BRONZE AGE MINDSET AN EXHOR T A TION BY BRONZE AGE PER VER T This book dedicated to the memory of Dean Dejana, a spiritual br other , a Sar dinian giant of high vision, man of super human physical str ength. Y ou wer e too str ong for this world, friend. Be r eborn in a better time—we meet again, we fight together! Cover illustration by owen cyclops @W esternIdentity VICT OR Y T O THE GODS! PROLOGUE This is not book of philosophy . It is exhortation. I hardly have any thing to say to most who aren’ t like me, still less do I care abo ut convincing. This is a ccount of my reveries. I tried to put, as brie f and simple as I could, the thought that motivates me and the problem faced by life in ascent and decline. I wa s convinced to write this b ook by certain frogs who told me, “Is it not a shame that hucksters are multiplying lies, and jizzing their filthy doctrines into receptive minds everywhere? Perversions— lame ones—are born by the thousands and haunt, like myria d cripplette midgets in halls of mirrors, they haunt the world, books, the internet. Minds are lost. If you wa it any longer e verything will be pounded to garbage, there will be nothing l eft—it will all turn, the whole world will turn t o a Bulgarian re st stop lavatory . But have you seen the movie Midnight Expr ess… and…and how did it make you feel?” I w as roused fro m my slumber by my frog friends and I declare to you, with great boldness, that I am here to save you from a great ugliness. If yo u lo ok arou nd eyes of som e people you see a kind of demented ener gy . It’ s pure anger or lust for power with nothing more. I hate to dirty these pages with mention of names of nobodies in our time. But if you see photo of Hillary Clintong or Adam Schif f with his eyes bugged out on stims and antidepressants or who knows what, you know what I mean. T here is a crease around the eye that tells it, it looks like cybor g gone of f-script, these people have an inhuman gaze and are vehi cles for something else. Y ou see this also in the chiefs of the EU burea ucracy with tiny moleman eyes behind small glasses, and the tiny lenses that reflect light. Y ou see it in the dead robot eyes of the new hue-man automatons running government de partments, the DMV , the brutal zombies running the security in airports or hospital “health care” rooms under vicious yellow fluorescent lights. I wanted to expose the grim sha dow of a movement that is hidden b ehind events of our tim e and from before. This is a great po wer that acts like a ghost. It hides in its own darkness and it has been absorbed by the lands and the peoples so that you can’ t really see it anymo re. There is just an eldritch quality e mbedded in things and on some faces. The same was said of Hades. Some said he w ould feel a great shame when some other god drew back the veil on the underworld so all the vile thin gs that are there could be seen. Is this Hades of our time cap able of shame? I heard also of such things being under the sea, the disgusting and frightful things revealed when the sea rece des befo re a great storm . I will draw back the curtain on this Iron Prison and show you where it is you r eally live… The secret things show in dream s. Heraclitus say , “All the things you see awake are death, all the things you see asleep are sleep .” He was trying to be coy! In his day many gods, clove-footed satyr , and other things showed themselves to men in dreams. Spiritually your insides are all wet, and there’ s a huge hole through where monstrous powers are fucking your brain, letting l oose all your life and power of focus. Y ou don’ t see yourself as you really are, but maybe some nightmare can show it to you. I am here to show you the way out. There was Empedocles, a philosopher , man of high vision. He jump ed into volcano Aetna in Sicily because he knew he would be reborn as a god. Now imagine yourself in front of rim of Aetna. It’ s dry and sandy . Y ou feel the heat but is not like you thought it might be. Is not Romantic. Is just hot, dry , you can’ t breathe, and the sme ll of infernal sulfur and wet earth and even w orse things triggers an old memory or instinct in y ou to run. Y ou’re brought to face with a vehemence and brutality of rock and you start t o feel dizzy staring in. Molten rock in your nostrils and it’ s n ot just that it scares you. If it were gre at fear , that could be a spur to action. But it fills your nostrils with banality and dullness of plain molten dust, you see gray and black. It reminds you of torrid summer afternoon by a bandoned gas station, yo u are stranded on dirt road, choked by heat and so much dust. Y ou see flames in the hole but i t lac ks the romance of fire a s you imagined it. Is this it? It seems li ke nothi ng to you, becau se to your eye it’ s nothing. So you pull away from it. Y ou’re n ot reborn as a god, you remain a mule. Y our lying mind now comes up with many thoughts about w hy it’ s right to pull back. Why , of course! There’ s a nice meal to h ave, a glass of wine. Maybe there’ s a girl waiting. Her pussy is warm and inviting. Empedocles was deluded. No, don ’ t jump in Aetna or Mauna Loa or Puyehue or Eyjafjallajökull, T itans of the world, even if you get yourself to do it, it won’ t work now . These portals are closed for ages. But! Oth er doors are closed to you too. What Mount Aetna was to Empedo cles—is there something like that to you? Is there something like that at all anymore? Life has a thing inside it that rea ches beyond itself. This is inter galactic wo rm, I can’ t say here, you must wait. But if you don’ t reach beyond yourself you are dead! Most of mankind is the walking dead. I tel l you other story . In Stone Age man appears, very strong shoulders, with club in hand. He is believed by the people t o be a son of some god…of a mortal woman who cucked her husband with a god . As child he already displays superhuman stre ngth. When he grows he goes into the deepest wild to fight gre at cave lion. He emer ges from cave with skin of li on o n his back. Lion had bee n eating and working terror in the p eople, but now he wears th is terror on his shoulders. He carries lion mane on head, lion p elt on back and a great club in the h and. This man comes to be worshiped by the people: his progeny becom e lines of kings, of Sparta and many other places. What was his act of foundation? He slaughtered monsters, he made the seaways known to man and tamed the rock-face. But don’ t for get the l ion-skin on his shoulders. This was lion of Ne mea. Do you understand what Nemesis is? There is in nature a great pur gative function. Y ou know about monkeys who switch sex in ce rtain times. In lake of some reptiles, when they overpopula te it and there is a surplus of refuse, there is trigger in nature: a monster is born to them. A lizard m any tim es the size of a normal one is born, who deals out d estruction and culls the lak e. The Greeks believed in this great po wer and worshiped its justice. In Bible it appears as allegory of the Flood, which in fact refers to the irrepressible spirit of the Sea Peoples, and the divine justice they brought to cities whose life had grown pointless, and a great ugliness on the worl d. Y ou bring lion cub into the house, but Aeschylus say , it will become a priest of doom when it reaches age: in nature there is irrepressible force. Its violence against the surfeit o f populations is divine justice. Its destruction of the feeble d esigns of reason, the pointless words of man—this is beautiful. This what the power of Nemesis means: few are chosen to wield it, fewer realize they are chosen or know what to do wi th it. When Hercules puts on the power of Nemesis on his s houlders he becomes hero w ho makes the world tame and safe for cities of real men. But th at was in his time, and ours is an a ge o f surfeit . It is dif ferent function. The star of Nemesis is sure to return, and it must already be burning inside some of you. In the Bronze Age men had life and for ce, and I already see, far on the h orizon of our w orld, but the glimmer is surely there—may it not be a mirage !—I see this spirit returning surely in our tim e. Piratical bands and brotherhoods will take to the seas, and not just to the seas. The enemies of W estern man and the en emies of beauty are to learn just what was meant b y a piratical race, a nest of pirates like the Chinese thought of the Dutch on first meeting them. I want to prepare you to receive this old spirit— old spirits are moving, from behind the reeds… the silhouet te shimmers against a river in late summer , and I see already men who know how to honor such uncanny old friends. May the y inhabit us again and give us strength to purify this world of refuse! P a r t O n e : T h e F l a m e o f L i f e 1 What if you’ve been misled ab out what is life? They do this by showing you two red marionette and shake them in front, then you stay mesmerized and clap like trained seal. Is like in politics before last year . Y ou had in years before T rump, the fat b ald gluttons of t he Right put in a fighting ring against the Janet Renos, the womyn with pickup trucks, the thin-lipped transnumales of the Left. Y ou had good people mesmerized eve n by this show: and it’ s funny to see a fat bald man try to tear o ut the eyes of woman of strong forearm with mullet, both frothing at mouth. Both saying nothing, but grunts of pigs and pre-made platitude, formula. But meanwhile the nation su f fered and the future of youth was given away . When they tric k you about what is life, this even worse because you don’ t see problem right away… but then comes out sixty years later and your grandchildren d on’ t exist, or they are 56% humanoid shifting about between shadows, or they are of noble power but have to hide under half-finished buildings because are hunted. But you must understand both left and right have been fooled about what is life. 2 Group of horses in broad plain , and the lead stallion is captured by a wi ld spirit, starts t o gallop this way and that, and the whole herd follows in a great rush of power and freedom— Nietzsche talks about this. I’ve seen many things like this myself: was at big waterfall, gathering place of many birds and other animal. Through all the cycles of history this place remains and birds who witness ed the coming and going of human civilizations remember it through the aeons and always return there. I saw many group of small birds, when the weather slightly changed, this waterfall so big that a small wind would make spray of wate r everywhere. Sun came from behind clouds and spread many small rainbows, birds would become excited , come out from crevasses in rock face and would glory in the sprays of water and the rainbows, they swoon d oing acrobatics this way and that. Like when Homer says that on som e Asian meadow tribes of geese, and crane and long-necked swans glory in the power of their wings above it , then land between the rivers, in Skamandrian plain, with a great clan g. Is not enough just to say , what is purpose of this to survival or reproduction? Surely some pedant can make a story . But when you see this behavior , is not so alien. Maybe, in happiest moments you were free to act and feel the same: what an ything to do with survival or reproduction! That kind of heavy necessity is the spirit of gravity , and this is opposite. That pet ty and cramped view of life…but in truth, life as it is, when free, life in abundance knows luxury , surfeit and waste…survival and reproduction are side ef fects of something else… 3 The mos t noble animals refuse to breed in captivity . Many animal, not just man, choose death when trapped. But I thought all life strove for mere survival and reproduction; but this not enough? But if not e nough then must understand animal in some other way . V ery much when thinkers talk about “evolutionary psychology” they abstract from way of yeast to way of animals and man, but this is backward. 4 There’ s a sociology of the w orld of scientists like of everything else. This is a cause of much confusion about biology and ideas of evolution. Y ou think you’ve been given objective truth, but the minds of biologists are in general very limited. The truth is the biggest minds always went for physics among the sciences, then maybe chemistry . Until recently but even now biology gives little opportunity for the kind of thinking that penetrates mystery of nature, the kind of insight into physical relations that attracts the best scientific minds. They’ve been on the whole a half-and-half group in history . Schopenhauer refers with contempt to the people who have their “c atalogues of monkeys” and think they understand nature. Darwin himself, Nietzsch e called him a petty mind, the kind of calculat or who likes to collect many small facts and synthesize some clumsy theory . The theory is clumsy and full of h oles. This is the biggest reason Creationists, who are also wrong, have been able to challenge it, where they were never able to challenge theoretical physics. There is much dishonesty and stupidity among scientists and biologists when they talk about evolution and life. 5 The problem now is you think I want to attaq idea of evolution or to c hange it because it’ s racist or uncomfortable, just like the left and others attaq or suppress it. This is not true! Listen: you don’ t need Darwin to believe in heredity and even evolution. People knew about heredity and the dif ferent lineages of man long before Da rwin. In the political sense the promotion of Darwin teaching and its application to mankind is a great good. The left and its many robots—I will talk of their ori gin later —want nothing more than to hide truth about human nature. And Darwin, evolutionary science in all its forms, i s a great weapon of tru th against them. In all this I agree, but remember the marionettes I mentioned. Don’ t be distracted by the puppet play . It is important not to be misled by a fierce deba te with a stupid opponent into just accepting the only other alternative that is presented to you. Although the left, or what I have termed the Bug-man, hates and fears evolutionary ideas applied to humans, Darwinism itself is the product of bug-thought. In the end it won’ t show you way out of the prison of the ages. The he reditary nature of the qualities, and the suitabili ty of an or ganism to its environment and vice- versa, all of this is true observation. And that true observation about he redity is in the end enough: you don’ t need more than that to utterly c rush all the designs and vanities of the Bug- man. The Bugman fears heredity and nature, not Darwin. 6 Y ou must understand that the evolutionary psychologist, the evo- biologist, the Darwinist in general—most such people are very good, and even great minds, who are just misled by the fight—plays a game of bait-and-switch. Many times he’ s not aware he do es this himself. He believes in Darwinism as a teleological faith, that reproduction and survival are the ends of life, the purpose toward which all life strives and that this explains how life or an or ganism behaves; and also how it is adapted to its environment. But when you confront him on this, he will deny all notion of teleology . He will say he doesn’ t believe in any of th is, but only in a material mechanism of natural selection. Through this mechanism those or ganisms that are not in keeping with demands of environment at some time are s lowly pared out. By a process analogous to our breeding of animals like dog and horse, nature itself breeds or ganisms a nd life this way and that, by accident. There is no end or purpose, he will say , you are crazy! But then when he’ s not paying attention he will talk a dif ferent way . They all do this. He will start to say that this or that anim al is behaving this or t hat way because it is trying to secure either reproduction or survival. He will explain physical features in this w ay too, and wh en he really for gets himself he will mak e a moral principle ou t of it. The most honest ones, when th ey trust you, will talk a bout replicating themselves as an aspiration and a goal. This is human, all-too-human but also very natural, because it’ s very hard to talk about biology or life without teleology or some consideration of ends or purpose. Clearly physics and chemistry seem to be driven by no purpose or goal. But animals seem very much driven by motive o r purpose, and is hard to explain a biological feature without referen ce to its end or purpose. So the Darwinist for gets, or tries t o change the top ic all the time: he knows what is re ally interesting is the ques tion of what drives life, what explains anim al behavior and what explains the correspondence between or ganism and environment. This is the ques tion. The mechanism of heredity or the means by which a species is shaped, natural or unnatural selection, which is really Darwin’ s only i nsight, is the least interesting part of all. Actually it is a tautology: yes, only those animals who have managed to reproduc e actually pass on their traits. Something every sheep breeder in history has known. But that this alone explains animal adaptation or behavior is nonsense. 7 There is Alpine mouse that collects food for winter . Somehow it knows exactly the proportion of poison herbs to include in winter stores, to preserve them. T oo much, and the food it gathered becomes poison , too little and it spoils. There is ex ample Schopenhauer gives: two insects, and one will kill the o ther on sigh t. Y et this other presents no immediate danger to the first, but will only eat its eggs in the future. How does that first insect know this? It is not taught, nor does it see. It has very primitiv e nervous system. It knows this somehow “in the blood.” This is a very spec ific and complicated behavior . There are many such cases in nature! Creationists have focused too much on complicated physical features, but even for something like the eye or the bacterial flagellum it is possible to construct stories of how they evolved gradually . I don’ t believe those stories, they sound improbable and made- up, but they’re more believable than the stories you have to make up in the case of behaviors. And many more! So many animals and simple insects have such complicated behaviors they are born with already . At some point the incremental explanation becomes so convoluted it is hard to believe. Please remember that Aristotelian-Ptolemaic system for calculating motion o f planet s and so on worked quite well for long time. It was abandoned because ever m ore convoluted explanations had to be inve nted to support the fundamental and wrong assumption of geocentric model . Evolutionary theory today is slowly i n same position, and nowhere more than where they may try to expla in inborn behaviors of this kind. It is obvious that such behaviors—if you want to call them “adaptations”— came about as we see them now , complete and without significant incr emental change . How did such “miracle” occur? T his is not Creationist b ook—I do not believe in that. Nor do I believe in the “miracle” that modern science has invented, hiding under the word “random mutation” and the hand-waving of “incremental change.” There is not enough time, nor enough number of specimens, nor the kinds of “mutations” observed to support either natural selection or Lamarckianism as explanations for evolution. Many of the mathematical m odels for how a trait will spread in a population have failed—they don’ t tell you this. No, I don’ t talk about miracles, whatever w ords you put them under . And the “des ign” is there, but it is by no means benevolent or intelligent, nor comprehensible. Y ou see in the spider ’ s web a creature of rudimentary nervous system and little intelligence “design” something beautiful and complex, and this is key to understanding also all of nature. There is an inherent “intelligence” in side things, uncanny , silent and demonic. Its workings and aims are obscure to us. Our own intelligence is only a crude de viation of it, an approximation. There is an “intelligence” in all things, and inborn in our bodies before anything to do with the brain or the nervous system. And all “adaptations,” n o matter how much natural or unnatural selection may have gone to spreading them within a population, occur not by random but by a spontaneous correspondence of some kind between the or ganism and the environment. So me day we may discover the material cause or manifestation of this correspondence, or the chain by which it travels from the rock-face and t he elements of brute matter up the for ms of life—there is some as-yet undiscovered “signaling” system. But the adaptation by no means takes place at random, nor even primarily by natural selection, which is just o ne

of the mea ns by which it spreads in a population. 8 A tr uly objective or scientific ap proach to life would be to start without assumptions. Make no big stories. T ake animal and stud y . Stud y what it does in natur e, not lab, when left alone from human. Study dif ferent specimens, the mood, the behavior at dif ferent time of year , in dif ferent places, at dif ferent levels of fortune and well-being. Make no assumption abo ut what it wants ultimately , study how it behave today , tomorrow , in the moment, which is only thing that exists for animal. Look inside its brain! Study its hormones and its internal states with great care, and, with clinical objective eye, correlate these internal states to what it does, or what it’ s driving at—and driving at that day or in that moment, not what you think about “reproduction or survival.” This is true path to understand animal, adaptation, behavior and life. There is some of this done, but much too little, and not well. In the end, are you so dif ferent from goat, dog or even ant that you look at such beings and really remain puzzled? For sure the real resear ch I just named must be done, if on ly to conv ince the boneheads. But the behavior of an animal would be a complete m ystery to you if you weren’ t very sim ilar yourself; but we understand right away a bear angry at bees, or playing under white-silver birch in thick of forest, o r lizard frightened and winding between rocks, why it does wh at it does. It is no my stery to us, who are also like them. W e love dogs because they express so honestly and without dissimu lation what we also are and want. They and other pets calm us because pr omote a kind of carelessness normal to animal life, unencumbered by thoughts of the past or worries about the future, none of which actually exist. W omen are, in their natural state, close to this condition as well, or closer on the w hole, which is where they get much of their charm and power from (the modern education, that teaches women to be hyper -aware, anxious for the future, abstract neurotics, etc., actually takes away their power to a great degree, while tricking them into thinking they are being tough or sa ssy; but a hyper -conscious woman is made powerless and charmless). But study must be made of inner state of animal, now in this cond ition, now that. What anyway would objective study of an or ganism say? What does life want? 9 Darwin and his style of thinking would never have made so m uch impression or ever had such power if it were simply false. Actually Darwinism is true, but only under certain conditions. It’ s not even a “half-truth,” it’ s actually the full truth about a kind of life, but the mistake is to think it describes all life. Darwin is meaningless without Malthus, but this is why Nietzsche is right ab out both of them when he says they de scribe only life in England, or more precisely the England of that time. The begin ning of the industrial age, and England as the first nation that solved the problem of infant mortality: these are the relevant facts. England was able to colonize so much of the New W orld because it was the first country to solve this problem. M any criticize in some way the Spanish or Portuguese model of colonization but you must know the Portuguese had a po pulation of one million when they beg an the age of discovery with Henry the Navigator . And of that population, many fewer were young men who could embark on voyages of great danger; some say up to a fourth or more died on these voyages alone. They had no manpower to settle faraway lands but continued the old pattern of “elite dominance,” where bro therhoods of conquering men often took local wives and such. By contrast the English could now transplant entire populatio ns, being surfeit of huemans. But it was still not enough. The cities became crowded, the filth unbearable as the lowest classes swarmed the monstrous new machines of industry . The living conditions of workers well into the 20th Century were purely hellish: M arx and his followers, at least, were right about that, and that’ s why they could pr ey on this condition. It was a condition of misery and destitution simil ar to or worse than we see in the shantytowns of the T urd W or ld. Solution to infant mortality problem meant these low er clas ses put all exces s income into supporting more mouths to feed, not improving the quality of life of the children they had: just an exponential increase in human biomass! And this is the world of Malthus and of Darwin, life under filth, life under distr ess. Darwinism describes life under extreme stress. From this very partial view he thinks he has discovered the truth about life in general, but animal under conditions of extreme stress, cro wded condition, observed and watched, filthy , beaten and imprisoned, its life severely regimented awa y from what it would like to do if left to its devices, will not give you secret to what life is. It will be very misleading example, and this is basis of Darwinism and of all thought that comes from it. It is the philosophy of life of the tenement and the slum, of the open air work-camp. 10 No kind of distress is worse than the feeling you are trapped. My worst nightmares are about opening a door only to fi nd myself in the same aluminum cell, over and over . The exhaustion that sets in after a long night of chess, when you sleep an d your mind dreams rep eat nonsense moves, I know of few worse forms of torment. An d this is self-imposed, through exhaustion, but even worse is w hen an outside force or being restrains you, yet you are in full control of your spirits and power , at least t o begin with. That condition is intolerable for the mos t noble animals, who ch oose death if necessary , or at least any way to escape no matter how painful. Many Caribs, trapped into slavery , died because they couldn’ t endure this, some bit through their arms to e scape their chains and endured any pain to escape captivity . Germanic mothers would kill infants when Roman legions clo sed in: T acitus describe life of Germanic warrior , who lived his whole life dedicated to war and fame, never became a dom estic! At Masada and at other times th e Jews killed their own children to escape subjection, when th ey were still a noble people. Xenophon describes in Anabasis how mo ther with infant would j ump of f a clif f in the highlands of Urartu, to escape th e advance of the Greek army: we see same vi deos in Japan in Okinawa, mother jump of f clif f. Buddhist monks V ietnam self-immolated and brought great sha me on the W est. For this reason Nietzsche say , noble peoples do not endure slavery , they’re either free or they die out. There is no “adaptation” to slavery for some types of life. What is that people, who has chosen survival at any price? The price they paid was monstrous and such a people becomes monstrous and distorted if it accepts this. The distinction between master races and the r est is simple and true, Hegel said it, copying Heraclitus: those peoples who choose death rather than slavery or submission in a confrontation, that is a people of masters. There are ma ny such in the world, not only among the Aryans, but also the Comanche, many of the Polynesians, the Japanese and many others. But animal of this kind refuses entrapment and subjection. It is very sad to witness those times when such animal can neither escape nor kill itself. I saw once a jaguar in zoo, behind a glass, so that all the bugs in hue man form could gawk at it and humiliate it. This ani mal felt a noble and persistent sadness, being observed everywhere by the obsequious monkeys, not even monkeys, that were taunting it with stares. He could tell—I saw this! He could tell he was living in a simulated environment and that he had no power to move or live. His sadness crushed me and I will always remember this anim al. I never want to see life in this condition! 1 1 Just a few weeks ago I was outside night club in city that is still un touched by first-world regimented hygiene: well- lighted, clean streets made saf e for women come at a high price for the mood of a city . In this place the government and bureaucracy couldn’ t extend its rules and cleanup ef forts even if it wan ted. Th ere are then many nooks and hidden corners that are under no one’ s control. In this no-man’ s land there is mafia, so many perverts, there is some crime, but it’ s kept at mostly very low or nonviolent level because place is full of of f-duty cops on the make and no doubt spooks foreign and domestic, and who knows what else. I find life without such refuge to be almost intolerable, so here I felt free but I think was afte r day in a haze and the glycine was kicking in. I must have tak en 600 mg theanine as well, and after much cof fee I was spacing out… under vicious neon yellow lights I stood looking at the b ouncer almost in a trance. I wondered what it was like to be him. He was alert, knew what posture to take for his job and wha t look in the eye to emulate… or put on an act of being vigilant, and was imposing in broad frame under leather jacket with military-type epaulettes, but there was a kindness or softness in his eyes. Maybe would have taken some power of perception to see this, and I doubt he was challenged often by the customer rif fraf f because of it, but I could se e it, how at times he sunk into a sadness and boredom looking in the distance. I too looked down the long broad street, m ostly em pty except for some small groups of drunks, hookers, some revelers, in the distance there was great fountain in plaza lighted up on all sides. I don’ t know why , maybe t he calmn ess of the bless ed aminos hit me but my gaze veered o f f to one of the apartme nt buildings on the side of the road. Th ere was just one light turned on in the middle of building and my mind wandered to who lived there and what they were like, a nd then to how it would be if I was the boy or girl who lived there. Many times I’ve wished, not so much that I wa s so meone else, nor that I was immortal, but that I could live man y dif fer ent lives simultaneously and not be limited to being only one t hing. At such moments of mood where you’re both calm and at least feel free every detail of life becomes interesting, all takes the character of images from a peaceful dream that present themselves in turn and don’ t move you one way or another , because you see through them. I wonder then at le ast a s a zoological experime nt what it would be like to be a V ietnamese girl, a nail shop owner , or even an obese Angolan middle -aged woman running a pedicure operation with pink walls…yes, no form o f hueman life is beneath me at such mo ments. I’ve even had d reams that I was a door or a vase, free to observe—I imagine only the seeing, the satisfaction of curiosity , and not the thousands of cares that must af fect these people who I want to inhabit. But most of all then, wh en to this love of curiosity is added some sudden burst of ener g y , I start to wonder about men like myself of around my age, and what it would be li ke to be them, what they think moment to moment, what pulls them this way and that. I feel then a great longing for them and also for myself, and think of the f riendships that I could hav e had with them and the great tasks that could await. I feel beset by this as an almost erotic irritation that is dif fuse, and a gr eat sadness and irritation that I will never know who lived in that building at that window , never se e what they saw lookin g out. These ways…this is all my v ersion of “ love for mankind.” Of the other abstract kind, it means nothing and those who invoke it are bullshitters. 12 V ery young rams, very young s tag even when fawn, well before horns appear , play-fight with heads butting. This is in anticipation of horns that will g row . Y et no one teaches them this, but they know it in the blood. What came “first” for this animal, the development of horn s or the “knowledge” and will to fight in this manner? In phe nomenon like this is kept the secret and truth about evolution and life. 13 Struggle for space— A healthy animal not under distress, not maimed, not trapped by man, seeks first when young: space. Animal seeks space in ph ysical sense, territory . But this meaning isn’ t crudely physical , I give this as vivid image which i s true for many animals that seek ownership of concrete territor y . But more generally you must take it to mean something else, space to develop inborn powers. Monkey that lives in trees s eeks skills to master canopy , beaver seeks ownership of river and banks and reeds in its grasp, many big cat o f course se ek mastership of actual territory and claims to prey and mates in this territory . Big feline, hunting dogs seek full use of cla ws, fangs, development of smell and other senses, to extend their reach over space. They seek these things b ecause t hey want to mas ter matter . All of this is higher or ganism or ganizing itself to master matter in surrounding space. Successful mastery of this matter leads to development of inbor n powers and flourishing of or ganism, which allows it to m aster more matter , to marsh al the lower to feed the higher . It is mobilization of matter to develop the inborn character or idea or fate—this true not onl y for food literally . In social animals an analogous proces s takes place within social relations or social “space”: there are some important changes that happen here, but principle is same. Important to understand that there is a circular process: or ganism seeks mastery of space, environment, to master matter in ways particular to its own abilities, and as a result of this mastery of matter there is development of its body , its senses, and all of its facul ties, and the unfolding of its inborn destined form or nature, i n time, its particular form flowering in the spring of its season. All of this requires precisely freedom from struggle for survival, or time away from this , a reprieve from this pressure. As for reproduction, animal in natural state will not even seek at this point, will not even think it. V ery far from its aims: it seeks to become strong, skillfu l, to master problems and feel the exp ansion of its powers, and not just feel them, but perceive it to be truly so, perceive intuitively its mastery over its space . Only after full devel opment of its powers and its mastery over space specific to its needs does the need or desire for reproduction come. Reproduction is side ef fect of animal desire for dischar ge of strength , after mastery over space is achieved. For this reason many lower animal breed very fast and in great hurry , but the higher and more or ganized the form of life, the mor e complex its n eeds for development are, the longer is delayed the time of reproduction and the more vulnerable it is to the stresses of competition for survival. Animals that have “evolved” under intense competition are in some sense “stunted,” less be autiful, less intelligent, less magnificent. There are many “factions” in nature and many paths that pull in opposite directions. Y ou must learn to see the secret la nguage of nature and what it drives at: there is one path that drives for the productio n of a supreme specimen. It is the p ath that governs higher life ; survival and reproduction are only side effects of this path. L ife is at most basic, struggle f or ownership of space. 14 Some th ings make my blood b oil far more than a direct physical challenge might. I once left the gym and some Chad came up to me and started to fee l me up. Then I discovered he was feel ing up my pockets, was trying to see if someone stole his missing stuf f. I found this very amusing. Maybe was post- workout and I w as very calm, but was not of fended by this, partly h is manner was not obtrusive despite what he was doing. It was po ssibly a form of muscle worship. But rarely do I f eel angrier as a violation of my privacy than if I eat in restaurant alone and someone comes to sit right next to me when the whole place is empty . V ilest of all is when a group of something, I think were subcon s or Han, came and sat just by me i n entirely em pty restaurant and started to eat with mouths open. That sound too, fewer th ings grate on the nerves and present t hemselves as imposition on your space than the sound of so-ca lled hue-man eating. Other animals making sound eating d on’ t bother me, but I find charming. Dif ferent types even within same grouping of animals—I refuse the word species —have very dif ferent needs of life. My blood starts to boil, against my kindness and ju dgment, even when I stay with gril and she insists on setting air conditioner of f or closing window because “too cold.” I like open spaces and slightly cool, and there can be no living together with creatures who like a huddled and over -warm existence. I believe also the white race, or rather some grou pings within it—there are far more rac es than people want to admit—is in general hostile to the way of life o f the tribes that like a close-packed existence. These are biological requiremen ts of this or that way of life, and no laws, no common beli efs, can bring such dif ferent types together . A hybrid of such types would probably be born and remain physiologically confused or sick. 15 Whor emoans: E ner gy and higher life the same— If we had very advanced sensors where we could observe the inside of animals from far and in great detail, without interfering, without them feeling irritated or oppressed by our impositions, we coul d learn much about what life means. From observing many d if ferent ones in dif ferent places we could see what conditions an animal seeks in life in general. Such sensors would need to be much more advanced than equipment we have now , and to show what par ts of the brain are activated, to see the relations hip of this to blood pressure and heart rate, the actions of the immune system, the level of various inflammatory an d anti-inflamma tory markers, and most of all the balance and action of the various hormones on the body’ s systems, on the brain, and how these correlate to what the animal is doing at any one tim e. Any information we have right now on thi s subject is at most rudimentary . The medical literature is confused, is presented with great confidence, but is corrupted by money , career , an d other interests of all kinds. The scientific literature is less known, and itself remains contradictory . W e know at most a few relations of what, say , elevated thyroid or cortisol means at such and such time of day , and its multiple ef fects on various body tissues and systems. W e have no real overall understanding of how such things i nteract, nor what they mean for the body’ s overall processes, still less in the life of an or ganism as a whole, and the few who have attempted to achieve such understanding, like Ray Peat, a re treated as cranks. But it’ s not possible to understand what life means, nor what an or ganism drives at, nor what any specific behavior or physical adaptation means until this is taken up. If biologists had been honest people they would h ave tried to proceed in this way , without assumptions, just amassing observations about dif ferent or ganisms in dif ferent situations. But they did this only very little, and it’ s always distorted by their various agendas and prejudices. The data we have its elf is therefore at this point much too sparse and it will take decades to get what is needed even if researchers begi n now . It will be a genius of the ages who will really be able to understand and explain the complete view of how hormones act in an or gani sm. There is no irony here: I don’ t do irony! Learn that I don’ t understand the gay idea of “irony .” Hormones hold the key to the meaning of life in the most fundamental way , and if this sounds “reductionist” to you, if you think I demystify thi ngs too much, it’ s because you think you know what you don’ t , or you think scientists know , when they actually don’ t. These substances, seen with fresh eyes, ar e pure Big Magic. T hey govern all cycles of an or ganism’ s grow th and its decay . They can turn small calf or baby go rilla into giant elephant or half-ton silverback on diet of gr eens, they c an turn skinny man into Herculean half-god or make st rong man take on the aspect of woman, and change tendencies and feelings, mirroring the magical transformation of some animals that switch s exes by signals we don’ t yet understand. This doesn’ t even begin to cover the dif ferent meanings of thyroid, p rogesterone, the various neurotransmitters, and many ot hers that act one way on the nervous system, another way on the gut, another way on the immune system, that govern cell division and the preservation of f unction in ways that are f or the moment a mystery to doctors and to science. Only a complete

