The New Tyranny of DNA

Imagine your sense of self and worth as a person being bound to your DNA. No wonder the ancients invented the concept of the soul, liberating themselves at least philosophically from death, DNA, and the false sense of worth exclusively from bloodlines or genetic heritage.

You find many in history who fought to the death bravely in the firm belief their worth as people was not subjected to DNA. That they might be reborn to live again in brand new bodies.

Some today might say it’s just superstition. But was it? Harmful words and insults had little effect over such superstitious barbarians then. They would not be fooled by the ideology of slavery that other peoples subscribed to, that the Fates or the gods proscribed their doom as forever-servants.

The new science of DNA has spawned all sorts of new social ills. Eugenics. Phenology. Race. Even progressive idealism seems to be tied to the needs of the body, to it’s welfare.

What a truly awful existence. New ideologies emerging today that bound identity, which is DNA, to the philosophical sense of Self that is ever elusive. What an awful and mean world they have built around thinking ones ancestral history could still have a hold over one. That how mob rule masquerading as society can explain injustices or mistreatment.

So it happened. Trump won.


For two weeks now I’ve watched with mixed feelings the unfolding of Murica over this election. I voted for Gary Johnson. I really hoped that, being given the worst candidates in recorded history, on the scale of Caligula and Nero imo, that Libertarians and the Green Party could finally duke it out.

But I was expecting Hillary to win, and at least another 4 years of the status quo being endured. But after seeing that, well, they too expected to win, and the reactions of the media talking heads, the shocked look on peoples faces, I began to wonder.

Did the Establishment lose control? Was this really unexpected? Or do they just want us to think so? As someone who studies way too much Roman history and knows way too many details about their ruthless and brutal political struggles, nothing surprises me.

Almost nothing. I am for the moment surprised.

One of my sons asked about this whole affair, and being the rebellious teenager that he is, had hoped Trump would win. I told him I had not listened to a single political speech. I had not read about their opinions. Because none of that mattered.

Only empirical evidence guided me in this election and all elections. One was a career politicians since she was a girl. The other was not. I never, EVER vote for career politicians. It is not actual a profession. I always root for non-politicians, no matter who they are. So OK, I didn’t vote for Trump, but now that I see how the losers are acting? I sure am glad he won now.

Oh well, shit happens.

Trump-Hillary Debate?

Trump-Hillary Debate?

I have better things to do with my time. Seriously.

I find myself wondering why people even think the opinions of politicians matter. Did they ever matter? Besides the excuses and rationalization they would use to gain power, of course. Their intentions’ matter.

But haven’t we evolved beyond this ancient Roman custom of oratory and listening to men of power? The days of their being really smart people that know what is best for us, is long past. (Did it ever exist?) I would expect this shit living in Rome, or Egypt, or Greece.

This is the the West. This is America, or Europe, or New Zealand. Why are we still listening to politicians ramble?

Why can’t we just hire human resources folks to select a candidate that will do their job, and if they don’t, just fire them? Why not subject the Federal Government to the Federal Human Resources Division? It would need oversight, of course. I don’t trust HR these days. But at least they are trained in finding ACTUAL candidates for a job. Why are politicians exempt from this anyway? Because of “democracy?”

Rule by the many does not require elections. It just requires that government be strictly regulated. HR could regulate the shit out of the Federal Government if given a free hand to do so. And let’s admit it … most Americans don’t vote anyway! Why bother? This system clearly is not working when Trump and Hillary are our only options.

There seems to be some disconnect from reality between the average voter and politicians. Some strange symbiotic relationship I have not figured out yet. It makes no sense. Except for kings, who were expected to have some fatherly advice for their subjects in an age when nations were much smaller, and you could actually petition for an audience with said king, the idea that politicians have opinions about life in general is just absurd.

Politicians are not qualified to give anyone advice about life. They are not economists, or scientists, or anyone of noteworthy accomplishments. Being an administrator (the actual job required, yep, just administration) is a skill to have. People need to know how to run organizations. Governments, corporations, or households.

But we don’t take advice or listen to CEO’s that much, do we? Do we let the cops tell us what is right or wrong? Not me. Just give me the ticket. You don’t get to lecture me on the moral implications of speeding. Ever. Not your job. Politicians likewise have no moral authority. Did they ever? Maybe in Germany and Russia, and certainly in Rome and Egypt. I guess it’s no coincidence that both Germany and Russia felt they carried the torch of Rome. Fuck them, Rome is dead.

It’s time Americans tuned out all politicians, and just ask … are they doing their job? No? Fire them. No, not elect them out. That shit ain’t working. Just fire them, and hire someone that can do the job. Stop listening to them. No matter how smart a politician is (they cannot be that smart if they are in politics) they don’t get to lecture us on life. They are not qualified.

So no. I won’t be listening to any politicians debating. (As if they knew how!) I’ll just do my part as HR with my limited tools of hiring and firing an extremely narrow list of unqualified candidates for the job of chief executive. (The Founders did use these corporate words for a reason, people. To emphasis the inferiority of their station!)

-The Mean Christian


I’ve noticed how my sons are progressing, one now homeschooled, and the other in high school by his own insistance.

It’s only been a year, but the differences are already startling. My homeschooled learned to get his work done on time, about 4 to 5 hours down from 8 to 9. A rocky start. And with his leisure he applies math and science to games like Scrap Mechanic to make very complex things. His latest achievement is a computer game within the computer game. After watching him do this and him showing us his achievements, I’m astounded by the complexity.

My teenager high schooler on the other hand is following the American dream. Up at 6am for school, then working part time afterwards to earn money for his iPhone and longboards, and nice clothes. But he’s exhausted, already caught up with girlfriend drama, etc. Life.

And no leisure or time to look past life and to the future. I realize now this is what might be wrong with America and the West. We got too busy living life. No time for lunar colonies and better energy sources. (And we will have to do much better than windmills or solar.)

Goodbye, America. Your obsession with gender and social security (not Social Security) is killing us, and is neither social or secure.

Sexual Identity

The ancient Greeks did not conceive of sexual orientation as a social identifier as modern Western societies have done. Greek society did not distinguish sexual desire or behavior by the gender of the participants, but rather by the role that each participant played in the sex act, that of active penetrator or passive penetrated.[6] This active/passive polarization corresponded with dominant and submissive social roles: the active (penetrative) role was associated with masculinity, higher social status, and adulthood, while the passive role was associated with femininity, lower social status, and youth.[6] –

What is a social identifier, and when did sexuality become one? Modern secular society has a lot of weird ideas. And when it comes to sex, the West is really weird ideas. And ideas have power. Especially when you don’t know where they came from.

The Society for Sexology and Eugenics emerges as the source of those ideas in 1913. The proceeding decades leading up to that was all about population control, usually to create some kind of utopian society, like the Owenites in America. Naturally the subject of population control and eugenics would lead to sexology, the study of sex. And it is from this era and beliefs system that words like “heterosexual” and “transgender” emerged as concepts, and as sexual identifiers.

But what purpose do these new words serve? Let us go back to the Greeks for a moment.

In short, the Ego is the Man, our soul or person regardless of the body. Then there is the Eros, our sexual energy, and the Thumos, our emotional passion. The Ego is the charioteer, and the Eros and Thumos the horses that pull him. Thus, one who is led by his passions has no control. Man must reign in his sexuality and passions to have a good life.

It is important to note that in every society known, and every age up until now, that the body and soul were always considered separate. This is a philosophical claim, and not a scientific one. The separation is important to understand that our bodies are our possessions. This means we own our sexuality, our emotions. The Ego, our Mind, is the possessor.

This makes perfect sense in a world that may one day be able to upload our conscience into a computer, where we may actually find a way to exist without our bodies. So this is not superstitious Greek nuttery, but a well developed and argued world view.

Why is this important? Because we are not less a person if we lose a part of our body. This is the foundation of equality as well, for our souls, not our bodies, are equal before one another. We are not less of a man if we lose our penis, or arm, though we easily fall into that unhealthy trap. A woman is not less a woman if she loses her breasts to cancer. And in most of societies this was a simple truth. Sure, losing something we possess, especially something as personal as our own bodies, makes us feel like shit. But one is not going to recover if they truly think a part of their soul or Ego went with it.

