I have a few questions. As this seems a deconstruction of everything, how is that different from the woke? No one takes up a sword unless they are compelled or believe in the cause. The woke will tell you the world they want to create (minus the authoritarian parts), so what vision of the future is the right, or are you proposing?
Has anything good ever happened? Because saying it is all a scam of some kind that seems to suggest there really is no point trying to change the course of society. It also seems like that would prevent people from seeing anything different from RFKjr and Javier Becerra, as example.
Also, the moon moves the tides, human emotions and hormones, and is connected to the unconscious, so it is not surprising some men are skeptical about the moon.
I know there are teachings how to inhabit a wolf through the astral realm, but if the wolf dies so do you.
And, I'm in that upper right quadrant of NFs diagram because I have faith humanity will endure, which makes me generally optimistic about life and my prospects.
I know this is a lot coming from someone who "knows nothing, has never been right about anything, has no character and is afraid of deep emotional investigation, like a woman."
Speaking for myself, the difference between what I am about when I engage in deconstruction and "woke" is that I am seeking Truth (as well as the Good and the Beautiful). I know I can only ever imperfectly approximate those ideals, but I do seek them. Our realm has so many deceptions on top of deceptions that I think some amount of deconstruction is necessary, but I would not engage in that for its own sake, but only because I want to avoid deceptions in my search for Truth. The woke not only do not care whether something is true, they actively invert the truth in order to feed their sense of self importance and gain power over others. That's night and day different.
As for optimism, I try to be optimistic too (I wrote a post a while back about that struggle), because I do think it's important. But when it comes to believing that a political solution will go well given current realities, I cannot help but become more pessimistic as new developments indicate Zion Don is controlled by our enemies. But I can believe that AND still focus on what I can do to improve my own sphere of influence in this world.
We will see what Don does. I have not been impressed by much of the right since the election, acting like he exists in some kind of vacuum, like he hasn't changed the last four years and since he got shot. Things are dynamic and guys acting like they know how he's going to react to whatever stimuli is not impressive. He goes after one Palestinian who is a foreign spook and people act like he's the Whore of Israel. He floated the idea of taking over Gaza, got hammered and hasn't really discussed it again.
WTF knows, if the economy collapsed who says he doesn't arrest the central bankers?
Anyway, just refusing the black pill, with eyes wide open.
I'll offer my thoughts on this if that's alright (as I'm going to offer them anyway, haha), although your question is directed at Rurik & Daniel and I'm interested in their responses. Like Daniel's question in his prior post about what the "black pillers" should do, the question hits on multiple layers of analysis, which are always the most interesting ones.
1. Deconstructing mainstream narratives serves as a delegitimizing force toward the existing establishment, and in this sense it *is* similar to the woke. The difference is the purpose of the deconstruction - the woke want to further push society leftwards toward even more intense egalitarianism as a continuation of the ultra-long egalitarian ratchet effect, while right-leaning dissidents seek to delegitimize a system that is rapidly resulting in permanent white erasure and neoliberal feudalism worldwide. Mainstream establishment narratives reinforce these existing trends instead of opposing them (including Orange Man's fake-populist turn), so challenging the underlying metaphysical assumptions that modern society rests upon is an attack on this whole system. Especially during a period where formal organizing is close to impossible.
2. "what vision of the future is the right, or are you proposing?" First, there is value in deconstructing this freedom and society destroying system without an exact vision of what the future should look like. With that said, opposition is always more powerful with a positive vision of the future. Ending the parasitical Rothschild central bank system would restore autonomy to the world and allow everyone to chart their own paths. But on a deeper level, people giving attention to these garbage Current Thing narratives is fundamentally wrong in and of itself -- the hope is that we can enter a future where people are much more willing to think for themselves and much more distrustful of authority or "expert" figures. A world of self-discovery, a world of wonder, a world of re-enchantment. Wouldn't that be nice?
