I didn’t like zombie-themed entertainment that much when I was younger even though pretty much all my life I’ve liked sci-fi, fantasy and imaginative adventure stuff. I just didn’t think zombies were that interesting as monsters or antagonists. They were too human, and I hated people, so I preferred something more exotic and alien. However that changed when I read I am Legend, by Richard Matheson, around the time the Will Smith movie with the same name came out. Haven’t seen it, don’t wanna see it.

I am Legend is a novel about the last human on earth after everyone else have been turned into vampires. During the day he hunts for supplies and kills vampires, during the night he tries to survive alone in his hideout. The time when I read it was probably the loneliest time in my life, which is saying something since I’ve used to being lonely and misunderstood. Still am. I am Legend is, of course, all about loneliness. Everyone else has been turned into some sort of monstrosity and you just want to survive only to wonder what’s the point. You survive because you can still think. Ponder the meaning and the pain of it all. The novel was all about loneliness. But there was the dog. And the dog died.

Although the novel was about vampires, the basic story is nowadays seen in countless zombie apocalypse movies. Most of the people have been turned into a group of zombies, and the remaining humans have struggle to survive, and squabble among each other for resources. In fact, the Wikipedia page says I am Legend was inspiration for Night of the Living Dead, the father of all zombie movies. (Now someone is gonna bring up Bela Lugosi’s White Zombie or something. Please, save it.)

After reading I am Legend I “got” zombies. I understood the point. It’s not about the external threat, but the internal one. We are already surrounded by zombies, as have been proven by photos on the internet with people glued to their phones. Most people prefer to exist within their miniscule grid of perception, or matrix of consciousness, or whatever fanciful term I wanna coin. Yet it’s not just us against them. We all have the ability to become a zombie if we’re not careful. I hate my phone, so I couldn’t really be accused of becoming a phone zombie, but at times I am zombified  in front of my computer. Sometimes it’s just too tempting to find one more distraction, something entertaining instead of something meaningful.



Moreover a few years back I watched a Japanese anime called Highschool of the Dead. The name should be a dead (pun pun) giveaway as to the nature of the show. It’s a rather juvenile anime with panty shots and big boobs and stuff like that, and despite that/because of that I liked it. It was vulgar and violent, but at least it had the energy of struggle to live, not only to survive. One could argue that is related to the vulgar sexual innuendo. Anyway, there was one scene in the first episode (I think it was the first episode), which has been archetypally etched into my mind forever.

The school was being overrun by zombies. Plenty of surviving humans were getting eaten, and the real survivors, the protagonists, escaped. But there was one couple, a boy and a girl. Maybe they’re brother and sister, maybe they’re lovers. Doesn’t matter. The boy gets attacked and bitten by zombies, and girl has an opportunity to run away but she just stands there resigned to her fate. Either she is too shocked by this new expansion in her consciousness (which I would say finding out that zombies are real and eating her Onii-chan is) to act, or she understands full well what is happening and makes the choice to allow herself to be killed or become a zombie, because she cannot live without her Onii-chan.

The moment it happened I thought what an idiot the girl is for not escaping. But for the girl her world, her belief system had been shattered, and she did not want to go on. Her only choices were real death or undeath. The boy represents her old belief system, her habits, the things she “knows” she knows. For a lot of people losing that is unbearable. But for me the zombie apocalypse meant opportunity. You’re free of your old life and old beliefs, which means losing many of the comforts of such life, but when you lose your belief system you are free. So had I been that girl I would have run, and I did.

Coincidentally my own Onii-chan-getting-bitten-by-zombies moment was around the time I read I am Legend. Around that period of time I had come into contact with the fact that most of beliefs were false and harming me. It is not a pleasant thing to experience, but necessary to do in order not to become a zombie. I got through it and I think I’m still not a zombie. I am alive. Spiritually and physically.

I think one reason why zombie apocalypse games, movies and whatnot are popular, because they not only represent our current state of feeling imprisoned in world filled with zombies, but there is the tipping point which sends everything hurling into chaos. And with that chaos comes opportunity. As my blog is called Concordia ab chao, harmony out of chaos (to be contrasted with the Masonic Ordo ab chao). As the world is now there is some security, but too much stagnation and not much space for us living human beings to forge our own existence. But it’ll come crashing down at some point, and we have to be ready and make sure the crash is merely painful, not fatal.

