Clown World Chronicles: What Is 'Bioleninism'?

Clown World Chronicles: What Is ‘Bioleninism’?

‘Bioleninism’ describes a familiar phenomenon in Clown World – social rejects coming together to force their will on society at large. A feature of Clown World is that people who normally keep themselves hidden away out of shame are out and proud. Even worse, they are organised and controlling the narrative. Bioleninism is the thread that binds them all.

The original Leninism was a kind of slave morality that attracted many of society’s misfits. Much like Christianity in the Roman Empire, which first became popular among slaves, Leninism first became popular among those at the bottom of society. In the case of Russia, it wasn’t slaves but drunkards, prostitutes, petty criminals and those shunned for cruelty.

Characteristic of all popular slave moralities is that they bring together the resentful. Christianity did this, the original Communism did this, and now the bottom-feeders of Clown World are coming together to do it again – this is Bioleninism.

Bioleninism is the name given to the phenomenon of all of society’s genetic rejects coming together with a view to force their will on the population at large. Its coining is usually attributed to a mysterious Internet commentator known as ‘Spandrell‘.

For better or worse, much of human life is a mating contest that primarily revolves around genetic quality. Society favours the good-looking, the tall, the strong, the intelligent and the vigourous. All of these qualities can be affected by nutrition, but the reality is that their expression is fundamentally a matter of genetics.

Evolution selects for genetic quality first and foremost, and in the modern human animal it does so mostly through sexual selection. In practice, this means that women decide which males pass their genes on and which don’t. Like the other workings of Nature, this is a brutal process that involves a great deal of suffering for all, especially those who are found wanting.

If a person loses the genetic lottery, and cannot find anyone to mate with, it’s common for them to become resentful. At worst, this resentment manifests as a bitter form of anger that desires the destruction of everything good in the world. The logic is that if I can’t have it, no-one else can have it either. This spite probably evolved alongside jealousy, envy and all the other emotions as a way of ensuring breeding opportunities.

Some people ask themselves how it’s possible that people still propound Communism, given that it has a track record of a hundred million deaths and has failed every time it’s been tried.

The reason is that the people who support Communism are primarily motivated by resentment and hate. They don’t care whether or not Communism lifts up or empowers anyone – they just want to see the people they envy brought down a level or two. As long as someone above average is smashed down to the same level as everyone else, then all is good.

Bioleninism draws together the same kind of slaves that would ordinarily be Christians. Only now, instead of burning infidels at the stake, the wrongthinkers they persecute are political enemies. Those healthy enough to assert the value of their families or nations are hounded into silence. Instead of being labelled infidels or bourgeoisie, they are labelled Nazis.

Characteristic of the Bioleninist is an obsession with equality, which is held up as a virtue for its own sake. The logic is that the genetic reject feels a deep sense of humiliation in the presence of the genetically healthy. Only by rubbing the latter’s face in the shit can the reject avoid this humiliation.

One of the reasons why Clown World is so terrible is because its rulers understand the phenomenon of Bioleninism, and use it against the people. As such, they take measures to destroy the genetic infrastructure of any place they lord over, making resistance to their will less likely. This is achieved in two major ways.

The first is to destroy any natural leader that arises before they can become influential. The rulers of Clown World know that human populations naturally produce great leaders, and that these great people will lead their nations towards ending their suffering. So these natural leaders have to be dealt to before they liberate their nation from control.

In practice, this doesn’t require that the leaders be destroyed so much as that the people are induced to follow natural slaves instead. This is achieved through mass media programming, which platforms entertainers and celebrities instead of intellectuals and philosophers. By raising up these clowns, the rulers of Clown World ensure that the natural leaders are not followed.

The second major way to destroy the genetic infrastructure of a nation is through mass immigration. The rulers of Clown World know that only high-IQ people are capable of maintaining an uncorrupt society. Therefore, since they want corruption, they want the kind of population that enables corruption. So they hold the border open to the dumbest, most impulsive people they can find.

The plan is to have one global seething mass of borderline-retarded consumer whores who can be played off against each other without ever seeing the man behind the curtain. The end goal of original Leninism was to have a society where everyone is reduced to the lowest common social denominator. The end goal of Bioleninism is to have a world where everyone is reduced to the lowest common genetic denominator.

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 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!

Metaphysical Phototropism

On Planet Earth, the light of the Sun imposes order upon the chaos of the dirt and water. The rays of the Sun are the metaphysical masculine that imbues the metaphysical feminine with life and energy. As the feminine is devoted to the masculine, so does life on Earth show its devotion to the Sun by growing towards it.

Plants that grow towards light sources are called phototropic. Phototropism is the quality that enables the shoots of seeds to grow upwards out of the soil. It is why trees grow to be tall and upright. Phototropism is so common that it can be stated, as a general rule, that plant life seeks the light (although vines tend to be an exception).

The light of the Sun is responsible for all life on Earth by way of providing the base of the food chain. Photosynthesis is the process by which plant life grows. Without it, there would be no animals, no humans, just bare rocks. In this sense, the Sun is very much something divine. This divinity inspired the Roman cult of Sol Invictus to celebrate the return of the Sun on December 25th, three days after the Winter Solstice.

