Signs That You're Not Gonna Make It

Signs That You’re Not Gonna Make It

Life in the West is getting tougher and tougher. The more perceptive of us are now aware that the whole system is unravelling, and that it may soon become extremely challenging to continue surviving. The grim reality is that not all of us are gonna make it. This article describes some ways that a person can tell if they themselves are not gonna make it.

You believe that the authorities are altruistic.

If you had shitty parents, you will have one advantage in the coming age of the world: you will have already lost faith in authority. Most people who grew up with decent parents blindly trust what they’re told by authority figures, and this makes them vulnerable to demagogues. Those people feel that the government is just like another set of parents: powerful, and willing to use that power in the service of justice.

Anyone who still believes, since the transition to Clown World some two decades ago, that the authorities are altruistic will be lining up for experimental vaccines like the citizens of Jonestown lined up for the Koolaid. The truth is that the authorities value your life as much as they valued the lives of the soldiers they sent charging into German machinegun fire – i.e. not at all. If you still trust the authorities to be looking out for your best interests, you’re not gonna make it.

You don’t understand that conspiracies are always happening.

‘Conspiracy theorist’ is an insult nowadays, used to smear someone as a paranoid schizophrenic who sees dangers where they don’t exist. As far as the Establishment is concerned, anyone who doesn’t trust them is a conspiracy theorist. The mainstream narrative today is that anyone who questions the mainstream media is by default a conspiracy theorist, and therefore mentally ill.

The truth is that conspiracy theories are happening everywhere and at all times. Read any history book, and it will recount numerous conspiracies by various groups of actors against other groups. Adam Smith once observed that “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public,” and this is just as true today as it was of his time.

If you don’t realise that conspiracies are being hatched almost every time there’s an incentive for any group of people to do so, you’re not gonna make it.

You can’t sit still in peace.

The entertainment industry makes hundreds of millions of dollars every year in America alone. This industry exists because of boredom. Ideally, a person could sit down for an entire evening and read a book, not needing external input. In practice, most people need to spend money on Netflix, OnlyFans and similar shit. Such people are dependent on the matrix.

The sort of person who needs constant thrills will be at an extreme disadvantage in the coming age of the world. Being dependent on the corporate media for entertainment means that the Establishment can shit directly into your skull during the ad breaks, and you’ll accept it as normal. If you can’t meditate in silence for at least ten minutes, you’re not gonna make it.

You believe that the Justice System is there to protect and serve the citizenry.

Young children are taught that the police are there to defend them from criminals and other bad guys. Television shows like Cops paint a picture of a world of violent criminals held in check by a thin blue line. In reality, the police are the army of the rich, and were raised to defend the property claims of the rich. They’re often as bad as the criminal gangs.

The difference between a prostitute and a police officer is that the prostitute will let you do things to her for money, whereas the police officer will do things to other people for money. If you have never reflected upon the fact that almost every human rights abuse in history has been carried out by the local security services, and that the police of your country would load you into cattlecarts as soon as they were given the order, you’re not gonna make it.

You believe that “If it wasn’t true, they couldn’t say it on the news”.

It’s possible that, in some halcyon former time, the news was compiled by honest people who wanted to inform their nation about relevant issues. That was a long time ago. Today’s mainstream media is a propaganda outlet for the Establishment. That became clear to everyone when they did the cheerleading for the Iraq War, and they’ve only become worse since then.

Every mainstream media enterprise has an owner and, today, that owner is likely to be a multinational asset management firm. They can say whatever they like on the news, because the people who own the news companies also own the politicians, and those people want to keep their dirty dealings secret. So the reality is closer to “If it was true, they couldn’t say it on the news.” Anyone who still gets their information from the mainstream television news is not gonna make it.

You think the brain generates consciousness.

The entire mainstream academic establishment will tell you that the brain generates consciousness, and therefore the death of the physical body entails the extinction of consciousness, and therefore life is meaningless. This is despite the fact that the greatest of all scientists, such as Plato, Newton, Schroedinger, Bruno and Planck, believed the exact opposite.

The truth is that our great war is a spiritual war. The idea that the brain generates consciousness is otherwise known as the big lie of our age, because it enslaves people with the despair of nihilism. This is why people who believe the brain generates consciousness so often die deaths of despair – if life is meaningless, why engage with it? The divine is completely absent from the lives of such people.

Anyone who thinks the brain generates consciousness is simply not gonna make it.

