Stefan Molyneux is a Prick

Stefan Molyneux is a “self-described philosopher”, a libertarian, a Canadian, and I’ve recently discovered he’s an aspiring cult leader. He’s done hundreds of videos, of which I’ve seen only a small fraction. I first heard about him several years ago. Molyneux seemed to have some worthwhile ideas, but I didn’t pay that much attention to him. Quite frankly I found him a bit smug, although that’s not a crime as long as the things you do and say are reasonable. I dismissed this as my personal bias, and not something I can hold against him. Until yesterday when I noticed there’s this “Molyneuxgate” going on revealing his true nature.

But first, let’s go back a year and half when I first started disliking Molyneux. In September 2013 Molyneux had a debate with Peter Joseph, the founder of the Zeitgeist Movement. I saw it on Red Ice Creations website, and I thought I don’t wanna see it, since I’m not a fan of the Zeitgeist Movement, and I think the Venus Project as presented in Zeitgeist Addendum is the worst idea ever. I didn’t want to hear what Peter Joseph has to say, since I thought the ideas he’s promoting are insanely stupid, but then I thought I have to challenge my beliefs and all that, and watch it. Besides, Molyneux was a libertarian, if Joseph says something completely idiotic Molyneux will point out his idiocies.

Well, long story short, it’s more like the opposite happened. Molyneux was passive aggressive and childish throughout the debate. He didn’t properly allow Peter Joseph to voice his opinions and arguments, moreover the little that Joseph was allowed to speak seemed somewhat reasonable, that he at least has some valid points worth considering. Moreover following the debate Stefan Molyneux made another video analyzing the debate with Joseph. In this video Molyneux basically said he won the debate, and praised his debating ability and proved he was a complete prick. I couldn’t even finish watching the video. I thought back then I should make a blog post about Molyneux’s inane behaviour, but decided against it, since I didn’t want to stir division in the “truth movement” and all that. Now I wish I had, since I could have said “told you so”, Stefan Molyneux is an asshole. Now I can only say I’m telling you now, he’s an asshole.

Yesterday I discovered that Peter Joseph had made a response video to Molyneux’s commentary on the debate where he points out just what a prick Molyneux is. I’m still not convinced at all by the Zeitgeist Movement, but at least this incident made Peter Joseph seem like a decent, rational human being, which is not something that can be said about Stefan Molyneux. Although I didn’t take it as a final verdict that Molyneux is an asshole, I regarded it merely as Molyneux acting like an asshole in this occasion.

Yesterday I was browsing the Youtube channel of someone called Thunderf00t. There I saw a video titled Stefan Molyneux: BUSTED. The video makes the argument that Molyneux acts like a cult leader, moreover he’s used copyright laws to take down videos on Youtube that criticize him, he’s lied about his psychologist wife being reprimanded for giving about false advice. And to top it all off, he advocates “defooing” for his followers. It means his followers should cut off all of their connections to their families, because all parents are abusive of some shit like that. I hadn’t heard about this defooing stuff before yesterday, but that certainly is some cult-like shit.

I wondered is this Thunderf00t guy correct in his accusations, and it didn’t take long to find out he seems to be. There’s some libertarian radio program Freedom Feens that has interviewed Molyneux’s former Inner Circle members that point out some of the cult leader-like behaviour of Molyneux. After the debate debacle with Peter Joseph, it wouldn’t have taken much convince me of the immoral nature of Stefan Molyneux, but Youtube is awash with videos highlighting the douche-baggery of Molyneux. And I don’t think it’s the government or the Illuminati trying to discredit him for getting too close to the truth. I think Molyneux discredits himself quite well by his own behaviour.

In conclusion, Stefan Molyneux is a prick. Don’t just take my word for, look into it yourself.


But one more thing. I’ve never liked how Molyneux calls himself a philosopher. If you go to the about section of my blog, you can see I call myself a wannabe-philosopher. For I take the title “philosopher” to be extremely prestigious, and I hope I can achieve it in this lifetime, but it is not something I can grant myself. It is something other people can say about me. If 100 years after I’m dead, people are still discussing my ideas, you could call me philosopher, but as yet I am merely a wannabe.