understanding of these hidden substances will re veal the fullness of life in its glory! T he study of life as a “black box” has led to misunderstandings because the observers are dishonest and stupid and will report an action, but not what comes before or after , nor its pla ce in the life of an animal, nor do they try to intuit from within themselves: the study of hormones, among many other internal processes of an or ganism, will prevent them from lying in this way . For example, an animal may act one way under stress and press ure, but then appear to do the same action out of a spirit of o penness and self-increase, and the same action or behavior may actually have completely dif ferent meanings biologically: this will be shown by actions of hormones, neurotransmitters, cytokines in the body . And I will tell you what they likely to discover! So far only Ray Peat, a man ble ssed by a grand and alien understanding, has tried to decipher the secret language of these blessed substances. Learn that there are at least two kinds of life. Usually you think of life ve rsus inanimate matter—how strange that the most primitive languages, the agglutinative grunts of Neanderthals like Ba sque, distinguish not between gender of noun, but between an imate and inanimate! I wonder then wh at they would call yeast. Learn th at there are two kinds of l ife, and yea st is dif ferent from higher life. Higher life means many fancy and mysterious things too of course but at its m ost basic i t has to do with dif ferentiation and structure. Y east is an “am orphous blob” that expands, whereas a higher or ganism has dif ferent parts wit h dif ferent functions, dif ferent or gans, dif ferent systems within itself. The sexes are dif ferent because it reproduces sexually , and some have taken this to be the m ain distinction, asexual versus sexual reproduction. But it’ s obvious that “dif ferentiation” in higher or ganisms goes much beyond this. And to preserve the function of the dif ferent or gan s and dif ferent systems within itself, an or ganism sacrifices the ability to expand and r eplicate indiscriminately , like yeast does for example. Y ou can think of it as “sa crifice” of this ability , o r just say that these two modes or te ndencies, expansion and re plication of cells on one hand, and preservation of higher or dif ferentiated function on the other , are at odds with each other . They are governed by dif ferent hormon es and neurotransmitters, where estrogen and serotonin are “stress” substances that govern cell division, but thyroid and progesterone are those that govern the preservation of function. It is not correct to call estrogen then a “sex hormone,” but a stress hormone, and its greater proportion in body of female is because female is under greater stress due to demands of inner cell division and menstruation. T he picture is far from complete of course, but this leads to many good observations. Considering this from the other side, the side of pathology , the indiscriminate cell division, the return of “primitive life” within the human body is called cancer , which looks an d acts very much like a fungus does. Co nversely , from the side of health, the structure of the body is preserved to the extent that cells successfully command ener gy , and so, to spe ak artistically but to be right, on one side the hormones th at promote cell ener gy are precisely those that promote the preservation of function, namely thyroid and the like, whereas the hormones that promote “lassitude” and that take away ener gy are precisely those tha t promo te cell division, inflammation, the production of f ree radicals, the breakdown in order and function. At a deep level this m ust be connected to the fundamental truth of nature, that structure and ener gy must be the same, that ener gy is not as “dif fuse” as we imagine it, but has an inner “intelligence”—this word is very bad in this case, because it is rather th e imperfect intellect of our brains that is a mere approximation of this primordial and primal W ill. This W ill is almighty . Its forms are endless. It is no dif ferent from the fir e of Herac litus, a pervasive ener gy at play , inside all things, that seeks to order and reorder itself into ascending, uncanny objects. Its intent is mischievo us, and beyond our ability to understand in words. In the lif e of or ganisms, this seeks to order itself into higher and more dif ferentiated forms, that is, concretely , seeks the production of one supreme specimen. Peoples are nature’ s circuitous ways to great specimens and for t his reason t he peoples that have arisen out of nature must be prese rved in their distinct forms. In same way see from all this that aesthetic physique has the most cosmic significance, and it is becau se of what I have said so far that aesthetic bodies are a “window to the other side,” because they are the pinnacle of nature. The gods that surely exist but remain hidden have the most beautiful bodies we can imagine—they appeared to the ancient Greek s in dreams. Contrary to this exists th e surfei t of flesh we see on the obese and in general the lassi tude, the spiritual obesity , not only of modern life but of m any historical forms of life as well, the domestic life of the villa ge, of the village sew er , of the fetid valleys, of matriarchy and domestics, of slaves, the pollution of cities built on filth, th e life of the swamp, the life of the human animal c ollapsed to mere life, life for the sake of life, as it devolves to the yeast form aes thetically , morally , intel lectually , physically . On the other side is the life of the immortal gods who live in pure mountain air , and the sign of this life, where ener gy is marshaled to the prod uction of higher order , is the aesthetic physiq ue, the body in its glorious and divine beauty . What of the mind then? W ell as rare as beautiful bodies are, the mind in the same condition is even more rare. Let us strive, in our decrepit, c ancerous and fetid world, for what is concrete and wha t we can try to attain. Those who for get the body to pursue a “perfect mind” or “perfect soul” have no idea where to ev en start. On ly physical beauty is the foundation for a true higher culture of the mind and spirit as well. Only sun and steel will show you the path. 16 Chimp in state of nature never jerks of f, but in captivity he does, wat does this mean? In state of nature he’ s too busy , to put plainly . He is concerned with mastering space: solving problem of life in and under t rees, mastering what tools he can, mastering social relations i n the jockeying for power and status. Deprived of this drive to development and self-increase he devolves to pointless masturbation, in captivity , where he senses h e is in o wned space and therefore the futility of all his ef forts a nd all his actions. The onanism of modern society is connected with its supposed “hyper -sexualization” and its infertility . It’ s not really hyper -sexualization, but the devolution of the spirit to the lassitude of a dif fuse and weak sexuality . Life in owned space becomes drained of ener gy through low-grade pointless titillation—and nofap is a kind of car go cu lt that tries to reestablish ener gy in order , on path of ascent. Sometimes, however , it’ s a successful car go cult, but whether it works or no can be seen usually within a week. The unfortunate thing about all this is that w*m*n have exceptionally go od antennae for this kind of thing, and when a man fre es hims elf from these pressures…they see this from very far away . They have an instinct to seek out ascending life and drai n it…they and the species thereby achieve their goals, but you are bled dry and sometimes left a husk. They revert life back to its irritated state, and by their drainage of vital essence they’ve laid low many great tasks. 17 I’ve always been attracted to filth and dirt, because something in me knew intuit ively that it is only in the underseam of life as it exists today that you find the real “lacunae,” the “holes” where its r each is limit ed or weak. I always sensed there was some r eal freedom in the blackest of red light districts among whores and junkies, perverts, and worse, with whom I’ve always chosen to take my dinners when I had the chance. I like the stories they told me, some showed letters from delusional Spanish engineer who wanted to marry her , another told me story of miscarriage her friend had in old pervert’ s bathroom, and how they flushed it down a toilet an d then its name written on a piece of toilet paper . It’ s in this world and almost only in this world today that you can start to polish the claws nature g ave you, assuming it gave you any . Unfortunate ly it’ s easy for a man with good antennae to see t hat even this world of shadows has at most a conditional existence. The truth is that they are allowing these “holes” because they , or the people who crafted the fabric in which the masters of lies operate, are smart enough to know you need these “free spaces”: they are of great use to a manipulator . See how the Japanese, so famed for their love of law and order , have neverthele ss always allowed the yakuza to operate running prostitution and meth rings and even worse. Such things h ave a serious function in Japanese society , as the mafia and oth er institutions have had in W estern society . Only a cretinous government will get rid of such a world entirely , and thankfully we have very stupid governments in the W est now . Their days are numbered. It is with sadness that you realize, eventually , after the first exhilarating rush of freedom in this world of the da mned, that these spaces too, though not so pervasively “owned,” have portals and gates manned by that which owns everything else. Still, it’ s better than nothing because in the moment all of that’ s still far away… on a late summer night when you are ask ed by corrupt lawyer to spy on Lebanese strip club owner and you’re out in courtyard with 20-year -old pros tie, she put coc aine on your tongue and you feel the ocean ai r at night fill you with the longing of the great sea…. you might almost for get suf focating air of gravity outside, and feel for a few minu tes like animal before moment of hunt. 18 When speak of whoremoans you might think I’m a materialist reductionist, or am saying you are like machine. This is attitude of many scient ists or maybe just cultists of science. Actually many on the left claim to have this attitude, though t hey can never explain w hat moral force their “rights” and “com passion” have, if it do esn’ t come from God or have some reality in h uman nature. When they say they are atheists, I n ever believe them: atheists act like Stalin or Brezhnev , not like a Presbyterian schoolmarm . The truth is that these who make the core of the modern left are moral fanatics. There’ s not a drop of ath eism or relativism in them. They don’ t enjoy the clear air of skepticism and never have. They always sneak in th e soul or free will when you ’re not looking. They actually get of f on this, and are acting out of spite, even spite against themselves. They want to feel they’re not in control, “my hormones made me do it”: what is this you apart from your hormones, your genes, your inborn instinct, then? “It’ s the genes,” “it’ s the environment,” “it’ s the economy or the oppression”—all versions of the milieu theory , a neurotic’ s theory a ccording to Nietzsche. This is how they can also get themselves to believe in the tran sgender: these are people who believe that matter can somehow be corruptly configured, and that we all hav e disembodied souls with male or female essences. The whole attempt to redefine identity , not just sexual identity , as a matter of decision, meaning decision made arbitrarily , freely , a choice of the intellect or reason, is their desperate reach to find a new ju stification for the freedom of the will, the so ul unrestrained by nature or biology . Such things make no sense when you realize you’re your body and there’ s n o you aside from this. T he first lines of the Iliad make this clea r: you do have a “soul” of sorts apart from your body…it just isn’ t you. It’ s a shade. It’ s completely homosexual. 19 Some think this view absolves you of your responsibility for your acts. But actually you’re responsible for much more than your acts. That which is s aid to constrain or determine you biol ogically is actually what you are. It does restrain your acts according to its inherent w ays of desiring and acting, but you ar e this it, and it decided to be, so actually you are responsible for much more, you’re responsible for what you are. Y ou are responsible for t he good and bad things that happen to you, for any accident or disease you might experience! Actu ally it was all going to happen to you just the way it did at the moment of you r birth or conception and even before, at the m oment your parents had a glint for each other in th e eye. There is fundamenta lly no dif ference between you and that glint. 20 Animals walk around in a state of permanent religious intoxication. Th is is the natural condition of the mind and intellect, the moment-to-moment perception, of man as well. I heard some computer fool say th at religion is the “older virtual reality” experience, to justify his scam industry . No, the denuded state of the spirit and intellect, where you walk around “demystified” and “dise nchanted” is the virtual reality condition, and a terrible condition at that. For the longest period o f which we are at present aware, for hundreds of thousands of years in the Paleolithic, humans walked around, like healthy animal, in a stat e that we would today call religious deliriu m, but which is in fact the default state of all conscious and semi-conscious life. For long after the coming of civiliz ation also, many continued in this condition, or did so during s pecial times of the year or festivals where man could regain his free and natural sta te. It was civilization and in particular agricu ltural civilizati on that forbad this condition and plunged the majority of humans into a semi-permanent repressive or depressive frame. That this is consistent with, and even a prerequisite for , the impressive works and development of higher civilization and higher culture shouldn’ t be surprising: the majority of mankind suf fered terribly also in their bodies from the coming of agriculture, the backbreaking labor , the malnourishment that shows itself in the smaller stature and more slender build of farmers’ skeletors, of the destruction of t heir teeth, the atrophy of their brains and other or gans. Agriculture allowed a steady food source, a n increa se in numbers, and above all the maintenance of an elite, free from these exactions, that lived parasitically on the many . But agriculture broke the human animal and domesticated him. Do you understand then what the “disenchanted” worldview is? I ha ve to laugh at the “secular worldview ,” the disenchanted worldview , which is in fact the worldview or mood of th e broken p easant farmer . “Science,” supposedly the content….that’ s not even relevant here… 21 My favorite thing is to walk around the city during the day completely plastered, on very crowded streets or on boardwalk by s ea o r river , with container maybe it looks like iced tea or water but is full of alcohol. At night I don’ t enjoy as much, but during t he day to walk around in a state of great enthusiasm and ener gy powered by liquor or , best of all, some kind of wine tha t ener gi zes you to a great and holy rage. I don’ t mean really ra ge, because I’m laughing on the inside, but I love to walk around like this, to see the people, to accost strangers in all kind s of ways, nothing is more entertaining. I’ve often wondered at these times what it would be like, and how blessed life would be, if I could feel this way all the time and not just when I drink, and als o never pay the price for it. Alcohol should never , by the way , be used for stress relief because after it crashes, and even the next day , there is a rise in cortisol so that unpleasant feelings become worse. But I wondered what it would be like to feel like this all the time and that there must be, or have been, people who do. Aren’ t we told this world is full of muta nts? Why not a mutant who is perpetually full of this kind of euphoria…but even more, why not just one set of emotions, or one emotion. I’ve wondered at these times how life could be i f you were possessed only by one specific feeling, and if there is a man who has only felt the purest and most intense anger , c ontinually and nothing else, or who has felt only a very spec ific kind of joy and no other feeling…even sadness of certa in kinds makes life beautiful and can be a spur to great things . Even panic is better than the numbness promoted in our time. What would a creature who only eve r felt such a thing be lik e, and why can’ t one exist? It would b e a monster , or a god, or in any case he would be possessed by a god. 22 Do you imagine that men of genius or , let’ s say , men of science in history walked around clear -headed, “disenchanted,” r easonable, with the tight-assed attitude of th e science cultist and materialist? No great discovery has ever been ma de by the power of reason. Reason is a means of communicating, imperfectly , some discoveries to others, and in the case of th e sciences, a m ethod of trying to render this communication certain and precise. But no one ever made a discovery through syllogisms, through reason, through this makeshift form of transmission. Great mathematicians saw spatial relations, as great physicists saw and to some extent felt physical relations. In contemplation of mathematical forms, there is almost a physical feel of geometric relations, and all mathematics at bottom is about geometric relations even when it d oesn’ t seem so. Compare the Euclidian proof of the Pythagorean the orem, based on syllogism, which helps you understand nothing that’ s actually going on, with the imagistic proof of the three squares, that makes you perceive, physically perceive even in your body , wh y this theorem is true. Gauss, so b eloved even by the tediou s scientistic goblins that even Google gave him a cartoon, is famous to have said something like, “I got it…now I have to get it.” Meaning, he had seen and felt the fundamental spatial relation he was searching, but now he had to translate it into the imperfect language of mathematics for others. Thus all mathematics and all science in general—mathematics is only the prototype and most precise o f the sciences—is about the definitions, not about the proof, not about the process or—absurd!—the “algorithm.” All great sc ientific discoveries, supposedly the great works of “reason,” are in fact the result o f intuitions and sudden grasp of ideas. And al l such sudden g rasp and reaching is based on what, in other circumstances, would be called a kind of religious intoxication: it depends on a state of the mind where the perceiving part of the intellect is absolutely focused, limpid, y et driven by the most relentless ener gy , an ener gy to penetrate. Direct p erception is already “intellectualized” and in fact much clo ser to the innat e “intelligence” of things than cerebral syllogisms. No scientist worth anything has ever felt pride at using al gorithms or trial-and-error to solve a problem. Y es, feminists are right that “s cience” is patriarchal in this sense, that it is a “rape” of nature. Real scientists like Galois are m onsters of will, and the pre ponderance of men in the hard sciences is explained by this or ientation of character , as also by the fact that the minds of men more than of women are capable of sustained focus on o ne thing (women are better at multitasking). There are women who were great scientists, but, like women who were great ch ess players, or poets, they are probably spiritual lesbians. 23 The modern peasant just replac es the artificial prejudices of superstitions and village old wives’ tales with the superstitions of science, which he receives ready-made from authorities among the popularizers of science. He loves them because of the creature comforts he believes they provide through technology . He is a car go cultist—he knows nothing of what goes into the discoveries of science, nor the way the substance is transmitted among scientists, he just has a propagandized image of some of the results. This is no dif ferent from belief in Big Magic, which is how many primitives think of science—the Big Magic of the white man. It’ s not even th e substance of science that is the problem because it could be of great use , as much as any other popular religion has been: the problem is the frame of spirit that it puts the acol yte in. It makes him think he has power over the processes of nature which are a t present actually very poorly understood. By removing primal fear—the only kind of awe that drives the many—it injects a toxic mix of complacency , arrogance, brutality , fanaticism that is all just under the surface only so long as times are good. Science as popular religion brings n o true consolation but instead feeds a kind of false pride, pride in spiting oneself—does this sound familiar? It should s ound familiar to women most of all. It actually makes the many more servile to the authorities who are presumed to understand and manipulate the technology . That is its purpose, to make the many submit, wh

ich wouldn’ t be bad, if they weren’ t submitting to the lords of lies. Y ou can see from all this anyway why Enlightenment can never happen but also why those critics of Enlightenment like most of the followers of H eidegger go the wrong way . They are right when they say , in so many words, that the inborn character of every man is in some way unique, the biology too particular , much more so than the more uniform characte r of animals. For animals the worker ant, or two fruitflies, will have exactly the same inborn, but humans are all slightly dif ferent. From this they draw the conclusion that no com mon “way” can suf fice for all, but that the only authentic way for you can come from the needs of your inner self. Every adherence to an external code, religion, or ideology is “inauthen tic” and represents essentially a f orm of mind control, your ad opting the thoughts of another , inappropriate fo r your own m etabolism, biology , peculiar conditions for growth or flourishing. Y es, it is true, Nietzsche went so far as to avoid reading anything written by others, so as not to infect his mind! And he was a mutant with a very particular biolog y—such types often are, and he was right that for t hem, physiology , diet, may be the most pressing research necessary . But he never for got that the fundamental fact of nature is inequality , and this is something these people, the followers of Heidegger , and Heidegger himself to a great degree, all for get. It is madness to ask the common prefab run of man to fashio n his own way , his own “religion”—the many find sola ce and meaning only in submission. It is good that this is so, and they shouldn’ t be made to feel ashamed for it. So much of the modern idiocy is based on shaming those who would find true pleasure in su bmission! The long chain of being is held together by command and obedience. The many are not so dif fer ent from one a nother , nor their conditions of life so dif ferent. In the end you t oo, no matter how special or a genius y ou may be, are held together to the average man through many ties of biology , so that you would both do well to p ay attention to what is com mon, especially insofar as the body is concerned. The body is not a private thing: the “individual” body is likely diseased. The universal body , the correct type discovered by anc ient Greek science and art, is not something you will develop by nurturing your own “individual” qu irks, doxies and faggotries. Biology works according to types and grades of manifestation, not according to the develop ment of “unique” personal eccentricities. Science rightly understood helps us understand the types, the species, the true cleavages of n ature. Science is not in and of itself the cause of our problems, of your “alienation,” nor does it ha ve any content beyond who uses it and for what. Science is a great tool because it can uncover for us the biological conditions of all life and the relationships between types of life. It can, as N ietzsche predic ted, settle the question of the true hierarchy of values, or more precisely , the real ladder of life, the true hierarchy of biolog ical types. What prevents this from happening is not inherent to science or technology as such. It is a political and sociological problem—one way or another , in time, the right force will take hold of the power of science and reveal its true poten tial. Science was never meant to be for comfort! 24 I don’ t talk about if God exist s, I don’ t know this. I’ve never ha d any feeling for this o ne way or another . I’ve sat in houses of religions, but I alwa ys felt nothing, it put me to sleep. Even the novelty of a Bu ddhist or Hindu temple wore of f very fast: I enjoyed the sp ectacle but could tell…these priests a re just more piledrivers. I was always so bored. How can the secret and hidden and precious things be about doctrine and just more talking? But—and I don’ t know why people put these things together , because for me they never had anyt hing to do with each oth er—even as a small boy I felt every object was inhabited by a n uncanny shadow or spirit. I paid honor to ce rtain toys and certain objects I found outside and hid carefully . No one ever taught me to do this. I found dead animal and buried it with c eremony . I always felt I could talk to animal and that they wer e my brothers and sisters. This “animism” is the natural religion of man, and shows itself even to sm all child l eft alone to play . I remember fondly a small white dog under thickets of wisteria bushes growing on corrugated steel, and I believe this dog has followed me in dif ferent forms my whole life. But I’m almost sure that gods exist, an d in any case, the ar gum ent against the one God isn’ t the s ame as aga inst the other gods. In all the fulminations of Sam Harris, and Hitchens, and the “new atheists,” there’ s nothing really new—they want t o banish not just religion from public life, but to enter your own mind and replace whatever vestiges of old or ganized relig ions are there with their own very stupid or ganized religion. If they have an easy time of it, this is because monotheism overreached. It made such grand claims… and when these claims were abandoned it left people with the impression that there really is nothing besides “science,” whic h of course, nobody really understands, because it’ s nothing but a method. It would have been far more honest t o embra ce skepticism but of course they would never let you take th e logical conclusion. But still, for get for a moment all the claims made about God, about the creation of matter o ut of nothing—which runs against all intuition and all observation that you can make yourself…you don’ t even need science for that. Paglia said on ce that the real novelty of the one God was t hat he spoke the world into existence. How dif ferent this was from all other creation myths! All pagans knew th e world was eternal, and that its present condition was a r esult of cycles of birth, rebirth, regeneration, copulation: the Japanese even have myths abo ut gods shitting on fields to make th em ferti le! How proper , it makes many other things about Japanese culture easier to understand. Monotheism, even of the intellectual or deist variety , and especially that variety , makes all kinds of claims too ab out the lawfulness of matter or of natur e, about intelligent design and the like. It’ s actually much cl oser to the science that claims to disprove it, than to the orig inal paganism of all ma nkind. So much of this story makes time a line and makes matter conditional on a deity or creator that lives outside it: t he creation of matter out of nothing, the creation of your s oul out of nothing. Matter is dead, in some ways homogenous, and its meaning is “divine” only in the sense that it reveals the creation of the external deity , or even better , just the laws he made to govern it. It seems and feels wrong, or runs against the immediate perception of the world, so it requires faith, a concept unknown to ancient pagans of all kinds. For this reason the Romans considered Christians and Jews to be no dif ferent from atheists. That view is very dif ferent. As such, there is no “scientific” reason why you would have to rule out the existence of beings stronger , superior , more intelligent, more magnificent than us, equippe d with powers that appear magical to our u nderstanding. The only reason I can think to dismiss this is Schopenhauer ’ s, his amusing refutation of God —that any being of intelligence higher than man’ s would have already abolishe d itself long ago. But if you don’ t believe that, what reason can there be? Plea se no say “there no proof,” “I didn’ t see it.” Scientific proof w ould be totally forbidden here: in fact there are many strange occurrences that have been recorded by many , as much as a ny event can be recorded, but this lacks any scientific meaning, it’ s a case of “not applicable.” If an impish deity of the lower kind, with which the wor ld is full, some purple goblin with a wicked face showed itself to a pedant in a w hite coat, the scientist would convince himself he was hallucinating—and in any case, without being available for study , for testing, for experiments that can be seen by others (this standard has been abandoned for many fields lately), its existence would not fall within the power of “science” at all. No, and what do you say to ancient accounts that such creatures showed themselves to men before, and maybe still do? Why would they show themselves to you? The weakness and spinelessness of modern man—no god would show himself to such cre atures, to be jeered at! Why? Remember why the young men in Mishima’ s story of the League of the D ivine W ind were so inflamed with passion and anger on behalf of the immortal gods. They knew that, without them, without the breed of warri ors, the many would for get the gods. They would become powerless spirits hiding among the reeds, th e subjec t of superstition, ridicule. The true gods have a ki nd of powe r , but not the kind the many imagine. Why should they care for mankind? T hey are rare and precious, and it is for man to find, acknowle dge, and honor them. This, at least, was the ancient view: and the foundation and preservation of oracles was the first question of life and also of st atecraft. Gods could not co ntrol nature or fate, but could reveal i ts workings at key tim es. If a god showed himself today to you, in a dream, would you have the inner ener gy and power to honor him and do his bidding in the world? Or would you, neutered by the modern pe rvasive hivemind of the slave, dismiss it, and yourself as unreal or unworthy , when it is the modern bugman and his blabbering that lacks reality . But I want you to be intoxicated wit h the highest enthusiasm and ready to receive these greatest blessings with great confidence! 25 Nerds, so prized by the middleb row clothmos who rule the cities an d want to think that, well, at least they’re smart and deserve RESPECT , are people who possess a kind of self- destructive paro dy of intelligence. Their facility with pointless concepts and abstractions make them think they have an understanding of real things when all they have is a misunderstanding of words and grammar , over generalized to the point of meaninglessness. Simple people confuse a facility with words for real intellect. It would be very easy to speculate, for example, on the two forms of life I mentioned above and to sa y , as some do, that there is a progress in the universe from the simple to the more complex. This is similar to th ose who believe in historic al progress, and that there is a motion in history to greater reasonableness, or peace, or prosperity , or freedom, whatever . All of this way of thinking is wrong. While I believe the two physiological processes I mentioned do describe two dif ferent kinds of life, and their dif fering condit ions and aims, there is no evidence for any motion in time in favor of one or the other , either when we consider the universe or just human history . If anything, the evidence is motion toward the lower forms of life. I have no doubt a nyway that beings of magnificent beauty and complexity existed before, but disappeared because the conditions for their preserva tion were that much more dif ficult. No doubt also that hum an civilization came and went in m any cycles, over many hu ndreds of thousands of years. Civilizations far more advanced than ours are buried under miles of ash and rock, or under the ice of Antarctica, or were entirely pulveriz ed. The memory of such things comes to very sensitive youths with a nervous system so strong that, as a parasite, it takes over the or ga nism: in moments of limpid calm, a small perturbation in the will brings a faint feeling of a memory from long ago…they suddenly remember , like a revelation… 26 Reincarnation is the original belief of every society or tribe that drew its conclusions from observation of life and nature. The new religions, the faith of Israel and those that have come from it, and many others that ca me about at that time, or have arisen si nce—I believe Zoroastrianism is likely the root also of the faith in the Bible—have some divine inspiration at their beginnings, but I believe at leas t the way they are interpreted now is a design of the human mind, and calculated. They are abstract, utilitarian, and crudely political. Before this nearly every society had a belief in reincarnation. This still has remained in some places, although the moral meaning imposed on reincarnation by Buddhism and Hinduism is, like Plato’ s, for r easons of social utility and is political. But there is much significance in the primitive belief in reincarnation, which is more like a pri mal and perennial belief. It is universal and naïve, an d I believe therefore it must have some truth. It’ s not possible to dismiss it as wish-fu lfillment, and a false desire for immortality: first, because as we see, the later religions achieve this in a much better way with the teaching of the afterlife, but most of all because to many people, reincarnation is a kind of hel l. Y ou’ve all had very comfortable lives and maybe wouldn’ t mind reliving something like this again, but try to visit a burn ward. Life is so painful for so many that suicide, an escape from this infe rnal prison, is very common at all times. But, unfortunately for the suicides, that death is not the e nd of the story . I believe r eincarnation is fundamentally true, ev en though most of th ese religions taught it in a metaphorical an d popular form c alled metempsychosis. This is the belief that the soul, the supposed (but false) unity of will and inte llect, is fully reborn. This is false. The intellect is a merely physical quality like muscular strength and can’ t be “reborn” any more than your muscles are literally reborn. Y ou are not at bottom your intellec t, this is impossible, although this is the assum ption of almost all modern people even when they claim otherwise. They pay lip service to “supremacy of the desir es,” or to biological determinism, but they still believe they are their in tellects, just imprisoned by flesh and matter and genes and a biological “programming.” This is wrong! And it’ s not the intellect that is reborn, I will tell you what is. T ake a fruitfly , or a worker ant. This type of being is very close to plant-life in some ways. It has very primitive intellect, very primitive nervous system. There are inborn ways of behaving, of reacting to certain stimuli, inborn desires and orientations “in the blood,” and when you kill one ant, the next one over will be identical in this regard. Its rebirth is “instantaneous” because the a nt has a will that is shared uniformly across its type in the hive, and is therefore persistent and enduring. Once the que en dies, the next queen is indistinguishable from it in that thing that Schopenhauer calls the will, what he says is inborn way of wanting, and is in a very literal sense a “reincarnati on” of this same thing. If you don’ t see this it’ s because you keep confusing yourself for your intellect. But that part of you that is really you persists even wh en your intellect is asle ep, and would persist even if you experienced total amnesia. If you doubt, just ask yourself… someone you love, if you had to choose—would you rather they for got everythi ng but still behaved the way you always knew they did, or w ould you rather that they kept all their memori es and knowledge but had a radical change in personality? This question is easy to answer…if you love someone only for what they k now or remember…everyone knows this is a betrayal because that’ s not who you ar e . And in fact there’ s no s uch thing as a radical change in personality . The lower forms of life are ne arly uniform in their wills or inborn ways of acting, and als o very simple: in the case of amoeba, yeast, and such they are not far removed from the behavior of the natural forces, like gravity , which is completely uni form and persistent. Once dead, they are immediately reborn, and indeed live simultaneously in numerous bodies. For higher and more dif ferentiated animals, the W ill appears more particularly defined for each type, species, and finally each specimen when it comes to the human. But this biological reality , independent of what is known, rememb ered, or consciously decided, is a matter of the blood and body , and this same being, thing, or W ill, call it what you will, will be reborn in just the same way . In a dif ferent time, but this same particular way of desiring and behaving that is inside you wil l come again: this is the real meaning of reincarnation. And with the glut of humans in our time, we have to wonder if the same being also lives now in multiple bodies sometimes. Where do these beings come from? Some have said that the se new billions of hue-mans, that in a previo us life they mu st have been yeast, amoeba, locusts and other insects that a re born in multitudes in each season. I’d like this to be tru e, but I think rather that in previous ages mankind also swelled to many billions or even more …and also I have no doub t the entire universe is teeming with life of all kinds. 27 It would be interesting to know what the “extinction” event or p ath i s in each previous human cycle of civilization. If it is something comp letely random and external, like asteroids or volcanoes, or if it is somethin g inherent to civilization as such…some cir cumstance or behavior that leads to virulent disease, or some kind of gr eat weapon or maybe even something more uncanny . I wonder if the peoples and religions that exist now al so existed in past cycles under dif ferent names with s lightly dif ferent sup erficial circumstances and appearances, but in all fundamental ways otherwise the same. And if one or a set of these, or some new belief that hasn’ t even appeared yet, is the cause of the end of civilization in every cycle. A frog once sugges ted to me that the explosion of African populations in our time is the event that the movie Alien describes, a population bred under the most extreme pathogenic load, and that, despite its weaknesses in cold weather , can nevertheless wreak so much damage on the rest of th e world th at societies collapse under the march of the zombi …I personally doubt this. Asia will shut them out without glancing twice or hearing of their suf fering. I think instead the end in previous cy cles has varied but that very often, an d most interesting, one cause has been the emer gence of b rotherhoods of savage men w ho have decided to purify the earth and rid it of the infestat ion of the human-cockroach. Because unfortunately in the long run the development of civilization and comfort leads to the proliferation of damaged life, the innovation of mankind leads to unspeakable abortions of life, and men on the periph ery who want to preserve the natural o rder begin to plot the end of everything. I also wonder if some ancient civilization has managed to escape all these cycles o f destruc tion and has hidden under ground somewhere. Maybe they are really eternal a nd live life as an experiment, detached, seeing it as a playful dream they can observe at a distance…maybe an emissary surfaces from time to time so they can amuse themselves. I shudder to think, though, that by this same reasoning the aborted robot life to which the mass of mankind inevitably degenerates in each cycle of civilization also survived, maybe in small communities of “moles,” inside dry hills of limestone, or not far under ground in old networks of caves and tu nnels. No doubt stories of vampires, kobold, cryptid humanoids and many others might refer to these degenerated stragglers that prey on us and terrorize us….no doubt m any among the ranks o f deities have come from both types, and stranger things still e xist under the earth. Please see DEROs if interested. There are more things…. 28 There can be n o “artificial intelligence” in the way that people really mean it. If the y mean some machine that approximates th e intellect of man, this may be possible, and even very useful, although they’ re very far from their goals at the mom ent. Success at chess is their one great achievement, but they fail still at kickin g a ball, pouring ketchup, recognizing simple objects …could one hunt, or survive being hunted? But they never mean just the intellect in this way , or a crude approximation of it: when people speak of “artificial intelligence” what they always mean is artificial life, a robot of some kind, or an artificial consciousness indistinguishable from human consciousness. There is an apparently dif ferent but i n fact simila r speculation that nerds love: that the universe is “logic ” or information. That what constitutes matter can in fact be recorded as “information,” as relations of logic, and that therefore the universe must be precisely this—this is behind also the belief that you can “upload” your intelligence to a com puter and attain immor tality , and many related forms of imbecility . The motivation fo r this is nerdishness and also somewhat the Jewish way of thinking, or the Judaizing tendency that promotes facility with words and number , but approaches mental deficiency and even retardation when it comes t o anything visual. The Jewish hatred of matter , an ancient prejudice that precedes the Bible, and the hatred also for beauty that they share with other Semitic peoples—and many others besides—all of this comes together to promote this kind of aggressive nerdishness. This is the origin of

