In order to accomplish something great; something truly worthwhile, your work must overcome you.  You must lose yourself to it.  It must become something which is more important — even than your own physical and psychological wellbeing.

Do not wonder that great artists so frequently overdose on drugs.

Do not wonder that missionaries go to areas of the world wrought with disease, violence and tyranny.

Do not wonder that you hear stories of soldiers losing limbs, only to fight to return to battle with their comrades.

Their work overcomes them.  That is why they are great.



«The heart has reason of which reason knows not.»

—Blaise Pascal

This simple statement rings very true to me.  It is my conviction that, on some level, human beings are entirely, 100% rational; although they may not fully understand their own line of reasoning.  Thus, the common view of man as a being struggling between a rational self and an emotional (and, by popular implication, irrational) self, is deeply inaccurate.

Emotions are automatic responses to phenomena based upon those phenomenas’ relationships to the subject’s true value system.  For example, a man who believes that a person’s body-ownership is sacrosanct will be deeply upset if he witnesses a rape.  A man who believes that killing someone is never right, regardless of the circumstances, will experience feelings of horror in the face of wars and executions, while someone who believes that under certain circumstances killing is necessary, may or may not experience the same emotions while witnessing the same events.  Therefore, emotions, contrary to popular understanding, can, in fact, be thought of as rational responses to phenomena.

Furthermore, without realizing it, we frequently act upon unidentified and unscrutinized emotional responses.  People who do this regularly (act without being able to identify the reasons for acting in such a way, post-facto) are typically thought of as «impulsive,» yet, I maintain, the reasons are there; they may be obscure, and they probably are not well thought out, yet they are there.

«Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.»

—Aliester Crowley

This statement is entirely correct, although, perhaps not in the sense that the author meant.  Mr. Crowley (of Black Sabbath fame) was a prominent Satanist and Hedonist.  Although the man was frequently cryptic of speech, one might imagine that what he meant by the statement was that one should not be held back by what he considered to be frivolous moral principles.

However, there is another possible meaning to this statement, which I think is perhaps more thoroughly accurate: that our actual value system, in conjunction with a man’s strength of character operates as law which, consciously or unconsciously, guides that man’s behavior by means of constituting his will.

So if you do a thing which is not consistent with your system of values as you understand them, what you must ask yourself is, «Is my understanding of my own value system incorrect, or is some short term sense of gratification able to override what I believe to be right?»


We walk this earth
With fire in our hands;
Eye for an eye.
We are: Nemesis!

We are with you:
Countless vicious souls
Fight; fighting for freedom.
United, we stand. We stand!

We are a legion
Voice of anarchy.
This is revolution;
Creating new disorder.

We are enemy:
Opponent of the system.
Crushing hypocrisy,
Slaying the Philistine.

One for all, all for one.
We are strong, we are one.
One for all, all for one.
We are one: Nemesis!

A malicious fever burns
In our heart, in our veins.
Your blood, my blood;
Our blood runs the same. The same!

One for all, all for one.
We are strong, we are one.
One for all, all for one.
We are one: Nemesis!

We are Nemesis!

One for all, all for one.
We are strong, we are one.
One for all, all for one.
We are one: Nemesis!

—Arch Enemy (Nemesis)

Happy 11SEP12. I hope you thanked a soldier today.


Money and power are inherently related.  This is common knowledge.  What is not common knowledge is the reason why this is the case.  And the reason this is the case is quite simple.

Power is the ability to exert influence over how others choose to expend their time, effort, and resources.

Money is an accepted, demarcated representation of time, effort, and resources.

Ergo, money and power relate to one another on a directly proportional basis.  An amount of money is a strong indicator of power, as well as being a source for the same.

An indicator: because, under normal circumstances, money is acquired by being able to constructively guide (or influence) human action.

A source: because it amounts to a direct means of accomplishing the same.

An insidious implication: when money stolen (or redistributed, which amounts to the same thing; subject of a future post), what is actually occuring is not merely theft, but also enslavement; because you are taking by force that which legitimately represents the time, effort, and resources of other people.

Contrast this to trade, which amounts to an agreement of equivalency; i.e., an agreement that a certain amount of time and effort on the part of one party, is equivalent in value to a different amount of time and effort on the part of another.

Tangential conclusion: people say that Capitalism is injust, and distributes income inequitably.

The former is not true; because the system in its strict sense, allows only for such economic relationships which each party (legitimately) in question is willing to voluntarilly agree to.

The latter is a partial truth: not everyone is «equal» in a capitalist system.  This is, for the most part, a function of the fact that not all people are equal.  Some are smarter.  Some are harder working.  Some have unique talents.  Some people seem to think this is unfair.  Such an attitude is not merely petty and resentful, but also counterconstructive.  These people should be thankful that these people are so much smarter, hard-working, talented, and wealthy than them, because this enables them to create a world that is much more pleasant to live in for everyone; they are able to do this because they understand how to allocate themselves and their resources.  If the socialists had their way, these people would be severely handicapped and we’d all suffer for it.

Caveat to the tangential conclusion: we do not live in a Capitalist society.  We live in a Fascist society.  If you do not understand the distinction (and many do not), then don’t worry; I will clarify it in a future post.


The single most critical factor to individual success is the extent to which he is embraced by the group.  In a healthy, functional social apparatus, the individual most likely to be uplifted is the one who either is able to competently guide the group to success and advancement, or is someone who is, in some functional area, indispensible to some critical function of the social infrastructure.  Frequently, the individual uplifted fits neither of these two categories.  This is a sure sign that the society is on the decline.


«The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everyone has decided not to see.»

I think that this, to a large extent, encapsulates my purpose, here.

What you refuse to see, I will lay out in such a way that it cannot be misunderstood, and I will relentlessly pusue the logical ends to which such things point.

This is my solemn promise to you, the reader.