I also recognize some traits in Molyneux that I possess. His extreme narcissism is something that could affect me, if it was nurtured by hundreds of sycophants. Fortunately I’m just a blogger with a handful of readers.


EDIT: Molyneux Vaccination:

EDIT 2: I’ll add a list of Youtubers and their channels of people who express reasonable criticism of Molyneux in several of their videos.

TruMirror, which is a mirror of the videos by TruShibes, who was victim of DMCA claims and had her channel pulled off:



Jim Jesus:

Philosophy Lines:



Freedomain Radio, Molyneux’s site:

Peter Joseph and Stefan Molyneux debate:

Molyneux’s response:

Joseph’s response:

Stefan Molyneux: BUSTED by Thunderf00t:


The Truth About Stefan Molyneux, from Two People Who Were in His Inner Circle – Freedom Feens:

Mother of Stefan Molyneux Cult Victim Speaks:

Jesus and Buddha are not good Role Models

In modern times, since the end of the Second World War I’d say, this notion of the ideal human being someone like Jesus and Buddha has become quite popular. We’re supposed to be kind, compassionate, loving and pacifistic like them. Jesus is depicted as a loving, non-judgemental hippie who hardly ever acts aggressively, yet things simply go his way because he spiritually rises above petty human concerns. Quite frankly that’s a harmful archetype that has caused a lot of damage in the last few decades.



I am not criticizing the mythological or historical, whichever way you perceive these characters, account of Jesus or Buddha. They may or may not have had many more varied qualities in the scriptures describing their deeds. I am addressing the archetypal image fairly prevalent in modern times where the ideal person is only about love, compassion and acceptance. All of the nasty stuff simply seems to be deflected off from the aura of benevolence around them. Jesus doesn’t have worry about being mugged in a dark alleyway. Buddha doesn’t need to address how to prevent mass rapes perpetrated by sick criminals. When we are considering such holy notions as love and compassion, these brutal facts simply seem to slip out of our minds.

This mindset is dangerous and harmful, because it basically makes us hate reality as it is. Regardless of whether people are religious, atheist or whatever, many people seem have bought into, as I have in the past, that the ideal we should strive for is this sinless paragon of virtue. We should never be hateful, angry, judgemental or selfish, yet the world sort of forces us to do that sometimes. We have to fight for our place in the world, we have to fight to get what we want or deserve. We understand there are nasty, criminal people in the world, yet we are not equipped to handle it with mere love and compassion. Still we try to reconcile these two mutually exclusive beliefs; the ideal of being meek and non-judgemental, and the unfortunate fact that the world is often unfair and dangerous. This often makes us resent reality for the nastiness inherent in it, when in fact we should resent the childishly idealistic notion of morality. It’s not the world’s fault that it contains a lot nasty and dangerous stuff, in addition to the awesome stuff in it. We can be equipped to deal with if we face it head on in a realistic manner. But if we try to hold onto this inorganic ideology that we should be somehow morally infallible, or even inhuman, we will fail.

Jesus is not a good role model. He is simplistic. He has an everpresent dictator, God, watching over him, conspiring so that things go his way. In this narrative the deck is stacked in his favour. Yours isn’t. So don’t resent the world that it doesn’t allow the archetypal Jesus to exist. He is not real.

The Religious Right is not like this. They’re not all forgiving. They’re quite judgemental on many issues. I may not agree with them on many things, but I’m getting more sympathetic with their overall attitude.

Let’s take a look at other mythological heroes that are better role models.