We are faced with the zombie apocalypse. There are three choices: die, undie (become zombie) or live. Many people are choosing the first option. Suicides are increasing in many countries, I believe. Some choose unlife, i.e. pick some sort of pointless consensus belief system to give them some sense of stability, but inside they are dead and afraid of the organic light of life. The third option, and the correct one in my opinion, is to live. It will be the most painful option, but such is life.

I was going to write about Pod People too, but I’ve rambled on long enough. Maybe next time.



I am Legend: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_Legend_%28novel%29

Highschool of the Dead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highschool_of_the_Dead



All of the world is arguing what is the best political system to fix all of the world’s problems. Leftists say we need a leftist government with free reign to fix everything, the rightists say we need a right-wing government. Anarcho-nationalists say we need anarcho-nationalism, Libertarians say Libertarian limited government. Most people still seem to believe we can fix problems with legislation. If only we knew how to write down the correct laws, to regulate properly how other people should act, then it will all be fine. I’m not convinced.

I’m not opposed to laws per se, but I’m opposed to laws regulated by someone you’ve never met and written in a jargon you don’t understand. I’m not against people agreeing together on a set of rules or simply making agreements together. Those are sane laws, and mutually accepted laws. They don’t have to be universally applicable throughout all time and encompass the finer moral issues. No, those things should not be included in legislation. If a town wants to ban the use of pants, let them as long as they let people who want to wear pants to migrate elsewhere in peace. The way laws are nowadays most people tend to equate laws with morality. As if not obeying a law was immoral. It’s not. Raping someone is not immoral because it’s breaking the law. It’s simply immoral because it is immoral. Some folks also tend to believe in the magical power of the law. As long as we write something down, it’s somehow more powerful than simply saying it. I think the main purpose for writing things down is so you don’t forget it. Which is basically what I’m doing now. If I tried to say all this stuff in a conversation or a Youtube video I would probably forget many important details.

Hardly anyone remembers the old maxim anymore: adhere to the spirit of the law than the letter of the law. People just tend to assume that we have to fine tune laws so well no-one can mis-interpret them.

We don’t fix criminal and immoral behaviour with laws. Need evidence? Our moden society has plenty of laws and plenty of criminality. Notice the connection? However, what we have little of is respect for each other. Two individuals can co-exist with each other even if they don’t always agree with each other or understand each other if they have respect for each other. Same goes for different countries, cultures and races. You might not like the way those people over there handle their affairs, but you should at least respect them. Respect their right of self-determination.

The problem with the concept of respect is, of course, you cannot weigh, measure or regulate the amount and quality of respect available. So most people with their semi-scientific cyborg-brain cannot wrap their minds around the concept and assume it’s some old fashioned superstition. Since the government cannot regulate the amount of respect I have for you, it must not matter. No, respect is a real thing we experience from time to time. And we also experience lack of respect. It is an important thing too. Both to notice when our enemies don’t respect us, and when we have enemies we should not respect them. We should respect their capabilities to harm us, but not respect them as people.

Some people are simply completely lacking in morals and decency such as a psychopaths, criminals and most politicians. We should not gift them with our attribute of respect, we should not give them the luxury of self-determination if it entails harming us or others we respect. We should punch their teeth in, whether figuratively or literally, and make sure they cannot harm others. Respect is a fairly practical concept, and not idealistic airy-fairy one like laws, or words on a piece of paper. People having respect for each other, and retracting that priviledge when need be, does not mean that there won’t be conflicts between different people or groups, but that you can overcome such harships. Whereas people who believe in legislation seem terrified of conflict.

Concepts like human rights and equality are also legalistic bullshit. We don’t need them if we have respect. Everyone is not equal to everyone else. However, even if two people are not equal to each other, if they have respect for each other they won’t want to exploit each other. And human rights… what are they? The media and groups like Amnesty International are going on about certain human rights violation occuring in certain places, but no-one really seems to know what they actually are. You shouldn’t accept some UN bureaucrat’s narrative of what human rights are. One person’s idea of human rights might the right to vote, whereas I prefer the right not to vote. Someone’s idea of human rights might be the right to eat banana.