The Second Hermetic Principle, the Principle of Correspondence, teaches us that as below, so above. The patterns we observe in the physical world are replicated in the metaphysical world. Applying this to the workings of plants gives us the concept of metaphysical phototropism. This is the phenomenon of growing towards metaphysical light.

Most human beings naturally grow towards the light, only here it is not meant the light of the Sun. Most humans, being spiritual creatures, grow towards metaphysical light. This means spiritual wisdom, that which is often referred to as “enlightenment”.

If one looks at the life story of a great number of people, a common theme of growing towards the light becomes evident. Most people were born into a state of fear and confusion, and suffered greatly as a consequence. Most of these people were able, at some point in their lives, to develop enough wisdom so that they could act to avoid the worst of the suffering.

It’s common for people drift through years of hatred, bitterness, trauma or pain before they experience enough divine light to see the metaphysical truth: that only actions towards the cessation of suffering have value. Because of this confusion, people often cause great harm to themselves or others. But an inbuilt tendency to grow spiritually towards the light seems to be part of the human condition, and so most people overcome.

Physical phototropism has two separate components: positive phototropism, in which plants grow towards the light, and negative phototropism, in which plants grow away from the light, and which is much less common. This division is also replicated in the metaphysical realm.

In metaphysical terms, positive phototropism describes the phenomenon of individuals whose consciousness grows towards the light. These are people who seek out enlightened others, make friends with them, and esteem them. These people are drawn to spiritual places and spiritual texts, and they intuitively understand that wisdom is as precious as gold.

Negative metaphysical phototropism describes the phenomenon of individuals whose consciousness grows away from the light. For whatever reason, these people elect to shy away from wisdom and reject it. Wisdom is for them as pearls to a swine. These people are rare, being more like demons than natural beings, but they exist in all times and places.

In the same way that some plants are more phototropic than others, so too are some people more phototropic than others.

Most people are mildly phototropic, in the sense that they understand and appreciate the value of wisdom. A smaller number are moderately phototropic, and study wisdom like they study other subjects. An even smaller number are majorly phototropic, and devote their lives to seeking wisdom like men dying of thirst devote themselves to seeking water.

Furthering the plant analogy, human society could be compared to an ecosystem. Most people are shrubs and bushes, some others are trees, and some others are like great oaks that stand so tall they give everything else in that ecosystem something to look up to.

In the same way that the physical health of a plant is a function of the force that compels it to grow towards the Sun, the spiritual health of a human is a function of the force that compels it to seek out wisdom. As below so above: in the same way that the life force of a plant will wither and die without sunlight, so too will the human life force wither and die without spiritual nourishment.

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!

Everyone That Exists Is Descended From Someone Evil

Some people, we are told, are the beneficiaries of unearned privilege. Their ancestors performed evil acts in order to gain power and wealth, then they passed that power and wealth to their descendants. As a result, those descendants are obliged to share their wealth with those whose ancestors were not evil. The reality, as this essay will explain, is that everyone on Earth is descended from someone evil.

The nature of life on this Earth is kill or be killed. At every single level of life, one must kill in order to continue. Life feeds on life, and the only alternative is starvation.

Even if a creature doesn’t eat meat, but only eats plants, they still have to kill for mating opportunities or for territory.

Mating opportunities don’t necessarily come easily – males fight to the death over fertile females in a great number of species. Even if a female goes willingly with a male, there are other males ready to kill him and take his place. Killing a male and raping his female is, as far as Nature is concerned, a perfectly legitimate mating strategy. All Nature cares about is that the female carries to term.

Even if a creature doesn’t try to reproduce, their body’s metabolic demands require that they eat, and this requires that they control territory. This territory will invariably be contested by other creatures who also seek food. Those other creatures are happy to kill their opponents if resisted. So control of territory requires a willingness to kill those others who would control it.

The nature of human history is little different. Humans might be different to animals, but the major behavioural differences between us and them didn’t arise until recently. Before then, the vast majority of us were as vicious, callous and opportunistic as any animal.

Men have always fought over breeding partners. The emotion of jealousy evolved to help motivate us to kill our rivals for them. At times in the human biological past, this rivalry was so intense that a small minority of men controlled a majority of the women. The others usually died in the attempt to get laid.

Men have also always fought over territory (or at least for the resources in those territories). This was an established fact well before the Age of Colonisation began. The first recorded war was some 4,700 years ago, and the warring has never stopped. Any king or ruler who calculated that they could conquer their neighbouring territory usually did. The need to spill blood did not deter them.

Ruthless conflict for ultimately biological causes has been an inescapable feature of human history from the beginning. In truth, even World War II – portrayed as the ultimate struggle between good and evil – boiled down to the control of territory and the resources that came with it. The first man ever to kill a member of the neighbouring tribe probably did so for lebensraum – nothing has ever changed.

World War II was a slaughter for resources, World War I was a slaughter for resources, the Napoleonic Wars were slaughters for resources, the Crusades were slaughters for resources, Julius Caesar slaughtered for resources, Alexander slaughtered for resources. All of these endeavours may have been framed as other things, but fundamentally they were about one’s tribe winning access to land and women.

