Of all the bizarre threats that get thrown around the Internet, one of the strangest is the repeated references to something called “The Day of the Rope.” Similar to the idea of the Boogaloo, those populating Clown World make reference to this event as if it was a much-anticipated glorious occasion. This article has the details.
The most meaningful characteristic of Clown World is that a great number of people are suffering, and for non-physical reasons. There are immense amounts of loneliness, fear, anomie and despair in the world today, even in the wealthy and developed countries. This suffering can be crudely measured by the rising suicide rates.
People are in pain and want revenge. The nature of the beast is that it doesn’t really matter who the targets of that revenge are, as long as someone gets it good and hard.
The Day of the Rope can be described as an eschatological belief that predicts a secular Day of Judgment. When this day comes, all of the bad guys in the world will finally get their comeuppance. The ‘Rope’ is a reference to execution by hanging. Some even believe that we will see the corpses of politicians lining Western streets, suspended from streetlights by ropes around their necks.
This has led to the common expression “It’s time for the Day of the Rope,” which is usually made in response to some new report of massive corruption or governmental ineptitude. On these occasions, when the government shows how fundamentally rotten and evil it is, there will inevitably be someone calling for its overthrow. That overthrow would see much of the existing political establishment swinging from streetlights.
Related expressions refer to a “Day of the Pillow” in which the world’s geriatrics are dealt with, or a “Day of the Rake” that gets rid of all the Canadians. In general, the expression “Day of the X” refers to an apocalyptic settling of the scores reminiscent of the Rwandan massacres of the mid-90s.
The ongoing Q psychodrama is an example of these beliefs in sudden, total justice. Supposedly Q has arranged many tens of thousands of sealed indictments, each one charging someone with a treasonable offence, all to be unleashed on the corrupt political Establishment in one volley. One day we will wake up to find enormous swathes of this corrupt Establishment arrested.
That the Q drama has become so popular is proof of the powerful sentiments that wish for a Day of the Rope. The vast majority of Q followers believe in some nebulous cabal of evildoers (called “the Swamp”), with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama as central network nodes. The common belief is that Trump will “drain the swamp”, end institutionalised corruption and usher in a new age of prosperity.
Sometimes it is said that, when the Day of the Rope comes, there will be no more liberals/globalists/Marxists/Jews/Trump supporters. In such statements one can hear an echo of the sentiments that inspired the Drang nach Osten. This is the great, unspoken danger inherent in Clown World: that the suffering caused to people by the ineptitude of their ruling classes could find expression in mass murder.
The Day of the Rope is a similar idea to the Boogaloo. Both share the idea that the current arc of history will be egregiously terminated by an event that upends the entire world order. The main difference is that the Boogaloo is a descent into terrifying chaos, whereas the Day of the Rope is a descent into terrifying order. The Day of the Rope will see a new order imposed with extreme prejudice.
The logic of the Day of the Rope is much like the logic of the other things in Clown World. The idea is that society is too rotten, too corrupt to keep standing. Therefore, it must collapse. In doing so, it will create a vacuum for a new order, hopefully a more just one.
Of course, the Western World has a gigantic intelligence and security apparatus devoted to stopping things like Days of the Rope. Internet chatter is constantly screened for any sign of violent insurrection, and the amount of chatter needed to organise any such violence inevitably gives the game away.
Any realistic chance for a Day of the Rope scenario relies then, on the intelligence and security apparatus itself. This fact is tied in with the culture that has arisen among Q followers, many of who believe that Q himself is an intelligence officer with close ties to Donald Trump, or perhaps a group of them.
*
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.
The argument for political globalisation is the argument for a one-world government. Whether or not the nature of such a global government is totalitarian or democratic has never been put up for public debate. We all assume that it would have to be democratic, but it is only the gullible among us that honestly believe that to be the case. The more cynical, or rather, sensible, just assume that some posse of faceless elites have decided that they are inherently superior to the rest of us and therefore have the right to rule over us.
It does seem reasonable that the only viable global state is undoubtedly going to be one based on dictatorial practices. The major obstacle is the inherent differences between racial totems which will see internal conflicts multiply as there are only so many resources to share between a global citizenry of nearly eight billion souls. A genuinely global governance system would need massive suppression of the populace to ensure resources are shared equitably.
