National Revolution and the Future of Socialism
God bless the wise, the noble and the truly beautiful.
In the lifeblood of every Briton, there is a secret yearning to throw off any form of tyranny that inhibits him or her in three key categories: firstly - the service to one's home soil and community, and the oceans and their preservation; second - a sustainable liberation and invigoration of the sex-function and reproductive life, which to this day remains subject to arbitrary constraints or fiscal punishments, and finally - the exploration of dialogues through fair and open discussion, both in the written and pictorial form, which was ever the right of anyone, but which today is booted around with contempt.
In practice, there are few idealistic and visionary nationalists, because they regard thinking and its relationship to actual practice as an embarrassing problem that they would much rather went away. Following the reckless tactics of Hitler, they hope that a contemptuous view of every portion of the masses and a willingness to tell big enough lies will get them through. That may be their way, but it is not my way. Eventually, cheats get found out, and in the age of the internet, if cheats get found out, the entire world often knows about it. Such people are like embarrassing adolescents who refuse to move on, to modernise and to re-appraise in the light of present circumstances. Furthermore, when cornered, they turn out to be pragmatists who say that something is "unworkable" because it is difficult to explain. It is one thing to seek to simplify a little, but it is quite another to descend into the language of ignorance.
The masses cannot be explained to as a whole. They require the call to instinct and at least two rational reasons to heed and improve upon it, both of which should re-enfoce each other. Only the intelligent "vanguard" elements listen anymore, and often the workers outside of universities grasp the problem long before the students.
In the long run, starting from the view of the lowest common denominator has a number of disadvantages. First of all, it involves vast amounts of dishonesty. Secondly, in our multimedia age, it carves out nothing much in the way of originality. One cannot possibly expect to please the majority today. That hope is dead. There are too many equally "simple" distractions at work. One can only build a tight and loyal cult of followers and work outwards from there. Thirdly, amongst the intelligent sceptics and opinion-formers, one can chip away at the notion that one is a reactionary fool - that there is no evidence, that there are no sound arguments. Last of all, by dispensing with absurd racial theories, one has the ear of dissident black intellectuals (most notably in America), who have persistently attacked Zionism, yet been given little credit for it. And this in turn creates a ripple effect that feeds back into white middle class circles who have been so infected with liberalism that a black critic has to make the attack for them before it is palatable.
If we were looking for a Past Master who might truly explain the European spirit as it ought to be lived from day-to-day, there is only one man fit for the job, and that would be D.H Lawrence. Today, we can see all of the themes that I began my essay with in his work. But even Lawrence could be reactionary when it came to the notion of progress - of civilisation. He would doubtless have been little-impressed by computers, by most machines of any kind. By contrast, I think that the entire nature of our networked world presents us with the best opportunity for revolution if we do away with the witless stupidity as regards our environment, our human passions and good diplomatic relations with anyone - be they British or foreign - who is progressive enough to share in a new vision for our planet.
The illusion of materialism - whether in the free-market or Marxist form - masks the nature of Jewish power behind it, which, contrary to the bizarre and outdated proclamations of certain Nazis, has little interest in material life except as a means to guilt. In Chapter 13 of "Integrity", I explain the true methods of Jewry - especially today - and how reasonable they seem to the uninitiated. What could be more Christian than to wound oneself for power, to make a virtue of weak worm-like twisting and turning, pitying and shuffling for influence? All of this could not have been concluded were it not for the Jewish nature of Christianity, which the polite Anglican has concealed under centuries of pagan Englishness.
Why on earth any supposed nationalists remain wedded to the Jewish Christ is beyond comprehension, except as a means of racial expediency - and even that is to cloak the whole pink glow of Nordic whiteness under a Semitic shadow. If one stated aim of nationalism within Europe today is to retain Nordic freshness and vitality, then why has almost every professed Christian begged on their knees to be allowed to shake hands with the grubbiest of Jew, other than they are one and the same in essence? Why is there a willingness to compromise with dirty mass prejudices and habits instead of seeking to smash and then reform them?
What sort of struggle is it that squirms on its belly, never seeking to stand tall and risk death? What sort of national pride is it that sees filth within its own race and prefers this over purity and virility in those belonging to another? Such attitudes are the last choking gasp of burning empires, not the cries of a people wedded to set principles, nor to destiny's forge and the reawakening of nations.
Can we really say that after decades of grooming into the environ of British life that not one single person of dark skin has grasped the essence of Britishness with intelligence and insight? White racism is only "useful" (if that word can be ever applied) if one assumes that the traitor tends to originate from outside of the white hemisphere. Yet what has really happened? Who among the Britons has truly become degenerate?
To understand this question, first, we need to make a serious attempt to understand what a racial group does when it panics and stops thinking. When a racial group stops thinking and panics it invariably attacks another race or becomes parasitical on it because, like the animal, that is how is survives. One even sees this at work amongst black Americans who have come to regard the racist police as part of a wider "white problem". If one paused to think a little longer and ask "Who is really friend?" or "Who is really enemy?", then the scene is set to win - instead of lose, as is the case today. Partly out a lazy cheerfulness, and partly due to my capacity to look at my neighbours with a sense of optimism, I have little taste for a "whites only" Britain and find it vulgar. Even if it were possible, it would take a Herculean feat of cultural restructuring to make that prospect anything other than a clock gradually winding backwards - either that or an obnoxious killing spree that we would not even savour when faced with a herd of mad cows. It is highly likely that such an all-white Britain would favour the old, the conservative, and people who enjoy slowing knitting themselves to death in front of coal fires.
The absolute epitomisation of what is possible with race relations - even in the grimmest of conditions - in Britain can be found in its black (African origin) communities. In some parts of Wales, they are so embued with local characteristics as to be practically indistiguishable from the other locals, save for the obvious difference of colour. Unlike in vast swathes of London, where the whole matter of settlement has been, an altogether grittier and more unpleasant affair, if anything, the "problem" with many blacks in small pocketed communities has been one of quiescence - of niceness - even though on a personal level, I have benefited from that warmth and willingness to tolerate me, often when whites regarded me with disdain. In London, there has been a great deal of Zionist manipulation of London's black gangs, by police and by the churches. Indeed, in Chapter 11 of "Integrity", I suggest that it is certainly convenient for certain powerful whites that such gangs are allowed to grow and to corrupt others in their wake.
The idea that anyone would wish to disrupt genuinely advantageous inter-racial pleasantries and handshakes because of the actions of manipulated black urban gangs (and indeed Asian groomers) and their Zionist puppet-masters is not only distasteful, it is also unwise. One only has to survey the retarded white zombies wandering around Britain's cities and towns to realise that these people are not the "great white hope" that nationalists dream of. Contrast that - and we must - with nations of people who decades ago could not speak a word of English and now speak with an ironic eloquence; people with clean dark skin who dress in suits rather than sport tattoos and T-shirts and who possess a lively sensual vitalism that is now so rare in white Britain as to be barely observable.
Many Buddhists in the Far East, and many Indians - have sought to resist Islam and Christianity, and yet the response of nationalists in the white world to this has been painfully slow, because they are unclear about the proper response when trying to resist Jewish influence, and are still wedded in their hearts to Christ the Jew. American evangelists - linked to Zionism - gloat at how many Hindus they have converted to Christ The Jew - much to the chagrin of Indian gurus about whom they neither know nor care. Worse still, the stupidity of these Bible-bashing missionaries has - by default - had the effect of bolstering Islam in India. Ah - but they say - these are not our white patriots, but coloured folk - so-called "inferiors". I would dread to think what sort of strategy it is that excludes a good tenth or more of the world's surface on the grounds that the hand one is shaking is darker than one's own! When one senses worthy vitalism in a culture, one ought not to beat it into a white-shaped hole, but harness its power.
I can say with absolute conviction that my new faith of Omeganism is a blueprint for a new national and global struggle, even for those that do not adhere solidly to it - and indeed I never make any such compulsion that they should. Its methodology is carefully designed in such a way as to give soil and water to the vital pagan instincts, without in any way eschewing the new potential offered by developments in technology and the new science of knowledge management. I have little time for rampant traditionalists who want their beads and rosaries and ancient banners as a means of appealing to the old at heart, or cheap drunken rabble rousing to excite young men to break windows and call out vulgar epithets.
