The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law (2)

All this makes me realize I don't even believe the left has feelings. They're sure all on antidepressants (anti feeling drugs) - anyone who does not revolt at cunnthrugh is surely deadened at heart somewhat.

If Kanye would specifically endorse such Democrats I'd proceed with trashing him and calling him insane and a coward. For now I assume he has been disappointed by some errors on the right. Which I assume can be remedied. As Trump himself is very far from being prone to racist jokes, and he is deeply sensitive to the plight of the Jews.

I expect Kanye to come around when he gets disgusted with the left again. But for me this was a welcome reminder that my work as a philosopher can never be detached from the individual emotive prorogative, the Child.

Trump is the first modern politician to even recognize true feelings. He is a very sweet guy. Very tough but sweet. Ivanka and Barron more than prove it.

None of this is about humans getting less sensitive for me. The absolute opposite. The left consists of genocide-lauding psychopaths, they have no idea about suffering in the world. Trump does. The alt right don't. I always despised the alt right. We need their votes but have to be very careful not to allow them to claim Trump.

As for Kanye music, I'd like to see him get back to the style of the first album. That truly bridged some fundamental divide.

But I'm even more un-alt-right in that i don't even support Mohammed cartoons. Not because I find them wrong or offensive, but because literally all they can value-ontically accomplish is make people furious and hell bent on bloodshedding. I don't see how one could possibly expect them set people free or bring levity.

If I see a mock cartoon depicting Odin in a disgraceful way I'll not give many shits for the authors life. I'll not feel compelled to hurt him myself but he would no longer enjoy my respect. I could simply be sure that that person has values antithetical to mine. I imagine the same goes for every single Muslim via a vis Mohammed. If i respect anything in them it is the passion of their valuing. I simply know with certain types that they will never abandon them. That's something the West has to find a way to deal with. Mocking their prophet is about the most self-destructive thing we can do. They genuinely love him.

Values trump life. That's not something I invented.

Where you defeat such an adversary is in revealing a superior way of life, a superior pride and joy. Such things are not suggested by demonstrating blunt contempt of their own particular tenderness. That rather proves to them that we have nothing to offer, that we lack insight in the human soul.

And this insight is precisely what we do have, what VO perfects.

Muslims that I know generally look down on the west precisely because they think we hold nothing sacred. The fact that we are surprised when they are enraged when the figure of their prophet is desecrated (they don't even allow themselves to portray him at all) makes it inevitable that they mistake us for a bunch of savages with no values.

Its totally fine for me to make these cartoons, but I just think the publishers are silly to be surprised when they have an impact. In fact, if you make a cartoon like that, it would be silly not to be prepared for a fight. What else is the possible outcome?
Again this is not about what I think should be the case, Im simply not moralistic like that. Its about what I know is the case.

The same goes for how the left treats Trump. How can muslims understand that the US is respectable, if it is normal there to mock the penis of the president on tv? Its not possible to respect such a society from the outside.

The deep right, that is the Christian Right, not the infantile alt right, is made out of pure valuing and respect. Not for muslims or black people or Mexicans but for Jesus and the Constitution, George Washington and also Jerusalem. Thats something the muslims respect and fear, and thats what will get them in line eventually. Only hard-core valuing of these very specific values has a chance of imprinting on muslim hearts the truth of western valuing. And when that is successful, the West will have conquered the world. We can only win by showing that we are more value-aware than they are, not less.

Thats what I really liked about these cards, too - they are very value-aware.

But I was in a tight spot because I know I have the specific responsibility among Trump supporters to be very aware of who is going to inevitably be hurt.

For example, no one in that caravan, nor any of these separated families at the border has a reason to be hurt. They all tried to take something that isn't theirs. It is shameful that where half the world dreams of being allowed into America these pieces of shit believe they just get to demand entry. Fuck them all. Thats not legitimate pain.

But when you're say Kanye, and say you visit this site every day to find some fun white people, then youve got a right to expect of us that one of us at least makes a note of the mild racism in the cards. Thats all I was looking to do, but it its a tricky thing. Its something only I can really do, I think. Walk that line.

So don't think I think these cards warrant someone getting murderously enraged. All I found offensive was my own lack of recognition of the mild racism along with my praise. And I project that on Kanye, generalizing what I think is the case within the right at this point - we've gotten a bit cocky especially after Kavanaugh. We need to remain very clear about being the not-racist ones. As hollorgorggh proved recently with its "they all look the same" "joke".

