Nadaam, Nietzsche, New World Order

I escaped Siberia, a spoiled wilderness enslaved by a desperate and defeated people.  There must be scenic solitude somewhere on this earth, sought refuge in Mongolia, no dice.  Ulaan Bataar is a bustling shit town, dirtier than it appears.  The Mongolians, I call them Mongoloids simply because I’m an irreverent fuck, seem a friendly and proud people.  They are living through the slow rape of the last of their legacy.  These are not a large people; I wade through crowds like an alligator through reeds.  I keep a knife stuffed in my front pocket at all times, it is beyond sharp.  I carry the blade not because I’m worried about getting into trouble, just because this is what’s done at the ends of the earth.  The spectrum of possibilities is wider than my cosmopolitan brain may be willing to accept until it’s too late.  I’m coiled, alert, and ready to make a deadly strike at any moment – this is the lingering effect of Siberia in me.  The Mongoloids don’t know it.  It’s just home to them.  They’re just riding the non-existant high of their history like children in a church group thinking they’re getting drunk on apple juice.  Time has passed them by.  Ghengis Khan is dead, and all his works are now dust.  They avoid this truth, like cockroaches escaping the light, shrink from it.  Clutching onto their heritage desperately, fearfully, futilely. That’s why I was here, to attend the Nadaam Festival.  It is a celebration of the three manly sports of Mongolia, wrestling, archery, and horseback riding.  Gender roles do not interest me whatsoever, but what it means to be a man, a thinking individual, affects me greatly, and at this time, in this place, those values and ideals began to resonate deep within me.

Not so long ago the Russians tricked Mongolia into selling them Lake Baikal for peanuts.  Now the Chinese are here in their quest to secure all the raw resources on planet earth to feed their collectivist hunger.  Like voracious scavengers they don’t even leave the bones of the dead.  The Mongoloids are a strange people.  They are dressed in strange fashions – a mix of eurotrash and asian ghetto, with the occasional traditional horseman outfit thrown in for good measure.  What skills do you refine in a place like this?  Avoiding the robo-pickpockets (apparently the best in the world).  Riding the glorified mules they call horses.  Picking up ‘engrish’ speaking hookers in beat up taxi cabs?  Going to the gigantic 8 story shopping mall in the middle of town?  Pretending you yourself don’t speak English when an obnoxious tourist asks you to help?  I am still edgy from the Russian redneck Riviera and a violent angst crawls under my skin like maggots.  I try not to let it show.

The funny thing is that I’m loving it here.  Here I am on the other side of the world.  All it took was a taste and I’m hooked again.  Hooked on travel, on living outside the scope of modern life.  Addicted to this freedom.  The freedom of new ideas, new people, fascinating places.  Having no roots, no ties, no limitations.  I’ve struggled with this before.  Learning illegal ideas, training in illegal skills, going to illegal places and doing illegal things.  Being proud of it, of my performance, of my new abilities, of my accomplishments.  It is good for me to have this perspective, going to the backside of the earth enables me to have an observing ego culturally.

Why the hell should I even want to go ‘home’?  The true American ideals of individual liberty are on the outs these days.  It will all be state sponsored pretty soon.  Why not just stay in Mongolia?  15% flat tax, countless business opportunities, vast and beautiful landscapes, welcoming and friendly people, pretty good food.  Any country where they make money by pulling it from the ground, that’s a place I can get behind.  We pump endless amounts of cash to aid ruined places that were all ready in ruins before whatever calamity struck it down.  Haiti, Pakistan, you fucking name it.  Fuck these places, fuck these people.  Let them solve their own problems, if they had good solutions to begin with then theses crises would not be an issue.  Fuck them, I am guiltless.

What about unemployment in the US?  Just extend welfare benefits, unemployment benefits, whatever you want.  Vote all my hard earned money right out of my pockets and give it to some worthless, jobless, piece of shit.  What about the shanty towns at home?  What about the shanty town that is my soul?  The American soul?  What is more susceptible to natural disaster, a 3^rd world shithole or the modern American ideology?  The spies were traded back while I was in Russia, weakness.  Hang them on the white house lawn.  The Russian spies’ backwards plan was simple; promote socialist ideology in the US.  I’m surprised the president didn’t give them a job.

