Part III
On Patterns of Control, Management, Manipulation, and Entertainment
Chapter 1
Control Kinetics
The way I approach language has to always be subject of reminder. Now, because this is a book, and/or a part of speech, words should “Pattern” in importance. They should “mean something” and be used towards an “aim”. But this is not actually common. Most of you are saying this “unicorn” is a part of that “unicorn” on this day and that, with the aim of being this kind of “unicorn”.
You are just reporting with your words what you “feel”, and what contextual sense you might have to the term. Most of you, you Americans, think you speak a native tongue called “English”... But you do not. You have a “relationship” with words that is often contextual, and preprogrammed.
I have never lived without a notion of psyops. I read Edward Bernays' book on propaganda when I was 9 years old. I had studied from the start how Influence and Control over the minds of others worked. I had to.
The main reason I had to will be of surprise to most of you. I was not born to a house, with familiars and that of precedence. I was born to the urban wilds.
Because I was born a savant, with a different chemical makeup than the rest of you, I was born alien. I was born with talents, gifts, and abilities that were unusual. Because of this, I had an instant value to any who would seek to harness my traits for their own interest.
I had something worth controlling by others. Did you?
This is me trying to share some “framework” and perspective with a point.
If any were to look upon me with suspicion to dare speak of “value exploited” and/or the Control others may wrongfully presume, it will be because of this absence of difference in them. One needs to have something of VALUE that others would want ACCESS to, more aggressively, to grasp very much that such a thing is occurring. Before I continue then, with defining and setting up notions of Control, I will address that “Pattern” and its “matters”.
If you think this amount of focus on ACCESS does not make sense, or have sense to it... then ask yourself why.
Why would you think I have dedicated too much to this subject “matter”, and that all of this, so to say, is NOT NEEDED?
I give two reasons for why this would be the case, that match the other two already spoken of in the introduction. For simplicity, I will refer to the two ineptitudes.
Previously accounted for was that of why Control would not be a subject matter that receives a science among humans and is bestowed in Patterns upon offspring and all.
-
One is either ignorant, and/or delusional, and therefore, merely has no sense, and has not been allowed to have any sense of Control, of Management, of Manipulation, of Seduction; and therefore, they are in the dark, and they make “moves” and/or “plays” that are not informed by a level of “sense” on the subjects to count.
These, those ignorant and lacking in sense, are often at the mercy of those who are more “with sense” in these mechanics, even if, and certainly it is as if... those others are not “much more”, but only “basically” more “in sense” of such things. This can often be seen on the base level with the different relationship that human females and human males have towards Control, Management, Manipulation, and Seduction. Human females, base like their human males, are yet born with a greater “sense”, not to be mistaken for a “great sense”, but merely, slightly greater in sense of these four than the human males. Yet, in that slight sense, ignorance is still the major mark... not skill, not competence, not MASTERY. This begets the second.
2. Is that of those who have a sense, be it slight, or plenty, that there are active, or perhaps, better said, passive states of Control, Management, Manipulation, and Seduction at play, and that to decorate these as “negative” is the way that the one trying to “have one over”, or that is... be in the position of Control and Influence, does not want the one in the first to be informed, and “hip” on their trail, that they behave with these things “active” or “aggressively passive”―if perhaps the only way humans are active.
Meaning, when you have a “slight sense” of Control, where others do not, because your sense is slight, you will be insecure and fearful around maintaining that Control, and this is ineptitude. Both are inept, the first and the second. But in the second, the ineptitude defines the relationship with the Control and how it is expressed. One who is skillfully, competently, and masterfully in Control has Equanimity around the notion, and is not guided by insecurity and fear. Therefore, they do not “struggle” with others over these Controls, and they do not hold Control through that of controlling others. They hold Control over that of systems that exist separate from relations. Any craft, so to say, has this character. It is not relational as a primary, but craft, and therefore, skill as a primary.
Those in the second, because they are inept with Control, are also insecure and fearful around “gaining” and “maintaining” it. It serves them the most, that there are plenty in the first category of ignorance and delusional around Control mechanics, to which Management, Manipulation, and Seduction are species of.
So the one in the second sustains the ignorance and delusions of the first. And one of those ways of sustaining it, is that the one with the slight, and inept sense of Control characterizes any practice of Control as negative. Why they “think” or feel it is negative, is because they themselves are inept, ignorant, and unskilled, and therefore, if they are themselves to exercise a relationship to Control, it will be negative.
They feel this about themselves, and therefore, they can not engage Control, and think others would be engaging in Control under another “sense”, such as a noble sense of sorts. Any who exert Control out of fear and insecurity are in this second category. And because of this, they beget stooges, in the first, and they require there be no sciences about Control that can be bestowed. Because if stooges in the first become “HIP” to the “moves” and the “plays” of Control, they would likely then seek CONTROL over their own lives, and this removes VICTIMS, or rather STOOGES for those in the second.
The best “play” here, for those in the second, is not that of concealing how plays and moves work. No, those in this category do not actually know anything about Control, Management, Manipulation, and Seduction in a realm of skill, realm of competence, and mastery. They have never needed to have a “sense”, other than an inept sense, because ALL of their targets are stooges, are mental midgets, are others who are simply more inept in these realms than them.
Remember, the seconds are only slightly more sensible in these areas, and more often than not, that slight difference in sense is merely because they are a human female, or an effeminate human male. And therefore, they have more aggressive impulses to MANAGE, and the level of Control they act on is usually only in this most base realm of Management, and more often than not, limited to a HOUSE, which is of the easiest sort to manage. And the level of impulse is more able to be observed when the individual “over manages” the space, the domicile. And this over Management can be detected, because in such a simple and petty space, there will be conflict, proving that, most certainly... them who can not manage their own house, most certainly ought not be looked to, to manage more complex spheres.
However, my observations are... that because of ignorance and delusion being common among humans, this is exactly what occurs, to which no standard guards against. There are countless many, including presidents, who could not manage their own kin, and house towards well-being, yet become placed in charge of many, and often, against the will of that many, had they any free will.
This is what humans do. It is a relationship to Control from the Management from fear and insecurity bases, and not from any sense of skill. Perhaps, it could be said, it is Management of the multitudes, and not even Control to begin with. But here, lacking in any Control is key. Perhaps then the genus would be Management, and then from there Control is born, Manipulation is born, and Seduction is born. The Three Roads of Management. However, all of them have Manipulation as a core and necessary ingredient.
The two ineptitudes in regards to Control mechanics
The first two ineptitudes then are:
-
Ignorant and delusional with a low sense of Control mechanics;
-
Ignorant and delusional with a base sense of Control mechanics from a Management proclivity, and in need of a class of “others” who are in the first to exploit.
The second set of two ineptitudes are correlated to the first set. They answer to the ignorance and the delusion.
When one thinks I have spent too much on the subject matter, and such is not “Patterned” in importance enough to warrant such Vigilance, it is for one of, if not both of these two ineptitudes.
First, that you, as an “individual unit” that is a part of a collective are a mere REPLICANT, a STOOGE, and a LOOPER, and as such... you were not born with anything of VALUE in your set of INNATE proclivities. You, being like most others, the commons, the many, the multitudes, do not have anything worth “stealing away”, or that is “exploiting”. Instead, you were born to be servile, and this exploitation is one that is easy.
Simply, it is found in you working a “job”, you know, taking up that “adult responsibility” and set of “duties” where you are bound to a “family”, to “work”, and most of all… to pay “your taxes”. Most will only be exploited on this level, and that is “managed” on this level, because it is all their nature has to offer. When you are merely of a servile existence, you will not be able to grasp then, why I have written works about “Access Denied”. You will not grasp, because you do not have a relationship with Control, Management, Manipulation, and Seduction, for the mere simple fact… others do not find you attractive, or do not find you to be a “prize”, for whatever sense motivates others to aggressively seek access.
There is a level of value needed, already, for this subject matter to even make sense in being expounded upon. In Part II, I address that point. That when you do not have any VALUE in you, that then, you will not be the one that needs to be investigating and/or implementing with denying access.
Access Denied, simply put, does not apply to most, and for this very reason. You are able to be ignorant and delusional about Control, Management, Manipulation, and Seduction, simply for the reason that your decisions, and your interactions do not really have much consequences, other than the base, and replicant versions there are, which are insignificant.
It's like you being robbed on the streets for what is in your pockets, versus, a jeweler moving jewels, or a cash truck moving cash. They may be armed, and ready to defend, because they have more material worth. But you, you may go on defenseless, because you are less likely to be a target from the start, with nothing worth taking, and if you were to be taken from, you could care less, because in having gained little, you have little to lose.
This is the relationship the first ineptitude has, in set two, to the first in set one. It is the one with a low level in potency of “Management, Provision, and Protection”. You are impotent. And as such you do not engage in activities, or a life that secures higher value relative to “yesterday”―meaning, you have not advanced towards or in anything, and therefore, what you have in “Provision”, in “Protection”, and in “character” is nothing worth chasing. You are ignorant, delusional and inept, and those who would target you for exploitation, if you were otherwise, would not even care to, in how you are now.
In essence, why would you need to know about Control, about Management, about Manipulation, and about Seduction, when these things will practically have no role in your actual life, while you are a mere stooge, and servile common with nothing to offer others, in the “Game of Interest”. And because you will be of hardly any interest to others, you will not be able to imagine how I, on the other hand, have garnished a great deal of interest from others. What is in me that others are interested in, is not able to be merely replicated in culture, customs, traditions, education, and so on. It is innately occurring, and as talents they are rare, especially in their combination.
Therefore, I am denying access from a position of “attraction”. Meaning, everyone I ever meet, wants more access to me, without being value added, whereas if you, as a human female, and human male, are used to being in the first order, not having much attractiveness to you, then you will not have reason to care for how others have access and/or want access to you.
Instead, you are thankful that there are other Children of Ineptitude that you can have access to, and you will have an all-inclusive policy of access, because if your “doors” are always open, then it means other inepts, and low value individuals will be coming in and out, and you, as an inept being, do not need to make any value exchanges of access, to gain access to them. You would in essence live in a “world” where simply put, no one in it is subject to Control, beyond the base level, Management, beyond the base level, Manipulation, beyond the base level, and Seduction, beyond the base level.
The mass of you being base, then, can be safe and secure in your ignorance and delusions, while little girls manage your emotions, and your worth, and little effeminate boys govern you through policy and the state, and teach you what to think through the media. You simply have no reason to be engaged, because you are of a “poor character”, and as a poor character, you have no sense, then, of why I would even engage on such with such a subject matter. To you, these issues are not real. And this will be true... only because you lack value that others would want. You are in essence typical, normal, base, and replaceable. You are a replicant, and therefore, in all of this... it would look like “nothing to me”.
The second category of ineptitude in the second set, here, matches the second in the first. You would be those who use the ignorance and delusion of low valued individuals to have access merely to them, and you have never been able to, and could never engage targeting “bigger and better fish”. In essence, you need the plays, and the moves to remain base, in the way you engage them. So if you see that someone like me is revealing the plays, and the moves for what they really are, that ruins your inept level of “play”.
If your stooges wake up because of my expounding, you can not play the pathetic level of games you play. You would be exposed as the replicant effeminate that you are, and they may rebel. But most of all... because you lack any skill at Control, Management with skill, Manipulation with skill, and Seduction with skill, you can not target someone like me. Your status of little inept girl, and little inept effeminate boy... is apparent at first sight. So then, easily enough, you would then get the sense, I ought not need be your mark, for certainly, I am not in the same “game” as you.
But too, you would realize, more so perhaps than those of the first mark, or category of low sense in these areas, that regardless of what I write, and how well I break it down, your “marks”, your “familiars”, your “targets” are clearly lacking the necessary sense to do anything with this information. You, because you have slight base sense of these realms, though a mental midget of ineptitude, know that your stooges have little to no value worth defending. Therefore, if they were to take this information, and not first become of value to themselves, then they would have nothing to DEFEND, and to deny access.
You see, folk... when you are of low value to yourself, with low self-esteem, and nothing in life you are a master of... to deny access to others would leave you in the worst position you could ever be in, as a human, and that is ALONE. Humans should not, and can not deny access by a standard to others. This, because humans have to be in a collective, or their insecurities and fears get heightened, and their innate domestic state of neurosis would kick in, and they would suffer more.
You all need to huddle and cuddle each other, because you are a pathetic species of hominid. You exist as the masses of the hominids, not because you were more advanced. You exist as the only remaining hominid in numbers, because your ancestors sent out the insecure, and the “fearful” brutes, with their anxiety, to kill off the others, so that your mommies would feel safe. And the other hominids, not having the same level of insecurity and fears, did not know what bases your kind was acting from. They presumed it would be more like them, and therefore, humans always have the element of surprise on their side, because the narrative, the lies, and the deception cover the nature.
Even today, if one was with Equanimity, and they looked at the “fighters” humans produce in sport, this level of anxiety and undermining nature can be seen. It is rare that one would see them working with each other to advance each other. Where one is facilitating the growth of another, even if that means, on appearance, one is less, even if the best. Instead, you have inept boys with anxiety issues, wrestling and striking each other as a means to establish inept hierarchies based upon who is willing to be more of a brute than another, towards a presumed “friend” or “ally”. In essence, these realms become “battlegrounds”, but are deceptively called “families”, as the cult of combat sport reigns true. Like a family, these chumps are trying to fight for the authority of precedence and familiarity, and most of the time, keep their newcomers from ever being “better” than them, because they would lose their status, if they truly wanted quality as a result.
When folk have these relationships to Control, to Management, to Manipulation, and Seduction, it ought not be a wonder why they view these terms only in a NEGATIVE light. That negative state of reference is revelation that the way they would, if they could, engage these realms, would be born out of their own need to negate. That is key. They can not “affirm”, can not invest in others, and cultivate, and elevate, so as to have a standard of quality, but instead, they will always need stooges, and those who are inept, and under them, so as to feel precedence and familiarity. When you need to compare yourself to others, and become ranked, and you fight hard and often anxiously at this, it means you are a collective chump, and likely born from the same collective chumps who were long ago used by the shamans against other hominids, to remove them, because they would not join your hierarchies of ineptitude, in the low positions you would have needed them to be in to feel safe, and secure.
When one thinks, among this Society Advanced by the Majority, that any portion can grasp the standards I speak to, you are deeply mistaken. Your soldiers do not grasp this, no matter how elite their shit pie eating was. Your business men do not grasp this. Your sport fighters do not grasp this, and far from being possible... Your Brahmin academics could never grasp it. It is alien, because the level of value is alien to humans. The level of value is much higher, and because of that, humans, in their ineptitudes, fears, insecurities, and need to exert these Management traits for the feeling of security and safety, always need to target someone like me for two inept reasons.
First and foremost, to overthrow, and/or cause me harm. To humble me.
Second is to have me as a “prize” and to “turn me” to their cause, so that I may become their “tool”, and/or their “weapon”, serving their interest, for utility, and/or in a role.
The first is the first ineptitude of the two ineptitudes, in that, when one can not overthrow me, subvert me, undermine me, and have their way of negation and disruption, the next is to have access to me, often either with more time and opportunity to carry out the first, or now, to convert it towards “recruitment” and artificial alliance, making me a stooge of their “cause”. In the second is also that of “roling” me, or that is, placing me in a role whereby I serve their emotional needs, or sense of worth based on association.
When there are no others attracted to you, to run these two ineptitudes, you could not then wonder why I would prepare a self-defense manual. It means, the manual is not for you. It means, there is nothing in you worth defending, because you are either the replicant mark of others, for base purposes, or you are the one with the low sense of these things, using them against your marks, and you will always have IGNORANCE to smoke screen you, because your IGNORANCE of these things is not a lie.
In the SECOND of the ineptitudes, IGNORANCE is real, and therefore, the most useful tool. The one who has a slight sense of these realms of Control over others, Management of others, Manipulation of others, and Seduction of others,
IS IGNORANT, and DELUSIONAL, like in the first ineptitude.