The second example of where white nationalists do not think things through is in relation to sexuality - of which they are thoroughly confused, largely adopting the Jewish duplicities of "for" or "against" that they often claim to be beyond. In the matter of pregnant teenage girls, Britain is cruel and reactionary, blaming the girls for what is a perfectly understandable instinct, particularly given the pressures of modern life - and in any case, one ought to think very sternly about those who have a penchant for hammering the law into people's private bedroom habits (especially when they are often the sort that conceal troubling secrets of their own). The whole matter of sexual spanking (which is now considered even more taboo than it was a decade ago) shows how over-protected we are from the heartiness of sexual resilience. Similarly, I worry that barrier contraception - whilst an ugly necessity on occasion - has sapped the virility of youth by making pregnancy the ultimate source of shame, when it ought to be a somewhat delicious prospect.
In the homosexual sphere of my life, I am connected to a sense of feminine male purity, and to a strong dislike of the dirtier homosexual aspects that have become mainstream within gay communities. The "Gay Pride" Zionists are everywhere. Let me be clear. They do not represent me, nor have I much love for them - nor are they of much help to me when crude prejudice presents itself. The idea that I ought to publicly display "pride" about having my intimate parts prodded by some young buck is a mystery only explained by hyperactive Jewish Americans, who largely kickstarted the entire squalid affair.
It is a constant source of irritation that I am tarred with the same brush as this out-of-date and thoroughly timewarped "scene", a "scene" which has little attraction for me, and which, in my corner of England, does not understand the merit of a well-ironed shirt, a decent aftershave, or of polishing one's shoes. Older women have been the most understanding of what drives my particular urges because it has something parental in it - something generous and heartfelt that they identify with completely. This, I suspect, is the best role for male homosexual activity - as a means of demonstrating virility and purity to women and ensuring the love and loyalty of other male comrades. It is rarely so today.
Returning back to where we started this essay - white nationalists have repeatedly shown a contemptuous attitude to problems of pollution and nature, often allying themselves to the petrol engine rather than the plough. It is now possible to ride a horse at full gallop and arrive at a destination faster than if one caught a taxi. Eventually, their foolishness will catch up with them when future generations of patriots reap the poisoned whirlwind, when the air causes them to choke, and when rivers are barely fit for human use. Indeed, the same lack of sensuality that applies in the private sphere of relationships - and the same racist thoughtlessness towards people who are similar in every respect but colour - shows itself also in their anti-environmentalism.
And finally, much can be said about the encroachments of the bourgeois-Zionist state on free speech. All that is vital and raises up national and global awareness has been stifled, and all that pertains to selling - even the selling of sex - is permitted, so long as it creates a sense of guilt and self-impairment.
If you still think that you can defeat the problems of today with crudities of class or race, or by repressing rather than harness the libido, then not only do you underestimate the cunning of the enemy, but you underestimate the new social alliances that are both possible and desirable in order to win. If you persist in nostalgic boy-scout parades, then not only have you squandered any hope of a lasting victory, but any lasting sense of credible progression from the crudely-hewn torches of the past.
I have reflected, and I have studied, and I have sketched out the future for others to fulfil. You owe it the world to seize this new dawn, and if it passes you by, you will be held to account for failing to rise up with it.
LONG LIVE THE REPUBLIC!
Sunday, 5 July 2015
Thursday, 2 July 2015
In praise of ugly towns
People of Britain's "ugly towns". You are so lucky. You live in a
country that has not "cleaned up" every inch of its architecture.
Something of the grime remains, and perhaps that grime is necessary for
the time being rather than being replaced with yet another banal
shopping centre. Try visiting towns such as Retford or Warrington or little Welsh places that are "almost" towns such as Flint or Shotton. There is often a quiet contemplative joy to be had walking around those streets after the shops have closed, sitting on a municipal park bench, staring at a peeling brick wall and eating chips next to an un-emptied litter bin. If nothing else, it's an exercise in resilience.
In my experience, slick and well-presented towns such as Chester or Harrogate often attract a certain "surface" mentality, which may look good, but often loses as much as it gains. By contrast, these slightly grubby corners of our land attract the ne'er do wells, but also people who really don't care - people who like to go where there's a challenge to be met, and people who like to buy a house for £10,000 less than they might have paid elsewhere.
And there's another reason to live in "muck". If you're a political activist, radical artist, sexual revolutionary or anything of that nature, the authorities might well be too busy focusing on REAL "anti-social behaviour" to bother about you. One of the safest places I ever stayed the night - or so I felt - was in a so-called "crime hotspot". And guess what. It had some of the most beautiful streets I have ever walked on. This, I suspect, is the lesson that residents of Soho or Harlem learned long ago, and indeed the lesson Berliners know more than anyone else. "Clean up" an area too much, and all of the bourgeois net-curtain twitchers start filming you on their digital cameras.
I can honestly say, at the risk of sounding pretentious, that I used to say to my wealthier associates from the South, "Oh, you really must see this lovely little place I've found! It is an absolute delight! And the chip shop is worth the effort alone!".
So yes, my views have changed. Like most people of my "aspiring" and "respectable" lower class, I suppose I was as guilty as anyone of making certain assumptions about Dirty Britain. But scratch the surface of Clean Britain and all of the nasty middle-class prejudices and conformities come tumbling out - and suddenly, it doesn't look quite so rosy. Best live in filth where ugly people get up to all sorts and reproduce carelessly than in the well-scrubbed corners of our islands where pampered girls in designer ripped jeans take offence at the slightest deviation from their pretend-punk conservatism, mock-Essex "student" accents and fake-punk hairdos. Yes, there may be ridiculous tattoos and burger-smells and a morbid fear of non-existent terrorists and molesters, but if you are prepared to hold your nose above that, you will find places to feel at peace and feel supported - and sometimes far more so than in a beautiful but downright sinister "tourist town". You will also find busy fat people with eleven children who say "They ain't doing any harm. Leave them alone.", rather than people who have the time or the inclination to compile dossiers on you (complete with photos) and dispatch them to the local authority.
People make their choice of home for very unexpected reasons, and when we meet such people, who amongst us hasn't had a "Who've have thought it?" moment. There are, and always have been, middle-class neighbours in some of the most run-down working-class streets. We should welcome these "class asylum-seekers" who find petit-bourgeois Jewish values ridiculous, and not be suspicious of them, or think they are mocking every single proletarian in existence. Their "snobbery" - if it can be called that, is the type of snobbery that comes from bitter experience of middle-class hatred, and a rather dogged belief that their power and influence can help make a difference to workers' lives. Admittedly, their notion of workers is somewhat more aesthetically idealistic (in the D.H Lawrence mould), but then, that is perhaps something the working class as a whole has failed to grasp - the need to present itself better instead of assuming that the arguments alone would carry the day.
In my experience, slick and well-presented towns such as Chester or Harrogate often attract a certain "surface" mentality, which may look good, but often loses as much as it gains. By contrast, these slightly grubby corners of our land attract the ne'er do wells, but also people who really don't care - people who like to go where there's a challenge to be met, and people who like to buy a house for £10,000 less than they might have paid elsewhere.
And there's another reason to live in "muck". If you're a political activist, radical artist, sexual revolutionary or anything of that nature, the authorities might well be too busy focusing on REAL "anti-social behaviour" to bother about you. One of the safest places I ever stayed the night - or so I felt - was in a so-called "crime hotspot". And guess what. It had some of the most beautiful streets I have ever walked on. This, I suspect, is the lesson that residents of Soho or Harlem learned long ago, and indeed the lesson Berliners know more than anyone else. "Clean up" an area too much, and all of the bourgeois net-curtain twitchers start filming you on their digital cameras.
I can honestly say, at the risk of sounding pretentious, that I used to say to my wealthier associates from the South, "Oh, you really must see this lovely little place I've found! It is an absolute delight! And the chip shop is worth the effort alone!".