The 12 labours of Hercules from Greek myth is quite famous. He got shit done, instead of just sitting on his ass being all holy. He killed a shapeshifting lion, and the hydra. Those required both bravery and strength. He was given various tasks to capture a bunch of other animals too. Hercules was forced to clean the Aegean stables with 30 years worth dung in them. He did it by rerouting two rivers to wash the stables. This required intelligence and industriousness. One task was morally questionable, since he has to steal some horses, the Mares of Diomedes. Not part of 12 Labours is the manliest task ever, he impregnated 49 virgins in one night.

Yamato Takeru is apparenly based on a historical person, but has become a part of Japanese mythology. He was a bad ass prince, a son of the emperor, who bravely killed lots of enemies, crushed rebellions and so on. In one quest he was supposed to kill two brothers, so he dressed up as a woman to gain entrance to their palace to kill them. (Possibly the game Final Fantasy VII was inspired by Yamato Takeru, since in one part the main character dresses up as a woman to gain entrance to the palace of a mafia boss.)

Yamato Takeru also killed his brother, either as accident ormaybe he was just an asshole. He also angered a god who cursed him. He got a mystical sword Kusanagi no Tsurugi, which was found in the body of a 8-headed and 8-tailed dragon (sort of like the hydra?), although he didn’t kill it.

Cuchulainn is a Celtic hero who was a tough fighter, romanced many women and killed an enormous hound. Not everything in his life was nice heroic stuff, since he killed his son mistaking him for someone else, and was grief stricken.

Cuchulainn deserves a longer description, as do the Hercules and Yamato Takeru, and I’d like to mention many other mythological heroes here, but quite frankly I’m getting sleepy. I think you get my point nonetheless. These other mythological archetypes are men who did stuff, they affected the world, fought battles, romanced maidens, and also had flaws and did morally dubious or reprehensible things. They’re the kinds of stories that should inspire us. No-one is perfect, we all make mistakes, but despite that we can arise beyond the limitations of our humanity and do something worthwhile. It’s better than aspiring to be a hippie, since they didn’t accomplish much. They didn’t stop the Vietnam war, and the military industrial complex is still going strong today.

And no, I’m not saying you should literally emulate these heroes and go kill people. Don’t be an asshole.



Labours of Hercules:

49 virgins:

Yamato Takeru:

More Takeru:

And more:

8-headed dragon:


Others sources:

The Ultimate Encyclopedia of Mythology by Arhur Cotterell and Rachel Storm

Bitcoin looks like a Cult to me

I was browsing Youtube and discovered the channel of a girl (I’m being sexist here saying girl, not woman, because she’s kinda cute) named BraveTheWorld. She’s got some nice videos on feminism and abortion. Then I noticed she’s got several videos on Bitcoin. Around a year ago I rambled on about the Mark of the Beast incoherently and suggested a possible connection to Bitcoin and the Mark. My views haven’t really changed on that.

One video by BraveTheWorld is titled How to be a Bitcoin Hater. It sounded fun so I watched it. The video basically makes fun of people who do not like Bitcoin, and marks that up to ignorance, and ends with a silly honey badger meme. (Honey badgers are cool, but that’s beside the point.) Despite the condescending attitude, the video made a good point: I should research Bitcoin, instead of condemning it based on ignorance. So I did, research it and then condemned it based on ignorance.

First, I went to I looked at a page titled How does Bitcoin work? It starts off by saying: “As a new user, you can get started with Bitcoin without understanding the technical details.” Nice. That’s just what I wanna hear getting into it a little bit hopeful it might a liberating new technology, but worried it might just be another scam. Blindly throw your money at us, you won’t regret it. Sure…

That page was short and superficial as all fuck, but at the end was a link to another document, the original paper on Bitcoin by the elusive Creator Satoshi Nakamoto. It starts off by saying: “A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution.” P2P sounds good. But soon after the document states: “What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party.” I agree with the bit about getting rid of the third party, but I don’t think having to trust the people you do business with is a problem. I thought trust was the basis of all trade, and not some maths nerd’s “cryptographic proof”? Or maybe “trust” here refers to some economic specialist explanation of the word.