Everyone who succeeded in this struggle was a killer. This they had to be by virtue of the fact that their aspirations were violently opposed.

The idea that someone can be meek and still thrive is a delusion brought about by the influence of slave cults such as Christianity. Throughout the entirety of human history, the meek were simply cast aside. Those casting them aside won the women, the land and the reproductive opportunities. All who exist today are descended from them.

Today, one can argue that it’s truly possible to be civilised. Kindness is outperforming aggression in an increasing number of work environments, as proven by the fact that women are doing better in them. But this is an extremely recent phenomenon.

The long peace that we have enjoyed since World War II does not change the fact that each and every single one of us, without exception, are descended from grievous criminals. Murderers, rapists, land thieves: those are our ancestors. Had that not been the case, they would not have survived. They would have been killed by other people’s ancestors.

Consequently, it’s pointless to try to make another person feel guilty for supposedly inherited privilege. No matter what class a person occupies, they are descended from those who killed to gain wealth. The best thing would be to widely acknowledge this, and then work towards finding an end to the suffering of all sentient beings.

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!

Hate Is Good When It Keeps You Safe

An enormous amount of effort is being made right now to “fight hate”. The logic is that a great deal of suffering in the world is caused by hate, and so there is no place for it. Although this might be a lovely sentiment, it’s a futile one, because hate is a natural and inescapable part of life. This essay explains.

All human emotions, without exception, evolved for a particular reason.

Love evolved to create pair bonds. If a man and a woman genuinely love each other, their mutual care will create a much better family environment than if they did not. A better family environment means that the offspring are much more likely to survive to adulthood in a state where they’re fit to reproduce. So over time, the offspring of those who were capable of love outcompeted the offspring of those who were not.

Fear evolved to keep us safe from danger. A person who feels an instinct to retreat at the sight of a dangerous animal will have a much better chance of surviving than one who does not. As such, the offspring of those who felt fear at the sight of danger outcompeted the offspring of those who did not.

Hate evolved for the same reasons as love and fear. Although the reasons for hate are not as obvious, the same general rule applies. Like all other emotions, hate evolved because it either helped people reproduce or it helped them survive. The role of hate in helping people reproduce is minimal, but its role in helping people survive is great.

Simply put, if someone wants to kill you or enslave you, then hating them will greatly increase your chances of survival. People who were able to hate those who wished them harm were more often able to destroy those enemies, instead of being destroyed by them. As such, they survived to reproductive age more often, and their offspring outcompeted those who were incapable of hate.

More specifically, hate motivates people to protect that which is valuable to them. If an intruder breaks into your house to rape your family and steal your possessions, it is hate that keeps you safe by providing the motivation to destroy that intruder. So hate, despite its bad rap, is simply an adaptation that keeps people safe in the face of danger. The main difference between hate and fear is that hate moves towards threats to neutralise them, whereas fear moves away from them.

It’s necessary here to distinguish between justified hate and unjustified hate.

Justified hate occurs when another person’s actions cause suffering to you or to someone you care about. If a person hates you, or if they have such contempt for you that they exclude you from due consideration, or if their indifference to you is such that their actions cause you harm, then hating them might be justified.

If someone is actively trying to harm you, then hate will motivate you to stop them. If you express hate at the person harming you, they might stop on account of that they didn’t realise their actions were harmful. If they knew but didn’t care, then hate might motivate them to stop on account of that they fear retaliation. And if they don’t stop harming you, hate might help you destroy them.

Unjustified hate is the kind of hate that is not beneficial. The classic example is disrespecting someone of a different group merely because you hate that group as a whole, or because you had a bad experience with one member of that group and generalised it, or because you were conditioned to hate that group from childhood.

If the group as a whole is truly odious (such as an ideology of hate like Communism, Nazism or Abrahamism), then hating them might be justified. But if they are a national or racial group – and therefore contain good as well as bad – then hate has to take a back seat. Otherwise, hating them is liable to get you involved in a blood feud of some kind, which will not benefit you.

Another example of unjustified hate is when an individual does something bad or harmful and regrets it, but is not duly forgiven. Many people cause harm not from deliberate malice but from making an honest mistake. On such occasions it’s common for them to regret it, and to feel sorry. A person who has caused harm, and is genuinely sorry, should be forgiven and not hated.

This logic sounds simple, but the problem with it is politics. Those who would rule over other human beings don’t want their subjects making free decisions, because that makes them harder to control. As such, they try to take authority away from those people. A common authoritarian tactic is to assume the authority to decide when hate is appropriate, through such means as “hate speech” laws, or through religious admonitions to love everyone until a priest tells you otherwise.

Ultimately, no-one can have the right to decide whether another person’s hate is justified, any more than they can have the right to decide whether another person’s love is justified. Every adult has the right to decide for themselves if their own actions are justified, and that includes deciding who their enemies are.

Therefore, “fighting hate” is as futile and authoritarian as trying to decide which consenting adults are allowed to sleep together. It’s impossible to decide on behalf of other people who their enemies are. Hate is a good thing when it keeps people safe, and only the individual can decide when this is the case.

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!