The Elementalist Conception Of Time

As with many other philosophical questions, Elementalism has its own ideas about the question of time. Most people take it for granted that there is such a thing as time and that it just kind of ticks along. Upon thinking about it, though, things are no longer as straightforward. This essay explains the Elementalist conception of time.

Most people assume, as if naturally, that space and time exist and that we move around in them. Space is three dimensional (the x, y and z axes), and time adds another dimension of movement, so spacetime can be said to be the four-dimensional space in which we all live. We are born at one point in spacetime and, over the course of our lives, move through it.

This materialist conception of time brings with it a number of logical quandaries.

Quandaries such as: when did time begin? Time seems to run as an arrow flies, unstoppably from one point to the next, but when and how did it start? If time started some fourteen billion years ago, with the Big Bang, what happened before then? Did time exist? If not, how could the material universe possibly have started?

Is time an inherent property of the Universe or does it exist as the result of the will of some divine creator? If an inherent property of the Universe, what makes it progress at the speed it does, and not a greater or a lesser speed? Why progress at all? And – most frightening of all – if it begins and progresses then will it end?

All of these questions create a great number of logical dilemmas in the minds of materialists and non-Elementalists. But an Elementalist, who believes that consciousness is the prima materia and that it explores the Great Fractal to entertain the gods, has no such dilemmas.

To the Elementalist, time is an illusion. Simply put, it doesn’t exist. It’s an illusion brought about by the movement of consciousness through the Great Fractal at a certain rate. Because the perceptions that occur to consciousness appear to change in a rule-based manner, the impression is created that time exists and flows at a uniform rate. The reality is somewhat different.

The illusion of a moving picture, on film or on television, is made by displaying a number of frames every second (usually 25), in quick succession. If these frames are displayed rapidly enough, the image on the screen will appear like it is moving, an illusion known as beta movement. The images aren’t really moving – they just appear to, as if in a flipbook.

Our consciousnesses navigate the Great Fractal in a similar manner.

It sounds incredible, but the reality is that our perceptions cycle through a cosmically large number of static universes in extremely short order. Entire universes blink in and out of perception a such a speed that it feels like we’re moving through them fluidly. But in fact, this movement is no more fluid than that of a horse running in a motion video. It’s also an illusion.

The Great Fractal, in its unspeakably majestic, all-encompassing nature, is static. Because the fragment of consciousness that each of us possesses can only be aware of a tiny section of it, and because the tiny section that we are aware of keeps changing, it seems like time exists. And it does, in a sense. But not in the sense that most people are used to thinking of it.

In reality, there is only one ever-present and unchanging now, and consciousness exists there. In this eternal now, perceptions change, and that’s all that time is. The contents of consciousness are ever-changing, but consciousness itself is not, serving as an unwobbling pivot around which the entire drama of material existence unfolds.

This perception of time sounds entirely radical to the materialist mind, but for a Buddhist, a Taoist or a Hindu, everything written here so far is familiar. It has to be understood that the common Western perception of time follows naturally from the common Western assumption of materialism – and this assumption is neither accurate nor rational.

Dilemmas like the Grandfather Paradox are easily solved by the Elementalist. Not believing that time is one-dimensional, there is no “go back in time”. A world in which your grandfather lives and gives rise to one of your parents exists in the Great Fractal, and will always exist. Therefore, a life in which your grandfather gave rise to you is, and will forever be, lived by a fragment of consciousness somewhere in the Great Fractal.

Somewhere in the Great Fractal are worlds in which your grandfather is killed, but this doesn’t negate the fact that there are still an infinitude of worlds in which he was not killed. Therefore, you could kill your grandfather a million times and it wouldn’t change a thing. He would still exist in the Great Fractal, so consciousness would still be aware of him, and would still perceive lives in which he existed and gave rise to progeny.

Likewise, dilemmas about how time started and where it will end are easily resolved. To the Elementalist, there is only one eternal now, and in that now we navigate the Great Fractal. Knowing that time is an illusion, questions about how it started or where it will end are meaningless. Consciousness exists outside of time and is more fundamental than it. Therefore, time is a function of the contents of consciousness only.