Long story short, I read the document. It’s only 9-pages, and I guess I understand the Bitcoin blockchain stuff a bit better than I did before, but I still don’t really understand it. I’m not a computer programmer or a mathematician. There’s sentences like: “we propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer distributed timestamp server to generate computational proof of the chronological order of transactions.” I’ve seen every single episode of Star Trek from the Original Series to Enterprise, and that technobabble is still mostly incomprehensible to me. I can understand maybe half of it, but unfortunately it is not enough. Moreover there are abstract mathematical formulas at the end of the paper, *gag*.

Maybe I’m just a fucking idiot, but I figure this stuff is too complicated for me, and requires special expertise that I lack, to understand. Therefore I should stay the hell out of it. I’d have to study computer cryptography two years in universite before I could make heads or tails out of it.

What I do know about Bitcoin, however, is that no-one knows who or what the creator of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto, is. The fanboys and girls seem to be happily oblivious of this omission in public knowledge.

BraveTheWorld is gushing with excitement on Prison Planet/Inforwars being interviewed by Paul Joseph Watson that Bitcoin’s blockchain technology is disruptive against governments. It’s freedom of speech, and all that. How? She transmits her excitement and emotion very well, but not the concrete facts of what makes Bitcoin so great. That’s what I always hear when Bitcoin enthusiasts talk about. I don’t buy the hype.

Just to be sure I’m not being suspicious of Bitcoin because of mere ignorance, I watched a video, which explains How Bitcoin Works Under the Hood. It sounds OK in theory, but as Homer Simpson said “in theory Communism works”. Based on the video and BraveTheWorld’s explanation I gather that Bitcoin relies on the assumption that it is rare or unlikely something will go wrong, or that someone is able to defraud the network somehow. I’ve played enough games with dice rolling to know if something is astronomically unlikely to happen, it will happen eventually.

What I see from the behaviour of Bitcoin enthusiasts is that they want to believe in it, that it will be the engine of our financial emancipation. I think it’s wishful thinking, I think it’s just another video game. Bitcoin may not be the Mark of the Beast, but it ain’t the Second Coming of Christ either.


P.S. Fuck off Paul Joseph Watson, you fucking condescending prick. You’re like the main stream media in ridiculing people who do not agree with the official explanation, except you’re not as subtle about it. Fuck off! I’ve got a paranoid fear of clicking on a video and hearing your voice, you passive aggressive piece of shit. If you wanna insult people, do it directly. Be a man.



Declare War on Feminism: The Body, Sex & Rape:

Why You’re Wrong About Abortion:

Mark of the Beast:

How to be a Bitcoin Hater:

How does Bitcoin work?:

Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System:

Is Bitcoin a Conspiracy? with Paul Joseph Watson and BraveTheWorld:

How Bitcoin Works Under the Hood:

Bring back the Patriarchy!

Last few days I’ve been watching many videos on Youtube by Sargon of Akkad. He mainly pokes holes at the logical fallacies of feminists and Cultural Marxists, and is quite entertaining to watch. However, when you think about some of the insane stuff the feminists say, it makes you worry.

There’s stuff like the Swedish government’s feminist foreign policy to counter Russian macho aggression, which is still quite benign example of feminism, perhaps even endearing. Then there’s the not at all generalizing argument that “all men are rapists”, and that women who claim to have been raped, should never be doubted, which leads anyone with a hint of conspiracy theorist in them to conclude if that were true women who don’t like a certain guy can say “he raped me” and he’s off to prison. On top of that there’s stuff too fucked up to remain in my memory. I suggest spending a few hours watching Sargon’s channel instead.

My point is, these feminists are clearly mentally unbalanced and are potentially harmful to themselves and others. I’m not simply making fun of them, I’m also being genuinely concerned. Then there are cases like “hundreds of other young women from Western countries”, including teenage girls, have joined ISIS in Syria to become their wifes or sex slaves. Although I take news like these with a pinch of salt, since it’s entirely plausible certain facts have been twisted to fit some propaganda angle, but I’m going to assume it is more or less true. So is this women’s liberation, are the feminists happy now that teenage girls have the freedom to choose to become sex slaves for terrorists? Few decades ago parents used to have some control over their children, and would have prevented something like this occurring. I’m not saying kids and teens didn’t disobey their parents, but this stuff is a bit more extreme to be simple teen rebelliousness.