Respect y’all, or something.

Respect by Arethra Franklin, naturally: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FOUqQt3Kg0

American Schizophrenic relationship with the Nazis

I’ve recently been playing the latest installment in the Wolfenstein series of shooting games, Wolfenstein: The New Order. It’s not very good. It’s fun when you get to actually shoot people, but too much of the game is spent following orders the NPCs (Non-Player Character) give you or watching cut scenes. The story isn’t very interesting either. However, this is not supposed to be a game review.

Warning! *Spoiler Alert*

The plot of the game is that the Nazis won the Second World War by developing highly advanced technology. The game is set in the sixties where Nazis rule the world and you play a generic American dissident/action hero hanging around with others and completing missions. It’s later revealed that the superior technology originates from an ancient Jewish secret society, Da’at Yichud. Somehow the Nazis got their hands on that technology and were able to conquer the world. (I don’t know about you, but I think it’s rather lame and unoriginal.)

In essence the world is a global police state held together by faceless thugs with black armour and advanced technology. Among some of the features that highlight the evil and inhumane nature of the Nazis are their fierce robot dogs, flying attack drones and huge mechs. Later in the game you get to fire Nazi laser guns, fly in advanced stealth helicopters, and go to the Nazi moon base. The Nazis have nuked the US. Does this sound familiar? A bit too realistic to be an interesting fictional story? It’s because the American establishment has done most of these things.

While there is no American moon base, at least as far as I know, the US has done a lot of the other stuff in the game. DARPA has developed a cheetah robot that “can run faster than Usain Bolt”. The US is also developing an Iron Man-style TALOS robot suit. They’re, of course, been killing people in the Middle-East with drones for years. They’ve developed lasers too. The only nation that has attacked another with nukes is the US. Seemingly American politicians like George Bush and Henry Kissinger, and millionaire David Rockefeller, have been promoting the New World Order for decades (note the game title, New Order).

Let’s take a look at modern US police:

Then Wolfenstein Nazi soldiers:

It’s not the Nazis who have created the New World Order, but US, under the direction of the globalists. I wonder of the developers of the game realize this irony of the switch between the roles of US and the Nazis?

Another interesting theme is the notion that Nazi technology isn’t advanced because of German ingenuity, but it is reverse engineered from ancient Hebrew technology. Here’s another bait and switch. Remember Project Paperclip? NASA was more or less founded by Nazi scientists and their technology. Now that I think of it, maybe even modern DARPA robots are based on the technological know-how originally acquired from the Nazis. I’ve heard theories that even the two nukes dropped on Japan were taken from Germans.

It’s funny how the sadistic propaganda plot of Wolfenstein: The New Order inadvertently reflects the true nature of the American establishment, while painting a Nazi face on it. I don’t even think the real purpose of the game is to be Zionist propaganda. It’s more like a sadistic desire to find someone you can accuse of having wronged you just so you can have the pleasure of revenge, à la Aleister Crowley’s Aeon of Horus. I find the kind of sadism in the game sick, because of the attempt to make it seem morally justified, which should be contrasted with normal videogame violence that is just a bit of fun with no moralizations added.

That’s all folks. Even though I don’t really enjoy the game, at least it gave me something to think about.



DARPA’s Cheetah robot can now run faster than Usain Bolt: http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/135569-darpas-cheetah-robot-can-now-run-faster-than-usain-bolt

Obama says US Army is building a real Iron Man and no, he is not joking: http://sploid.gizmodo.com/obama-says-us-army-is-building-real-iron-man-and-no-he-1532582334

DARPA Lasers: http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Releases/2014/03/06.aspx

Apparently the Scientific Method is equal to believing whatever bullshit the Social Consensus tells you, or I hate people and I hope they die horribly

I’m drunk (which is the best way to start any blog or article). I was talking with a friend about the nature of reality, disbelief in dogma (whether “scientific” or religious) and the Matrix. You know, the usual drunk stuff. Then some random female arrived at the scene (note: I’m saying female, not girl or woman in order to be disrespectful). She said she’s been listening to our conversation for a while and asked if she could join. We agreed, and I was sort of excited about talking about philosophical matters to a stranger.