So having said all this, back to business.

Defenders of the Earth wrote:

this makes sense to me,

What he says about a moral code here is crucial.
This is both why the ruling class can do anything, and why muslims cant respect us.

The removal of god from the equation, "the death of god", places islam above us in terms of prospects. Thankfully Christ is very much alive.

Also we interpret these cards differently. And note that I never expected of you to make a point of the racism, you come in it at a different angle.

You said you see the cards as mocking the idea of Trump as a white supremacist.

I see them as genuinely honouring him for protecting the realm created by of white European people, namely the free west, in a time when racism against whites and hate of western values is beginning to become a normative must.

So this is as complex an issue as issues get. The potential of it is very rich.

My lack of recognition of the complexity, an ideal terrain for me as a philosophic magician, is what made me feel I dropped the ball. Not that there were jokes being made, but that a gigantic double sided sword was raised and I didn't have a comprehensive response to it.

No true muslim can never truly respect a western liberal, not deep down. Because what is there to respect in someone who has no values?
On the other hand there are unquestionably many untrue muslims who simply follow rhetoric and fear politics, these are essentially the same as liberals.

A strange alliance might thus be formed between the more radical sections of different faiths versus the relativistic mobs and the consumer-products that rule and selfvalue them.

I do not mean the insane, but simply the orthodox. Like I am an orthodox priest of Zeus. I think Sokrates is evil predominantly because he fooled the Greeks into losing their self-respect, which was given to them by their respect of the Olympians, which put humanity in general in perspective, and exalts the Greeks somewhat. Sokrates wanted to be Zeus, to have his own supreme god within him. Thats unthinkably sad and poorly and indeed he was known to be a very unsightly being. Sokrates made the love of beauty and strength known to people as something stupid, superstitious.

Nietzsche understands that man is only worthy anything at all if he creates above and beyond himself. Worth anything to himself, first of all. Sokrates simply feared oblivion, the scumbag, thus he couldn't stand the distinction of being vs non being, thus he was eager to die and have his death symbolize the lack of meaning of life. His Apology is the apology of life for its own existence, implying and giving the condemnation.

What is the function of Aristotle over Socrates?
Where is the common thought between them?
Sokrates was the naive pretence of skepticism, a simple infantile narcissism that axiomatizes its own triviality rather than its consequentiality.
His conclusion was that knowledge is foolish.
Aristotle posited "A"="A", and all sorts of ideas about how general principles can guide a mans natural logic to arrive at the best possible case. A hierarchy of merit. I don't see how people make the link between the two other than that Aristotle felt he needed to take care of the problem Sokrates from within his power structure.

Whatever the case may be it was through Alexander that Aristotle had his greatest impact, and that his logics were preserved. If the early mohammedans (Mohammed said that the ink of the wise man is worthier than the blood of the martyr) hadnt so fanatical converted what Alexander brought them into algebra (which his bizarrely the personal name of an Arab, Al Jabr), geometry, astronomy and ontology, then the early Eunuchians (the Constantines) who had usurped the Christian idea would have succeeded in eliminating a lot of value from the world.

I believe Trump is acting wisely on the whole in restoring Islamic power to Saudi Arabia, where it originated.
It went very wrong when they lost control over what it means. It was then that a "great wise man" decided that truth can not be derived from other truth. Since then Islam only holds true what is "divinely revealed" - but we might as well say it holds true only what does not follow from other truth


The hard case to deal with is that Islam isn't bound to dissipate any time soon,I find it wisest to look for the meaning of this seed closest to the Earth, where it was sown. The very ink of wise men which Socrates had first rejected, and what Alexander went out to prove as the most powerful truth. And there is only one origin given to the wisdom of the Greeks: the transgression of Prometheus. We know what Zeus did with him - and surely there is something of the fear of the terrible temper of Zeus to be recognized in the Skygodfearing hearts of muslims.

Their doctrine did not end up being strong enough to preserve their whole god. Because that never was a single god, but a mountain full of them, riddled with strife and hate, contradiction at the heart of life. This, the monotheists never understood - how gods can be plentiful and yet pure. Historically it seems only sailors have been able to holds this in their hearts. Perhaps the open sea teaches the final distinction of gods in the ocean versus the sky - the true division of nature from herself in which divinity is known as terror at too great beauty rather than as a being. One has to love this terror to receive the gift of Prometheus.