Clearly we need some sort of patriarchy to protect these teen girls who join Islamic terrorists, and feminists who are just crazy, from themselves. Let’s make one thing clear, I’m not saying all men should protect all women from doing insane and harmful stuff like this. The majority of women, once they reach mental adulthood tend to have some degree of common sense, as do most men, but I’d say the majority of teen girls don’t (although most of them don’t want to join ISIS), and neither do feminists. Quite ironically I think it is feminists who really do need a man in their lives to control them in a benevolent manner, since they are emotionally too unstable to face reality.

There is one aspect where I agree with the feminists to a degree, and that is the conspiracy theory of the patriarchy. I’m a conspiracy theorist (or a conspiracy nut, as I prefer), as regular readers should be aware of, and I do believe in the existence of this control system that was in place already before I was born (in the 80s), and still exists. Back in the 80s the control system was more masculine, so you could call it a patriarchy, although not in any simplistic terms of a system by men to enslave women. Instead, both majority of men and women were enslaved by it, even though the enslavement and control was not so obvious then as it is now. Nowadays, I guess ever since 9/11, perhaps even before, the control system has become more of a matriarchy, the nanny state.

I’ll be magnanimous here and concede that perhaps some of these feminists, not all since some are just smug bitches who love the sound of their own voice, do perceive the control system around them, and do feel oppressed by it. But as the only explanation they are familiar with for explaining this oppression is the feminist theory of the patriarchy, they falsely conclude the feminist narrative is correct, although it’s only partially accurate. The patriarchy may have existed decades ago in some form, but nowadays that is clearly not true. It is possible that the people on top, the “Illuminati” or whatever, consist solely of men, but they certainly do not care about the “privileges” of other men, and I would say majority of feminists unwittingly serve their agenda of turning people against each other, and making people disconnect from reality and natural facts.

So men need to man up, and don’t get taken in by the insane feminists narratives that can only lead us to ruin. Stand for the truth and call a spade a spade, or a feminist a fucking nutcase.



Sargon of Akkad:

Girls of Jihad: Western Women and the Lure of ISIS:

Austrian teens latest victims of rape by IS ‘husbands’ now want to come home as Raqqa sex slave camp run by Brit jihadists may have pushed them over the edge:

Temporal Displacement in the Minds of Cultural Marxists

I once read a book of medieval Europe for a university course that claimed the medieval Europeans had a peculiar notion of the Middle-East. In some way the way the Middle-East was a thousand years before at the time of Jesus, and how it was in the middle-ages had merged. The Europeans somehow saw the Saracens being the people who killed Jesus. I guess that is a mythological view of reality where the past is always present, or something. Anyways, I failed the exam so I shouldn’t talk about the book, so I’ll move on to Cultural Marxism, which is something I’ve never had an exam on, so no fear of embarrassment either.

Cultural Marxists love victims, and anyone who is not regarded as a victim, must be an oppressor. Cultural Marxism manifests itself in many forms such as feminism, where people with gender or some shit like that, i.e. women, transsexuals and gays are victims, anti-racism where anyone but “white people” are victims, and socialism where anyone with money is an oppressor, unless they’re gay, black females, for example. The people who give themselves the generic and meaningless label “progressives”, presumably believe in all of the above victim groups, but I’m not sure.

I do believe that many Cultural Marxists set on that ideological path with good intentions, and a genuine, sane concern for minorities, but somewhere along the way they go batshit crazy. They are literally extremists for concern of the Other. The Other is in extremist conservative groups often reviled as some outside force, like a foreign religion, race or ideology. The main difference between extremist conservatives and progressives or liberals, is that conservatives hate and fear the Other, but progressives love it, and hate anything is too normal or normative.