The cool damp Ulaan Bataar air spills in through the open window of my hotel room along with a small assortment of flies.  Its 6am and the city is beginning to wake up and go about its day.  I start the day right, Ghenghis Khan energy drink.  I am an energy drink junkie.  I will regularly pop an ephedrine, slam a blue Monster, then hit the gym for three hours – crushing myself.  This thing; thick, syrupy, tastes like a drink they call multi-vita – a kind of an orange-mango-pineapple juice beverage.  I had to cut it with soda water it was so strong.  It probably should require a prescription; it rocked me up 4 levels.  I was vibrating in the stratosphere staring down on my body, watching it twitch sickly in the throes of a simultaneous heart attack and brain aneurism.  The energy is good, my jetlagged body doesn’t know exactly what the fuck it’s supposed to be doing.

It has been raining sporadically, unusual for this time of year, I find myself escaping the downpour throughout the day.  Huddled tightly together with the Mongoloids under a plastic awning.  Bodies pressed together.  Coughing on each other, wiggling, writhing, and rubbing against one another.  Disgusting.  The ground turns into a Petri dish cultivating the next flu pandemic.  I visit the festival, visit the town’s attractions.  Mongolia was occupied both by China and the Soviet Union in recent years.  The stone idols of both civilizations still stand.  I stare up at Lenin.  He looks down over the city like an angry god.  Judgmental, disappointed, insane.  I myself am feeling statuesque.  A pillar of abandoned ideals, a philosophy that the world has discarded.  A pillar of salt.  Like the Dali Lama exiled from Tibet, carrying my homeland with me only in my heart and beliefs.  Celebrating it only in my actions.  Don’t tread on me.

This place causes my mind to be brutally awakened.  These are my funerary rites.  Eating the ash of dead empires.  Observing bizarre and long forgotten rituals with deep respect to dead gods. I am the poster child for the disenfranchised. I watch with sad eyes at the homogenization of culture, homogenization of products, and homogenization of humanity.  Dollar value is meaningless, arbitrary, fluctuating around the world, but no matter where you go on planet earth, from Katmandu to Kalamazoo, a Coke in a can always tastes exactly the same.  Produced locally in every corner of the world, using local resources, and yet they all taste the same.  The new modern currency.  Food with no nutritional value.  Beliefs with no spiritual value.  Ideas with no rational value.  People with no individual value.  Nucleotide bases, genes, were all 99.9% the same anyway. So what the fuck!?  Why!?

The answer? Well, according to Nietzsche, because God is dead.

For thousands of years we have believed in religion. But in the modern world religion has become a shadow of its former self.  In the modern world we have seen the dramatic rise of science providing different, less comfortable answers to questions religion traditionally had a monopoly on. We have thrown off the shackles of feudalism with its unquestioning acceptance of authority and knowing our place. We are more individualistic and naturalistic in our thinking.

Imagine a child who is awakened in the middle of the night to be told by strangers that his parents have died. The child is suddenly an orphan. As long as he can remember, his mother and father have been presences in his life, looking after him and guiding him, sometimes firmly, but always a benevolent protection and support in a world that he is not yet able to handle on his own. Now they are gone and, ready or not, he is thrust into that world alone. How does the child handle that sudden transition?

Culturally, we are like that child. For as long as we can remember, our society has relied on God the Father to look after us, to be a benevolent and sometimes stern guiding force through a difficult world. But suddenly we are orphaned: we wake up one morning to discover in our heart of hearts that our naïvely childhood religious beliefs have withered.

So now, whether we like it or not, a question creeps into our minds: How do we face the prospect of a world without God and religion?

The answer is that modern apes are not facing it well at all.

Most people avoid the issue, sensing that even to raise it would be to enter dangerous waters. They sense that the game might be up for religion, but out of fear they close their minds and will themselves to believe that God is still out there somewhere. Life without religion is too scary to contemplate, so they retreat to a safe harbor of belief and repeat nervously the formulas they have learned about faith. Now, it is one thing for a medieval peasant to have a simple-minded faith, but for us moderns such a faith has a hint of dishonesty about it.

Socialism is on the rise, and many socialists have abandoned the religion of their youth – but only halfway. Most socialists accept that God is dead – but then they are very concerned that the State take God’s place and look after them. The mighty State will provide for us and tell us what to do and protect us against the mean people of the world.

