Curt Doolittle

Category: Religion, Myth, and Theology

  • WHAT IS THE LIMIT OF CHRISTIAN CHARITY??? (important insight) “The Limit of Chri

    WHAT IS THE LIMIT OF CHRISTIAN CHARITY???

    (important insight)

    “The Limit of Christian Charity? Like war and childbirth, charity is not subject to proxy.”

    This was the bit of profound insight I gleaned from my long morning conversation with a committed catholic ‘recruiter’. There is nothing western about christianity. It is a cult that is designed to attack the aristocracy from below. Nothing more.

    It’s just like Marxism and Postmodernism. The difference is that christianity works through building trust and extending kinship love using supernatural excuses, and marxism works by economic jealousy and pseudoscience, and postmodernism by identity (genetic) jealousy and lying.

    So christianity operates by doing material good under false pretenses of afterlife subsistence salvation;

    Marxism operates by doing substantive damage under pseudoscientific pretenses of future economic and class salvation.

    Postmodernism operates by doing substantive damage to norms under false pretenses of future economic, class, and genetic status salvation.

    Here is the truth tho: You are just virtue signaling if you proxy your charity. You are just virtue signaling if you help the immigrant rather than the old couple across the street. You are just virtue signaling if you devote the income of others to charities or redistribution. You cannot, as a proxy, determine the morality of an individual. Therefore, we might say that all of us might redistribute some portion of our dividends (pool of taxes) to deserving individuals. But if you work through a proxy you are just depriving those individuals of the full merit of your contributions.

    And virtue signaling is just another form of fraud.

    So, charity, like war, like childbirth, is not open to substitution or redistribution. You must do it yourself or you are a fraud. In other words, there exists no such option as political charity.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-25 14:36:00 UTC

  • ( Woman explaining to me that when “The Moon is Blue” was released, the Catholic

    ( Woman explaining to me that when “The Moon is Blue” was released, the Catholics had to go to confession after seeing it. )

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-25 06:51:00 UTC

  • by William L. Benge A COSTLY BUREAUCRACY Pagan Roman religion was, like nearly e

    by William L. Benge

    A COSTLY BUREAUCRACY

    Pagan Roman religion was, like nearly every aspect of anything Roman, an ordered, systematic, state-sponsored bureaucratic institution [and therefore fragile] featuring extremely costly: a) hierarchical priesthood, b) vassal virgins, c) real estate d) expensive garb e) special rites and rituals, traditions, the esoteric/exoteric, national holidays, and d) of course, taxes.

    WEALTH TRANSFER

    Emperors Constantine thru Justinian, eager to appropriate middle-class resources, convert Messiah-ism into statecraft.

    DIFFERENT GARB

    A revised Hellenism emerged featuring: a) hierarchical priesthood, b) vassal virgins, c) real estate d) expensive garb e) special rites and rituals, traditions, the esoteric/exoteric, national holidays, and d) of course, taxes.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-24 16:47:00 UTC

  • NIETZCHE ON ISLAM by Daniel Gurpide Nietzsche considered himself as the biggest

    NIETZCHE ON ISLAM

    by Daniel Gurpide

    Nietzsche considered himself as the biggest enemy of Christianity. His entire project of reevaluation of all values was based on a harsh critic of all crucial values of Christianity. Let us not forget that Nietzsche himself was the product of Christianity: he came from a long line of preachers. In that sense, and only for polemical purposes does he praise Islam.

    He presents Islam in a more favorable light since it is a lot more masculine and warrior-like than Christianity: male Semitism vs. female Semitism.

    “If Islam despises Christianity, it has a thousandfold right to do so: Islam at least assumes that it is dealing with men….” (The Antichrist).

    Nietzsche also respected the Persian Aryan spirit which had survived underground within Islamic civilization. He appreciates it’s aesthetics, culture, wealth, art. And let us not forget that he is comparing Islamic civilization at its zenith with the medieval dark ages in Europe. He is not offering a choice to modern European man.

    The scholars who made the “Arab miracle” possible were mostly Syrians, Persians, Spaniards and Jews (not a drop of Arab blood in their veins and completely alien to the Arab mentality). Expelled from Europe by the Christian crusaders, displaced from Asia by the Mongol hordes, dominated by the Turks in Egypt, the Arabs lost contact with the Persians, Syrians, Christians, and Jews. Isolated once again, under the yoke of their fanatical Imams, they fell in deep slumber and the cycle of ignorance, dysgenics, poverty, and brutality started again. Any critical spirit which was left was suffocated without remorse: Allah aalam, God knows best.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-24 12:07:00 UTC

  • “Give the people heroes not lies – and not heroes who lie [prophets].”—Bill Jo

    —“Give the people heroes not lies – and not heroes who lie [prophets].”—Bill Joslin

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-24 11:32:00 UTC

  • As I continue my work, I generally think more in terms of conflation and deflati

    As I continue my work, I generally think more in terms of conflation and deflation. I’m not against religion – i think it’s necessary. I’m against falsehood. And that’s because falsehood is not necessary – and the consequences of it are terrible.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-24 09:17:00 UTC

  • RELIGIONS: SEPARATING THE OPERATIONS FROM THE CONTENT I understand the value of

    RELIGIONS: SEPARATING THE OPERATIONS FROM THE CONTENT

    I understand the value of Myth(Decidability), Ritual (Mass), and Mindfulness (prayer).

    But do you understand that there is nothing in what you call ‘christianity’ that cannot be produced by truthful means, rather than lies?

    So my opinion is, like a woman, or a child, you cannot separate the OPERATIONS: teaching myths for the purpose of shared decidability, performing rituals for the purpose of shared trust reinforcing thost patterns of decidability, and performing contemplative disciplines for the purpose of adapting to those patterns of decidability – from the CONTENT of those operations.