They have a “slight sense” that differs. This is to be remembered. They do not have understanding, knowledge, certainty, skill, craft, potent ability, and mastery. If they did, they would have “sciences” about these “plays” and “moves”, but they do not. For if they had a science that was informing them, and not some effeminate Management impulse, then you too would be able to gain access to that science, and flip it. But they do not have a science, and they would not want one... for that very reason.
Why would Children of Ineptitude with a slight sense of these Management traits want to ruin it all, by pushing it with science to be explained. It all exists because of ignorance. It depends on both being ignorant, not just their marks. Because when the second gets caught “over controlling”, “over managing”, “over manipulating”, and “over seducing”, they will be able to honestly say… “I did not know” (ignorant), and “I did not mean to”, and “it was not my intent”, or “you are mistaken”, or “I was trying to do this, for this good reason”, and so on.
When you know you are ignorant, or that is to say… you feel you are ignorant, you have a greater chance of feeling it is likewise, that others suffer the same as you. So when you look at those with a slight sense of these things, you dismiss that slight sense, and instead, see what you can see... which is, that they too are of low value, and ignorant, like you. You see what is like you, not this slight sense of these mechanics... because you do not have that slight sense yourself. So when they engage that slight sense which you are oblivious to, and they get caught, they will help you conclude, you only caught their ignorance, and not something that is foul, that is ghoulish, that is manipulative and “ill willed”. No, they will say... “It was simply in my ignorance that the outcome is what you see.”
The ignorant then think, as they feel... “this is likely the case, for I am ignorant, and often, I am accused of ill intent or Manipulation, when I had no idea what I was doing”. Both the mark and the predator can use ignorance as a viable excuse... because it is true, they are both ignorant, because they do not behave based on KNOWLEDGE.
However, and here one must pay close attention, the inept may not KNOW what they are doing is wrong, or ill, but there is something that is certain… They feel that their play at Control, Management, Manipulation, and Seduction was being carried out from a negative and/or a negate'itive position, because in ignorance, and ineptitude... IT IS.
They FEEL inept, and lowly, and therefore, when one is a Child of Ineptitude, most things will feel this way. Because most things will feel this way, and ignorance is valid to them... they will have a “character” of their decision making, being that of dismissing these feelings, as they often will need to do, to maintain appearances of “well-being”.
When they move to dismiss this feeling they have, that their relationship to these Management realms is inept, they are protected by ignorance, because none of this is about knowledge, and skillful Control and awareness. The dismissal of the feeling allows them to say, “I do not know why I did that”, or “I thought I was doing it for this reason”. And “that reason”, and most of this would occur “after the fact”, and in actuality, they were going off of “feelings” that they did not have the self awareness to account for, and even more so… feelings that once slightly accounted for, would often then be dismissed, and a post rationalization comes to take its place, whereby they say, it was “for a reason”, but then show confusion about those reasons.
This CONFUSION around one explaining their choices and behavior is born out of what I have expounded in, above. It is born out of SKILL NOT having a place; FEELINGS being the PRIMARY, but not being able to be used in explanation, because of IGNORANCE, as well as the dismissive disposition of the inept. In being dismissive―and this shows in many places―the inept has dismissed the “emotional” and “feely” component, because this lacks mostly utility, and fails in explanation. Therefore, they are left with a confused expression of their “intent” and the “purpose” behind their behavior. One who is becoming informed needs to treat confused expressions of behavior under this knowledge.
They are not confused because of widespread ignorance. They are confused because of widespread delusion, which requires widespread ignorance. They are confused because they have removed the motivation of a base emotion, or “feeling”, and that base emotion is located in the Kinetics in which I have expounded upon. Those who have a bad relationship with the two ineptitudes, where they would target Control, Management, Manipulation, and Seduction in the negative or negate'itive, are those who are acting from the Kinetics of fear and insecurity.
If they “felt” they were engaging these things upon others, they would feel negative about others engaging them in the same way. So when they catch you engaging these “realms” among, or upon them, they know to “feel” it is wrong, but they only truly “feel” it is wrong when they are the ones it is being used upon. They “feel” it is wrong when they are doing it, but remember, they dismiss that feeling, because that “feeling”, to them, is active in most of what they do, and they can not discern in what it means.
But when you are caught engaging in these plays, and moves, and they are the ones to catch you... and that “feeling” is activated in them, they do not dismiss it. That “feeling” is used to “familiarize” with you, and even though that “feeling” is already there, they are not entirely conscious of its presence, because they actively dismiss it, when it has to do with their own behavior.
This too is what it means to lack a sense of personal responsibility. Humans need folk to feel shame, guilt, and humility, because if they are dismissing their feelings for their own behavior, they have nothing else to use. So, “being in touch” with your “feelings”, for humans, means listening to those feelings, and not dismissing them. This, because most would hear “negative” emotions about their own behavior, and if they were listening, it is presumed, they would then try something different, to produce a positive “feeling”. This presumption in psychology and self-help spheres is false.
Navigating based on feelings vs. systems
Navigating based on “feeling” is the exact issue that is present in human decision making. Navigating based on systems, regardless of “feeling”, is the only way to then take Control over the feelings. One ought not wait to engage the positive, when they are to feel positive. Engage the positive, or the affirmative, in enjoyment, joy, pride, and Triumph, even when feeling negative, because then, and only then, would you detect that the negative feeling is not conditional and contextual, but is that of conditioned and habitual orientation.
The fact of engaging what ought to be wholesome and yet feeling negative would prove, and only prove to a semi reasoning mind, that the feeling, the emotion is a thing of its own, running on its own, and because of this, if thought of as connected, acts as a filter that takes primacy, subjugating the decisions, and the conclusions of one's “affairs”. Those who engage in advanced performance have a greater sense of those “feelings” that seek to impede. They can identify them, not from trying to “look at them” and be aware of them without contrast.
Contrast is absolutely needed for “emotional awareness”. If you want to know if you are predisposed to, or inclined to “negation” based emotions, all you have to do is try hard to habitualize wholesome things, and when you see the “negation emotions” appearing, regardless of the choices, the actions, and the wholesome pursuit, then “rest assured”, you are born to negation.
These will be your Kinetics, and too, they will be the cause of the rest of your negative path, whereby you will not be able to last long in “affirming” a life of advancement. You will have every excuse to be inept, to be suffering, to be a victim, and then, in need of asserting Control, Management, Manipulation, and Seduction over others, as you will blame them for your innate states. You will have to be of the thought that, if only my CONDITIONS were better, then I would “feel” better. But you will not have Control over these conditions, if this is the way. Instead, you will have excuses, and continue to SUCK.
Access Denied, the result of valuing self as a primary
It must be distinguished that value to oneself has yet to be properly characterized by this writer. This, I am well aware of. It is not the point of this piece. What one is dealing with, when this piece is in motion in their life, is that of being of “value to others”. For the most part, one is not of “value to themselves”, and this “path” or “Way” is not yet known. But this “Way” of becoming “of value to oneself” can not occur, with the impediment of the primary of being of value to others, or that of trying to get others to be of value to you―often in some emotional role, so being “roled” as I say. “Roled” into being of value to serve some emotion. Loneliness, insecurity, fear, despair, and the need for “admiration”, or that is, acceptance far more than actual admiration, so to say. Acceptance does not have a concern for esteem, value, and quality, whereas admiration might.
In essence, if I am able to carry on with the right amount of speed, by time these works are being read by others, they too will be able to access literature that has to do with being of “value to oneself”. It goes to Reason that the chronology starts first with the stopping of something, not the starting, only to have that which ought to be stopped, in not being stopped, being a filter and impediment to that which must be started.
Here is the issue. Many will make the “Way” about “negating”, about “negation”, and they will merely think, and say… “I have stopped this and that, and therefore, I am wise, in that I have stopped.” This is not the “Way”. Stopping that which would be impediments only Patterns in importance, so much that it makes way for the starting of something. However, to have begun in the starting realm, the realm of Virtue, so to say, would have had others seeking to do these Virtuous things, while being immersed in impediments. It is like the ones who eat healthy, and engage in intoxicants, undoing the other health practices in their lives. They are fools who did not realize, first, they ought to remove impediments, and counter and contradictory forces. They would see their absurdity as “balance” and “moderation”, which are fallacies.
These works can not, as of yet, resolve the “value to oneself” that is the thing that determines “stopping” being of value to others.
Access Denied means... YOU will not make me be of VALUE to YOU. This also means, I am preparing others to have that attitude with ME. When they have that attitude, and they can be accused of being in a CULT, or being under the spell of another... and they can not defend against these accusations, that will prove that they were looking for a CULT, not that I was looking to get them to “follow me”. I do not say... I am not to be of VALUE to you, because of YOU, and at the same time, but you better be of value to me, while not of value first and foremost to yourself.
Let it be made clear, everyone needs to be of VALUE to those they are seeking to gain, and maintain access to, so it is not to say, one does not require others be of value to them. It is the specific kind of value I am addressing. One is not of value to a Vir, if they are not of value to themselves. That first and foremost is this self-esteem, this self-evaluation, and it is not a “feeling” of one's worth through make-believe. It is not merely thinking and saying “I am of value to myself”. “I am beautiful just the way I am”. That is câlice. That is not a part of this “Way”.
In simple form for now, here is this. If you do not invest in your own advancement towards being skilled, competent, masterful, self-reliant in Control and Management, Provision, and Protection, then you are NOT, and can NOT be said... to be prioritizing and valuing yourself. One who values themselves, in easy form, is one who is seeking through a set of actions to advance in their Control and Command over their conditions and self, and this is potently so, not casually so, so as to meet some outward appearance of being so. The evidence of the pursuit is found in the gains. No gains, no claims.
When you say, and act in Access Denied, it is not likely from a position of valuing self as a priority and primary. It is likely for, and as a means to deny access so as to remove impediments. It is likely the tactic of starting from scratch and removing distractions, and removing those to whom one knows exist only to role you. One does not come against these role players. When one denies ACCESS to being “roled”, and that of “roling” others, one does not do so oppositionally. Those who do so oppositionally are infected with malcontent and despair from the condition. They too, are a problem.
One ought not mistake ever one who is denying access for the sake of seeking to disrupt, undermine, harm, and/or subvert those “roled” with them. When you are “roling” with others, this makes you feel despair, and disgust for them, when you find out why. You would not feel these emotions, if it were Access Denied. You would instead be greeting with knowledge, not ignorance, and you would get an excited joy, to see them as once “roled”, and yourself once “roled”, and now delighted in being freed from the roles.
Those individuals were not individualized, and therefore, they do not deserve your displeasure, your malcontent, your despair, and targeting. One who blames those “roled” would then need to blame and shame themselves, because you, like them, “roled” them as they “roled” you. This is key to grasping. One who meets these challenges with displeasure is a chump masquerading about with these words and “Ways” as a novelty, not akin to being born in confidence.
How you can “sense” that you may be one having been meant to be born in confidence is that it is not displeasure and disgust that get ignited in you, for now knowing these things, and seeking to apply them in decision making. Instead, what will be instigated is “pleasure”, is enjoyment; and in the act of taking Control of your own values and self, liberation from “roled” existence will lead to Pride, and Triumph, which will then transmute your relationship to information as requiring an eager relationship, a curious relationship to cultivate more knowing, which will excite Vigilance, Veracity, Wrath when in defense, and Courage and/or Valor in ALL, not some, decisions.
When the one who is perhaps “parting” needs to tell you that you, the “roled” one, were a problem, an oppressor, a tyrant, and try to get you to “grasp” this narrative, then you, if reading this, would now be informed they are an impostor. Those “departing” from the Life of the Dead would not treat the dead as able to be individualized, and worth the energy of explanation. Instead, the Departing only says, “I am doing this, and that, for me”, not that of being “against” others, and in need of others “following”. This is why it is absurd to ever conclude I seek followers.
Those who know of me to any extent, know that what I do... is GET RID of those who need to follow, and lack creativity, imagination, and spunk to be leaders of themselves, and those who need to be led to leadership. I am all about others becoming leaders, and a good lead leads others fastly to a point of self leadership. Everyone needs to be in charge, not me. And you will be of no value, you would NOT be value added, if you are not in charge of your life, being the one controlling and cultivating your character. Yes, you must be of value, and a follower is not value added. A follower is a leech, who roles leaders to feed their emotional insecurities and fears of not knowing where to go, and what to do. These followers and leeches leech on to charismatics, and then charismatics get blamed for “misleading”.
The jig is up.
Culties using others in numbers for validation and access
But many need to lead others, who have no actual place to lead. They need others to be dependent, and because of this, most charlatans―who are rarely charismatic in actuality―will confirm this belief held that all who step forward with a thing, need others to “admire”, be “attracted to”, and validate that thing. Even the notion of what charismatic is, is determined this way. One would say... “they are in a cult of personality, and the leader is a charismatic leader”, and then, I would go and observe the leader, and they were a babbling chump of ineptitude, and the only basis to say they were charismatic, was that in their chumpness, they were able to sway the favor of other chumps. It is not charismatic to attract chumps.
But numbers is all other chumps are using to say one is charismatic, for they have appealed to many. The masses, the many, the multitudes are not directed by charisma. This is a myth. The many, the multitudes, the masses are opportunistic feeders, ready to role whoever is willing to be “roled”. Do not get that mistaken.
Because I know my own value, I refuse to attract and sustain leeches, and those who are not value added. Hence Access Denied, as a means to create that buffer. Hence what books and videos will follow. You chumps looking to follow will not target me with your opportunistic “roling”, and because of this, let it be clear, never would there be numerous individuals born out of the collective that will take to these “Ways”. These Ways are designed with an appeal that in no way, shape, or form, could have numerical support. So then, surely, it should not come about where I can even be accused of being a charismatic leader, because my straight and forthright Warrior sense ought to turn away most, if not even all.
One who would be seeking to lead others, have followers, and admiration would not be so blunt as to make clear that they think of the masses, the many, and the culties who would follow that they are inept, inadequate; and therefore, surely not to be the ones looked to, to confirm the value of a thing. Numbers involved in what I aim to do being great would in essence prove one thing: that charlatans have infiltrated my works, and those coming to my works ought to first start with that suspicion.
This, too, is odd... because if there is to be any socializing around the ideas I espouse, and others accuse cult activity to be occurring, it is probably true, and I myself would be engaged in dismantling that activity. But as it may be true, it would not be around me, but perhaps another who has found my works, and is trying to use them to get access to others.
⚔⚔⚔
A long time ago, in California, I met this fella who was a Tom Cruise look-alike, only, he was in his 20s. Because of this look of his, he was very “familiar” and appealing to others. I mean truly, he was a look-alike, not someone who bore some resemblance. When I met him, he was scripted in the normal New Age ways of California, and it was not getting him far with access to others.
I was not as Vigilant in these days. I was in my experimental and investigative phase, working with an Elite Research Institute on the side, to afford to feed myself, while I was engaging acting, social gaming, and other things, having only just recently ended my service in the name of the state and its interest. I was “free” now to “play”, and I had set a life policy to say “yes” to every invitation, if and only if there was no “harm” involved. Therefore, I did not say “yes” to intoxicants, or foul behavior―though I said “yes” at times where I could observe others engaging in perhaps “foul behavior”. I was not a bodyguard yet in LA, but that would follow shortly after.
I would come to find out that this look-alike was promoting me, behind my back, and running game on others. He would attract the pretty people, and pull them in, and when I would meet them, they would look at me in this weird look I had yet to familiarize with. Awe if you will. I had registered this was how they looked at everyone, as a means to lure them in; that it was a California thing. I would come to find out in time, it was.
That they used “eyes” and their “attention”, and stare to lure others in, and it was “creepy”. They would use silence, so that you would “fill” the space with your own wishes, desires, and “assumptions”, and I saw these pretty kinds able to “control” a great deal of others. But they had no narratives.
Eventually, the look-alike―I will call him S, because his name is not mine to give―would bring to these “pretty kinds” and his order, my narratives, which were investigative, not conclusive. He would draw conclusions from them, when I would state what may be likely thus far.
Later, I would learn through further investigation that these “likelies” were reduced as valid, by the discovery of more and more data. They were only likely given limited data. But he did not require investigation. He needed a theme, and he needed a narrative, and any would do.
