, or perhaps even psychosis which has absolutely no survival adaptive value for the person who it afflicts, and is quite possibly counter adaptive in its distraction..
Cases should be judged on their merits and we should not assume that everyone has good intentions.  Even those can lead to hell as the saying goes.  I see memes admonishing us not to judge people.  Equally I wish we would see memes admonishing us to not trust without that trust having been earned.  Stefan’s example of not telling a murderer who wanted to kill your wife where she is demonstrates clearly why we should not feel obliged to tell the truth or be empathic with people who do not have our best interests at heart, or whom we at least have reasonable doubts about.

I always found myself getting twitchy watching episodes of Star Trek in which Picard or Janeaway would trust an unknown alien vessel and drop their shields without any more reason than saying that ‘a truly civilised race would be peaceful’ or asserting that showing trust was a good thing as it encouraged the aliens to do the same thing.  I don’t know if Kirk ever did that, I may be wrong, but I suspect it was a later development.  Frankly, in a real situation that kind of behaviour would be reckless, and probably in direct contravention of standing orders..

I can’t help feeling that there are some manipulated religious concepts and feelings here.  We have the ‘Original Sin’ of the White Privileged, and the sanctification of the sufferers, like Dives and Lazarus in the parable that Jesus gave of the poor man in Heaven and the Rich Man in Hell.  Perhaps the Rich Man deserved to be in Hell, but surely not just for being rich, and perhaps Lazarus deserved Heaven, but surely not just because he was poor.

After having been a Christian for most of my life, off and on at least, a year or so ago I started to realise how these kind of Christian tales and mythology weaken the mind so as to feel guilt over things which are associated with success, and a feeling of somehow being beholden to the ‘Victim’, who becomes sanctified.  I have to reiterate that I am not defending cruelty or bad treatment, but that ‘Victims’ can become so in an infinite variety of ways, and if that involves becoming so in a way that was self caused, then no-one else should feel guilt about it, but rather that person should take responsibility, and not expect someone whom they can exploit to come and rescue them.  Images of Africans on overladen rafts in the Mediterranean come to mind.

In some cases of course, there is not even any suffering or real victimhood.  The endless moaning of feminists about a society in which women are held in higher esteem than any other culture in the history of  world, and in which men endure extreme hardship to secure the safety of their women and children is wearisome.  It is simply embarrassing to hear these people playing the victim while they claim that men are becoming ‘obsolete’.  Meanwhile almost all construction and infrastructure maintenance is done by men, and often in harsh and dangerous conditions.

The cries of ‘Victim’ have become too shrill and hysterical to be taken seriously any more whether they come from feminists, migrants or social justice warriors.  It has become an exploitable meme that must be resisted at all costs as it has become perhaps our prime weakness.  Literally millions of people are attaching themselves to our civilisation with no thought, as John Kennedy said, of ‘ask[ing] what you can do for your country’ but only of how they can exploit it for their own ends, which now are looking much like the conversion of our society into the one that many of them came from.

And this from the exploitation of our compassion for their suffering and victimhood.

What they fail to understand is that there is a psychological process that goes beyond compassion.  When someone realises that their compassion has been played and exploited the emotion is entirely reversed, and that is an absolutely natural instinct for survival.  That which has betrayed you must be eliminated, or it will do it again.