I’m not sure what we first talked about, presumably I expressed my scepticism about everything, as the female, or the narcissistic smug idiot bitch, brought up the idea that scepticism is good as long as it doesn’t go to far like questioning the effects of vaccines. I naturally answered that I do question the purpose of vaccines. There was a tedious back and forth. Ultimately she said that vaccines have wiped out terrible diseases, to which I conceded it’s possible that has happened. However I pointed out that swine flu vaccines had several negative effects on people, especially in Germany. There was some more back and forth, and then she said I should use or trust or something with the scientific method in a smug way. I was sort of dumbfounded, since I thought the scientific method meant you’re supposed to find out how things work yourself, instead of trusting some random guy’s or institution’s claim without even meeting them in person. Apparently I didn’t get the memo where the definition of the scientific method has been changed to “obey what the social consensus is”.

Note, I did not say that vaccines do cause negative effects, except for the swine flu vaccine. I rather questioned their effects, and wondered if there is something added into the mix. Apparently that is somehow ignorant and unscientific. The smug idiot bitch (SIB) did recommended I read a certain Carl Sagan book (I forget which one since I’m drunk). I don’t really disagree with her suggestion since I haven’t read any of Sagan’s books, but I don’t know what he teach me about vaccinations used in the last few decades since he died in 1996.

This is, of course, my subjective, drunk account on the incident, but I can attest whole-heartedly that she was a smug idiot bitch, and I hope she suffers horribly. I don’t really care if she dies or not, though (as might be implied from the title), but I wish she suffers. Oh no! This is not a spiritually enlightened position to take on someone who behaved like a bitch toward you. Yes it is. Fuck you. Some people, many people, most people are just fucking idiots and they deserve the shit that is coming for them. I’m being spiritual by being a real human being, a man, and getting pissed off at someone who tries to pass off social consensus fantasies as science or truth, and trying to make me feel like an idiot because I don’t buy it. Still, I’m not saying (all) vaccines are necessarily bad, but I certainly would not trust them without probable cause.

Also this isn’t the first time I’ve experienced narcissistic smugness as this, although I don’t think I’ve argued about vaccines like this before. Just question the social consensus, and narcissism is what you get.

EDIT: I saw this picture on David Icke’s website. How appropriate.


H1N1 Vaccine Deaths in Germany: German doctors issued warning about swine flu jab: http://www.globalresearch.ca/h1n1-vaccine-deaths-in-germany-german-doctors-issued-warning-about-swine-flu-jab/16208

The Unraveling Pedophilia Networks

The global pedophile network is becoming more public every month, and especially the British side of it. I guess it started with the revelations about Jimmy Savile, various other media personalities have been revealed to be pedos since that. Of course they’re still covering up for the highest level politicians and the royal family. But they cannot do it forever if the people keep pushing. The latest revelation in this is the Rotherham scandal. It’s all so fucking the sickening on so many levels there’s not much I can say that makes a difference.

The most disturbing thing is that there have to have been several seemingly decent people covering up for the high-class pedophiles. It makes little sense to blame someone like Jimmy Savile for being a monster. He was what he was, and you just have to look at his picture to notice there’s something creepy about him. It’s pointless to blame a fox for eating your chickens if you put him in charge of your hen house in the first place. Savile, and all those others, were responsible for their crimes, of course, but the greatest blame goes for the people covering up for them, and believing in those sick fucks. Supporting them, voting for them.

The most sickening are the people who themselves were not pedophiles, but helped in it, because they were too cowardly to do anything else. Or because they believed in the social order and thought hiding the crimes of the people on top was better than shaking the fabric of society. Fuck those people. I can understand a monster being a monster. I can even respect a monster for the evil that it revels in, but I cannot say the same for a normal person who covers up the crimes of others because of fear, or desire for the continuance of a system based on lies.

Is true Religion Race-based?