Can this love be taught?
Only by an empirical revelation of that fearsome beauty to the huddled masses. Only an example of western divinity can split the brave from the mob.
Caesar and Alexander both claimed to be descended from the gods, and they no doubt believed it, even though they know themselves silly for it too. This kind of pride speaks to inner riches that a natural monotheist can not fathom. But a natural pagan in the house of monotheism will all too easily recognize his chance and run into the wild from which his soul came.
In the sound of the voice of the wind swept tree he now walks and never questions his heart again.

Monotheism is verification of a faded heart. It arises in decadence, amidst a debauchery of demonic god forms. A strict punishment upon the senses, the iron will of ascetic health overcomes the inner Jabba the Hutt. But this is not our state - we are mankind that has attained a new health, we require tremendous follies to draw us away from grave pettiness, or scare away that pettiness, so that it does not accompany us wherever we go.

My uncanny task is to discern pettiness from genuine smallness.
Muslims feel small. That is what their religion causes one to feel. Small but secure, and therein strong.
Supported by something massively great and deeply unstoppable - supported in their smallness.
In the knowledge of this great massive merciful bestowing super truth, they relinquish every idea of egoic accomplishment. Thus what remains is libidinal accomplishment.

i don’t have much time to reply but i will more throughly reply later. but i uphold freedom of speech and to mock and insult and cartoonize any religious figure one wishes. i don’t believe in authoritarianism. i don’t want to live in a society where it is a crime to make fun of someone’s “god”. authoritarianism even in service to a good value is only waiting to be put to service of far less good values. the only thing stopping that slide is upholding the principle of free expression and personal responsibility, which means that if i call someone a dumb fucking cunt or if i say muhammad is retarded then i’m not responsible for what someone does to me when i say that— they are responsible for themselves. if they’re enough of a fucking animal to actually attack someone for saying that, then fuck them.

i don’t need wish weak reactionaries in my life, people with such lack of character and self responsibility they can’t even handle the fact that someone else doesn’t like them, believe what they believe, or respect what they respect. if someone mocks what i respect, oh well, fuck them i guess, and i move on.

we need to be in a war of values. how can you have a war of values if no one can criticize other people’s ....values? and if people are supposed to be such weak sheep that YOU are responsible for how they react to what you say? naw, fuck that, i will never accept responsibility for what some fuckwad does in response to me speaking my mind. his actions are on him.

this is fascinating to me. we almost example a divide between liberal and left. i’m on the classical liberal side here, you’re on the left side here. really interesting. i’m looking forward to reading your previous post and writing more about all this later when i have time.

i uphold the idea that society should be structured on the assumption and expectation that every person is self responsible and mature enough to manage their own reactive feelings, which after all is their own responsibility, and that if they ACT on those feelings in a way that harms others, unlawfully, they will be liable for that under the law. “he said something offensive to me” isn’t a defense for hurting someone else.

offense is in the eye of the beholder. i’m not responsible for what offends someone, and i’m cerrienlt not responsible for what they DO in response to whatever they are FEELING. i actually treat others by the assumption that they are sane, mature, reasonable, in self control enough to moderate their own internal subjective perspective and experience with the world around them. yeah some people aren’t able to do that very well, but they are examples of the problem, not examples of what we should expect as normal human behavior.

the problem now is this leftism of “feelings are superior” and anyone’s personal feeling somehow justified anything at all. offended by a maga hat? beat up whoever is wearing it. feel like “a woman on the inside”? well then you must be! feel like anyone who says you’re not really a woman is a hateful bigot? then beat the shit out of him!

i cannot possibly go along with anything even remotely like that. my standard is action. what people do. thoughts and feelings are measured and mediated in social interpersonal space of a marketplace of ideas and dialogue, between sane rational adults. is not my problem so many people now aren’t sane or rational enough for that, but i surely will never idealize or accept as normal such people, as the left certainly does.

I think you'll find if you read more closely that I share no properties at all with the left, classical or modern. Im rather a libertarian who believes in the need for an army. There was in my writing no suggestion of the restriction of free speech. I hope that was evident, but since you evoke the term "left" in reference to my position, just to be sure; I don't think you should expect to be able to insult someone with the guarantee that that person keeps doing as you please.

Who should give that guarantee of non-reaction?  I don't believe in restricting human nature, but of course I do not really fit in any political paradigm other than  value ontology, which is how I make sense of things, and which governs Trumps presidency. I just am a Viking philosopher navigating the pure contradiction that is the human heart, disclosing freedom therein, such as the possibility for Trump to become president. I don't accept any lesser paradigms, its just a waste of power.