Anyways, Cultural Marxists seem to have one thing in common with medieval Europeans, if the book whose name nor author I do not recall (EDIT: It’s Medieval Civilization by Jacques Le Goff), is accurate, they have a mythological view of present and history. Cultural Marxists obsess over victimhood, and they seem to view their favorite victim groups always being temporally situated in the era that was most oppressive for them, or at least in some time in the past when they were oppressed. Women are seen as being stuck in the Victorian Age when men “feared women’s sexuality”, and men controlled society, women were property and so on. This may have been true over a hundred years ago, but is not true anymore. Homosexuals have been oppressed in many countries in the past, and it’s been illegal and so on, but homosexuals are not oppressed anyone, not in the West at least. President Obama supports gay rights, for fuck’s sake. Black people are seen as eternally stuck in 19th century Confederate America as slaves or a weak minority fighting for its rights in the 1960s, Asians are always supposed to be viewed by Westerners through 19th century Orientalists eyes as something exotic and mysterious.

Cultural Marxists have been called Social Justice Warriors, and I’ve always disliked the term as something too pedestrian, but now that I think about its quite accurate. Cultural Marxists are like Don Quixote thinking he’s back in old times fighting against monsters that do not exist. I haven’t read Don Quixote, but assuming the filmatizations and TV-shows I’ve seen on it are accurate in their basic message, it’s eerie how well the description fits Cultural Marxists.

Moreover, it’s quite interesting how the medieval Christian mythological view coincides with modern Cultural Marxists, even though most Cultural Marxists despise Christianity. Jesus was the ultimate hallowed victim, the scapegoat sacrificed for no reason and all the best reasons. The ideological origin of the sacred victim mentality of Cultural Marxists must originate with Christianity. They often say: Don’t blame the victim.” I agree, but I retort with: Don’t idolize the victim either.

The “Truth Movement” is Growing Up

The direction the “Truth Movement” is going has changed quite significantly over the last couple of years, at least that’s how I see it. Five or ten years ago it was more about the elusive Illuminati, unity consciousness, realizing the falseness of duality dichotomy, physicality is a holographic matrix, letting go of beliefs systems and so on. Basically it was more airy fairy and feminine. In last couple of years its gotten more nationalistic, traditional, racially conscious, and maybe even political in some ways. Nowadays the “truth movement”, along with the realization that conspiracies and false flags happen, is becoming more main stream, concrete and masculine.

While on a superficial level these might seem opposites, like the “movement” is going back and forth without a clear direction, I do think it’s all leading to something meaningful. At first it was about letting go, and changing the inner world of the individual, but now we are realizing there are many things we should hold on to, things worth fighting for. Michael Tsarion said for one to have the Chemical Marriage, one first has to have a Chemical Divorce. I think the divorce happened, now the marriage is occurring. Socially the alchemical Solve et Coagula, dissolve and coagulate, is happening right now. We are a brew at boiling point with various ingredients thrown in. It shouldn’t be too long before its finished, and we, the people who actually care about truth, justice and all that stuff globalists and cultural Marxists don’t like, will start to have perceptible influence over things on this earth.

I’m quite excited to see what the next phase is, where we are heading. Don’t get caught up in the past, ride the tide and all that. I know I’m being somewhat vague, so I’ll try to reiterate my point. At first the awakening was about introducing mystical and synchronistic ideas to us, right now we are in a phase where we are trying to implement them in the real world, and after a few years we should reap what we have sown. In other words, we rediscovered there is a spiritual reality behind everything, now we are using the spiritual understanding in the physical world to affect it, and in the near future the spiritual and physical will merge into something new, and hopefully good.

Was there an Awakening happening in pre-Nazi Germany?