Tuesday, 17 November 2015



The ‘Other’ was coined as a philosophical concept by GFW Hegel some two centuries ago as a counterpoint to the Self. 
In modern sociological and feminist discourse it has become a weaponised term.  It is not, as someone once suggested to me, a typo of 'Mothering'!
Society is built of in-groups who have normative values and behaviours.  This is the way that humans have evolved.  We might see it in early nomadic ice age tribes, or in the guild structures of mediaeval towns.  Ethnic groups have clustered together, just as those of similar trade or economic standing have always done, or children, women and men.
Modern feminist debate often centres around demonising what they describe as ‘Othering’.  To ‘Other’ someone is to see them as ‘Other’ to your social group.  This is considered very bad by feminists.  Since the current moral imperative is to be ‘inclusive’ and as ‘We Are All One’ we must not perceive anyone as ‘Other’ to ourselves, even if they are a stranger. 
As was recognised by Hegel, ‘Otherness’ is a logically necessary concept in describing the world if we are not to resort to solipsism, and yet modern thought seeks to collapse the distinction between Inner and Outer, whether that be psychologically Inner and Outer, or materially.
I have been somewhat incredulous at the ludicrous extent to which this is politicised and used as an attempted weapon of social control.  This amusing little website claims that ‘There are no others’.  None at all.  While it is admitted that ‘there’s a powerful evolutionary drive to identify in some way with a tribe of people who are “like you” ’ it nonetheless argues that this leads to an ‘insidious’ inclination to ‘other’ people.
Really all it is saying is that the writer doesn’t like the fact that the creation of in-groups as an evolutionary strategy exists.  This seems to be based on some kind of assumption that we have moved beyond the need for such survival strategies.  Feminism sees any group which has achieved ‘hegemonic’ stature as essentially ‘oppressive’, despite the fact that these kind of cultures provide stable milieus for complex societies.
This seems to me to be either a catastrophically naïve error or a purposefully intended attempt to undermine what must be a basic survival instinct.  Stay with those who are like yourself.  They share your genes and your culture.  If you stick together you have a better chance of survival.  Allowing strangers into your midst engages unnecessary risk.  The ‘Other’ may in time become friend, but it needs to earn that trust, that friendship.  The feminist wants you to give that trust without it having been earned, and if you don’t you are a bad person.
I imagine my reader will by now have surmised that there is a connection here with the psychology of the migrant invasion in Europe, November 2015.  The feminist sees the traditional protection of territory as ‘Othering’ the outsider, despite the fact that limited resources are a very important factor here.  Since in that ideology ‘There is no Other’ everyone is part of our own Global, Universal Tribe in the Global Village.
And yet simple game theory will inform us that unless the incomer respects the values of the group that it is accepted into, the system will collapse. 
This is a classic Cultural Marxist move in which reality is inverted and the truth turned upside down.  In the long established way of the world, life and evolution, creatures established their territories.  The dominant members of these tribes and clans would be responsible for defending them from ‘Others’;  but now, the alpha males who previously were responsible for maintaining the boundaries and protecting their people are now made to be the enemy, and the enemies who would invade are encouraged to do so and celebrated for it.
What we see taking place with various people in the aftermath of the Paris Bataclan massacre who are urging us to take more refugees to show our compassion is a pathological expression of this refusal to recognise the ‘Other’, or to see beyond the immediate situation at the larger consequences of endless mixing with it.  The Muslims all know that we are each Other to the Other, but too many Europeans delude themselves that this is not so, that ‘There is no other’.  That to ‘Other’ someone is to dehumanise them.
And so the Liberal European population has been brainwashed into laying down their arms, into refusing to stand up for themselves because we have to ‘treat others as ourselves’.  Everyone?  Does that mean we have to give them all our stuff?  House and feed them?  Let them destroy our civilisation?  One refugee, fine.  A million?  You have to think again.  Probably half the population of the world would like to get into Europe and get a Social Security cheque.  We have to defend against this.  It is not evil to seek to survive in the face of millions who would seek to exploit your civilisation. 
This is about boundaries.  One of the most important factors in human development is the establishment of personal boundaries.  To have a sense of responsibility for oneself and not to over rely or intrude on another.  Systems Theory tells us that we need cell walls, osmotic membranes that protect, select and filter what is permitted to come into the cell.  This is interface between Self and Other.  Where the Known meets the Unknown.
It is also about the poor countries who are losing their most energetic young people to a grandiose and false dream of seeking their fortune in the golden paved streets of Europe.  The Pied Piper of Mr Soros is enticing them all away form their own countries to destroy others.  Villages in West Africa have collapsing economies because all the young men are taking ‘the back way’ across the Maghreb to come to Europe and get rich.  There are downsides for others than ourselves.
We are going to see an interesting process in the coming weeks following the Friday 13th massacre.  The politicians, liberals and general leftists are going to insist that we keep taking more migrants, insisting that we ‘shouldn’t give in to fear’ and that turning migrants away would in some way be ‘giving terrorists what they want’.  And yet we have already seen borders being closed.  Sweden had already, incredibly, closed its border before the atrocity, simply on the basis of there being too many causing a ‘threat to public order’.
A large number of State Governors in the USA have declared they will not be taking Syrian ‘refugees’ following the atrocities, and France has closed its borders.  This is clearly a chaos situation which is not going to improve unless measures are taken to prevent further deterioration of the situation.  It will doubtless continue to slide for a while as the EU leaders prevaricate.  Meanwhile the resolve of the European peoples is rising.  It is quite clear that the Videgrad 4 ~ Poland, Czech/Slovakia and Hungary are taking a firm stand and that is important for Europe as a whole.  These countries, and others in the East, still have ancestral memories of the Ottoman Empire and its depredations over hundreds of years.
They know that all civilisations periodically face the ‘Other’, and that it is in this that they are tested.  A nation, people or civilisation who are unable to distinguish what is ‘Other’ has lost its sense of Self, of Identity, and is vulnerable to being taken by the ‘Other’ as New Orleans was to being flooded by the sea when the levees broke.
Defence against the ‘Other’ is what all civilisation has ever been about, it is the ancient myth of Osiris keeping back the chaos of Set and the desert.  A civilisation or nation that opens its arms to the ‘Other’ has lost the will to live and submits to its own demise. 
The war for the soul of Europe has now begun.  We must find our Self, and repel the Other.  The alternative is for Europe, the jewel of civilisation, to sink into an endless night of oblivion, as chaos rushes in and its light is extinguished.

