Category Archives: Natural Order

That Which Plagues Us – A False Diagnosis, Part 1 of 3

A False Diagnosis

Brainwashing is blamed as the cause of today’s leftism, but this is largely not true. Most ills in modern society are the doing of peoples’ own temptations, and the inability to stand up to loved ones creates slippery slopes from these collective temptations. Sure, over-exposure or early exposure to vices can normalize them or bring about the means to temptations that are already there, but that normalization is made up of every participant of the deviant action.  The problem with calling everything “brainwashing” is that it asserts that these horrible dynamics are created from malicious intent instead of the “victims” perpetuating them. It ignores how historically ineffective intentional brain washing attempts have been, overlooks how consumer-driven markets allow this to reach massive scales (not for some underlying scheme but simply for the bottom dollar), and obfuscates the problem by casting it as the all-knowing will of some external actor instead of the collective conspiracy of every single addict or true believer drawn to these destructive vices.

By misunderstanding the problem, you will misunderstand how to fix it.  There is no counter-brainwashing that will work.  The problem isn’t a top down one, it is made up of not just “leaders” but of every follower of each particular vice.  You don’t save people from themselves by coddling them or creating a victim narrative through externalization.  Cycles are not ended by blaming someone else and relinquishing people from the responsibility of their actions, no matter if they were part of a collective or not.  There would be no destructive leftist movements or lifestyles or addictions without every single person that makes up part of that collective or statistic.  No top down power structure will save everyone either because it’s simply the wrong direction for the given problem.

There would be no feminism without feminists. They are not “brainwashed” because they choose to accept narratives that appeal to them – especially the desire for power they perceive men to have.  People aren’t destroying marriage and pair bonds through cheating because they were brainwashed into it but because there are no consequences for their actions.  You do not fight this by blaming a tv show that shows cheating in a good light – because that show is a consumer driven product. You stop adultery by holding people accountable to social and/or legal consequences.  Cheating is only normalized by those who want it accepted. This is not brainwashing.

No-fault divorce isn’t some top down conspiracy that was created from nowhere. Democratic systems allow people to elect those who push for things they want. No-fault divorce benefits many people who do not want to be tied to the responsibilities of their actions.  Every person who breaks up their family for selfish ends and temptations is to blame for the collective loss of family values.  You cannot (reverse)brainwash people into family values, nor appeal to them based on instant gratification, but you can make people responsible for the consequences of their actions, intended or not, and demonstrate what is best for the long run knowing it is their choice to work for that or not.

It’s not that most can’t get past their “programming” it’s that people are not meant to live in massive cities or interact in online social networks. People are meant to sync with their tribe and that tribe will cease to exist if they promote self-destructive behaviors – civilization has replaced tribalism and taken on a life of its own, while creating a life for you that you are not meant for and is unhealthy. Being kind to those you love is always more comfortable than correction, so this acceptance of every illness in urban society only degenerates it faster.  Peoples’ collective temptations and impulses perpetuate part of the “programming” like a drop of rain in a storm, as do their loved ones who believe that “loving” them requires they not correct them and accept even destructive tendencies. By removing all agency from these people, it assumes it is someone else’s responsibility to fix them. Agency is seen as some all-or-nothing state of being, where if someone keeps doing something bad and doesn’t stop themselves, then they no longer have agency.  If they are part of a group committing destructive actions, then they are said to no longer have agency and must have relinquished their agency to some external actor who “brainwashed” them. This is pure malarkey.

For this to work, you must find someone else to blame –an absurdity to be sure. Agency is about responsibility and you don’t lose agency by refraining from hard work and facing the repercussions. Excusing such a person makes them even less likely to accept it is within their control and creates a circular cycle of externalization.  While everyone falls more and more into dysfunction, waiting for someone in an inherently corrupt power structure to save them, who will be functional enough to save others?  No one is saved that doesn’t want to be saved, and this is only effected by effort on their part.  This is the cold truth of reality.