In summary, Elementalists have an entirely different conception of time to that of the ordinary materialist. Not only do they not believe in time in the sense it is usually understood, but neither do they believe in any of the conclusions drawn by materialist philosophers of time. For the Elementalist, all these dilemmas really do have elemental solutions.

If you enjoyed reading this essay, you can get a compilation of the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2019 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 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!

Should The Mainstream Media Abandon Kayfabe?

‘Kayfabe’ is a professional wrestling term which means acting like what you are doing is real, although it isn’t. The professional wrestlers have since abandoned kayfabe, choosing now to present themselves as sports entertainment instead of as serious competitors. This essay asks: should our mainstream media follow suit?

In the early days of professional wrestling, people took things a lot more seriously than they do nowadays. Life was much more brutal a century ago, and people were far less given to flights of fancy. As such, the vast majority of people wanted to watch real wrestling matches between two fit, determined men out to triumph over the other. Although professional wrestling was fake, this couldn’t be admitted.

By the 1990s, when life had become easy, people had come to take things less seriously. It no longer seemed important to pretend that the matches were real and that the outcomes were not fixed. The definitive moment came in 1996 when superstars Kevin Nash, Scott Hall, Shaun Michaels and Triple H all embraced in the middle of the ring after a match, when, according to the WWF coverage, they all hated each other (see image above).

In professional wrestling, where the wrestlers are playing characters, the actual wrestlers are usually great friends. After all, they have to trust each other very closely in performing their dangerous physical stunts, and this combined with the inherent danger of the job leads to a strong sense of camaraderie. Their feuding and battling is just an act, one that is now admitted to. Kayfabe has now been abandoned.

A convincing argument can be made that it’s time for the mainstream media to follow suit, and to admit that what they say does not reflect reality. Should they come out and admit that the product they sell is not information, but dramatic entertainment portrayed as political conflict? Is it time for the mainstream media to abandon kayfabe?

In professional wrestling, it’s understood by all that Vince McMahon runs the company, and his primary interest is making money by producing a quality entertainment product. So no-one pretends the matches are real anymore, they just go along with it as if it were pantomime. The sporting media reports on it as if it were entertainment, and it’s understood as such.

When two politicians clash, however, the mainstream media portrays it as if they genuinely hated each other. Election debates are presented to the populace as if they were heavyweight title fights, with two sides going head-to-head for an accolade that only one of them can possess. The television journalists describe mere insults as if politicians were ripping into each other like pit fighting dogs.

The story we’re sold is that all sides are ready to beat each other’s brains out. In reality, every single politician has a mutual interest in keeping the gravy train going, and this sentiment is shared with the owners of the mainstream media. For the political class, it’s very much them against the people whose taxes keep them in luxury. They will choose to put each other first before the plebs, anywhere and always.

Evidence for this assertion comes from how closely members of the political class interact with each other when the cameras aren’t rolling. They populate think tanks together, they party with each other, they marry each other. Politicians might ostensibly represent interests that are implacably opposed to each other, but the reality is that almost all of them come from the ruling class, and represent the interests of that class above any other.

This is why New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, of the Labour Party, can have a cousin named Shane Ardern, who is a Member of Parliament for the National Party. It’s no contradiction that one family can produce MPs for both sides of the fence, because Parliament is a ruling class institution, and the Arderns are a ruling class family.

The average man in the street had figured out 20 years ago that professional wrestling was fake, but is only just figuring out today that the mainstream media is equally as fake. Yes, the mainstream media is just as scripted, dishonest and utterly unreal as any professional wrestling show. Now that this is widely recognised, it’s time to admit it.

It should be openly accepted by the mainstream media that they are the employees of their owners, the international finance and banking interests. As such, they are presenting a program that serves the interests of those owners. Their product is drama, in particular drama between different political actors and/or factions. They aren’t selling objective information, or an objective overview of what’s going on in the nation and in the world.