It would also create a small and very well-paid ecosystem of crony enforcers and overlords and leave the masses without any legal recourse. The most optimistic outlook would be that any system implemented to suppress eight billion people would tire itself out very quickly.
We should not forget that this whole utopian vision is one created by western elites immersed in Abrahamic sympathies. The Chinese, the Indians, the Africans and funnily enough most of the European populations do not share this supremacist dream.
What is the connection between the Abrahamites and global imperialism? Well, the Bible details the Abrahamic dream of global supremacy thoroughly. The covenants made with Abraham and all his spiritual successors follow the same basic mantra, Psalms 2:7-9, illustrates this well:
I will proclaim the decree: Yahweh said to me, “You are my son; today I became your father. Ask of me, and I will make the goyim your inheritance; the whole wide world will be your possession. You will break them with an iron rod, shatter them like a clay pot.”
Further Abrahamic texts in the so-called “New” Testament and plenty of Koranic text also make for excellent reference material. The bottom line is that global supremacy has been a pipe dream of the Abrahamites since time immemorial, it underpins the very premise of their faith.
All Abrahamic ideology is based on a tribalistic wet dream of supremacism. “I” over “thee”. Moreover, an adherent has all the moral and ethical certainties which go hand in hand with a personal deity, such as Theism postulates. A deity which elevates his followers over all others, and blesses them with an abundance of women and other material resources.
It is silver magic at its best. Luckily for the non-believers, this dystopian attempt to create a new Babylon is failing miserably. Simple viruses and occultic meme magic have proven significant adversaries to these worshippers of Moloch. They will continue to falter against the approaching dawn.
The world order which these Western elites are building is deteriorating faster than what they can rebuild. The USA, the best example of regional governance ever implemented, is fractured, unlike ever before. The frictions that led to the 1861 civil war do not even come close to the massive ethnic Balkanisation that happened across the USA since the introduction of the civil rights act of 1964 and the subsequent immigration changes. The federated United States is exponentially accelerating towards its own destruction.
In the old world, the European Union is the most successful attempt at a regional government since the USA. For a time it looked like a peaceful Europe may exist. However, the EU has continued to morph into an authoritarian and imperialistic bureaucracy, filled to the brim with unelected and unaccountable tyrants. Large parts of the European population are extremely disgruntled, and events such as Brexit are merely a taste of things to come.
There is also the damage done by the enforcement of globalist ideologies such as forced cultural and racial diversity to consider. The Multikulti tyranny is gradually erasing any form of natural diversity and replacing it with a cheap “one size fits all” cultural substitute. The backlash will be mind-blowing, grab some popcorn and strap in because some real “Day of the Rope” action is bound to happen in this part of the world.
Various other attempts at regional governance are flaccid in all aspects. The African Union is incapable of affecting even the most basic consensus on policy decisions. The reality is that on most days, it is just an excuse for corrupt dictators to squander the tax money of their hard-working citizens in Addis Ababa’s whorehouses.
The globalised economy is supposedly steered by superregional organisations such as the World Bank, IMF and World Trade Organisation. However, interest groups, most notably the Abrahamic money lending cartels and their corporate spawn in Europe and the US misuse these organisations for global hegemony.
The discriminatory voting system in the UN is still based on a western and imperialist ecosystem. Attempts to reform it has only led to the UN diminishing in stature year after year. It’s an expensive joke for the most part. One country (or ethnic group) legitimately raises an issue (Palestinians or Kurds for example), interest groups align, nothing happens.
Now for the good news. Rival ideological options are starting to emerge globally. Many are not clearly defined yet, but these reactionary ideologies are leading the daily assault on the status quo. Millions of lay and educated individuals on the historic left and right are going through a transformative phase which has seen the emergence of new and disruptive ideologies across the world.
Revolution is again in the air. Some argue that the best outcome of these reactionary ideologies would be a world in which we see a multi-polar world order as opposed to a centralised dictatorship.
It is only sensible that such poles would naturally centre around racial totems. The thick black lines would reappear on the map and power would be given back to the local populations to change them as they feel inclined.
There will be a reversal of globalist Multikulti policies and unfettered economic dominance of a small cabal. The concentration of political and economic power will be dispersed and localised. Natural order would again prevail over supremacist ideologies. Human harmony would be the primary aim of everyday endeavours.