3. "Has anything good ever happened?" Everything contains elements of good and bad within it, which can't always be predicted at the time it happens. Something bad today might result in good tomorrow, and vice versa. I discussed this concept by highlighting the Chinese farmer story: https://substack.com/@neofeudalism/note/c-100027394 . It's certainly nice that we live in an era with refrigeration, with mass transport, with air conditioning, with very low birth mortality rates for women and babies, with plumbing and electricity and instantaneous communication, etc. Technology isn't an all bad or all good thing. *Generally*, though, history leans toward increasing centralization and loss of power/autonomy and increasing methods of societal control by elites. One of the purposes of philosophical pessimism is that, other than being a better predictor of future events than optimists, it sets a better baseline for going through life - being surprised to the upside is much better than being surprised to the downside, imo. It doesn't mean wallowing in negativity, it is about expectation management. Philosophical pessimism also creates a MUCH more open world, a world of unexpected and uncontrolled change, something I will hit on tomorrow in my post on Emil Cioran.
Lastly, I wouldn't take offense at Rurik's insults too much, that's just how he interacts with people sometimes. Keep showing a thick skin and it might get you past that point with him...well, maybe.
There has to be some kind of destruction to restore order. It might be egalitarianism the Left is after, but it kind of seems to me more like total chaos and collapse they would get. But I have been struggling to ascertain why Trump is not seen among many on the right as trying to restore the productive economy of America. Just because he has Yarvin and Thiel etc more or less on his side does not mean he is going to let them rule America. Maybe he can't stop it, but I will always remember Theil sweating and stammering after that CEO got shot and killed, and I am ever reminded he is no god, just a flesh and blood man.
Any society/civilization has to believe in something, is what I was getting at. It seems to me Trump is not getting enough credit for doing a lot of what the right claims to have wanted. It almost seems like many on the right do not want to "win" but rather just want to tear it all down, without knowing what they would build.
I'm not sure I agree with your philosophical pessimism as being better than optimism. But I will wait to comment more about that until after I read your piece about it.
>It almost seems like many on the right do not want to "win" but rather just want to tear it all down, without knowing what they would build.
Under the pavement, the beach.
All I want is to remove the pavement. I don't need a utopian program to a) want the stuff that I don't like removed and b) to then replace it with something worse.
Once the pavement is gone, I can simply enjoy the beach again.
And you think I am too optimistic. I don’t know for certain of course, but barring some new effectively unlimited energy source, no one can be certain. But if you are truly metaphysic it might have occured to you we are not here to go to the stars necessarily.
The hardest obstacle is freeing oneself from the stifling and ever-present cultural matrix. How can one fight the enemy without understanding either oneself or the foe? So many harmful memes, self-defeating modes of behaviour have been instilled in us. The classical Christian example is - "If you kill your enemy, you lose".
Seeing everything (especially in history!) as a great morality play is foolish as well. Lessons may be drawn, but what if they're material? The material is the basis of any ethics - if you're dead, you can be neither good nor evil anymore. And to be alive, one has to eat and screw (personally, I find life abhorrent, but if one wants to live, he must be necessarily abhorrent himself).
Rolo Slavskiy hates me, but I am thankful to him for his precious contribution nonetheless. Russian people seem to much "crazier" (freer?) than what can be seen in the Anglo world. I also follow a tiny Russian cult Goy Gaya focused on retaining humanity as opposed to becoming a feeble-minded and/or golem.
04:50 Indeed, from what I understand, individuals don't have much say in the world. You have your Payton Gendrons, but even they have failed to budge the system even in the direction of tightening gun control (to "wake up" the normies).
Finally, I'm Ukrainian, and my terrible country leads the way in showing how bad it can really get - régime thugs abducting indigenous males off the street simply for being male, people with guns agreeing with being sent to die, and people with drones sending said drones against the same peasant proles on the other side as opposed to harming actual propagandists or leaders. When there's so little conscious humanity left, it's rather unfortunate. I wonder whether it used to be better, and the state of mankind has been intentionally lowered by... those of many names?