If a person has a drug addiction you do them a disservice by excusing their behavior as a disease… as if this was done to them by outside forces. It allows them to use that as an excuse and crutch, or even as a means to get attention or pity. People should give them support to break the chemical addiction but should not coddle them. Appreciate their ability to stop and give positive reinforcement for this, but there needs to be disapproval and repercussions for continued destructive behavior. If they do not stop, they need to be made to suffer the consequences of their actions. The “disease” is not responsible for their life’s decisions – they are! By making them hold this responsibility they are more likely to overcome the obstacle instead of being defined by it. Agency doesn’t mean that someone is always going to do what is right for them, it means they make a choice even if some choose to not put in hard work or use will-power.  A collective of people might justify their choices, but numbers don’t make each person less responsible for their actions. The more excuses accepted the more excuses that will be made.

If people start to punish or demonize destructive actions and hold these individuals responsible, those who perpetuate the destruction will either change, leave, or soon cease to exist. If people are allowed to externalize the agency for their weaknesses, their destructive tendencies will only increase and they will for sure cease to exist in time, along with all those they influenced.  Everyone seems to give excuses for why they can’t take a stance against people in their personal life, as if being kind is the only form of care or love you can have.  If you love someone then you must love them enough to edify them and take a stance against unhealthy behaviors.  If you cannot stand the temporary disharmony in your family that will result from trying to stop their destructive ways, then you should be embarrassed to complain about how they are brainwashed into their beliefs and actions – they are coddled into them.  When met with no judgment or standards by their family or peers, people will continue down the path of whatever vice feels good…because they can.

Charity isn’t the only thing that starts in the home – correction, edification, and responsibility within your family must be started and maintained by your family, including you!  Your line is your responsibility from birth until death and in these times people forget this fundamental aspect of natural order.  In older times, not teaching and edifying your line could end you all; in easy times you still have to protect the health of you line or they will cease to exist. The world always has been a dangerous and unforgiving place – some things may change but in the end no one will save you if you are not willing to save yourself.

The Intrinsic Flaws in Nature vs Nurture: Part 2 of 2

(Please read part one before continuing on to this article.)

Two independent variables lacking a proper relationship will perpetuate confounding factors that are used in place of the controls.  The false dichotomy of nature vs nurture creates confusion to overplay nurture for some and underplay it for others.  When their relationship is zero sum, the outcomes can only be egalitarian in nature – applied the same to all.

What is hidden by this false dichotomy is that environment’s meditating function between genetic potential and phenotype is exponential, not linear.

    When the relationship between nature and nurture is linear, it follows suit that environment affects all to the same degree.  In reality, the greater the genetic potential a person has then the more environment can help or harm them – high genetic potential has a much wider spectrum of possible phenotype than a low genetic potential.

    Many of those with the highest quality of genetic inheritance will understand how environment has helped or harmed them.  When placed in a horrible environment, the high functioning are far more likely to project their own abilities and struggles onto those with low genetic potential – who are nothing like them and are even a part of sustaining the harmful environment.  In fact, the current paradigm of nature v nurture almost guarantees projection because it gives a narrative that reinforces this innate tendency.  Thus, in a declining society the dwindling high-functioning will support wasting resources in an egalitarian fashion on those it will not help, instead of restoring the natural order that protects loss of potential.

    Projection and guilt of the high functioning – who can see how much environment has influenced their own potential – perpetuates the false nature v nurture debate as normative, especially those that have had their potential brought down from the highest peaks.  It is the catch 22 that the only capable of figuring this out are the ones projecting the most to reinforce it.  This is yet another case of circular reasoning woven into the false reality created by nature v nurture.

    The perfect example of the downward spiral created by accepting an egalitarian (linear) importance of environment is the failure of Blacks in America.  No matter how many Whites project themselves onto Blacks and do for Black communities what they would need to help themselves – they cannot make Blacks, as a whole (see unemployment, incarceration, and fatherless household rates compared to the amount of scholarships and aid out there for them), civilized or a functional part of society.  There is no amount of aid or affirmative action that will change this because Blacks will waste instead of utilize it, yet this waste of resources is only increasing.