Through the establishment of a genuinely democratic system, people would seek to restore ownership, agency and identity in a secure environment. A complete renaissance in the aspects of group and individual rights must follow. This renewed Magna Carta will require the establishment of a new form of political theory to rival the basic tenants of globalism. It should be fundamentally altruistic, rejecting any avarice and supremacism. Human spiritual fulfillment should be at its core.
As occultists, we believe in the natural order, in dharma. We understand the need to “uphold the world” as part of our esoteric practices. We must, therefore, advocate for sensible change in the exoteric traditions of the societies into which we manifest. If we are to see society change for the better, we need to instruct people according to the primary nature of their spirits.
Racial totems are a somewhat obscure topic rarely discussed among occultists. An understanding of racial totems is necessary to complete a more holistic view of reality and our goal of a stable and natural order (dharma).
Let us first consider a moral argument against the empirical science of race. Scientific racism in all its forms remains a repulsive child of modernism and the epistemological belief in empiricism. The measuring of noses and the classification of peoples based only on their natural expressions lead to unnecessary suffering, all in the service of greed and selfishness.
This moral argument against the scientific classification of humanity should, however, not interfere with our ability to perceive the natural temperamental and spiritual expressions as found within humanity.
Simply spend some time to observe the differences in temperaments of different human populations. A good example is to look at non-integrated immigrant communities with widely different racial totems. These immigrant communities seldom adopt the culture of their new hosts wholeheartedly. Wherever smaller groups do this out of necessity, it quickly disappears when the group achieves a certain percentage of the overall population. The immigrant community then reverts to a culture based on their inherent temperaments and friction between the totem powers escalates.
This process is a fundamental law of Spirit that needs to be understood; the Great Fractal splits into various components, each having an overriding or dominant characteristic. All resultant expressions of the fractal along that line will then follow the same characteristic pattern.
Human populations which share common human ancestors would naturally live more harmoniously within an environment where these characteristics form the status quo. It comes down to the occultic laws of attraction and repulsion.
God truly does express himself differently in different groups. Individuals in one group cannot easily perceive God through the optics of another. This principle is a biological function as much as a sublime mystery. Any form of dharma or social order should seek to minimise this effect as far as possible by preventing it entirely.
A new political dispensation is, therefore, what is needed to overcome this ever approaching tyranny. The specifics of which will be an ongoing discussion, however, laying down a fundamental esoteric law would be a good starting point for some productive discussion.
Let us consider that reality is ultimately a form of two entangled natures. The first nature is one of awakened consciousness or Spirit and the other, the reflection, but more correctly, the reverse, which we simply call un-consciousness or matter-energy.
These two elements fuse to join and manifest reality in an infinite amount of variations but always in a state of balance-seeking. All matter is animated by Spirit, and all Spirit finds expression in matter. Alternatively, as an old maxim states “Quod est inferius, est sicut quod est superius.” This ancient maxim is a key to understanding the Great Fractal and all manifested reality.
If we are to see a stable political system, we must endeavour to model it as near to this principle as possible. Any stability-seeking system will allow for the transmutation of energy from the one extreme to the other and vice versa in a predictable and orderly manner. Both extremes should be able to influence the other freely.
A firm top-down system seems to be the most practical way in which societies in more stable and cultured eras found expression. The simple reason why this worked for so long is that the magi had tremendous influence over those societies.
Kings under heredity monarchical systems may have ruled by decree; however, it was God that allowed them that power, the magi that revealed that power and the people who were the receptacle of that power.
Once a ruler forsook natural order, destiny would step in and relieve the said monarch of his power in short order. This lack of duty towards his subjects would lead to the magi forsaking him, and God forsaking him. He was then left vulnerable and without a mandate. His enemies, or even his close subordinates, would then capitalise on this state and relieve him of his rule.
Any elective system seems to be a superior option, especially if a robust bottom-top / top-bottom mechanism is put in place. A genuinely responsive system of democratic rule has thus far been elusive since there no technology to build it on. In today’s world, where even the poorest of citizens have a smartphone, an interactive democracy or elective monarchy could quickly become a possibility.
The rise of a global patchwork of localised states, based on a tiered elective and super responsive system of governance, would dramatically increase competition. It would remove the burden of superfluous trade and production, and increase the absolute quality of the human experience all while upholding the values of our racial totems against Abrahamic supremicism.