So yes, my views have changed. Like most people of my "aspiring" and "respectable" lower class, I suppose I was as guilty as anyone of making certain assumptions about Dirty Britain. But scratch the surface of Clean Britain and all of the nasty middle-class prejudices and conformities come tumbling out - and suddenly, it doesn't look quite so rosy. Best live in filth where ugly people get up to all sorts and reproduce carelessly than in the well-scrubbed corners of our islands where pampered girls in designer ripped jeans take offence at the slightest deviation from their pretend-punk conservatism, mock-Essex "student" accents and fake-punk hairdos. Yes, there may be ridiculous tattoos and burger-smells and a morbid fear of non-existent terrorists and molesters, but if you are prepared to hold your nose above that, you will find places to feel at peace and feel supported - and sometimes far more so than in a beautiful but downright sinister "tourist town". You will also find busy fat people with eleven children who say "They ain't doing any harm. Leave them alone.", rather than people who have the time or the inclination to compile dossiers on you (complete with photos) and dispatch them to the local authority.
People make their choice of home for very unexpected reasons, and when we meet such people, who amongst us hasn't had a "Who've have thought it?" moment. There are, and always have been, middle-class neighbours in some of the most run-down working-class streets. We should welcome these "class asylum-seekers" who find petit-bourgeois Jewish values ridiculous, and not be suspicious of them, or think they are mocking every single proletarian in existence. Their "snobbery" - if it can be called that, is the type of snobbery that comes from bitter experience of middle-class hatred, and a rather dogged belief that their power and influence can help make a difference to workers' lives. Admittedly, their notion of workers is somewhat more aesthetically idealistic (in the D.H Lawrence mould), but then, that is perhaps something the working class as a whole has failed to grasp - the need to present itself better instead of assuming that the arguments alone would carry the day.
Friday, 29 May 2015
The "gays" and the Jews: a marriage of public convenience
(image: "The Zionist Pink Pound" : (c)2015, His High Witness, The Prophet V)
(.....This blog is still under construction......)
The post-1945 political consensus that existed between Britain and America, and between Britain's main political parties, was a cry of "never again" in response to the atrocities committed by the Nazis against Jews, homosexuals and other minorities. Out of this sense of horror, a "victim culture" emerged in which the exaggerated stereotypes of both gays and Jews were promoted as a means of drawing attention to the obvious wrongs of physical violence against both, and other crimes that both have suffered. Consequently, a wailing stone wall of silence was built up, preventing criticism of any of the "oppositional" minorities who helped to fight Hitler, or whom were his chosen victims.
Far from destroying homophobia, homophobia has simply changed in form. Now, it is acceptable to be a "camp gay" - a degenerate to be pitied, or a "butch gay", which is still "camp" but in a different form. But if one chooses NOT to concentrate on "camp" and to be what is referred to as "straight-acting", and reject ideologies such as Zionism, one quickly finds that the "gay scene" will turn on you, even if you identify as being entirely homosexual. In Africa, where Jewish influence operates to control Christian and Muslim religions alike, open homophobia has moved south. This, in turn, provides fertile breeding grounds for the Zionist counter-offensive of a global "LBGT religion", of which the "rainbow flag" is but one symbol.
It is high time that the gay/Jewish consensus was shattered, once and for all. The above image, which I designed myself, will hopefully begin this process. Future generations deserve the right to have an open sexuality that is not defined by the Zionist "camp" (or "Camp David" as I call it).
To be continued......
THIS IS A PLAIN TEXT ARCHIVE OF ALL MY OLD POSTS.
My original blog entries will be deleted and copied to my website.
His High Witness, The Prophet V
Blog relating to my alternative spirituality, music, politics and community-related business interests.
Wednesday, 13 May 2015
Stealth Marxism and the Judeo-Capitalist Axis
Is David Cameron a Stealth Marxist? No, I have not gone mad. I am fully aware that David Cameron is a rich Etonian Tory who would sell his dead great-grandmother for manure and happily see workers kettled. But for all of his free-market liberalism, Cameron is also the peculiar inheritor of another tradition: a form of Bourgeois Marxism known as Stealth Marxism.
Stealth Marxism was born out of the frustrations of a small group of (often wealthy, and rather spoiled) far-left quasi-Trotskyite intellectuals - mostly in Britain - who decided that their dream of proletarian revolution could only be achieved by stealth: an extreme variant on Trotsky's classic doctrine of entryism. Many once-diehard radicals now hold key jobs in the City of London, the media, education and in other arenas of "respectable" power, using the analytical skills they learned from reading Marxist literature. They have abandoned any genuine and meaningful attempt to communicate with their former comrades.
Anyone who has ever experienced charges of "racism" or "misgoyny" from the "left" will notice that they are very quick to call the police or the media of the "right". What used to be dealt with informally has now become a matter of ruling-class prestige: of being "seen" to be doing something "for the women" or "for the minorities" by throwing them patronising breadcrumbs. And the irony? Many of the social groups that such measures are aimed at don't actually want them: and those that do are likely to have been co-opted as a sort of unofficial police force.
Although most of the Marxist "entryist" intellectuals found their way into the far-left parties, a handful also trickled upwards into the Labour Party. The more libertarian wing even toyed with Toryism. Generally, however, Stealth Marxism pre-occupies itself with eye-catching particularisms: radical feminism, multiculturalism and traditional set-in-stone class identities, despite the fact that other Marxists now question if such particularisms can be over-emphasised. We saw these particularisms at work in the so-called "Militant Tendency" of the 1980s. Far from providing the working-class with a legitimate platform, it is now easy to see Militant as a thoroughly bourgeois project: divorced from the cultural experiences of workers, the unemployed and even the very minorities they were supposed to advance.
Particularisms can be useful to raise particular cultural agendas that have formally been oppressed, and this never truer than in some black communities today. Radical black voices have got lost in all the furore over a largely Asian Islamic extremism, and there is this aching feeling of having been forgotten - of being left out. However, the appropriation of particularistic slogans by the free-market right shows how easily Stealth Marxism fits in with a bourgeois agenda of divide-and-rule.
We are now in a bizarre situation where some white working-class, gentile and secularist modes of living have become the new exotic tribalisms, and in some instances, victims of a metropolitan conspiracy between the free-market right and Stealth Marxism, which tends to have fallen in with a post-Blair way of thinking. Genuine cases of misgogyny, racism or homophobia are one thing - and of course, deplorable. But it is just as advantageous for our current political system to invent cases of prejudice that do not exist in order to crush mass dissent, just as it is advantageous to exaggerate or invent concepts such as "date rape" or "child abuse" where the person under suspicion also happens to hold radical views that challenge the existing order.
Stealth Marxism garners its strength from a failure to truly comprehend the nature of capitalist power. Capitalism is part of a wider religious system: Judeo-Capitalism, which produces an agitated, hyperactive consciousness, but not necessarily a truly informed one. Indeed, if that were not the case, a watered-down social democracy would very easily come into being - if only as a means of the ruling class preserving itself. In the post-1945 period up to 1970s, we saw hints that this might be the direction of travel for capitalism, but this experiment was very quickly abandoned. So what are the elites afraid of?
Firstly, to the uninitiated, the reactionary shift of bourgeois power might suggest that the ruling class is stupid and has absolutely no idea of the huge risk it is taking: not only with workers' lives, but with the very existence of the market it seeks to maintain. Well, quite clearly, that is not true. Lord Gilmour's excellent book, Britain Can Work, spelled out the risks that exist when a ruling class becomes cannibalistic and ends up eating itself.
Secondly, and more controversially, it might suggest that the ruling class knows full well that its days are numbered and has already planned an "exit strategy". Well, certainly some of its members must know this. Stealth Marxism has all the advantages of a bourgeois, particularistic strain of thinking, but none of the pitfalls. It is the backup plan for a failing bourgeois elite. Quite what form it would take in government: as pro or anti-capitalism, is in one sense irrelevant if some of the same principles are simply transferred neatly over from capitalism to socialism.
Some Marxists still operate under the delusion that fascism is the default position of a failing liberal-democratic bourgeoisie. That option is becoming increasingly untenable. For a start, the Web means that information about fascist tendencies that exist in liberalism are very quickly rooted out. Activists are not so willing to go along with crudities as they once were. The only option for capitalists is to engage in the ultimate form of asset-stripping: mass robbery of the workers on the one hand, whilst keeping a firm control over the workers' movement on the other. In Britain, that means ensuring that the wider working-class movement is Pavlovian and responds to its every stimuli: to ensure that the "revolution" is not so "revolutionary" after all.