My narratives are easy for “attractive kinds” to adopt, because it favors “beauty” and “nobility”; but DO NOT GET IT MISTAKEN. What passes as “attractive” in this society is not “noble and beautiful”, and that is why many neurotic females dominate the realm of “attraction”. Looking young, childlike, and innocent, and pretty is called “attractive”, and that is why these females and males were attractive to others, in the California setting.
But beauty and nobility is actually distinguished as rugged, as tough, as capable, as battle ready, and this is not in the eyes of the beholder, or subjective. This is, what can endure and overcome nature is what is defined as beautiful and noble. When childish traits are the mark of “attraction”, this can only be in a realm of deference, where prosperity allows for these creatures, and they are creatures, to be sustained.
Therefore, “attractiveness” is often found among the leisure class, where there is little demand levied on their kind. Their “work” tends to be easy, and that is why they have preference for schools and degrees. They tend to make money doing things that in nature would be useless, and no value added. They need everyone else to take care of everything else, so that their imaginative work can seem valuable, and they sell image and luxury, not meaning and effectiveness. All of these petty pretties were pathetic at living, and their sense of calm, ease, and carefreeness could only exist because others toiled on their behalf.
Do not get it mistaken. The reason why many of you can see carefree little human girls, and effeminate boys acting like they are attained, is because they are “privileged”, and they are “entitled” in a “world” where others do the câlice work, toil, labor, and sustain “prosperity” on a thin border.
When you see someone selling carefreeness, ask them to exchange resource conditions with you. You move into their house, get access to their servile class, and they take yours. It's a sham. Carefree is for children, and when this is appealing, the one who is attracting you to it is a charlatan, who lives off of others. If your daddy is often more stressed than your mommy, or seemingly so, it's because he is taking care of your mommy, and she could care less to be devoted to such a servile status.
That is why “carefree” females can be found dominating every cult, and every social spheres, and too, why in politics, their delusional existence of deference leads to whacky notions of how society ought to be. They demand more servitude, not to be in service themselves. They only praise the servants to keep them servile and motivated.
To me, yes, having soldiered... “thank you for your service” is an insult to my nature. I did not do it for you... I did it for ME. I was not your servant, and if there were no gains, on my end, I would not have done it. Those who knew me, knew never let any say “I died for a cause, or a country” that I “sacrificed” myself. NO. Not me. Yet, that it is a thing, means, YES, for most it likely pertains to.
So-called America is dominated by Children of Ineptitude, with their soft skin, and fragile childlike bodies and appearance, and the reason you all favor that, and call that attractive, is because you are weak, immoral, and in your fear and insecurity, you want deference. That is why so many boys want to be girls. They have drunk the Kool-Aid of deference, and they know if they adopt the most female presence that can be adopted, they will receive deference. It's got nothing to do with anything else. Imagine a boy wanting to be a female, who wants to be a male, and therefore, takes on more responsibility and rugged living. No, instead, it's a boy who wants to put on a dress, which limits physical duties and responsibilities, do up their hair, which requires high maintenance, and throw on makeup to look like a model, which denotes neurosis, like the same, in the female who does it. They want to look effeminate, because this is a “class” that is “protected”, and not allowed to be given rough and tough expectations at living. It's the pursuit of deference.
It's Norman Bates, dressed as his mother.
Any who would take offense to that would need to be everyone. For I am calling out those who are this way, and those who praise this way. It is absurd to call a female who is doing this attractive as well. That is my point. Meaning, it's all of this society that has the same value issue, the same immorality. It only then makes sense that lost boys would turn to these images, and want the same benefits of deference.
When these so-called pretty kinds were taking my speculations and making them conclusions, they could not sell it to others, because they could not think through the thoughts, as they were kinds thinking was not required among. Because they saw me as a pretty, they thought I was one of them, who then merely had the odd ability to use my brain. So they lured others towards me, to let me do the presentation and talking, to which I was doing out of experimentation.
I would see their “game”, and it instigated in me curiosity. I began to reverse their play, and give lectures that allowed others to see what these kinds were doing. At first, they would dismiss it, as odd, but then start to say... “But, is this not what is happening here?”, to which I would say... “Yes, that is exactly what is happening here.” These scammers began to get exposed by the one they thought they were feeding followers to, to pump up the need for admiration―only, I am rather disrupted by admiration and find it petty.
I destroyed their game and exposed them, shutting down this indeed cult that they built around me... but not first before getting to play with it, to travel among rich groups in California, and see what games they were playing among each other. This was the ticket into a “world” most of you will never get to see, so when you judge it on the outside, you think you have enough data. You do NOT have any data. You just have targets.
I wanted the data, and see how they all played each other, and there was no one innocent in this, being played. You're all playing each other, and being played, because you are ALL “roling” each other. Victims of this are the ones who are not as good at it as others, and therefore, either get caught, and then rebel, or find that others just simply would not submit and commit enough to them in the roles.
Everyone who joins a cult is trying to role the cult. Everyone who then leaves the cult and complains, is doing so usually because they got caught, or simply they were not the best at it, but they wanted to be. There is no innocence. Just as the uglies who target cults, need to role others, and get some attention for being in opposition, and so they make a name for themselves for calling out others and their ways; and yet, never affirming in anything of goodness themselves.
There are no victims in most cults; there are those who went to role others, and to be “roled”, and they are often engaged in more entertaining games than the rest of you, who only engage roles you inherited based on precedence and familiarity, making you simply at the bottom of the “roling”, and merely subject to it, compared to those who role about. Just like in jujitsu, show me how someone rolls, and I will tell you what occupies their mind, and most roll under anxiety, neurosis, insecurity, and pent-up sexual aggression, and daddy issues. That is why I am one to say, in these spaces, you have Children of Ineptitude hiding behind systems of precedence and familiarity that grant them access to others.
The tactic of taking the lower hand to reveal your mark
You want to know the truth about those around you? Faint weakness, and faint a lower status, and then observe how quickly they take the “high place”, and how quickly they get excited and rejoice if they think they are higher than you. You can not see this when you are competing with them. The trick is to let them have their way, and see what they do with it. Some call this appearing dumber, or more inept than the mark. The mark is the one you aim to play upon. You have marked them for your “game”.
When you do this, you can see where their arrogance is. I get this play often enacted upon me. Females do it often, to get you to talk about yourself, as they know, this makes them “feel” good, so their sense of Manipulation is to “make others feel good”. This taking the lower hand position, if you will, is to give the other the upper hand. I prefer this notion of the “play”. Taking the lower hand, and surrendering the low hand, and this disarms.
I even do this with the handshake, where literally, I will let them place their hand over mine on top, and watch them smile and get a boost of higher position. Then, in the rest of my behavior, I will not behave inferior, and this will trigger in them undermining ways, to get back to the presumption I am lower. Often, this can be seen, where you will see the other you let have the upper hand try to inform others as fast and as much as possible that you are lower. They will make the “competition” in their mind available to others, to then establish a hierarchy. This, I use with males the most, to see if the male I am dealing with knows nothing but that of subversion, undermining, and overthrowing, and needs to be seen as “mighty” in their role. I let them have it, and watch to see if they care such has occurred.
In 2017, I was with a local National Guard light infantry unit that was composed of Army Rangers, and many other high speed fellas. One of them was a Marine for more than four years, with experience in the field, who then went Army Guard. I do not think the Marines have any Guard units, so that is why there is the crossover. This fella caught me giving the lower hand, and he knew it was artificial. So much, that it angered him. Others were quick to accept it, and think it was legitimate, and put them at ease to “know”, or that is “presume” my place. They were inferior in skills, and they were not capable, and did not have the drive to be.
But this Marine was skilled, capable, and motivated, and so he took offense, when he was able to profile that I was skilled, capable, and motivated, but for some reason, was giving him the lower hand, in this sense. He put me to the test, during a display of weapon manipulation with speed reloads and other high end familiarity with the long gun. He saw me falling slightly behind him, and he caught that I was acting with ease. He wanted to see me work, and he wanted to earn his status against me. But at the same time, he was aware that I just might overtake him in that skill, but he anxiously needed to know.
I held my position, because he was “the man” in his unit. He would go on commanding for years to come, whereas I was there for a year, in and out. He needed to be at the top; I did not. So no matter how frustrated he got, which made him get better when thinking it was a competition, he stayed ahead. When he would see I might overtake him in skill, he pushed harder, and I merely only pushed enough to motivate.
This is what I do. I do not take the top, ever, because I am not real in the hierarchy. But I benefit from others being pushed to be better, so I remain a challenge to them, but only, and always right below, or short-term inch above, till they overtake. Human males need this frame of reference; I do not. I do not need to overtake other males, and be competitive, but I do need to be skilled, competent, and masterful in my craft.
However, often, human males need you to prove to them you are, to trust you, but it is not about trust. It's about measurement. So often, because I do not play this game, I let human males be in expression without challenge, because every now and then, one who is truly skilled will detect that they should perhaps chill out real quick, and ask what “Yoda” thinks. When this does not occur, and there is no one checking themselves, suspicion of actual ability, then it means I leave them to their order, and let them behave in accordance with systems of familiarity and precedence.
This is called Control, Management, Manipulation, and Seduction, only the last one not being accurate. I am not doing it to harm; I am doing it because my way of being would undermine their way of being, if it was overpowering and expressed. I would be without intent a disruptive force, and in these realms where I was active, that makes me the enemy, because there is a mission, set of objectives that need to be met and achieved in, to solve a problem. If I was being “straightforward” and “myself”, myself would have been the wrong thing for the condition.
The problem with most of you, is you have no “sense” of what you are, what self is present, and how it impacts the condition, because most of you have a “low impact” existence. I do not. If expressed in full, my nature taking point, I have a “high impact existence”. I can take Control of most conditions, and be the guiding Force in those conditions, but I have observed that when I do this, it breeds deception among those with the “lower hand”.
They will target me, with their malcontent, their disgust, and their feelings of insecurity and fear. I have learned in my life that my Kind should never be in a position of leadership among humans, because humans hate their leaders, and target them for their own petty conquest, with onslaught of attempts of overthrowing. To lead humans and to not be a human is to ignorantly place oneself as a mark and target of those humans.
Some call this gaming of mine 4D chess. You may think you won because you got a checkmate, but in actuality, you lost, because you were not playing the same game, with the same aims as me. I won, because the game gave me knowledge of your profile. In the game, you aimed to win through checkmate. I watched you be attached to the outcome, and how, if I took advantage of that, I could have turned your hasty moves against you. But here, you are ignorant that your moves were hasty, because I did not exploit them. So I have learned, without exploiting you, and coming against you, you could not see on your own that you made inadequate moves. You need negative consequences to shape you, and you need inept motives to compete. So you won the checkmate, but in doing so, you often show you are pathetic at self-awareness.
⚔⚔⚔
A popular story one of my associates tells, Apache, who was present, is that of a chess prodigy in Santa Cruz, who was otherwise “stunted” in all normal senses of functioning, was playing me in a game, having been used to playing with me all the time. It was common for chess to be played downtown everywhere in Santa Cruz, and attracted hustlers, and masters who wanted to play. He was considered one of the best, as a prodigy, and his whole identity was tied to this.
Every game we had ever played, he had won the checkmate. And this was a great thing for him. My game was to make him earn it, on one of my more advanced levels, to which he always beat. But it was not my level where competition of checkmate existed. I no longer play on that level since I was a young man playing for money in the parks. I now play to advance the abilities of others, if even I play.
I will never play a competitive game of chess, because I saw how much that ruined people, especially the young prodigy Jews I played against in New York. It caused them pain to lose, but it did not do anything to me to win or lose, so I mastered the underhand enjoyment of chess with the sensitive kinds. I knew this prodigy―though technically he was too old to be called that in body, but not mind―would be hurt if he lost to someone. It was near impossible, or rather improbable that he would, even though great players were attracted in the Bay Area to those tables.
I made a move with him that was a shortfall from my own aims. It was too obvious of a blunder, and he began to “pop jokes”, or “come out his face” in the words of my old culture. He usually was not secured enough to “talk junk”, but in this game, he started to. He saw a clear and easy victory to follow my “mistake”; only, that was not going to be the case. He became arrogant and oblivious, thinking it would then be a done deal, and I saw well in advance what he was running towards a victory, and I had the plan to upset that, and cause him to be more creative for the win he was sure to have. He was not going to have that win, based on what he had in motion. It was not a mistake so to say on my end, but it was a blunder, objectively.
When he began to “talk junk”, however, he changed the nature of the game. “Talking junk”, in Brooklyn and NYC, was normal when I played when young. Jews did not do it, but so-called “blacks”, whom I played mostly with, did. Usually, I would stop that by being quiet, and smacking them around on the board. I would begin to ask… “You sure you want to talk junk right now?” And I would respond to their “talk” with actions, and eventually, they would stop. He activated this “history” in me, and I wanted to preserve him as a good playmate in chess. I know that beating others in chess does not preserve playmates in chess. It makes them stop playing with you.
When he began to talk junk and insult, I warned him he ought to stop. That he ought not presume my blunder is the mark of some inadequacy, because he even stated that one move meant, even after all the years of playing him, that I was not good enough. He did not yield to my warning. I asked him if this was only a competition to him. He said… “too easy”, even though, I always made him work for the win. When he said that, and he was laughing in his odd way, I decided a new game was in order. Let's have some fun. Not, that game being restarted, but the game I was running beside that game. You want to have fun, then here comes a surprise.
Apache watched as I flipped the game, and changed its entire direction, crushing and defeating him, with a checkmate because of his arrogance. He discovered for the first time in years of playing me, that had I ever competed with him, he would have lost all the time. He was crushed that day, and his excuse was that, he would not play with those who lose intentionally―only, I was never losing intentionally. He was beating legitimately a level of game play I play. I do not play A game, and I do not compete with others. I play my own game on the board.
I underestimated his dependency to his relationship with chess. In order for me to beat him in that game, because I was disadvantaged, I had to play my A game, and he could beat my B game. I would not be able to win with my B game. So it was obvious in my victory that he had never seen my A game. To him, it was an insult to not bring my A game, and he would later refuse to play me ever again, having felt “manipulated” and not wanting that feeling again.
Word would get around, and others considering themselves masters and wizards, and whatnot, would want to see if they were being “played”. Their attitudes changed against me. They were now looking on the board for “how I was losing”, and what win that was giving me, because surely I was winning at something. They could not see it, and this infuriated them.
“Play me with your A game, stop doing something else.” That was their attitude. They needed to know, was there someone they could not beat, and rank among, among them, and refusing to be seen? Where do they stand? What is their rank? They all became nasty, when they no longer thought they had the upper hand. In the past, they would “coach me” and “feel” wonderful that I was “up and coming” and could “use their help”. It gave them “status”, and do not get this mistaken, that “feeling” requires that one does not advance to challenge the “benevolent ones”. It's about securing that position.
Now, that position was threatened, and the truth, the nasty truth became revealed. They would all stop playing me after that, and I would not return to the tables. I refused to do anything different and to compete, and they would not have it any way. They would get nervous, anxious, and be ready to do war; whereas I avoid doing war with others and their issues, and that is where I win.
When I see you would be at war, because you lack quality Control and Command over self, and conditions, I will take the lower hand to not trigger your feelings of inadequacy. Now, Access Denied is about no longer doing that. It's about me not playing with the petty emotions of others. You see, I once found Entertainment when I was young, and in need of experiences, in that of interacting with others. That's over now. I have collected so much data, and there are no surprises in these interactions. You all mostly behave the same way. And now, I am not experimental, for I have exhausted my research.
I will no longer play this kind of game, but this does not mean, come to compete. It means, when you are looking for others to compete with, to overthrow, to undermine, to measure yourself by... I will not be in that role at all. You will not be “roling” me. You will need to target someone else. But this was where I was controlling and managing, manipulating the emotions of others, as a means of self-defense and preservation... but too, it was to maintain access to these folk as a source of Entertainment. This is no longer the case.