With the rapid changes that have occurred in the West over recent decades, many people have been forced to make quick strategic decisions. In some cases, grievous errors have been made. In other cases, great amounts of complete and utter bullshit have been spoken. This article looks at one egregious example.
On 11 January this year, Radio New Zealand ran a smear attack against Right Minds columnist Dieuwe de Boer, calling him a “far-right activist”. This was part of a report detailing how de Boer had been raided by Police in connection with a recently-prohibited firearm part (none was found). This hit piece led to a couple of complaints to the New Zealand Media Council.
Beholden to the same globalist corporate interests as the rest of the New Zealand media, the New Zealand Media Council ruled in favour of Radio New Zealand. In a decision that the Marxists at the Human Rights Commission must have applauded, they declared that it was not unreasonable to use the term ‘far-right’ to describe de Boer on account of that he was “openly critical of Islam”.
As usual when it comes to Governmental proclamations, the truth is closer to the opposite of what they say it is. In this instance, the truth is that open criticism of Islam is left-wing, not right-wing.
Islam is practically no different, in either ideology or action, to the far-right-wing Christian conservatives that the left has always opposed. Just like Christian conservatives, the vast majority of Muslims oppose homosexuality, oppose women’s liberation, hate non-believers and oppose the use of spiritual sacraments.
There are 12 countries in the world that currently punish homosexuality with death: Afghanistan, Brunei, Iran, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen. All of them are Muslim-majority countries.
The vast majority of Muslims support punitive measures against homosexuals. Koranic passages such as 26:165 and 29:28 describe homosexuals as evil, and declare that they should be destroyed. Hadiths such as Sunan Abu Dawud 38:4447 are no less horrifying. This one cites Muhammad himself as saying: “If you find anyone doing as Lot’s people did, kill the one who does it, and the one to whom it is done.”
These attitudes and beliefs are firmly right-wing conservative. The religious sentiments that inspire Muslims to persecute homosexuals are almost identical to the religious sentiments that inspired Christians to persecute homosexuals in decades gone by.
Hatred for homosexuals is not the only thing shared by Muslims and conservative Christians. Both have taken measures to oppress and enslave women. Both have taken measures to persecute non-believers. Both have extremely relaxed attitudes to child abuse. Both have imprisoned users of spiritual sacraments.
In all of these instances, Muslims and Christians have been opposed by the left. It was primarily the left that fought to change the laws that were persecuting homosexuals. It was primarily the left that fought to criminalise child abuse. It’s primarily the left fighting now to end the persecution of cannabis and psilocybin users.
Therefore, opposing the attitudes and beliefs held by Muslims is left-wing.
It’s left-wing to oppose Islam because Islam itself is far-right. In fact, Islam is so compatible with the far-right that there was even a Muslim division of the Waffen-SS. The 13th “Handschar” Division was made up of German officers and volunteer troops, mostly Muslim, mostly recruited in Bosnia with assistance from the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.
Nazism and Islam are highly compatible on account of that they are both hate-fueled supremacist ideologies that share a common enemy in the Jew. If Nazis are the kind of far-right extremists who we should all be scared of, and if Muslims fight side-by-side with Nazis out of shared ideological sentiments, then Islam itself is far-right. This is basic logic.
De Boer opposes Islam, not because Islam is left-wing, but because the Christian vs. Islam conflict is part of the interminable internecine warfare that Abrahamism has inflicted upon the world. Everywhere there is Abrahamism, there is war, whether war against non-believers or war against heretics. Christianity and Islam have been at war for almost 1,400 years, and de Boer is merely playing his part in that.
One point needs to be emphasised, however: just because there is an internal conflict within Abrahamism, one that sees Christians and Muslims fighting with each other, doesn’t mean that anyone criticising one particular faction of Abrahamism becomes “right-wing”. Christianity is itself divided into Catholic and Protestant factions, but no serious person would claim that a Protestant who opposes Catholicism on account of Catholicism’s barbaric attitudes towards spiritual sacraments is ‘far-right’.
The left would like to claim Muslim voters for their own on account of that Muslims tend to be non-white and outside the Establishment power structure. But neither of those things is close to sufficient. Homosexuals, women and users of spiritual sacraments are already outside the power structure – therefore anyone who hates these people is in service of the right wing.