It is understandable how those not made for a civilization would feel overwhelmed by it and oppressed; Sub-Saharan Africans have shown throughout history that they can neither create nor sustain a civilization.  Instead of accepting this as their nature, liberals go on pretending they can change the genetic potential of Blacks – as if environment is an independent variable not restricted to genetic potential – which has time and again show to be futile.  This has escalated to the point that the monster they created is turning on them, yet they still refuse to see it for what it is because of their projection.

    Bernie Sanders is continually interrupted by Black Lives Matter protesters.  They are emotional and unreasonable, which seems to be confusing for so many in the coverage of this fiasco (around the three minute mark is just hilarious). The leftist emotional tier system has no method to their madness and that is because it is based off of the same premise of nature v nurture.  Their latest attempt at giving some logical form to this victim hierarchy is to use the word “power” – as if this magical thing is granted to some over others, yet no one seems to ask where power comes from.

    The truth is that many of the “oppressed” are just dysfunctional and meant for a more primitive environment.  Blacks can’t even see the strategy in not biting the only hand in the world that feeds them, yet it is the shock of leftists that truly shows how ingrained their projection is into their ideology.  Bringing the third world into a first world environment won’t turn savages into high functioning beings, it will only turn a high trust civilization into a third world hell hold.

The reality that is hidden by Nature v Nurture needs to be understood to stop the downward spiral of the world.  Keeping the primitive in line is not enough, since projection will harm the high functioning over time and lead to guilt for the plight of those with genes that no one can change.  It is important to keep the lowest functioning separate from those with more potential, as to not bring down their betters.  By apportioning resources to prevent substandard environments from destroying those with the best genetic potential, they are able to uphold all – this is the beauty of restoring natural order.  It is hard to accept the most functional reality when being idealistic feels better, but it will only make reality worse to deny it’s optimal ordering – The world needs it’s natural leadership, and to stop the unnatural expansion of the least capable.

 Setting the normative mindset to view the world in terms of nature v nurture has a snowballing effect and is driving civilization downhill. Genetic potential is the independent variable, environment the mediator variable, and phenotype the dependent variable for the Individual Epigenetic Spectrum.  The mediating function of environment in this is exponential, with the vastness of the possible phenotypic range directly proportionate to the greatness of genetic potential.  Nature v Nurture needs to be recognized as fallacious; every study and mindset derived from it is fruit from a poisonous tree.


Some closing ideas for the reader to consider:

How would this change in seeing reality affect food aid, both in-state and internationally?  If the quality of genes is important in population percentages, then expanding the mosts reckless people exponentially with food aid would be a ridiculous solution to poverty. Resources would be better apportioned if the right framing was given then there wouldn’t be so much guilt for those that can’t improve. Duty to future generations would return over guilt to the lowest functioning that are growing en masse.  How would this new framing effect affirmative action, both de facto or de jure?  Schooling systems catering to the least common denominator would be recognized as a horrible idea.  This small shift in how reality is understood could reverse the current shaming of excellence and success.  Hierarchy becomes preferable to egalitarianism, as it is more functional and just.  Unequal rights proportionate to the amount of responsibility the person can handle would be properly gauged and valued above idealistic human rights.  There are numerous ways this could apply, this just outlines the jist of it.

A Growing Tree: Of Being and Becoming

There is a balance between the states of being and becoming

To understand human connection it’s important to understand where one comes from and where one is headed. The similarity between a people is like their roots – the mother and feminine half of their vital force. There is comfort and nurturing quality to similarities; common origins and upbringing builds bonds. Shared experiences parallel shared blood. This is one half of healthy bonding between people: the state of being.

The state of being is the origin, but a tree should never be frozen in time or it brings stagnation and decay. Creation and destruction are part of life and healthy growth – they create and contrast each other to give meaning and life to the other.

Our experiences and the concrete reality of our connections are propelled forward by our creative energy. The abstract gives life and continual motion to the concrete – that connection must be maintained as a tree’s limbs are connected through the trunk to it’s roots. What mankind is now as a species, race, ethnic type, community, and family is not what it was a millennia ago, and sure not what it was 10,000 years ago. There is a steady growth on the life and death continuum that is natural and healthy. A drive to create and destroy, conquer and settle, build and explore… The abstract or symbolic is the masculine half: the state of becoming. The home births a person and raises them with nurture while the next frontier brings the passion that makes one feel alive.

It is what a people share that grounds them to give strength, yet it is the differences that enthrall them to give inspiration. In a high functioning people’s inequalities lies their growth and evolution; appreciation for these differences is also bonding. This is why a high rate of sexual dimorphism is seen in the most advanced of people – they were able to hone into the proper balance of what binds them and to what propels them, creating interdependence. Herein lies the key to why multiculturalism and the equalizing of unequal things are so harmful: both complementary sides of this balance are attacked.

Multiculturalism aims to undo the present state of being, which has been slowly woven over the whole evolutionary process and needs to continue to grow naturally, not cross what never should be or could be possible. Then the equalizing of unequal things brings down those who uphold the rest – it drowns out the spark of excellence that keeps humanity in motion and the tree of life growing. Turning the balance on both ends upside down creates stagnation.

Traditional art; infrastructure in line with the golden ratio; unique vantages; allowing people to dream; and nurturing the creative spirit while keeping people grounded; these are combined to give civilization an upward pull. These connect right down to the very essence of one’s being – the origin threaded through the rich fabric of many phases of becoming upheld in a detailed tapestry. Maintaining a healthy environment in line with one’s nature is how to get to the best of that nature, while rejecting it will have it implode on itself. The unnaturalness of the times requires force and leaves all in a stagnant chaotic mess of a world with no deeper connections. The ugliness of modern art, jarring infrastructure, tyranny of popular opinion, conditioning herd morality, multiculturalism’s chaos and the blaming of all excellence for the ever-expanding dead weight is suffocating the life out of mankind. The commonalities of people must remain separate and distinct to give any meaning to those whom it connects, and to keep appreciation for the differences in race, community, and family. The balance of what is shared with what is unequal is what truly connects and bonds people. Improving superficialities in technology for base needs and desires will never fill the void or replace this key understanding of human nature, which must remain active to continue growing for future generations.

A tree must be connected to its roots to keep growing, but the leaves will never grow back into the branches, nor the branches into the trunk, nor the trunk return the ground and become a seed once more. New seeds will only be produced by the healthy growth of that tree. One day when it returns to the ground it will bring even more nourishment to all the new life it created. True traditionalists understand their nature and want connection to the past to keep growing, not try to reverse time but find balance between where they come from and where they are headed.

Femininity Interrupted

There is a dual nature to femininity that is vastly ignored and/or distorted in its modern understanding – maternal instinct is the driving force of both.  A giver of life will be the most protective of that life.  The ability to bear children is a gift and a curse; the greatest strength and the most powerful weakness.  

Healthy blood lust of women is very deeply intertwined with the love of their children and family unit.

Maternal instinct applies to one’s children as much as it does to one’s people and future generations.  If there is nothing a woman would kill and die for then there is nothing she truly loves; the reverse, however, is not true.  When a woman becomes consumed by blood lust unchecked by the protective aspect of maternal instinct, then it is self destructive – not only to her but to all humanity. 

Feminism creates an abomination of maternal instinct.  Civilization now rejects the second half of woman’s nature, only allowing for the first to be acknowledged so that the blood thirst attached is ignored and held unaccountable.  Women are placed on a pedestal in-that they can do no wrong and their nature is distorted.

Rights and Responsibility should never be separated.

The push to hold off on marriage, love, and bearing of children in a proper household only compounds the drive of blame with no accountability.  This blame is at the center of feminism; hatred is its fuel.  Women are taught that they are to be competitive with men – that patriarchy is oppressing them.  Instead of healthy home’s bringing women completeness and purpose, they are pitted against what would fill that void.  Feminism blames the emptiness on what would heal them; what they’re supposed to bring nurture to they bring destruction.  Without this drive to protect, the love is lost.  The suppression of understanding the destructive half of the feminine doesn’t prevent it, but amplifies it, and in turn the loving half of maternal instinct is lost.

“She is wedded to convictions – in default of grosser ties;

Her contentions are her children, heaven help him who denies!-

He will meet no suave discussion, but the instant, white-hot, wild,

Wakened female of the species warring as for spouse and child.”

-Rudyard Kipling from Female of the Species

Women can’t intellectualize this loss because the design is to lead towards it.  Leftist logic is not sound, it is all based on emotive persuasion and ideals that seem good but when applied in reality are destructive – as most unnatural things are.  Feminism is a cancer; modern globalist mentality doesn’t allow for the cancer to be caught until it has metastasized.  Feminism is embedded in the globalist mindset to blame patriarchy as if males have always held females down from glory. Women aren’t taught to accept their own nature; they can’t accept what they are never made aware of.  Females are pushed to be like men, unable to see the harmony in complimenting them.  Instead of protecting their offspring and home against any who threaten their pack, the blood thirst has taken over. Women war against all mankind for the losses of what feminism has robbed them of, continuing the cycle by going from victims of feminism to perpetrators of it. Regardless of not understanding the void inside of them, they still feel its loss, but out of ignorance chose to target their salvation in revenge. “Hell hath no furry like a woman scorned.”

The pro-life movement wants to stop the effects of rebellion against natural order without correcting the causes of this evil phenomenon. What does it say about a civilization when the givers of life would chose to tare that life out of their wombs? There are many obvious evils promoted by abortion – an instant gratification mentality having a quick fix, recklessness with life, irresponsibility, the loss of traditional values, immorality, promiscuity, etc. These are all things that lead to this evil and compound it as discussed above, yet there’s a plot within pro-choice propaganda that is vastly ignored.  The deeper reasoning behind the feminist abortion agenda is to create the mentality that children are a trap set by men to oppress women.  This rejection of the masculine’s leading role for the family unit puts the future generations as the burden of her suffering in a woman’s mind, distorting the nature of the female and male joining to make a whole. The protector is then taken away allowing for women to go through eternal pain only to blame what they never knew was their shield; the nurture that sustains the male’s leadership is cut off in the same blow, turning the masculine cold.

Healthy femininity is only possible when understood for its dual nature, but also must be the reciprocal of masculinity.

Women and men should never be compared in quantitative measures for equality as the goal.  To create a reciprocal unity to one in mathematics, the product of 2 and ½ is perfect. There is no judging of the ½ to the 2 in math, yet this example will never be without animosity when applied to human nature.  The ideal that men and women must have their merit based on the same standards of comparison will only bring chaos in reality, because what fulfills women is not the same as what fulfills men.  The male and female should be judged to each other in qualitative respects – the closer they are to fitting their true nature then the higher their quality.  This wisdom is rejected by modern intellectualism and scientism.  Natural order between the sexes is too deep for quantitative analysis and will drive the female ego to repress knowledge of the id.

Humanity has lost touch with it’s innate constitution.

There is another phenomenon in addition to the aggressive blood thirst of mainstream feminism.  Instead of vengeance, there are those that can’t let go of the longing for love.  These women try to find solutions fruitlessly, since they are unable to reject the basis of modern mentality.  Patriarchy is still seen as the evil oppressors, yet these women rebel against nature in the opposite fashion by pushing passivity as an absolute for the entirety of mankind.  This is terribly unnatural – the solution is still based on the delusion of ignoring the essence of maternal instinct and rejecting the masculine all together.

If a woman’s only drive is to be compassionate, gentle, empathetic, nurturing and passive then that creates a moral paradox. When there is no discernment between how and who this applies to, these traits are applied to all which is no longer a virtue but a vice, in that it allows for passivity to overrule maternal instinct.  There is a balance between the passive-nurturer/lover and the protector/warrior of a woman.  The feminine is meant to be the passive compliment to her masculine patriarch, creating a whole – to continue the chain of life and death.  Unity of a female to her male is what creates an eternal cycle of rebirth.  The new age, hippie, and feminine/nature worship ends that cycle and leads to death without renewal by shifting the delicate balance.  Applying the passive half of maternal instinct to all is evil. Standing for everything yet nothing at all is the reason behind the saying: “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”.  

The inability to discern between what is precious and in need of protection and what isn’t turns into solipsistic inaction in the face of destruction.  Passivity, complacency, and appeasement disguised as tolerance will bring the self-righteous suicide of the world.  

The hippie style/new age mentality also ends in hatred: passive-aggressive blood thirst.  Ignoring the dualistic nature of femininity will leave the blood thirst as the only remaining aspect; whether it is aggressively hostile as the former or passively suicidal like the latter.  Without complimenting the masculine, the feminine will doom the world.

Some stories tell of how Kali fought and killed two demons. It was then, celebrating Her victory, that She drained the blood from their bodies and, drunk from the slaughter, She began to dance. Kali became overjoyed with the feel of their dead flesh under Her feet, and She continued to keep dancing, more and more wildly, until She finally realized that Her husband, Shiva, was underneath Her, and that She was dancing him to death.  Realizing this, Kali’s wildness did slow down, but only for a short while; it is believed that She will eventually continue Her dance and that when she does, it will bring an end to the world.”


The globalist mentality is egocentric, ignoring the id/nature of the sexes.  Kali fought and killed two demons – these demons represented the dual nature of the feminine.  She was so caught up in the power of blood thirst that she didn’t even realize it was her own husband (mankind) whose dead flesh she was dancing over.

Monotheism is automatically negated by focusing on its oppression in the literal sense, instead of trying to learn it’s hidden wisdom of the absolute truth.  Maybe Genesis of the Bible isn’t about oppressing women, but saving humanity from the fate of Kali – preventative not reactive.  The teachings are not to blame women but to understand that they must never dominate the male, or the world is doomed.  Traditional gender roles are to protect all from their own natures; they are not perfect (as people are not perfect) but they are the best for what can realistically be achieved. Feminism harms women the most, leaving them empty and scorned by the loss of fulfillment – the ruined possibilities of their nature’s true purpose.

I will make your pains in childbearing very severe;

with painful labor you will give birth to children.

Your desire will be for your husband,

and he will rule over you.”

The punishment for eating of the forbidden fruit was death.  The above passage is interpreted as an alternative punishment, yet it is still a death sentence.  Genesis 2 is an outline of natural order versus temptations – to not live by its teachings is to reject wisdom and eat the forbidden fruit of knowledge.  The punishment has always been death.  

Genesis tells of two trees in the garden of Eden: The Tree of Knowledge and the The Tree of Life; yet, only the Tree of Knowledge was forbidden by death.  The reason the Tree of Life wasn’t forbidden was because no temptation for it existed – they were given harmony and life everlasting.  Genesis’ blueprint for the interaction of the genders is essential for continuing the everlasting life/death cycle.  Once this wisdom is rejected, the sentence is death.  The more solipsistic and knowledgeable people become, it creates the desire of the Tree of Life – self preservation of the individual – while the rejection of wisdom brings destruction for all.

Accept maternal instinct in its entirety, allowing the blood lust to be driven by protection of what one loves – the family, the tribe, the nation, mankind – in that order.  This is only possible when accepting the submissive role to the masculine, creating the harmony of a family unit that builds up to the world as a whole.

Feminists and modern mentality of the masses equates natural order to female weakness.  It is easy to be selfish, to give into temptation, to settle for instant gratification, and to emasculate men with the laws of modern societies backing women at every step.  The truth is that the most strength is shown in standing with tradition while the whole world is spiraling out of control in suicidal rebellion.  

Accept the duality of the feminine in its best possible form; accept its role in complementing the masculine’s lead – or accept doom.