Nationalisms, or other forms of radical religion linked to a national struggle, are not in of themselves reactionary or "splittist" (I am well aware of the Leninist terminology at work here). Indeed, they can bypass many of the filter systems that are inherent in the Judeo-Capitalist Axis, because they hint at a utopian consciousness not ground under by daily toil under the oppressive mechanism of the market. When some Marxists see these tendencies and immediately cry "Nazi!" or the pejorative of "fascist!", they do a huge disservice to the many individuals who - by accident or by design - are seeking an alternative way out to the dehumanised logic of dialectical materialism.
It is interesting to note that the grounds under which nationalism is built is slowly shifting towards a more socialist form of struggle. We see elements of this in Scotland, and with smaller parties such as the Patriotic Socialist Party in England. No-one of any importance is buying into the old racist narratives, and even those know that their days are numbered. Even UKIP - a bourgeois-nationalist party, has a membership that contains a socialist element, and which already incorporates elements of anti-racism as part of its strategy for hegemony.
When not shackled by the brutalism of Marxist logic, individual working-class leaders are likely to make naive and stupid mistakes, of that there is no doubt. Many trousers will fall down, and much laughter will be heard amongst so-called "intellectuals". But this is part of the necessary evolution that is require to take socialist revolution forward.
Let us stop laughing at such experiments, and start attempting to engage with them. Otherwise, today's bourgeoisie will be tomorrow's Stealth Marxists. And we won't be able to get rid of them quite so easily.
Posted by His High Witness, the Prophet V at 10:19 1 comment:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Wednesday, 1 April 2015
2015 - The Year of Transition
2015 is the year of transition for the Faith - from struggle and pain to stable, quiet and productive progress!
It's been years since I last posted on Blogger - and in that time, quite a lot has happened. I've been slandered, libelled, threatened, cheated - nearly got married, then I didn't.....and felt so depressed by all of this fear and uncertainty that I've not felt able to record a single track of completed new music. I have numerous hard discs and memory sticks full of uncompleted songs, and I am only just starting to look at them again with a view to releasing new music online.
Well, I am happy to report that 2015 is an extremely exciting year for me! For a start, I have just finished writing the Early Edition of my new book, "Integrity", which is about my religious faith, #omeganism, and how it works: in theory and in practice. You can Like it on Facebook by going to http://www.facebook.com/Integritythebook - and also ask me questions about it - as well as following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/theprophetv.
You might think that a book such as that wouldn't have an appeal, but I am optimistic. I've been trying to get marketing advice from the experts, but one thing I can tell you is that most of my friends are buying it, and I fully expect more sales very soon.
Another thing to mention - and this is very important - is that I now feel able to be more militant in my views - and justifiably so, given the hassle I've had. My book talks about about an entirely planned and co-ordinated "Warlord culture" operating behind the scenes that promotes this kind of thing, and it needs to be stopped RIGHT NOW! If you think that going down to your local polling station every five or so years will put a stop to it, well, you really do need to have serious rethink. These people are vicious, and worst of all, they pick on vulnerable women and play to all of their worst fears about men in order to keep their power. They can lie, they can alter computer records, they can steal from you, spread rumours that would make your own mother believe them and not you, invade your house, tap your phone, bug your Internet, scare your children, burn down buildings you visit..... In short, you name it - they can do it. They are the shadowy force that operates between the gangland world and the world of law enforcement, medicine and telecommunications and media companies. And you'll probably never, ever meet them; that's how devious these people are.
None of these warnings I'm giving you should stop you from feeling a tremendous sense of empowerment from the Faith should you choose to accept it. God is a technician, above all else, and all of the cogs in the machine are designed to work together. So you need never worry about the existence of evil, or have too many regrets, because there is a Divine Plan for you - and just as importantly, your work colleagues, your partners and family - your many wives and husbands, concubines and so on, even your household pets. Knowing what the "Road Map" is and how to get there is half the battle already won, and just barking orders at people or making them guilty about their "sins" is not only a huge turn-off, but confirms the same stereotypes about religion that have done so much damage to our spiritual growth as a species.
I used to be fearful and worry what people would think about me being so openly religious, but now I sense the excitement as 2015 progresses. The Fellow Traveller concept that I've developed allows non-religious people to contribute to my work, because there are things in it that are of benefit not just to the Faithful, but to those who have no inclinations towards religion at all. What matters is not whether you believe in God, but whether you have the progressiveness of mind to see the advantages in the Faith as and when they are of benefit to you.
I hope that this is the year that the penny finally drops - and that all the doubters out there finally get it - that I'm not out to point the finger at all unbelievers, just those that stand in the way of progress. You out there, who have read this - you can be the bridge between the Faith and the doubters. In your own very small way, you can be the revolutionary consciousness to your small corner of Britain, and perhaps, one day, the planet.
Posted by His High Witness, the Prophet V at 13:11 No comments:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Labels: 2015 - The Year of Transition
Tuesday, 25 June 2013
My e-mail to The People's Assembly: All In This Together?
Dear People's Assembly
"What can I do to help? I am out of work and very unlikely to find opportunities that I am capable of taking up.". This is my current situation, and is also the situation facing many other people. I live in Yorkshire, which has persistently been neglected by successive governments, particularly in attracting investment from South to North.
We live in some of the most challenging economic circumstances of the last 100 years. New Labour continued the Thatcherite agenda of previous governments. The Coalition extended it.
I often find myself at odds with the labour movement about ways of dealing with our current malaise. Previously, I have found the emphasis to be on existing and well-established unions and other organisations rather than alienated individuals on the margins. I am more spiritually focused than political. However, what your Assembly seems to offer is a way for different strands of opinion to come together. If that's genuinely the case, then not only will I support you, I will actively get involved.
God bless the wise, the noble and the truly beautiful.
His High Witness, The Prophet V
Posted by His High Witness, the Prophet V at 08:23 No comments:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Friday, 12 April 2013
The Troubling Spiritual Legacy of Margaret Thatcher
(early draft of full article)
Please note that as you either mourn or celebrate the death of Lady Thatcher this week, you do so in a spirit that arises from the same soul. My belief is that Thatcherism was a damaging influence in most respects, and that Britain as we know it would not have died and withered away had it not existed. However, if you look only at Thatcher from the point of view of raw economics, you are missing that point as to why she arose in the first place. Nothing exists without having some useful purpose.
Britain, as a country, thrives best when it is led by people with a vigourous sense of regal pomp and theatrical oratory - a sensibility that tends to be found most amongst the upper and middle-classes, and only very occasionally elsewhere, and which invariably has a feminine dimension, even when expressed with anger. Mrs Thatcher had it. Arthur Scargill had it in his own way, but it was with a masculine and somewhat rapacious sense of stripping away regality, not re-enforcing it. Such is the hunger for this oratory that people would be willing to see destruction wrought in its name, just so long as they can feel inspired and enter into the great theatre of real life, not merely see such pomp acted out on an artificial stage.
Women can identify with Thatcher even though they say they don't - a type of feminine, aristocratic, operatic sexuality and guile. It just happens not to be very fashionable at present. Glenda Jackson could only manage to critique Thatcher on the strength of her policies. This is not why people continue to turn to Thatcher for inspiration. Political admiration is a cover for something more aesthetic, and, dare one say it, more erotic. Mrs Thatcher might be a little too steely for my tastes, but I understand her appeal even on an erotic level.
If men have traditionally been the sweaty underbelly of society, women have always - even within the working classes - a sort of elegant aristocracy. Consequently, male grumbles about working conditions, pay and so on, when they may not have treated women any better than slaves themselves, always strike women as hypocritical. The romance is always to escape to some aristocratic utopia in which men and women are suave and far from the daily grind and sweat of working-class life. Because in truth, whatever one might wish for, the working classes - however one might seek to romanticise their struggles - are not beyond their own forms of oppression and brutality.
As a socialist, I find myself constantly poking the ribs of my comrades, warning them of the stupidity in merely become vessels for economic frustrations. But equally, as I shall demonstrate, the Tories - and now also UKIP - need their own poke in the ribs - and I can assure you that a good poking of conservatives by a thoughtful socialist is far from being a futile exercise.