The WWF, its acronym redolent of the Olympic wrestling federations, rebranded as the WWE and started calling itself “sports entertainment”. It’s time for our mainstream media to do something similar – to stop pretending that their role is to inform or to hold power to account, and to start calling itself “journalistic entertainment”.

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!

Clown World Chronicles: Who Is Doomer?

The horrifying and seemingly hopeless nature of Clown World can easily lead to despair. As suicide rates climb all around the world, one member of the Clown World pantheon grows ever stronger. He is the Doomer, and his presence can be felt everywhere.

The Doomer cuts a depressing figure. His very appearance is doom. Sunken eyes peer out from a pallid, unshaven face, the expression on which is one of dread. A smouldering cigarette juts from his mouth – it should have been ashed five minutes ago but he isn’t paying attention. He looks extremely tired, the sort of tired where one needs to sleep but can’t.

His clothing, like his beanie, is black and grey, the colours of depression. The Doomer fears and is anxious for the future, but at the same time he is tormented by the fact that he doesn’t know why. He understands that he lives in a time of great material wealth, and feels guilt that it doesn’t bring him happiness. But deep in his heart, he knows that Clown World isn’t normal.

Clown World is the Doomer, and the Doomer is Clown World. He feels the pain and fear of the world acutely. The Doomer manifests in the expectation that everything in the world is about to get worse. His time comes in the great autumns of the world cycle. When the nights are warm and dark, the Doomer stalks the streets.

The Doomer is one of the Elder Gods, occupying the position beyond the Virgin on the Negative Masculine Axis. The essential nature of this axis is passivity – but where the Virgin is physically and socially passive, the Doomer is spiritually passive.

This spiritual passivity is not only the key to understanding the Doomer, but understanding Clown World itself. The Doomer is very much Clown World in microcosm. His suffering might seem overwhelming, but the grim truth – which he is unwilling to accept – is that most of it is self-inflicted. His own habits and his own moral failures have led him here.

The spiritual passivity of the Doomer has made him indifferent to his spiritual needs. The Doomer doesn’t meditate, because he can’t stand the noise in his head. Either he doesn’t use spiritual sacraments or he uses them irresponsibly. Most of the time he’s under the influence of pharmaceuticals or alcohol, or smoking something. Anything to numb the longing for a better world.

Nightwalking is the closest that the Doomer gets to a spiritual practice. This he does compulsively, as if an automaton, driven by a desperate need to escape his suffering. But in nightwalking he finds peace. Perhaps it is from intuiting the lesson of the streetlight: it’s forever meaningful to shine in the darkness, because a new dawn always comes.

This is one important facet of the Doomer: he contains within himself the seed to grow into a Bloomer, his exact opposite. The Doomer might be in pain, but that’s only because he cares enough to keep going. In that sense, the Doomer represents a flicker of light in every spiritual darkness. His spirit is more than just suffering – it’s also that which endures it.

As mentioned above, the Doomer is what a Virgin becomes if they continue along the Negative Masculine Axis, of which the Virgin is the Younger God. The most common path to doomerhood isn’t an extended spell of involuntary celibacy (i.e. it’s not merely extended virginity). When men become Doomers, it’s usually because they succeed in attracting a woman and establishing a romantic relationship – and then it collapses.

The Doomer is not created from a man who can’t get what he wants, but the reverse. Once a man gets what he wants, and finds that it isn’t sufficient to make him happy, he can become a Doomer. If a Virgin makes love to a beautiful woman and then the next morning realises that it didn’t solve any of his existential problems, he’s taken the first step to transitioning into a Doomer.

Doomers became numerous after the Great Financial Crisis, which could be argued to herald the descent into Clown World. It was in 2008 that an entire generation of men became faced with the reality that they would not enjoy the same easy lives that their fathers did. A few years after that, the doom had become widespread and permanent.

The solution for the Doomer is to develop spiritual strength, which will enable his will to correctly guide his mind and body to make the right moves. In doing so, he transitions onto the Positive Masculine Axis and becomes a Chad.

This article is an excerpt from Clown World Chronicles, a book about the insanity of life in the post-Industrial West. This is being compiled by Vince McLeod for an expected release in the middle of 2020.