But it is only no longer the case, because I have exhausted all that would be entertaining in this. Therefore, tools fall out of use. I do not have use for the tools anymore, from that of philosophy, to that of chess, to that of martial training, and so on. Everywhere I looked, the same Patterns with others surfaced, and having had access to many test subjects, able to be observed, and experimented upon, I have concluded, 99 percent were simply replicants, and now I know how to detect it immediately. I would then entertain the interaction, so that others beside me could perhaps learn from it, only for it to show, the ones beside me too, observing, were doing so more often than not from ineptitudes, and projecting their own nonsense into the situation, so that even engaging others for this reason has become useless. Rather so.
At this present level of awareness of mine, I can no longer find where controlling others, managing others, manipulating others, and seducing others... even has a place. Previously, for Entertainment was acceptable. But now, it's not even entertaining. It's like playing a “video game” over and over again, and having to deal with NPCs that get no upgrades. It's rather wasteful now, and this, learn here, is why the Sage moves to a life of Solitude. You all keep prioritizing the same relational and role based talk, and loop through the same wasted breath, and aims. In my life, perhaps a handful of individuals may have existed to give indication that there are “conscious” beings existing. Otherwise, for the most part, nature's simulation and program dominates, and the masses are a bunch of animal replicants, with petty emotions guiding the whole of their decision making, lending credibility to the “simulation argument”.
In this treatise, for the first time ever, others will now be given a “system” to consider, a “science” to consider around these terms, that of Control, Management, Manipulation, and Seduction. Some may think, it is not the first. You have Machiavelli, you have Sun Tzu, you have The Book of the Courtier, Casanova, and so on. You have the compilation of these ideas, made modern by the hack Robert Greene, and so on. Surely then, this would not be the first.
But it is, and here is why. Those people were not free from these things, so the way they would report on them was often from a position of “possession”, that is, under the “possession” of the conditions, and trying to unravel them, to “control” them, but often failing, especially at asking the question, are these things supposed to be this way.
I used to recommend the “Greene” books, only because I wanted others to have an intro to questions on these matters. However, I would see then, they only had more mud, and/or supposed that I was recommending the attitude and aim and purpose behind the works, to which I have actually never read. I wanted others to merely have some “deliberation” on power, on Control, on Manipulation, on Seduction, and gaming, so that perhaps honest discussions could take place. And that never worked. I still would not have others able to articulate, to challenge, to consider, to expound on the notions. Agree or disagree, but at least, “get at it”.
But then, this would not occur, leaving someone such as myself to say look, you mental midgets, you can not escape these things. They are in everyone's lives, only, you all live defeated, and subjugated under it, and like the fish surrounded by water, you declare it's nowhere. But it's everywhere, and when I am accused of foul practice in these realms, it is always by those who have no sense of these realms, other than themselves as examples of those who simply are inept, and simply are bad at all these things, and doing bad, because of that.
But I am not oblivious to things; rather, I am quite MASTERFUL at them, and in practice. One does not make a mistake in thinking, when I break it down for you, it is because I am a master. However, when one thinks that Greene is a master, because he had bestsellers, they are making a massive mistake, because he is far from a master, and he is the opposite. He found writings by would-be masters, copied them, organized them, and spit them out in a way that would be appealing to a mass audience. With this, comes the lie that you can learn how to “work” the “plays” they promote, as if anything they wrote is skill based, competence based, and noble, to which it is not.
I will not battle the works of others, with this piece, when I can expound on the variables in an original and clear form. I do not need Machiavelli, Casanova, Shakespeare, or any other thinker to make use of my own mouth, or fingers that type. I have an Operator at the core of my own being, and it can expound far more deeper on these matters than these past and present chumps. Best to think of it, however, as if an alien has been observing your kind, and is using a different standard of measurement to break it down. For the sake of a thought experiment, I will tap Voltaire somewhat, and be that alien, from here on out.
It is like saying “here is what I see” from that of “what I think” and from that of “how I do”. It is not so much versus, but is more so like a mechanic diagnosing behavior, and its output, and that of causality in its regards. If you do this, for this reason, this occurs. If you do this alternative, evidence will be in this occurrence. It is rather matter factly, though you humans, norms, and mental midgets will take offense to me ruining your “crappy” plays, and moves. They are so base, it is unbelievable to refer to them having experts, or “players”, or anyone “skilled” and “competent”. These are arrogant promotions of petty and base things. I will expose its pettiness.
To be or not to be... is to be managed, or to manage
Etymology of Manage (v.)
1560s, “to handle, train, or direct” (a horse), from the now-obsolete noun manage “the handling or training of a horse; horsemanship” (see manege, which is a modern revival of it), from Old French manège “horsemanship,” from Italian maneggio, from maneggiare “to handle, touch,” especially “to control a horse,” which ultimately from Latin noun manus “hand” (from PIE root *man- (2) “hand”).
Extended sense of “control or direct by administrative ability” any sort of business is by 1570s; meaning “to wield (a tool or object) by hand” is from 1580s. Meaning “effect by effort” (hence “succeed in accomplishing”) is by 1732. Intransitive sense of “get by, carry on affairs” is suggested by 1650s, in frequent use from mid-19c. Related: Managed; managing. Managed economy was used by 1933.
“Manage literally implies handling, and hence primarily belongs to smaller concerns, on which one may at all times keep his hand: as, to manage a house; to manage a theater. Its essential idea is that of constant attention to details: as, only a combination of great abilities with a genius for industry can manage the affairs of an empire.” [Century Dictionary]
Always to be reminded that my relationship with the English language is not a schooled one. I see a native history connecting it to Latin, and so many more ideas, because of my commitment to etymology, and deliberate definition in my use.
I mentioned briefly in Part II that I was arguing with an old, inept grandma last year about language, and how its “natural flow” has it to where often meaning of terms are not based on deliberation when they are changed, but based on poor use and ignorance. I will probably never have that argument again, as in her ignorance, she could care less what the topic was; she was simply “unhappy” and displeased that as a “guest” in her “house”, I would not let her “manage” me.
In her mental midgetry, she could get her familiars to yield to her Management, and perhaps for the first time in her life, a “male” called her out, and made her “earn” such an access of Management―to which she could not, because she was no more than a fat adult Child of Ineptitude that had no choice but to lose her câlice, and throw a tantrum.
Say no to adults, and you will see them enter tantrum mode. “But”, “but”, I am Grandma, Grandpa, Mommy, Daddy, cop, mayor, president, manager. No you are not... At least, not over me, to which under, I do not fall. None manage me, and I avoid where such would take place, for none have shown me ever that they descend from those nature has equipped to manage, and manage well, and for the right reason. Where there are none who are Manu, there are none who are truly “managing”, though this term is all there is to use. Manu requires Reason, Logos, not Pathos. What humans do is control for the sake of Control, and the emotions, more so than manage, and manage a thing for what it is. If you were to treat a horse as if it were a cat, that would be poor Management. They are not the same. Poor Management is not Management at all.
But I must accept that among the commons, the notion of terms is not the same, but that said commons have only common context, and that of relations by example to terms. My standard of meaning would have most humans grunting, which is in truth what they mostly do, and I would forbid that of deception, through masking such grunts with well deliberated upon terms. Far pleased would I be, if humans stopped masking their base sense of terms with meaningful rendering, and just admit, their utterances are flatulence at best.
When you have never thought about the meaning of a term, and implemented it into your language of mind, and meaning... you are engaging in flatulence when you speak and think. A foul smell that indicates what you have been failing to digest economically.
“Manage” is born out of the word “Manus” or “Manu”, for that shared in root to “Man”, a species of thought, with Reason and intelligence as its prime character―to which few should ever be called Man or Manu. Few should be called this, because a Manu augments with intelligence as the guide. A Manu manages things based on what intelligence says about their identity. Them who reject identity, and project their emotions instead could hardly be said to ever do anything Manlike. My hanging onto this term Man, and all that which is connected, is because too, in ancient times, there was no such thing as Virtue without martial.
And Virtue, called Manliness, by some, then means... No sense of being a Man, without too being martial, and of course, the history with the horse was primarily the history of being martial. Warriors rode horses; raiders rode horses; pastoralists rode horses; and as pastoralists, they were ALL FIGHTERS. And here is where the first “war” or conflict would arise, because Earthlings, or “mud kinds”, which were most, did not have a sense of “property” and investment. When pastoralists would work the cattle with horses, they were cultivating the value of the cattle for use, and trade.
But when Earthlings see things, even organized as such for cultivation, they can not take mental note of this concept. They think, “I want”, “I need”, “I wish”, and that which others manage and/or cultivate is often going to be the easiest pickings. An orchard of fruit trees is a paradise to an Earthling, who otherwise must wait for the discovery of the rare fruits location, and in their limited numbers, the routine of the production of those fine fruits.
But to be an Earthling, as most of you are, mere mud beings you call honestly “human”, you could care less if another is invested in that cultivated and organized state, and has done the thinking and the labor.
“GIMME” leads to the first notion of theft. Hardly is it theft when it is naturally produced. It is possession through Cultivation, being affirmed, that then leads to the notion of theft. And those who do not grasp, in Manu, that of the Cultivation of a thing, will also have a very loose sense, then, of that of the notion of theft. When one does not cultivate value in things, all things, in essence, to them, will only have a base value.
And that is what cultivated and herded animals were to humans, who were on their feet in the mud. It was “natural”, in their eyes, and any and all had a right to pick of it. In their ignorance and in their “humble” value, surely they did not have the intent to “steal”; for they could not know it was “stealing”. But those who knew it was stealing, and theft, because they cultivated the value, at first, did not need the thief to know they were a thief to stop them. Instead, they simply stopped the act of stealing, and punished the “ignorant”, and the innocent child of humanity, in their feebleminded thought process.
Only later, would these enforcers and defenders realize, “Oh, humans do not know what theft is, because they do not know what 'cultivation' and 'value advancement' is. They see things in 'natural state' of 'gimme', not a state of 'artifice' and 'augmentation' of becoming 'possessed' as 'property' transformed, and therefore, 'owned' by the one managing and transforming it. They see cattle, or cow, and they do not see property. They can not see investment and advancement, carried out by another, because they can not invest, can not advance, and therefore, have no reason to manage.”
Most of you are human. You are managed as livestock yourself. Others will “take care of you” insofar as they are “roling” you, and in what role you are in, you are servile, like livestock, and you are exploited.
“to handle, train, or direct”
Question:
If to manage is to handle, to train, and to direct, what do you “manage”?
Do you handle your own “affairs”? What are those “affairs”?
Do you handle your own “Maintenance”, and if so, by what standard? Was that standard one of deliberation, or one of inheritance? The difference is, if you have merely inherited all your sense on precedence and familiarity, then it is not one of deliberation, of a science, a discovery founded on principles, which can be evidenced in extrapolation and definable expoundings.
What do you “train”, what do you “direct” in your life?
List that which you “manage”.
The Three Duties play a role here.
Manage your:
Maintenance, or well-being (how?)
Cultivation, Advancement, training (how?)
Protection, Defense, willingness, and ability (how?)
All of these previous points are used for deliberation. This is the base level, the starting level of the Three Duties. What, in your day-to-day, is occurring where you manage these; or are they outsourced?
It should be obvious, but it is not, when talking with the deceiving masses, to say, if you are fat, and physically unhealthy, based on your choices in life, one can not say... you are well managing your health, and your individual potency; therefore, Duty One is not honored. If you do not have anything being trained, cultivated, and advanced, then you are idle, and what of idleness, is too... Management?
For most of you, there are two things that seem to be subject to this term. You have “work” and the “house”. These are called “your affairs”.
You are not managing in these areas; you are managed in these areas, with ritual rules running you as a program.
Chapter 2
The Valorous Art of Virtue
In previous parts, I broached the notions of that of Control, that of Management, that of Manipulation, and that of Seduction. Part II of Access Denied was composed of these elements as a means of equipping the Departing with that of “armor”, as they stand on the battlefield of the “Controls”, the “plays”, and the “moves” of others. Part III will go deeper in the Control mechanics and their categorization, based on what has been broached in the previous parts. The direction of the Vir and why they need to be well guarded against the plays and moves of others will become clearer.
If one was to investigate the “realms” of Seduction, they would often hear it referred to as an “art”, and for those who know something of it, along those lines, they would have many classical pieces to use as a reference of “familiarity” to said “art”. I became acquainted with most of these classical pieces as a youth, because my autodidactic, or that is, self-directed learning path was all about the “Classics”.
I could not read fiction, nor can I do so these days. So novels were out of the question. I do mean, can not, versus that of “do not wish to”, or “have an interest in”. Most fiction writers can not form a proposition, and can not write in a manner called logical, so to say, and this, I require. When one thinks, then, my study of the works of Voltaire would be of that of reading fiction, it does not meet this category for me, in it being “satire”, in that, the way in which Voltaire has written, it was entirely in “tone” with the way in which my own mind was operating. Therefore, I was able to meet it with ease. I have read some fiction, though barely so.
A classical piece was spoken of often when I was in discussions with “Jews” of Brooklyn. I knew this Jewish lady who was heavy into literature, and she had a fascination with the classical piece Les Liaisons dangereuses, which in English would be translated as “The Dangerous Liaisons”. Such was a novel written somewhere in the late 1700s.
The Jewish lady was also the one to first expose me to the word “narcissistic”, outside my encounter with it from copying out the Oxford English Dictionary. She was a professional therapist who had heavy jargon, and she was always “attracted” to this little fella to which I was, who would ask her to clarify her terms, to expound on them and explain.
As I said earlier, it is a common play, with no need for “art” to know, to “impress upon another”, to get them to “like you”, you need only do one move... That is, GET THEM TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT.
Now seemingly here, one may think, this “move” would only work on a “narcissist”, but if that was true, then ye all be “narcissists”.
However, narcissism has the sense, in line with psychopathy, that there is an overcompensating for low self-esteem that is occurring in their presentation of being “overly in love with self”. So first and foremost, one must have reason to believe, the individual has low self-esteem.
I had observed that this lady indeed was a “basket case” with low self-esteem, and one of the things she did, to try to convince herself otherwise, was seduce everyone she would encounter. Now, honoring the meaning of this word, that of “Seduction”, it would beg... to “what” was she “leading others astray” from?
My answer would be, from that of seeing her “real”, or rather, her “natural” and sustained self, or that of her habitual self, which was in no way likened to that of the mirage to which she presented. She was often over the top, fancying herself some Cleopatra. She often targeted Brooklyn black fellas, whom she would speak lowly of, and often brag about the ease of it... Only, I knew better, because I was raised up and out of the regions of Brooklyn that were predominantly black. The ease, in actuality, was what she was presenting to her “marks”, in that she was their “mark”. But the difference was, they were at ease about it, and did not have an attachment to the results, whereas she was not at ease, for she was dependent upon the attachments and the attention to which they paid her in, with ease, for sexual access, and then simply moved on. They often moved on past her, when they would begin to see she wanted to control them, and perhaps for some sick fetishes reason.
I had met her through one of the “black fellas” she considered a “mark”, and between listening to, and having familiarity with the two of them, it would be an odd advantageous point to study human behavior, in this particular realm of supposed “plays of Seduction”. Certainly, from my perspective, there was NO ART that was at play, because for there to be “art”, there must be a “science”. And though one may think, the “science” is knowledge of human behavior, which I myself wield, those often engaged in so-called Seduction have no need for knowledge, but they do have some need for familiarity, to which I discern.
There is no doubt to me that this lady, whose name is not mine to give, was arrogant, as well as delusional. She was from Jewish New York generational wealth, and in this position of birth, she did not have severe consequences for being delusional. This deference is common to two kinds: those born in poverty, and those born in wealth. Those in the middle of all this economic standing tend to be more realistic in their ways, because they aim to advance their status, or that is, realistic if indeed they have these aims. For without the aim to advance, there is hardly a need to be realistic, grounded in facts, grounded in knowledge, and in need of some science. SCIENCE that is, is what is used to ADVANCE in KNOWLEDGE, or that is... To be CERTAIN in what one BELIEVES they KNOW.
This certainty and the need for such is the drive and the motivation behind observations, investigation, experimentation, and examination. And these are essential components of a “science”. Seduction does not rely on, nor need such states of observation, and a 4-year-old girl knows how to “seduce”, and it being “leading astray” that of “others” from their own standing, to serve the standing, wants, wishes, and ways... of the little girl. Surely, little girls are not considered scientific?
It is the way of little girls to give themselves credit where it is not often earned. For they are born into lives where their mommies and daddies treat them as a “prize”, and they need do nothing but smile, and please. So then, these become the only things they then come to think could be called, when done with some intent... ART. Little girls have a very low standard and requirement for what passes as “ART”, and what they are really saying... is “intentional, and flowery expression”, when they say ART.
The origin and meaning of “art”
Why would I say this and/or that of the term “ART”?
Surely, there is the mental midget ready to say… “In your opinion”, that is what “art” is.
What makes one a “mental midget” for thinking such way is that... they still believe in the “skill-less” approach to language; that like little girls, the sissies they are, a term can mean whatever they think it means, and there ought not be a standard, certainly not one called the English language, where the terms have a history, have roots, have meaning defined for common use. So then, why would the term itself not be treated with the same subjectivity and deference in demand? It would receive the same treatment.
The mental midget little girl boy, or little girl herself and their sissied state demand that you yield to their inadequate use of language. You need to read the mind of a sissy, and not depend on any source for understanding, but them. Perhaps then, it could be said... it is a part of narcissism, that one thinks they have some deference they are entitled to, in their ignorance, and their laziness. But then, that would be most females and most males of the human sort, would it not?
But ART as a term has a history.
Etymology of Art (n.)
early 13c., “skill as a result of learning or practice,” from Old French art (10c.), from Latin artem (nominative ars) “work of art; practical skill; a business, craft,” from PIE *ar(ə)-ti- (source also of Sanskrit rtih “manner, mode;” Greek artizein “to prepare”), suffixed form of root *ar- “to fit together.” Etymologically akin to Latin arma “weapons.” (see arm (n.2)).
In Middle English usually with a sense of “skill in scholarship and learning” (c. 1300), especially in the seven sciences, or liberal arts. This sense remains in Bachelor of Arts, etc. Meaning “human workmanship” (as opposed to nature) is from late 14c. Meaning “system of rules and traditions for performing certain actions” is from late 15c. Sense of “skill in cunning and trickery” first attested late 16c. (the sense in artful, artless). Meaning “skill in creative arts” is first recorded 1610s; especially of painting, sculpture, etc., from 1660s.
“In science you must not talk before you know. In art you must not talk before you do. In literature you must not talk before you think.” [Ruskin, “The Eagle's Nest,” 1872]
“Supreme art is a traditional statement of certain heroic and religious truths, passed on from age to age, modified by individual genius, but never abandoned. The revolt of individualism came because the tradition had become degraded, or rather because a spurious copy had been accepted in its stead.” [William Butler Yeats, journal, 1909]
Expression art for art's sake (1824) translates French l'art pour l'art. First record of art critic is from 1847. Arts and crafts “decorative design and handcraft” first attested in the Arts and Crafts Exhibition Society, founded in London, 1888.
Before I make use of the etym. as my source of orientation on the meaning of the term ART, I will provide its “common definition”, so the two can be compared.
Art (noun)
The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power: the art of the Renaissance.
Or as some perverts would define as:
“Art is a highly diverse range of human activities engaged in creating visual, auditory, or performed artifacts— artworks—that express the author's imaginative or technical skill, and are intended to be appreciated for their beauty or emotional power.”
Now, why would I call this a PERVERSION, and those who think this way... PERVERTS?
The common and modern sense of the term “art” shows exactly why in contrast, I use the history of the term, when I believe better thinkers and better deliberators walked this Earth, even if they numbered few. Moderns are mental midgets on average, and no longer have among them the “best”, compared to “ages” having come and gone. Do not get it mistaken, I am not for “tradition” and “traditionalism”, and this is not a praise of precedence. It is not that I am saying, what was once before is better, because it came before. I am saying, what was once before was “better”, because “before”, there used to be a better standard, and a greater sense of accountability, and what has changed for the worse is that of a “culture of accountability” only known by a few, to that of a “culture of deference” demanded by the many, the multitudes, the most, that in many ways... has never actually changed. In essence, those who “account well” were an old species that may have died out, as their ways were not hereditary.
For the modern mental midget, art is about the emotions, more so as a primary, versus that of what the etym. made clear, which was “skill”, and of the best sorts of skill. The earliest etym. is found actually in a specific realm, with the Latin roots of ARMA. Here too, is where “arms” in reference to weapons come from.
Etymology of arm (n.2)
“weapon,” c. 1300, armes (plural) “weapons of a warrior,” from Old French armes (plural), “arms, weapons; war, warfare” (11c.), from Latin arma “weapons” (including armor), literally “tools, implements (of war),” from PIE *ar(ə)mo-, suffixed form of root *ar- “to fit together.” The notion seems to be “that which is fitted together.”
Meaning “branch of military service” is from 1798, hence “branch of any organization” (by 1952). Meaning “heraldic insignia” (in coat of arms, etc.) is early 14c., from Old French; originally they were borne on shields of fully armed knights or barons. To be up in arms figuratively is from 1704; to bear arms “do military service” is by 1640s.
Now, it can be said that arma is akin to the root, and not perhaps the root thereof. However, “craft” and “skilled craft”, as all crafts imply, are about, and began with that of warfare. Working metals served first and foremost the “wheels of war”, and the “weapons” or the “arms” of “war”. Creativity and innovation are most provoked out of need, whereas in a modern sense of “art”, such needs will not be based on demand and in “Reality”, but can merely be “expressive needs”, or rather wants; and this, and only this, is then why it can be, and will be about the emotions. Being about the emotions, able to, and shown deference in being, is the ultimate mark of being a part of a privileged and protected class, to which most are, in that of what is referred to as the industrial and commercial nations, from “Japan” to the “US”.
You are privileged and you are entitled, no matter what color your complexion is, or what region of origination you prescribe to... if you can be about the emotions, in their expression, and in their deference. It means, you have no “CRAFT” that has a purpose outside of mere expression and acceptance. In the past, only children, and often children of the poor, were allowed to receive such deference, whereas even the working poor were required to manage their emotions, and not let them be the primary, but have their “craft” and/or their tasks and responsibilities be the primary. This does not mean that was the way to live...
But that of being able and willing to have a life of “expressive arts” that focus on showing your “feelings” and “provoking like feelings in others” is straight up on the luxury some rich kinds preserved for their inept, and often feeble young.
Leonardo Da Vinci, and other artists of the like, were not producing pieces for your emotions, the petty ones you identify with. They were engaging the expressive arts as “worship”, and that is why the skill was competitive, the techniques meant to be innovative. They were pushing their craft to be at the best of it, as a means to “prove” their “worth”, their skill, and their “right to worship” in that manner. Too, these expressive artists, if you must, were then mentally skilled in other areas. They were not little Sally, putting her emotions on a canvas and calling it art.
The more soft a society becomes, the more “educated” into “mental midgetry”, the more “emotionally” on “display” its populace will be. “Emotionally on display”, these days, is proof you live an entitled life of deference, that was once only considered possible when an ignorant and inexperienced child, and even then, something meant to be remedied through skill, through having a craft that was worth mastering.
The element of “imaginative” was added to “art” with “technical skill”, as the means to open this term up to meet the needs of its users, who would then be sure to have more of “imaginative”, versus “technical skill” elements prevail.
Rtih, the Sanskrit root, has that of “manner and mode”, “modus operandi”, which was rooted in the sense of a methodology. To say then the “art” of such and such was to say the “method” of such and such; and in this, a demand of “accounting” is higher than that thought of in the commons, who did not live lives governed by an art. Just as the commons did not live lives where they bore arms.
The right to bear arms is way more important than even its advocates could understand, for one who can not, and will not bear arms, can not, and will not have a connection to a “Martial Way”, and to say “arms” and to say “martial” is almost to be engaged in saying the same. That, the first and the most significant of the “arts” is ARMA, is the “Art of War”.
Remember reader, that in Part II, I demonstrated how the term “Seduction” originates historically in that of “warfare”, where to “seduce”, to “lead astray” meant to “get one to commit treason”, and to “turn against” that of their “lord”, to commit “sedition”.
Etymology of Seduction (n.)
1520s, from French séduction, from Latin seductionem (nominative seductio), noun of action from past-participle stem of seducere (see seduce). Originally with reference to actions or beliefs; sexual sense is from 1769, originally always with women as the objects. Earlier appearance of the word in Middle English with a sense “treason, treachery” probably is a confusion with sedition, which confusion also is found in Old French seducion “treason, betrayal.”
Etymology of Seduce (v.)
1520s, “to persuade a vassal, etc., to desert his allegiance or service,” from Latin seducere “lead away, lead astray,” from se- “aside, away” (see secret (n.)) + ducere “to lead,” from PIE root *deuk- “to lead.” Sexual sense, now the prevailing one, is attested from 1550s and apparently was not in Latin. Originally “entice (a woman) to a surrender of chastity.” Related: Seduced; seducing.
Replaced Middle English seduisen (late 15c.), from French séduire “seduce,” from Old French suduire “to corrupt, seduce,” from Latin subducere “draw away, withdraw, remove” (see subduce).
Etymology of War (n.)
late Old English wyrre, werre “large-scale military conflict,” from Old North French werre “war” (Old French guerre “difficulty, dispute; hostility; fight, combat, war;” Modern French guerre), from Frankish *werra, from Proto-Germanic *werz-a- (source also of Old Saxon werran, Old High German werran, German verwirren “to confuse, perplex”), from PIE *wers- (1) “to confuse, mix up”. Cognates suggest the original sense was “to bring into confusion.”
The roots, here, say something else, that once correlated, has a solution to it.
“to confuse, perplex”), from PIE *wers- (1) “to confuse, mix up”. Cognates suggest the original sense was “to bring into confusion.”
What offers the solution?
Etymology of arm (n.2)
“weapon,” c. 1300, armes (plural) “weapons of a warrior,” from Old French armes (plural), “arms, weapons; war, warfare” (11c.), from Latin arma “weapons” (including armor), literally “tools, implements (of war),” from PIE *ar(ə)mo-, suffixed form of root *ar- “to fit together.” The notion seems to be “that which is fitted together.”
The most important “essence” or component here is:
from Latin arma “weapons” (including armor), literally “tools, implements (of war),” from PIE *ar(ə)mo-, suffixed form of root *ar- “to fit together.” The notion seems to be “that which is fitted together.”
War brings about: “to confuse, mix up”.
Arms, armor, preparedness bring about: “to fit together.”
And art was to bring about: “skill as a result of learning or practice,” “manner, mode;” “to prepare”, suffixed form of root *ar- “to fit together.”
⚔⚔⚔
I was having a talk the other day with a local fella I am entertained with in discourse. He is quite disconnected and troubled, though with what he can, he has been trying to “lead” himself towards well-being. Being often too far ahead of those around them, he is left only with his “own guidance” to call on. He is considered by mental midgets, color coded as a “black man”, originally from Philly, and him and I are of the same age, in our 40s, and we experienced a lot of commonalities in “Black American” 80s and 90s culture.
Both him and I hold most in common our “affinity” for Malcolm X. As I have written elsewhere, Malcolm X is the first of my “Fathers”, in this present flesh and its mind. Meaning, the first to bestow Patterns upon me, as he also bestowed Patterns upon my Patruus, the uncle on the male side of my lineage, who was “my keeper” for the first four years of my life, and exposed me to the audio recordings of Malcolm X speeches. Later, I would learn, at age 5-6, that Malcolm X copied out the dictionary. I would then move to do so myself.
When bringing this up to this fella the other day, I saw that it did not ring out as necessary for him, and perhaps, age too, plays a role. This fella, had he used this technique and prioritized it, would discover a brilliance that is locked away in a confused mind, a “mind” that has had “War” and “Seduction” waged upon it in many ways, a “mind” that has not prepared through the “Arts of War” to have “crafted” in “skill” that of “arms” and “armor”, rightly suited to the conflicts that are about.
The fella fancies himself a “Malcolm X” of today; however, he has not trained and prepared to “do battle” in the ways in which Malcolm did, in readying his mind long before he had become a spokesperson for The Nation of Islam. One of the most important “secrets”―though not really a secret―that Malcolm X had discovered when in prison was that dictionaries are mini encyclopedias, that could also tell you what, and how others think, based upon the words they make use of, and the ones they are attracted to, and/or avoid. That in the history of the terms was culture, were ideas, were explanations of values, of “Ways” of deliberation.
Language was extremely important to Malcolm X, and in my region of origination, in that of Brooklyn of the 80s and 90s, this discovery and influence of Malcolm X was strong and vibrant in the local culture, albeit the one I was among was a subculture, in actuality, with Musa Powell certainly being a “Father” to me as well.
Knowing “our words” and what they mean was akin to knowing our thoughts, and how to use them. That skill in the craft of language was without a doubt absolutely necessary, for preparing the mind to “do war”, or to “survive” what conflicts would arise.
I did a great deal of physical “war” and “conflict” growing up in the region of Brooklyn, and greater NYC. I fought certainly weekly, both in the streets out of survival, but also in makeshift rings, for money, at the early age of 8 years old.
And though this would mean, I would have a fighting background, that most could only dismiss as fantasy, the amount of linguistic war, or that of psyops, or psychological operations via language was that of one far more massively influential, and not limited to me, and those like me.
You see, or maybe you can't... Most do not live a life of physical war, or “fighting an opponent” with “flesh” who seeks to harm you no matter the intent. Most who would read me may have only a couple examples in their lives of “using arms”, or they have none. Therefore, to them, my extensive experience in this would need be a sense of fiction, imagination, and make-believe, for certainly… they know of no “world” where one would have needed to engage combat in the ways at which I would claim to have.
But too, here is some clue of the nature of the DEFEATED, the CHUMP, versus the CHAMP. Those physical threats, even though heavy, are NOTHING compared to the mental and the cultural threats that everyone had upon them UNIVERSALLY.
YOU, no matter who you are, or where you are, if in an industrial nation of commerce and compulsory education, with techno media tools, were under constant threat, and constant attack, and constant states of SUBJUGATION, where your ATTACKERS, those Veneficus, were spitting their venom not as “chemicals” of a material sense, but disguised and smoke screened behind IDEAS, behind WORDS, behind NARRATIVES, and behind what they would call ARTS, what they would call POLITICS, what they would call EDUCATION, what they would call SEDUCTION, and what they would have you all calling it... LOVE. You were not loved to death... You were…
Loved to DEFEAT.
Your schools did not teach you native English, and to form a skilled relationship to the craft of a native tongue. They taught you vocabulary to memorize, to test on, and prove up on, and NEVER was etymology, and intimacy of language a part of that teaching. You learned “schooled English”, just like your mommy and daddy did. And that language is disguised as “akin” to English, in that it is called “Basic English”. But that “English” is an “auxiliary language”, and is a “constructed language”, with aims and purposes towards designing what a “schooled citizen” could, and would think, and what they can not, and will not think.
Your relationship to WORDS and NARRATIVES is way BEYOND what you could ever realize. Your language is the primary determining factor for whether you will remain a mental midget, or be elevated up and out of that, and into a more skilled way of thought. Without skilled language, there is no skilled thought, and the skill of the language requires a greater devotion to the meaning of terms, their use, and their relationship to other terms. I learned the English language this way, and mostly through the “Classics”, and their display and arrangement of the use thereof. I did not learn English in American schools.
Now, before I leave this matter of language, somewhat... think about this.
In the American shopping mall called the United States, you have those mostly on the Left that like to remind the living, of how those who preceded them took Native American children, and put them in forced schools to “educate them” in the “white man's ways”, and when they say this, they speak of it as “nefarious” in tone. Now, of course, I agree that such activity is “mental slavery” for “physical slavery”, and so on.
But if you think this, do you actually agree it was this, when you might have your offspring in the same education centers? Or because your offspring looks like everyone else, does it become “your” or “our schools”, and it is only wrong if someone who does not look like you is forced into the same? How come these same individuals behave obediently in these schools, go off and get college degrees, and live as if at the same time, an “education” is a given, in that, it is needed, and it is good?
Is not the United States of America, with its compulsory education, still doing what it, as a leviathan, once did to indigs?
Did it not do this to the Irish American?
Did it not do this to the Italian American?
Did it not do this to the German American?
Did it not do this to the Jewish American?
Did it not do this to the Afro-American?
Who in the “hell” is the so-called “American” who this having been done to them, was the right “American” for this to have been done to?
Do not get it mistaken; learning language, thinking, literacy, and philosophy is not under the monopoly of “education”. When one directs this learning, they are not “self-educated”, and this is what is implied every time one tries to correct me, and calls me “self-educated”, not “uneducated”.
They believe because I display that of having learned, and learned better than them, somehow, the word education ought to still be attached. Like explained elsewhere in my works, education is institutional rearing, whereby the minds of the subjects are “schooled” into conformity and obedience with the elite who run them. Education breeds mental midgets, and stooges. And when you have an exception of one or two here and there, it proves you do not grasp this, that when you can name the individual, that they are an individual proves my point. Out of the names you could choose who stood bright and were educated at the same time, there are hundreds of millions who do not meet that standing, who almost certainly received an education.
The art of “teaching” is referred to as “pedagogy”. Research that word, and its history. Learn about the “drill instructor” who was often a “slave”, who would take the children and need to use behavioral modification techniques to get them to adhere to the “teachings” of a “school master”. Learn the history of what has been done to you, and do not show agreement in mere narratives that such harm was done. Show agreement in “healing yourself”, and this is first and foremost done with your language.
Heal your tongue, because it reveals and connects your Mind. When you are inarticulate, it is not because someone is a better speaker than you... it is because they are a better thinker than you are.
Many have been dismissive with me in my own life, over this point. They say… “I am not as 'articulate' as you are” about this and/or that. As if, I just know how to speak what they may know how to think. This is a dismissive myth. I think what I speak better than one who can not speak it. I do not merely say it better, or with some separate skill.
Mental midgets put this forth all the time dismissively against others. “I know that, I just did not think to say it that way”. No, you do not know, for if you did, in your knowledge, it would be said this way. All knowledge is a declarative statement, even in the mind. It is something being affirmed and/or denied, in relation often to something else. Beliefs too are declarative; however, they are able to be loose, and in no need of evidence, though some evidence could exist supporting the belief and giving it weight.
When one then says, articulation, in terms of expression, and their clarity of analyses are skills of their own, this is a conclusion only a mental midget draws, in that, had they the ability to articulate, but from their present mind, it would appear “theatrical” and rather “experienced” based, and merely rote and memory, rather than that of a direct correlation to how, and what they actually think. It is important for one to cure this dismissive attitude towards language and the Reasoning it makes possible. One is not to hold this false notion that articulation and skilled thought are separate.
It would appear that though phonetically the word “art” is in “articulate”, they are sourced in different roots. However, when one has a combined knowledge of etymologies, they can resolve the likelihood of a connection. Remember the “joining” or the “putting together” elements of “art”, and that of “arms” or “arma”. Too, here, one finds that what is put together are “joints” or that of “points” of “connectivity”. The etym. gives indication of the relationship.
Etymology of Articulate (v.)
1590s, “to divide speech into distinct parts” (earlier in a now-obsolete sense “to formally bring charges against,” 1550s), from Latin articulatus, past participle of articulare “to separate into joints,” also “to utter distinctly,” from articulus “a part, a member, a joint” (see article).
Generalized sense of “express in words” is from 1690s. In a physical sense, “to join, to attach by joints,” it is attested from 1610s. Earlier sense “to set forth in articles” (1560s) now is obsolete or nearly so. Related: Articulated; articulating.
Etymology of Articulate (adj.)
1580s in the speech sense, “divided into distinct parts,” hence “clear, distinct” (1570s as “set forth in articles”), from Latin articulatus “separated into joints” (see articulate (v.)). Compare Latin articulatim (adv.) “distinctly, in clear sequence.” Physical meaning “composed of segments united by joints” in English is from c. 1600. The general sense of “speaking accurately” is short for articulate-speaking (1829). Related: Articulately.
The key component here in “articulation” is that of “distinction” and that of being “clear”, such as “distinctly, in clear sequence”. “Composed of segments UNITED by joints” is both in the physical sense, and that of the “metaphorical”, albeit perhaps analogue sense.
The general sense of “speaking accurately” gives the notion that “accuracy”, as clearly a part of being “clear”, is an objective. Accuracy, then, in speech, has a requirement of accuracy in knowledge of the meaning of terms and their use, which then implies the need for knowledge of meaning. And this knowledge is that derived from the “method of reasoning upon the knowable” that ought to be called science, but ought not to be mistaken for professional scientism, which in the days I am writing this piece, have more politics, and academic ideologies involved than there ought to be.
The essence of the ars of “art” and “arms” is unification in accuracy and use. It is, and always has been, culturally, not concerned with emotions, as these are the base forms of expression, but has culturally, and historically been about skilled and capable expressions, accurate, knowledge based and meaningful to the mind―not the so-called “heart”, a metaphor proving the point about the whim of most.
Because of this old cultural standard of observing ART, if it was maintained among the moderns, the masses, the multitudes, the many, and certainly the populace of educated, they would not be allowed to claim a relationship much to any that would be called “ART”. Therefore, as a society weakens its intellect, or the intellect of its elites, that which was once done by a few becomes altered in meaning to match the capacities of the many.
So then art becomes “expressions” carried out by an “artist” who targets the emotions of an audience, and gets a “rise” in those emotions. Provoking emotions is more common than provoking thought, and the mental midget masses have no choice but to target such things, and it can barely be said... to target the emotions of others requires much knowledge, skill, and articulation. It's an easy task, and every little girl and boy, with more girls than boys, get praised for what unskilled nonsense they express on sheets of paper.
I remember a cultural shock, when I was working with this lower middle class family, consulting about their children. Though financially they were lower middle class, they were culturally poor, and very poor. Their offspring brought me a picture, expecting me to take it as a gift as you dimwits do. I rejected it for its “poor quality” and no sign of seeking to actually know how to draw and color. I told him, he will need to get books, and watch videos about drawing, and make something better, if I was to take it. I placed “conditions” on the gift, and placed standards on the young boy... and this was the first these cretins had ever seen this done, because poor culture is defined by deference, and ignorance of ignorance.
To accept his inept gift would be to accept ineptitude. It would be to reinforce in him that anything he did was praiseworthy, and there was no measurement of what was laudable. This, the poor cultured kinds do with their young. Those of a higher culture have the standard that their young ought to learn how to do a thing, before they set out to do the thing, for only then, would skill be recognizable, absent the encounter with a prodigious savant.
The world of art in the US, and perhaps beyond, is marked by little girl boys, and little girls producing anything they fancy, in the presence of rudimentary abilities, and then emphasizing more so how they will market their brand, versus their brand being worth marketing. Art has to have divorced from it skill and accuracy, or there would be only few who could be called artists. Humans have this drive to want to be a thing, in recognition, and when they can not be that thing... they “move the goal post”, so that with lower standards, they achieve.
Humans do not raise standards, ever; they lower them. And this is manifested in the decline of any “golden civilization”, which is often only golden in that the best of thinkers and producers started the “fire”, but the generations that followed were born with “anti-fire” proclivities, instead preferring the mud. Eventually, the “science of fire” becomes lost, and if you think this is a metaphor, you are mistaken.
I have taught a great deal of others how to produce fire in the wild, and how they react to this production tells me exactly what kind of individual I am dealing with. The best of the best will become obsessed with many ways to build and start a fire, whereas the mud people would be content with lighting stoves, and having fire be sourced in the productivity of others.
The only fire that is yours, is the one you build from scratch. Articulation is about building from scratch the contents of your mind, and using a method of organization to determine how they are integrated. That I need to write these things, and they would be unheard of, makes me think I am writing them to those who can not receive and integrate them to begin with, and I am surrounded by a world of retarded mental midget automatons, existing as mere replicants of ignorance of ignorance, Domesticated Under Delusion, Material Over Mind, and Malcontent Over Magnificence. Chumps.
You, or they, then dare to dismiss my articulations as some standalone, that is not evidence of a mind that is clear, that is exact, and is LIBERATED into its own expression and excellence.
It is then NOT TO SAY... that one begins ART with what they express, and how they express it. One does not begin an ART, until they have a relationship with a skill that is clear, that is accurate.
In essence, that is, having as essential, there can NOT be, and will not be any sense of art without a “science”, a “branch of knowledge” with a skilled sense of such that begets a potent level of CONTROL in some set of EXPRESSIONS.
The term Control, here, highlights what everything is about, be it that this is known by others or not, it “matters” not.
Why the “Quest of the Five” no longer exists
Previously accounted for were the Seven Disciplines of Mind, from 1-7, in an order from beginning to end. However, now, I will present them in reverse.
7. Warfare
6. Jurisprudence
5. Aesthetics
4. Ethics
3. Logic
2. Epistemology
1. Ipseity
Presented here in reverse is for this reason. When there is a conflict, it falls under the category here of Warfare.
That conflict would be because of an injustice, which falls under the category of Jurisprudence.
And that which is the receiver of said injustice, would be that individual, and/or their affiliations seeking to be well expressed in their excellence, their nobleness, their Virtues; and that falls under the category of Aesthetics, the discipline of expressing what is noble and beautiful.
And the foundation of this was established in one's values, in one's ethical code, and therefore, modus operandi, and that is in Ethics.
That ethical sense was established through methodical Reasoning upon one's existence and being, and brought to order in thought; thought designed to be exact, to be sound, well Reasoning, thus Ratiocinative, and that category is called Logic.
But there could be nothing to Reason upon methodically, worth such, if there was no degree of certainty in it, and therefore, we have the category of Epistemology, and how it deals in knowledge, versus that of belief, that form of sense not certain, though meant to be advanced through certainty.
None of this can be done, and Pattern in importance, without there being certain identities, held by things that are fixed, reliable, and able to be acted through, upon, and with, and therefore, it all starts in Ipseity.
Every one of these Disciplines is about controlling something.
Controlling a sense of identity, as it can be observed, and made use of.
Controlling a sense of relationship to what is understood, and how it could be advanced in certainty, and accuracy.
Controlling that of the relationship the “certain notion” has to the “certain term”, such as a word meant to instigate the exact thought of a thing and bring it into an exact expression through articulation of Logic.
Control in how one makes decisions towards that of values, and what ought to be sought after, to Gain/Maintain, to Cultivate, and to Defend/ Protect.
In being controlled, brought to be accurate, and wholesome, and thus, noble, and beautiful, expressed in excellence, and therefore, Aesthetics, in being excellent, noble and beautiful, needing to be secure, stable and guarded over, with a controlled notion of how others ought to be with others, and therefore, the realm of Jurisprudence.
And where then the expressive ways of all these noble and excellent Disciplines can not impress upon the mind of another, who seeks to impede with ill will and/or negligence, there is War, and such War is controlled by, and conducted in a manner born out of the traits and attributes of all the previous settings, thus making that War, a just War.
And so flows the notion of Control in Viritus, and so is the establishment of the strength and power of the Kinetics of the Vir, for without these Disciplines being developed in a controlled, and skilled manner, there is no Vir.
All of this was WRITTEN upon my NATURE, and because it comes forth from my nature, and in this manner, not being the product of DOCTRINE, many will find it foreign, and few will hear its Call and attraction as some Seed of this nature that may be present in them. Where such a Seed is not present, one ought not think negative about this, nor when the Seed may be present, ought one think positive of it. Neither is true. There is IS or IS NOT, and all that “Patterns” in importance is knowing what you naturally are, and being that, controlled, and skilled; not what that X becoming resolved is.
It may “matter” but it won't “Pattern” in importance. When the X, the unknown is resolved, and one discovers their own nature, the next point is to control that nature towards a skilled, an exact, an accurate expression, and it is later on in the Aesthetics of the individual that their nature can then be observed by others; how one would be expressed in the realm others have access to.
That expression will indicate what “essence” exists in them, that could be measured, and judged upon by the 7 Disciplines of Judgement, of Analysis of the Mind.
It is said that for the so-called Mytho Buddha, he has three primary traits:
-
The Immovable, all powerful analytical Mind;
-
The Wisdom to wield it, and use it;
-
And the Duty, the drive, when Virtuous and attained, to instigate in others the same.
This last one is under the title “Karuna”, to which mental midgets have long translated over into “compassion”, but, it is not this. Karuna is that of being Virtuous and Sovereign, and thus with the Duty, and the compulsion to advance others in the same, towards their own might. It is not, pity partying of whimpering little tits of despair.
In the first of the traits, of the Saka traits, to which the so-called Buddha, that mythical being had, the 7 stars were the guide to usher in the Sun, the greatest of them all. The analytical mind is Solar, is not that which characterizes the Earthling, which is the mud, the dirt, the soil, and that of being unable to see X as unresolved, but instead, born in fear and insecurity, humans project upon the unknown that which frightens them, and triggers the worst of them.
Whereas the Solar, the analytical, the exact, the Immovable are so, having been born in confidence, born in noble expression, and noble drives, and this is absolutely necessary to be a Vir. In the absence of said birth, one may employ Vir tactics to perform well, but they would struggle. When one was meant to be a Vir, it is a “coming home” to that which is easy, and no struggle shall be present in them hearing the Call and acting upon it.
There may be a “struggle” in the condition for being expressed in one's noble and excellent character, but there can be no struggle in that expression itself, if Vir. The struggle in the condition begins after the expression in the conditions; thus, it begins in the 5th, in Aesthetics, and therefore, is controlled and governed by the 6th, and the 7th, by that of Jurisprudence, and Warfare. It is after the 5th that one must contend with others, whereas the four first are all about the individual, and what Control is theirs―to which they OUGHT NOT share in with any other.
One through four of the Disciplines is where Control and Command over self can become actualized, and because of this, and that “life is war”, not one of you reading this could turn to something having been made, to guide you through that process. If I am correct, that these 5 Disciplines of Mind are needed for the self to advance in Control and Command, then how could that make sense that systems are not presently available to aid in that “Quest”? So then, in the absence of said systems, surely these ideas of mine must not be valid.
But the reason for their absence, and therefore, the absence of the “Quest” is found in the 7th Discipline of Warfare; to be found in the 6th Discipline of Jurisprudence. Those who control War, and that of a sense of Justice, control legislation, and that of the compulsion in indoctrination and conformity to their nature and will. Played backwards, like any great Satanist would, your society starts with FORCE, not CONTROL, and though force too is neutral, the way in which they use force is not.
Your ELITES, through LEGISLATION, and CULTURE CREATIVES, intervene before you have any chance to consider the “Quest of the Five”. They intervened with your parents, and their parents, and this has the date that matches the coming of compulsory education in the so-called Americas, where in 1850s, in Massachusetts this all began, and generation upon generation would become the stooges of the elites who benefit from a servile culture, a patriotic culture, and a culture of commons needed to “field” the “assembly lines”, as well as have NO self standing with family farms, and that of trades and crafts, with apprentices and masters. Schools were designed from the start to create stooges who would have merely, and only a servile existence, but absent that of a mastery in any SERVILE ART.
The WAR for Control over the population, in an overt sense, was the Revolutionary War with Britain. The war was to LIBERATE British SUBJECTS, with the sole purpose of becoming the new land lords, and masters, to exploit said SUBJECTS under a new flag.
“WE the PEOPLE” did not mean, and never meant... the “commons”. The “people” is, and always have been... those who the “STATE” is composed of, and that is its “ACTIVE MEMBERS”, and its “ADMINISTRATORS”, and its “OFFICERS”, not then those who were its “SUBJECTS”, to which ALL OF YOUSE are openly called and referred to as by the STATE.
When that overt WAR was won, all of the SUBJECTS of Britain were merely transferred to be SUBJECTS of the United States of America, to be SUBJECT to taxes, and other exploits for their interest, their CONTROLLING INTEREST. Your ancestors, be them having been here, which most were not, or being about this place during mass immigration, which most were... were born to, and/or came to... a life of DEFEAT, a life of being VANQUISHED, a LIFE OF SUBJUGATION by DEFAULT. Meaning, you were not DEFEATED; you were born DEFEATED. And because of this... You do not know WAR.
You may not “feel” defeated, and you may deny any such sense of LIFE AS WAR... but this is simply because, you never have experienced a life of GAINS, a life of CULTIVATION, a LIFE of SELF-DEFENSE to CONTROL your own DESTINY. Only those who take up that QUEST, come to then discover what IMPEDIMENTS were in place, and/or are in place, and then how to win out over those impediments, exposing them, and expelling them, thus... coming to a Life of VICTORY.
You do not live a life where the Quest of the Five exists, because you live a life under the direction of those who have used the 7th and the 6th to SUBJUGATE you, and use the 5th of their kind to CONFORM you, and to RULE over your minds.
Your Aesthetics, your sense of beauty, nobility, pleasure, and ENTERTAINMENT has been dictated over the entirety of your lives, as the shamans and the Brahmins have given you your CULTURE in all the forms of music, pleasures, entertainment, and schools, to which your previous generations too, were so enslaved to. You are a schizo because you have a persona and a personality that is based on a kind that is not likely akin to your own nature, but having a potent nature of its own, it has pitted “their personality” and “their Aesthetics” against what you might naturally “feel”.
And because of this, you have low self-esteem, low Control, and NO DIRECTION that speaks to your nature, but plenty of obligations to what speaks to “your personality”, as has been so devised. This makes you a stooge, and a mental midget, and just why it could never be permitted that there would exist any source for the 5 Disciplines of Mind, that when actualized, would remove the victims, and subjects that such ELITE need, to have their own urges, desires, and Sense of Life realized as a FORCE upon this planet.
THIS IS NOT NEW.
The shamans among humans have been running them for thousands of years, as their Brahmins. They are the PRIESTS of every RELIGION. They are the POLITICIANS of every STATE, and they are the MEDIA WHORES whose voices are most exalted, and whose images as IDOLS are most worshiped. In all NATIONS, in ALL STATES, in all IDEOLOGIES, the SHAMANS made Brahmins rule over your minds, and that is why such things as CONTROL, Management, Manipulation, and Seduction... have their sense and nature “FELT” to be so wicked; because the only ones having WIELDED it, upon your kin, have been, by their very nature, discordant, and set upon its use over others, as they have NO ABILITY nor CAPACITY to SELF CONTROL, to SELF MANAGE, to SELF MANIPULATE, and to SELF ORIENTATE towards RIGHTEOUSNESS.
The shaman gets its directive from an “otherly realm”, that it believes appoints them intermediaries between dimensions, and/or gods, or any other imagination they prioritize over reality, and because of this, to them, everyone is inferior and meant to be ruled by them, and in practice, that everyone is ruled by the shamans and their Brahmins makes their claims seem legitimate, and confirmed. This is born from Nature, out of the same “feeling” that “mothers” have over that of children. They believe innate authority, not earned authority.
Seduction is a War term, and in fact, everything you all even consider is a product of War, of Jurisprudence, and based upon the Aesthetics of your masters. You have existed in the terrible three, made terrible only because, these three are only accordant when they are the ARTS of the 5. And the 5 are perfected based upon the essence and the nature of REASONING upon REALITY, and acting in accordance with those REASONS as a more authoritative guide to CONDUCT than that of emotional Kinetics born out of FEAR, out of INSECURITY, with the desperate need for some stability, security, and sense of safety, to which you shamans provide through the Control of war, justice, and expression.
Because they control these three over you, and yours, they make you feel safe because you are excused from the hardship of having to “think for yourself”. You are excused, because... you instead think for “them” and “their selves”, for they have priority over you, and that is exactly why you are trained to be “selfless”. Because when you are selfless, you are ripe and ready to be the stooge of another, who in action and practice, will certainly not be selfless, but all about themselves. But the self to which they will be commanded by will be the bestial self, that is waging war against their “person”, because their person is designed unnaturally, as it is a collective product.
As terms of War, with War as the ART that can either SUBJUGATE or can LIBERATE, one is in a constant state of being “seduced”, and the ultimate answer for why you are seduced, and to what aim, is found in the meaning of the term, and that is... to be “led astray”. And what you are led astray from is dialectically clear and obvious, and to know what that is, you need only consider the worded ethics of your so-called kind, and its shamans... and that is, this great demand of SERVICE, and this great demand of sacrifice, selflessness, and living for others, as what is noble and beautiful, and therefore, the CODE of Seduction is revealed…
Led away from, to be astray from… any sense of a natural Self, that would have Sole Reign, Control and Command over its conditions, and its course in expression, in the way in which it was meant to be expressed by nature.
You have been led astray, or rather impeded. That impediment, or set thereof, was designed to keep you from “KNOWLEDGE OF SELF”, and instead, any sense therein is that of having been kept in a theatrical condition of mimicking, and imitating the idols to which your shamans have so directed you to worship, and have so compelled you according to a scheduled life, to ever be so obsessed with; and you have not been permitted to exist outside of some relationship to this hive mind.
I call that hive mind SAM, or the Society Advanced by the Majority. They have you calling it the “MATRIX”, because so long as you see this “world” as a SIMULATION carried out in a material sense, with a problem you can not solve, then you will never discover the real MATRIX, which is right in front of your face, with “Patterns” once known, would become “Patterns” now Controlled and Commanded.
They leave your mental midget displeased minds thinking that the problems are magical and the solutions are magical, and that is exactly why their magical solutions they are pushing now are, as they were to their shaman ancestors, that of intoxicants, that of hallucinogenics, and so on. Their magical solution for you, for the magical problems they present to you, is more DOPE, and they know this will work, because they have Data On Previous Engagements―but you, in your ignorance in subjugation, have no idea what a life of DOPE would look like.
I have my own DOPE, my own DATA ON PREVIOUS ENGAGEMENTS, and it's not intoxicants, and magical solutions. But because you have been subjugated and doped up for so long... what I propose as a form of Liberation may not be even possible to be brought to fruition, for you all suffer far too much under impediments, and love too much your DELUSIONS, to which my very nature and noble expressions come to offend, triggering in you your whimpering little tit of SAM programming, causing you to defend a “persona” of a “hive mind” that you delusionally think is “YOU”.
This is what it means to be “seduced”, to be “led astray”, and to have “NO KNOWLEDGE OF SELF”, and why it has always been said, “KNOW THYSELF”. But you have never been shown a WAY of “knowing thyself”, a science and an art, but instead, left with thinking, to know thyself, you merely need to “self reflect”, foolishly not realizing that, that which you can only reflect upon is that “person” assigned to you from birth, and reinforced through the schools and social norms, that was designated by, and compelled by a collective.
Your self-reflection is limited to your collective role and sense of existence, insomuch as you have a sense of “them”, the “collective”. You do not and can not have a Sense of Self, and know thyself separate from the collective, in the absence of an engagement of the mechanics that the 5 Quest Disciplines engage. There is NO innate system of knowing thyself, at least, not at a level to where it is other than anomalous.
Instead, it is not “know thyself” that is the accurate decree. It is that which is best said to be “CULTIVATE the SELF”, and oddly, this is about a relationship with the essence of mastery, and mastery in anything. And when one becomes a MASTER and has that “relationship”, or that “accordance”, a “self” is not a “personality”, but is this “Operator” that can then call upon the potential, the capacities, the faculties of the machine “operated” through, and become accordant through excellent expression.
Personality becomes merely a tool, in which one engages others in the 5th, through the 7th. And because of this mastery, the one who has Control and Command over the 5’s products of the Quest, they are the ones who are then called SAGES.
This, because they do not have Knowledge of Self, so to say... This, because they have Control and Command over conditions and self, and where others coming from the 7th and backwards as the satanists, the adversaries they are, may exert Controls of injustice over the conditions of the SAGE, they can not DEFEAT, and they can not OPPRESS the SAGE in their essence, and take from them the gains of their mastery of this Quest.
This is why the Sage, no matter the level of oppression upon their conditions, will always shine up and out, and in that shine, may be targeted and killed for it by the shamans, who despise the Sage and their Kind the most. But such a death would be a glorious death, not because of dying for something, but because they lived about and for something.
Dying is not glorious; actual living is glorious, and the bulk of you are already dead, because in order to live, one must Command.
The ROAR of the Immortal
When one has come to live based on the science of life, and has engaged the Valorous Art of Virtue, it then comes to be said, they have conquered death, and they are Immortal, and this, only this, is because death, as a possibility in living Virtuous, can not MOVE the Sage from doing so. Threats, coercion, and oppression can not be used to get the Sage to live a life of VICE, and a life of ignorance, and a life of delusions.
Death, as a threat, sways not their Quest, and this is what it has always meant, to “conquer death”, and to become “Immortal”. For those who are “mortals” are those who will be governed by their fear of death, as they fear so much, and whereby choices of cowardice would be made to avoid death, one is mortal.
Where choices of Virtue, of Justice, of excellence may have the risk of death involved, the Warrior does not sway. And because they do not sway, even if their flesh is harmed, and their last breath is taken... they died Immortal.
And this, a human, in their mortality, can not grasp, because fear and insecurity has the mortal thinking, immortality is where no harm can come to them, and they have the safety of forever. This is why a human is mortal. And that the Vir knows the true meaning of this, is why when they are realized, and they are truly Vir, they join the ranks of the Immortals. An Immortal is one who is not moved by the threats of, and the possibility of death, when they are on course, and Questing with and through Virtue.
An Immortal is one where Virtue is so strong in them, and Triumph so powerful, that nothing can cause them to be “led astray” from it... NOT EVEN DEATH.
When EQUANIMITY becomes the characteristic of the INDIVIDUAL, they are seeded in the PATH that leads to IMMORTALITY.
To the shaman, who is with self-hate because of their MORTALITY, the IMMORTAL is the most dangerous force they have ever considered, and therefore, to weed them out, they beget societies under their Control, that is solely driven by FEARS and INSECURITY.
For when the IMMORTAL stands up, they must see them fast and weed them out, so that the “Immortal” does not wake up their Kin, and lead them towards this sense. For if there were Kin of the Immortal, life would alter them from being fear based, and insecurity based, and have the emotions transmuted into that of Triumph, that of Pride, that of a well operated self, that in curiosity, and its excitements, is led to Vigilance, and Veracity. And in the face of injustice, they would meet the shamans, the Brahmins, and their brutes who do their bidding with the Wrath of the Immortal, who is endowed with all the Data On Previous Engagements of those who came before them, walking those great halls of records, and tasting and being blessed with the memories of Old, the memories of their Kind, that once written upon their nature, light the Way of the Quest in the most Holiest of Ways, towards that of the Accord, the Great Law, the Great Destiny, to which all Immortals combine their forces to attain in.
To be led astray, and to be able to be led astray can only occur when one is not “about something”.
As one of my “Fathers” of many has once said…
“He who stands for nothing, will fall for anything”.
Malik al-Shahbaz, formally known as Malcolm x.
You must be “about something”, and when one does not know the “right thing” to be “about”, that does not mean, they are to “wait”. First, be about something, the best you can find. Because the secret here is not that... that “something” is “right”. The secret is developing that “relationship” with a “Way”, and that of “mastering a Way”, and when young and starting off, almost any “Way” will do.
Because all “Ways” to be mastered, in essence, require a relationship with memory, a relationship with skill, a relationship with competence, and accountability, and responsibility, and these are the true pursuits at the start. When one does not have a relationship to these things, it is to say… “They have not found their way”. However, it ought to be said… “They have no way”. These are the signs of a “way”. Too, is it why I have never spoken ill of being “religious”, yet those who come to meet of me think I am disgruntled, and malcontent like them, and they often “scriptingly” say… “But you are not religious... right?”
WRONG.
It only means you have not been paying attention. Hence why the only response I have to offer is... quite the opposite; I am ONLY RELIGIOUS. Everything I do is guided by my Religion, to which I am in SUBMISSION to, in OBEDIENCE to, and therefore, DERIVE ALL MY COMMAND from.
When you have a “WAY” that you, or thou, be deeming SACRED, and you adhere to that “WAY”, and you do not WAIVER, you are, or thou be… “Holy in that way”, or “Religious in that Way”. Religious does not mean refer to what a god says, or refer to what a prophet says, or to declare a universal truth.
My Religion, that of Viritus, is not universal. It is not designed nor meant for, to be applied by humans; and it is meant only for that species of being, the VIR, who though looks much like that of the Earthling humans, is Solar, and no Earthling at all. Its Virtue, and attraction to such, sets it apart from that of the humility of humans.
The Brooklyn Jews taught me when I was a young fella, that goyim, that non-Jewish nations and their subjects, were humans, in the bestial sense of beasts of burden, and meant to be ruled over by God's “chosen people”. I had rejected this notion, projecting my own noble Ways, and beauty on humanity... And therefore, for the longest time, I was wrong to prescribe my own traits as universally true. And that which they would have said about the masses... I would come to see was rather confirmed, in the sense that, easily ruled over, easily wanting to be ruled over, and easily led, must mean, in their nature to be so, or else they would revolt and try to be affirmed in something else, as I am natured to be.
The evidence is in that I have been given the same Society Advanced by the Majority, and it did not win out over me, assigning me a persona of servitude, of collectivism, of ignorance of self, but... my nature won out, and did so with massive ease, barely able to be called a struggle, other than from the outside looking in. Though yes, I am an oddity, nonetheless, it shows that if and when there is a nature seeking to be free and expressed in its nobility, at least, in the United States of America, it will be free to be expressed and as it ought to be.
When this is not present and common, it then must imply, given the best “nation-state” and “society” to be free to be your nature among, no nature of difference coming forth, implies no nature of difference. Surely, as I have seen in a few others, when they are set upon their nature and the freedom of expression of it, as long as individualized and not collective, that individual is not impeded, nor, dare I say... even targeted.
I am not oppressed. You might be, but that is doubtful. I would ask, if you are oppressed, what is it that is in you that is seeking to be “expressed” that is not being permitted?
Yeah, that question reveals you witches and warlocks. It's like your delusional magic gets swept away almost immediately. Your spell casting is broken. You love spelling delusions, whereas I articulate, I do not spell, and my accuracies break your spells.
I had things of my nature seeking to be expressed, and when I sought to express them, there was no one there to interfere, or that could. Surely, many tried, but the whole point is that, potent enough, they were not, and therefore, succeed they could not. So then, if you are trying to be expressed in your nature, and others succeed at stopping that, it's because you are a coward, and your so-called expressions are not potent, and/or, then, you nature is timid, is docile, is agreeable, is subdued, is defeated, and you have none to blame but your own cowardice and indifference.
Surely one would then like to say... you must have had it easy. Must have been born to the good life. Mental midgets, and whimpering little tits…
By so-called American standards, I had the anomalous level of “despairing” conditions the rest of you can only account for in TV or media watching. I was born to a crime ridden war zone, in Brooklyn New York of the 80s and 90s, where the war of, and on drugs is not a subject I need only be acquainted with through news and books, but saw firsthand, and even fought in the entirety of the first phase of my life. I was born to impoverished areas, to ghettos, surrounded by thugs, clicks, gangs, and organized crime, and to add to that, orphaned at a young age, and set to find my Way on my own, living with whom I saw fit, having no generational wealth to call on, no social network of comfort and surety―but all I had, I had to fight for, and did so with JOY... so do not get it mistaken.
I had no “white privilege” you Veneficus try to guilt others with. But the color of my skin made me a target, a pet, an exotic where I was, and though perhaps it indeed gave me benefits, only so much as an oddity would be treated beneficially. I have been physically beaten down more times than your entire kin collectively. I have been at the end of beatdowns by state agents, by thugs, by criminals, and so on, well, until I hit my growth spurt, and then became relatively invincible, now that I could hit back with a greater strength.