Class struggle ought to be one tool in a wider struggle, not a project in itself. To inspire, not only with oratory, but a total holistic aesthetic, and indeed, in my case, a futuristic fusion of politics and religion, falls upon deaf ears with most socialists because they find something embarrassing in the sense of pomp that such an enterprise would require in order to be successful. They aspire to be "common", to be "ordinary". Ironically, those who hunger with the most depth to be anything but ordinary are certain sections of the working classes themselves
To the Socialists, I cry, despairingly: "Can't you see what you're allowing to happen? The remnants of aristocracy have mastered the higher aesthetic sensibilities in order to persuade in ways that transcend mere placards and slogans.....and you still say the same things in the same way?! Haven't you learned anything?".
To the Tories and UKIP, assuming they have stayed around long enough to listen, I say: "I know perfectly well that you have been reared on an image of socialism that embodies fear, that embodies the stripping down of higher aesthetics to a sweaty and unpalatable torso: a lack of grace, of spiritual destiny and nationhood. For this reason, and not reasons of economics, you spit out the very word 'socialism'. But have you not considered the dangers in your actions? Have you not considered that by taking the hammer to crush all those you fail to accomodate, you only put your own lives and families at risk; you only cause a sense of revolt to burn in the bellies of your opponents? Have you not seen the gathering storm-clouds over your livelihoods and those of your children?
I do not come in a spirit of hatred. So I present to you a choice. Will you choose the socialism of hope - or the socialism of fear? Either embrace the socialism of hope, or else, like the market system you cling to, that hope will be snatched not just from you, but from the British people as a whole. And all that will be left for you is the socialism of fear. And on that day, when you look out of your windows, you will see a nation not at peace with itself, but a nation in flames, and all of your dreams of Britain torn apart by the violence of despair. And when future generations look to you, and ask where you were in building the socialism of hope, all you will have left to say is that you were too afraid to change for fear of what might become of you."
There is no need to repeat the charges of economic decline that were said to be the hallmark of Thatcherism. That does little to move the debate forward. The task ahead involves making the re-distribution of wealth from a matter of fear into a beacon of hope, not only for those that are the most in need, but those that fear losing the most. It is precisely the nature of that fear that only a new and abiding faith can overcome: a British Faith for British People - a new faith (indeed) for the world, and beyond.
For those on the far-left expecting that all this signifies some bourgeois turn of thinking, I have only this to say. Materialism frustrated leads to despair. Omeganism is the faith that keeps on giving.
Posted by His High Witness, the Prophet V at 15:59 No comments:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Tuesday, 8 May 2012
Why I Am A Genius
God bless the wise, the noble and the truly beautiful.
The implication of this blog is to ask "'Rational discourse': How rational is it?". Immediately I can hear the voices of philosophers complaining about this title. "But you've just used a form of rational discourse to criticise the very thing you wish to attack!" they will exclaim. But I have already killed them, and thus, the broken genesis of my genius begins. Given that language, however nonsensical has a rational structure in any case, the only thing left to be said about this is to deny everything. If we have already confirmed the rationality in language, then surely it follows that there is nothing.....absolutely almost, possibly, everything, nothing. The only sane human reflex, then, is to make the best we can out of nothing, or almost nothing, however futile that enterprise might seem. As soon as anyone begins to claim that something is significant enough to require demands of reason to be made, they have already engaged in a deception. Like the shopkeeper demanding payment for goods with paper money that is, in truth, "worthless", we expect these little deceptions to have significance: worse, we are interrogated into relevance. We might as well now say that the moon is green, and no doubt on some level of existence, it is. Reflection is a necessary phase of thinking that can be surpassed and overcome: necessary because we need order in order to wash our hands and avoid disease, surpassed in case some new form of disease is required.
Objections will be made that without some rational processes, no court of law could ever function. We need reason, do we not? Quite so, we do not deny it for the time being. We must take whatever method gets us truth or justice before all of these things melt in front of our eyes. We must tell lies in order to arrive at the truth. We do not condemn those who do this, even at our expense. If hell exists, it must surely begin with the act of needing to write down a definitive statement. After then, a flood of other demands, both sane and insane, rush at the hungry masses, and lo, the supreme joke of civilisation begins.
The moron is more honest and makes more sense than the intellectual in one very important respect. There is very little attempt in the moron to carefully construct that which is plainly a deception. This is self-evident. Spitting, urinating, inarticulate and ignorant comments and gestures, childish rants: these may one day be thought of as acts of supreme intelligence, though one might ask that they are cleansed of a certain aimless barbarism. At present, there is a miserable process of thinking to be gone through to arrive at the final excretion, the final insult: death, in which the intellectual's nappy is encased in "soil" to prevent it from becoming "clean": therefore, it is finally clean. All of our efforts to impress with constructed ideas to prove we can argue "rationally" are, in truth, appeals to authorities that demand, nay insist upon this. Have we not seen that a philosopher (or sometimes other academics) has become an authority? Indeed, he or she is the most ruthless judge. Have we ever met a philosopher that was, at any point, structurally incontinent: better still, a school of incontinent philosophers? That would be to deny the essence of philosophers as a distinct class of predatory animal, who must, at the very least pretend to make sense. The critics of art and society, with their cases carefully prepared! This, in truth, is the madness we must somehow surpass someday. All too often, we must enter the courtroom that we despise in order to deceive the judge of our true intentions: namely, to burn it down.
Every argument is a deception. This begs the question, why say anything at all? But this itself is stupid. Does the moron who protests by throwing a brick ask this question? We are built from the same stuff as morons, and indeed slugs. Cursed by the law: the law of reason. And let me underline why this is so disgusting.
The kangaroo court is a court, just like the court of law, or "the court of public opinion", as Harriet Harman would have it. To me, the court without appeal, even as it condemns us without sufficient grounds, seems more honest that the scales of justice carefully weighed in the modern, civilised manner, otherwise, we might as well let murderers take tea with lions, for who has ever truly been guilty of murder? Honest justice is whichever diseased party has the greatest number of chains, or whips, or bombs, for what else sustains the silver tongues of firm authority but the threat of random force? There is certainly no genuine reflection in aiming a pen squarely at the eye. However, we concede that for our everyday purposes, we prefer our justice neatly wrapped in palatable pretences that seem consistent and, therefore, massage the egos of supposedly intelligent people.
The process of suprematism that those who write have, and to order others around with words.......Even a banana knows as much.
Somehow, we must cleanse both reason and justice of the stench of false balance without losing the gains that reason sometimes affords to us.
Posted by His High Witness, the Prophet V at 01:40 No comments:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Friday, 4 May 2012
Holocaust? What Holocaust?
God bless the wise, the noble and the truly beautiful.
I want people of every nationality, sexual orientation and colour to learn about my religion. I want them to see that their traditional religions and traditional political parties are simply no good for them. However, sometimes, I get angry and despair. A good example of that is something that happened to me a few days ago.
I was at a meeting at the University of Derby, and used the opportunity to protest about Rolls-Royce, who are engaged in supplying the means for mass-murder and genocide to regimes around the world. Some of the responses I got were appalling. They clearly didn't show care for those that had died as a result of Rolls-Royce. One included "Well, all that's in the past. Rolls-Royce have brought a lot of money into Derby.".
So this got me thinking. What other mass-murderous events in history are also "in the past". What is so special about one lot of brutal killers and not another? They are all killers, after all.
These crimes, these murderous events......Liberals like to create "events" to advertise that they would never stoop to "that sort of thing". We call such events the "The Holocaust" or even more banal: "9/11". But these "events" are constructed myths. Murder happened, torture happened....These are the real events. They never ended after 1945, they did not ended with the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs and they still have not ended. They did not start with fascism, they started the moment war become industrialised mass-slaughter. The victims of Belsen, or even Idi Amim, did not suffer or die so that we could turn them into advertisements for liberal imperialism: for planes carpet-bombing Iraq and Afghanistan, for the Israeli occupation of the Lebanon and suppression of Palestine. If there was a "Holocaust", it is still going on today, otherwise it never happened at all! Yet we never speak about "The Murders". Why?
The real reason is that the Judeo-Capitalist axis manages to silence every attempt to seriously address the kind of points I am raising. The lesson I learned from the apologists for Rolls-Royce is that murder is "okay" if it's the "good guys" doing it.
Well, that's also fine. If ever I needed to persuade others of the merits of fighting for my faith-nation, at least I have valid precedents to draw upon.