many of these claims, though it shoul dn’ t be imagined that here or elsewhere I am referring to all J ews, or that this absolves non- Jews. Because the “Judaizing” tendency I talk about is inherent to human nature, and is very common also among non-Jews, and in some degree it exists within everyone, together with the counter -acting love of vibrant matter , image, and beauty . It just exists in dif ferent degrees in dif ferent people, and peoples. In any cas e, all of these delusions, that you can be “uploaded” because your “brain” can be uploaded, that “the universe is information” or that something like “artificial intelli gence” actually can exist, are all at bottom the same delusion and the same po wer fantasy of the nerd. The nerd can be described as a person of inelegant and pedantic intelligence, often middling intelligence, who takes excessive pride in the inte llect, even in the memorization of facts, the design o f clumsy concepts to wh ich reality is then expected to fit li ke to bed of Procrustes…. And he identifies with it. There are v ery rare pe ople in history , even a few saints and martyrs, who wer e ashamed of their evil character and will, and sought salvation in contemplation, sought some escape in this. These are sometimes noble people, but this doesn’ t describe the nerd. The ner d doesn ’ t hate himself, his nature, his tendencies or spirit, nor is hi s intellect powerful enough to over -awe his needling will and consider things without the pressure of interest or the g ravity of petty desires. He never sees things like the true genius or the artist does, when the perceiving part of th e intellect becomes so pow erful that it really overpowers everything else…so that the fullness of the object occupies all of c onsciousnes s and an idea, or some new insight into the world, is actually grasped. No, the nerd is a creature of will, under th e direction of a petty will in the everyday sense, and all o f his thoughts, concepts, and designs have a for ced quality because they refer always to need and desire for some kind of gain. This very often is just ma terial gain, but the desire for prestige is even worse. In men of intellect the desire for prestige is often the most disgusting, especially when there’ s no n ative manliness, because this leads to cowardice and lies, to ot hers and oneself. For this reason Nietzsche said manliness is the first requirement of the philosopher , but there’ s no one farther from the philosopher than the unmanly nerd, and there’ s no enemy more implacable of the human race and of the genius of the species, than ju st this nerd and everything he represents. The attempt to “mimic” life through algorithms, through the brute-force of tria l-and-error , will never create either life or “consciousness” —just what would such a machine be “conscious” of?—but just that, a mimicry or parody of the middling human intellect. A mirror and exaltation of the false intellect of the nerd, that never leaves the stream of words, syllogisms, motives and desire, that is always forced and contrived, because it’ s under pressure of some pe tty need . And it’ s really grotesque. It’ s as if you have a girl you desire, she dies but using Big Magic you reanimate her corpse, put makeup on her , re-teach this zombi to speak, force he r to copy all of her old habits, condition her like you would a pigeon to act in ways you remember and that you liked. But in the end she’ s just a reanimated live-action doll, and this is grote sque. This is ju st what “AI” is. It is a fantasy of powe r of the conspiracy of biological interests that unites the n erds, the in tellect of “reason”—the party that believes in empty w ords—the middling, and the Jews of the human spirit into hoping for their golem. “AI” is the golem of those who hate life…. It is their true Messiah and their vengeance. 29 Y outh and beauty are universally hated in almost all human societies in history . These societies are run by decrepit, sclerotic old men. Sometimes they use image of fat woman “Earth M other” to beat the young men over the head with and make th em submit. Other times they promote ugliness in all ways: u gliness and perversi ty in custom, scarification, circumcision, self-mutilation. Customs and religious authorities that concern themselves with how you should wipe your ass, brush teeth, how many fingers to insert in anus to achieve such and such “magical-medical” goal, petty legalisms of all kinds—the Shiite sect among Muslims and rabbinical Judaism are most like this. All of this smothers genuine religious enthusiasm and the true oracular science, from which can evolve arts of great b eauty . Often their food is unappetizing and looks like boiled rocks. Their languages— most human languages are so hard to listen to! T agalog is almost torture to hear , though I don’ t mean to single out this culture, it’ s hardly the worst in terms of love of ugliness (actually the Filipinos can be a p leasant people with an impish sense o f humor inherited from the long-lost negritos now absorbed in their population). Their people are ugly: millennia of arranged marriages, for financial gain, among the Indians— originally a noble people—led to a nation now , of one billion, that alm ost never wins any athletic contests, that has won fewer gold medals since its inception than tiny Croatia has since 19 92, where both the me n and the women are inbred, ugly , unsexy , and almost deform ed. I don’ t mean to pick on them, because they’re hardly the only ones, and this ugliness, physical ugliness, is almost universal in the human race. Beauty is the very rare and precious preserve of tribes that have striven to promote child-making for something other than financial, social and political gain. No, the promotion of ugliness is nearly universal and the love of beauty is so rare: among the great civilizations, only the ancient Greeks, the French, the Japanese, and somewhat the Italians are true lovers of beauty and refinement, and have based their existence exclusively on the promotion o f beauty . How many times in history have cultures become ugly and petty because financial interest overrode eugenics in marriage—and free love, though not perfect, is somewhat more eugenic than letting fathers trade daughters for personal ga in. In their hatred and distrust of b eauty one feels such socie ties live under a tremendous pr essur e of needs. Their true ruler is the god of gravity and they are dominated by fears of the future, unspeakable anxieties about money and m atter , and importune, brutish behaviors all motivated by need, by the desire to grasp, by the feeling t hey all nourish that they’r e being taken advantage of. They al ways feel they’re being disr espected. The desire for r espect is the true mark of the forever -slighted. The distrust of beauty is sometimes sold as the high-minded rejection of material desire by the saintly or the kind or the contemplative. But tha t’ s just nonsense, and you can see it in this way . Beauty-hating cultures have o ne other peculiarity they all share, which is very revealing. They hate also privacy and personal space, they hate also beauty in good and refined manners. These societies are based on such popular solidarity that it’ s considered normal to ba r ge in on other people, absurd to demand to kn ock; they make animal sounds when eating— or , the way such people are o ften said to smell in history whenever such societies are encountered—all of this tells you what the hatred of beauty is really about. Freud refers to the inner pa in many of his clients experienced trying to shift from this kind of m edieval, collec tive, smothering culture of ugliness to one where personal space and distance, refinement and beauty , were instead valued. It’ s about the hatred of distinction or superiority , hatred of the principle of differ ence and distance between individuals , that is by contrast so prized in th ose very few beauty-loving cultures. And the hatred of superiority come s from the suspicion the many in such beauty- hating societies feel, that, in not being subject to the horrible pressures of need and anxiety under which they themselves live, tha t the beautiful and care free make a mockery of what they tak e most seriously . The beautiful threaten to unravel the regimentation under which the y must subject their constant crude need for things. This is why such societies descend to the lowest types of faggotry w henever their native laws are even slightly relaxed. Islam is most like this. Jews, when devoid of their religion, as well as Persians who live under the tyranny of Shiite law , and most of all the people of the Gulf States, all revert to a crude anim al condition without their rigid laws and become completely dis solute, as the Arabs were said to ha ve been bef ore Islam. And they will soon return to this. I don’ t need to add notes for sper gs and pedants: men like John Milius are excepted from such judgments, but their existence has nothing to do one way or another with my point here, which is about g eneral types and the ways these generate. I am speaking of two opposing views of life that are based in two very dif ferent needs of two very dif ferent biological orientations. There can be no compromise between those who live und er the pressure of need and of material increase, who are the walking shadows of the dead, and on the other side, those who are c arefree, joyous , pleasure-loving and worship beauty . One seeks the preservation and expansion of mere life, the other seeks the exaltation of life. 30 Among the Greeks the man of power was called aner , who was dif ferent from the other word used, anthr opos, which referred just to some shadow-being, indistinct, some kind of humanoid shape. The real man w as rare, and most males were not and are not real men! The word in beginning was used only fo r demigods and superhumans like Achilles or Diomedes or Odysseus. In the Iliad Diomedes in his moment of g lory is comp ared to lion whose spirit has been aroused by anger at wound , and scatters th e shepherds and dogs before him. Athena kindled a fire on his head and shoulders and marked him as o ne possessed by the true inner force inside all things. T his burst out of him now and made itself light up above a ll others. The real man was a man filled by courage and dari ng that all came from an excess of being. This idea was shared also by other Aryan cultures; the Roman vir , the Sanskrit and A vestan nar , the W elsh ner , the Proto-Indo- European Hner all ultimately refer to a kind of vital life-force capable of superhuman strength. There is other word, related, having to do with manly youth: ayu; ayu refers to the youthful life-force that renews itself in each generation, that moves from life to life without end, forever persisting. It is behind all the Indo-European words for youth, and youthful strength and power . It appears in Latin iuuenis, in Sanskrit, and all the Germanic and English forms. B ut most of all it is this same word, this same idea that is behind the Latin aetas and aeternus, behind the vision of an age, a cyclical age, of eternity . How pregnant in mean ing that youth and eternity are the sam e word and idea in these languages! The Gothic and Germanic words are the same. This idea very vivid in Greek! In this the words aiei, meaning foreve r , and the word aion, both contain at t heir root this meaning: of life-span, life-force, youthful strength. These peoples saw the vigor of youth as the true driving force behind life a nd behind all things, forever renewing itself, reincarnating itself anew in each generation in full forc e, though the memories of men and of societies may disappear . If you want the most beautiful poetic expression of this view , you m ust see in the Iliad when Homer describes the death of Euphorbus. His death is compared to young tree in its prime blown down by strong wind. Pythagoras, looking on Euphorbus’ shield in Sicily , broke into tears, remembering that he had been this man. He knew of what was hidden on the other sid e of the shield. This view persists: and this is why someone like D.H. Lawrence could look on the sarcophagi of the ancient T uscans and see in this pleasure- and beauty-loving people a celebration of something very similar . They put on their funerary objects images of reveling, and feasting, and abundant flourishing life and great joy , wine parties, leaping dolphins, to remind themselves that this irrepressible force, nature, youth continues anew in each generation and is never defeated by death. In same wa y when I poast physiques of beautiful and handsome youths I do so because in contemplating them I am filled with a deep calm and joy—I see in them the persistent rejuvenation of this same eternal force, th at is inside all things. I see in this force the hidden design a nd inten tion of nature, its reaching beyond itself. Its designs are unspeakable and what it reaches and wants is mysterious to us, can only be understood imperfectly and through metaphor . Its “plan” and design is beyond human comprehension, but it is without doubt that it is striving, against numerou s other “factions” and centrifugal forces, for the production and creation of a superior creature of some kind, a specimen of terrible beau ty and power . I have no doubt that the gods, if they exist, would look only like perfected and improved versions of beautiful physiques of young men, just like they showe d themselves to the Greek oracles in dreams. They were the fi rst to discover the true biological and physical form of the man , the correct form, the true proportions. I have no doubt also that this force, in being inside us together with others, h as made human history , life, and our own minds the battleground and stage of its action, and that passivity in the face of its power is therefore absurd: it calls on us to allow ourselves to be possessed by it, and to wage war on its behalf against i ts enemies. If you wan t to understand the true power of aion, of th e eternal youthful ener gy th at is the universe, you must stu dy what remains from Heraclitus when he uses this word, and how he connects it to the idea of fir e that is the essence of all things and all action. And he is very right when he says, “The best desire one thing above all, ever -flowing eternal f ame among mortals; but the many glut themselves like cattle.” This is what I believe in! P a r t T w o : P a r a b l e o f I r o n P r i s o n 31 If yo u recognize pathology , brokenness, denatured life as what it is, it can teach you a lot about life in healthy state. There is nothing wrong with lo oking in life under distress, if you no confuse it for life in ascent and freedom. When you put some kind of working dog, like terrier , even cute Jack Russell in city apartment, they will start to try to dig through the floor . This mode is in born to them, they seek the development of their pow ers, an d there are very few sadder things than to see animal thwarted like this. Playing at becoming itself, but reduced to a doll and useles s acting. Carl Schmitt said, “They’ve put us out to pasture.” This is the condition of life in modern world. 32 Modern world not bad just becau se modern; and it is better than som e ages in the past. Man y parts of past were as bad, or worse, than our situation, and for the same reasons. The modern is “nothing new”: it is the return of a very ancient subjection and brokenness unde r new branding, promoted by new concepts and justifications. If you want to see our future look to Europe as it existed bef ore 1600 BC, or much of the world as it was until recently and still is….the communal life of the longhouse with its young men dominated and broken by the old and scle rotic, by the matriarchs, the blob and yeast mode in human life overtaking and subjecting all higher aspiration. Aztec “cities” with twenty morons sleeping and eating of f the floor , demagogued in the masses by blood- hungry p riests w ith dead eyes. I t is no dif ferent if they use the doxies of Reason and Logos to cart us of f to this life. 33 A history of modern br okenness— So m any dif ferent things have been written about the evils of modernity , or the crisis of our situation. Both on left and right many , maybe most, feel something has gone terribly wrong. Even those who love some aspects of the n ew age, like technology , look away from our banal time and i nstead hope for a futuristic flourishing that is not yet here. I’m a little tired o f all this! I don’ t want to just repeat more aspersions of modernity , which many of you already know . Most of these are footnotes or commentaries to Nietzsche’ s Pro logue from Zarathustra, where he describes the Last Man. The Last Man has been wrongly confused for the bou r geois, though Nietzsche says it’ s something much worse. Houellebecq, whose explanations of the sexual problem of modernity , of the incel —all of these explanations are amazing and true, but even he is just following Nietzsche. If you wan t to understand true problem of our time, you can read that, then, and I won’ t dwell on it. I want only to deal with one particular case of domestication, brokenness, of potentially high life that has been thwarted, to illustrate modern problem. The pec uliar “hi story” of how th e queen develops, the modern ef feminate homosexual, is very telling. The problem of the modern homosexual is revealing because it is the model according to which many other kinds of higher life have been thwarted and warped into some thing else. Don’ t be fooled by propagandists: the modern homo has nothing to do with ancient “predato ry bisexuality” or with the pederastic rites found in many societies. On o ne hand such people as the modern queen hav e al ways ex isted but on the other , there are many sp ecimens now who become this, who would not have before. It is very unfortunate event in life of animal. Camille Paglia s ays that the modern hom osexual is the product of the pressures of post-industrial life . Her model for this is that a very sensitive young boy , open to aesthetic experience of all kinds, m aybe the kind of slightl y neurotic and artistic boy that a century ago would have experienced synaesthesia; such boy is turned of f by the horseplay and “rough” masculinity of his brothers and father and other boys his age. The distancing from this masculinity is concurrent with his becoming over - close with his mother , idolizing the feminine: upon puberty , the dista nce or fear from mascu linity leads him to eroticize it, while he turns a way from women, either because of too much familiarity , or too much awe. In this she is only half right, and the other half o f the story I discovered from an alien mind whose te achings have been spread among some of the frogs. His name Harro MJ, but I think this is false name. I tell some of his ideas here as best I understood. He tells I believe his own sto ry , or someone he kno ws: he tells of how modern world corrupted his nature through stricture and turned him into a homo. But I think his story speaks to many others, who didn’ t turn into ghey , but who have nevertheless been disfigured in some other way … by the same force. Now , Paglia’ s restatem ent of Freud is correct, but she misses an important element of the story , which is why such a boy turns away fro m the masculinity of his peers in the first place. It is not hors eplay o r the roughness of male competition as such that mak es him turn away , bu t the utterly fake or artificial character of such displays, us ually , in our time. Such boy perceives what his peers don’ t, the conditional and entirely dependent character of life in our age. It is not the masculinity , the competition for status among men, the physical roughness, that makes him turn away… but the fact that all such play is happening in already owned space. It is this aspect of our time that is crucial to understand. When I speak of something like owned space, it must not remain mere word. When you understand som ething: I mean you must see and feel it like you would a landscape you know from youth, how to navigate all its nooks, t he dif ferent heights of earth, the banks of streams, where the trees are and how it feels inside them, how long it takes walking from this or that group of beech to the abandoned factory , so that the map is already in your body . This is only way to really understand something. I believe boy like this is one of the types that sees through the charade the lords of lies hav e dangled in front, the shadow-play to dazzle the m any , and he is turned of f, maybe not by manliness, but the b uf foonish, deluded charact er of modern masculinity . The defeated male that is turned into a peon and a neutered beast for women and hidden masters is a terrible thing to see. The jockeying for status, the physical fights, the adventures boys are supposed to have in a stat e of nature…all of this is in nature meant as preparation for life, for a life of conquest and expansion. Rom an teenagers of patrician class were sent already on missions on behalf of Empire abroad. Modern adult W estern male seeks permission to watch other men playing sports, quaf f vegetable oil relish, beg for “coochie” in simulated intercourse, masturbation with plastic on dick. Precisely a character born for conquest, for expansion, a precocious type of boy who seeks r eal development and the real domination of the space ar ound him, who understands in his blood that p lay and manliness are

to this end, precisely such a boy will have his expectations about life crushed and thwarted as soon as his eyes ope n. This may be around the age of six or seven, but it sometimes happens earlier . Such boy then comes to have only contempt for those among his peers who, no t seeing the subjection w e are in, continue under their delusion and accept the breaking that the lords of shadows begin on the hu man spirit around this age of awakening—by nine or ten, the “education” is a lmost already complete in our time. They submit to the yok e and their sham simulated masculinity is now a parody of the true manliness, which in a state of ascent develops into the will to actually dominate space ar ound oneself, not into a caricature for the benefit of women. But this domination is not possible when space is alr eady owned. This int uition o f owned space comes on one very early: with eyes open, it ’ s like an evil spirit inhabits everything. I think there are many types of ener getic and perceiving boys who reach this stage, who are turned of f by the mor al and biological self-ca stration of their conventional peers, who sense the suf focating limitations of modern space. The rest of this story is more particular to the boy who as response becomes a homo or t rap, and Paglia is right about that part—masc ulinity rejected simply because of distance from oth er boys in general, m ostly as a result of a certain native over -sensitivity . But then there is the added observation that when, late i n adolescence or some time in youth, such boy decides he is “gay ,” that is but the final act of self- misunderstanding. The drama of his spirit is reinterpreted on sexual terms. He has convinced himself that the feeling of suppression and dread that had accompanied him his whole life was because his sexual desires or “sexuality” had been repressed by “society .” He for gets how these sexual desires developed in the first place, that these desires themselves were a c ircuitous result of the truth t hat dawned on him in silence, the t ruth of the utter subjection and domestication of the space in w hich he fou nd himself. In becoming “gay” he believes he is es caping that sense of primal limitation and subjection that he fe lt a s a small boy: he has reinterpreted his entire drama as a maudlin story of sexuality suppressed or oppressed by retrograde social and political norms. In this he becomes an unwitting pawn himself of the very power that as a young boy he had intuited to be the enemy , the great and suf focating shadow of our t ime, that smothers all higher life out. The gay is th e spiritual foot-soldier of th e new regime, when he is born to be its enemy . This is the unusual part of this realization, that some of the mos t sensitive and perceptive youths, those maybe imbued with spark of inspiration and a conquering, expanding spirit, end up becoming the vanguard of that which has smothered and broken them. In a previous age they wouldn’ t have bee n gay at all in the first place. The story of such boy is story of all higher types in our time. Not all gays are of this origin—there is Jef frey Dahmer , there are others. And of course not all h igher types become gay , only a tiny minority . But all higher types in our age are af flicted by a similar drama of the spirit—what happens later , the sexualization of this alienation partic ular to this case, I use only as the most vivid example. Now in all this you se e this idea of space or territory that is already closed and ow ned. And this brings up the question of who or what this for ce is. I think the answer to this problem isn’ t so simple, but one feature of this new condition in m odern age is that the master s are hidden. That is even why this condition of subjection seems so suf focating, because they hide, and so there is no opportunit y for open and manly challenge. This problem is then to be understood through example of a dif ferent type…and I mean that of the spook. V ivid and instructive is the matter of the gay underworld, which no longer really exists in our time. But in the 1950’ s and a lit tle before th en, when the system of global tyranny was being f irmly erected, it should not be a surprise from everything that has been said, th at the gay underworld was the “negative” of the new world order , its sieve and pressure valve. The gay underw orld was part of “the r emainder .” The phenomenon of “homosexuality ” in the modern world reaches up to the most profound of political and social problem: it was always the ghost world, the underworld left over that the engineers of our time couldn’ t manage or account for in the erection of the Leviathan. This underworld included far more than the gays of that time, of course: that’ s the point. But the gays for med a kind of “bulk population” that allowed an easy bridge between this world and ours. They made it far more permeable to others as well: if y ou had girlfriend, maybe artsy girlfriend, she had ghey friend ; you could go with them to lounge of this half-world, and there would be there…maybe two soci al conta cts removed…t here would…one of them. But now that this wo rld has disappeared, you have no easy way of even kn owing where to start. Its boundaries were policed, its entry po ints were surveilled, but it always existed as a space of freedom outside the pervasiven ess of domestication in post- industrial civilization. Let’ s not for get, I repeat, that the “gay underworld” wa s hardly just the gays, but precisely that world penetrated by all types of deviants, perverts, whores, pimps, impresarios, nig ht club owners, mafia, gangsters, spooks, intelligence services of all kinds—just see the Dark Ocean Society and you will understand. The Dark Ocean Society of Japan is the ke y to understanding all modern political and social or ganization because underneath the pervasiveness of the domesticatio n and management of modern civilization, underneath its superficial orderliness, there remained the “floating world,” the free world as a still and dark ocean in which moved monsters, includin g the lords and crafters of this new civilization themselves. They still live in that world, not in o urs. Our wo rld is the house of subjection, they live in the estate of freedom and power . It is only that, with the relatively lar ge number of gays that exist, this world was much lar ger than it is now , and more v aried, its entry points more penetrable. The space of night that gays created for themselves, in which such types could at least feel they had new opportunity to expand and act, was nuked in the 1980’ s with AIDS first of all, and then at the same time with the “gay rights” and “gay identity” mo vement, through which they came “into the open,” and b ecame the worst and most merciless enforcers of the global slave state. But enough about them: you must understand! I u se this as illustrative and true example of what happens to all higher ty pes in our time. The vast maj ority do n’ t become gay , but the plight of the gay is the most simple and therefore instructive example of this. Anyone born with a will to conquest and expansion, any specimen born to co urage and t he expansion of boundaries, will feel thwarted now , wil l awake n at a young age to find themselves in a world pervaded by an evil and smothe ring shadow that seeks to blot out their spirit and break them. How one r esponds to this… that is dif ferent. And the respon ses are various. Look at litter of p ups, of whatever species, so me will be inquisitive, playful, seek to experiment, to push b oundaries, to leave gaze of parents and the old, to conquer space; others will be far more docile a nd will lack curiosity . T he only ones who survive the modern education “whole,” no t to speak of the regime of modern medicat ion, are precisely those in the litter who are born docile. And more to the point; who can look at the beaten-down males of today and think that a boy who inside him has the spar k of conquering spirit won’ t have anything but disgust for their clownish parody of masculinity! What matters here is which way the spirit tu rns, and if it can survive the obstacle course of domestication that modern life and the modern education imposes on the best. “Homosexuality” in our age, in any case, is unlike any behavior in the past: as a total phenomenon, it represents one of the characteristic ways that some of the most unusual specimens respond to domestication and are broken by it. Modern homosexuality is a form of vacuum behavior and stereotypy . 34 As sad as the story of many of the modern gays is, the story of the mo dern transsexual is the same in all ways, but worse. This explains also why so many traps are obsessed with Hegel. They know in their blood— but they misunderstand themselves and for get who br oke them. The story of the modern transsexual is the story of our collective future. 35 Should the tyranny that has descended on our age ever gain the power i t seeks and then be challenged enough to feel itself in danger , the mass annihilations that will be carried out by homosexua l, transsexual, and especially lesbian commissars will exceed in scale and cruelty anything that has yet hap pened i n known history . Imagine lesbian mulatta commissars wi th young Martin Sheen face and haircut manning the future Ber gen-Belsens, installations that will span tens of miles. 36 Barbarism and Civilization —It’ s fu nny wh en W esterners defer to China o r the old cities of the Near East and the Orient as the fountains of civilization, the standards of city life: “we’re l atecomers, we were in loincloths in forest with painted face hun ting boar while they had cities and writing.” This true, but W es terner for gets what civilization means. Less myopic than oth ers, bu t still myopic, he thinks when he hears Chinamen lived in cities for five thousand years, that these must be like the cities in his own history . There are cities and cities. But what was writing? M ost of it was for inventory or the m ost tedious kind of national or dynastic chronicles. Lists and lists: the kinds of passages that make the young bored even wit h the Bible. The oldest part of Greek literature is from the Iliad, the catalogue of ships: the heroes and their retinues are recounted with much flourish and poetry , so it’ s not so boring, but is just barely saved by Homer ’ s artistry . But nearly every national “writing” is like t his, and most “writing” stayed in that condition for a long time. Chinese have always lived in houses, yes, if t hat’ s all you mean by “civilization”; but their history is marked by convulsion s of annihilation. Just look in their history , the Cultural Revolution is the norm: mass extinction of millions of faceless peasants in the name of remaking a new society . They are no hive: they ignore the dead in the street and look away . I’ve known of ravens who have more consideration for on e of their own. Everything for oneself, everything for personal utility: a pleasure in cruelty toward the weak and toward ani mals. This is the end-result of thousands of years of “civilization.” Don’ t be fooled by the supposed histor ical self-concep tion of such people. Many periods of for getfulness, when they erased and threw away their chronicles even and totally falsified their history (small example even today: they teac h that Genghis Khan was a Chinese general…) This true for many other civilizations. Even religious texts: leaving aside the problem of translation, the Koran is, as Schopenhauer claimed, a tedious book of wretched, repeti tive stupidity , with not a single new idea in it, “the poorest form of theism.” Unfortunately this is suf ficient for the level of most people’ s religious needs. Is not clear that writing is a gre at advance, for much of history…its value is questionable. Only quite late some productions of genius arise that red eem the skill of writing. In similar way , dif ferent societies mean quite dif ferent things by “city .” In the Orient this has always referred to a ste aming pile of humanity , with crowded, fetid eateries, close-packed throngs wading through shit and the filt h of animals, rabbit and hen kept in cages, abused orphans, endless drone of yelling humangs hawking wares an d spitting phlegm on s treet. Y ou see this still in the cities of the Fa r East. Even i n Japan, that all love for its supposed order , there is a ter rible menace hanging on the streets of T okyo that drives too many of the good people there to th e mental asylum. The work place is hell and transportation system is chaotic and suf focating, it reduces everyone again to the cipher he has always been in the Oriental city… a shadow even in his home where the woman inhabits all the terror of the ancient family deities. The Japanese man gets allowance from wife, who often physically depletes him, takes his phone allowance, his lunch money . The woman rules V ietnam, and the face less clerk or merchant who claws his path in the antheap of this society is behol den to his hectoring wife like slave. Matriarchy and anonymity are the principles of these piles of biomass—never call th em hives! The hive is noble: the h ive can be a work of beauty and order , but the city , the city in its original form, is humanity reduced to a steaming ratpile. In the hive the ant or bee achieves the full development of it s inb orn natu re as worker or warrior or queen, but who can say this of most cities in history—do you think man stamping papers, scheming to escape wrath of long-nailed of fice autocrat with spittoon, who hawks smoked fish out of newspapers with fingerless gloves or sells birds with clipped wings to jeering hueman macacas, do you think such creature is a spec imen of well-turned out life? And the more depressing possibility that, for the vast majority , such life is the expression, the full expression o f their inborn reach and wants, still it must be the case that they were selectively bred by their masters to this degraded and zombified form. But even the scared a nd hudd led ash-and-sal low-faced schemer of Saigon or C hengdu was in his remote ancestry like the free Black Y i who terr orized t he Han as recen tly as a hundred years ago, or the pow erful-bodied, self-suf ficient T ibetans who have made sport of them for centuries. Existence for such life is hell, trapped not only in a miserable society of anonymity , but in a body bre d for such a society . S till there must be a spark they can never extinguish, that at least asks for all this to stop. Do you understand what Buddhism is now? No, look north: to the Manchus and other T ungus-peoples hardened in the taiga and the Arct ic, to the freedom-loving Mongols who to this day love not hing more than to drive out into open country with no roads and consider our cities horribly claustrophobic. Actually in h istory when you look at life of true nomads who are always o n the move and in open space, they never engage in the kind of depressive introspection and questioning of life that you only se e in settled and civilized peoples. The Buddha became a world-denier in the city—look at his conversion, what dro ve him to it! It is the injustice but above all the filth, the disgusting suf focation of city life, the vision of life degraded and under distress, that led him to his escape… he said, “th e home is a place of filth.” And what was this escape, after all , but just an attempt to re-establish the freedom and openness of the steppe, where man can once again be what he was born to be? He thought he w as opening up a steppe of the spirit, and in the sangha, the brotherhood of disciples and monks, he was re-creating that true secret society of the steppe, the society natural to a man like him, the brotherhood of warri ors and the free youths! In such way you must also understand “the W est,” or actually the city of the W est. The small, o rderly city of the north Italians, the German and Swiss cities M achiavelli praises for how well-run they are, this is entirely alien to the Orient, and indeed to all other civilized societies that we know of. The v ery idea of the citizen is alien to civiliz ation as such. In the respect for privacy , for distance, for property and propriety—in the small and orderly character of the cities, in the relentless c oncern of the aristocracy with biological quality , you see an attempt to mitigate the great evils of civilizat ion. Actually you see an attempt to reestablish some of the character of barbaric and free life inside the city , if only for the citizen class, or the upper class. If there can be any defense of civilization it is this, that historically it gave a class the full or nearly full benefits of the free life of the steppe and forest a nd mountain while ridding them of some of its inconveniences—at the price, of course, of misery for the vast majority . In nearly all other parts of the world but the W est, the misery inside civilization was un iversal and the elite, such as it was, did n’ t redeem this misery: they themselves remained servile. A city means nothing, but could even mean a retrogression in the human type . If the only civilizations that had existed were all like Han C hina, then the choice between barbarism and civilization would be easily made in favor of barbarism, of free Mongol life. 37 The modern city is a monstr osity , but it doesn’ t yet approach the anonymous squalor of Oriental civilization, of default civilization. It’ s a contradict ory place but you see a counter -drive even in the attempt to preserve parks. This exists in T okyo, in many European and European-derived cities like Buenos Aires—its makers must have been obsessed with preserving some piece of nature inside the city , and hired the French to beautify it—and in non-W estern cities that have copied this way . In the arrangem ent of public spaces as well, of the streets, an d even of the social life, the modern city is not entirely a reversion to the pre-modern squalor of pure civilization, but an attempt to p reserve or at least simulate a natural space for man to mov e, to expand, to practice and perfect some excellences, as lim ited or stunted as these may be. In the mode rn world the re turn of pure civilization is the slum and the shantytown. It is slowly but certainly encroaching on the modern city as it still exists, which is in all ways a left-over from European domination of the world, and is by no means the form toward which life is progressing. The future of Blade Runner is much too optimistic, and even that in Elysium doesn’ t approach the true wickedness of our fate if nothing is done. Mohammed Atta, one of the leaders of the 9/1 1 plo t, was an architecture student. He was deeply moved by wha t had happened to Aleppo, and the corruption of Muslim life that finds itself diso riented in the modern city , not just in its dif fere nt moral life, but in the arrangement of space and buildings that upsets the life of the faithful. He was reacting to the modern city as such, not necessarily to the slum, although the expansion of modern life in the third world is v ery ambiguous here; there’ s always some slumification. The cities of the Near East, of North Africa, of most of the Muslim world and even much of the Orient, were in any case always dif fere ntly arranged from the W est, having neighborhoods c losed of f physically from each other , walled compounds with inner courtyards, and in general a turning away from public, political space, into the space of the family and the clan. This was a result not only of the corruption of authorities, but of an entirely di f ferent feeling of what the city existed for in th e first place. Th ere is a confusion about what dif ferent peoples object to in the modern world: they don’ t necessarily hate in the modern the same thing you hate in it. I would ra ther ally with the leftis t hipster than with China! The Chinese will actually “appropriate” everything and pretend they invented it. 38 Aristotle says Greeks are dif fer ent from north Europeans and the Orientals. The Asian is civilized but slavish; the European barbarian is uncivilized, unlearned, but free. In this formula is assumed Aristotle believed in a “balance” between these two extremes, and that Gr eeks were better because they were the “median” between these two deficient extremes. Actually neither Aristotle’ s view nor the view of the Greeks of his time, and even later , took things quite this way . There was no equivalence drawn between the free northern barbarian and the slavi sh Asian, but the Greek s valued and respected the free barbarian far more than the Asian. Y ou can see this is so from many things: as late as the Crusades, when Anna Comnena wrote the Alexiad, she refers with s ome horror but also much respect to the W estern barbarians. She is in awe at their handsomeness, their bravery and often their intelligence and cunning. Similar praise never exists for the civilized or slavish peoples of the N ear East. The sa me attitude existed also in the age of the classical Greeks. Herodotus among others expresses much admiratio n for the Scyt hians and sees them as the innovators of a new and magnif icent way of life, the nomadic, through which they confounded and defeated Darius and the Persians. V ery often you can read of classical Greeks who, perched on the shores of the Black Sea, “went native” at least for p art of the year and joined the nation of the Scythians, in admiration of their free life. Th e same

thing happened much less ofte n, and usually not at al l, in the Near East: there were mercenaries, artisans, architects that worked for the Persian king and others, but they didn ’ t go native in this way (the char ge, “ to Medize,” referred to a political alignment taken out of n ecessity , not to a cultural pr eference or af finity for a way of li fe). The Ath enians used Scythians as police in their city , but, aside from a few very old families with claims to Phoenician heritage, there was no equivalent use of Orientals and Asia ns, exce pt as slaves. Th e beauty of northern European children is praised in antiquity very late: children of Angles for sale are refe rred to as “not Angles, but angels.” Many of the Greek heroes and gods had fair hair and blue or grey eyes, among w hich, A phrodite, Athen a, Apollo, Achilles, Menelaus, and many others; many ancient poets refer to the Dorians as a blond race. It’ s hard to believe that such idealization would have be en made for the qualiti es of neighboring nations that were despised. No, from all this and more it’ s clear the Greeks admired the power and freedom of the barbarian far more than the “civilized” way of the slave, and his false intelligence. And the “balance” often attributed to Aristotle between these two ways is no such thing, but a reference to what I speak of here, that W estern civilization, the European city , is unusual because it is the attempt to preserve fre e and barbaric life within the confines of the c ity . It’ s an attempt to exalt and develop certain tendencies of that free life that could presumably benefit from the arts, the science, and the leis ure that can only be promoted inside a city . It’ s an exception in history . And by settled city and settled life, I mean settled with SLA VES! And let’ s not for get that the Greeks never abandoned that mobile and nomadic life, but transposed it to the sea, as to a lar ge extent the Germ anic pe oples also always have—they’ve always been a seafaring people. Entire Gr eek cities, like those of the Phocaeans, rather than submit to Persian rule preferred to embark their ships and move to colonies as far away as France and Spain—Marseille was founded by them, but there were outposts farther west as well. Th e Athenians were ready to do the same to escape subjection, a nd like the Scythians, take to the o pen sea in their sea-wagon s, which in fact they did for a while. The call of the open steppe, the freedom of the new steppe o f the seas, this never lef t them. It’ s clear from this and even more how much contempt they had for the civilized and slavish life of the Asian, and how much respect and longing they had for the life of the free barbarian. This extended in some wa y even to their respect for the blaq Ethiopian, about who Herodotus says such nice things, especially when he compares them to the neighboring Egyptians. But in this case, there wa s very little familiarity w ith the African, his nature too foreign to the G reek, and there was the suspicion, supported by A ristotle and many others, that the African and also the Arab were too stupid to represent an admirable alternative. Nevertheless in spirit I would sa y even now the European has much m ore in common with the African than with the “Asian,” meanin g the inhabitant of the broad swathe of land stretching from Han China to th e Near East, that includes the long-settled farming serf regions of the planet. I know many dorks who fetishize IQ above a ll else will disagree with this. The Ori ent and Asia has always been the enemy…Africa is mostly irrelevan t. The “African” may even be an ally and only became a problem under conditions of modern mass democracy , when he has been m anipulated and stirred up by others. 39 Some of the modern right wing is “environmentalist,” and even bey ond this, but mostly ha s contempt for the left Greens and oth er half -and-half beca use they misunderstand the problem of civilization and of technology . The problem of modern left is they seek not to defend nature, but to blame the W est for the m odern conditio n. And this is because the problem is said to be technological or “civilizational” progress as such. These people don’ t understand that the rapacious life, the buglife, is the default condition of mankind and that the W est alo ng with a couple of others has attempted, since its beginnings, to try mitigate the evils of “pure civilization” and to b ring the benefits of free life within civilization, as far as this was possible. The left env ironmentalist is not a reliable defender of nature: he’ s “anti-ra cist” first and cares for nature second. Actually the two things are incompatible. China and India are by fa r the sources of the most serious obvious pollution, which is the destruction of the world’ s oceans with plastics and garbage. The contempt for animal life is rare in India—Schopenhauer says it’ s for this reason that they easily rejected Christianity , because they heard of the gross mistreatment of animals in Europe of the time—but animal cruelty and abuse is exceedingly common and the rule in China a nd most of the rest of the non-European world. It is only In dian and, today , European man that is moved by compassion for animals, who are our brothers and sisters. The practice of industrial agricultur e is a great evil that must be stopped, but who besides Europ ean man really cares for this? Others seem to take a great joy in the humiliation and torture of ev en cats and dogs. Furthermore it is, as is well known, the zombi h ordes of the third worl d that care nothing for public and nati onal parks and that are the ones who litter and exploit them, often by flinging feces a s they’ve long learned, being sons of the honey badger that eats its own shit. As is well known, the Sierra Club and other environmentalist or ganizations used to oppose mass immigration, in part quietly for this reason, b ut also because population increase will on its own place unacceptable strains on nature. The populations of Europe and Japan, under the st rain of life in high population density in the late 20th Century , chose to limit their fertility , and there’ s nothing wrong wit h this: it is the governments, corrupt and under the lash of financiers dependent on population increase, that forba d a natural retrenchment of population. The refore the modern left, “anti-racist,” pro- migrant, can never really be environmentalist. But, even more, in the promotion of the third wo rld “primitive” (he is no such thing) and the false belief tha t life there is easier on the environment, they promote the slum, the shantytown, “civilization,” the locust default existence of mankind. It’ s true that the non-W estern man lives “closer to nature” in terms of his material needs, but this d oesn’ t translate into a more natural life or le ss stress on res ources: he uses any excess to breed indiscrimi nately and make more like himself. Any aid to Africa or much of the rest of th e third world doesn’ t translate into imp roved q uality of life, ev en into improved nutrition, but is immediately converted into more children who continue to live at the same level of misery . The true environmentalism is racism and has a racial foundation, and in fact the two things, environmentalism and racism, are indistinguishable. This is why there’ s endless discussion of “global climate change,” because it takes attention away from concrete problems that are within our grasp to solve—the destruction of national parks, of public spaces, of the mistreatment of animals, and most especially of the oceans. All of these problems are problems of race, not of the modern city as such, modern progress, or the progress of tech nology . In fact, the attempt to limit this progress and to screw back humanity or freeze it in some supposedly pre-modern form, the attempt for example to bring back “small communities ” in the modern world, is the greatest danger and a possible source of the most thorough- going and totalitarian subjection. 40 The true understanding of peasants you aren’ t going to get from those modern windbags who extol their life or that of “noble s avage”; but more likely to get from Chekhov’ s story of th at name. T hey are a wretched bunch, and locusts on the earth. Y ou can g et a good image of them also from Kurosawa movie like Seven Samurai. The peasant and serf, the default state of mankind has, like anima l, his nose directed toward the earth and the ground, because it is there that the objects of inter est are found, the needs of bare life. He is far from contemplation even of the stars, that Homer says gladden the heart of the shep herd alone on mountain. The dwellers of the valleys and tillers of the soil are the prototype for all the modern “bugme n,” don’ t be f ooled otherwise. This is the “frame” or worldview that turns all matter and all things into mere utilities. It doesn’ t need te chnology to do so, and never has. In primitiv e farming societies they will immediately execute any of the intelligent as a witch: this is still done in Africa a nd there is the famous Chinese saying about how the intelligent must be killed. This is always the case in much so- called “primitive ” life, life under the thumb of the empowered old matr iarchs a nd the conceptual dildoes they use to clobber the head s of young men. Wha t is worst about the modern world is the reim position of this life, which is taking place for political and biological reasons. The problem of our time has never be en with technology as s uch. There is no inner working of technology that inevitably leads to human subjection. The tendency exists merely because, by allowing an overwhelming increase in the n umbers of the superfluous, it gives them and those who cater to them power when it is mixed with democracy . The left environmentalist, among many others, is misguided because he wants mor e power given to such people. He a ttacks precisely those elements of the modern W est, of modern technology , even of modern culture, that can mitigate somewhat the rule of the superfluous and their destruction of nature, including human nature. I can imagine few fates worse than if we decided to “live closer to our means,” to retrench and stop technological progress and innovation, to scale back to “ small, integral communitie s,” to bring back “traditional forms” in our circumstance. I understand the desires of those on t he right wh o long for the great parts of the past, but understand this: any such attemp t in the modern world, I mean to p romote the small village, th e rustic life, the modest life, will lead not to the reestablishment of the glories of past ages, but to the freezing of modern corruption, to its stabilization and permanence. Y ou will get small communities run by the gynocracy , to suppress true manhood and youth, but this time with the benefit of whatever modern technology is already around. They will do so in the name of “traditional virtue.” They will be Ch ristian, maybe, but their Christianity will be a cover for Marxism in one way or another . It doesn’ t matter what ideology or religion or “id eals” you give them, they will still beh ave the way they’re b orn to. The problem of the modern world, as also of the de gradation of the environment, isn’ t technology or a way of life or an ideology , but the ubiquity and rule of a ce rtain kind o f human…. and until this problem is solved……… 41 I do n’ t know if the wardens of this prison and owners of this spac e are present or not, b ut I suspect they are. I don’ t think we live ju st in some impersonal emer gent mechanism, a “system” tha t entraps everyone, something like “managerialism,” or “post-industrial ennui .” I thin k all of this was consciously crafted. It’ s possible much of known history is falsif ied. Nietzsche among many others hinted at this. I don’ t think we can ever know who these individuals are, but I suspect they walk among us lik e average men. I once knew a woman of Rockefeller branch— and let me say , this is exactly what I don’ t mean by these hidden powers I’m talking about, you don’ t know their names—b ut she went to vegetable shops or o n su bway w ithout anyone knowing who she was, without jewelry , and had only contempt for the known rich who have to walk with ret inues and bodyguards and are under constant surveillance by media and other s. What could they want, then, you ask, if not to enjoy and show wealth? Just that, freedom and pow er , that everyone else la cks. They live outside all law and con straint, we are but the material and fodder for their hunger . Their schemes are demented: the movie Mulholland Drive revealed some of what they do, indirectly and with metaphor . They have learned how to harness various kinds of ener gy , for example, the kind o f ener gy bestowed by human attention in lar ge numbers, an d to power certain kinds of machines with it. The attention that Hollywood gets is received and absorbed by a machine of great power , that amplifies it and serves some us e. They founded this rite with human sacrifice and human blood, and that is what this movie is about. They know how to harness sexual ener gy , which is why they persecuted W ilhelm Reich but stole his technology . T rump’ s family knows the secre ts of T esla. They know many other things: science and rationalism are the “public religion” of our time, but the rulers believe in something quite dif ferent. The mas ses are dazzled by the fridge, the hairdryer , the phone: they live drugged and hypnotized by assurances that the wizards who produce these things are modest engineers who live by publicly known and verified procedures, that they’re just quiet men who master unremarkable and docile physical forces. T heir comfort is a surety of their faith in the regularity of nature , that has taken divine fear and awe away from them. Meanwhile the world is run by men like Erik Jan Hanussen, or , actua lly , he was only a too l of others like him, but you don’ t know their names. Someone wore green gloves in Hong Kong. They live in the realm of power and freedom. 42 Great lie of our age is that it is about the freedom of the senses, liberatio n of the desires from stodgy social and moral controls. In fact even Middle A ges man lived with more lust for l ife, even m ore sexual lust, than the modern: he worked less also. Most of the year there were feast days. There was the minimum amount of work done possible to have enough crops and to pay the taxes, that were relatively small. Most modern men hardly have the property of the medieval freeholder . Hygiene was bad and disease rampant, infant mortality very high: many other problems too . Is not my favorite time. But once you survive childhood, work is the great dif ficulty in life, it’ s t he c urse of Adam: go to sm all book shop in Thailand, you find complete chaos among the books on sale there. If you ask the owne r why he doesn’ t arrange alphabetically or some other way , he will say , because would be too much work and I make enough as it is. But in this one thing, “Merry Old England,” for e xample was a place of joy and drunkenness and feasts. They drank ale without hops, but used gruit made from heather and other herbs: this drink they had all day , filling them with passion for life…beer at this time was a stimulant and aphrodisiac. They considered the water -drinker much like we look at the dry hipster herb who stirs caf feine-free rooibos and looks at you with dour eyes . It was the Puritans who introduced hops, precisely to make beer bitter and unpleasant, and to turn it fr om a stimulant into a soporific that kills the sexual instinct in man. But before this, the people of England had surely more intense sex0rz, if that’ s how you measure things. Actually it’ s how you should measure things because it’ s a sign of something else. A life of great and real joy or passion is a life receptive to certain other instincts and desires, that also come from nature, but that the modern lords of lies are terrif ied of. It is these others that they want to suppress, at least for the laity . The sexual irritation that the many are kept under is dif feren t from the kind of unencumbered and carefree, passionate and demonic lust you found in premodern times, and that you st ill find in pockets of the Third W orld. This modern parody of lust drains all ener gy , that other true lust sets the h eart on fire with many other wild enthusiasms: Paglia is wrong, they will never allow her brand of “feminism” to flourish; it would defeat the purpose! Entire purpose of modern education is to suppress that enthusiasm, to make you second-guess yourself when you hear the voice of old friends…goading you on…..And yes, they achieve this by promoting the tedious, exhausted sexual irritation you find among the obese, the “polyamorous,” the weirdo old tribesmen who get of f on exposing themselves to women. This pervasive irritation blinds the many also to receptivity to these other desires I’m talking about. “T elepathy” is public and mythical versio n of something real. This is same way that many r eligions teach metem psychosis because truth of reincarnation is too impersonal and too hard to grasp. It’ s not out of the quest ion that we are constantly receiving motions inside th e unity of things from many inanimate objects, some possibly on the other side of the known universe, but occasionally from people we know , trees, and many other objects. W e may have close bon d on this level with individuals related to us, even in the future, or an intimation of those that the genius of the species intends as our mate, because it wants the p roduction of this or that ch ild at this or that moment. The most significant of these “telepathic” connections is indeed when two such people, supreme ly suitable for each other on a biological path, r ecognize in each other this inner intention or striving of nature for the production of something—of course they think it’ s a bout something very dif ferent. In the normal case this is almost always man and woman, for production of a certain c hild, th at nature wants to bring into emer gence. But on rare cases the re can be other reasons for similar connection in will, such as, two friends who are intended to achieve some task together . “W e reach out wit h open arms in anticipation of satisfying our desire or delusion, meanwhile nature achieves her secret intention”: it is so in the birth of certain children, but also of other thin gs. The suspicion of friendship that the “ghey rights moveme nt” promotes has worked to destroy this. W omen are likely to be able to receive such messages more than others, because in them the intellect is more firmly planted in the body and the inborn will. Many times this means they are, more than others, slaves of utility , but it also means they live more in the moment, less encumbered by concepts and abstractions, have more access to direct perception of things. They can s ee through many lies and can know people’ s intentions before they know what they want themselves. Saddam Hussein was like this: he was a transsexual in his soul. Not al l women, but there are cases where a certain turn in spirit frees their intellect from the confusions of their drives and th e chaos of their hormones, and yet they don’ t l ose that rootedness in nature that is usually harder f or men to achieve. This is why the Greeks and many other an cient peoples knew that women are more likely to be Oracles and to know the futu re and also the intentions of others (they “know” the future from innate sensation of the intentions and the blood of others). Cassandra was such a prophetess, and even the great seer T iresias was said to have turned into a woman for a while. Many shamans practice transvestism among various peoples—fools interpret this as “gay rights,” not seeing the cultic understanding of femininity . The Pyt hia was a woman, and the ancient Germans always consulted women before great decisions, because they could provide a dif ferent and more direct view of things. The modern lords of lies have alienated women from this by promoting the hyper -conscious, talky , neurotic-obsessive persona among urban slave women. That is a parody of the worst kind of m en. Oracles in nature are already rare enough, and how many h ave been lost to us because they were misled by the snakes w ho seduced her into thinking she should ape the sna ppy , chatty self-con sciousness of the midget homosexual and “comedian”? They know how powerless we are without knowledge of the future; they keep this for themselves. 43 Many ti mes in a new country I got so restless in small apartment and filled with such a desire to act out that, if bars and everything else is closed, I go to the nearest hostel and make a nuisance of myself. I was kicked out of a number of such places, and also out of frathouses in the past, when I told them my theori es about mind control, about the numbers in phone books arranged in suggestive ways, about the habits of African hunting dogs and the strength of hyena’ s bite and neck. Th e people liked my stor ies, but the staf f watched me from the side wi th great jealousy and wanted to “call security .” In m all I’ve bee n frequently asked by sallow guard if “Sir , do we have to call security ,” becaus e, while walking, I felt myself grabbed with a fast spirit, and ejaculated all kinds of words in T ourette way . I went to troll gay bars with Hitler mustache, and outraged the patrons there with stories of how the

National Socialists started out as a gay-ri ghts movement in a basement in Munich, and how this is admirable. Hunger for space, claustrophobia—the most noble phobia—isn’ t “just spiritual.” Nothing serious is ever just “of the spirit.” Of the spirit means fake and gay—all real orientations exist only in the blood and show th emselves, not just in th e higher reaches and tastes of one’ s spirit, but in daily life and daily needs. I want always to be in center of ro om in front of big window when I must work, which I hate doing. All real thoughts come only when you walk ou tside, sta nding up, in fre sh air: I knew this long before I was made aw are of it throu gh Nietzsche, who says you should d istrust a ny thoughts you’ve had indoors. Add to that, any thoughts that come into you r head in the fetid miasma of most cit ies. Add to that, when the whole day you’re harassed and nee dled by the viciousness of others, that comes from a vulgar d esire for power displayed by secretaries, service workers. Service workers have often tried to oppress me. Larry David understan ds this problem; but he is still trying to be too “nice,” he presents his struggle against the oppression of the service industry as self-deprecating, self-criticism. They are mostly vicious demons. Just today waitress came to try to take away cof fee cup, even though it had small layer on bottom, my favorite cold layer of cof fee….I told her , no I drink this, I signaled with my hand, and stil l she bend over , while looking me i n the eye, trying to take, and I could see in the look in her eye a mixture o f defiance, lust, masochistic lust, a desire to usurp, a desire t o eat me alive. I had to repeat three times. I’ve had to push cus tomer service bitchmale against the wall, he wouldn’ t stop following me around and commenting on the wine. I don’ t pretend to be a reb irth of Theseus or Ajax, but if any such man were born today , h e’d be fast in a mental asylum or dead. Only the small in spir it can thrive. In this way they chip away at you r spirit in a thousand ways. T raf fic lights train you to obedienc e like animal in cage, especially at night when there are no other cars around. Having to be in passenger seat while m oron is driving, I could n’ t even stand this friend and asked hi m if he wouldn’ t mind if I jacked of f while we drove between two cities. “Y eah man, sure, go ahead no big deal…” he agree, so I know there was nothing left in him. It’ s for this reason also that I go in the dirtie st of red light districts or enter porn cinemas: I like to see trap injecting industrial-grade silicon in chest, I like to hear whores trade stories how the word “homosexual” comes from “a sexual man,” and that homos are just hypersexualized whore-males. I believe this is true. 44 There was night club on top of strange cinema that during the d ay doubled as place of por n. I decided to go inside once with frie nd, and old man farther on same row contrived so that he g ot out righ t in front of us and brushed right by me, grabbing my crotch. I shoved his face into the wall, and had to push my way past security-guard with terrible breath and goblin-like pockmarked face. There was loose vampire bat in lobby th at had flown in, but this normal. Outside on the street as I ran looking for taxi there was black woman taking shit in middle o f road. At intersection in gray beaten up V olvo there was a driver wit h no head and on seeing this I entered a state of v ertigo and f ugue. Some talk about this “madness behind things.” The r eal world is very dif ferent from the one that appears to us in waking life, but it’ s not so dif ferent as to be entirely alien or abstract or “philosophical” in the way you might th ink. It’ s not abstract, o r made of perfect and eternal forms, it ’ s not somewhere else: it’ s immanent, here, and within things, and it’ s twisted. It doesn’ t have any moral significance that can be und erstood by us. When Heraclitus speaks of all things being one, and all things being fir e, he means this: when this actu ally shows itself to y ou, there is a demoniac and violent madness underlying things. The real world is similar to the apparent, but uncanny , de vilish, disordered for us . Its hidden order , the fatal X behind things, reaches for things and aims beyond our scope as humans: it’ s why Lovecraft knew it was true, our world is fashioned by a demiur ge who is a blind, retarded schizophrenic. Its origin and happenings and its fate is in the play an d war of the most gruesome factions, for gotten gods…to them we’re like stowa way rats on a ship. This shows itself most vividly in some dreams, which, if they had continuity , we couldn’ t distingui sh from waking life. Some but not all of the insane are able to see parts of this world, but they’re all unheard prophets, and ever more so in our time… psychiatry , a fraud, has weakened all faith in them, and of them in themselves. Everywhere the signal is jammed. 45 I’ve always been attracted to the dirtiest and filthiest of the Gnostic sects: the Carpocratians, and later their analogues the Khlysty in Russia, Rasputin’ s evil coven. They formed groups of w omen around a great teache r and sorcerer who could drive them into or giastic madness: the rebirth of the Maenads! Man who plays the wrong way with this ends up being eaten alive like Euripides’ Pentheus (otherwise an inadequate piece). The Jews had a parallel version, the Frankists. All of these believed that insi de us is a spark of divinity that is trapped in matter . Since matter and this world are the work of an evil Demiur ge, the laws governing matter and human life as they appear especially in the Bible are the la ws of Satan. Therefore to free yourself you must overturn every single one of these laws, you must en gage in every act of evil, every crime, every atrocity: only in this way does the gate open out of the kingdom of shadows… only this way you f ind Paradise and get past the angels guarding its paths. I don ’ t recommend this way! Some say much of t he left is mo tivated by such a faith, its secularized variety . There are, in the case at least of Frankism some w eird historical peculiarities: many of the prominent leftist Jews, the founders of th e most aggressive leftism at least, are said by some orthodox Jews to be of Frankist origin. This was so in the case of Brandeis; hardly the worst, but supposedly there are many othe rs. I myself don’ t believe this, though i t should be studied. I feel a kinship to such sects, but this not direct: I must explain. In general you can understand Gnosticism, in all its forms, in this way: the Hebrew faith is based in claim “saw that it was good” …the claim that the world is crafted by a benevolen t God and that matter and the world is good. There are only a few other faiths like this: Islam is anoth er , and Schopenhauer claims Greek and Roman paganism are same, although th is is not the full truth. Greek optimism is of a n entirely dif ferent sort than Biblical optimism anyway . But Hinduism and Buddhism see the world as something you must escape, the y believe in nirvana or moksa that frees you from the cycle of rebirths. This is more normal, and a lot more widespread in h istory . And this is in a sense true since suf fering so obviously outweighs its opposite: in any individual life this is true, whe re moments of happiness are rare and pass quickly . But also, if you imagine the pleasure of an animal eating versus the pain and agony of the animal being eaten, you can’ t be fooled …y ou see that suf fering exceeds pleasure or happiness in this world, by many magnitudes. Many bears, some African hunt ing dogs and others, they bite out of animal before it is even dead. Best, like I said, to be killed by jaguar that dispatche s you with quick bite to the skull! Its jaws are strong, grown to bite through turtle. I believe it’ s the most compassio nate cat, but most murder in nature isn’ t like this. Houellebec q talks about how as a boy he couldn’ t stand the self-sati sfied, dronelike and calm “reasonable” voice of narrators on nature shows, that try to obscure the worst agonies of animals, murder in blood. According to any rational calculation, life is not worth living, because pain far outweighs pleasure. Heavily medicated nihilists are likely to deny this—the blessed and happy know it’ s true… but al so know that re ason and rationality are false. Gnosticism is driven by the problem of suf fering, or compassion for those who suf fe r , and tries to absolve God of responsibility for this state of things. Sometimes it says the God of the Bibl e was put to sleep, or imprisoned himself, or that he is bound with chains of adamantine and kept in a cage, and that a usurper took his plac e. Other times it says that the God described in Genesis isn’ t the real God, but a demiur ge, and the real God sent his emissa ry Jesus to overturn the rule of this demiur ge. There are many variations, and some interject not one demiur ge, but ninety-nine, all to remove responsibility from the Godhead for the creati on of this world of evil. They should have just become Buddhist or Hindu and stopped trying to save the myth ology of Canaan! Maybe in its beginnings the Christian faith was the same as the Buddhist, and this is now lost in the confu sions of hateful sects that distort history . It’ s easy to think tha t this is the religion of a hopeless age, that it’ s a by product of the decay of the Roman Empire and the symptom of despair or suf fering. It’ s much worse than that! The pro blem for man as for other animal isn’ t stress or suf fering, but the feeling that on e can’ t escape: the despair and panic of exhaustion and entrapment. Beyond the borders of the known inhabited world, the oikoumene, there lay uncrossable oceans, including the great earth ocean of the steppe, and the Sahara in the other direction. C hina and India were known, and trade existed, but this was only a vague knowledge that could have, in theory , stimulat ed the sense of conquest and adventure. There were, in other words, plenty of possible sources for the feeling that b eyond the known world still remained the unexplored. The same unknown that called the enterprise and spirit of the Portuguese, Spanish and other Europeans who set out on a colonial mission of world- conquest and discovery , all of this existed in late Roman times. But the will or s pirit was not there, there was only exhaustion on all sides, the same exhaustion that explains the pointless history of China, India, and all long-settled farming places. Civil wars and palace coups will always continue, but the spirit of man is broken by habituation to an overlong domestication, and nothing genuinely great in body or spirit takes places again after a while. This “habituation” includes of course th ose “habits of the blood ,” which leads to the breeding and overproduction of the superfluous. Once a great power imposes domestication on its neighbors and then itself, comforts grow , and so many are born who experience life already at birth in an exhausted state, and who call upon themselves the governments and religions of the exhausted and stressed. Surely the external obstacles we face now are far greater: outer space for us is not traversable even in theory , and we know of nothing on the other side of empty space… everything outsi de the already k nown seems barren. And yet, I repeat, this kind of physical limitation isn’ t the real cause of a spiritual exhaustion that yearns for escape of some sort. It is the very character of domestic life to present the world as an enclosed owned space, and, although mankind adapts itself on the whole to this condition, both biologically and culturally , yet there remains a glimmer of the opposite tendency inside even the lowliest. He can’ t help but experience this new state of thing s in late civilizations except with dr ead, the dread suspicion…an uncanny suspicion….. that the world is artificial. He begins to sense th at this hothouse he lives in is the m alevolent creation of a dem iur ge that likes to observe our suf ferings, that He and his m inions feed on them. In the remote future, should the evil of human innovation continue unchecked, we really will live in the world the Gnostics feared, a nd that spark of vital life and ener gy that is the gift of nature to all youthful peoples b orn from its womb, that spark will remain entrapped in “matter wrongly configured,” matter entirely foreign to its inborn desires and workings, but fashioned instea d for the benefit of something else. In many ways the world we inhabit now already anticipates this living hell of the Gno stics, and the response of those in whom the pain of civilization and mode rnity is most advanced, the transsexuals, unwittingly help to further uncouple reality from nature, and to make our progressive domestication more totalitarian and aggressive. And yet, for yourselves, who wish to fight the encroaching tyranny , remember that in conditions of crisis the “Carpocratian” option, the attraction precisely to the c riminal and deviant, can be very great …but…one here is at the edge of th e abyss. And th e way you interpret the call of this instinct… 46 I am interested in the falsificati on of history and possibly of geography . I think mankind is exceedingly stupid and wicked, you can’ t trust a word you receive. I have no doubt your rel igions are true, but ca n you be sure some vicious faction d idn’ t in sert itself into the hierarchy of priests some time ago, or of religious authorities, or of book printers, and insert all kinds o f things that weren’ t there to begin with? For example, all Old Slavonic copies of the Bible in Russia used to have hea vy Gnostic interpolatio ns. This explains the multitude of s uch sects that sprung up there, including those who castrated themselves, and others like the Duhobors who make a mockery of the higher and noble nudity by practicing the nudity of the de formed. In the W est there were similar things: how do you thi nk the Cathars found such currency in north Italy , in the Rhin eland? It wasn’ t just a new teaching, but very old practices and old formulas that f ound a ready home among a population long prepared to r eceive them. Some were pre- Christian, while others had spread along with the early Church, and preserved elements of early Christianity mixed in with Manicheanism and Magia nism and other even stranger things. Why do you assume the n that the main religions that survived are not in fact for geri es? Islam could very well be such a for gery: the Koran is a mishmash of nonsense, and possibly was originally a Syriac Christian devotional book that was re-edited much later . Mohammed was their name for Christ, and the f aith originally was a version of Nestorianism that was spread by the Persian king, not by Arabs. The entire history of Heraclius’ crusade against Persia, as of Persia’ s downfall in “battles” against Arabs may be entirely fabricated by both sides, t hough of course now this lie has long been for gotten. What historical or ar chaeological evidence is there at al l for the existence of a Moh ammed? But do you have any idea how specul ative the conclusions drawn from archaeology are in general? Just read, for example, the kind of “evidence” they use d to establish horse-riding on the great steppe before 1000 BC—a few , maybe not even five or six, bones that seemed to look like bits. Life is short ; rebirth as a man is uncertain, and may happen a billion years from now: to these pitiful liars to trust your only life? Look at Thucydides, who is a great man and a genius of the ages: he seeks to outdo Herodotus, and this pattern is followed throughout all antiquity . Each great historian was setting out to outdo his predecessor as a rival. Do you think they made some things up? How much do you think th en that the scholar , the scribe, the vain “monk”—the “nerd” as a type—is likely to lie? They will lie far more than you think…the nerd more than a Thucydides is possessed by inf initely greater mendacity and also van ity , jealousy , spite and pettiness. Don’ t you think such people, w ho, for the longest time in the form of the monk were the only keepers and copiers of texts from antiquity , don’ t you think they would be willing to change the text, to add, and even to make up entire books and authors? Corroborations from “third sources” would be relatively easy to manufacture as w ell. But anyway , Josephus uses this rivalry among the Greek w riters to cast doubt on Greek histories in general, and in th is he’ s not entirely unreas onable. Of course where he’ s wrong is in supposing that the centrally-controlled archives of the othe r peoples, like the Egyptians, the Babylonians, or his own, are any more reliable. Nietzsche refers to the falsification of t he history o f Israel that occurred at some time before Josephus—and I think he was referring to the Maccabees. There is no external record anyw ay of the Jews existing before the kingdom of the Maccabee s—Herodotus never mentions them. Bu t there is evidence that the falsification Nietzsche was referring to is e ven of a later date. Much of antiquity could have be en invented by sects or orders of Christians or even Jews, to make it look like t heir contrived and artificial, utilitarian religions had some basis in human nature or were anticipated by wise men in the past. When, in fact, the entirety of their ener gy was directed toward suppressing the natural spirit of man, the innate reverence of man for the magnificence inside animals and inside thing s. In the end, nothing can be trusted, that you can’ t see and feel yourself. 47 W e don ’ t know if all of antiquity , or maybe if lar ge portions of it, was entirely made up by medieval monks or by Italian humanists in the Renaissance…or if some eccentric scholar at Constantinople or a monk in Iberia added entire books and passages to Plato or t o others. When Nietzsche says that Plato “studied with the Jews” in Egypt…what does he really m ean? Co uld it be, as some have said, that the Jews are actually themselves a recent invention, a sect of the Arabs in Cordoba, and that this group m ade up parts of Plato or of Aristotle…or s o heavily corrupted their works…perhaps working with scattered groups of monks in Europe and with the V atican later? What is the V ati can—and if it didn’ t ex ist before, say , the year 1200, how could you be sure…? Machiavelli mentions that St. Gregory wanted to entirely destroy and blot out all pre-Ch ristian culture, and that these bearded men in black robes smashed temples in their hysterical rages, crushed statues, burned books. How do you really know how successful they were, or when this actually took pla ce? How do you know that the legacy of the ancient world that Machiavelli claims they preserved only out of necessity—because they shared Latin as the same language— wasn’ t almost entirely corrupted by their “transcriptions”? Every new form of life among mankind seeks to blot out the memory of its p redecessors, to rewrite the history , and maybe does so literally , corrupting the texts themselves. Is there any evidence the desultory and unfortunate “doctors of the early Church” ever even existed? Augustine is almost surely a complete fiction, and there never was any such man—his pidgin “Greek” is nonsense in t hat area to begin with, and is rather the makeshift Greek of the medieval monk, maybe living so mewhere in Bur gundy . Y ou don’ t need to go that far though. I’ve heard other less s trange, but still wild theories: that the New T estament was written by a Jewish woman, as a parody o f Greek tragedy . It wa s an ef fort to overturn Roman life and power , “Roman privile ge,” by means of the Passion story—the dead god as an inversion of Greek mystery cult surrounding Dionysos. Does this sound familiar in our own time, when monstrous historical hoaxes…including the so- called an d entire ly fake “Cold W ar ,” during which the U nited States was funding and arming the Soviet Union the whole time? If Nietzsche believed such things, he would have never put t hem under h is own name or said them openly—but, could it be, when he says that Plato is unGr eek, that he really means precisely this? W as Plato, or at least many of the works of Plato, t he inve ntion of a B yzantine polymath, or of a Benedictine? S uch speculati ons are the opposite of comforting, especially in a world where the consolations and certainty of religion are rare. History has somewhat taken the place that religion had, I mean to provide stability to a world that is otherwise lost in complete confusion and chaos and uncertainty . I want this chaos, because what I want to bring thrives in it. The continuity of history , if not its progress, is that last thread that secular , scientific man, unmoored in the universe on this floating rock, t he play of titanic and foreign forces…it’ s the last connection that he had to any sanity . I want a world of psychosis, I want the end of his sanity . What if there is no firm ground to what we receive from history , and the continuity we think we ha ve is actually a jumbled and confused mess—that events from antiquity have been confused with events from the Middle Ages, for example? I found the suggestion of Fomen ko, that the Crusades and the T rojan W ar were

really the sam e event, to be so disorienting that I had to act out in a very vehement and stern way that day later . At the lounge, when the b ouncer asked me if “I was on drugs” …and I p ushed his forehead away from me in a gesture of majesty and power . I was soundly beaten up by his goons in the a lley . The sp eculations of Anatoly Fomenko, as well as the so-called “phant om-time hypoth esis,” which claims that three centuries have been wrongly added to our chronology…this is small stuf f. It’ s very small—From these doubts I was led to many ot hers far more horrific. I ’ve lived a wandering life, and at times I was co nfused by a stra nge similarity between certain street c orners, the smell of t his and that building that I supposed were dif ferent, the uncanny likeness of two streets that, years later , I can’ t tell anymore which was which, or if instead I dreamt it. I believe it needs to be investigated, for example, if Mexico City is not in fact the same as Bangkok, and the so-called Baja peninsul a not the same as the Malay . The similarity of dishes like mole and Thai curries only lends further support to this hypothesis, as does the kwak’ ing language of the Oaxacans and Chiapans…it’ s the same as Laotian. I’ve heard rumors that as you go inland from Port-au- Prince y ou start to see the lights of Manila, and that the Caribbean islands are no dif ferent from the Philippines. Both enjoy th e grilled pork, the rice with cheese, delights like spaghettis with ketchup and hot dogs or spam, and, I hear , certain other things also. The sl ums of Bangkok are the same as those of Mexico City , and Cambodia is the same as Guatemala (Hon duras is entirely fake). Thus it is said in some corners, when Columbus came upon Cuba, it really was Cipangu, or Japan, and he really did discover Asia. The entire New W o rld (and many other are as of the world also) is thus a fraud of the first order . Shanghai can be accessed in two hours from Ma nhattan by secret bullet train. And if you ask how it is that so many tra vel by plane, w ell, it’ s not so hard for there to be an understanding among the relatively few active pilots to keep this a secret and use circuitous routes to make flight-time seem a lot longer . If you don’ t want to go this far , remember how they can, n evertheless, keep entire continents or islands a secret—you’re not allowed, as far as I know , to approach the North o r South Poles, and it’ s not out of the question that a tropical refugium exists in both . There is an esteemed scholar from Bangalore who points out that the year in the V edas has six months of daylight and six months of darkness. 48 But you think I’m promoting idea of “noble savage”? Do you understand your visions of what is “noble savage” are just a miniat ure ove r -spent China, a spiritual China on a smaller scale? I know there no such thing as noble savage: Mark T wain a ttacked the Red Man as a faithless liar and rogue. W ell, fine. That doesn’ t bother me: my idea of noble and vital power is dif ferent. But…choose whatever view of nobility you will, it doesn’ t m atter , you won’ t find it among primitives as a rule. Y ou idolize peasants. Y ou look up to island savages living “at one with Nature,” I ask you to see what happened to Mar garet Mead, and how the Polynesians punked her—most of th e things she wrote about their views on life, about their sexual freedom, was nonsense they made up to make her look foolish. In same way the fools like Gimbutas and others who believe that mankind at some remote point lived under a benevolent matriarchy , again, “at one with Nature,” in balance with the needs of the soil and such: sheer nonsense. Everywhere his torians, archaeo logists find what we thought was mat riarchy was really no s uch thing. Y ou see this in the Odyssey where it is clear that the right of succession belongs to h e who is husband of Penelope, and Odysseus’ son T elemachus isn’ t assured of his inheritance of the kingdom. Local p riestess of the rites of fertility , of the flowering and blooming of the seasons of the e arth, who made crops assured to sp ring from the soil: priestes s of the local earth goddess or spirits— whoever married this woman was given a certain prestige or legitimacy as king. This much is true, but it was men who decided who she m arried, and they decided the sovereignty of the kingdom as well. Everywhere you look to find any kind of formal matriarchy you see that in reality it was not hing of the sort, but something very much like this. When y ou find polyandry as among some inhabitants of the Himalayas, it is men sharing a w oman for lack of resources or because of some other circumstance. By what mechanism could, after all, women rule si nce they are so much weaker physically , and seem unable to politically or ganize without men? But…but…there is way for them to rule. And so the debunkers of matriarchy are co rrect but don’ t see far enough into social relations among primitives, and even the civilized, to re alize that m atriarchy of a so rt is a reality . I already spoke before o f one kind. But you find among the Chinese, the Sicilians, that household is run by grandmother . When many of you moderns pine for “com munal living,” and talk about inter -generational households…you seem to for get that this would mean subjection to a strong-willed Dragon or Gor gon lady . The modern girl, when sh e pines for the community of the p re-modern extended family imagines that she gets from it the emotional and social support of her female cousins, and a crew of servants in the grandmothers, not the reality…which is utter subjection to the mother - in-law . The modern southeast Asian whose ancestors have lived in Oriental “cities” for generations is completely beholden to his wife…read any anthropological study written before 1970 to see the truth about Asian social life. In Afric a, the men are utterly defeated and beholden to matriarchy in complicated ways: the women run all food pro duction without the help of the men, who rely on them for the daily ration of bland sop mushed up from grains. A t times to break this monotony they seek bushmeat, but they mostly live as farmers dependent on big-armed woman tending messy patch of roots. The entire social life in this area is managed through secret societies. The apparent political power is brittle and meaningless: interlocking secret societies, based on the manipula tion of black and white magic, are the true sou rce of all important decisions reached in the village a nd even in the cities. W omen play a prominent role in such societies, or outright rule them: there is among them a long tradition of respect for wo man as oracle, which is only natural. The Y oruba water priestess chimping out in ecstasies over the boa, rec eiving visions, this is not so dif ferent from the Pythia. But where the Pythia had submitted to the solar and boyish manliness of Apollo, such a conquest of the power from under the earth never took place in Africa, nor in many other places. And so here as elsewhere there is a kind of matriarchy , but it works covertly , so that both the “left” and the “right” are fo oled on this point. In the end then the “left” is more co rrect: th e worship of the titanic powers of the earth, of the Great Mother , is connected to a kind of matriarchy , but where they’re wrong is in imagining that this leads to any kind of freed om, that it represents a kind of liberation from the strictures of modern civilization, the pain of specialization, the submission to moral authority , the modern “alienation,” and every ot her thing they like to blame. In fact everything that you hate about modern life an d that makes it into an Iron Prison—and I agree it is a prison—represents a return of the endless sallow night of matriarchy . It is a r eturn in every way , you must understand this literally! Nietzsche says that in the modern Europe you see the reassertion of pre-Aryan modes of life, the return of socialism, of the longhouse, of feminism, and that this is happening also to us internally , where the higher instincts of the spirit are being overtaken physiologically by the retrograde and prehistoric. The life of the v illage and o f the primitive is one of utter subjection, total domestication a nd total brokenness. The “matriarchy” that does exi st, and that exerts enormous influence and power in the social and moral realm, is only the manifestation of this brokenness of the males. Communal solidarity absorbs and snuf fs out any personal distinction or intelligence and this task is re latively easy where it conce rns the majority of the parts of the village: the real problem becomes what to do with the young males. In every way th ey represent a threat to the established custo ms and the phy siological torpor that benefits the old and the women. The social problem in primitive tribes as w ell as most civilized and unfree societies becomes this, what to do with the young males, their aggression, their sexual instincts: in every way they mus t be broken and subsumed for the benefit of t he tribe. This is more or less easy for the majority , who lack life force in a ny significant quantity , harder for the remainder , and where impossible—the fate of the outcast, or , more likely , death . Y ou fool yourself if you imagine that “young males are needed for protection from external threat.” In fact most societies of the settled, primitive and as well as civilized, are more than willing to accept the risk of submissi on to an alien tribe. In a given area, if many such trib es follo w this same path of self-domestication the risk is hardly even that great in one’ s own lifetime and a few benighted, spine less “warrior” drones are suf ficient to contend against similar neighbors. But even in cases where there is great external threat from vigorous tribes, such societies, ruled by wom en, the old, and the imbeciles, are willing to rather accept subjectio n to the alien than to allow freedom and flourishing for their young m en. They are right in this calculation too: subjection to an alien force rarely means extermination at its hands, whereas allowing their own youths freedom and power would end their way of life for good. But submission to the alien just often means some sporadic taxation that used to be relatively hard to enforce: peasants are very good at hiding stores of goods, and even fields. The routine humiliat ions of subjection, the loss of honor , the rare but occasional rapes, the loss of sovereignty means little to such people. They are allowed t o continue their communal life unchanged under the subjection of another , and even thrive under su ch subjection. They prefer it, anyway . This is the condition of the so-called “old civilizations” of mankind, and especially China and India. The Chinese Han faced the most dreadful external threats from the steppe, and were frequently conquered by a few scattered men on horseback that they outnumbered many times over . They didn’ t care: their stolid, unchanging life as a community continued, whether it was Jurchen or Mongol or Black Y i that preyed on them. The Indians, once they reached their period of priestly rule and senescence, also degenerated to this condition: they were conquered every summer by ad venturers and warlords from the Hindu Kush and beyond. Afghanistan ruled India. But subjection suited them. Slowly , with the patience that yeast enjoys because time is on its s ide, the Chinese would wait: “the day will c ome when this conqueror too will become exhausted, his blood spent; then he will join us, the people. ” And they were right. This is the famous assimilation of Chinese civilization, the assim ilation of the exhausted and spent. A nd there’ s no real way to understand the Chinese other than the reduction of the human animal to mere life: they are not what you understand normally when you say “civilization,” but rather a perpetual subject population, a uniform and undif ferentiated blob of serfdom that seeks subjection and undermines thr ough it. This is the rule of matriarchy . The Indians and many others are the same. The Chinese on many occasions preferred this path to the alternative, of letting their own men assert themselves and gain the sovereignty . On the brief occasion in the 15th century when they began to have a navy , with its glimmers of freedom and empowerment for youths, they noticed the ferment and disorder that this brought to their society and immediately quashed the whole project. Such societies can’ t change their condition even if they want to: the interests of mer e life are too entrenched. The way of settled life is just this then: to break the y ouths from early age, to tak e the boys and caponize them physically , mentally and spiri tually . This happens in the smallest tribes as well. When they become civilizations, they look much like H an China, or th e sinkhole cities of the Aztecs, Babylonians, and others. Y ou see here why people like Evola, Jung, Gu enon and all their follo wers go the wrong way . There is only this: whether life is stunted and broken by a “tradition,” or wheth er it is one of the very few , the rare exception, that allows the ascent of life. As a rule, life is stunted and deformed by huemans. This is why huemans are disgusting as an a nimal, and must be over come. This is the “free and primitive life” of the noble savage, this is the “matriarchy” that keeps its faith to nature in “s ustainable” form. In fact the society of the grass hut is hardly sustainable: such places are rapacious of natural resources, and often vicious to animals and vicious tyrants to people. A good parody of such a society on a small scale is the movie The Beach. The rule of weakness is not good but something of incredible cruelty , even cannibalism. Ca nnibalism is the way of all yeast life, to which the hum an animal degenerates under these conditions of gynocracy . Cannibalism is the eternal way of those erased hue- mans wh o subm it themselves to the V enus W illendorf and all “earth mammies,” because this faction of nature is a putrid evil dripping blood from its claws and seeking the dissolution of all higher life, spiritually and biologically , to the amorphous muck of the primeval swamp. If you traveled in Europe around maybe 3000 BC or so you w ould find wise-eyed cowlike black-haired Ne olithic matrons overseeing vast villages of longhouses where lived the hueman animal, fifty or a hundred to a room, with sheep and goats, wallowing in its own shit, tilling th e soil, eating those o f its members deemed to be “chosen by the gods”—anyone, man or woman, distinguished by vital spirit—and she might even smack you on the head with a lingam-d ildo and question your privilege as a traveler . This is the cond ition of most of mankind until recently , and it is th e suf focating miasma to w hich the modern world is fast r eturning, inside and out. But enou gh of this prison. I supp ose you want to know of a way out, or , at least, to hear of a dif ferent way of life? P a r t T h r e e : M e n o f P o w e r , a n d t h e A s c e n t o f Y o u t h 49 Life app ears at its peak not in the grass hut village ruled by nutso mammies, but in the military state. In Archaic Greece, in Renaissance Italy and in the va st expanse of the heroic Old Stone Age, at the middle of the Bronze Age of high chariotry , lived me n of power and magnificence in great numbers. W e are in every wa y their inferiors. Physically , spiritually and in intellect they exceed us in every way . I give example: our elite athletes, our special forces operators, are nothing compared to them. W e find Paleolithic bones, the femur , so robust that nothing from our runners or power -lifters equals. These men were ca pable of sustained speeds unimaginable today . Y ou know about Marathon, but not the whole story . The real physical feat wasn’ t just the soldier who ran the twenty miles or s o back to Athens to warn the people. The entire army ranged o n the beach in heavy bronze armor , facing the enemy . After the Persians landed, the G reeks char ged them from more than a mile aw ay . The Persians were amazed at the line of gleaming bronze running toward them and their war cry . These men ran a mile in very heavy armor and also carried six-foot- plus ashen spear -spike. They dr ove the invaders into the sea. And right after t his great ef fort they marched, still in armor , all the w ay back to Athens without pause, to prevent the Persians from ma king an opportune landing there. I don’ t think any special military units would be able to equal this feat today , and these were t he average citizens of Athens. Still more, they exceeded us the same way in mind and spirit: their sophists were able to rem ember fifty names, and more, upon hearing them once. Some had the gift of remote vision, that the Rosicrucians pine for , and that the Soviet and American intelligence services have attempted to rediscover in vain. Here we have life at its peak. Y ou know about their great art, science, and literature, or think you do. But these were men of conquest, exploration and adventure first . A eschy lus had on his tomb stone engraved that he f ought at Marathon, not that he wrote his plays. The free man is a warrior , and only a man of war is a real ma n. W e must look to their lives and exploits for inspiration and anticipate with great enthusiasm that such life will retu rn. I’m afraid that, in th e end, the examples of ancient men of strong hand, ancient men of power , will be very discouraging to many of you. Because you can’ t easily replicate their achievements and power in our time, and also, many of you are actually sissie s compared to them, in your blood. But I think it’ s good for all of us to remember we’re panty-wearers c ompared to them. Also, while you may not be able to emulate them in every w ay , because the age we live in is on e of total repression, you can still take some inspiration from their examples, and try to live the same in some way… try t o live accor ding to a Bronze Age Mindset. Y ou must not misunderstand this. This is not self-help book and I can’ t help you with how to live—no one can. I am concerned with the subjection of life and the suf focation of vitality . I hope to show you that things don’ t need to b e this way , and that you don’ t need to limit y ourself to small things. Above all you must reach for the great aim, physical and military independence. Only the warrior is a free man. The only right government is military government, and every other form is both hypocritical and destructive of true freedom . Y ou must aim high! Band with your friends on the way of power and know that nothing has the right to stop you, and no thing can stop you! I say this especially to the military men and those who will become. Some time ago I spoke with another frog about Generalissimo Alfredo Stroessner . He was dictator of Paraguay for forty years. H e went to sleep at one i n the morning and got up at 4 AM; asi de from this he took a tw o hour siesta in the afternoon (this is before a ir conditioning , and siesta is a necessity in tropical places). The entire day he worked relentlessly for his country and to keep down the vicious and Satanic communist sect that would have massacred his people—but he also did this for his own glory! The frog says to me, yes this drive is admirable but you have to be specific: Y ou can’ t encourage people t o strive like this to succ eed at W orld of W arcraft, or at their car eer as an interior designer , there’ s no honor in that. I agree! B ut when you look at those ages in which life is ascending, the great vitality of their blood is the same as the great aim for which they reach . And although we live in the most debased of all ages, it’ s still possible, as you will see, to break this Babylon and have the eternal fire of youth sur ge you to th e he ights o f power . In you r own life you can break their power and ascend to a chaos of joy and destruction. And in our future I already see like faint image far on horizon of vast ocean in violet evening—I see the islands of Hyperborea, on the e dge of this Leviathan, whe re we will be able to establish new outposts and subdue this great beast from the outside. 50 Imagine a Mitt Romney , but dif ferent…a Romney who actually was capable of acting like he looks, and was worthy of his looks. Imagine a youn ger Romney who rouses the nation to a new war , against India, through power of charisma and speech alone. Then he leav e on ship to head the armies conquering India. But then come rumors that Mitt ran a Black Mass Sa tanist dinner in New Y ork. Also, people awaken one day and find tha t someone defaced the Holocaust Museum and the L incoln Memorial… rumors spread that it is Mitt and his friends, in preparation to overth row the government. So he is recalled from his command to s tand trial. Instead of returning, Mitt runs to Ru ssia where he becomes a major advisor to Putin. S oon though, he finally

has to leave in a great hurry when it is discov ered he’ s been banging Putin’ s wife in secret. He runs to Chi na where, again, he miraculously becomes a major political force and advisor , adopting Chinese customs and lang uage with ease. After s ome time he leaves China and ends up living in Afghanistan with the tribesmen as one of them, in one of their mud fortresses, where he is finally found by Ame rican special forces and he goes out fighting, char ging them repeatedly with machine gun in his glorious black-and- gold armor and Dune-like headset. Exactly such, and more, was the life of the ancient Alcibiades from Athens. How inconceivable! Even as versatile and flashy a man as T rump is very far from this possibility in our time, though he at least makes such a typ e somehow believable. There’ s nothing like it in almos t any other era of history . Someone like T alleyrand is famous for switching from the monarchy , to the republic, to Napoleon, and back, being somewhat successful under dif ferent forms of government, a nd that’ s rare enough to make him famous. But that was all within one country . Alcibiades’ achievement is made all the m ore amazing by the fact that dif ferent cultures at that time were actually dif ferent, their ways of life entirely alien to on e another , and yet he excelled everywhere. I believe this is bec ause in Athens, where he grew up, h e p icked th e god of erotic passion as his patron. He was very bea utiful youth, admired and pursued by all the men and women. He rejected the advances of the Pelasgian pedo- pervert Socrates , a story that Plato then inverted and twisted like the lying cunt and Phoenician-asskisser that he was. Alcibiades excelled in athletics and at skrewl he refused to play the flute be cause it made your cheeks look puf fed up and ridiculous. Other boys followed him, considering that the harp is noble, but pla ying the flute in music is something for slaves and cocksuckers. As he grew in power , his shield had Eros with a thunderbo lt on it, and this scandalized the older men. In such way he sho wed that he was a disciple of the irrepressible life force, a devotee of the young god of sexual passion and total destruction ; he showed that no law or word of man would stand in his way! In the beginni ng was the word?? NO! In the beginning was the demonic fir e that bursts out in men like Alcibiades and lays low the citie s of men and exposes all their nonsense! Such men are sent b y nature to chastise us and be our Nemesis. They are the great cleansing. His story is told by Thucydides and Plutarch, though you must know the latter is a famous liar . But I think there m ust be someone as colorful as Alcibiades among you. 51 The mystery of rigor mortis is very revealing! Why is dead flesh rig id? But study was ma de where they put dead rigid flesh into bath of A TP , the master of ener gy for cells, and the muscles softene d and relaxed. The physiologically ener getic state is the relaxed state. Flesh that is either rigid or loose is spent, b ut ener getic biomatter vibrates in a ready repose: you see in the glow ing skin of ve ry healthy young people this relaxed suppleness in flesh, like Pietro Boselli. I’ve written letter to him, to ask him to allow dozens of nubile women to touch his soft, glowing, full and rubbery-like vibrating skin, all in public . The modern world exhausts and in doing so it makes everything rigid or turns it into a dif fuse blob. Physiologically it pr omotes the s tressors, estroge n, serotonin, hyperventilation, over -excitation, the hallmarks o f ener getic exhaustion. Loss of structure, form and dif ferentiation follows, which was the intention. There follows on this also a spiritual and intellectual rigidity , the orientation of the ideologue, of the social activist, but also of all o ur intellectual class right and left, as of those who work in the corporate world and in most of the military . They’re stif f and constrained b ecause, in short, they live in utter fear , fear that they will lose something. They have very little to lose, but they live in thi s fear anyway and this is why when th ere is a question of pote ntial gain or , worse for them, potential loss, they react with de speration, they freeze in terror and hyperventilate. Our politicians are all like this, and quiver in fear of the spanking hand. Everyone was already so tired of their robotic platitudes, that they repeat out of timidity and because they’re all owned; which is why a man like T rump, who seems not to car e, and to find joy in this flouting and ener gy in this outrageous loosening—he seduces. The modern world is a killjoy , in short. But the ancient Greeks were quite dif ferent, and dif ferent also from the over -serious stuf fy men with English accents who play them in period dramas. What they admired was a carelessness and freedom from constraint that would shock us, and that upsets especially the dour leftist and the conservative role-playe r . There was a Hippocleides from At hens, said to be one of the most beautiful youths: Herodotus tells this famous stor y of a man admired by all the world of the tim e. He went, with dozens of other youths from various Greek cities, to try to marry the daughter of a very important and rich autocrat in S icily . This man decided to test out t he s uitors, t o find which wo uld be the best husband for his daughter: he put them up for a time, treating them with lavish parties while he tested them in feats of athletics, wit, conversation, an d other abilities. It’ s a sign of this people’ s greatness that marriages weren’ t conceived purely as political or financial alliances, but that their aristocracy paid attention to biological quality in pairings. V ery few nations have the freedom from the fear I speak o f; only a few peoples have had the sens e to raise their snouts from the ground, look to the stars, and consider something other than the utility of immediate advantage in marriage and children. The way our own elite today marries and pai rs of f, by the way , is anything but “eugenic”: two over -the-hill spent people in their thirties marrying for “practical” reasons…this doesn’ t give rise to strong c hildren. The bodies of middle-aged people nauseate me, and I assure you, they brin g nausea to nature as well. In any case, Hippocleides was becoming the favorite of the father , for all his great qualitie s, his illustrious lineage, his looks and his charm in con versation. At the last party , however , Hippocleides got drunk and decided to start dancing on the table. Th en he started t o dance upside down, on his arms, moving his legs around! W ell, you know that men then didn’ t w ear the ridiculous constraining clothmo clothes we wear tod ay , such as pants, so the father was of fended at the show . He said, “Hippocleides you have just danced yourself out of a marriage” …but the answer was “Hippocleides doesn’ t care.” In this one phrase you have the whole attitude of this beautiful, reckless piratical aristocracy that colonized and conquered their known world. It’ s an attitude that upsets all the moralfags of our time, of the left and right. Hippocleides went there to have a good time, to display and use his powers and excellences and biological superiority—but these two things are the same! He didn’ t care about the gain or loss of a wife. He didn ’ t go to act like a meek, beaten male ready to dance to some sclerotic’ s tune. He was as careless of his own property as of others’—t his is what T ac itus says also about the most noble men among the Germanic tribes, who lived only for the joy o f war and battle. This is w hat t he grea t among the Gre eks admired. Another story shows you the same thing: it is also the attitude of Diogenes the Cynic. When Alexander the Great came before his bathtub and as ked him what he would want most of all in the world, Diogenes told him to get out of the way , stop blocking the sun…he was just trying to catch some rays! No w compare that to one of our slavish intellectuals and philosophers, and how their meager spirits would huf f and puf f at the approach of even a mid-level constipated bureaucrat— how dis tinguished! The honor! Alexander said that if he had not been Alexander , he would wish to have been Diogenes. I don’ t kn ow if I c an recommend for you to be like Diogenes or Hippocleides. It ’ s hard, maybe y ou have to be born that way . I can tell you it’ s a better thing to aspire to, divine carelessness that comes from embracing the life force, and that this is what this great people loved. Anythin g truly great must have some of this divine carelessness. Didn’ t the Christians also believe in “g ive us but our daily bread”—implying that this is enough and you shouldn’ t worry abou t anything else, even for the week? Nietzsche say good things about poverty , independence, and being of go od cheer . And these were very poor men: but the sons of God need nothing more! 52 Schopenhauer explains the carelessness and joyful frivolity of wome n by the fact that they l ive in and for the genius of the species. Although unconscious of it, they are full of its boundless aims that reach far beyond the individual, with his petty anxieties and cares: the coming of the next generation is the m ost serious matter . They li ve in the species. In them the species rejuvena tes itself. It goes without saying I’m talking of women in the be st case, and most specimens are botched. Why are they botche d though? They’ve been taught to hate their own nat ures and instincts, and in some cases these instincts have been warped or BUTTH EXXED into something else: they’ve been as a wit recently p ut it Bernankefied up the ass. Modern women have given up this great advantage, so they can become neurotic copies of gay desk-workers. They’ve abandoned the great power endowed in their blood. If you don’ t believe me, remember a carrier pigeon that knows the way…surely he would lose his w ay if he saw a map and had to think about it. What comes from the blood is best. But it’ s hard to hear this cal l of instinct tod ay , because you’re taught to distrust it. Abandoning yoursel f to instinct, once one has a discipline and practice through the body , a man can pass over a chasm on a tightrope with a sure step: the left talks much about letting loose, about no lo nger being repressed. If they only und erstood what this really meant! I will show you men who really didn’ t have any hangups, who weren’ t repressed at all. One name w as Clearchus, and he was a Spartan general. He w as sent by Sparta to city of Byzantium by mouth of Black Sea. Th ey had asked for help . He came there as military advisor , but soon no longer answered to Sparta: he used his power a nd contrived to invite the prominent men, the senators and the rich of the city to a m eeting where they were then hung by the neck. He took their property and took the prize of sovereignty in this place! After Sparta sent an army to dislodge him, he put up a great resistance in dif ficult battle but was defeated. Then Clearchus managed to escape while the city was besiege d; by night he sneaked away in a ship with the treasure, from a neighboring cit y that he had also taken over . Eventually he fled to Persia. But in Persia he didn’ t just enjoy his r iches, which he had won b y the power of his hand. This man was possessed by the pass ion for war and adventure. He put out a call for many mercen aries from all over the Greek world, and led t his army through many bold enterprises in the wilds of Thrace and the middle of the Persian Empire where, however , he died because of treachery—here he was careless…you must be careful and know how to use the fox as well as the lion in you! I tell y ou of another man, praised by Machiavelli as a guide for life, a kind of life coach. He talks about a man, Agathocles, from the ancient city Syracuse, a Greek city in Si cily . This man rose from humble beginnings, through the ranks of the army , b ecause of his great bravery in battle and his astute mind planning stratagems and ambush. Eventually he was appointed top general in the city where, again, to tally uninhibited and unencumbered, he invited the full sena te and all the notables to a meeting, where his soldiers killed th em all. He took the pri ze of power in this city . Then with many struggles he defeated the Carthaginians who were harassing the Greeks in Sicily , by landing in Africa and giving them bloody nose. He ruled securely and in great glory . I tell you these stories because they s how the lives of two men who were similar , who knew how to really let loose, who weren’ t held bac k by petty inhibitions. T hese are men who really knew how to enjoy th eir freedom, and who weren’ t limited by the opinions of others. What wa s slogan of last decade in America? Y es you can! This is slogan of last decade in America, at least, and I see no r eason why you shouldn’ t take this idea to its conclusions—after all, no one of the very moral wise men who r ule that country saw anything wrong with that slogan. Surely they must want you to have “internalized” it. Please remember that these small people like Bill Gates, Zuckerface, and Bezos are entirely dependent men. They can’ t really d o with their wealth what you think they can…for example, they could never just kill a man and take his wife, but even the ruler of the smallest African country has this power , this true wealth. When your happiness and wealth depends on the f orce of arms of another , you’re not really your own man…nor can you enjoy the greatest delights in life. Clearchus and Agathocles knew this: they show you one of the ways ou t; they’ re really authentic men who went their own way! Y es you can! 53 The pirate and the fortr ess— “W ork was never pleasure for me, nor homekeeping thrift, which feeds good children. But to me oared ships were pleasure, and war , and well-glinted spears and arrow .” So speaks Odysseus, playing the pirate. This is motto an d life of the pirate. Do you understand what pirate is? Many times I’m asked, why the Bronze Age? Because it’ s the heroic age you s ee in Iliad and Odyssey , yes, but don’ t for get what hero really means. Thucydides says the men of that time enjoyed piracy , and saw nothing wrong with it, and this is true. And what is the pirate but the original form of the free man and of all ascending life! How pathetic, when you are told now about “living life,” or “having a life”—these people know nothing about what true life means. Compare the intensity of Alcibiades, that super -pirate, or of what I am about to describe here, to the “life” you’re encouraged to “have” today . How worthless the vaunting of these anxious creatures who live on pharmaceuticals, cheap wine, t he rancid fart-fumes of status and approval they beg from each other . Schopenhauer says that at some poi nt in the past all animals were herbivores, but then some species decided to take its own life in its jaws, to risk itself, and with great daring become a beast of prey , living of f the hunt. The predator is always the more intelligent animal. In every decision to become a hunter or pirate, a man or a people is showing great daring and embarking on great freedom. Hero is not slave to the many , who sacrifices himself for t hem; the common man is awed by this kind of “sacrifice,” because they would never do thi s for themselves or others. But this is hero reduced to faithful dog. W olf seeks not to “sacrifice” anything, but to dischar ge its powers over territory . W e take the wolves and lions and leopards from among us when pups and break them with false ideas, vicious conditioning, and lately , drugs that would have lobotomized a da V inci, an Alexander , a Frederick the Great out of existence in his youth. Then the ener gy that remains to them is channeled into mindless wo rk for money . Labor and commerce are the ways to subject you to mere life and its preservation: when the superior are corrupted to a life of work and finance, they slowly move f or their own destruction in the long run . I could say leisure is the source of all great things. The preservation of life is tedio us; freedom from its demands is needed for al l high science, art, and literature as well, and also all beautiful living, all adventures, all development of your bo dy to the heights of beauty . One of the reasons the modern world has no great culture is because the sons of the rich have such bad conscience about not working, they all strive the same as others to cl imb on top of each other in normie j obs. Just fifty years ago most used to list “sportsman” as th eir main pro fession; that was in a recent time with slightly more be auty and more art. But …but…it is wrong to look at this aspect of life, because it assumes we have more familiarity with it than we d o. It’ s not just that we don’ t “deserve” to have a hig her culture, although it’ s th at as well, but that the purpose of such a thing is completely alien to us. From the point of view of real cu lture and refinement we’re as barbaric as the most obscure herd of the Khwar ezm where the women scratch their pub es in public…we’re just more tame and insipid than they were. So when I mention leisure, don’ t imagine I mean by it what you mean by it. It’ s not j ust leisure, you don’ t need just leisure for higher life, but specifically leisure for preparation for war . T o escape the subjection of our time, you can’ t really look to science or art any lon ger: you have for gotten their purpose. They’ve been defanged and almost all participation in these today amounts to a kind o f car go-cultism. Who can even think of a true scientist or artist among us? I think there is maybe a century since one existed. Just see how Cellini crafted his Perseus, in w hat frame of m ind he was, and how foreign this is from our “artist” diddlers. Paglia says the artist is an obsessive, with a mind close to that of a stalker or serial killer , and she is right: look at monoma nia of Newton, or character of people like Balzac or Baudelaire. V iolent Sper gs and obsessives. Our diddlers are diddlers because they lack all intensity and all faith in themselves and what they do. They’re not e ven nihilists, they lack all c onviction in nihilism too: they just lack intensity , they’re pissed dry . This is why in this book I d on’ t promote for you the life of the scientist, or artist, or writer , because in our age the se degenerate to hobbies and ways to pass the time, and there ’ s no value in this. People who promote these things, without really having a reason to, are just doing this to make you harmless and to advertise to others in media or elsewhere that, they too, are harmless. What past ages understood by leisure is very dif ferent from what we understand. Sho uld robots relieve mankind of labor , there won’ t be any flo wering of the i ntellect or the arts or sciences. It’ s not enough n ot be free from work, because the retired and the N EET’ s are like this, as wel l as most academics and many others, but all do nothing that’ s worthwhile. They’ve been reduced to a co nstrained and dependent state, and this is the problem. Constrained and dependent people don’ t have real thoughts: for same reason that n ations without manufacturing don’ t re ally un derstand anym ore what “innovation” and invention was for in the first place. So our science and technology too is just more diddling. Cervantes completed Don Quixote while in jail, Spinoza was a lens-grinder , Diogenes was homeless, and many other great things were done by people who were poor er or in direr straits materially than peo ple toda y . And yet one can’ t deny that the life of the average Americ an is that of an overworked, over -stressed slave: but the re st that would come from relieving him of that would b e just that, simple rest , if it doesn’ t also come with manliness and sovereignty . There is no substitute for freedom and power—not even the feeling of freedom of power is a substitute for the real thing. The pirate, the true warrior—not the modern soldier in subjection to a high brass eunuch—is the only free man, and it is this freedom, the primal freedom of the Bronze A ge that some must reca pture before anything else can be d one. Listen to what T acitus says of the ancient Germans: they preferred to win through battle the things of life, and considered it mean and petty to work the land and sweat and toil r ather than t o get their living by their spears and by risking their blo od. They otherwise spent much of their time in feasts and idleness. The noblest yout hs among them, if their tribe was at peace, would go to other tribes to seek out wars, because lack of adventure was odious to their race, and only through risking blood did they win distinction. This was also attitude of the medieval knight, the chevalier , the Rittern, the riders w ho consi dered the life of the

serf, of the community , to be mean and dirty , worthy of slaves and low-castes and women: they were always ready to ride away to new things and new adventures of glory and danger . So you see, it’ s not enough to say “such people w ere freed from caring for the necessities of life; they had leis ure.” It was leisure of a very specific type. The Roman aristocracy , as Nietzsche says, had the motto otium et bellum , leisure and war , these being the only right ways of life for a man of power and freedom. In Celine’ s Journey to the E nd of the Night I t hink he says a t one point that his landlady , otherwise a modest woman, had an aristocratic cont empt for labor; this was but an idle vestige and he make s fun of it. By his time , the last flower of the Aryan aristocracy had been extinguished, as Nietzsche says: in French Revoluti on, a mass revolt of racial slaves that remade Europe and took it on the dow nward path. Then there was another peripheral aboriginal revolt in 1917, that plunged Europe into a civil war from which it still hasn’ t recovered. But in Celine’ s b ook the main character , in his restless seeking in th is trash wo rld…he was looking for that hidden key , the true freedom into the expanse of open space that he could conquer . Where to find the frontier? There are many places, but p ath is not easy . In the natio ns, leisure from the slave state must be secured, and this leisure must immediately be used in preparation for war . In Greek city the man of power spent his time in the hunt, at the gymnasium, in the study of military history and strategy , in every way making himself ready for war . Many think of the Greek age, when they think of its spirit, they think of a kind of solidarity and soldierly order quite dif ferent from what I talk about here…they think of the line of hoplites, and their discipline. They think of this age as one where the individual subsumed h imself to the city and its laws, to th e discipline of the ranks: a nd they connect this seeming egalitarianism to the practice of democracy in our time. In this way they want to flatter them selves. Modern man is then called on to ma ke a similar “sacrifice,” and blamed for his selfishness. This is confused. In beginning the hoplite, the man who fought with heavy round shield, tall spike, and heavy armor , he did not come as a “tool” of the republic or a democracy , the way modern s oldiers are tools of the slave state. If you wan t to see what the spirit of the Bronze Age is, you look to ancient drinking song, at the mess halls of Crete and Sparta: “This is my wealth: my spear and my shield. W ith this I trample sweet wine from the vine. W ith this I am called master o f serfs. Those who do not dare to have spear and sword, a nd fine leather shield to protect skin, all cower at my knee and submit, calling me ma ster and great king.” This was real song: a popular drinking song among the ruling men. Such formed small companies of adventurers who, early on, took over the state away from the mo unted aristocracy—themselves equally piratical predators. Some time after they too k over a state and established themselves as its rulers, they then “submitted” themselves to the rigors and discipline of a strict training program. But only in t he sense that an athlete enters training in a tea m, specifically for making himself strong and ready fo r a task, and never losing sight of that specific task. When w e see the Greek cities at their heights in the classical era for which we know this culture, ruled either by aristocracies or in some cases democracies, we see cities where such men have taken over and built a state for themselves, and for the purposes of training for battle and supremacy in battle . That same haughtiness and l ust for physical power that you see in the song, that never left them. In th e case of democracy the only dif ference is that the sailors are adde d also to the ruling assembly of armed men. And you can understand then the meaning of this ancient “public- spiritedness,” wh ich isn’ t that at all, but free men accepting the rigors of training together so they can preserve their freedom by force against equally haughty and hostile outsiders and against r acial su bordinates at home. Any “racial” unity of the Greeks was therefore only the or ganic unity of culture or language, but never became political: such people would never tolerate losing the sovereignty in the states they and their recent a ncestors had established to protect their freedom and space to move. But to draw any parallels to our time is absurd: these men would have never submitted to abstractions like “human rights,” or “equality ,” or “the people” as some kind of amorphous entity encompassing the inhabitants of the territory or city in gener al. They would have rightly seen this as pure slavery , which is our condition today: no real man would ever accept th e legitimacy of such an entity , which for all practical purposes means you must, for entirely imaginary reasons, defer to the opin ion of slaves, aliens, fat childless women, and others who have no share in the actual physical power . How is it po ssible for all to have an equ al share in the state and a full demand on its r esources, when they in fact possess no actual physical force: and if you think this question through, you will understand also the nature of our subjection in this time. Because it is not these people who are at fault, but a hidden power t hat uses them as a pretext. Modern “democracy” is totalitarian and vicious, and trie s to subject the best to the rule of the heaps of biological refuse and most especially to the rule of those who can stir them up. The military men who constitute its external defense and its internal police forces should in principle never accept this condition. That they do is a great question mark: how is it possible? T o what end, and how did they agree to this? What’ s in it for them? The ancient life that I describe here, the Bronze Age mindset, is one of complete freedom and power . There is a hidden path for you also that remains…behind the mark etplace, it begins in the thickets of small woods….it winds u p many steep paths tow ard the high mountain air , to life in the ascen t, uncorrupted by the miasma of the yeast man and the toilets in the river valleys….the life on Jason’ s Ar go can be reclaimed…and by som e few in the modern world, it has been…. 54 Gr eek Friendship— Y ou think maybe I promote the ruthlessness of a machine polit ician with tuna-stained brown sportcoat, or a petty of fice intri guer , or catty interior designer with upward lilting voice who b ackstabs his colleagues to get contract. Fools, you think I’m here to promote a “way of life” or morality! No principles or ideas are of any use today , all will be retooled and taken over by people like these. Self-help is completely useless, and not what this book is about: rather , I would like most to go toward se lf-destruction and to be rid of them. I only ca re about very f ew who, being constrained in their pre datory nature by this o pen-air zoo, must look to the past to understand what is possible. I want to give encouragement to some who ar e a c ertain way , in their blood, and to encourage them to becom e the purifying hand of nature. Among your instincts you will find the longing for strong friendships, that the modern evil tries to snuf f out. And they have good reason to try this, be cause every great thing in the past was done through strong friendships between two men, or brotherhoods of men, and this includes all great political things, all acts of political free dom and power . The modern zoo wan ts you instead to be a w eak and isolated “individual.” In most Greek cities there were the aristocratic clubs or fraternities, which were always places of great plans, great ideas and spiritual ferment. Here were made great political plans, plans of colonization and exploration of new lands and new citi es, plan s of conquest, actions against the designs of tyrants and plebs. Where is your bulwark today against Babylon, when all this has been made illegal for you? In life of Cellini you see h ow dif ferent is a real free man: when insulted, or when one of his friends or family is hurt, he gathers fifty bravos for a raid on th e enemy , something impossible in our states to day , not only because of the immense power of the evil that suf focates, but also bec ause you have no such friends who could or would help you. A brotherhood of men in this form is the foundation of all hi gher life in general: there is a certain madness, an enthusiasm that exists also in a community of true scientists or artists, that follows this same pattern. It is tota lly forbidden in our time: it’ s totally absent in universities, which is where science has been sequestered. But what fat e can science have here? Everything in corporate labs, in unive rsities, as in government labs, and at the military and intelligence facilities that still carry out some scientific tasks… everything militates to crush the spirit of science. The dedication, severity , focus and enthusiasm necessary to sustain true sci entific enterprise are forbidden because they make women and weaklings uncomfortable: the presence of “lactation room s,” and an env ironment where such rooms could even be built…the suppression of vigorous debate, the promotion of an “unhostile environment” of petty chitchat and chumminess, th e subjection of scientists to administrators, human resources cunts with fibromyalgia, to the crushing banality of everydayness, all of this reduces the young scientist to domestic muck again and destroys his aspirations and will. The as sault is very heavy in Silicon V alley and other holdouts of research as well where, however , there wasn’ t any serious innovation being done in the first place: already technology had been reduced to the development of dick pic apps for adolescents. Science h as long ago ceased and been castrated… W ill it be born again? The cleansing barbarism that I talk about here must first sweep the world: no science is possible any longer , nor anything else, in a place where all spheres of life h ave been submer ged into the great mother of the Y east. But th is isn’ t really ab out science or art, I say again, you’re very far from understanding what those are even supposed to do i n the first place . Do you know how for Greek all higher aspirations went into strong friendship between two men wh o together dedicated themselves to a higher task? In Thebes, Epamin ondas and Pelopidas reformed the state, and established a democracy based on the Pythagorean sect—that last part not imp ortant. They believed in some peculiar things, like reincarnation, the veneration of the “left side” and also of beans an d other legumes, which I don’ t understand so well. But it was they who establishe d the famous “Sacred Band,” the elite military unit that bro ke the power of Sparta. This group w as formed of close frien ds, and you will always have too muc h love and compassion for a real friend to waiver in courage in front of him—but I doubt you understand what such fri endship means or that you ever had such friend! In Athens the two friends Harmodius and Aristogeiton put down the tyran ny through their schemes and their bravery: this is, you know , why all tyrants and totalitarians are suspicious of strong friendships between men. Most of all this is feared by the m iddle-aged lesbos and defectives that are used as guards by our prison-st ates. And yes, I know the rumors that these friendships were sexual, but I believe this is misunderstanding and exag geration promoted by the homonerds of our time, for reasons I will ex plain later . The model for all such friendships was that between Achilles and Patroclus: Homer never hints such frie ndship was sexual. It is only out of the poverty of our imagination that we think it was , because we can’ t conceive of such intense love between friends without some carnal or material benefit in play . It was out of his friendship for Patroclus that Achilles embarked on his great rampage: it was for the sake of his friend that he would not tolerate living a long and inglorious life at home…he chose instead a short and glorious one, and a violent dea th full of promise and beauty . Friends can spur you to this! H ow shameful to drag out life like a dog and die overseen by strangers in a hospital, who hate you , rather than to die in th e prime of your youth, for the sake of your fri end, and to lea ve behind a beautiful corpse! The ori ginal form for all th is was the divine pair of charioteers: Cas tor and Pollux, or for the Aryans it was the Ashvin twins, and for the Saxon s it was Horst and Hengist, the pair of the chariot driver and the archer—do you understand this is the real ro ot of all the higher aspirations of Europe? The charioteers who took over Europe around 1500 BC depended on this close bond between two men for its military or ganization; and probably this people itself had its ultimate origins in friendships of this kind. The Spartan state, in any case, entirely depended in its education of youth on this pairing of two friends, as kn ight and squire. It was this conquering aristocracy that really made Europe stand out from the morass that the rest of the world has always been stuck in… An d for the Greeks, and al l great men of the Bronze Age and not just th e Greeks, friendship wasn’ t just a way to “temper” the lust for power an d adventure that some of you will surely embrace, but an ab solute prerequisite for it. It is most of all not a duty . Friendsh ip is a social relation of a kind that is beyond all “ethics,” you see, and if you ever think of it in terms of ethics you misunderstand it. It is a great pleasure between two, very dif ferent from sexual pleasure between man and woman, but of the same species, in that it is pleasant, and never feels like “ethics,” which is for cows. There have been a few atte mpts in our age to replenish this form of friendship, for example Montaigne’ s famous essay . There have been other attempts as well, you find som e nice words on friendship in Nietzsche in Zarathustra , and then most of all there are the modern scouting movements, that come from Germany and from this same spirit. The first movement like this was called the W an dervogel, but there were various others, all based on the experience of nature, the promotion of camaraderie and of nationalism. Thi s included the J ewish youth guard movements that became Zionists, the Boy S couts and others in America of course. Among the Jews, the promotion of this kind of camaraderie and friendship wa s a great miracle in the early 20th Century , because it so much w ent against their culture of the cramped shtetl , of ner ds dominated by wom en and old people a nd by fear . It was a gr eat act of self-overcoming for them, an d many are right that in some sense the creation of Israel is the most “anti-Semitic” act ever conceived. It is, in any case , a great model for others to show that reestablishment of antiquity is fully possible, although there is no real reason why Am ericans or Europeans should have any regard for the welfare of this country . In their case too, however , by our time that spirit of piracy is long gone, and they’ve gone so soft that on the streets of T el A viv you have Y emeni “Jewish” bluegums with Rasta style feeling up Ash kenazi girls, and in general a feeling of torpor . The conditio n of other modern nations is worse. In our time friendship is made illegal between boys in school, real fraternities are for all purposes banned, and the scouting movem ents are forced to accept women—and women are destructive entirely of any g reat friendship. In private life, friendship amo ng isolated and defeated modern males is unheard of. Men are deluded in to thinking their wife can also be their best friend (and this, of course, also makes their wives lose respect for them). Then als o so many are rightly afraid of the w ay such rel ations have been sexualized between men and are n ever sure if a prospective friend has sexual intentions…at the s ame time a s all this goes on, gays act out a domesticized and castrated parody of friendship. Where to recover true friendship then? In this case though, more than in others, how could th ey stop you, if you only learned to listen to instinct and follow the pleasure of desires? There’ s nothing in principle that the state can do to stop you, if you should give yourself over to real friendship. All of the things I’ve said are a kind of conditi oning, a very st rong conditioning, but it’ s all a form of psychol ogical control that should in principle be easy to break. All you need to do is give in to desire for great things. The true foundation of t he Bronze Age, of the age of great ad ventures…such a thing is a matter of the blood and spirit and for those few among you who are suited to it, it should be as easy to recover as the carelessness that comes from fill ing yourself with the fi re of the life-force. Y ou must only embrace your own instincts with abandon and understand that in common dedication to a higher cause, a great friend is invaluable becau se you spur each other on and keep guard on each other in the mission. 55 Superman mindset —inside every noble Greek was an unquenchable lust for power , and this means power to become lord over life an d death in your state. It’ s hard to understand what this means from looking around today , because there’ s nothing like it f rom the big examples you might have heard. Many of you mi ght think of dictators in North Korea or some public la vatory of the world, or of the great total states of the last century , but you’d be wro ng. These men weren’ t really free or powerful, in many ways they were hostage to their own security services . Someone like Stalin was trapped in a stream of e vents where his freedom t o operate existed only in the realm of murder , and murder alo ne, and any small step outside of th is would m ean his doom. Ideology is so tiresome! These are “systems” of control that call on the mobilization of the entire society; and the demand s of this control far outweigh the capa bilities of a single m an. In a monarchy he could delegate these tasks to ministers and concern himself with other pr ojects, but someone like Stalin or Mao can’ t really do that. Y ou must u nderstand that all true greatness is parasitic on matter , f or example the brain and nervous system are parasitic on the body: for anything good to happen the capacity of the hegemon must exceed the dem ands made on it for attention, management an d control. The analogy here would be a body with the lower o r gans so lar ge and powerful, their demands for control so overwhelming, that th e brain would be barely equal to the task and w ould remain entirely in their service, although ruling o r tyrannizing over them. That is the kind of “modern dictator” you know about. An d the types of men that are drawn into this today are also quite dif ferent, they are the kind of id eological martinet you meet every day among those who are “public spirited” and into “ public service.” It’ s a kind of very ag gressive schoolmarm type. This is a lower kind of creature. What I’m talking about is entirely dif ferent from public se rvice, b ut seeks to live like a parasite on the state and on the substance of its various factions, to pursue quite dif ferent interests and desires. They have interests alien to yours. In the modern world this condition isn’ t approached by dictators of totalitarian states, but certain others I will describe soon. In fact t he great totalitarian states you know about weren’ t that dif ferent from our own, or the “liberal democracies”: we live in the same kind of state, only that it is more prosperou s and the viciousness of the power is indirect and hidden. But it is no less monstrous. If anyone is free, it certainly isn’ t anyone you see or know about. No Greek that I talk abo ut, in any case, would h ave enjoyed being the gofer of the n ational security and industrial state and its thousands of demands. Such men saw the priz e of sovereignty as a means… a p erch from wh ere they could remain watchful over the state and of territory far outside it, a nd swoop down like eagle for the prize; in one swoop the king of birds catches its bloody prey in fast talons. They were tr ue artistes : tak e, fo r exam ple, Periander of Corinth. This man’ s name means literally “superman.” At no point in his life as king of Corinth did he restrain his lust for the darkest paths: it is said he copulated with his mother , that he violate d his wife’ s corpse, and much worse. He had all the boys on the island Corcyra castrated. And, having done all this, he was memorialized as one of the Sages, or Geniuses of the ancie nt world. A philosopher and a poet, he wrote an epic on th e mysteries of nature… that showed themsel ves to him alon e on afternoons when the long shadows make the blue-green s hores of those seas whisper to ears ready to hear . He supported also the art and philosophy of others in the state, but only

out of a careless generosity: I was there at his cour t, I played the harp and he once threw a well- used courtesan in my lap with a gesture of disdain. It is true that he established his city as a great trading outpost, bringing great wealth. He also built the first railroad in history—a kind of w ay to transport goods across the isthmus of Corinth; at the time a great inn ovation. He did many other such things…he established colonies abroad, he built temples, he chastised the nobles a nd raised up the middle classes, but you must for give these acts, or rather , not misunderstand them. He never did any of th is “ for the good,” out of dut y or necessity , but rather these actions flowed from those we consider vices, as a kind of excess. Everything came from his instincts to conquer and expand t he dom ain of his action . Born to power in his state, he could have chosen a middle c ourse. If he had excessively enjoyed honors… or prestige…o r security . These were his to have, an d easily . The great danger for a house passes once the son is able to su cceed the father in seat of king. But he gave all this up, for really no reason. He chose a path of adventure, but …he chose even a path of sorr ow . In all he did, there was a kind of artistic sorrow and grotesque misfortune, that he seemed to want to bring on him self…to make life interesting, or so he could overcome even this latest outrage. He killed his own wife, and I know why . She was pregnant, and though he had copulated with her , in a dream he received word that during the act a small snake had become attached to his member . And that a monster would be born. Then it’ s said that his s on was mur dered by those same people from Corcyra that Periander had made the subjects of his weird experiments, but that they did so because they loved the youth. But this is absurd. The real reason was tha t he was trying to impregnate all the women o n the island. S o Periander dreamt he would become progenitor of a “brood of snakes.” He only ever saw political of fice as a means to self-overcoming and self- perfection, as a way to turn himself into a living work of art. From this came for the citizens m uch good and also much bad. It ha s to be expected that such m en will appear as monsters to others. I n any case, the things he did were hardly the worst. One oth er man I can think of, a tyrant or a king, have it what you will, he married of f the women of his state to slaves: through this overturning of values, that he learned from Plato, he secured his infamy and power . Do you understand what Plato’ s Republic means? It is a formula for such men to unleash their complete madness on the world. It teaches them certain tricks to expand the dom ain of their struggle for self- perfection into every area of soc ial life. Plato himself says that the secre t desire of every Greek was to become a tyrant, and Nietzsche understands all the greatness of that people, their exploration of the seas and limits of the world, their foundation of the arts and sci ences…all of this as just an extension of this secret desire in the heart of every noble Greek. I t was the secret desire also in the heart of the great French artists, and it is simply put, the unlearnable desire behind all great things. If you have it you must by no means restrain it. This is because hum an nature is feeble and easily led astra y , and only when driven by this kind of monstrous and single-minded o bsession for the heights of power can it find the moti vation to overcome the lying, dirty ape in us. A certain distance too from oneself is n ecessary . A “clinical” eye in regards to oneself, one’ s faults, is required for this mindset. In our time this can be achieved in part by embracing spirit of true science, whereas for man of Bronze Age it was easy to embrace because he saw things that happened to him, including the great motions of the spirit, the feelings that troubled him, as instantiations of various gods, for which he was not r esponsible, and whi ch he could therefore judge and evaluate externally . His view was, however , correct. For this reason when you see men like Periander you have to understand their special quest wasn’ t one where they try to accomplish “the public good,” nor was it some worthless desire to dominate others or ex ert will for petty satisfaction: they see others instead as tools o r objects on a mission of self- overcoming. He was trying to turn himself into a work of art, his life into a replay of the gre at motions of the stars, or the secret passion plays of the gods. In the same way that the Greek state in general was conceived as a work of art by the citizens. Periander understood his position as king then as just another means: here science, h ere art could be free from all limits and could rule unhindered and embark on great experiments. And yet from all this you see something very strange…The secret desire of every Greek…the Bronze Age mindset….was to be worshiped as a god! This is the secret tar get to which that boundless l ust for power aims! There are many other examples. Among the Spartans you find the great general L ysande r . He turned th e Spartans from a land power into a great navy , defeated the Athenians and ended the Peloponnesian W ar: then he went from city to city as a liberator , on a g reat tour of self-glorification. He was the first to be worshiped as a god at altars. He had searched for this his entire li fe, and it was the prize of his victories. There was another such unlikely man, Bra sidas, a Spartan general of a generation before L ysander , of very unusual character . He liberated many cities by his force of personality and the magical charism a that emanated from his body . A Spartan and man of battle an d the science of war , he nevertheless managed to win by persuasion and speech: only such man, with disdain for w ords, can r eally understand what speech is really for . He was type of man who, when hi s back is against the wall, the strong sp irit in him rallies like w ild boar who rages in his thick chest wh en he is cornered by hunters, and char ges for the kill. In sa me way Brasidas performed best when he relieved many cities of siege. H e died the mos t glorious death, in the middle of v ictorious battle, when he rushed into the thick of the enemy with his elite guard. H e was worshiped as a god thereafter in the city of Amphipolis. It’ s not a surprise that you see men of this type of man com e out of Sparta: the place that made th e sterne st demands on itself produced also the most brilliant men. They went rogue and easily imposed the intensity of their magic charisma on foreigners. T rue power needs no ef fort: it draws all arou nd it like a force-field. Power of character and body attracts others in orbit as if by magic. 56 In Iliad you see the greatest warriors ris e up to fight even the gods. When Diomedes is about to go on his great rampage, Athena the white-eyed appears t o him and whispers in his ear . She reminds him of his father ’ s great feats and breathes strength into his chest: she tells him to go fearlessly into the throng of the enemy on his chariot and in this exalted condition she draws back from his eyes the veil that had previously hidden the gods. She tells him that if that harlot Aphrodite appears, he has the power to harm her . And Diomedes does this without an y fear! Even the goddess of love is laid low before the aroused might of a warrior on rampage. Achill es too in his great moment chastises the river god and makes him submit. Th is reflects one great truth, that in th is c ondition of aroused spirit the true man is given the gift of heightened perception and ca n see things that others can’ t. This is what is m eant by the fact that the genius sees this same world w e do, but sees in it thing s that we can’ t, much like we see thin gs that dog or ant can’ t. Indeed time itself entirely changes when the will is raised u p to this height: the warrior in some way can be said to rise outside the stream of events in which we are he ld like prisoners. In this condition he appears magnified, anoin ted and others who are not privy to the same things begin to orbit around him physically and spiritually: in the Bible too y ou see in the middle of battle for Jerusalem, “the House of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord” before the many , who subject th emselves in awe to this great gift. In same w ay in their moments of great glory Athena kindles on the neck and head and shoulders of the warriors a great fir e that can be seen from far away . She does this for Diomedes and for Achilles as th ey let loose their strength on a wild rampage, a great bonfire explodes on their body and behind t hem. This is the irresistible power of charisma and strength that draws all to it like magic: for man this is no less true than it is for migratory birds on mission, for pack of wolves on the h unt, for hives o f bees, in all cases the many begin to orbit around the anointed hegemon as if by magic. It’ s a biolog ical compulsion, and a great good. And you must understand one thing: the end of Achilles’ mission was the total destruction of the city of T roy , the fire melting the brick of its alleys, its men killed, its women and children sold into slavery . This last was held to be the right of conquerors throughout the history of the Greek world, or at least for its vital per iod of ascent. Thus this most humane and refined of ancient peoples found it absolu tely necessary nevertheless to have this out for t he wolfish and predatory instinct in man. W ar alone brought rejuvenation of their nature. When Alexander drags the body of the rulers of T yre outside the city walls fr om his chariot, and c ircles around the city , he is copying what Achilles did to Hector when the city of T roy was annihilated. Nietzsche sees in this an excess, something unfortunate…but I tell you, he means something else. When city is destroyed its gods are destroyed: you must remember that each city h ad its tutelary gods and spirits for protection. The Romans, before they conquered a new city , promised the gods of that ci ty that they would honor and respect them tenfold more than the inhabitants. When a city or culture is destroyed, gods are destroyed w ith it. The destruction of the cities in fire that the greatest warriors of antiquity took upon themselves was a form of divi ne warfare. And it was only possible because such men knew als o how to listen to the vo ice of the gods, and allo wed the mselves to be e ntirely possessed by a divine madness. It imbued them with superhuman strength, and drew others into their designs by instinct. This abandon to nature and instinct— this is the Bronze Age way! And you can learn to cultivate this exalted psychosis inside you also. 57 I see no reason why , if there should be epidemics of all kinds of diseases, the same can’ t also be true for what we call “mental disease.” And you see repetitions of this throughout history and even now: among p rimitives in Sudan, when they become possessed of fears that wandering Jews are spreading penis-modifying bananas, or th at shaking hands can destroy your gen italia, or such things. This is funny but in all eruptions of th is kind of superstition I see a divine significance and great potential. In Europe there use d to be the mania called St. V itus’ Dance, and in ancient G reece the cults of Dionysus spreading the madness of maenads and turning the women into hungry , cannibalistic sluts. I say this in “sex-positive” way! I believe a ny child born of such excesses is likely to be blessed, because here the genius of the species is allowed to make the choice without any interference. This is not endorsement of anything in our time: there is nothing like this, it’ s just LARP’ing. Y ou’ ve been abandoned by the gods. Only a global or gy of fire will whet their appetites for return. 58 Y ou make fun of “decadent” Roman Emperors? In the horror stories from Suetoniu s you have prototype of “monarchy gone wild,” of mad emperors who use position only to satisfy arcane and criminal lusts. I don’ t write to defend such things, but the co ndemnation isn’ t moral—how can it be, when my reaction at reading excesses of Caligula or Nero or T iberius is to feel a g reat sense of loss, or envy at what they could do that I can’ t? Caligula had the genius idea to fo rm a long line of ships on the sea, put platforms on top of them, fi ll them with earth, so that he could fulfill a prophecy of w alking on w ater between two points. He gathered the army on t he seashore facing Britain and ordered them, instead of invading, to collect seashells. H e then called this a great booty for t he Roman P eople and the Senate and threw a few pennies at the soldiers sa ying “Go Happy! Go Rich!” He captured two Gauls but dressed them up in Ice-Nigger -Face to look like T eutons and then enacted an obviously transparent “hunt” to pretend he had captured them in front of the soldiers. Everyone laugh ed and rolled their eyes, for sure. But he was caught up in the story of his own godhood. At Rome he used to lo ck down t he Colosseum during the hottest hours and withdraw the awnings so that t he people would suf fer in the heat and pregnant women wouldn’ t be able to leave. Sometimes he replaced the regular gladiator shows with pathetic fights between cripple s and deformed animals; he would lo ck down the granaries to let the people go hungry for no reason at all. He was the greatest troll ever . When the Jews of Alexandria came to complain about civil war simmering in that city , he igno red their pleas a nd asked them why they don’ t eat pork . When you look at Elagabalus you see this tendency taken to its logi cal conclusion: this man was a trap-Emperor , and asked his doctors to give him a sex change operation. It is believed he was a devotee of Cybele, and like the insane priests o f that cult…wanted to castrate himself. Instead of this, he became a prostitute inside the palace, and used to publicly give him self air s over how muc h he was making. Commodus became a gladiator and found great pride in his swordplay , although such things aren’ t so s trange to imagine in our time: and they are to be welcomed! Nero was a pioneer of gay marriage. The first time he did i t as the groom, and the second as the bride: he made the old senators listen as he mimicked the soun ds of a young wife getting deflowered behind the doors. O f all his exploits I foun d most fascinating that he put on the mask of a lion and, having tied up various men and women naked in his mansion on the island, came at them with the rage of a beast and in a frenzy bit at their bodies and genitals. I don’ t celebrate any of this, but I think when in our age elites are accused of similar behavior…this isn’ t right…I think we flatter ourselves. W e want to think they’re a lot more interesting than they are…it’ s easier to think we’re ruled by demons than by defectives who would normally be running a smoked-fish stand or running vodka parlors outside Minsk. W e don’ t want to admit that we’re as lame in vice and deviance as we are in greatn ess, and for the same reasons. Y ou see these old wet rags of an “elite” getting arrested, and in almost every case it’ s for something on the level of a Pee W ee monkey- show , self-exposure in a porn cinema, masturbating themselves in front of some frigid cinema whore with leatherface and bugged out eyes, exposing their weapons of mass de struction to a Dominican maid. It’ s hard to understand what even goes into this kind of “decadence,” but it’ s of a dif ferent kind from the excesses of the worst Roman Emperors, who, even when they were trannies, seem more manly an d brave than our perverts. I wonder if it’ s not possible to think of history in entirely dif ferent way , I mean: all we think now is from point of view of the people, and the story goes about progress or regress with respect to how they fare; or at best how something like science or hygiene advances, or technology , or moral responsibility , or equality , or inequality , or anything else you want….advances or not. But history would lo ok very dif ferent if pursued with eye of connoisseur for superior specimens, judging them as you would prized steers or stallions. In such case you would have to dismiss these kinds of fr eaks like the emperors I mentioned, and judge them defective…but for entirely dif ferent reasons. Y ou would learn to see history from view of life and biology… as great bestiary…and le arn what is necessary in our time also to make way for the long-lost tropics a nd jungle…the abode of the gods….that can return….and return…….. 59 I alw ays loved the statues of the kour oi. I can safely say that upon viewing such statue by myself for three hours (someone let me in to look alo ne in museum), I was able to ejaculate without touching my self. But I had no dirty or untoward thoughts the entire time. This experience made me wonder…if it is possible to ejaculate without touching yourself, is it possible also to will yourself to death just the same, without doing anything? The kour oi have long story behind them, you might have heard. At first these statues were copied from Egyptian models, but they became much more realistic in the h ands of the craftsman of the Archaic Greeks, also much brawnier and more muscular . The pose is still stylized and the smile they have on their face is very enigmatic, almo st like you think they could crush big stone on your head, or ru n iron blade through your sternum and have that ston ey , autistic smile unchanged while looking you in the eye. T w o brothe rs of this type had to carry their mother to a religious feast. It is story of K leobis and Biton, twins. She couldn’ t get there on her own, so they carried her on a kind of palanquin, rushing with great force up the steps to the temple. They pr esented her in time to the sacred procession, but both died from the great exertion. Herodotus says Solon told this story to Croesus of L ydia, who was one of the first self-made kings we know from history . C roesus took his state by force, with the help of a company of elite warriors. He was the one who made the first coins, to pay his mercs. He ruled outside all limits an d pursued the way of power . In this he inspired many to s imilar actions. But Solon, the wise founding father of Athens you could say , a famou s lawgiver , went to visit him. He asked Solon to tell him about people who lived a happy life and Solo n told him this story of the brothers. The full story says that after th e twins performed this great athletic feat and delivered their mother in time to the sacred feast, she asked the goddess Hera, to which she was dear , for a great reward. And the godd ess gave this reward, that the twin sons would lie down in the temple for a deep sleep, and never awake. This is idea of a Gree k…. of a hap py life. This story confused Croesus the king, and it probably confuses you. It’ s strange to see how far the Greeks took aesthetic understanding of life and the world. There is no moral lesson in this story at all. Any moral lesson that you could thi nk of, for example of duty to parents o r to tradition, could hav e been made in dif ferent way . What’ s unusual here is the ending. There is just biology: it is best for the end and the acme to coincide. A beautiful death at the right time is the only key to understanding a life, its only hidden “meanin g.” It is a beautiful death to die after accomplishing a great feat for the glory of one’ s city , family and for the gods , but it’ s greater still to die in one’ s prime, at the height of your powers and at the acme of their dischar ge. A beautiful death in youth is a great thing, to leave behind a beautiful body , and the best stu dy of this pursuit you find in the novels of Mishima, a real connoisseur . 60 The most glamorous Christian prince for me was always young Conradin, King of the R omans and King of Jerusalem. He was unjustly killed in Italy by usurper Charles of Anjou with the contrivance of a corrupt Pope. He came from an illustrious famil y . His grandfather was the emperor Frederick II Hohenstaufen, called Stupor Mundi and celebrated by Nietzsche. His beauty was said to be resplendent, like that of his half-brother Manfred who was holding much of Italy by force of charisma and arms while Conradin was still a small boy . Upon reaching age at thirteen or fourteen, Conradin embarked with his few but powerful knights southward to reclaim his rightful throne in Rome. He defeated the usurper

and then entered the city . Ridin g at the head of his column of knights in all their full armor , with the imperial banners raised high—this was a glorious day , all the people came to the streets to welcome their beloved liberator and showered the procession with many flowers. T he outpouring of love for this boy was like something that hadn’ t been seen since the age of the Empire, and this alarmed t he Pope and all the sclerotic prelates as much as this boy’ s grandfather had, if not more. Conradin was just thirteen or fourteen, but he refused all orders to wait and never listened to the timid counsels of his advisors who tried to hold him back from his acme. He entered Rome as world-conqueror . Thereafter came a series of disasters: his army lost a great battle in the south, despite a successful first char ge, and mostly through the inadequacy of some of his auxiliaries. He was captured by treachery and then Charles of Anjou, with the help of corrupt jurists, found a legal pretext t o put him on trial and behead him and a friend. Y ou might th ink this is very bad, and certainly it would have been better to die in t he middle of ba ttle, but much can be excused by his youth. And it must be said that he never compromised or begged for his life. His execution was so absurd and unjust that it permanently discredited Charles of Anjou, the usurper . It di scredited too this kind of Pa pal “legalism” that must sound very familiar to you now . Still more so, it permanently discredited the aggressive Papacy that promoted a man the people of Sicily and Italy—as well as most of the German states—viewed as an arrogant, nearly-autistic, and unjust upstart. This Charles was ever d riven in his life by the hatred that came from being slighted i n his youth by his mother and other relatives. He was a man driven by a sclerotic lust for power and crude ambitions, where Conradin was carried by the n ative charisma common in his family , by his beauty , his careless courage . He was riding to seat of world-ruler purely through naïve trust in his own glamor . Know that despite all force and treachery and contrivance, all public sanctions and honors, the people will not be fooled: they know the real man of powe r , and can tell the dif ference from a deformed usurper . Charles’ execution of Conradin was lamented by all Germany and much of Italy . Now the robots who run our world also want to be love d or feared, and are trembling because the people don’ t respect them. They too, the nations of our time, seek the return of youth, of a Conradin. It seemed to the peoples of that t ime a story of the promise of youth, the beauty and purity of its intentions, extirpated by the old and ugly . So that in the end the memory of the young prince was victorious. Not lon g after this the peoples of Sicily conspired with the House of Aragon, ruled by relatives of Conradin, and broke the pow er of Charles in a revolt. This was the end of idea of “universal monarchy” through the Papacy…and this was the beginning of the national co nsciousness in Europe. The memory of Conradin was prized as the promise of beauty and youth, memorialized in epics and poetry , that rejuvenated the peoples of Europe and awoke them. Though he died without achieving his goal, he died as a martyr for Europe against Asia, and inspired the birth of t he new state—the springboard of worl d conquest that was s oon to come in the age of exploration and colonization. C hristianity is a versatile faith, capable of many interpretations. I believe Conradin was the most Ch ristian prince but also might as well have been the renewed avatar of Apollo in Europe, recalling very old memories. It was the spirit of fire and youth renewing the peoples through its magnetic power and then through the sacrifice of its blood. In mom ents of torpor we can always return to this spirit of the ancient Greeks as a tonic. 61 Crusaders like Cortes and Pizarro, Fernando de Soto, Drake and Raleigh, Magellan and Balboa equal in daring, intelligence, magnitude of spirit, resourcefulness and achievement any of the great m en of the Greeks and Romans. The stor y of the heroic age of exploration remains to be told in full, and maybe one of you one day will make big book or big movies. I say also now: for those who seek to make a dif ference and have some artistic or visual bent, movies are the golden key to the minds of the many . What Mel Gibson does is worth a thousand books or “activisms” for your side. Learn to make movies, if you can, and you can start with video. In any case, the re is just one great epic that tells the story in its proper form, the great poem of Camoes, a man born to piracy and high adventure. This man lost a n eye in war in Ceuta against the M oor; he then lived as a brig and and vagabond in imperial Lisbon, getting into one duel and fight after another , composing poetry , getting drunk. His mother saved him from prison, b ut he was pressed into service in the colonial navy and army . He a rrived in Goa and from there participated in many adventure s, military and diplomatic, as a man of low rank but high spirits. All the while he was writing his great poem the Lusiad, and when he was shipwrecked of f the Mekong with his Chinese girlfriend, he carried the text of this timeless work above his head to save it from the water . No one reads it anymore, and his life would make a great movie. But he is right that t he voyages of these new crusaders equal any great ex pedition even from the myths and legends of the past. Here we have Jason’ s Ar go made anew , and not just once, but in every one of these nations of the W est. England’ s glory during these years might nev er be equaled again by any people. Even the kings of Por tugal, who started the age of colonization and exploration, had English blood. The Gothic restlessness of the steppe shook in the lords of Iberia with a T itanic ener gy . Before the great voyage to the Orient of V asco da Gama , spies—and I mean jus t one or two men—went alone on expe ditions i n Egypt and do wn the Red Sea, into the heart of Arabi a, fearle ssly , incognito, to collect information crucial for t he coming e xpedition. Perched on the beaches of the great Eurasian mass, these men went, in just a hundred years, from sailing a few almost-rafts that they barely knew how to navigate, to explorers of new worlds and founders of global empires that lasted for centuries. Y ou must understand how amazing this feat was: there was no tradition of seamanship in Portugal or Spain, let alone Fra nce or England…it all had to be done from scratch. Do you know at all to respect the sea? If you’ve ever traveled a ferry on even a relatively calm sea like the Adriatic, on a windy day a l ar ge modern ferry , as big as a city block…it will swing right a nd left. Y ou won’ t be used to it. The Atlantic has waves ten feet or more as a matter of course a nd thes e men were tra veling on wooden ships with 15th Cen tury tech; y ou must be cra zy to have no awe of this. For romance of the sea you should read Melville. Columbus is celebrated, yes, but there were others who were even greater than him , or at le ast his equal, an d few know about them. They don’ t rec eive the glory they dese rve because, first, many of the writers w ho cou ld have done thi s were prejudiced against their strong religious faith and their piety: you see, most of the modern glorifiers of antiquity usually had an axe to grind against Christianity or the Church, so they didn’ t want to promote these men, or admit th at the champions of the faith were the most s hining exemplars of the classical man in our time. Even Nietzsche stays awa y from them and, in a moment of weakness, speaks nonsense about the “superiority” of the Aztecs. On the other hand, the Church has been embarrassed about th ese men. More than any one else they spread its power and gosp el through the world, an d even before that, they saved Europe itself from the Moors an d the other threats. They’re the direct descendants of the crusaders who liberated Spain and other pa rts of Europe. The Chu rch doesn’ t want to admit that once Ferdinand and Isabella cleared Spain of the enemies of Christ, G od ble ssed that nation with a century of prosperity and pre-eminence, and gave it the foundation of world-empire. But the Church was embarrassed by them, by the conquistador es, by their cruelty and their pagan love of vitality and action, so i t tried to disavow them while making use of their strength. So their story remains lar gely untold, although it’ s one of the pe aks of history and of manly achievement. Few understand the voyages, for example, of even one of the most famous a mong them, V asco da Gama and how in many ways it exceeded the feats of Columbu s. This man circumnavigated Africa a nd foun d the sea route to the Indies—what Columbus had actually set out to do (or so the story goes…I believe Columbus had some secret maps…) Such voyage was attempted long before by the Phoenician Hanno, but no one knows what really came of that. The travel was dif ficult. When you reach a cert ain point of the W est African coast you can’ t just continue to hug along it…you have to pull out to the west and swoop around—this is likely how South America was discovered. Do you know what starvation, scurvy , and tropical disease is? Do you understand tropical heat? Sure, some of you mig ht, but know that of f the W est Africa coast, when a wind blo ws in your face it’ s no t a relief: it’ s like a hairdryer going of f in your face, nonstop. And yet he reached India, he found sp ices, he found monkey , he made the Zamorin submit with big guns. His investors mad e thousands of percent return. Just seve n years later another conquistador returned, Almeida, with a great armada that tore a s wathe of destruction along the Indian Ocean. He burned down Mombasa, though outnumbered, because of the arrogance of its Arab rulers— imagine the stench that must hav e wafted as far as Japan! This man defeated a huge armada of Ottomans, Arabs, Mamelukes at the Battle of Diu, to avenge the death of his son: and this was momentous time. Space itself on our world changed. The great overland routes of trade were now outflanked by the seafaring nations of western Europe, which from this moment began to dominate the Indian O cean and the Pacific. Do you understand Ame rica had a great destiny in this design as well? When the colonists founded Jamestown, let’ s say there were no m ore than tw o hundred or two hundred and fifty years from that act to the time of Commodore Perry: the American people had tamed the continent and pushed their way to Asia across the seas in no time at all. It would have happened even faster if they hadn’ t been hampered by the domination of England… once they gained their independence their expansion was very fast (the Constitution, the ideology , the doctrine of rights, is all so much nonsense and has nothing to do with any of this…it barely all even l asted through the lifetimes of the founders of America, who were seeking merely dominion and freedom of space to expand). The great de stiny of America had always been the conquest of the Far East and the domination of China, which o bsessed the leading minds of that time. All of this has now been for gotten and America’ s great fate has been thwarted—at lea st for now . What do you know then of men like this, or of Afonso de Albuquerque who followed Almeida, who captured Hormuz and Muscat with seven ships, who opened the way to the Spice Islands of legend? I prefer as usual not to ta lk of such men : they are so far from your possibilities that the example is almost depressing. I want to encourage you again with someone else fr om this age, a man more to my taste, and more within the realm of what is possible, of what is about to become possible again. This is the brilliant right-hand-man of Cortes, Pedro de Alvarado. He was a man of knightly family from southern Spain, but had fiery red-blond hair , which amazed the Mexicas: they believed he was a child of t he Sun, and call ed him T onatiuh, the mane of the sun. He was of boundless courage, carelessness, and also boundless cruelty . Cortes left him in char ge briefly in T enochtitlan wh ere he massacred all the Aztec nobles in the Great T e mple during a banquet…for no reason at all. During the battl es he distinguished himself by insane char ges into the thick of the enem y by which he was outnumbered by hundreds to one: yet he n ever lost heart, he went right for their garish flower -decorated lieutenants and cut them down, striking fear into the multitude. Don’ t believe the lies about gunpowder . Guns we re very basic at this time, and on many occasions the Spanish didn’ t have guns at all. The armor , the pikes, the T oledo steel blades, the discipline and know-how from decades of fighting the Moor—all of this was far more important. And above all, bravery and daring, the same that led Pizarro to take down an empire with a retinue of thirteen men. What I wa nt to say about Alvarado, though, is this: once conquests were made, he never stoppe d. His thirs t for space, for new worlds, for new conqu ests, was without end. In his letters y ou see this is his only in terest. Though made governor of a huge area—the present-day states of Guatemala, of Honduras, these are his creations—he nevertheless showed no interest at all in ruling them. He squeezed them of whatever money he could, never paying any taxes back to Spain, and always planned new adventures and new conquests. This man was a born pirate: right before his death he was planning a great expedition for the conquest of China and the Spice Islands. Alvarado was a nemesis to civilization, and this is right an d good. God sends suc h men to chastise mankind. I want yo u to be like this: to listen to these instincts in you. When he was put in char ge of territory , Alvarado could have very easily settled down to the life of a governor; most men would. E nticed by the prestige a nd honor , they would play the part: then also, their vanity would fool them into thinking that they could govern well. W ell, m aybe you can govern well, or maybe you can’ t. But Alvarado knew what he was. And he didn’ t tr y to be more than one thing. Be one thing. Single- minded purity of purpose is true manliness. He knew he was a born bea st of prey , and never pre tended to be more or less than this. This self-assured sense of w ho he was made him insanely attractive even to the natives he oppressed and massacred: despite his cruelty , they could n’ t help being drawn to his charm, his lofty manner , his ou trageous magnificence. They worshiped him as a god. The o ther Spaniards were in awe as well. Y ou must see that nature b lesses all men who have faith in th eir own blood and in their instincts…nature blesses them with such magnetism. Alvarado is the avatar of our new age, and I predict thi s: within fifty years a hundred Alvarados will bloom from deep in the tropic al bestiary of the spirit. They will sweep away the weakness of this world. 62 Bob Denard shows that the spiri t of Bronze Age pirate can exist als o in our age. It can flower complete and unedited. Y ou have no excuse! This man may not be what you expect. How dif ferent he is from the pretentious bureaucrats we see, the politicians with their high-flown language, their tedious moral preaching, their careful self-positioning, timidity , and the drudgery to which they subject themselves. Men who embrace high-flown moral principle in public are usually looked down on b y many reg ular people; they can smell the bullshit from far a way . He sta rted out as a regular soldier with the French in V ietnam, but he was court-mar tialed after he burned down a bar—part of a dispute, you se e. Some men chimp out by writing a complaint, others by getting in a bar fight, others by burning down the building. After this he wandered around Africa, finding odd jobs in the employ of local nabobs and potentates, all of them utterly corrupt and incompetent. He said once something like, “It’ s important never to be ‘ambitious.’ Men of ‘ambition’ are losers. Act and feel like a winner a nd goo d things, friends, and victory will come.” He took part in adv entures all over Africa: coups in Benin, the Congo, secessionist movements like in Biafra (the French styling on English Nigeria) and so forth. His greatest feat was to ov erthrow the government of the Comoros four times. Each time Fr ance had to send spe cial forces to the islands to dislodge him. Otherwise he would have surely become a hereditary ruler . He had many wives and won many properties by t he power of his hand. At t he end of his life…well…this life laste d too long. He should have died in defense of his territory , younger , and without descending into the dementia and pain that to ok him in old age. France repaid his service with persecution; no longer needed to fight communists in Africa, his vainglory and ferocity became a liability . Now , if you need great moral elevation, if war must be in the service of a good cause, you can cons ider his service in Congo, in Katanga and then against the Sim ba rebels. At Stanleyville he, along with only a handful of o ther white mercenaries, freed thousands of hostages from rape and sure massacre at the hands of the savage Simbas. In many ways he defended whatever residues of civilizati on remained in Africa after decolonization. In this last venture he was joined by a man of similar temperament, the Colonel “Mad Mike” Hoare. This is another great example of the m odern rebirth of Bronze Age vitalism. And another example of why you’re a fag. An Irish- English dandy , he was a gentlem an among soldiers, but a man before being a gentleman: he remained throughout his life single-minded, brutal and co ol-headed in the middle of conflicts where he was outnumbered thousands to one, swamped by the demented zombi hordes of the tropics. This man understood communism for what it was: the infestation of vermin he was tasked to exterminate, a biological event, not an ideological, political, or historic al one. After the war in Burma he m ade a livin g working on safaris and then, like Denard, gaining experience in the service of various African governments. He led an elite un it of mercs in the Congo, and in the same operation with Denard, was responsible for relieving Stanleyville and sa ving a hundred nuns and missionaries from rape and torture. Thereafter he led many missions in Africa, a new frontier . He was later involved in an aborted coup on the Seychelles. Failure is not dishonorable, as long as you are making a great gamble for great gains. It isn’ t right to judge such people by the “justice” of their cause. Some of you sp er gs and almost all of the half-educated class think when Nietzsche talks about “beyond good and evil” that he’ s making some grand proposition about there being no possibility to evaluate men or events. Morality is absolute necessity for the people. There is the other morality , that reveals a biological hierarchy . Just the same, a dif ferent standard applies to huemans, and a dif ferent one to the true men wh o are willing to live in danger , and who don’ t care for their animal lives. Men like D enard and Hoare are a great attempt on the part of na ture itself: they show that even in our age ther e are men who yearn inscribe their wills in bronze for the ages, who want their terr ible creations to endure for centuries. They should be judged by what they were willing to risk in their spirit—and also by the unequaled rush they all must ha ve had, inside them, as they pursued their high aims. Even just a few years ago Mar garet Thatcher ’ s son Mark was given a sentenc e in South Afr ica in 2005 for an attempted coup in Equatorial Guinea. He w as ratted out and caught at the airport. Y ou must understand that the meddlesome little cretinoids who run the W est always put a stop to great plans and great actions. They’ve ende d many promising adventures through their snooping…they’re tattletales, always watching, never sl eeping, always whispering. Gallant men, who live under th e sign of the lion are stopped before they can act. A dif ferent way is necessary . But I mean to say , don’ t be fooled: in our age too m en of adamantine character exist, who fight like Capaneus before Thebes, r eady nude with fire in arm to burn dow n city . They appear now as villain, now as hero to the people, but you must learn to for get just this desir e of the people and yearn rather to live dangerously and do great deeds, for good or evil. The danger of our time is not that it makes p eople bad, but that it makes everything small and afraid. Neall Ellis in his trusty M i-24 Hind helicopter held of f the rebe ls in the Sierra Leone civil war , singlehandedly , and saved innumera ble lives. There’ s little glamor in his job, and in th e en d it didn’ t matter: but o n his trusty flying Hind steed he must have felt like a beast of prey swooping down on the

enemy . He worked for comp any , Executive Outcomes—a name that might make you think of second-rate consulting company in of fice park. But this was merc company that ended the civil w ar in Sierra Leone and threatened to establish a ne w order all over Africa. For this reason they were stopped by the UN, by gangs of international lawyers and financiers who fea r the power of the new Sea Peoples. How long can they hol d of f such men from their destiny? In the Rhodesian war , you had companies of a few white farmers, raised in the bush, who ambushed armies of Zambia and Mozambique many thousand s strong. They would attack with stealth, stalking them, inflict frightful casualties, and escape unharmed. Many such stories: look up Nyadzonya raid. The potential for adventures and conquests like European man has rarely ex perienced in the past st ill exists, and I have no doubt that in the comi ng years such opportunities will become ever more frequent. The great Leviathan will falter , sooner or later . The coming age of barbarism will not be owned, as so many of you urb an cuck s fear , by the gangbangers and the unwashed hordes o f the teeming cesspools of the world, but by clean-cut middle-class and working-class vets, men of military experience, who know somethin g about how to shoot and how to or gan ize. The fools who th ink oligarchs will be able to control t hese men for very long should look to the fortunes of the Sforzas and many others, and remember that money is no match for force of arms combined with charm. When Theodore Roosevelt was I think close to seventy years ol d, he went on expeditio n to the Amazon, then mostly still une xplored: he called it one last chance to be a boy . This expedition led to his death; a nd it was a good death. He followed in footsteps of men of power like Lope de Aguirre… and never lost the yearning in his heart for Eldorado. P a r t F o u r : a F e w A r r o w s 63 Giving “ freedom” to women— an impossibility . W ith the liberation of women in the 19th c entury , the W est has given itself an infection from which it can’ t recover without the most terrible convulsions and the most thorough pur gative measures. What the “freedom” of women means in practice is the d omination of mankind by t he demagogues who can rally the lowe r orders of the spirit. Because there is no world in which “the women” can act as a political unit. Liberation of women means freedom and p ower for financiers, lawyers, purveyors of comforts in and outside government, employers who whore out your wife and daughters. It has been the greatest weakening and self-own a civilization has ever visited on it self. But in the end is this so dif ferent from democracy as such? Y es…because the “lib eration” of women makes democracy into a terminal disea se…one that doesn’ t just end a particular government, but the civilization. 64 If yo u wonder h ow mankind fell from the high times of the Renaissance an d the age of exploration to our times of mediocrity and repression…I can only tell you this, that our age is the norm in history . It takes great ef forts and much good luck to be able to su rpass the dirty ape and rat inside us all. Most of mankind never left the regime of deformity , and it’ s no s urprise that this morass is returning. It’ s just a reversion to the norm. That said, there d oes seem to be something especially menacing about developments in our age: the ubiquity of this Leviathan, the inability to escape it. Everywhere you might become a hermit, you are reminded of it, it intrudes everywhere. And s o the very success of the great men of four hu ndred years ago, their foundation of a new world, the great expansion of human knowledge and know- how…this ended up setting the stage for our trash-world. They succeeded beyon d what they could expect, and that success is what allowed the profusion of t he lower types of mankind. In nature t he vital part of mank ind would rule and in the beginnings of many societies it does: military brotherhoods of men rule, and p hysical force as well as force of personality , charisma, draw the rest in an orbit around those who possess these in the highest degree. This is all by a natural and secret pull, by instinct. There is a ma gic to charisma that does this, and the military-monarchical or ganization, the rule of the warlord, comes from desire for this in the nature of all, not from reflection and abstraction. Unfortunately some things conspire to end this original condition of mankind, which is itself no paradise and is full of strife, suf fering and problems. These th ings are , first of all, the very success of these men in securing the conditions of life and comfort for the rest of the community . Second, the ascent, within this peacetime, of the priest, the shaman, the schemer , and the matriarch, which slowly usurp power away from the brotherhoods of young men and their captains. Spinoza explains the corruption of the Jewish people in just this way: the Hebrew “Republic” was in fact a military regime of the type I say here, a rule of the captains. But the priests took this power away and corrupted the natio n to weakness. In same way something happened to the Arya ns in India and in many other places. This state of things doesn’ t need to b e so: the men of religion an d those of power have many interests in co mmon, and can rule together . But it often hap pens that the men of power become decadent and let the state drift into the hands of those who can’ t rule— and who start to resent them for this abdication. W omen become also very aggressive, once real and relaxed manhood atrophies. If you imagine that w omen in the Muslim world, for example, are sweet and feminine…they are hungry viragos of iron will. The feminist Muslim a will be a figure of much importance among them. The men in Arabia will turn gay . The V ietnamese or Chinese grandmo ther has her knee on the neck of t he son-in-law . Thus every where we see that the very comforts and safety produced by the best men leads to the usurpation of society by those parts of the human spirit that are oriented instead toward a dif ferent kind of life, that everywhere that mode of the yeast wins out…and usually wins out v ery quickly . And in the W est, whose special fate has been confused for History or Progress of the entire species, this development has taken place through the promotion of logos or re ason and a ll the manifestations of this: the adulation of empty w ords, of legalism as a guide for social and political life, of the cult of science that is very far from real science. All of this has been a cover for the ascent of the blob human, of the l ower orders of the spirit an d is instead delivering not just the W est, but all of mankind, to a condition of domestic brokenness and servility . V ery concretely you see in feminism the return of pre-Aryan matriarchy . The great “Earth Mother ,” originally some kind of half-hu eman half-cockroach creature resplendent with horrid eggs like big Amazon centipede….this seeks to re-abso rb you. Of all the things that you blame for the decrepit times we live in, fem inism and the “liberation” of women is both t he proximate and the ultimate cause. Nothing so ridiculous as the liberatio n of women has ever been attempted in the history of man kind. It is an act of complete insanity , disguised as “logic,” “reason,” presented in the most absurd legalisms about supposed “rights.” The modern socialisms, the expansion of the power of the state that squashes all initiative and all lif e, the hypocrisy of all political life in our time—all of this is to be attributed to the participation of women in politic al life. I don’ t complain about the “freedom” or “degeneracy” that supposedly comes from this arrangemen t. That’ s all mis direction and self-flattery . The state we live in is as repressive as any oriental tyranny . But its hypocrisy is that it hides its force under the delusion of egalitarian ideals and legalis tic procedures inconsistently applied. It is not women actual ly being free, but their “legal freedom,” a practical fiction, be ing used by a hidden power to oppress, to dispossess, to intimidate and extort. It took one hundred years of women in p ublic life for them to almost totally destroy a civilization. But you would be a sper g to think that this problem can be solved by taking away women’ s voting power , “forcing” them into the home, or some such thing. The presence of women in public life is a spear with two tips, and can be turned on the enemy w ith some ease. W omen, after all, can still, even in the most deb ased condition, be made to call on their deep passions by a great leader . They voted for Hitler , Mussolini, and many others, with some enthusiasm. The enemy who “freed” them has made use o f a great weapo n: he has increased his power immensely and introduced a w ar into the house and life of every man. But this enemy also made a gamble and I believe, ultimately , a mistake…because women more than others will set t heir bodies o n fire with pass ion for a savior and be willing to ab andon the f ear and love of comfort on which the modern state depends… them more than others, out of a wild and stupid enthusiasm. 65 How wa s it possible for women to become “free” at some point in the 19th cen tury…how did this agitation come about? From w here comes the gynocracy that rules, not just as in tribal societies covertly , but that now pretends also to be in the public s phere and to demand “r ights”? Who was there in the first plac e to give rights…and o f what use is a right if it’ s not also a privilege? The answer to all this is a little bit more unpleasant. It’ s only because women lost all respect for the males of the time that there coul d be any pr etext like feminism or “w omen’ s suf frage” in the fir st place. The loss of r espect in general marks the modern age since 1800 or so: the loss of respect in authority , for example, that came when industrialists and bankers replaced the warrior nobility . As “decadent” as the latte r had become, this class had never really lost its grace of manner , its be auty and magnificence and glamor: this made the common man more eager to submit, or to accept such leadership. But who could accept the rule of the dour economic creatu re that took the lead in the states at the end of the 18th c entury ? This is why Napoleon was such an enigma for so many: h e represented a man out of time, something completely unexpected in the age of middle class mediocrity and hypocritical “democracy” that was just then coming about. For this reason a ll the higher spirits of the 19th cen tury , all the great art ists, the writers, they th rew themselves at the feet of his mem ory: he seemed to repr esent the possibility of higher aspirations in our time. Y ou can read Stendhal for this spirit. Napoleon was an escape from the domination of the bugman that was just the n beginning to take hold of the nations. Now , don’ t imagine I will attack “the bour geois” …we’ve declined so fa r ev en from the level of the bour geois of that age…in our time the desolation is almost c omplete. This is why it’ s so ridiculous to hear these “conservatives” yap on about honor , or glory , or sacrifice, or any of this garbage. The respect in all institutions and all leadership classes and all traditional authority has already been lost l ong ago, and for good reason. It’ s impossible for the erased m ales to command any respect from the people…and still less from their women. Feminism then is the revol t of women against the outrage of democracy . They have been in a revolt again st the inability of the bugman to command authority or respect. And you must understand that there is no bottom to this “freedom” or revolution. There won’ t be any o pportunity to say “I told you so”: they will never “learn a lesson” from their foolishness. And they resent the insecurity you have put the m in. The calamity that will surely f ollow from going down this path will not be a “teachable moment” to anyone. They resent the “beta,” but you’re wrong to think it was ever any dif ferent. No…great civilizations and cultures were never founded nor kept alive by “betas.” The nerdoids who have taken over much of the right have brainwashed you to this view , but it’ s wrong. W omen never loved the shopkeeper , the timid merchant with the nasal voice, a nd no, not even the clockmaker or craftsman. They have always loved the knight, the sailor in love with wild ideas of th e se a, the adventurer and pirate. And it is right that they loved th ese men , and that, with the coming of the rule of the bugman, they would try to seek their “liberation” from unworthy men and the boring so ciety they were building. That this resentment was manipulated itself by the Satanic power that rules our time, and that through this very drive for freedom woman became enslaved more than she had been before…is beside the point. Y ou won’ t be able to make women “see reason” and love a “beta civilization”—a fabrication of the H BD cuckold crowd of our time. W omen will love you if you are a warri or . And they will help, through the entirely retarded mechanism of democra cy , to elect men of glamor and charisma who are our only immediate hope against the machine that runs our garbag e world. T rump, for all his hesitations, is only the beginning. He has shown the path insofar as woman is concerned. The mob also is a woman. Now im agine a man of T rum p’ s charisma, but who is not merely b eholden to the generals, but one of them, and able to rule and intimid ate them as well as seduce the many . So far we have only had Gracchi …but C aesars and Napoleons are sure to follow . 66 A man of great charisma who can seduce the people with a wild spirit and br eak thr ough the rule of the pervasive bureaucracy-media complex is our best hope for the immediate problem…and maybe our only hope. Such a man might be among you and, in any case, he will need help. Our enemy has so much spread: he is everywhere. He’ s in your home even, and he’ s inside you. The domain of the fight has extended everywhere now . Therefore any answer must be on multiple fronts, and each one ca lls for a dif ferent strategy and dif ferent type of talent and man. I fear that many of you are actually autists and sper gs and don’ t want to see this. There is no one fight and no one solution, and what you want in the end or a s ideal may require dif fere nt plan than facing imminent threat. For the l atter you can make alliance with people who otherwise wouldn’ t be your friends. I believe that democracy is th e final cause of all the poli tical problems I describe here, but i n the short run democracy—the will of the people—is on our side because the democracies have been hijacked by a stupid and corrupt elite. The nations face extinction and an era of p ermanent civil war because this elite wants to pillage and pillage: and wants to flood the m with the shit of the world. This is the immediate threat, and on this you can be allied with people who otherwise may not shoot for the same star you do. If Ann Coulter o r Pat Buchanan were in char ge, you would get 99% of what you want. Therefo re use them as models to solve the p roblems that face you, and don’ t scare the peoples with crazy talk if you want to move things politically . Let the normies have their normal lives , and paint our enemies as the crazies…which they are…and as the corrupt vermin they are. If you haven’ t compromised yourself go into political life maybe, and use T rump as a model for success. Those of you who choose this path, if you like this book or the other things I say , should denounce it and disa vow me if ever asked about it, and den ounce also all other cr azy ideas. Y ou must have an instinct for how much normies are able to take. It isn’ t even a question of getting them to where you want “gradually”—I don’ t think they’re able to get v ery far at all. But they can be moved to defend themselves fro m the grip of the global slave state, wh ich I also hate, althou gh for dif ferent reasons. If an ethnostate is your ideal, or if it ’ s Renaissance Switzerland or ancient Egypt—fine. If you intend to go public and try something politically , work now instead so that America and Europe don’ t become Bosnia or South Africa. People who try to misle ad you from such things and try to encourage you to talk in public i nst ead about ab stractions like “ethnostate,” dork ideological constructs like “Eurasianism,” anachronistic slogans like “blood and soil” that never had any historical attraction to Anglos and Ameri cans…these people are sper gs or very often fe deral informants, or manipulated by such. By all mean s study such things, be lieve in them, troll with them, let them guide y our final aims; but know what is possible in the normie political sphere and don’ t become the clown of ZOG lik e Nehle n and so many others did. If they were serious people t hey would have never come in public and encouraged young men to go on marches where they could be identified and tracked for life. Know whe n the snake is defending itself —don’ t be a p atsy . Y our models must be those that have worked: T rump, Orban, the Italian move ments now ascendant, Sebastian Kurz and his party in Austria. Y ou don’ t see these people marching around in hotel bellboy’ s uniforms with a Sonnenrad and talk ing abo ut the “Jewish Question” and this other kin d of role-play . It’ s true that in the end, my aims here and tho se of someone like Or ban have little or nothing in common. If they were successfu l, all they would be able to do is reestablish the same world of sheep that existed a hundred years ago, maybe inoculated against the latest degradations… but nothing very great. Still, I think it’ s better for the nations to be well- tended, happy sheep than to be reduced to teeming piles of starving rats. This, an yway , is my advice for those who wa nt to go into normie politics and have a relatively normie life, and there’ s nothing wrong with that—it’ s even a great necessity . I’ve written this book, however , because this may not satisfy some of us, and I wanted to talk about the world in the coming decades, and what paths may open for a dif ferent way . 67 T oo much is already said about the evils of suburbs, but I think the danger of such places for modern civilized man is so great tha t it must be repeated. O n the other hand it’ s important not to take this too far: the Europeans live in the center of their cities and are politically and so cially in just as bad or worse situations. Still, I think it’ s easier for them to fix their problems, and to avert the greate st dangers, should they arrive. It’ s easier because in these plac es the rightful citizens of the nations still own their cities. I d on’ t see any evidence that the tax base of America moved to the suburbs by choice. Their inner cities were taken away from them not, as is imagined, by blacks, b ut by the politicians—a nd their handlers—who found it more profitab le to replace middle class citizens with an underclass. The space to which t hey’ve been segregated and to which they have to “commute” is I think a form of absolute hell to raise chil dren in, especially boys. There is no freedom of motion except to regimented activities, they are always watched by caretakers of som e kind. The places are of incredible ugliness, which takes away also from the will to discover new things at all. Th ere are no nooks and corners where boys can form gangs, be away from prying eyes of parents a nd others, and have the feeling that they are exploring and owning territory , as there is in the city and in the countryside. A merica has successfully portioned of f its historical popula tion, its rightful citizens, and its tax base, in work camps and dormitories. That is what the modern American “city” is: an economic zone arranged much like a work-camp, or concentration-camp if you want. It would be trivial for the Fr ench security services to shut of f access to the banlieues infested by turds, and it would be just as trivial for American security services to shut of f access to the suburbs and hold the middle class by th e neck. I think the reason the suburbs are hateful to the raising of boys is also the reason they are most objectionable in general, namely that while in the c ountryside or the city a res tive population would be able to h old their ter ritory and challenge a power should the need arise, su ch a thing is impossibl e in the suburbs. Suburbs are living arrangement for slaves and subjects. 68 “Social justice”—disgusting parasitism, dressed up in rags of w ords so wor n-out and pee-stained even their defenders are sick of the smel l…they say it half-mouthed and pleading: just look at them du ring the Occupy rallies, hoping to siphon of f r espect. The need to be r espected is sign

of very low and wormlike condition of spirit. The tantrums of the coddled and domesticated, of no force… No force behind it, just the opinions of the left-over , the pra ttling of guilt and begging: not even the Marxis t engine of the worker . What worker? They have contempt for the worker… the force and confidence in his labor , in the place of his labor in history that the Bolshevik had is gone, now it’ s the lumpen using his language, unconvincingly . Dependent on t he Leviathan, and therefore its tool. “So cial” ju stice…but why only “social”…why set your sights so low…you mean just th e opinions of the many? Who cares. Here is my vision of the true justice, the justice of nature: the zoos opened, predators unleashed by the dozens, hundreds….four thousand hungry wolves rampaging on streets of these hive cities, elephants and bison stampeding, the buildings smashed to pieces, the cries of the human bug shearing through the streets as the lord of beasts returns. Manhattan, Mos cow , Peking reduced to ruins over grown by vines an d forest, the haunt of the lynx and coyote again. The great cesspool slums, Calcutta, Nairobi, all the fetid latrines of the world covered over by mudslides, over grown with thick jungle, this is ju stice. Lisbon to me always seemed city still inhabited just out of vanity . Let loose hundreds of tigers, companies of rhinoceros, with strong engine of spirit revving in th eir d eep che sts, let them bri ng the justice of the volcano to this world of trash! Bless the passing of the Shoggoth! 69 There is story from Heian perio d in Japanese history that I always found amazing. Japan w as still ruled by the Imperial court an d there were local adm inistrators and so on, like any Oriental centralized despotism. But there was also warrior class. They inherited this from some steppe invasions that changed their society a few centuries before. Anyway as always happens, the Imperial bureaucrats grew useless and weak an d by the end of this age, all the actual physical power was with the samurai. What I fin d amazing is how long it took them to figure out they no lon ger had to listen to the weak commands of the Imperial hierarchy , and that they were actually the rulers. W ords like “legitimacy ,” “soft power ,” “rights,” or , in their time honor , duty , divine right and so on are a ll delusions meant to distra ct and obscure men of power from the ir own strength and aims, and put them in service to someone else. Such men are m ore likely than others to be driven by notions of honor and responsibility . And this sense is therefore very easy to abuse…and such men can be manipulated fo r some time. Eventually they do realize, however , that they don’ t have to listen, and that they are actually the ones who rule. This moment, when “the game is up,” the moment of revelation, i s what I’ve always found very amazing. In the modern world everything moves much faster….I expec t that not long from now such men will awaken in the W est and I suppos e other parts of the world, and wonder why for so long they ha d listened to complete cretins give orders…and give orders too with such weak pretexts, much w eaker th an the bureaucracy of Imperial Japan. In Fiji the n atives became relatively recently outnumbered because a hundred years before the English imported their favorite cheap labor , the T amils. Eventually these outbred the natives and became the majority . So under democracy rules, they took over the state. The natives, however , still controlled the military . They saw no reason why they must follow this “democracy” int o giving their lands away to aliens brought in by o ppressors. So they took ov er the state, and did so very easily . I think it ’ s inevitable that this will become the rule all over the world, and very soon. Democracy and ethnic diversity don’ t mix, but the ethnic natio nalists are wrong when they think that the re sult of all this will be secession. Low-grade ethnic warfare is a terrible thing , but to break up entire nations into sma ller pie ces, as much as the city state is to my taste, isn’ t likely to h appen. Y ou must look to South Africa where the w hites and c oloreds could have asked for their own state in Cape T own, and agitated for th is, but instead they wanted to keep the country together . The reason for this is that any such secession would have meant giving up all parts of the country rich in gold, diamonds, and many other things. South Africa is an extre me case and secession, where a minority is five or ten percent of the po pulation….here it might happen. But it’ s a net loss to have the Boers migrate out of the land their ancestors tamed an d built, and it would be a net loss in America if it had to happe n what some of you want, to cede the southwest to Mexico, or whatever other schemes are discussed. If indeed you do manage to get a white population that is as mobilized and self-aware as you want, the y won’ t feel it a great victory to g ive up land and resources their ancestors won by their valor . T he great est president was Polk. But what’ s likely to happen long before any mobilization by white populations in their home countries is military rule: democracy will go before pure ethnostates are formed. I think this happened many times in history in ages of national decline, not just because of ethnic or religious diversity , but for many other reasons, and most of all beca use the military form of government is natural to human species. Those generals will be most successful who mix pow er with personal flair , l ike Duterte or Peron did. This is ve ry dif ficult in America bec ause of the types of men who get prom oted in the military . Some will be able to af fect, however , the charisma of Roman stern old man. 70 Given t he inev itability of military government, I see already how nationalists and many similar men, sympathetic to the c ause of freedom and high life, will join the armed forces and rise through the ranks, an d my guess is that many are already doing this. In some wa y this had already happened, and at the middl e ranks the armed forces are still relatively full of patriots throughout the western world. In France the military and security services, including the CRS, support the National Front of Le Pen, overwhelmingly . It’ s only a matter of ti me. In the Anglo world it’ s somewhat more complicated. The upp er ranks have long be en pur ged of men who could of fer resistance to the hidden hands that rule: it started with the T ailhook “scandal,” and even before then, and only accelerated after . Ev en at the level of captain or major , many men are traditional conservatives and not exactly nationalists. I think it’ s unnecessary to address such men directly: events alone will con vince them. But many are being persecuted as it is, and run out of the military , in the same way that police departments are being pur ged. This process is very slow . It won’ t work out well in the end for the lords of lies: all the technology in the world won’ t save a “diverse” military if it should ever be in a conflict: they’ll turn the missiles on themselves by accident or run su bmarines into the ocean floor , as h as already happened in South Africa. Still, America is pretty well isolated from danger , and you fool yourself if you think they will “reform” anything even if they suf fer disastrous defeats abroad. They fear men of power within the country more tha n they do any foreign army . It’ s dif ficult to solve this problem. The military is already so full of homofaggotry that it will be very unpleasant for any man who is a man to join its ranks at the moment. He might have a hard time advancing in its h ierarchy , even af fecting the views of a traditional religious conservative or a mainstream T r umpist which is, I suppose, as far as you could go right now . I would hate also to see any free man killed or ma imed in the service of this military that’ s been turned into a Hessian merc force for Gulf nabobs, for various ethnic groups, for the idiotic schemes of international financiers and the benefit of machine politicians looking to advance their families’ fortunes abroad. Then there is also the extreme bor edom you shou ld expe ct from any kind of military life, which even under the best circumstances consists in busywork. That said, military training is very valuable. Even in a situ ation—precisely in the case where men of any worth will hav e a tough time becoming generals and such…then it will be even more valuable. Military training and the brotherhood with other men in battle that comes from it is a lifelong advantage, and a great benefit to any cause. I can’ t give adv ice to anyone for how to live, but those who would be willing to deal with the evils of the modern military and are aware of all the drawbacks, but still find themselves suited for it, would do a great good for themselves and for their peoples if they joined. It goes without saying that they will have to practice good judgment and discretion while in service; but the military can’ t simply be abandoned to mohawked Latinx traps and neo-Leninist activists. Nationalists, I have no doubt, will join and attempt to reform both the ranks and the academies in the western world. Then there are also things like the French Foreign legion, although the discipline they practice is terrible. It lasts seven years, and they reserve the right to pursue you in any country if you desert. M any ex-SS men and other Germans from W orld W ar II jo ined the legion and fought in V ietnam, and some committed s uicide because of the rigors of this unit. Although it’ s possible now that they’ve relaxed somewhat. 71 Everything that is said now about Russia is pure projection. In fact it’ s America and the western world that is run by spooks a nd intel agencies. They’ve placed their assets and compromised patsies in the corporate world no less than in other governme nt agencies and among elected politicians. Many , like Obama for example, are entirely creations of this or that faction inside the security s ystem. These in turn are allied to o ligarchs and often to foreign interests and powers, so that it’ s hard to thin k many western nations have anything but a parody of freedom and national sovereignty . “Representative democracy” plus a bureaucratic state is often criticized by conservatives as destructive of personal freedom and initiative, which it is; but given that most people who go into public life are poor and weak-minded, it also just means indirect rule by spooks, oligarchs, and whatever foreign nation or interest can funnel m ore money or influence or threat here or there. Many of these people in the west screaming about Russia are puppets of China or the Gulf States—even when they’re not directly on the take or compromised, they expect sinecures and great wealth that will come in the future. Most of the media is similarly comp romised, although the average schmuck journalist is probably deluded b y the platitudes of “free press” and the humani tarian doxies that have been banged in their heads. Inside head they have ce ntral vacuole full of fluid, no brain. I have n o doubt that th ings like “pizzagate” are real simply b ecause, if I was a spook, or a rich man with spooks available, I’d find it very easy to compromise the of ficious, status-hungry low people who have been attracted to government in our time. These people arrive in the capital cities with a hungry look in the eye and, being full of the feeling t hat “they’re in on thin gs” and that they’ve made it, have a very toug h time controlling their appetites or behavior . Many are chosen and groomed precisely because they begin with dem ented appetites to begin with. This isn’ t to say there aren’ t patriotic factions withi n the security services that actually run the west, or patrioti c oligarchs who can’ t of fshore their we alth, and whose interest is in some sense then tied to the land and the people. I foresee a time anyway when nationalists, tho se who are capable of it, will begin to join these services. They will do themselves, their friends, and their country a great good through this. Some who are suited to math an d technology will no doubt join those types of agencies. Other s are already learning foreign languages— T ibetan has many uses! But there are other languages and area studies f or those who go to college, to study and do well in. Arabic, Russian, Persian, Chinese, Indonesian—many opportunities! Given the very low talent pool in government or available for recruitment, they w ill be able to join those other types of agencies, of which the re are a few , with some ease. Here it would b e necessary more than in the military to hide one’ s power level, and even to af fect the left-internationalist doxy at times. A ny nationalist or populist would be wise to af fect at most the style of a Mu eller should he want to be “on the right .” Not all are capable of this, and I think the strain will be c onsiderable. Such people will often have to work alone and rem ain quite isolated for ye ars, holding their aim and star as a pre cious hi dden possession , and never confuse the short- term for the final goal. Few will be able to or want to deal with the nonsense…this has been the problem of the Anglo conservatives al l along, though. They’ve always preferred to get a tan, play te nnis, and make money . They’ve wanted to be left alon e, so that the state was taken over by vermin. I expect such thi ngs will change, regardless of what I or anyone else says, sim ply because some people want to survive, and not to die out. They will no doubt slo wly , one way or another , join and cha nge the face of such agencies. The power of the modern world remains, for the foreseeable future, in such agencies. A fateful comet like a Caesar and Napoleon is a hard thing to hope for . And such a man would need allies, anyway . 72 Government wo rk can be too boring for men of adventure. Some say that the CIA, for example, exaggerates its incompetence in movies, or in known events—the failure of 9/1 1, of Iraq, th eir endless humiliations at the hands of the Soviets—to hide its true power and appear weaker than it is. But I think this isn’ t true, and if you’ve met ex-CIA people you’ll understand that the rumors about their disability aren’ t exaggerated at all. After James Jesus Angleton they were thoroughly fuck ed in every hole by the Soviets and others. All his warnings came true. He was a unique American, of rare secretive character in a people that enjoys openness and display; for this he is now mali gned in mean-spirited movies. He wasn ’ t very typical of his people, the Anglo-Saxon, and I suppose it’ s possible that through his Spanish blood there came a strain of Habsbur g cou rt intrigue, or something like this. The Russians and others are very good at intelligence work, be cause th ey grow up in a world of secrecy and learn to take gr eat joy in subter fuge of this kind. Most Americans who try this are just playing games, and af fecting a manner . Full of Mormons and various cripplettes who put on a high W asp manner , full also of soccer moms and neuters, the intelligence services are in fact quite incompetent, despite their considerable power . Both can be true. And you can see this in their very clumsy attempts to af fect public opinion inside America. I won’ t talk about spe culation over false flag attacks and such, which I’m sure happe n. But it’ s without a doubt that they’ve tried to get into the “m eme” business, and had units dedicated to this kind of visual propaganda, especially during the last election. W e all saw th eir ef forts and we laughed. I think the biggest threat the right presented to this system came from something like 4chan, which showed it can be an intelligence age ncy of its own, and far superior to what the formal spooks could do. How they located obscure objects, places, and people from photos is something that formally- trained agents couldn’ t normally do. The memes put a spike of fear in the hear ts of all the constipated spooks. A couple of images spread by Ricky V augh n or some channers made the news and were many times more ef fective than the government’ s own propaganda ef forts, and you can see, in shows like Homeland and othe rs, the really titanic hatred these people h ad for the army of right-wing autists that messed up their plans. They work hard to dox, for this reason. Y ou must understand where your strengths lie. If government or military work isn’ t appropriate, learn this art of the visual communication and share it with your friends, work with each other to perfect it. Don’ t be lame. Learn to make videos and photos—there are various tools around, many editing programs. Y ou can start with ch eap camera if you need. W ork in groups…in “labs” to develop, perfect, and tar get these videos a nd images. I assure yo u this frightens them, and is many , many times more ef fective than marching in public and playing the clown they want you to play . The long game of persuading the public is far fro m won. Keep the eye on the task, far from accomplished: to discredit authorities, to mock all public pieties, to show the leaders of government, bureaucracy , finance, corporations, big tech, and media for the pathetic ghouls they are. Many gains have been made lately , but their dishonor in the eyes of the normies is far from accomplished. When they try to make you expose yourself and to make positive claims, they win. Keep up the pressure of true samizdat. 73 Some people like to meet and di splay in public, and I think this can be done, if done well. But there are very few groups that do this well. They exist all over the world—a couple in America and Europe, some in South America and in Japan. The few nationa list or ganizatio ns that do it well have much care for appearance and also don’ t engage in ideologies, symbols and behaviors that a re bizarre or hostile to the customs and wishes of the people. A Japanese nationalist can invoke Shinto imagery and oppose this nationalist mode to the “foreign” religion of Buddhism, but that’ s because these two traditions have been in a push-pull game throughout the history of that country , and still are. But no independent pagan tradition exists in the western world, and play-acting in that way is going to fail. Of fending Christians in political movements is stupid, when they’re one of the last bastions against a common enemy . If th eir beliefs are corrupted, they can be reformed. Above all I believe that any public movement will be most ef fective if it is not political at all, a nd remains “implicit.” I think there can be much good done in public, but should be promot ed in the form of a social movement, not a political one. Nationalists must present a healthy alternative to the eternal rule of ugliness in our time: promote nature, beauty , physical fitness, the preservation of high traditions of literature and art. In regards to the latter , it’ s even a necessity because there’ s no school or university that will give you a worthwhile education. There are a variety of ways to approac h this but I think given the collapse of the Boy Scouts, that a scouting and nature-preservation movement would be one of the best. Hiking and the protection, preservation, an d admiration of public and national parks would put youth in the wilde rness and inspire a sense of boundlessness and awe in them. It would teach them many skills, b uild ca maraderie, and emphasize the connection between the people and the land both for the participants and as a matter of im age for others. It’ s without a doubt that any public or ganization will be infiltrated by feds, hostiles, and agents pr ovocateurs, and ther efore it’ s necessary to a void and condemn any imagery or messag e of violence, and to ostracize people who exhibit tendencies in that direction or who try to convince others to idiotic “action.” One can do this at the same time tha t such groups can engage in self-defense martial arts training and indeed, in an urban setting, work for the creation of private boxing and wrestling clubs. The risks are considerable eit her way , but it’ s not out of the question that through the path of the promot ion of health and beauty you will be able even to persuade f eds to your side: they too can self-improve! This would be a movement of peace. The right can at the moment furthermore easily take over the doctrine of peace—of nonintervention abroad—and of the protection of nature, and these things would be great achievements…this would go some way to convincing youth to your side. I would also reco mmend that you don’ t engage in outright racism of a useless sort, for example, the deliberate exclusion of friendlies from dif ferent races and so on; they would in any case be very few . This can ha ppen at the same time that you openly appeal to white youths and defend them from racial attacks and teach them the greatness of their history and their literary traditions. W omen, on the other hand, must be absolutely excluded from such gro ups, and rather encouraged to have their own. The presence of women in any grou p like this will totally destroy its social function, by introducing sexual competition, and by the fact that it’ s in their blood to play on men’ s misplaced chivalry to cause friction for their own advantage. Such a movement would be a living rebuke to the constrained and low , anxious life promoted by the regime of the crippled. Once

developed and with some reach, but maybe even in the beginning, they can engage in lo cal welfare projects of various kinds, for example helping opiate addicts by providing them with gy ms and by breathing i nto them the desire for life, helping old people who are alone, keeping the streets and parks clean, and many other s uch things. I also think that claiming public spaces in cities should eventually be tried, in the same way th at members of Generation Identity in Europe often patrol the subways and s treets to show they won’ t be intimidated. Bu t for this to happen there must be good-will built firs t for the public. There will of course be many attacks made on such groups, but what matters is whether the majority will believe them. If you remain firm as a social movement of peace, of the pr omotion of natural beauty , healthy living, and healthy nationalism, any attacks on such groups can be made to appear for what they are, the fears of the paranoids and hatreds of the resentful and ugly . 74 The equivalent of the “meme” in political action is the prank. Y ou really can’ t underestimate the power of a good prank…this can be as little as putting up a funny banner or a witty slo gan. Such things don’ t need to be connected to any formal group, but done in private by yourself or with your friends. The pit bull ban campa ign is a great example of real- life trolling. The “It’ s OK to be white” stickers were a good idea, at least i n the beginning: those who began to put threatening fonts on them, or logos for weirdo or ganizations ruined that troll very fast. The purpose of all such “political action” should be the same as memetic samizdat, which is to make the enemy look ridiculous. Y ou must show them for what the y are, which is, dour , old, sclerotic, ugly , pedantic; it’ s good if you show yourself in the opposite light, although not necessary . But in France the Hommen, a traditionalist and manly re sponse to the Femmen, have provided a good model for a ttractive public action of t his sort. They use masks, and anonymity is often an absolute necessity for this kind of thing. But the possibilities of this are boundless and, even in cases like the “OK to be white” stickers, where the initial message isn’ t fun ny , it works because it forces the enemy to take a public position that is widely an d justly recognized as evil and resentful. T rump has been very good at this, although it’ s not hard; he frequently forces his op ponents to take the side of the vilest m urderers, gang members, of lawlessness and decrepit viciousness. All such actions mu st be performed unannounced, planned in secret, and carried out with a close group of friends, to prevent the enemy from or ganizing a preemptive action. Remember that they still own many of the cities and the police forces in these cities, which can be induced to act illegally and to p ut you in danger; for this re ason, and many others, public rallies an nounced well ahead of time are totally useless, as are public “policy” speeches and other such wankery . Y ou must of course avoid all violence and al l talk of violence as well, and not fall into the trap they want you to fall into. In a small group of friends you know you rself, it’ s easier to police who stays an d who doesn’ t, and easi er to use your judgment about whether this or that guy is nuts o r worse. Remember always to keep eye s on the prize in such action, which is to discredit the enemy and expose his authoritarianism, his stupidity , his slavishness, his corruption. 75 The friends you make are more important, far more important, than the girlfriends or wives you’ll have. And actually your girl will admire you for this—not that you should d o it for that reason, but it’ s an added benefit: women admire men with great personal projects, and who are not beholden to them. If she’ s your “everything” and your “best friend,” she will likely lose resp ect for you. The greatest “in” that nati onalists and allies have against the enemy is the fact that the enemy has sowed sexual chaos and has destroyed romance. Our parents’ generations are lar gely responsible for this, bu t the lords of lies and ugliness who rule our time continue it and use it as their greatest tool of control. So this is the b est way to awaken men to the evil and subjection of our time, an d, I would say , also many women, who are very unsatisfied. On the other hand, someone who is motivated simply by this p roblem isn’ t reliable. There won’ t be any “beta revolution,” and betas are unreliable, because they can be easily bought of f with a girlfrie nd, or even a shrew wife and the parody of a good domestic life. I’ve seen many men, intelligent and well-educated, bu t weak in their core and much too concerned with women, who gave up all higher aspirations once a half-dece nt girl came alo ng. I find it disturbing that so many think this kind of life is a great salvation for you personally or “for your race.” This is ridiculous. By all means, marry and have children if you want, but don’ t do it as a political stateme nt or a form of action. Quite aside from the fact that you you rself wouldn’ t have wanted to be born as part of a demographic war , this i sn’ t a kind of struggle that civilized races, with a need for space and fresh air , can ever win. The idea that whites or Japanese should start vomiting out six o r seven children to a vagina like the illiterate slave hordes of Bangladesh or Niger is absurd. For one, it’ s never going to happen…and it shouldn’ t. Throughout history we’ve almost always been outnumbered, and it hasn’ t been a problem. Immigration re striction, combined with some judicious deportation done gradually , would be enough to secure the homelands of the civilized. If the situation worsens or a time of crisis comes, the eventual abandonment of democracy and other , far sterner measures, including, I expect, the intervention of the military , will take place. Autists having a family or not doesn’ t matter in a world of billions; the European nations have populat ions of hundreds of millions and aren ’ t in danger of “dying out.” So by all means, have a girlfriend and a family , but I fe ar that too much focus on this as a “statement” against the program of the enemy is a mistake. Usually a family is the end of a man. This can be both good and bad. B ut the necessities of caring for a family , and the emotional demands, usually blind him to anything higher . In case you do have a family , have it because you have great love and lust for a woman—and I would recommend the same for wom en, abandonment to such instinct, if you are lucky enough to have it. Choose by quality of biology and remember that the intellect is inherited fr om the mother , the character from the father . But once you have a family , don’ t think this is a “political” achievement, or that it would ever be enough. Continue the mission you hav e set out for yourself, and continue above all the friendshi ps you have formed in service to this higher ca use. The friendships you have made meeting each oth er , in person or online, are the greatest event of the last few years, and source for the greatest promise. Y ou must never stop studying and working together or for get the enthusiasm of this discovery . A friendship in struggle for war and a higher cau se is something that, more than anything else, can lift you out of the dreadful gravity of this tur gid world of shades. 76 Caring too much about food, nutrition, and especially health can be considered something unmanly…a kind of neurotic, hypochondriac fretting more suited to spinsters. On the othe r hand, in the past the w orld was not as full of poison as it is now . Nearly all the food is centrally produced, stored in warehouses, and poisoned with mycotoxins and many other things that slowly destroy y our essence. Therefore it’ s important to take measures to p rotect yourself against this as far a s yo u can. Although it’ s expensive, the probiotic Gastrus has been of great use to many of us. Something else I can recommend is coconut oil, and staying in the sun. If you are not a bogjig whose ancestors evolved under permanent cloud cover in northwest Europe, you will usually be able to tan, and the ef fe cts of sun are many and very good. Y ou have no excuse! (Those who can’ t tan must supplement with vitamin D3, but also som e other things.) Y ou begin with ten minutes in mid-day sun, and work up from there. Usually thirty minutes a day is enough, when you c an get there. There’ s much propaganda abo ut tanning, but once you live in tropical areas you can see that even brown people begin to look sickly and have a kind of sa llow color if the y avoid the sun. Y ou’re meant to w orship the sun. Remember t he song of New Order! It goes without saying that you must lift weights, and for this there are many dif ferent programs, all suited to a dif ferent body , dif ferent biology , and dif ferent aims. In general it’ s better to lose fat and cut body fat before growing in muscle, but it depends on many things. But a regime of sun and steel is absolutely required, for your mood, your aesthetics, for getting the a ttention of women and the respect of men, and above all for prep aration for struggle and war . In ancient Greek cities, only the citizens were allowed t o lift weights and work in the gym: slaves were forbidden. It’ s no wonder that the robots of Babylon seek to ban gyms for men in our time. The pathetic failure of the “swole-left,” an entirely artificial construct promoted in a pre-planned and coordinated way by formal or gans of the left, all of this is very instructive: the occasional exception aside, it’ s not possible to be “swole-left” today . Any man wh o improves his body th rough sun and steel will drift away fr om the modern left, a program of decrepitude and resentful monstrosity . They know this and are afraid. I hav e to make this restatement now at the end of this brief manifesto: Many are domestic animals and happy that way . I speak instead to the men who feel stifled by this bug world. People at all times try to domesticate each other . Language is used to clobber and deceive others into submission and domestication. Ideas and a r guments and stories are manufactured fo r the same. The modern world is no dif ferent in this regard fr om any wretched tribal society . I’m sure that Europe prior to the Bronze Age, before the coming of the Aryans, was similar to modern Europe. People lived in communal longh ouses and were likely browbeaten and ruled by obese mammies who instilled in them socialism and feminism. Most of those so-called males of the longhouse age were probably similar to the modern leftist “herb” who doesn’ t lift. Which is why those societies were so easily conquered. The left realizes they look weak and lame—because they are. They know they have nothing to of fer youth but submission and lectures. They know they’re unsexy and staid. If indee d young leftist men wi ll start lifting and worshiping beauty , they will be forced to leave the left. The bugman pretends to be motivated by compassion, but is in stead motivated by a titanic hatred of the well-turned-out and beautiful. The bugman se eks to bury beauty under a morass of ubiquitous ugliness and garbage. So much of the Pacific and the pristine oceans are now full of garbage and plastic. This garbage is flowing out of cities built on piles of unimaginable filth. The waters are polluted with birth control pills and mind-bending drugs emitted by obese high-fructose- corn-syrup-guzzling beasts. Then of course there is the ugliness of the people. And it’ s only getting uglier with the crowded, unhygienic new cities of our age, populated by hordes of dwarf-like zombies th at are imported for slave labor and political agitation from the fly-swept latrines of the world. People feel they can’ t escape this, they know this is an aggressive meth od to demoralize and oppress. When I post my images of vitality in the clear s un of a long noon, they feel a weight l ifted of f them. Many f eel as if they’ve escaped the gravity of this trash world and returned to a time when the natural beauty of man could be displayed, indicating this is a form of life free to develop its powers. I b elieve in the right of nature. I’m bored by ideology and by w ordchopping. The images I post speak for themselves and point to a primal order that is felt by all, in a physical sense. When I or my followers post powerful, beautiful images of male models of unbelievable vitality and youth, our enemies gnash th eir teeth in envy and hatred, while we are exalted and inspired. The sup erior , l ike the handsome Alexander , exert an almost magical ef fect that draws others to them. Some are drawn to higher action, others to other tasks, but all petty cares are for g otten. There is nothing that needs to be said or elaborated, no need to intellectualize this any more than the natural a ttraction wolves on the move have for their king, or bees in a hive for their queen. When I post images of godlik e men like Pietro Boselli, many are in awe and drawn to emulate. I have inspired many to develop their bodies and physical and spiritual power . I ha ve nothing to say to the f rivolous people who have found th emselves, maybe bewild ered, in positions of influence in m edia or government, or t o the many superfluous who follow them. In the next hun dred years and even before, barbaric piratical brotherhoods will wipe away this corrupt civilization, as they did at the end of the Bronze Age. 77 The Star of the Covenant — What is likely then to happen in the long run? I foresee a time, not too far in the future, when the Leviathan will not be able to hold itse lf together . I expect that the peoples will be able to save the mselves from the global slave project that is now promoted. But what will come after is likely to be unsatisfying as well. The nation s will escape the danger , but they will return to their peaceful and sheep-like existence. They wi ll need to be protected from getting themselves into the s ame position as they are no w . I believe that at some point, before or after the troubles, the superior specimens are going to find each oth er and leave thi s civilization. They will form fortresses on the edge of the civilized world, in the tropics, from where they will watch the seas. The era of high piracy will return. Such men will develop above all their physical powers and their ability to wa ge war . They will of fer the nations defense in exchange for a price. Occasionally they will send a great demagogue into the peoples, when this becomes necessary . Such men, perched atop these eagles’ nests, will have the territor y of a new frontier again, and a life that suits them. Science will be liberated from the constraints of caring for comfort or entertainment. Great projects in science, the projects of private men, will once again begin. Such fortresses will possess frightful weapons to defend themselves, and will have penetrated deep into the n ations their antennae and their many emissaries and watchers. I think that is a great dream, but it may happen sooner than you thi nk. W ith a few details of f, it’ s what Executive Outcomes would have become, or Bob Denard would have become, if the g reat states of E urope had been unable to stop them. And I think soon they will be unable. But this great opportunity is still some time aw ay . Before then, there must be a g reat work done. I see a time soon when a few men, maybe no more than a few hundred in the whole nation, or spread out over the whole world, will embark on the mission of the great down-going. I have praised ins tinct many times in this book. But life on the a scent can follow instinct, whereas if you feel yourself to be a decadent, it’ s very important to resist instincts that lead to pointless self-destruction. Discipline and excellence are best when they come from your own desires, not from repression. But if you r instincts lead you instead to self-debasing behaviors that will hurt you, by all means resist. Just und erstand that this path is at most a makeshift. W e should want to give birth to beings who follow the higher path in li fe a s a matter of innate blood and desire, not out of duty . Having to spend time and spir itual ener gy trying to repress destructive desires is dif ficult and expensive. Discipline is most important, but it matters where it comes from. Unfortunately many pay no attention at all to these two ways of “disci pline,” but instead are concerned only with the public image of their v irtue or goodness. There’ s next to no good in that. An d the right has hurt itself considerably by the adoption of this kind of P hariseeism. I give you an example of what I mean: many of the intelligence agencies are populated with Mormons. These men are chosen for their upright moral character , the fact that they pass lie detector tests, that they’re not easily compromised, and so on…all qualities that make for bad spies. T o be ef fective in this world you must be very well- acquainted with the underworld, with criminal life, with junkies, dealers, prostitutes, ga mblers, with the perviest of pervs. A nd this is what I mean by the great down-going. T o gain a true hol d on the foundations of this trash-world, a certain group among the right will have to descend in this inferno. I am firmly convinced that this is the key to overturning everything that is corrupt, and the path to the great pur gation. I imagine a network of brothels and gambling- houses around the world, prod uction of porn videos, and a complete penetration of the world of vice. Y es, to ensnare, to compromise, to corrupt, and above all to observe and to know their secr ets. T o descend into a floating world of complete vice, and even to engage in it—as you must if you are to thrive in th is w orld—while keeping yo ur head and keeping in focus the fire of you r aim…isn’ t this a great and very dif ficult achievement? This path must be only for very few , very few are s uited to it. But these few a re to be among the greatest of the coming generation. This brotherhood will work instead to intensify vice, to stir up dem onic passions, to sow total confusion in the heart of the beast. The increase of chaos, confusion and pressure on the Leviathan will lay it low: imagine even a world where the people, under relentless assault of contradictory and wild claims, would lose all faith in the media and government and doctors and believe nothing they hea r throug h of ficial channels anymore. This would be an order of knights of the spirit such as exists at most every thousand years. Slowly , maybe over two generations, they will work patiently , exploring and lay ing claims to all the sewers of the underworld, all the ef fluences of the Leviathan, all the joints of the low er skeleton that under girds this world. They will take over night clubs, bars, brothels, hotels, casinos, pornography , and much worse, and rather than live to insulate themselves from the vice promoted by this world, they will intensify it and learn to wield it as a great weapon. It is the greatest weapon in our age. Kn ow that the Leviathan sustains itself not by the promotion of vice, but by its normalization. But in every normalization, a great deal must be edited out; this is its great w eakness. This order of knights will keep vice true to itself. From underneath comes all the Satanic power of the Babylon we are fighting. Some men, whose bond between each other must be made of tita nium, will surely come around who can descend in that worl d…who have the mental and spiritual resources to descend to the underworld and come back with the prize. I am sure this covenant, this brotherhood of th e damned, when they are f irst taking steps to descend… will feel like the great mystery o f things will reveal itself in its fullness to them…not the answer , ungraspable by the mind, but just this X, the madness inherent behind things will show itself as they ar e about to descend …it will be an amazing rush, lik e when great pterodactyl cryptid bird of prey in Congo is about to swoop down in the night on its tar get from canopy . I kn ow such m en of bronze exist…I dream that, as they descend they will keep their e yes above on the great North Star , and I think about how they will feel…I imagine how they will trav erse the great labyrinth of shadows while their spirit fixes itse lf with a great focus and obsession on that fateful star , and tha t other one…the destroyer of nations… never for getting the way back….not for getting its call and the eternal task it whispers into those with ears to listen.