I recently read Hammer of the Gods by David Luhrssen, a book about Thule Society and origin of the National Socialist Party. It seems there were already many similar theme’s in Germany over a 100 years ago we are tackling with now. The people were unhappy with the multicultural Habsburg Empire, or Austria-Hungary, as it pushed aside needs of the indigenous peoples of Europe. Corporations were seen as a Jewish entity to control the people, and communism and capitalism were regarded as Jewish conspiracies as well. Now after a century, I think it is safe to say there is some validity to these notions by looking at the world as it is.

There was a racial awakening occurring in Germany prior to the formation of the Nazi party. The people were into Ariosophy, the study of supposed Aryan roots of the Germans. They were rediscovering  the indigenous Germanic Wodanic religion, in contrast to the universal/ Abrahamic Christianity. While I cannot say how much of the Ariosophist ideas were fact and what was fantasy, I cannot help but see the rediscovering of a nation’s roots and traditions as nothing but good. This applies to everyone whether you’re Korean, German or Ethiopian. This is our defense against the New World Order.

Many similar themes to today can also be detected in pre-Nazi Germany. Well, this one was used by the Nazis: a poem by Dietrich Eckhart called Deutschland Erwache (Germany awake) “became the motto of the Nazi movement”, according to Luhrssen. The terms “awake” and “asleep” are often used in the “truth movement”. The Thule Society wanted to replace the Roman law, which “serves the materialistic world order” with German common law. Sounds like Maritime law vs Common law to me.

Another interesting thing is the storm symbolism of the Nazis and pre-Nazis. The book is named Hammer of the Gods, referring to Thor’s hammer, the god of lightning. I think there’s a connection to the vajra of Hinduism and Buddhism, which means lightning or diamond, but no-one really knows what it means. The Nazi SS (Schutzstaffel) had two lightnings as its symbol. Nowadays there’s the Thunderbolts Project, which espouses the theory of the electric universe, headed by David Talbott. Moreover it is often stated that we are currently in the Kali Yuga  (world of gross matter) of Hindu yuga cycles, which will lead to Dwapara Yuga where “man gains a comprehension of the electrical attributes, the finer forces and more subtle matters of creation.” It’s not far fetched to mix ancient Hindu ideas with these modern Western ones, since it well-known that the Aryans conquered India in ancient times, and therefore their ideology is probably on some level inherited from the Aryans. I don’t know to what degree the Germans are the descendants of the Aryans, but perhaps Ariosophists were onto something.

One comment in the book was that the word “swastika” is Sanskrit for “so be it” or “amen”. It made me think of “Make is so” by Jean-Luc Picard in Star Trek: The Next Generation. I think it’s quite funny to think of him saying “swastika” every time he orders the Enterprise to set a new course.

I don’t know how well I managed to explain it, but reading Hammer of the Gods, and even recalling some of the books from Nietzsche I’ve read, it doesn’t seem like the world has changed that much since the late 19th century. At the risk of sounding New Agey, I think we are trying to “spiritually evolve” into a new, less dense, electric age, but another force wants to delay that. The electronic devices and addictions we have today are not really the proper fruits of a new Yuga, but the same old Kali Yuga-stuff with a new label to trick us. I think there was potential for this “evolution” in pre-Nazi Germany, but something went wrong. I think the Nazi party was a corruption of the genuine spirituality of the Thule Society and other groups.

Alternatively Hammer of the Gods is a good basis for a silly conspiracy theory to claim there is really nasty Neo-Nazi element behind the truth movement, as is evidenced by some of the concerns of Germans over a hundred years ago and similarities in our concers. But no. I’m not buying it there’s any Nazi conspiracy going on in this world, or lets say for the sake of argument that some Nazis escaped to the moon on their Haunebu-crafts or to Neuschwabenland in the Antarctic, and they are somehow subtly influencing world events, I think they’re the good guys, although I don’t really think the Nazi party overall were “good guys”. However, I certainly don’t buy into the Hollywood version of history where the Nazis are the manifestation of ultimate evil and the Allies were heroic as shit.




Thunderbolts Project:

The four Yugas:

Make it so: