Tag Archives: Bruce Charlton

Plague Journal, March 16

Posted on by
Reply

Supermarkets still fully stocked. Were I of money & knowledge I would buy a put on toilet paper – the tricky thing is to ascertain the time range, the point at which people realise they have enough loo roll for the next 10 years so they stop buying, and hence toilet paper companies experience a sudden drop in sales.

I know two people who know people with Coronavirus now. I wonder how long before I know someone personally.

My read, as Bruce Charlton and others claim there is no CV and it’s just a pretext for the globohomo to go to full New World Order boot-in-face: it is possible that all the video/photos leaked from China, and the evidence that Iran is digging mass graves, is a wide-scale deception; I find it harder to believe that Western Europe could carry this off, and it’s clear that something serious has befallen e.g. Italy. I think the Cabal released this in the hope of setting off a war between the US and China, and to crash the world economy and so sabotage Trump’s 2020 election – as if The God Emperor would be at all daunted by such a minor inconvenience. Naturally, each regional Cabal-satrap is using the CV to increase their powers.

The God Emperor is not to be foxed by mere Satanists. I fully anticipate that, in a year’s time, everyone will be perplexed that the Coronavirus merely aided Trump in his endeavours.

the spirit in the machine

Posted on by
Reply

Bruce Charlton and William Wildblood have been considering Artificial Intelligence, in particular as a vessel for demonic intelligences. My own feeling is that everything physical has a spiritual (or non-physical but real) counterpart. There are also, I think, spiritual forces, e.g. the idea of a nation, which exist without an exact physical counterpart, but which nonetheless bear influence in the materium. Perhaps the pleasing grain and texture of certain physical objects is to do with this immaterial anchoring, a spiritual underpinning & echo.

So, a pen or a book or wristwatch has a “spirit”. Logically, it seems computers must too; and yet, while I have grown very fond of certain books – the particular physical book, not merely the arrangement of letters therein – I have never felt the slightest attachment to a smartphone, PC, DVD, or CD. When my old copy of Dante’s Inferno literally fell apart through a decade’s reading, I felt sad and would have much preferred to have it repaired than buy another; and when I inevitably bought a replacement, in the exact same edition, I nonetheless felt disappointed – this new book wasn’t mine, not the Inferno I knew and enjoyed. I ended up ripping the old edition’s pages out, and using them as decoration on my office walls, and as wrapping paper for gifts.

I never felt such loyalty to CDs, DVDs, the PC I’m using now, or my smartphone. Even my old dumbphone, which I quite liked, was merely a thing to me. Although I understand little, and like less, of technology, I think everyone feels this way – even the most impassioned Apple geek would, I imagine, be delighted if Apple offered him a brand new replacement for his 6-month-old Mac: he would not think, But this is my computer, I like it, we have a history. No, he would seize the opportunity to get a free replacement.

And so, if computers do have a spirit, it is presumably a cold and frictionless surface, to which human experience and loyalty will not cling. It is denatured and alienating. When a computer goes wrong, it feels, somehow, perverse: at best, an indifferent spirit has decided to stop working; at worst, a malevolent imp has decided to cast its hex upon our evening.

For this reason, I don’t foresee a straight-line trajectory for technology. I am, of course, unusual; but I am often harbinger and stormcrow of catastrophes to come.

the demonic chain

Posted on by
Reply

It is often noted that homosexuals were typically abused as children. I dare say, if one examined a modern paedophile, for example this sterling individual,

they would have been abused as a child, and that abuser abused, in filial obligation for endless term, and so on back to demonic agency & inception.

Which brings me to this Brucey Bonus:

As I see matters, the problem is with the upper class elite ‘English’, ultimately those of Norman descent although constantly recruiting more widely. Since this group arrived in England, there has been a pattern of coercion, exploitation. Jumping a few steps; what I take from this that the British Establishment is (and has always been) strategically working-for ultimate evil. And that a key part of this corruption is either rooted in sex and/ or uses sex as the means of initiation and to enforce loyalty.

The personal consequences are perceptible. As a middle class non-elite person; it has always been evident to me that there is a shallowness/ hollowness/ unemotionality; a robotic, dead-eyed or snake eyed – quality in most of the upper class people I met. There is no depth, no reality, no soul. 