It is left wing to stand against doctrines that call for the subjugation and oppression of homosexuals, women, outsiders and users of spiritual sacraments. This is especially true when the subjugators claim to be acting in the name of the God, and it goes double when they specifically claim that it is their destiny to rule over the rest of the planet.
Residents of Western Europe have noticed a new phenomenon in recent years: the appearance of large, solid concrete blocks near major walkways and throughfares. Known as ‘diversity blocks’, these brutal grey cubes are very noticable in otherwise highly refined and meticulously sculpted urban landscapes. This essay explains.
In the first two decades of this century, Muslim terrorists killed several hundred people in Europe in dozens of incidents. Initially, the preferred mode of attack was to use bombs, whether dumb bombs or human suicide bombers. This was how the 2004 Madrid train attackers killed over 200 people, and it’s how the terrorists who blew up the London buses the next year operated.
After these incidents, local security services tightened the net around the networks that provided the chemicals and the knowledge necessary to build explosive devices. They also introduced measures such as the need to fill out a form declaring one’s intent in order to buy potential explosive precursors. This meant that it became much harder to organise a bomb attack.
For a while, knife and machete attacks (and even the occasional sword attack) filled the gap, but these left a frustratingly low number of victims. It was soon realised that a terrorist in control of a truck (or at least a van) could inflict a great number of casualties simply by running down a crowd of people – especially easy in Europe thanks to their tradition of pedestrian streets.
The first act of terror to make use of this new insight was the 2016 Nice truck attack, where Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel drove a cargo truck into a crowd of people celebrating Bastille Day, killing 86 and wounding over 400. This inspired the Berlin truck attack some months later, where another Muslim terrorist killed 12 people, and the 2017 Stockholm truck attack, where yet another Muslim terrorist killed five.
These attacks became so common that people started to refer to them as “truck of peace” attacks. At this point, even the sclerotic European authorities realised that they needed to do something about it.
The problem with truck attacks is that many major roads run right next to major pedestrian lanes. This is all but inevitable given the logistics of traffic planning. So all any prospective truck attacker needs to do is drive along in regular traffic, and then suddenly veer off into the pedestrians. With enough momentum it’s possible to kill dozens of infidels in this manner simply by running them down.
The solution was as crude and brutal as the truck attacks themselves: gigantic blocks of solid concrete placed between the pedestrian malls and the roads. The logic was that the truck would hit these blocks and lose all momentum before ploughing into anyone. These blocks were placed everywhere, but especially in front of pedestrian malls and open markets.
It wasn’t long before some European citizens started taking the piss. Inspired by the sentiment that German Chancellor Angela Merkel had unnecessarily endangered her nation by opening the borders to over a million “refugees” from Syria in 2015, some started calling them ‘Merkel blocks’. The name that stuck, though, was ‘diversity blocks’.
They are called ‘diversity blocks’ for two reasons.
The first is that they are only necessary because diversity exists. In the days before mass Muslim immigration, European citizens generally didn’t have to worry about terrorism. Although there was localised terrorism at certain times, like the IRA, the Baader-Meinhof Gang, and the Basque separatists in Spain, there was nothing close to the pervasive, continent-wide fear that exists now.
When “diversity” started to become popular as an end in itself, many different groups of people became invited into Europe. Some of these people had very different ideas about the value of life to the natives. Many among these newcomers were inspired by violent ideologies foreign to Europe. Thanks to the diversity that these people brought, Europeans now have to put massive concrete blocks everywhere to prevent being murdered.
The second is that the blocks are also evidence of diversity. They don’t have them in Eastern Europe, because they don’t have Islamic terrorism there. Neither do they have them in Japan or South Korea. Diversity blocks only exist where Islamic terrorism exists at a sufficient level, and Islamic terrorism only exists where Muslims are sufficiently numerous.
In Clown World, the fact that we have to put gigantic concrete blocks everywhere to prevent the newer members of our society from slaughtering us is not considered cause for alarm. The mainstream media plays down the significance of these blocks, suggesting that they’re only temporary measures while returning ISIS soldiers can be deradicalised. Most of us know that they’ll be there as long as Clown World is.
A sane society would get rid of the people opening the borders to these killers. In Clown World, we vote those people back into power. Diversity blocks, then, stand as totems to the decay of the West, as gravestones for the free and easy way of life that we once knew.