Every idea needs its enemy. Every ideology that has ever truly mattered has required proving itself to be superior over its rival. Justice only truly belongs to the victors, not the vanquished. And as for freedom of speech, this always exists, and always will exist, in opposition to some other freedom of speech that opposes it. This is why democracy is now in ruins and shown to be a sham almost everywhere in the world. The best we can hope for is a dictatorship that knows when to stop: out of the sheer human-ness of being human.
A spiritual government does, and must know when to stop. It acts according to clear principles. Governments based upon reforms of market economics, with no moral or spiritual counterpoint, always end in capitulation to the religion of materialism. Even the 1917 Russian Revolution: surely a magnificent victory for working-class power, ended itself because Lenin was a religious zealot with secretly anti-Marxist aspirations, but he was trapped in Marxism's flat economic body.
The nearest Britain ever had to that was the 1945 Labour Government, and even that was largely built upon the murder of Japanese citizens and enslavement to American loans. Harold Wilson, for example, far from being "man of the people" was willing to allow black people to suffer and die at Diego Garcia.
Fortunately, my faith position is that every race has its correct caste. When the Supreme Caste intermarries, and the lower castes diminish, the whole of humanity benefits, often without a single shot being fired. The principle of selective breeding and eradication of the lower castes and incorrect religions would mean no need for the type of routine mass murder we still see today.
My original blog entries will be deleted and copied to my website.
His High Witness, The Prophet V
Blog relating to my alternative spirituality, music, politics and community-related business interests.
Wednesday, 13 May 2015
Stealth Marxism and the Judeo-Capitalist Axis
Is David Cameron a Stealth Marxist? No, I have not gone mad. I am fully aware that David Cameron is a rich Etonian Tory who would sell his dead great-grandmother for manure and happily see workers kettled. But for all of his free-market liberalism, Cameron is also the peculiar inheritor of another tradition: a form of Bourgeois Marxism known as Stealth Marxism.
Stealth Marxism was born out of the frustrations of a small group of (often wealthy, and rather spoiled) far-left quasi-Trotskyite intellectuals - mostly in Britain - who decided that their dream of proletarian revolution could only be achieved by stealth: an extreme variant on Trotsky's classic doctrine of entryism. Many once-diehard radicals now hold key jobs in the City of London, the media, education and in other arenas of "respectable" power, using the analytical skills they learned from reading Marxist literature. They have abandoned any genuine and meaningful attempt to communicate with their former comrades.
Anyone who has ever experienced charges of "racism" or "misgoyny" from the "left" will notice that they are very quick to call the police or the media of the "right". What used to be dealt with informally has now become a matter of ruling-class prestige: of being "seen" to be doing something "for the women" or "for the minorities" by throwing them patronising breadcrumbs. And the irony? Many of the social groups that such measures are aimed at don't actually want them: and those that do are likely to have been co-opted as a sort of unofficial police force.
Although most of the Marxist "entryist" intellectuals found their way into the far-left parties, a handful also trickled upwards into the Labour Party. The more libertarian wing even toyed with Toryism. Generally, however, Stealth Marxism pre-occupies itself with eye-catching particularisms: radical feminism, multiculturalism and traditional set-in-stone class identities, despite the fact that other Marxists now question if such particularisms can be over-emphasised. We saw these particularisms at work in the so-called "Militant Tendency" of the 1980s. Far from providing the working-class with a legitimate platform, it is now easy to see Militant as a thoroughly bourgeois project: divorced from the cultural experiences of workers, the unemployed and even the very minorities they were supposed to advance.
Particularisms can be useful to raise particular cultural agendas that have formally been oppressed, and this never truer than in some black communities today. Radical black voices have got lost in all the furore over a largely Asian Islamic extremism, and there is this aching feeling of having been forgotten - of being left out. However, the appropriation of particularistic slogans by the free-market right shows how easily Stealth Marxism fits in with a bourgeois agenda of divide-and-rule.
We are now in a bizarre situation where some white working-class, gentile and secularist modes of living have become the new exotic tribalisms, and in some instances, victims of a metropolitan conspiracy between the free-market right and Stealth Marxism, which tends to have fallen in with a post-Blair way of thinking. Genuine cases of misgogyny, racism or homophobia are one thing - and of course, deplorable. But it is just as advantageous for our current political system to invent cases of prejudice that do not exist in order to crush mass dissent, just as it is advantageous to exaggerate or invent concepts such as "date rape" or "child abuse" where the person under suspicion also happens to hold radical views that challenge the existing order.
Stealth Marxism garners its strength from a failure to truly comprehend the nature of capitalist power. Capitalism is part of a wider religious system: Judeo-Capitalism, which produces an agitated, hyperactive consciousness, but not necessarily a truly informed one. Indeed, if that were not the case, a watered-down social democracy would very easily come into being - if only as a means of the ruling class preserving itself. In the post-1945 period up to 1970s, we saw hints that this might be the direction of travel for capitalism, but this experiment was very quickly abandoned. So what are the elites afraid of?
Firstly, to the uninitiated, the reactionary shift of bourgeois power might suggest that the ruling class is stupid and has absolutely no idea of the huge risk it is taking: not only with workers' lives, but with the very existence of the market it seeks to maintain. Well, quite clearly, that is not true. Lord Gilmour's excellent book, Britain Can Work, spelled out the risks that exist when a ruling class becomes cannibalistic and ends up eating itself.
Secondly, and more controversially, it might suggest that the ruling class knows full well that its days are numbered and has already planned an "exit strategy". Well, certainly some of its members must know this. Stealth Marxism has all the advantages of a bourgeois, particularistic strain of thinking, but none of the pitfalls. It is the backup plan for a failing bourgeois elite. Quite what form it would take in government: as pro or anti-capitalism, is in one sense irrelevant if some of the same principles are simply transferred neatly over from capitalism to socialism.
Some Marxists still operate under the delusion that fascism is the default position of a failing liberal-democratic bourgeoisie. That option is becoming increasingly untenable. For a start, the Web means that information about fascist tendencies that exist in liberalism are very quickly rooted out. Activists are not so willing to go along with crudities as they once were. The only option for capitalists is to engage in the ultimate form of asset-stripping: mass robbery of the workers on the one hand, whilst keeping a firm control over the workers' movement on the other. In Britain, that means ensuring that the wider working-class movement is Pavlovian and responds to its every stimuli: to ensure that the "revolution" is not so "revolutionary" after all.
Nationalisms, or other forms of radical religion linked to a national struggle, are not in of themselves reactionary or "splittist" (I am well aware of the Leninist terminology at work here). Indeed, they can bypass many of the filter systems that are inherent in the Judeo-Capitalist Axis, because they hint at a utopian consciousness not ground under by daily toil under the oppressive mechanism of the market. When some Marxists see these tendencies and immediately cry "Nazi!" or the pejorative of "fascist!", they do a huge disservice to the many individuals who - by accident or by design - are seeking an alternative way out to the dehumanised logic of dialectical materialism.
It is interesting to note that the grounds under which nationalism is built is slowly shifting towards a more socialist form of struggle. We see elements of this in Scotland, and with smaller parties such as the Patriotic Socialist Party in England. No-one of any importance is buying into the old racist narratives, and even those know that their days are numbered. Even UKIP - a bourgeois-nationalist party, has a membership that contains a socialist element, and which already incorporates elements of anti-racism as part of its strategy for hegemony.
When not shackled by the brutalism of Marxist logic, individual working-class leaders are likely to make naive and stupid mistakes, of that there is no doubt. Many trousers will fall down, and much laughter will be heard amongst so-called "intellectuals". But this is part of the necessary evolution that is require to take socialist revolution forward.
Let us stop laughing at such experiments, and start attempting to engage with them. Otherwise, today's bourgeoisie will be tomorrow's Stealth Marxists. And we won't be able to get rid of them quite so easily.
Posted by His High Witness, the Prophet V at 10:19 1 comment:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Wednesday, 1 April 2015
2015 - The Year of Transition
2015 is the year of transition for the Faith - from struggle and pain to stable, quiet and productive progress!
It's been years since I last posted on Blogger - and in that time, quite a lot has happened. I've been slandered, libelled, threatened, cheated - nearly got married, then I didn't.....and felt so depressed by all of this fear and uncertainty that I've not felt able to record a single track of completed new music. I have numerous hard discs and memory sticks full of uncompleted songs, and I am only just starting to look at them again with a view to releasing new music online.