If you enjoyed reading this essay/article, you can get a compilation of the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2020 from Amazon for Kindle or Amazon for CreateSpace (for international readers), or TradeMe (for Kiwis). A compilation of the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2019, the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2018 and the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2017 are also available.

If you would like to support our work in other ways, please consider subscribing to our SubscribeStar fund. Even better, buy any one of our books!

How Psychological Scientists Know The “Structural Racism” Theory Is Crap

The “structural racism” conspiracy theory is everywhere nowadays. Most media consumers take it for granted that white people are to blame for black and brown economic and academic underachievement. But people trained in psychological science, who understand the real causes of behavioural phenomena, know this theory is crap. This essay explains how they know.

Any quality scientist will tell you that the value of a scientific theory is a function of its predictive power.

This has always been the case. Back in the day, when learned people discussed astronomical phenomena, the greatest among those scholars were able to accurately predict solar and lunar eclipses. The theories that correctly predicted eclipse seasons were praised and committed to memory or written down; the theories that incorrectly predicted eclipse seasons, or failed to predict them, were denounced and forgotten.

This ongoing process of refining theories, based on which ones best predicted the outcomes of experiments, evolved into the scientific method. Today, the scientific method involves taking multiple different theories and subjecting them to experiments with various conditions. Then the scientist compares the theories to see which best fits the resulting data.

When the Western World opened its borders to mass immigration from Far East Asia in the 1990s, there were two major theories about how successful it would be.

The structural racism theory predicted that these immigrants would do poorly. This theory held that the low economic and academic achievement of blacks and browns was the result of white prejudice, and, since those whites had no reason to be less prejudiced against Asians, those Asians would also have low economic and academic achievement.

The biological realism theory predicted that these immigrants would do well. It had been known since shortly after World War II that Japanese, Korean and Chinese populations scored as highly as European ones on psychometric measures of intelligence. Because economic and academic achievement is primarily a function of intelligence, biological realists predicted that Asian immigrants would have high economic and academic achievement.

In fact, the majority of Far East Asian immigrants did very well upon immigrating to the West. They all faced some degree of prejudice from the native populations, but few of them were impacted heavily enough by this to remain poor; Asian Americans have the highest net wealth and highest average income of any American racial group.

This outcome repudiated the structural racism theory, and supported the biological realism theory. But this is not the only case where the latter showed itself to have more predictive power than the former.

Another test of theories involved the relative developmental prospects of China, India and Africa. After World War II, China, India and most of Africa were at a similar level of poverty, i.e. undeveloped. But the Western plan was to develop all of these territories to the maximum extent possible, as quickly as possible.

The structural racism theory predicted that all of these territories would develop at a similar rate. Absent the white oppression that had held them back during the Colonial Era, and absent the white oppression that held back blacks, browns and natives in colonial countries, there was no reason to assume anything other than uniform progression to Western levels of wealth.

The biological realism theory, by contrast, predicted that China would develop faster than India, which would develop faster than Africa. This prediction was based on the fact that psychologists knew the IQ scores of these groups were different.

The Chinese scored at a similar level to white people, or even higher. India was about one standard deviation below that. Africa was about one standard deviation below India. So the biological realists predicted that China would develop the fastest, Africa the slowest, and India in between.

By 2021, the GDP per capita (PPP) of China was $18,931, that of India $7,333, and most African countries between $5,000 and $1,000. These differences were just as predicted by the biological realists. The structural racism theories are left floundering for an explanation as to why high-IQ China has outstripped medium-IQ India and low-IQ Africa, when none of the three are controlled by whites. They are left spouting nonsense about “white adjacency”.

In summary, the biological realism theory of explaining group differences in economic and academic achievement has proven itself to have far greater predictive power than the structural racism theory. In fact, the structural racism theory has no predictive power, and can be rightly considered a conspiracy theory pushed for political reasons, and not a scientific one.

If you would like to support our work in other ways, please consider subscribing to our SubscribeStar fund. Even better, buy any one of our books!

Spiritual Religions And Political Religions

Enormous confusion surrounds the discussion of religion. The term ‘religion’ seems to encompass some extremely different, even contradictory, attitudes and ideas. This essay argues that a major conceptual division needs to be made: between spiritual religions and political religions.

A spiritual religion is a doctrine that, if followed, will alleviate spiritual suffering. The alleviation of suffering is as close as this world gets to a universal moral good. As such, spiritual religions are seen as something holy. So both spiritual religions and political religions claim to be spiritual religions.