Of the three people whom I know to have attended a posh boarding school, one boasted of being forcibly sodomized by a 17-year-old (he apparently loved it, even though he was 9 at the time) and another was almost certainly raped. Given that much of the British elite attended these schools, I suspect they practice systematic rape and humiliation, as a form of in-group bonding and MK Ultra-style conditioning. It is not merely the Old Boys’ Network, it is the MK Ultra Network.

I think of Ranulph Fiennes writing that he would never send his children to Eton. I think of the peculiar dead-eyed stare of which Bruce Charlton writes; and I am glad I was spared such privilege. And these are the people who have ruled us for centuries.

 

bureaucracy and evil

Posted on by
Reply

Bruce Charlton on bureaucracy:

We can feel the life being squeezed out of us, our humanity filtered or crystallised. Weber termed bureaucracy the ‘iron cage’ – that is true, but the worst of the cage is that we know it as a cage yet have chosen to inhabit it, and that we disbelieve in the possibility of a life outside of the cage.   

I was lucky enough to be born & raised before bureaucracy had an iron hold on my homeland, a homeland which is now a semi-Orwellian state of mass surveillance and mass proscription, where almost everything is illegal unless you are a Muslim (in which case everything is permitted). I was therefore greatly affronted by the bureaucracy in my Alma Mater, a decade or so after Charlton, and one of the first lessons of my tedious office jobs was “don’t try to debate the rules, especially when they make no sense.”

Like most relatively sane people, I detest bureaucracy. I felt it strangled all that was human & good in the university I attended, and in my office jobs it seemed an either pointless expenditure of time & energy, or actively contrary to its alleged purpose, e.g. Equality Officers who ensure that any white straight male or Christian is discriminated against.

It is worth noting that the religion chosen by our rulers is one of detailed regulation; for all its crudity and neolithic savagery it is an essentially bureaucratic religion.

There is, in bureaucracy, a ratcheting effect whereby even when we feel the bureaucracy to be needless and dispiriting, we shrink from a reduction thereof. I experienced this myself in one of my many tedious jobs, in a hospital, where medical students called to ask if they could borrow a textbook for an exam – their library having lost theirs. My initial reaction was a 50-50 of “why not?” and “that’s probably against the rules”. I thought about it for 2 or 3 seconds and said “that might be okay, but I need to check.” My manager said they could come and make notes but couldn’t take the books out of the teamroom or photocopy anything, since of course that could leave the hospital open to a lawsuit.

Later, I wondered why I had initially shrunk from granting a perfectly reasonable request – for a couple of medical students, based just across the road, to use our textbooks. But this is the constantly ratcheting effect of bureaucracy, to diminish not merely freedom but the desire & instinct for freedom. It is most likely a natural psychological reaction, that provided a man has structure & stability, he will shrink from any diminution thereof – even if there are clear justifications, the structure cripplingly inhuman.

The human mind requires structure & stability, the Germanic peoples being the most extreme examples in this regard, since Ordnung muß sein. Just as the Bosche would rather live with a destructive, inhuman order than with freedom, so the human mind will very quickly adapt to structure, and resist its removal. This leads to one natural conclusion: the Tower of Babel.

tower of babel

Destruction:

the_tower

and lest you think this mere mythopoetic speculation, it is good to ponder the EU Parliament and reflect that They certainly built it with this in mind:

eu-european-parliment-louise-weiss-building-tower-babel-building

Bureaucracy waxes as a sense of the religious/spiritual wanes. When Man denies the gods, all that is left is the manmade, and what could be more tritely manmade than bureaucracy and ugly architecture? The European Union is a project for the utterly manmade world, divorced from that which created Man – it is, like all advanced bureaucracy, Satanic.

The modern Satanic idea, “you are god” says “there is nothing to which you are not subject.” But since every human being is therefore god, that means other human beings can create their own senseless order, and force you to submit to it. Hence, the semi-religious fervour of the true believers in bureaucracy – in Europe, those who regard the European Union as the saviour of mankind, because, well, a bunch of bureaucrats and politicians and bankers, and their bought academics & “journalists” said so, and if you don’t like it you’re a Nazi and should be locked up and your children given to the Religion of Peace.

The Tower card seems extremely negative. Destruction, calamity, loss. We resist the degradation of an accustomed structure, however horrific. And yet, as Chigurh says in No Country For Old Men: “If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?”