Well, I am happy to report that 2015 is an extremely exciting year for me! For a start, I have just finished writing the Early Edition of my new book, "Integrity", which is about my religious faith, #omeganism, and how it works: in theory and in practice. You can Like it on Facebook by going to http://www.facebook.com/Integritythebook - and also ask me questions about it - as well as following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/theprophetv.
You might think that a book such as that wouldn't have an appeal, but I am optimistic. I've been trying to get marketing advice from the experts, but one thing I can tell you is that most of my friends are buying it, and I fully expect more sales very soon.
Another thing to mention - and this is very important - is that I now feel able to be more militant in my views - and justifiably so, given the hassle I've had. My book talks about about an entirely planned and co-ordinated "Warlord culture" operating behind the scenes that promotes this kind of thing, and it needs to be stopped RIGHT NOW! If you think that going down to your local polling station every five or so years will put a stop to it, well, you really do need to have serious rethink. These people are vicious, and worst of all, they pick on vulnerable women and play to all of their worst fears about men in order to keep their power. They can lie, they can alter computer records, they can steal from you, spread rumours that would make your own mother believe them and not you, invade your house, tap your phone, bug your Internet, scare your children, burn down buildings you visit..... In short, you name it - they can do it. They are the shadowy force that operates between the gangland world and the world of law enforcement, medicine and telecommunications and media companies. And you'll probably never, ever meet them; that's how devious these people are.
None of these warnings I'm giving you should stop you from feeling a tremendous sense of empowerment from the Faith should you choose to accept it. God is a technician, above all else, and all of the cogs in the machine are designed to work together. So you need never worry about the existence of evil, or have too many regrets, because there is a Divine Plan for you - and just as importantly, your work colleagues, your partners and family - your many wives and husbands, concubines and so on, even your household pets. Knowing what the "Road Map" is and how to get there is half the battle already won, and just barking orders at people or making them guilty about their "sins" is not only a huge turn-off, but confirms the same stereotypes about religion that have done so much damage to our spiritual growth as a species.
I used to be fearful and worry what people would think about me being so openly religious, but now I sense the excitement as 2015 progresses. The Fellow Traveller concept that I've developed allows non-religious people to contribute to my work, because there are things in it that are of benefit not just to the Faithful, but to those who have no inclinations towards religion at all. What matters is not whether you believe in God, but whether you have the progressiveness of mind to see the advantages in the Faith as and when they are of benefit to you.
I hope that this is the year that the penny finally drops - and that all the doubters out there finally get it - that I'm not out to point the finger at all unbelievers, just those that stand in the way of progress. You out there, who have read this - you can be the bridge between the Faith and the doubters. In your own very small way, you can be the revolutionary consciousness to your small corner of Britain, and perhaps, one day, the planet.
Posted by His High Witness, the Prophet V at 13:11 No comments:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Labels: 2015 - The Year of Transition
Tuesday, 25 June 2013
My e-mail to The People's Assembly: All In This Together?
Dear People's Assembly
"What can I do to help? I am out of work and very unlikely to find opportunities that I am capable of taking up.". This is my current situation, and is also the situation facing many other people. I live in Yorkshire, which has persistently been neglected by successive governments, particularly in attracting investment from South to North.
We live in some of the most challenging economic circumstances of the last 100 years. New Labour continued the Thatcherite agenda of previous governments. The Coalition extended it.
I often find myself at odds with the labour movement about ways of dealing with our current malaise. Previously, I have found the emphasis to be on existing and well-established unions and other organisations rather than alienated individuals on the margins. I am more spiritually focused than political. However, what your Assembly seems to offer is a way for different strands of opinion to come together. If that's genuinely the case, then not only will I support you, I will actively get involved.
God bless the wise, the noble and the truly beautiful.
His High Witness, The Prophet V
Posted by His High Witness, the Prophet V at 08:23 No comments:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Friday, 12 April 2013
The Troubling Spiritual Legacy of Margaret Thatcher
(early draft of full article)
Please note that as you either mourn or celebrate the death of Lady Thatcher this week, you do so in a spirit that arises from the same soul. My belief is that Thatcherism was a damaging influence in most respects, and that Britain as we know it would not have died and withered away had it not existed. However, if you look only at Thatcher from the point of view of raw economics, you are missing that point as to why she arose in the first place. Nothing exists without having some useful purpose.
Britain, as a country, thrives best when it is led by people with a vigourous sense of regal pomp and theatrical oratory - a sensibility that tends to be found most amongst the upper and middle-classes, and only very occasionally elsewhere, and which invariably has a feminine dimension, even when expressed with anger. Mrs Thatcher had it. Arthur Scargill had it in his own way, but it was with a masculine and somewhat rapacious sense of stripping away regality, not re-enforcing it. Such is the hunger for this oratory that people would be willing to see destruction wrought in its name, just so long as they can feel inspired and enter into the great theatre of real life, not merely see such pomp acted out on an artificial stage.
Women can identify with Thatcher even though they say they don't - a type of feminine, aristocratic, operatic sexuality and guile. It just happens not to be very fashionable at present. Glenda Jackson could only manage to critique Thatcher on the strength of her policies. This is not why people continue to turn to Thatcher for inspiration. Political admiration is a cover for something more aesthetic, and, dare one say it, more erotic. Mrs Thatcher might be a little too steely for my tastes, but I understand her appeal even on an erotic level.
If men have traditionally been the sweaty underbelly of society, women have always - even within the working classes - a sort of elegant aristocracy. Consequently, male grumbles about working conditions, pay and so on, when they may not have treated women any better than slaves themselves, always strike women as hypocritical. The romance is always to escape to some aristocratic utopia in which men and women are suave and far from the daily grind and sweat of working-class life. Because in truth, whatever one might wish for, the working classes - however one might seek to romanticise their struggles - are not beyond their own forms of oppression and brutality.
As a socialist, I find myself constantly poking the ribs of my comrades, warning them of the stupidity in merely become vessels for economic frustrations. But equally, as I shall demonstrate, the Tories - and now also UKIP - need their own poke in the ribs - and I can assure you that a good poking of conservatives by a thoughtful socialist is far from being a futile exercise.
Class struggle ought to be one tool in a wider struggle, not a project in itself. To inspire, not only with oratory, but a total holistic aesthetic, and indeed, in my case, a futuristic fusion of politics and religion, falls upon deaf ears with most socialists because they find something embarrassing in the sense of pomp that such an enterprise would require in order to be successful. They aspire to be "common", to be "ordinary". Ironically, those who hunger with the most depth to be anything but ordinary are certain sections of the working classes themselves
To the Socialists, I cry, despairingly: "Can't you see what you're allowing to happen? The remnants of aristocracy have mastered the higher aesthetic sensibilities in order to persuade in ways that transcend mere placards and slogans.....and you still say the same things in the same way?! Haven't you learned anything?".
To the Tories and UKIP, assuming they have stayed around long enough to listen, I say: "I know perfectly well that you have been reared on an image of socialism that embodies fear, that embodies the stripping down of higher aesthetics to a sweaty and unpalatable torso: a lack of grace, of spiritual destiny and nationhood. For this reason, and not reasons of economics, you spit out the very word 'socialism'. But have you not considered the dangers in your actions? Have you not considered that by taking the hammer to crush all those you fail to accomodate, you only put your own lives and families at risk; you only cause a sense of revolt to burn in the bellies of your opponents? Have you not seen the gathering storm-clouds over your livelihoods and those of your children?
I do not come in a spirit of hatred. So I present to you a choice. Will you choose the socialism of hope - or the socialism of fear? Either embrace the socialism of hope, or else, like the market system you cling to, that hope will be snatched not just from you, but from the British people as a whole. And all that will be left for you is the socialism of fear. And on that day, when you look out of your windows, you will see a nation not at peace with itself, but a nation in flames, and all of your dreams of Britain torn apart by the violence of despair. And when future generations look to you, and ask where you were in building the socialism of hope, all you will have left to say is that you were too afraid to change for fear of what might become of you."
There is no need to repeat the charges of economic decline that were said to be the hallmark of Thatcherism. That does little to move the debate forward. The task ahead involves making the re-distribution of wealth from a matter of fear into a beacon of hope, not only for those that are the most in need, but those that fear losing the most. It is precisely the nature of that fear that only a new and abiding faith can overcome: a British Faith for British People - a new faith (indeed) for the world, and beyond.