But in the same way that visiting a prostitute and having sex is not really making love, even though it appears similar, political religions are not really spiritual.

A genuine spiritual tradition is not concerned with the will for temporal and material power. A doctrine such as Buddhism teaches its adherents that gratifying such desires will not lead to happiness. And it is correct – once a person has met their basic physical needs, further happiness comes not from physical excess but from meeting social, intellectual and spiritual needs.

A political religion is a doctrine that is primarily concerned with temporal and material power. The authorities of a political religion are not concerned with alleviating suffering – they want power, money, fame, prestige. For them, suffering is a good thing, because it gives them a chance to portray their political enemies as the ones responsible, and themselves as the saviours.

The difference between a political religion and a political non-religion (such as Communism) is that the non-religion doesn’t attempt to cloak itself in the shroud of divine morality. Communism was happy enough teaching that consciousness is extinguished upon the death of the physical body. Political religions, by contrast, admit that consciousness survives the death of the physical body – but there’s a catch.

The catch is always this: your consciousness will reincarnate in a place of suffering in the next world unless you obey the political religion in this world. So the political religions demand that you give them money, time, labour and devotion in this world on the threat of suffering in the next.

The foremost examples of political religions are the Abrahamic cults, in particular Christianity, Islam and Judaism. Each of these has aped the spiritual wisdom of their age to create an ideological monster. Each of these teach that only by submitting to the priesthood can one achieve the cessation of suffering. The priesthood speaks for the divine – a power granted only to them. Therefore, obey or suffer.

The characteristic sign of a political religion is that they cause suffering in order to gain power. Relentless, grinding misery causes people to look to higher authorities for solace, which is why Abrahamism is doing so well in Africa and the Middle East. To this end, political religions usually support the persecution of women, homosexuals, prostitutes and drug users.

Also characteristic of political religions is that they drive out other authorities from cultural space, a kind of memetic brood parasitism.

All political religions decree that no other religion may co-exist with them. The Hebrew Bible states that “He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto Jehovah only, shall be utterly destroyed” (Exodus 22:20), and the Koran commands follows to destroy non-believers at numerous points (2:191-193), (3:56), (4:74), (4:89), (5:33), (8:12), (8:39), (9:5), (9:73), (9:123), (47:3-4), (47:35), (48:29), (66:9).

Following this imperative, political religions do everything they can to destroy spiritual religions in any territory they control. In much the same way that criminal gangs of narcoterrorists don’t allow outsiders to operate on their turf, neither do criminal gangs of spiritual terrorists. True spiritual religions don’t need to aggress against other religions, because they know that the falsehoods of other doctrines will reveal themselves.

All spiritual religions understand that accumulating earthly power and wealth, gratifying as it may be to the ego, doesn’t provide spiritual solace. As such, true spiritual religions never have a “prosperity gospel” in which it is taught that material wealth is granted by God as a reward for righteousness. Neither do they hearken back to past times of military dominance as golden ages.

Buddhism, for example, doesn’t care if people don’t follow it. Anyone is free to reject the Buddha’s doctrine and indulge in sensory pleasures. But when a person tires of such indulgence, and they feel that it’s time to strike a balance between indulgence and abstinence, then the Buddhists are there to explain their methodology.

Islam, by contrast, cares a lot. Thirteen countries impose the death penalty for apostasy, all of them Muslim ones. This means that children are considered to be Muslim when they are born, and if they don’t like it as adults, they are killed. At the time of writing this essay, almost 1,000 people had been killed in the past 30 days in Islamic terror attacks. All of the killers were following the admonition of their religion to expand its political influence.

The irony, of course, is that all this makes spiritual religions look spiritual, and political religions look material, and this pushes all genuinely spiritual people towards the former, and all genuinely base people towards the latter. This explains why hedonistic self-aggrandisers, when they discover religion in adulthood, tend to discover political ones.

The clash between spiritual and political religions has defined much of the world’s history, and may define much of its future. There are many signs that suggest the Abrahamic cults are slowly uniting under one banner, and, when they do, they will inevitably try to conquer the world or be destroyed in the attempt.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, Abraham was probably the world’s first true psychopath. The cult he started developed into the greatest collective evil the world has ever known. This evil reflects Abraham’s sadistic desire for total control and dominance, something shared with all his followers. Indeed, Abraham could be said to be the father of political religion.