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!

Understanding The New Definition Of “Crime”

Most of us are still getting our heads around the bizarre attempt to redefine racism as “prejudice plus power”. Well, hold on to your pants, because there’s about to be another effort to redefine a simple word to suit a political agenda. This essay has the details.

If you’re in Generation X, the definition of racism is simple enough. If you dislike someone because of their race, and not because of personal characteristics that are worthy of hate, then you are a racist. You have judged a person prematurely on account of your bigotry, which is prejudice. Prejudice is bad because it doesn’t give other people a fair deal.

We had just gotten our heads around how racism was a bad thing when the definition changed.

Now, or so we’re aggressively told, racism is defined as prejudice plus power. This new definition asserts that only structural and institutional racism counts as actual racism, and that racism that isn’t backed by institutional power is merely prejudice. In practice, this means that non-white people can’t be racist because their racism isn’t “backed by institutional power”.

This is clearly bullshit, but enough morons have fallen for it to make it possible for the next move to be made.

In recent months, keen observers have noticed another attempt at redefining language, this time relating to crime. Some criminal actions are made out to be horrific atrocities, whereas other criminal actions, much worse than in the first group, are made out to be perfectly and understandable courses of action that no reasonable person would complain about.

For instance, 472 people have been shot and killed by American Police officers in 2020 so far. At that rate, some 30 have been killed between the death of George Floyd and the writing of this article. The crucial difference between the death of Floyd and the hundreds of others is simple: Floyd was a black man killed by a white one. As such, the severity of the crime is much greater than if it had been different.

The new logic is that a criminal act isn’t really a criminal act unless it’s coming from a place of power. In the same way that racism isn’t real racism unless it’s committed by those deemed to have power, now crime isn’t really crime unless it’s committed by those deemed to have power.

This is why no-one cares about the fact that American blacks kill 4,000 other American blacks every year. These might be killings, but they’re not really murders because they’re not coming from a place of institutional power. As such, they’re not worthy of any outrage.

It’s also why no-one cares about children getting beaten to death. Children are almost always the same race as their parents, and consequently there is seldom a racial power differential between parent and child. Absent such a differential, crimes aren’t considered severe enough to warrant attention. No-one knows who Sofia Taueki-Jackson is, and no-one cares.

In the new paradigm, not having power means that you can basically do whatever the fuck you like for whatever reason. Someone else is always to blame. No matter how wretchedly unenlightened your conduct, someone else is always to blame. There will always be a chorus of slaves willing to make excuses.

The morality can be summed up thusly: to have power is to be immoral, to be powerless is to be moral.

This morality explains why the authorities of the Capital Hill Autonomous Zone have been filmed taking action to enforce the zone’s borders and immigration policy. The authorities of CHAZ are powerless, therefore they get to enforce immigration laws (in any case, if they are not weak then they represent those who are). This is why it’s moral for them to enforce borders but not moral for America to do it.

Enforcing immigration laws is only a bad thing if you have power. If you don’t have power, then it’s fair for you to violate other people’s boundaries. This is (of course) never explicitly stated, but it’s implied. Only the strong are obliged to hold to moral laws. The weak can do what they like, and all blame can be safely deflected onto the structure of society.

This logic is self-contradictory, because such a system does nothing to abolish hierarchies or power differentials – it merely grants ultimate authority to those who decide what power is. If power is defined as wealth, then the powerless are the poor. If power is defined as white privilege, then the powerless are the non-whites. If power is defined as social status, then the powerless are the degenerate and the outcast.

In reality, under such a system, all power lies in the hands of those who can most effectively claim to represent the powerless. And those people will be those who were powerful in the beginning, and who are powerful in all times and places: members of the ruling class who are able to persuade others to follow and obey them.

Understanding the new definition of crime requires the recognition that the Western World is now fully in the grips of slave mentality. We have given up on the concept of self-mastery entirely, and now indulge baser instincts in a manner little different from animals. This won’t change until the world goes through a revolution that reasserts master morality and an honour culture.

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!