For those on the far-left expecting that all this signifies some bourgeois turn of thinking, I have only this to say. Materialism frustrated leads to despair. Omeganism is the faith that keeps on giving.
Posted by His High Witness, the Prophet V at 15:59 No comments:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Tuesday, 8 May 2012
Why I Am A Genius
God bless the wise, the noble and the truly beautiful.
The implication of this blog is to ask "'Rational discourse': How rational is it?". Immediately I can hear the voices of philosophers complaining about this title. "But you've just used a form of rational discourse to criticise the very thing you wish to attack!" they will exclaim. But I have already killed them, and thus, the broken genesis of my genius begins. Given that language, however nonsensical has a rational structure in any case, the only thing left to be said about this is to deny everything. If we have already confirmed the rationality in language, then surely it follows that there is nothing.....absolutely almost, possibly, everything, nothing. The only sane human reflex, then, is to make the best we can out of nothing, or almost nothing, however futile that enterprise might seem. As soon as anyone begins to claim that something is significant enough to require demands of reason to be made, they have already engaged in a deception. Like the shopkeeper demanding payment for goods with paper money that is, in truth, "worthless", we expect these little deceptions to have significance: worse, we are interrogated into relevance. We might as well now say that the moon is green, and no doubt on some level of existence, it is. Reflection is a necessary phase of thinking that can be surpassed and overcome: necessary because we need order in order to wash our hands and avoid disease, surpassed in case some new form of disease is required.
Objections will be made that without some rational processes, no court of law could ever function. We need reason, do we not? Quite so, we do not deny it for the time being. We must take whatever method gets us truth or justice before all of these things melt in front of our eyes. We must tell lies in order to arrive at the truth. We do not condemn those who do this, even at our expense. If hell exists, it must surely begin with the act of needing to write down a definitive statement. After then, a flood of other demands, both sane and insane, rush at the hungry masses, and lo, the supreme joke of civilisation begins.
The moron is more honest and makes more sense than the intellectual in one very important respect. There is very little attempt in the moron to carefully construct that which is plainly a deception. This is self-evident. Spitting, urinating, inarticulate and ignorant comments and gestures, childish rants: these may one day be thought of as acts of supreme intelligence, though one might ask that they are cleansed of a certain aimless barbarism. At present, there is a miserable process of thinking to be gone through to arrive at the final excretion, the final insult: death, in which the intellectual's nappy is encased in "soil" to prevent it from becoming "clean": therefore, it is finally clean. All of our efforts to impress with constructed ideas to prove we can argue "rationally" are, in truth, appeals to authorities that demand, nay insist upon this. Have we not seen that a philosopher (or sometimes other academics) has become an authority? Indeed, he or she is the most ruthless judge. Have we ever met a philosopher that was, at any point, structurally incontinent: better still, a school of incontinent philosophers? That would be to deny the essence of philosophers as a distinct class of predatory animal, who must, at the very least pretend to make sense. The critics of art and society, with their cases carefully prepared! This, in truth, is the madness we must somehow surpass someday. All too often, we must enter the courtroom that we despise in order to deceive the judge of our true intentions: namely, to burn it down.
Every argument is a deception. This begs the question, why say anything at all? But this itself is stupid. Does the moron who protests by throwing a brick ask this question? We are built from the same stuff as morons, and indeed slugs. Cursed by the law: the law of reason. And let me underline why this is so disgusting.
The kangaroo court is a court, just like the court of law, or "the court of public opinion", as Harriet Harman would have it. To me, the court without appeal, even as it condemns us without sufficient grounds, seems more honest that the scales of justice carefully weighed in the modern, civilised manner, otherwise, we might as well let murderers take tea with lions, for who has ever truly been guilty of murder? Honest justice is whichever diseased party has the greatest number of chains, or whips, or bombs, for what else sustains the silver tongues of firm authority but the threat of random force? There is certainly no genuine reflection in aiming a pen squarely at the eye. However, we concede that for our everyday purposes, we prefer our justice neatly wrapped in palatable pretences that seem consistent and, therefore, massage the egos of supposedly intelligent people.
The process of suprematism that those who write have, and to order others around with words.......Even a banana knows as much.
Somehow, we must cleanse both reason and justice of the stench of false balance without losing the gains that reason sometimes affords to us.
Posted by His High Witness, the Prophet V at 01:40 No comments:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Friday, 4 May 2012
Holocaust? What Holocaust?
God bless the wise, the noble and the truly beautiful.
I want people of every nationality, sexual orientation and colour to learn about my religion. I want them to see that their traditional religions and traditional political parties are simply no good for them. However, sometimes, I get angry and despair. A good example of that is something that happened to me a few days ago.
I was at a meeting at the University of Derby, and used the opportunity to protest about Rolls-Royce, who are engaged in supplying the means for mass-murder and genocide to regimes around the world. Some of the responses I got were appalling. They clearly didn't show care for those that had died as a result of Rolls-Royce. One included "Well, all that's in the past. Rolls-Royce have brought a lot of money into Derby.".
So this got me thinking. What other mass-murderous events in history are also "in the past". What is so special about one lot of brutal killers and not another? They are all killers, after all.
These crimes, these murderous events......Liberals like to create "events" to advertise that they would never stoop to "that sort of thing". We call such events the "The Holocaust" or even more banal: "9/11". But these "events" are constructed myths. Murder happened, torture happened....These are the real events. They never ended after 1945, they did not ended with the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs and they still have not ended. They did not start with fascism, they started the moment war become industrialised mass-slaughter. The victims of Belsen, or even Idi Amim, did not suffer or die so that we could turn them into advertisements for liberal imperialism: for planes carpet-bombing Iraq and Afghanistan, for the Israeli occupation of the Lebanon and suppression of Palestine. If there was a "Holocaust", it is still going on today, otherwise it never happened at all! Yet we never speak about "The Murders". Why?
The real reason is that the Judeo-Capitalist axis manages to silence every attempt to seriously address the kind of points I am raising. The lesson I learned from the apologists for Rolls-Royce is that murder is "okay" if it's the "good guys" doing it.
Well, that's also fine. If ever I needed to persuade others of the merits of fighting for my faith-nation, at least I have valid precedents to draw upon.
Every idea needs its enemy. Every ideology that has ever truly mattered has required proving itself to be superior over its rival. Justice only truly belongs to the victors, not the vanquished. And as for freedom of speech, this always exists, and always will exist, in opposition to some other freedom of speech that opposes it. This is why democracy is now in ruins and shown to be a sham almost everywhere in the world. The best we can hope for is a dictatorship that knows when to stop: out of the sheer human-ness of being human.
A spiritual government does, and must know when to stop. It acts according to clear principles. Governments based upon reforms of market economics, with no moral or spiritual counterpoint, always end in capitulation to the religion of materialism. Even the 1917 Russian Revolution: surely a magnificent victory for working-class power, ended itself because Lenin was a religious zealot with secretly anti-Marxist aspirations, but he was trapped in Marxism's flat economic body.
The nearest Britain ever had to that was the 1945 Labour Government, and even that was largely built upon the murder of Japanese citizens and enslavement to American loans. Harold Wilson, for example, far from being "man of the people" was willing to allow black people to suffer and die at Diego Garcia.
Fortunately, my faith position is that every race has its correct caste. When the Supreme Caste intermarries, and the lower castes diminish, the whole of humanity benefits, often without a single shot being fired. The principle of selective breeding and eradication of the lower castes and incorrect religions would mean no need for the type of routine mass murder we still see today.
I have moved. This is my new blog address
Dear followers:-
To all of those wondering where my old blog posts have vanished to, don't panic. I will be transferring the best of them over to this new page. This is simply to let you know that I have moved addresses. Thank you for your interest so far.
God bless the wise, the noble and the truly beautiful.
Regards and best wishes,
His High Witness, The Prophet V
To all of those wondering where my old blog posts have vanished to, don't panic. I will be transferring the best of them over to this new page. This is simply to let you know that I have moved addresses. Thank you for your interest so far.
God bless the wise, the noble and the truly beautiful.
Regards and best wishes,
His High Witness, The Prophet V
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)