Think of it this way: The Judeo-Christian tradition says this is a world of sin, in which the weak suffer at the hands of the strong; that we should all be selfless and serve God and others, especially the sick and helpless; and that in a future ideal world – heaven – the lion will lay down with lamb, and the inescapable power of God will bring salvation to the meek and judgment to the wicked.

The Marxist socialist tradition says this is a world of evil exploitation, in which the strong take advantage of the weak. But we should all be selfless and sacrifice for the good of others, especially the needy – “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” – and that the forces of history will necessarily bring about a future ideal world ending all harsh competition, empowering the oppressed and eliminating the evil exploiters.

Both religion and socialism thus glorify weakness and need. Both recoil from the world as it is: tough, unequal, harsh. Both flee to an imaginary future realm where they can feel safe. Both say to you: Be a nice boy. Be a good little girl. Share. Feel sorry for the little people. And both desperately seek someone to look after them – whether it be God or the State.

And where are the men of courage? Who is willing to stare into the abyss? Who can stand alone on the icy mountaintop? Who can look a tiger in the eye without flinching?

Such men exist. Every generation produces its occasional magnificent men – brilliant, vital individuals who accept easily that life is tough, unequal, unfair, and who welcome asserting their strength to meet the challenge. Those who have unbending wills against anything the world can throw at them.

But such magnificent human beings are few and far between these days.  Why?  I look back on past cultures where the magnificent men dominated: strength was prized and inequality was a fact of life. Assertiveness and conquest were a source of pride. The Japanese feudal nobility with their samurai code of honor, the Vikings who raided ruthlessly up and down the European coast, the mighty Mongolians – and of course the awesome Roman Empire.

What explains this stark contrast? Why do some cultures rise to greatness and unabashedly impose their will upon the world while other cultures seem apologetic and urge upon us a bland conformity?

There is a possible natural explanation.  All of organic nature is divided into two broad species-types – those animals that are naturally herd animals and those that are naturally loners – those that are prey and those that are predators. Some animals are by nature sheep, field mice, or cows – and some animals are by nature wolves, hawks, or lions. Psychologically and physically, this divide also runs right through the human species. Some people are born fearful and inclined to join a herd – and some are born fearless and inclined to seek lonely heights. Some are born sedentary and sluggish – and some are born crackling with purpose and craving adventure. Some are born to be slaves and some are born to be masters.

According to Darwin and Nietzsche there is little you can do about it. There are some brute biological facts here: Each of us is the product of a long line of evolution, and our traits are evolutionarily bred into us. Just as a sheep cannot help but be sheepish and a hawk cannot help but be hawkish, each of us inherits from our parents and from their parents before them a long line of inbuilt traits. “It cannot be erased from a man’s soul what his ancestors have preferably and most constantly done.” – Nietzsche

For me, evolution and original sin sound too familiar in these terms.  I do not believe that a man is born flawed or subject to actions that are not individually his own.  My views on the individual, his rights, his property, and his responsibilities would align very closely with the views of John Locke.  Additionally, I personally ascribe to a more optimistic perspective based upon the fact that humans are thinking beings.  We have a mind, we existentially exist, and we are capable of choice.  I would agree with Ayn Rand that the use of our reasoning mind to interface with the world is good, and the non-use or anti-use of the mind is evil.  The act of not choosing one’s path is then the greatest evil because it denies the philosophical facts of one’s own existence.

In this world the master types live by strength, creativity, independence, assertiveness, and related traits. They respect power, courage, boldness, risk-taking, even recklessness. It is natural for them to follow their own path no matter what, to rebel against social pressure and conformity.

The slave types live in conformity. They tend to passivity, dependence, meekness. It is natural for them to stick together for a sense of security, just as herd animals do.

What about morality, about good and bad, right and wrong? For a long time we have been taught that morality is a matter of religious commandments set in stone thousands of years ago.  Bullshit! What we take to be moral depends on our nature, and different natures dictate different moral codes.

Think of it this way: If you are a sheep, then what will seem good to you as a sheep? Being able to graze peacefully, sticking close together with others just like you, being part of the herd and not straying off. What will seem bad to you? Well, wolves will seem bad, and anything wolf-like, predatory, aggressive. But what if you are a wolf? Then strength, viciousness, and contempt for the sheep will come naturally to you and seem good. There is nothing the wolves and the sheep can agree on morally – their natures are different, as are their needs and goals, as is what feels good to them. Of course it would be good for the sheep if they could convince the wolves to be more sheep-like, but what self-respecting wolf would ever fall for that?