When we think of religion we usually associate it with world religions such as the Abrahamic religions or Buddhism. More modern religions are the New Age and Wicca. Although Wicca certainly borrows many old, pre-Christian ideas and concepts my perception of it is that it’s a light religion for people who are not religious, but don’t wanna be merely gray atheists either. A fad to occupy your time with. Yet, I don’t really see any of these religions connecting their followers to any spiritual reality. The only spirituality that comes out from them is consensus spirituality, i.e. as long as everyone present agrees on a pseudo-spiritual concept they can pretend it’s true.

True religion, or true spirituality, is something quite different. My definition of spirituality is connection to the truth. This can be contrasted with science which is intellectual knowledge of the truth, or pursuit of it. True spirituality is something that comes naturally to you, not something you have to learn at a lecture or from some hierophant. This natural religion would be the ethnic or racial religion of each individual ethnic or racial group. Every culture on this planet has its innate Pagan pantheon or animistic system of spirituality. Connection to these beliefs was something our ancestors did quite naturally. They did not need to argue over theology and form countless different sects and denominations to have their own version of the same core religion, as it is for Christians, Muslims, Jews and Buddhists. It was understood that different locations can have different gods and spirits, and certainly that different people have different gods. These religions are in our blood, whereas the world religions are in our minds.

The world religions are more of a spiritual ideology or philosophy than a religion. It does not mean that they are innately false, but must keep a certain intellectual distance to them. There are several Christian and Buddhist ideas that I agree with, yet overall I abhor the notion of following their robotic rituals and believing all of the dogma. The world religions give us various ideas such as an author gives you ideas in his book. You might agree with many of the ideas the author proposes, you might even say that you whole-heartedly agree with the overall message, yet you would not proselytize that everything the book says is holy, and to disagree with it is heresy. Not unless you are insane.

The natural, ethnic religions are different. You are a part of your personal ethnic religion whether you like it or not. It takes you back to the past of your ancestors and can also direct you to a future that you should be heading. One reason why it looks like we have no future, especially in Western countries, is that we have lost connection to our tribal gods. We either don’t care, or simply think they are childish fairy tales. But we should care as they are a part of us, those stories, those archetypes are a part of us, and knowing of our ancient religions is a necessary process to knowing ourselves. If you don’t know yourself, you cannot know anything at all.

I won’t conjecture on the possible metaphysical significance of our ancient gods here. It would take too much space.

My first hands-on experience with ethnic religion was in Japan almost 10-years ago with Shinto. Shinto (神道), the way of the gods, is the original religion of the Japanese. The name Shinto did not exist before the introduction of Buddhism to Japan, since they had no need to differentiate between the religion that was natural to them and another faiths. It was simply something natural. I too enjoy Shinto-shrines greatly. The aesthetic, the atmosphere and so on, but since I’m not Japanese I cannot fully understand it.

More recently I went to Hong Kong and Taiwan. The people there too had small shrines in their homes or even in some restaurants. Some of them had Buddhist deities (?), other Daoist or Confucian, but overall I got the impression it’s really just the Chinese ethnic religion, which has adopted Buddhist elements into it. Daoism and Confucianism are originally Chinese religions too, of course, but in some sense they have become disassociated from the ethnic religion. Not necessarily by the Chinese people, but by scholars.

Anyways, based on these experiences I though why don’t we have anything like that in Finland? Every Finn knows some stories about our pre-Christian beliefs and gods, but not that much. Maybe we should re-discover them. Another inspiration for this post is the recent trend of Red Ice Creations to promote Asatru, the Norse religion. I’m happy to see its resurgence, even though we Finns are not the descendants of Norsemen. I’ve always found the Norse myths such as Ragnarok quite fascinating. I first heard the word Asatru around ten years ago, and thought it sounds fascinating. Then I heard it was “racist”, even though I didn’t really see how, but I didn’t look further into it. I’m now very embarrassed of my past wussiness. But all true religion is racist. Deal with it.

It does not, of course, mean that if spirituality is related to your race that you should impose it on others or persecute others based on religion. It’s the opposite. Only with the advent of the “universal” religions that religious persecution has become a common thing. A sane Norseman would not presume that a Japanese man would have to follow his religion, or wise versa. Only when you take race out of religion is that this has happened.