I think we need more reflections like these. I suspect that the right is becoming a bit complacent. Look at birthrates and mental health indicators and the culture of academia. Can they really claim to be winning?
What I heard was the footage was fake but we did go to the moon. Idk. Have you heard people talk about how the sun used to be a different color. More orange or something.
The footage is definitely fake. I have no idea whether we went or not, but the narrative about it is obviously wrong. I have heard that about the Sun, that it used to be more yellow/orange and less white than now, and I think that sounds right, but my memory could well be faulty. The main upshot is that the regime lies about damn near everything, and they invest a lot of resources into promoting their lies and burying legitimate criticism, as well as to using "counter intelligence" type disinformation agents to discredit and mislead the critics. Something is really rotten.
And oh yea, it was the night of the full moon AND a total lunar eclipse at midnight on the 13th, so you can’t really get better than that from a magical point of view. Maybe the infernal Saturnian lunar collection field was eclipsed for a short while, or something.
Great talk, gentlemen. Thank you very much. Herewith two recommendations for your consideration.
1) Ironically, although we live in a uniquely metaphysically dead age, arguably two of the best books ever written on metaphysics were produced in the last 70 years. The first was Bardon's 'Initiation into Hermetics' (1956); the second was Ashcroft-Nowicki/Brennan's 'Magical Use of Thought Forms' (2009). Chapter 1 of latter? Werewolves.
You could try Magical Use of Thought Forms. Unlike Bardon (which is quite hard work), it's extremely easy to read yet without trivializing the subject in the least.
Outstanding! I’ll need to listen to this again. There is so much in it that it needs multiple listens for the content to be received by my puny (compared with you gentlemen) mind.
Daniel D you do a great job of knowing enough about the topics to lead Rurik towards exposition and expansion, without usurping him. Rurik demonstrated admirable patience in allowing Daniel D time to set up the appropriate framing. All-in-all, this was admirable work and as entertaining as it was illuminating. Thank you!
A great conversation gentlemen. Your mentioning werewolves, trans, etc. reminded me of this old dream I had back in 2016. It was probably the most vivid dream I’ve ever had and I can still remember it clearly. To make it short, I was a member of a commando team who broke into an old man’s mansion in order to confront him and demand some answers. When he wouldn’t answer, we bound and stripped him and discovered tiny bio implants along his backbone, gell-packs wired into his skin, and even a sort of small motherboard, containing common computer circuitry, with a row of tiny injectables on it. After we methodically snipped all of the wires he transformed into a reptilian with glossy black and white striped scales and enormous golden eyes.
The funny thing is that I’m not really into the David Icke style reptilian meme, but apparently my subconscious is. Anyway, this reptilian is a sort of werewolf, is he not? Though he transforms into a human, not away from that, and it is all technology based. The point is that even though he appears to be human he is not, merely in disguise.
BTW, can anyone send me to a book or substack by dino denialists? Sounds like a good read.
You guys understand why I like writing about the moon landing. 👍
Definitely!
Fascinating conversation.
I have a few questions. As this seems a deconstruction of everything, how is that different from the woke? No one takes up a sword unless they are compelled or believe in the cause. The woke will tell you the world they want to create (minus the authoritarian parts), so what vision of the future is the right, or are you proposing?
Has anything good ever happened? Because saying it is all a scam of some kind that seems to suggest there really is no point trying to change the course of society. It also seems like that would prevent people from seeing anything different from RFKjr and Javier Becerra, as example.
Also, the moon moves the tides, human emotions and hormones, and is connected to the unconscious, so it is not surprising some men are skeptical about the moon.
I know there are teachings how to inhabit a wolf through the astral realm, but if the wolf dies so do you.