Monday, 12 October 2015



Equality, a concept which has been working on the Western psyche for some two or three centuries, has now, having infiltrated itself into our very bones, become weaponised against us in our every thought, word and deed.

Who can argue against Equality?  Who can gainsay such a noble aspiration, seeking as it does to recognise the Divine Soul within all Humanity?

But how shall we apply it?  Shall all tall people be made equal with the short?  How shall it be applied between those of different abilities or accomplishments?  And of course how should it be applied between different cultures an value systems?

Equality before the law, and equality of opportunity are simple, because they can actually be observed and controlled to the degree of quality and quantity of their realisation.

But beyond here, as they say, lies nothing.

I am not the equal of Michelangelo, Proust or Elizabeth I.  In the realm of human endeavour there is infinite diversity of accomplishment.  An infinite variety of aptitudes and inclinations, unique in every individual.  And yet in many areas of life the Equality agenda is being enforced.  Achievement is not rewarded so as not to hurt the feelings of those who have not achieved.  Everyone has to feel good whether they have done anything worth feeling good about or not.  Gay ‘families’ which cannot produce children are considered equal to old fashioned heterosexual ones that serve to deliver the next generation of our people.

(I shall address the matter of male/female equality in a separate piece, but for now let me address that of cultural equality.)

This is also being applied to the populations of European countries as a whole, who are being told repeatedly that they are no different from the muslim hordes who are consolidating their position here in Europe.

The definition of Equality, has slid towards first ‘the same’ and now ‘complete interchangeability’, which removes the value of the individual and their uniqueness.  Thus true diversity is attacked and blended out.

This is a background mindset which has been used to justify the importation of a foreign demographic.

In most countries throughout the world, you only have citizenship if it is your ancestral home, so you have it by right.  Migrant workers and businessmen have visas for the length of time they need for their work and then leave.  In Syria for instance, I have just heard it said by a guest on R314, even when someone from abroad marries a Syrian, it is only the children who have full citizenship.

It is, or used to be, accepted conventional wisdom that a country’s population benefited from and inherited the fruits of their forebears, and hopefully prospered so that their posterity could build on this further and so on down the generations.  The idea of large numbers of non related population groups entering that society and staying there permanently would have seemed ludicrous and alien to that nation.  From a psychological point of view, there is a complete difference between how an indigenous people regard a country’s heritage, and incomers.

Absorbing literally millions of outsiders of an historically oppositional culture and thinking of them as ‘Equal’ is pushing the limits of my conceptual abilities.

We are bound by this notion that ‘all souls’ are equal. 

Perhaps in the sight of God, but here on Earth us mortals have to deal with inconvenient practical issues such as law and order and distinguishing between genuine cases of need and jihadist infiltrators.

And we hear ludicrous arguments such as ‘It’s only an accident of birth that you are European, we have as much right to be there as you.’  I don’t where to start with nonsense such as this.  It seems to propose a kind of universe where anyone can and is anything without any history, experience, or qualification.  There is no continuity, no thread connecting the meaning and purpose of your life.  ‘Abdullah had a dream of living in Europe’.  As if abandoning your ancestral people and claiming a place amongst another people to whom you have no connection were a perfectly normal thing to do.  The Cultural Marxists don’t recognise family, kin or tribe.  Hey, we’re all human, we all bleed, right?  What’s yours is mine, okay? 