Im honestly too far beyond any category wherein things are being restricted, be it speech, or thought or feelings or reactions -
I don't even believe that the law is a restriction. If it was, there would not be prisons. Prison is just a place to do with a certain type of decisions.
Death equally is not restricting any reactions where it comes to values, as we know a muslim will often gladly die for what seem silly reasons.

I think you conflate the ideas and emotions behind these peoples reactions, and my acknowledgement of them having these ideas. I don't respect the hearts of terrorists. I just know they won't be overcoming their tendencies.

The fact that I don't acknowledge the ideas and feelings themselves as truthful and wise, but do acknowledge them as existent stems from the fact that I simply acknowledge self-valuing rather than any particular ethos as agency, and this also gives me the right to do whatever I need to guarantee my own freedom of self-valuing, such as constantly risk my life in fighting back muslim occupation and restriction of free speech.

I simply rationally embrace the fight, and I think this is what it mans to be a Viking. To understand that there is no higher good in the world than the fight for values. This fight is the ultimate value. No single human can attain it by himself.

Theres a weird fine line that sun to explore between racism and mockery; 4chan launched Trump and Im not actually denying these people are racist as fuck and often very funny at it, they even make me laugh with their Jew jokes, thats hard. I laugh also because I know what kind of people they are, which are socially harmless often poor kids with genius minds and no future besides the most unlikely outcome, which they allow to come to pass. Its all grounded in teenage libidinal hype, which is just the reality that forms our society, a few steps up from the infantile society of totalitarian states, but not yet in any sort of adulthood; Trump is the beginning of our coming of age. We have a long dazed and confused ride ahead of us. All we can do is watch the leather, man... stay fine tuned to the moments most difficult predicaments. This is how the scientists take over.

Hmm. So whats really the issue here - what is (in a frame where the liberty of speech is self evident) functionally harmless racism.* Racism as a symptom of a recovering health, of defiance, or of simply breaking he rules.

This is not about restricting anything at all. Merely about seeing it for what it is and does. That is, in a sense, a restriction as it collapses passion into facts. So Ill be honest about that - Im concerned enough about racism to try to identify a viable form for it. And obviously I find in these cards a viable form - I like the cards, they are deeply truthful, they are about the preservation of the realm. There is no question that there is a racial element involved, people from other races have made it well known, just as whites have made it known to me that being jewish is definitely an issue beyond joking, that white people are this and this and that and all kinds of bullshit, like they cant trump to begin with.
o - that was really meant to be jump --

racism exists and these cards make sense out of it. Thats why this is so difficult. There is a racist element in preservation of the realm.
In as far as the cards are not joking I would say that blacks are part of Trumps race, given they used to treat him as a king before he was one. Its however territorially completely necessary to keep out people trying to cross into the US from Mexico. I guess I like the cards too much to want them to be a joke. Sometimes thats where I make problems where people don't have them. Its why I became a philosopher - I prefer practical jokes.



*Harmful racism I would say is deliberately going out of your way to damage people on account of their race. In other words, the policies of the left.
I move to classify National Socialism under the header of Leftism as well now; Categorical Statism (defying any claims to natural supremacy) is Leftism as it always requires a non-real notion of governance agency, not to mention it took the name Socialism to get proletarian voters, which is what indeed Socialism is. Tactics to get poor people to vote for you. So WWII was the battle of the Left against the Right first, and then the Left against itself. In between the two Lefts, Eastern Europe was caught and frozen. The negation of negation.

Still, from an honest German perspective, Hitler did preserve the idea of Germany as an inevitable reality.
Like France did under Napoleon, Germany showed what it was capable of in threat of extinction, showed its heart.

Considering, the US has a pretty damned peaceable heart in comparison.



But then the greater, deeper reality of WWII is the German wish, in part perhaps inspired through Heidegger, to have as much natural space and America. Thats perhaps what was discussed most in the early days of the nazi rule. In these days the plan was still to banish the Jews. It was all a botched attempt to stretch out. Poor Germans, lol. A locked up giant.