One’s moral code is a decisive witness to who he is, to the innermost drives of his nature.  Moral judgments are symptoms and sign languages which betray the process of physiological prosperity or failure.  So, one’s moral code is a function of one’s psychological make-up, and one’s psychological make-up is a function of one’s biological make-up.

Much of the intellectual world has moved away from thinking of reality in terms of timeless, unchanging absolutes to viewing it in terms of process and change. All of this applies to morality as well.  Moral codes are part of a biological type’s life strategy of survival, and the more we look at the history of morality evolutionarily and biologically, the more we are struck by the diversity of circumstances and how dramatically beliefs about values have changed across time.

This is precisely our key problem culturally. The evidence shows that we once prized excellence and power and looked down upon the humble and the lowly. Now the meek, the common man, the kindly neighbor are the “good guys” while the aggressive, the powerful, the strong, the proud are “evil.”

Suppose I gave you the following list of traits and urged them upon you positively.

It is good to be proud of yourself, to have a healthy sense of self-esteem. Wealth is good, for it gives you the power to live as you wish. Be ambitious and bold, and seek your highest dream. Don’t take any shit from other people – make it clear that you will take vengeance and exact justice against those who fuck with you. Seek to improve your life and devote yourself only to things that will profit you; don’t waste your time or resources. Seek great challenges, great pleasures, including sensual pleasures of the body, and go your own independent way in life, embracing whatever risks you must to develop a full and realized sense of yourself as an individual. And when you accomplish something great, admire yourself for what you have done and indulge yourself in the rewards that greatness deserves.

Now consider the elements in this list together as a whole. Does that list resonate with you? Do you feel in your bones that if more people lived this way they would live more active, fuller lives and they and the human species would realize its highest potential?

Now consider a different list of traits, and let me urge them upon you positively as well.

One should be humble, for pride goeth before the fall. The meek shall inherit the earth, and blessed are the poor. As for wealth and the rich, it shall be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven. Instead of seeking profit, one should sacrifice and give to charity. Be patient and forgiving. Turn the other cheek. Be aware of one’s weaknesses and sins, and be ashamed and self-deprecating as a result. Practice self-restraint, particularly with respect to your lower, impure, and often disgusting physical desires. Play it safe, think of other people’s needs and don’t rock the boat, and realize that we’re all dependent upon each other. Obey your parents and your preacher and the politicians.

Does the second list on the resonate with you? Do you feel that if more people lived that way they would live better lives and they and the human species would realize its highest potential?

The first list expresses the values of the master and the second list expresses the values of the slave.  I want to make it perfectly clear that the slave morality is dangerous to human potential. It reeks of weakness, even sickness and unhealthiness. It undermines the human potential for greatness, and it is, tragically, the dominant morality of our time. In our time, the traits that ennoble man are condemned, and all the traits that weaken man are praised. Morality, paradoxically, has become a bad thing; morality has become immoral.

The problem is this: Somehow the morality of the weak has become dominant, and the morality of the strong has declined.  How the hell has this happened?

Part of the historical story is that the modern world has embraced democracy, and democracy means giving power to the majority, and a majority of people are conformist in their tastes, concerned with what their neighbors think about them, looking forward to retirement when they won’t have to do anything, content to sit passively in their little homes gossiping and griping about their bosses and mothers-in-law.  The media and modern marketing can be seen as a major contributing factor to the persistence of this paradigm.  Let it also be said that the American founding fathers despised a democracy.  The United States was founded as a constitutional Republic, not a democracy, the founding fathers knowing that a democracy is in fact a fundamentally flawed creation.

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.” – Tytler

Democracy gives that sort of person power, so we should expect that democratic laws and policies will reflect the tastes and interests of that sort of person. Democracies tailor their policies to the majority – not to the exceptional few who are radicals, visionaries, trailblazers, and uncompromising risk-takers.

But the modern movement to democracy is itself an effect of deeper historical causes. If we reflect again on the elements that were on the slave side of the list – Pride goeth before the fall; Blessed are the meek; Turn the other cheek – clearly all of them come out of the Western religious traditions.

The Judeo-Christian moral tradition is to blame for the rise of the slave morality. Morally there are no essential differences between Judaism and Christianity.  Jesus was a Jew who wanted to reform Judaism, and the ensuing split between Judaism and Christianity is a matter of two variations on the same theme. Both Judaism and Christianity share the same roots and the same general approach to morality. The origin of that morality is traced back to a decisive set of events early in Jewish history, before the time of Moses. That event was the enslavement of the Jews in Egypt. If you recall Biblical history, the Jews were for a very long time a slave people under powerful Egyptian masters.

Yet we know that the Jews found a way to survive their enslavement under the Egyptians, and while their Egyptian masters have long since perished the Jews have survived, spread across the globe, and they have kept their religion and culture alive despite often horrible adversity. How did the Jews do it?

Here the Jews asked themselves some very realistic, practical questions about morality. If it is good to survive, then what policies and actions will keep you alive? And if you happen to be a slave, how does one survive as a slave? And, by contrast, what policies and actions will likely get you killed? If you are a slave and you have children whom you desperately want to survive and grow up, what will you teach your slave children to increase their chances of doing so?

In this case what is good and bad, what is moral and immoral, is not a matter of supernatural theological commandments that hold for all circumstances timelessly. What is good and bad is a matter of real-life, practical circumstances, and different circumstances call for different moral strategies.

So if your real-life circumstance is that you are a slave, what strategy will be moral – that is, what strategy will actually help you survive?

Clearly, if you are going to survive as a slave, then you must obey the master. This does not come naturally. All living things have an instinct to express themselves, to assert their power. In the case of humans the additional task of using one’s mind is also instinctual.  Yet as a slave you have to stifle your natural instinct. Or suppose the master strikes you because you did something wrong – the desire for revenge comes naturally – but you have to stifle it. You train yourself to restrain your natural impulses and to internalize a humble, patient, obedient self. The slaves who don’t do this end up dead. Slaves who are proud, impatient, and disobedient do not last long. Consequently, slave virtues of obedience and humility have survival value. And those are the traits you will drill into your children if you want them to survive. Slave virtues thus become cultural values across generations. Thus, during this decisive event in early Jewish history, the slave values became the internalized cultural values of the Jews.

Take note that obedience, humility, forgiveness, and patience are moral not because some supernatural being commanded them to be so – fundamentally, morality has nothing to do with religion. The goodness of those traits is based on down-to-earth, nitty-gritty, practical how-do-you-survive-in-a-tough-world-of-power-struggles considerations. If you are a slave in such a world, then slave morality is a tool of survival.

Now of course time passes and many people forget where their culture’s moral code came from. Or they are passive and don’t think much about it at all and simply accept the prevailing norms. And even among the slaves many are sheep-like and do not especially mind being slaves. But others resent it. And here the story becomes darker.

Some of those Jews who are slaves under the Egyptians and later masters are living human beings with a human being’s desire to live, grow, express who one is. But they cannot express it. To live as a slave is to be frustrated constantly, and the more one is energetic and alive, the greater one’s frustration.

Such slaves will naturally start to resent the master strongly – and they will also start to hate themselves for having to do what the master says. How do you feel when your boss tells you to do something you don’t want to do? Do you tell the boss to take this job and shove it, or do you knuckle under silently and do what he says all the while resenting it? And if you knuckle under often enough and resent long enough, what does that do to your soul? The pressure builds up: Not only do you start to hate the master, you start to hate yourself for being such a weakling and knuckling under. And that in turn causes unbearable pressure inside, psychologically. And that is when psychologically ugly things start to happen.

So if you are one of those who have this psychological angst how do you console yourself? How do you not descend into self-destructive rage? How do you channel all that pent-up energy and frustration in a safe direction that nonetheless lets you feel good about yourself? You cannot take real revenge against the masters, but what about fantasy revenge?

The sickening answer according to Nietzsche is what he calls ‘priests’.  These priests are the heads of religious or political movements.  And what are the priests of the Judeo-Christian tradition constantly talking about in their sermons? Isn’t it one big revenge fantasy?

They tell their flocks that it is good to be humble, meek, and obedient. But to whom is one to be obedient? Well, to God of course. But God is not really around, so being obedient to God in practical terms means being obedient to God’s representatives here on earth – and guess who those people are. Of course, it is the priests. So this is part of the strategy: form a power base of large numbers of people who are your obedient followers. You might not have quality people on your side, but sometimes large quantities of people can be a powerful weapon.