We have met the enemy, and believe me, they are not us.

There are entirely different civilisational streams going on here.  To suggest that they could be equal is not only wrong, but dangerous.  And they are definitely not the same.  The culturally Marxist eroded values of the West imagine that their values of pathological altruism will be reciprocate by the new arrivals.  That they just need to be hugged and given a good job.  It is beyond the understanding of many that the ideology under which they have often spent their entire lives entails the premise that everyone else who is not part of islam must be subjected to it or die.  Predators and enemies exist, and are not just our own paranoid projections that we need to get over.  You cannot convert an enemy who is determined to be resistant to your compassion.  He will only despise your weakness.

It is not a happy time when the pathological altruist meets the jihadist, or even just a simple muslim women in a sack.  The liberal is unable to understand that these people are foundationally opposed to our way of life.  To them, ‘Equality’ is submission on your knees to their vile dogma.

I shall have to post a piece specifically dealing with that subject soon, but for now I shall contain myself to the opposite natures of islam and our own dying continental religion, Christianity.  Clearly they are not equal.  One forgives, and one conquers.  One is softness and charity, the other sternness and steel.  ‘Strike off the fingertips of the Unbeliever’ (Surah 8:12)

They could have been deliberately crafted as natural opposites, and there are those that believe they were.

The thing is, that in Nature, there is very little Equality.  Or at least of the sort that Leftists desire.  Although there is one type of Equality that is fundamental to the physical existence of the universe, and that is the Law of Entropy.  Heat tends to move from areas of greater intensity to those of lesser, thereby equalling its distribution.  This will one day result in the heat death of the universe it is thought.

However, there is in the world a force which, while it does not entirely negate the effects of entropy, nonetheless does work against it, and this is the force we know as life.

It is argued that since life involves drawing energy in and concentrating it in forms and structures within the organism, its existence cannot be accounted for by purely mechanical laws.

The bit I really like is that the concentration of energy through extraction and refinement is exactly what Alchemy was all about, in both the spiritual as well as the material realms.  The extraction and development of Essence.

The Prima Materia of raw matter, or the inexperienced or ignorant person must go through the refining and improvement process, as in smelting of metal from ore and working it with hammers.

Passage through rites which lead to progression on one’s soul path advances one in wisdom and in worth.  The coward who flees the battle and is hunted down after the battle like a dog is of less worth than the peasant who faces his death at the hands of the barbarian with a pitchfork in hand when the reavers come for him and his family.

There are qualities that are better, and there are those that are worse.

And so it is with peoples and their cultures.  Europe has distilled perceptions and ideas through the primacy of Reason and won a balance of freedom of expression with good manners and tolerance.  Within the parameters created by what was loosely known as Christendom.  I don’t consider myself a Christian any more, but for a thousand years or more it was the basis of a coherent civilisation.  So long as it was able to see itself as the guardian of special value not found elsewhere in the world, and protect that, it was a viable morphic field.

But over the generations during my own lifetime this has been lost.  The European civilisation which was to abolish slavery within its jurisdiction, possibly the greatest collective moral achievement of the entire history of the human race, has somehow lost its confidence to the degree where we are now incredibly blamed for all the ills of the world, rather than thanked and appreciated for all that we have done as a family of peoples and civilisation.

The weaponised use of the concept of Equality has led to the total infiltration of European civilisation, a demographic time bomb which will cause immense problems in the future.  Ecological models of introduced species to islands such as Australia or Britain demonstrate how damaging to the ecosystem these can be.  Human communities are no different.  We should remember the Red Squirrel.

There is much discussion of how this serves the global corporations with cheap labour and so forth, but the greater goal is clearly to destroy the European civilisation and its peoples for it is they who have the potential to subvert and remove the global elites.  Without their obsession with ‘standards’ and ‘ethics’ we would have Bhopals every week in the developing world.

‘Equality’ in the manner of the Cultural Marxists is nothing else than the attempted radical disempowerment of the whole of the human race.  It seeks to remove us from our roots and homogenise us into one global McDonalds culture.

Europe has become like a soft fruit, ripe and juicy to be plucked, sweet to the taste.  But I think there is a hard stone at the centre on which the teeth of the invader will break.

‘The stone which was rejected has become the foundation block’.  That stone is both the essence and the seed of a new generation which will grow again.