    But that it is the OPERATIONS, regardless of the CONTENT that produce the ‘goods’ that result from performing those operations.

    So as far as I know, you are ‘owned’ by your inability to deflate the operations, the content, and the training from those operations. And you treat the content as material, when it is the operations that are material regardless of the content.

    It is trivially easy to reform our church. It is trivially easy to reform the operations in our churches. And trivially easy to reform the mythos of our churches. That is because the good that is in our churches is the use of Myth, Ritual, and Mindfulness to produce that High Trust of the European Peoples.

    And we do not need the lies of the semites, who do not practice this high trust. We do not need the mental disease of the semites, to demand submission – that is the antithesis of our european peoples.

    We have plenty of myths and decidability, we can always use the Feast (Church/Mass) ritual of Toast (preaching), Oath (Creed), Feast (bread) as an opportunity for creating common decidability and common trust.

    And we can always use the some combination of self-analysis (Stoicism), internal dialog with archetypes (prayer), mindless repetitive chanting, and mental discipline (meditation) to adapt ourselves to the order we create by those means of decidability.

    The difference is that we will need to return to the era when the men who lead such civic ceremonies are worthy of our audience.

    Where the decidability provided by the content is materially transcendent, heroic, good, true, and beautiful – in the european heroic ethic not the semitic tyrannical.

    Where the Feast Ritual heralds western man’s achievements in the real world, not the lies of the semitic world that imprisons men in ignorance.

    We can reform our church.

    But the first step is realizing that you err. That you value the content rather than the operations. But that you are wrong. It is the operations regardless of the content that makes a religion valuable.

    And most importantly: there is no content on earth superior to the european scientific, technical legal, political, economic, cultural and historical.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-24 08:06:00 UTC

  • ABRAHAMISM *why do you need to lie?* *why do you need lies?* *why do you fear tr

    ABRAHAMISM

    *why do you need to lie?*

    *why do you need lies?*

    *why do you fear truth rather than lies?*

    The left has produced a false secular religion. They did it with pseudoscience and lies.

    The right tried (failed), but is finally producing a secular religion without pseudoscience pseudo-rationalism and lies.

    WHY DO YOU NEED TO LIE?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-24 07:30:00 UTC

  • YOU KNOW THAT FUNGUS THAT MAKES ANTS ZOMBIES? Um. That’s Abrahamism in humans

    YOU KNOW THAT FUNGUS THAT MAKES ANTS ZOMBIES?

    Um. That’s Abrahamism in humans.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-23 19:49:00 UTC

  • BECOMING OURSELVES ANEW By Daniel Gurpide It is impossible to ‘bring back the Gr

    BECOMING OURSELVES ANEW

    By Daniel Gurpide

    It is impossible to ‘bring back the Greeks,’ i.e., resuscitate the pre-Christian world. A genuine Aryanism can only be neo-pagan and post-Christian, rather than merely pagan or pre-Christian, and revolutionary.

    ‘Neo-pagan’ because with the ‘death of God,’ the old gods that Christianity maintained indirectly alive as promise and nostalgia of a diverse world, also died. They metamorphosed into a mythical and exemplary return to the origins that make a new beginning possible.

    Revolutionary in the proper sense of the word (re-volution, from the Latin revolutus, revolvere: to turn over, to return) because we want to ‘turn over’ the existing system of values, ‘change the world,’ and return to or reproduce a moment that was. Our attitude towards our present world should be similar to the one adopted by the first Christians towards the Greco-Roman world.

    Before the development of diachronic linguistics, the Aryans or Indo-Europeans did not exist! The term ‘Indo-European’ may be used to classify fossils or bio-macrophysical remnants, and so doing might be considered appropriate in that history is founded on human biology. Nevertheless, we know that an historical Indo-European entity has never existed: no record has been found of a people calling themselves ‘Indo-European,’ or demonstrating awareness of possessing that identity. This is scarcely surprising: an historical fact finds its reality only at the level of human consciousness. The Indo-European fact does not enter history, does not become historical agent, until it is ‘discovered’: that is, until human consciousness, bound to a determined epochal perspective—a consciousness and a perspective which are ours—conceives it as the past of its own present.

    It is no exaggeration to say that the Indo-European fact becomes such only in us and through us. It is the projection of ourselves onto the past; at the same time it is the reinvented myth through which we project ourselves into the future.

    Indo-European roots are the source, the past of which we may be future heirs—but only if we dare to become what we are. For us, indeed, an effective response to the challenges of modernity must re-produce, readapt, and reinvent it: the Indo-European adventure. It is for this reason that we project the Indo-European inheritance twice: as re-presentation of the past—and as imagination and re-creation of the future.

    The re-appropriation of our deepest roots entails, in itself, the rediscovery, valorisation, and defence of our identity as Europeans. By exclusion we may decide what is ‘originally’ ours—in the sense of being created by us, and in harmony with our own perception of the world, our own psyche—and what does not belong to us, but has been incorporated at a later stage, lacking authenticity and genuineness. If the two inheritances of the European world, Christian-Semitic and Indo-European, reveal themselves as irreconcilable, it is for us—the current heirs—to decide which is our own, original, and originative, and which is not.

    Furthermore, in a world which has become planetary—and where Europe, at risk of losing its identity and independence, is condemned to transform its centuries-old ethno-cultural unity into an organic whole—the rediscovery of our common roots, of our affiliation with the Indo-European past, has immense political significance as foundation myth of a community of destiny of European peoples. A synthesis—political, ideological, and philosophical—capable of safeguarding European civilisation—can be articulated only by returning to the primordial source: to the cornerstone of European humankind—the core of our human specificity. There, the archetypes of our psyche can be reactivated anew.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-23 15:07:00 UTC