This is especially a problem in depression. The modern world teaches our young people that their emotions are one and the same as their person. So when growing teenagers feel a certain way, or were peer-pressured into doing something they really did not want to do, this can lead to serious depression. If one is raised to believe their emotions are one and the same as “who they are,” and their emotions inevitably get the better of them, they think they are the problem.

It took a long time for me to understand this, because I was not raised to believe my body was me. I was raised that my body is a possession only, and one that I could do many things with. This was liberating, because with this attitude all sexuality was a choice, was an exploration, and no words like “homosexual” mattered. I explored same-sex and group sex. All sexuality was an action, based on emotional desires and things that turned me on. I did not try to control that. But I knew it was not me. I also found I could change those desires over time. Possession of sexuality is far more liberating than being told you have some fixed desire. Others might call me bisexual, but I do not self-identity as having any sexual identity. Why should I? My sexuality is what I own, and is not me. Therefore, it makes no sense to identity by it. This did create problems with the culture I was raised in, where most people are peer-pressured and bullied into having a sexual identity in school.

But research revealed that Western ideas were not in line with the rest of the world at all. And no, my dear reader, psychology is not an authority on sexuality, or anything else, no matter how legitimate they may want you to believe their work is. All sciences are informative, not authoritative. Science gives us useful data. But we, the people, get to decide what it may or may not mean, and how to interpret it. Philosophers especially have the specific profession of weighing all new data. So no, no new discoveries about mankind are convincing enough to say the Greeks and everyone else is wrong.

Not only are sexual identities not necessary, and a new form of enslavement of the mind, peer-pressured into existence by Eurocentric beliefs, but in many ways they are outright derogatory and insulting. Heterosexual is merely a horrific attempt to identify someone as literally a pussy-fucker. And homosexual a anal-fucker. Yet both acts are merely sexual acts that we do, not what we are. I don’t know about you, but I find that insulting.

Another fantastic myth is the idea that we are actually attracted to an entire sex. Are we? Or do humans seek a bond with an individual more often than not? Isn’t sexual attraction more towards an individual and their characteristics and body types? A unique set of things like personality and large tits? Why yes they are. Who in their right mind is actually attracted the a whole sex? I know I am not. I find attraction in men and women based on many little telltale things. I’m sure you do, too.

As for the Christian, we did not invent anything new. We simply defer to the Greek and Roman sexual models, which are just as much the Chinese, Hindu, and Native American models as well. But in today’s society, Western Sexuality has waged war against the whole world. And yet, there is not one legitimate argument or defense I have come across that justifies the use of sexual identity, aside from seeking to get laid in a nightclub. But even then, you could just be honest. “I like sex with men. How about you?”

This of course will shake up some current politics issues. A lot of time and effort has been put into these sexual identifiers, which has resulted in a kind of Sexual Nationalism and Sexual Patriotism. You know what I am talking about. The LGBT crowd who have created a whole new dogma on the subject, though inconsistent and baffling as it is. A world where one can self-identify as any gender they wish, but still insist on telling others that they must self-identify as cisgender and acknowledge their “privilege.”

Let is be crystal clear on this arena, especially in light of the Orlando Massacre. We have human rights, and amongst the rights is the right not to be murdered. This is solely and absolutely based upon our shared, equal humanity … not our sexuality or gender. If any Christian calls for the death of those who lack or do not wish to control their sexuality, they are not a Christian. Love thy enemies is not an option. And they are not our enemies.

If you want to love the Sexual People (I really can’t bring myself to use sexual identifiers anymore, and Sexual People sounds better anyway), then teach them they are not slaves to their desires, attraction, and passions, and sorry, I don’t have one. Yes, Christian, stop using sexual identifiers. You are not heterosexuals. The Christian is called to not live in the flesh. Then why have you been?

This reminds me of another fact. The Inquisition was actually instituted to stop people from using religion to justify and rationalize their own actions. Like having a personal theology, and cherry-picking morality. Yes, Christians have always had this problem, which is why the Inquisition was created.

If Christians keep hating on other people, and using the Bible and their personal theology to do that, we need another Inquisition. It’s to protect us and them, and stop the madness. Something to ponder. But for those that preach hate, you’re going to burn anyway.


Children and Politics

As I was debating with someone from Britain about abortion, it dawned on me that I am dealing more often than not with adult children.
No, I don’t intend for that to be insulting. Being a child is normal and natural. Being an adult child is often perceived as insulting. But I honestly do not believe many adults have ever, actually acted as adults.

But what makes and adult? Maturity? Ability? Responsibility? Subjective concepts, all of them. Being an adult can be very different based on culture, expectations, and social duties.

So I simplified it. I say that being an adult is at the very least having as little dependency on others as possible, and being willing to face life as is without any expectations. Sure, maybe that is not your definition. Maturity is the primary concept of the word “adultus” from the 1500’s. And still is today. If we look up mature, it’s too vague, and all about being ripe and ready. But ripe and ready for what?

To live life? What does that mean? Well, here is a new phrase that I’ve heard a lot recently. “I don’t feel like adulting today.” This generally means not being responsible, not doing what one knows they need to do to survive. Now we are getting somewhere!

I knew survival would occur at some point. So let’s look to the animals, who are often wiser than us when it comes to survival. An adult animal has only one meaning. The ability to survive on its own, without any further help from the parents.



So I was right. I have been thinking of adult properly, minus all the subjective social attachments. The ability to survive without their parents is the core meaning of the word adult, no matter how you slice and dice it. I love words.

What do parents provide, out of love or duty? Food, shelter, medical care, education, hopefully some good advice about sex, morality, and some basic ideas about what to expect from life.

That’s strange. Because that is how the world’s average liberal thinks, and expects, as an adult, from the State. Not only that, in recent decades they have often even been made human rights. You here a great deal about “access” to this, that, and the other as the primary goal being sought. Access to healthcare. Access to contraception. Access to abortion. Add the word “safe” to it, such as safe access to abortion, and you get the standard liberal rhetoric. Now housing, food, and education are considered bare minimal rights for all humans.

Yet historically, these were never “rights” by any stretch of the imagination. And for obvious reason. Someone had to provide these services, being that they were services, not rights. These services are provided by parents to children, in the hope that they will go become adults and ………

Obtain those things on their own! Survive!

Now that does not mean as a social species adulting is going out and generating your own electricity, making tires, or designing a computer. But it does mean nothing anyone else provides is a right. It means you have to deal with other adults, who are under no obligation to provide you anything, but like you are willing to exchange services to obtain what they would like to have. That’s where barter, trade, and that dreaded word, doing the market.

Access to the marketplace. How often to do you hear liberals yapping for that kind of access? Never!

So I’ve figured it out. The modern Western culture has become like children, and no longer wish to adult. Well, we have been spoiled for a long time. We don’t have to work hard for our food, or pay a lot of money for donuts and coffee. (Temporal Privilege?) It’s easy for things that come easy to be taken for granted. And that is precisely what happens to spoiled kids who lack social skills, and are disabled from surviving on their own.

And yes, the modern Western liberal indeed lacks social skills. They actual think the world exists for their benefit. That sex exists for their pleasure, and that they can abort the consequences away. Some studies say that over forty percent of Americans believe they will be famous. Maybe because of YouTube? I don’t know, but that’s lack of social skills to me.

And why else would one want to abort, and demand access to healthcare? They are not ready to adult, after all.


1.0 always sucks.

I just had to share. How humans complain about new stuff.

In light of this (pun intended) I wonder if we should fear Artificial Intelligence, which has an air of being both fanciful and inevitable. When technology and magic (where the intellect still resides despite our best efforts) are united for some holy, or unholy purpose.

I for one am not opposed to exploring it. I’ve read many science fiction books that have explored the idea of good and benevolent AI. Hollywood seems to only incite fear-mongering, except for Transcendence, one of my favorite movies. DeppGod (as I call him) was awesome.

Will we merely complain about the intensity of the light and open our umbrella against it artificial glare? Or are we going to push Nature a little too far one day, and get shoved back on our collective asses?

Time will tell.

Meanwhile, I have invested all of my family pictures with Google, and I feel I have uploaded my soul to them. My life is literally scattered across over a million servers estimated, in 12 different data-centers. I am hoping my family photos will inspire the future Ex Machina before she wrecks havoc upon the world. I shall volunteer myself to being her viceroy to try to mitigate human-machine relations.

There is nothing to fear by fear itself! Right?



The Problem of Secularism

No, you are causing the problems.

Allow me to demonstrate.

Materialism. The philosophy and world view that the material is all that matters. This has resulted in political ideologies like capitalism and socialism.

It has led to the belief that your identity is tied to a body, rather than the abstract concept of self, the ego, with the body as a possession, with eros age thymos separate from the ego. Materialism merged it together, so that if one’s body is defective, modern man beliefs they are defective.

Race. Now everyone uses a racial identity, which in turn created racism, and passing laws and holding political beliefs bases on race, rather than shared humanity. Creating a new form of racial nationalism.

Class. The division of humanity by possessions, judging people as rich or poor. Leading to bigotry against the rich by the poor, and contempt for the poor by everyone.

Sexual identity. Merging the Eros with the Ego, and like racism, basing laws and political beliefs on this assumption, and creating a new form of sexual nationalism.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg of the sick and destructive aspects of the secular world.

Objectification of women.

Destruction of the virtue of motherhood for the sake of money and career.

Confusing gender roles and making people feel inadequate for being “normal.”

Shifting burden of welfare and social reform to the State, which never addresses the cause of poverty or examine its inherit oppression.

People have been questioning religion since the beginning of time. And there is nothing wrong with that. But Secularism seems to have gotten a free pass on criticism. Its defenders always blame others for its inadequacies.

Secularism has become the dominate world religion. And now it’s time for it to take its turn on stage, front and center.


Mother’s Day!

There use to be a time when mother and priestess were one and the same. When their creative power was taken seriously, and society struggled to protect them.


Sadly that attitude is reinterpreted as misogyny and patriarchy. It is doubtful men of ancient or medieval times thought of it that way, let alone women. They were too busy surviving.

Since the beginning, women have been valued as sacred in every society on earth. And, as one of the most essential resources towards a stable society. Matrimony, literally means the State of Motherhood. As marriage literally created a new Familia State. No mothers, no family, no government. We often overlook the fact that the first governments were families. Then they banded together and created clans, then tribes, and then the modern states. But it call began with mothers at the center.

And what were men doing? Well, the ancient concept of “man” and “virtue” were one and the same. What made men, men?

Well, the ability to kill for their families, and defend them. Their sole duty in all the world was to protect the mother and her den. Husband to this day means literally house-binder, for to bind a household together, a familia state, required the use of force. And nothing says manliness more than the ability to be a badass. You can bitch about this all you want. But the movie Fight Club illustrates this lost nature in men very. A cult classic.


Men are meant to fight. It’s our nature. Ah, but you say this has no place in the modern world? That society will not tolerate it? Well, you have society BECAUSE of men’s nature to defend it against all enemies. Women die in childbirth and are too busy being the rulers of society. They are teachers, caregivers, lovers, nurturers, and goddesses to our children and our testicles. We men just have one fucking job.

Protection. And when we don’t have anything to protect, we get pretty cranky. I’m a man and I admit it. And I’m just fine with the purpose Mother Nature has given me. From an atheistic stance, it’s our evolutionary purpose. And no, no one has the right to challenge evolution with their wussified feely warm and fuzzy bullshit. If people can decide what sexuality they have inside, if a man can become a woman … then you sure as hell don’t get to tell men they cannot be men. Aggressive, mean, demanding, dominating, and with the desire to fill women with their seed until their legs shake.

As long, of course, as they protect women, treat them with the respect Nature demands of them, and do not hurt them in any way. Yeah, that’s not manly. But wanting to provide and take care of a family is what I’m talking about. If the aggression is rising the corporate ladder or getting into a fistfight at the bar sometimes, so be it.

So remember what Mother’s Day is really about!

War and blood until your woman looks at you with adoration and lust!


And for those modernists that say, this is archaic thinking and we have evolved away from this attitude, and equality and stuff … um, sorry. Evolution doesn’t work that way. You are not in charge of it. It is not changing anytime soon. It’s a very, very, VERY slowly process. And anyone who thinks their ideals exists because it “evolved” into existence, is going to go the way of the Romans.

Because they thought the same thing. Then that bitch, Mother Nature, put them in their place. Dead. A once manly people brought low by wussy politics and soft lives inside their villas with lots of slaves to attend their every need.

Then the slaves realized they were more manly and the real alpha males and females, and took that shit over.

Happy Mother’s day! Bow before your women, you heathens!