I do get the point of racism as just a healthy expression of irreverence and assertion of ones own type, but when it gets tied to resentment it become a confusing and distracting narrative, not a threat, but an impediment. Like a flat tire. You cant get ahead with it. This is what I still see in the alt right a lot. In me it often causes anger because the Jews are the brunt of Id say 75 percent of all racism, genocidal racism of course included. For me, who would not have existed if not for my grandfathers repeated escape from nazi imprisonment, not responding to racism would be similar to a cat in the field not hearing a harvesting machine approaching. I can only train my response, figure out what it really means to me - for this, positive racism is required; like no one ever has any problems with the Aryan Brotherhood they simply represent themselves in respectable ways, strange as that may seem for a prison tied group - not strange at all since they claim warrior hood. They're not known for their hatred of other races but for not being to be fucked with. I don't mind Mohammed Alis racism either. The Wu Tangs second album is full of black supremacy, which is just a rendering of hiphop in general I suppose.

These cards form a good epistemic response to the notion that a white man cant say nigga. Its a rather stupid and peculiar balancing act but I am a psychologist of the monster of energy. Reason only goes so far, and at that point, its opposite takes over. Not the lack of reason but the opposite of reason. That which makes reasoning impossible. Reason must always count on this to keep continuity.

"A" = "A", but "=" is not a path in between.
That path is only the strewn variables.

Life is chaos, logic is king.
But nothing else!

Thats my hierarchy, dimensionality. I don't expect anything but constantly breaking patterns. Whatever doesn't break is a pattern Ill smile at. Thats it. I don't do nothing else!!I just smile at stuff that manages to exist. I think thats cool. Like a blade of grass is as cool as Trump, and thus far cooler than any leftist. I lovelies of grass. I love a lot of small beings much more than I can bear.

Which, through the notion of small egos and libidinal identification, reminds me of this. You can turn off the audio (I had to) and just watch these fools in action.




these kids at the end here - MyW8e0jn_4M

I find Arabs are infinitely more beautiful creatures than muslims on the whole. There is a looseness to them that perhaps allows for this strict religion to not be aberrant and brutish. If you're actually living in the sand dunes, that religion might work, like runes work in the forest.

To be clear, Im someone who would be most benefitted by a truly lawless state. I can only perceive jungle anyway, within the law or without - the law is just a more restrained and convoluted jungle. So Im not someone who would try and tell someone what he can or cant say. Im that someone who laughs at his jokes and points to the guy coming for his guts, and helps him fight him off if he cant do it by himself.
There is a lot more to freedom than the idea of it. The practice of it is will to power, and nothing besides....

Continuing, lets discuss the nature of emotions and the Right.

It is true that right wing commentators like Styx and Molyneux have always pissed me off by being emotionally sterile in the extreme. On the other hand, Trump himself is very emotional, as am I.

It is true that the Left contains a lot of people who show yuuuuge emotional outbursts. But I question the veracity of these emotions. I highly suspect that, since many if not most leftists are on meds, all their raging is a form of trying to fill the hole where their psyche is supposed to be, at least for a moment, with the energy of hysteria.

Face it, if someone has voted for Clinton, it would mean one had no emotional compass, to put it mildly. Anyone who can not see the cursed demon in Clinton is emotionally debilitated or just malnourished, has never known real emotive truth. And most leftists did vote for that cursed demon. I can not avoid the 1+1 thingie, the outcome of which is; the left is emotively debilitated.

This does not mean that the right is emotionally completely whole. But I still think all proper emotional truth is to be found on the Right, simply because emotional truth is the antithesis of literally everything the left is spitting out and swallowing. That - and I do not know any person who opposes Trump who is remotely in touch with their emotions. All people Ive talked to that stick to hating him are also people who constantly drift off from focus on their own heart, their family, their friends, their children, etcetera - damaged hearts, broken emotional circuitry.

The right is probably relatively cool emotionally speaking because all of us have been emotionally violated by having to live under the leftist regimes, so it was for decades impossible to utter ones true feelings. Since the stupid fucking hippies took over, emotions have become plastic commodities indiscernible from prostitute-morals. Morals because it sells, emotions because it looks good. In my familys communist circles Ive never seen anyone comfortable with genuine emotions except my mother, who has come to loathe and despise the left for the hollow hearted scumbags they are.

In the left, emotions are nothing but theater and rhetorical means where argument fails. The intensity of the emotions suggests some reality behind it, but when it suits these people they just stop emoting and go about with whatever abuse or deceit they were occupied with before. It looks like they have the hormones, but no consistently present psyche or soul for these hormones to reflect. There is no emotional structural integrity on the left.

Lets figure out what an emotional structural integrity looks like.

First of all I think it requires an honest mind, a life that does not go about accusing others before it has properly investigated itself. This is lacking all across mankind, but in the left the lack seems quite absolute.