Another part of the sermon is to condemn those who are rich, powerful, and assertive – to demand of them that they give away their money, put their power in the service of the weak and the sick, and be like the lion that is supposed to lie down with the lamb and not eat it for lunch. What is the point of all these sermons against the rich and the powerful? Of course part of it is a consolation for those in your audience who are weak and poor – it plays on their envy of the rich and powerful and gives them the satisfaction of hearing the rich and the powerful getting shit talked.

But the sermon is also meant as a direct weapon against the rich and the powerful and is meant to induce in them a sense of guilt and self-doubt about who they are and how they live. The moral sermons are psychological weapons in the battle of the weak against the strong, and the weak use psychological weapons since physical weapons are not their forte. They are essentially passive-aggressive.  The priests never use physical confrontation against the masters, and the masters find it beneath their dignity to fight against an unarmed, and to them contemptible, enemy. Instead the priests use morality as their weapon of confrontation: they praise the meek and condemn the strong. Judeo-Christian ethics, Nietzsche says, “has waged deadly war against this higher type of man; it has placed all the basic instincts of his type under ban.”

The Judeo-Christian moral code becomes part of their revenge strategy. Its point is to enable the weaker to survive in a harsh world in which they are often on the receiving end of the big stick – but also to undermine the master-type’s confidence in themselves and eventually to subdue and bring down the masters so as to exact a spiritual revenge.

Standard Judeo-Christian rhetoric continually blathers on about how, despite current appearances, the weak, the sick, and the poor will triumph in the end. Their kingdom shall come some day and God will visit his wrath upon the rich and powerful.

Boiling all of this down to two essential points, the slave morality of the Judeo-Christian tradition is a two-fold strategy:

(1) it is a survival code that enables the weak to band together for survival; and

(2) it is as revenge and a power play in their battle against the strong.

Unfortunately, there is no question who is winning this battle.

All of this is a great moral crisis, and it is a crisis because the future development of mankind is at stake. What kind of species do we want to be? In what way do we want to develop? The moral code we choose will set our course. What most people consider to be the only morality possible, Judeo-Christian morality, is a threat to human development because it damns all those traits of assertiveness and egoism and independence and risk-taking that make human greatness and development possible.  That same morality praises smallness and meekness and falling on your knees in shame – all traits that undermine human greatness.

So the current dominance of the Judeo-Christian morality is an unhealthy development that must be overcome. The fate of the United States and the human species depends upon it. We must go beyond good and evil.

If God is dead then we must become gods and create our own values. Yet most people are afraid of legislating for themselves. They know there is inequality and risk out there in the big, bad world. So they want to let some higher power shoulder the responsibility. But for some precious few among us, the realization that God is dead galvanizes every fiber of their being. They respond by feeling, both passionately and solemnly: I will become the author. I will create. I will think.  I will choose.  I will act.  I will achieve. I will embrace the responsibility – joyously. I will move beyond good and evil and create a new, magnificent set of values. The founding fathers enshrined those values in the concepts of individualism and individual rights.  A man does not simply have rights at the beneficence of the state, but by the simple fact that he was born, that he is alive.  Man’s rights can never be taken by force, by religion, or by popular vote.  Man’s life is not to be subordinated by anything, not God, not State.  To embrace these individual rights means to embrace the responsibilities that go with them.  The American Revolution enabled every free man the ability to choose his path as a master of this earth, not as a slave.  We, as the inheritors of that revolution, are truly Nietzsche’s Übermensch. We have the ability to raise mankind to a higher level of existence.  Sadly, in this decaying, self-doubting present, we have lost the ability to carry this fire.  The fire that shines the light of intelligence, freedom, and choice.  We must embrace the light bringer, not the blind animal ignorance of the garden of eden.  Lucifer and not Jesus must become our champion.  Not religiously but intellectually, morally, and will full acceptance of the repercussions of this decision.  We must redeem ourselves not only from the hitherto reigning ideal but also from that which was bound to grow out of it, the great nausea, the will to nothingness, nihilism; the hero of this conflict is then the Antichrist, the anti-nihilist; this person who will be victor over God, the State, and nothingness.  I know what path I walk, your future in your hands.

Popularity: 4% [?]

Related posts:

1. Hipsters of the World, Unite!
2. Men Without Eyes Multiply Like Flies
3. Follow the Leader
4. Writhing In My Insect Fear
5. The Self-Licking Ice-Cream Cone