On the Mithraic ladder, Abrahamism is equivalent to the lead, the basest possible frequency. The spiritual religions, on the other hand, are equivalent to the gold. They are akin to divine radiance beaming down on us. Thus, although political and spiritual religions may appear very similar on the surface, it’s necessary to draw a sharp distinction between them. Ultimately, they reveal their true interests by their actions.

If you would like to support our work in other ways, please consider subscribing to our SubscribeStar fund. Even better, buy any one of our books!

The Ruling Class Is Manufacturing Consent For A War With China

Anyone following the zeitgeist will have noticed a sharp rise in anti-China rhetoric lately. Some will also have noticed that the mainstream media recently switched narrative on the origins of the Covid virus. Until recently, one could get banned from FaceBook for suggesting that the virus was made in a Chinese lab. Now FaceBook encourages the idea. Why? This essay explains.

This BBC article from March is typical of the new rhetoric. The British Government’s main propaganda organ is now openly declaring that China is committing a genocide against their Uighur population in Xinjiang. The American Government has followed the British lead, with the Biden Administration now formally stating that China is guilty of “genocide and crimes against humanity”.

Declaring China to be carrying out a genocide is a major step, because it means that many people will feel morally obliged to do something about it. It will also allow the Establishment to paint the Chinese Government as the moral successor to Nazism, and thereby to play on all the conditioned guilt around the Holocaust.

This sudden concern for the Uighurs seems extremely odd, as the Uighurs aren’t treated any worse than cannabis users are treated in most Western countries. Moreover, not even other Muslims care about the Uighurs, as demonstrated by the fact that Muslim trade delegations to China seldom raise the issue.

The plight of the Uighurs is being exploited for propaganda purposes. There will be a lot more mainstream media propaganda in this vein in coming years. The narrative will be Evil China. We will get daily reminders that China is oppressive and evil – because the Western Establishment is trying to manufacture popular consent for a war against them.

Although many Westerners consider their ruling classes to be omnipotent, the reality is that they still need popular consent for any major move. That popular consent lubricates the gears of the war machine; without it, those gears don’t turn. To that end, the ruling classes instruct their lackeys in the mainstream media to manufacture consent for those major moves in advance.

The next major move they wish to make is to smash China. The ruling class of the West intends to attack China now for the same reason it attacked Germany then: to stay on top of the pile.

Measured by PPP, the Chinese economy has already surpassed the American one. It’s apparent that China’s economic rise will soon give it the capacity to project power over Taiwan. The fear is that China will eventually gain the capacity to project power over Singapore, and thereby over the centre of the world.

Today, the Chinese economy is some 10% larger than the American one. By 2026, according to IMF estimates, the Chinese economy will be some 40% larger. It’s apparent to every Western military planner that, if they want to prevent China from becoming unmanagably powerful, they have to strike now. As Machiavelli wrote in The Prince: wars cannot be avoided, they can only be postponed to the benefit of one or the other party.

The ruling elites of the West have been faced with a stark choice. Either strike now, and put the rising challenger back in its place, or wait, and risk that China becomes too strong to deal with. Given that China has an average IQ of 105, and is not near as wealthy as other populations with similar IQs, logic suggests that they have the potential to become a lot more powerful yet. More logic suggests that, if all that is true, the time to strike is now.

The Western ruling classes followed that same logic to its inevitable conclusion a while ago. They have decided that war is preferable to falling further behind. To that end, they will do everything they can to stoke conflict. This explains the sudden intense increase in anti-China rhetoric from the mainstream media.

The war imperative is why Western powers are sending flotillas to patrol the South China Sea. Everyone understands that the attack on China will be a multinational affair, with America, Japan, Britain, Australia and India all involved at a minimum. The strategy now is to increase the provocation and intimidation, and wait for China to make a mistake.

The great risk is of a false flag attack similar to the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. It’s entirely plausible that the Western ruling class blows up one of its own warships and tells the plebs that the Chinese did it – this was how they successfully manufactured consent for the attack on Vietnam.

If such a thing did happen, the mainstream media would scream 24/7 about the need for revenge against murderous Chinese aggression before it was too late. The narrative would be that anyone unwilling to destroy China is dishonouring the victims of the false flag attack, is endangering the rest of us and is therefore a traitor to the West.

Westerners be warned: if the mainstream media informs us about a sudden and inexplicable act of deadly violence carried out by the Chinese against Western targets, we need to steadfastly remain sceptical. Freethinking people might not be able to stop the herd stampede to war, but we might be able to limit the carnage.

If you would like to support our work in other ways, please consider subscribing to our SubscribeStar fund. Even better, buy any one of our books!