And, I'm in that upper right quadrant of NFs diagram because I have faith humanity will endure, which makes me generally optimistic about life and my prospects.
I know this is a lot coming from someone who "knows nothing, has never been right about anything, has no character and is afraid of deep emotional investigation, like a woman."
Speaking for myself, the difference between what I am about when I engage in deconstruction and "woke" is that I am seeking Truth (as well as the Good and the Beautiful). I know I can only ever imperfectly approximate those ideals, but I do seek them. Our realm has so many deceptions on top of deceptions that I think some amount of deconstruction is necessary, but I would not engage in that for its own sake, but only because I want to avoid deceptions in my search for Truth. The woke not only do not care whether something is true, they actively invert the truth in order to feed their sense of self importance and gain power over others. That's night and day different.
As for optimism, I try to be optimistic too (I wrote a post a while back about that struggle), because I do think it's important. But when it comes to believing that a political solution will go well given current realities, I cannot help but become more pessimistic as new developments indicate Zion Don is controlled by our enemies. But I can believe that AND still focus on what I can do to improve my own sphere of influence in this world.
We will see what Don does. I have not been impressed by much of the right since the election, acting like he exists in some kind of vacuum, like he hasn't changed the last four years and since he got shot. Things are dynamic and guys acting like they know how he's going to react to whatever stimuli is not impressive. He goes after one Palestinian who is a foreign spook and people act like he's the Whore of Israel. He floated the idea of taking over Gaza, got hammered and hasn't really discussed it again.
WTF knows, if the economy collapsed who says he doesn't arrest the central bankers?
Anyway, just refusing the black pill, with eyes wide open.
I'll offer my thoughts on this if that's alright (as I'm going to offer them anyway, haha), although your question is directed at Rurik & Daniel and I'm interested in their responses. Like Daniel's question in his prior post about what the "black pillers" should do, the question hits on multiple layers of analysis, which are always the most interesting ones.
1. Deconstructing mainstream narratives serves as a delegitimizing force toward the existing establishment, and in this sense it *is* similar to the woke. The difference is the purpose of the deconstruction - the woke want to further push society leftwards toward even more intense egalitarianism as a continuation of the ultra-long egalitarian ratchet effect, while right-leaning dissidents seek to delegitimize a system that is rapidly resulting in permanent white erasure and neoliberal feudalism worldwide. Mainstream establishment narratives reinforce these existing trends instead of opposing them (including Orange Man's fake-populist turn), so challenging the underlying metaphysical assumptions that modern society rests upon is an attack on this whole system. Especially during a period where formal organizing is close to impossible.
2. "what vision of the future is the right, or are you proposing?" First, there is value in deconstructing this freedom and society destroying system without an exact vision of what the future should look like. With that said, opposition is always more powerful with a positive vision of the future. Ending the parasitical Rothschild central bank system would restore autonomy to the world and allow everyone to chart their own paths. But on a deeper level, people giving attention to these garbage Current Thing narratives is fundamentally wrong in and of itself -- the hope is that we can enter a future where people are much more willing to think for themselves and much more distrustful of authority or "expert" figures. A world of self-discovery, a world of wonder, a world of re-enchantment. Wouldn't that be nice?
3. "Has anything good ever happened?" Everything contains elements of good and bad within it, which can't always be predicted at the time it happens. Something bad today might result in good tomorrow, and vice versa. I discussed this concept by highlighting the Chinese farmer story: https://substack.com/@neofeudalism/note/c-100027394 . It's certainly nice that we live in an era with refrigeration, with mass transport, with air conditioning, with very low birth mortality rates for women and babies, with plumbing and electricity and instantaneous communication, etc. Technology isn't an all bad or all good thing. *Generally*, though, history leans toward increasing centralization and loss of power/autonomy and increasing methods of societal control by elites. One of the purposes of philosophical pessimism is that, other than being a better predictor of future events than optimists, it sets a better baseline for going through life - being surprised to the upside is much better than being surprised to the downside, imo. It doesn't mean wallowing in negativity, it is about expectation management. Philosophical pessimism also creates a MUCH more open world, a world of unexpected and uncontrolled change, something I will hit on tomorrow in my post on Emil Cioran.
Lastly, I wouldn't take offense at Rurik's insults too much, that's just how he interacts with people sometimes. Keep showing a thick skin and it might get you past that point with him...well, maybe.
1000% this. Very well said.
There has to be some kind of destruction to restore order. It might be egalitarianism the Left is after, but it kind of seems to me more like total chaos and collapse they would get. But I have been struggling to ascertain why Trump is not seen among many on the right as trying to restore the productive economy of America. Just because he has Yarvin and Thiel etc more or less on his side does not mean he is going to let them rule America. Maybe he can't stop it, but I will always remember Theil sweating and stammering after that CEO got shot and killed, and I am ever reminded he is no god, just a flesh and blood man.
Any society/civilization has to believe in something, is what I was getting at. It seems to me Trump is not getting enough credit for doing a lot of what the right claims to have wanted. It almost seems like many on the right do not want to "win" but rather just want to tear it all down, without knowing what they would build.
I'm not sure I agree with your philosophical pessimism as being better than optimism. But I will wait to comment more about that until after I read your piece about it.
>It almost seems like many on the right do not want to "win" but rather just want to tear it all down, without knowing what they would build.
Under the pavement, the beach.
All I want is to remove the pavement. I don't need a utopian program to a) want the stuff that I don't like removed and b) to then replace it with something worse.
Once the pavement is gone, I can simply enjoy the beach again.
That sounds like a metaphor for deindustrialization. Rather seems to me like where humanity is headed regardless, 200 years hence, give or take.
It’s sad that you think that
And you think I am too optimistic. I don’t know for certain of course, but barring some new effectively unlimited energy source, no one can be certain. But if you are truly metaphysic it might have occured to you we are not here to go to the stars necessarily.
The hardest obstacle is freeing oneself from the stifling and ever-present cultural matrix. How can one fight the enemy without understanding either oneself or the foe? So many harmful memes, self-defeating modes of behaviour have been instilled in us. The classical Christian example is - "If you kill your enemy, you lose".
Seeing everything (especially in history!) as a great morality play is foolish as well. Lessons may be drawn, but what if they're material? The material is the basis of any ethics - if you're dead, you can be neither good nor evil anymore. And to be alive, one has to eat and screw (personally, I find life abhorrent, but if one wants to live, he must be necessarily abhorrent himself).
Rolo Slavskiy hates me, but I am thankful to him for his precious contribution nonetheless. Russian people seem to much "crazier" (freer?) than what can be seen in the Anglo world. I also follow a tiny Russian cult Goy Gaya focused on retaining humanity as opposed to becoming a feeble-minded and/or golem.
04:50 Indeed, from what I understand, individuals don't have much say in the world. You have your Payton Gendrons, but even they have failed to budge the system even in the direction of tightening gun control (to "wake up" the normies).
Realistically, what "we" (who?) can do is, first of all, not give the Matrix our attention! And I don't mean walking on our hands just to be different. But simply not getting caught in its lies. "Turn off the TV", as they say (or "dissolve your head parliament" © Pelevin). The next step would be focusing on real stuff, like IRL connections and people you can trust (imagine). Online activism has always arguably been a joke, if you look at the fruits of their labour... (Which is ironic, considering these pleasurable Substack bloggers^^ - Of course, there is a point talking, but real world should also be kept in mind, as opposed to being lost in hyperreality! Even if "we" memed Trump into existence, so what?)
Finally, I'm Ukrainian, and my terrible country leads the way in showing how bad it can really get - régime thugs abducting indigenous males off the street simply for being male, people with guns agreeing with being sent to die, and people with drones sending said drones against the same peasant proles on the other side as opposed to harming actual propagandists or leaders. When there's so little conscious humanity left, it's rather unfortunate. I wonder whether it used to be better, and the state of mankind has been intentionally lowered by... those of many names?
I think we need more reflections like these. I suspect that the right is becoming a bit complacent. Look at birthrates and mental health indicators and the culture of academia. Can they really claim to be winning?
https://jmpolemic.substack.com/p/horizontal-information-flow
What I heard was the footage was fake but we did go to the moon. Idk. Have you heard people talk about how the sun used to be a different color. More orange or something.
The footage is definitely fake. I have no idea whether we went or not, but the narrative about it is obviously wrong. I have heard that about the Sun, that it used to be more yellow/orange and less white than now, and I think that sounds right, but my memory could well be faulty. The main upshot is that the regime lies about damn near everything, and they invest a lot of resources into promoting their lies and burying legitimate criticism, as well as to using "counter intelligence" type disinformation agents to discredit and mislead the critics. Something is really rotten.
And oh yea, it was the night of the full moon AND a total lunar eclipse at midnight on the 13th, so you can’t really get better than that from a magical point of view. Maybe the infernal Saturnian lunar collection field was eclipsed for a short while, or something.
Great talk, gentlemen. Thank you very much. Herewith two recommendations for your consideration.
1) Ironically, although we live in a uniquely metaphysically dead age, arguably two of the best books ever written on metaphysics were produced in the last 70 years. The first was Bardon's 'Initiation into Hermetics' (1956); the second was Ashcroft-Nowicki/Brennan's 'Magical Use of Thought Forms' (2009). Chapter 1 of latter? Werewolves.
2) This lady is a great on both the moon and the sun. Her forte is explaining them to children. https://old.bitchute.com/video/6q7Og69RRaPq/
Thanks for listening and for the book recommendations!
ive been stuck 1/3 of the way in beardon's book. for an intro its pretty high level.
If you're saying it's pretty high level, I probably will need to start somewhere simpler and work my way up to it.
You could try Magical Use of Thought Forms. Unlike Bardon (which is quite hard work), it's extremely easy to read yet without trivializing the subject in the least.
Thanks!
Outstanding! I’ll need to listen to this again. There is so much in it that it needs multiple listens for the content to be received by my puny (compared with you gentlemen) mind.
Daniel D you do a great job of knowing enough about the topics to lead Rurik towards exposition and expansion, without usurping him. Rurik demonstrated admirable patience in allowing Daniel D time to set up the appropriate framing. All-in-all, this was admirable work and as entertaining as it was illuminating. Thank you!
Thanks, and glad you enjoyed it.
The virus mental block is a very difficult mental barrier
daniel: finish your sentences🤪
A great conversation gentlemen. Your mentioning werewolves, trans, etc. reminded me of this old dream I had back in 2016. It was probably the most vivid dream I’ve ever had and I can still remember it clearly. To make it short, I was a member of a commando team who broke into an old man’s mansion in order to confront him and demand some answers. When he wouldn’t answer, we bound and stripped him and discovered tiny bio implants along his backbone, gell-packs wired into his skin, and even a sort of small motherboard, containing common computer circuitry, with a row of tiny injectables on it. After we methodically snipped all of the wires he transformed into a reptilian with glossy black and white striped scales and enormous golden eyes.
The funny thing is that I’m not really into the David Icke style reptilian meme, but apparently my subconscious is. Anyway, this reptilian is a sort of werewolf, is he not? Though he transforms into a human, not away from that, and it is all technology based. The point is that even though he appears to be human he is not, merely in disguise.
BTW, can anyone send me to a book or substack by dino denialists? Sounds like a good read.
I'm not sure about dillingpole but this interview w John Hamer goes into it, starting about the 15 min. https://odysee.com/@JamesDelingpoleChannel:0/hamer:f
Thanks for the link. I will check that out.