I have fought my whole life to exist on this planet, when conditions kept trying to end me. You, you whimpering little educated tit of a chump, can not use the common venom on me, to get me to doubt the worth of my gains, because I started off worse than all of you housed subjects of mommies and daddies possession, existing for the schools to work upon. You grew up in the safest condition any humans have ever known, a trapping of a house, a school, a city, a state, and a country that has done most to make your life of servile ease, everyone enslaved to everyone.
“WE” did not start the same. And with what I started with... it did not DEFEAT me, because it would have required me to have been born already DEFEATED. But my birth was a noble and glorious birth, and I have not had a single day in my life of doubt, of confusion, of despair, of low self-esteem, of some sense of no worth, or little worth.
If there be a GOD, or gods, and their touch is the touch of TRIUMPH, then they smacked my little ass when I was a baby; the doctors didn't. And when they smacked my little ass with their godly touch of Triumph, I did not let out a CRY, like you little whimpering tits; I let out a Thunderous Roar. And where this seems metaphorical, on the account of my Patruus, it was not. I did not cry when I came out. They thought I was not breathing. I came out “scanning”, unable to see the “world” through pinched eyes, and patiently waited for those physical eyes to open, while the “experts” thought something was wrong with me and had to run tests.
My nature was potent from the start, and I have beat back your shaman ruled world with ease, to bring this Ancient temperament to the foreground, and have no doubt in this right to exist, and my Duty to cultivate, and express it in its Noble Ways.
Ask yourself, why, even now, as I express my nobility, it may be offending you or someone you know. Why is noble expression, and self proclamation a target of the masses? Why are they ready to scream narcissist, and crazy man for one being filled with inner Triumph, yet they have no evidence to think, I think less of myself, and I am overcompensating?
Why... It proves shamans rule you. It is forbidden to have a Noble birth, and a Noble life, and any who seems like they may have, must be attacked as lying, as deceptive, as overcompensating, and trying to run a con.
Je m'en câlice, watch me shine and keep your whimpering little tit depravities to yourself…
ACCESS DENIED.
Why this extravagant set of declarations of my own “feelings” of “worth” and “potency” perhaps will be found unattractive to most, the most who suffer their Sense of Self in low esteem?
Well, for the very reason of what follows next.
The Art of Immovability
You see, to grasp what “Seduction” is, and why it's a variable in this “world” Advanced by the Majority, as that of a social order... one needs to have contrast. Seduction requires low self-esteem, for he, or she, or them who values themselves, and is in Triumph will have Equanimity, and they will not be able to be led astray, and have their mind, their persona, their direction... captured.
The opposite of being vulnerable to so-called Seduction is EQUANIMITY, and it is in the definition that this is so revealed, for often, liken to the Upekkhā of Buddhism, EQUANIMITY means IMMOVABLE, it means DIAMOND HARD, SOLID, POTENT in one's STANDING, so as to be UNMOVED by that of the PASSIONS, and that of OTHER, or ANY PHENOMENON... which is to say, OCCURRENCES.
But you can not be IMMOVABLE by being idle. You can NOT be Immovable by staying still. You can NOT be Immovable for merely wishing to be.
The science, and in action, the ART of IMMOVABILITY, requires that the individual be POTENTLY ABOUT SOMETHING, and where one is not potently ABOUT something, it leaves them VULNERABLE to everything. And to whom one is vulnerable to the exploits of, ought not be a mystery, for certainly, it would be those who praise VULNERABILITY, who promote vulnerability. Those who mark it, and all connected to it as “goodness”, as “kind”, as “nice” as “desirable”. Certainly, this makes these Veneficus, and their Venenifer easy to discover. These poisoners, and their poisoned, with the venom they so spout, seeking to make you their stooges, and to “lead you astray”. And to “lead you astray” is to lead you astray from “knowledge of self” and the sciences and the art of that of “Sole Reign”, or that is, self standing, and that of SOVEREIGNTY, which one is not born to, nor with, but must attain through the sciences, and put in motion through the ARTS.
Therefore, to ever learn of the ART of SEDUCTION is to not learn of any ART at all.
To learn of any notion of “Seduction”, it is not “sciences” and “arts” that one will encounter, even if such “set of plays” and “game” bears the name. No, instead, in learning of such things, and adopting their “ways”, you are in essence being groomed to be a “sucker” by the writers and the speakers. You are learning to be the “servile” element of these “games”, which is why it caters more to males than females, for females, though they will seem to be seducing, do not really need to, at least not much.
Most notions of Seduction need to act as if one needs to know what they are doing, but once examined shows knowledge is not needed, on the level in which such plays, play out. For just about all forces in the human male's life, among the commons, have turned them into willing victims, dopes, servants, stooges, and chumps, ready to step into the role of “Seduction” with the aim to “lead another” to that of their “interest”―yet ignorantly, in doing so, they are in fact the ones being servile in the interest of others.
It is as if “little girls” have taken over the notion of Seduction, and taught the little boys they need to play at it, to get the “little girl”, and in order to succeed, they themselves must become LITTLE GIRL BOYS. Seduction in the name of social spheres, not needing to be sexual, is far different from Seduction, and the sedition it was once characterized with, in martial, and war context. Like all things common, the commons who are cowards need to adopt things designed for war, and make them a part of their daily existence, because without the things of others, they would have nothing born out of their actual servile condition.
So instead of being active in a war for their own independence, the commons are passively aggressive in the war against each other, their familiars, their peers, their acquaintances, as a means to get them to serve some role for their emotions, and need for a sense, a “feeling” of stability, security, and safety, and to do this... the play is simple, IT MUST BE FORBIDDEN TO SERVE ONE'S OWN INTEREST.
Evidence that this is TREASON in the commons, is easy. What of your world PROMOTES Virtuous and Rational SELF-INTEREST as a priority, versus that of SERVICE and CARE for OTHERS?
NOT A DAMN THING.
But because this has always been the norm, and you have never learned the SCIENCE and its ART of Virtuous and Rational Self-Interest... It can not be said that you have been “led astray” from that of “self”, and one's worth, because, previously, you had never arrived at such. At such a VALUE, to be led astray from.
This is what it means to be BORN DEFEATED. It means, you were not knocked from “knowledge of self”. It means this was impeded and interfered with from the start, and in the absence of this CONTRAST, you would not be able to identify THREATS to your “VALUE”, because you had not attained in VALUE, for such was FORBIDDEN. And to ENFORCE such a FORBIDDANCE, all they had to do was erase, remove, impede, distract, and KEEP THEE FROM... that of the notion of ANOTHER WAY. Which is easy when among the commons.
MOST, the many, the multitudes, have NOT that of any potency of nature written upon their own form that could arise as a CONFLICTING nature, able to be expressed under any condition. Many tools are used to identify these foreign natures, and have them targeted and removed in advance. One of these tools, surprisingly, is that of the criminalizing of many behaviors, and in particular, the behavior of Vigilantism.
Meaning, you are not allowed to take JUSTICE into your own hands, and if you do, you are a CRIMINAL. But ALL who would be called MANU would be VIGILANTES by this standard, for NO MANU, no VIR would ever stand by, IDLE and PACIFIED in the face of an INJUSTICE, and because of the legal oppression, would indeed, to be VIRTUOUS, to be MANLY, to be of the VIR, would at the same time NEED TO BE A NINJA. This is why a Vigilante would need to be a GHOST FACE KILLER.
The word Vigilante is a bad word in your SAM, and they use it to attack those who even use force simply in the name of, and practice of SELF-DEFENSE, and because self-defense means you hurt, and/or kill another, in DEFENSE of the SELF, you are even EVIL in that act, and the legal system tries to be pushed as much as it can, to even OUTLAW self-defense. But in the United States, the cultural shift is moving, and these Ancient rights and the notions of them are on the rise, and to this... I shall do my part.
Let's talk words, and watch how the shamans and the Brahmins reveal themselves. They tell you who they are, and what they are about, but you have only been exposed to their words, and lack the contrast to understand then, what it all means. Contrast is not the same as REASONING, in the most preferred sense. But it is where Reasoning well begins, because it instigates discernment. Watch, and pay close attention, take good account of what I am about to do.
The core value of Vigil in Viritus
A Vir is with trait Vigil.
The Buddhists are called Buddhists, and their master Buddha, because of the word “Bodhi”, which for awhile was translated as “enlightened”, though such a term has been corrected often, with the alternative, the much better alternative “awake” being put forth. Bodhi means “to awake”, which in many ways means... to take “proper” and “accurate account”. The word “ratio” is the root of Reason, and it means to “account”, with the implication of “accurately” and “precisely”, which then leads to the “favor” shown to the “faculty” or the mental power of “DISCERNMENT”.
What you do not know, even if a Buddhist, or one who admires their nonsense, is that the Buddha of mythology, and it's mythology on historical fact... was supported by rich merchants, and the grove in which he “semi settled” with his peers was provided by rich merchants. This means, “capitalism” in its best form of those days, where cronyism and state interference could not occur, was at the foundation of establishing the so-called community around Mytho Buddha. So today, when a shaman, and their Brahmin is a Buddhist, and they promote statism, collectivism, socialism, and Communism, here is what to know… This is Ashoka Buddhism, like Catholicism was Constantine Christianity in many ways. For the Buddhists, their Constantine was King Ashoka. One of the things King Ashoka did was make laws, forbid practices that were used by those in REVOLT, and those refusing to pay TAXES, like those in TAXILA.
In Sanskrit, they say Taxila was called so because of being a “city of cut stone” from Taksha. However, there is an alternative to this notion, with “carpenter” being something that can be factored in, but enough with this mud.
I am not saying, the notion of tax, and taxes is derived from this, but the old name of this city, and the relationship it had with Indian rulers is correlated. They could not TAX successfully, Taxila, or that is force them to “pay a burden”, and in etymology, be “touched” by the Empire, with Ashoka seeing this under his father's rule, if any of these characters were real, which it matters not in importance.
But the things made illegal were that of “hunting” the land, and “feeding one's own” in essence, with locations of food dispensing becoming developed and sustained, albeit likely poorly. Next were made illegal martial sports, or any activities where one was engaging in “fight” for play, competition, or anything for that matter. All of these in the name of “non-violence”, in the way in which moderns spin this. All chumps and fools, seeing that he was destroying the cultural roots of independence, and that of aggression, and liken to today, that of masculinity, because then, the legal system is the best at making legal slaves and subjects, who would eventually call itself a community of sorts.
These are the true roots of the monastic bitch communities of Buddhists. A bunch of Ashoka chumps, whereas near to Taxila and Gandhara, up in Swat Valley, is where likely the Saka were, those who the so-called Buddha came from, as a SakaMuni, or Sage of the Saka. He came from forest Warriors, yet Ashoka would forbid Warrior training, as if the Sage rejected his roots, which he certainly did not. He promoted his Warrior caste as the best birth, the Confident birth, and was not against VIOLENCE, but they taught that VIOLENCE born out of the emotions was the issue. Of course, emotionals do not grasp this, because Mommy's emotions are not said to lead to war, and of course, none conclude it is because Mommy is inherently a coward, as is Daddy, and their emotions lead to passive aggression. That is why my “extreme” tone is unattractive to most, because I am not aggressive with it, and passive at the same time. I say WHAT I MEAN, and I MEAN WHAT I SAY.
Ashoka's legal decrees, if enforced and sustained over generations, would lead to the impossibility of a “Buddha” who relied on his “Saka roots” for most of his notions, and experience. But this Mytho Buddha was an Ashoka Buddha, to which no Saka Kinds could have produced, and therefore, the real threat was with the Liberation thought that the Taxila kinds had known so well from having Saka in their regions for so long.
To tax is to “touch”, and one needs to remember that. To “TAX” is to burden. To “TAX” as well means, there must be a “state”, an “empire”, a “monarch”, a “republic”, or some “collective” claiming a monopoly of FORCE on a set geographical location, and/or populace, to whom then would be their subjects. There has never been, and there could never be TAXATION levied without the threat of FORCE, or that is COERCION, and because of this, TAXATION is inherently THEFT.
Now, when you have been mentally prepared to “pay your taxes” and cowardly do so as a stooge, remember this: you were forced to be educated, to be conditioned to accept the state, and authorities that preceded you. It does not matter, if it's the best of options, and NOT AS BAD as others.
It is COMPULSORY, and the reason why it is such is because given the option to self govern, and to make use of the fruits, the full fruits of one's labor, MOST that are productive, and have value, would not agree to such a burden and payout, when they could do better in the marketplace.
But those who are not productive, who do not have a craft, who are not of value and able to exchange on the open market with others, must demand that those who are have them as their burden. And none is so driven to be this way the most than the human female, who rarely has ever believed she ought to have more value than her sexual appeal and organs. Rarely does a human male think he ought to be of any more value than a servant, who gladly takes up the burden of the state, being taxed, so long as he has the “privilege” of having a family, from which his full worth or sense thereof is drawn.
Humans do not believe in VALUE; they aim for safety, stability, and security, and they can be burdened to death, because the Jews were right, who taught me when young... humans are mostly BEASTS of BURDEN, lacking in a SOUL, which to me is the Intellect.
And because of this, but shared with their shamans as well... To be “awake” and to take “account” is a “CRIME”, and that is why I brought up Ashoka. Watch carefully. Buddha means the awakened one. It means one who is “awake” to their nature and “Reality”, or that is, how their nature ought to be expressed with Equanimity. With this definition, and this definition alone, I AM A BUDDHA. I am established in these two pillars.
But watch the trick.
In Latin, an equal term is “Vigil”. The term means “watchful, awake”. It means the same thing as “Bodhi”, and in Niō Zen, Beyond Sissy Buddhism, my first publication, I state my intent to LIBERATE BODHI from BUDDHISM, and now watch in how VIRITUS is used just for that.
Vigil means “lively”, and it is “energetic”, not passive. It is to be “awake”, and with this term, in Latin, one then would correlate terms born out of it, to establish, or to “account” for a trend in values.
From being “awake” and being “watchful” in a “lively” manner, is the implied notion of the opposite of the “impediments”. Meaning, to be “lively” requires being “unimpeded”, and then that of the value of a “freedom in expression”, and perhaps, “self-determined nature”.
These naturally correlate, or a contradiction would form. That is why those who are “lively” would lose liveliness, and lose Vitality, if they engaged in intoxicants. One may be LOUD and expressed when intoxicated, but this then contradicts the level of “watchfulness” and the level of being “awake”.
If you think you know someone who engages intoxicants and hallucinogenics is “lively”, then you are mistaken. They may be outspoken, loud, and expressive in something, often only that which can be secured in deference or fortune of an audience, but the Vita, the liveliness, would be in their “uprightness”, the force of their physical and mental Vibrance.
They would be at their best, and often those who look capable while engaged in intoxicants are only those passing as so among an audience themselves who are not “lively”, who are not “awake”, and who are not “Vigilant” and driven. “Sure looks fine to me” is from a perspective, and chumps do not determine what is lively and awake, for that would be foolish, and only a chump could think one who intoxicates, and impedes the mind with mood alterations, as well as hallucinogenics, could be “awake”.
Chumps, in fact, would see these folk as this, merely in that they are expressive more freely, not seeing that these intoxicants are known to remove social inhibitions, and that frees them up... but when freed up, they have nothing to produce that stands on its own. They may exist merely in opposition and critique of others, which may be the first step, but then certainly something will need to follow to be affirmed. When they have held their status of expression for years in opposition, with nothing affirmed, such is the evidence that they are impeded, and have nothing out of the self to produce that is meaningful. They will then only be admired by the malcontent. Admired by the displeased, and then “time” will show where their habits lead, as they become less vibrant, less lively than they were when younger, not more.
The sign of being lively is that it beats time, whereby not entirely, but better than the dead masses. So then as they age, they have Vitality in their age, and one does not see them being brought down so easily by time. Time brings all down, because time spent habitually around impediments is the defeat by the way of impediments. Time was the opportunity for one's habits to solidify, and begin to produce a product called one's character. It reveals all, because in youth, one can hide behind the ease of chemical Vitality, but when not maintained, and not cultivated and disciplined, gets taken away with chemical age.
Vita and Vigil are core values in Viritus, as they would need be for that of a Vir. And in correlation are the core terms VIGILANCE, and VIGILANTE.
And in these terms, as mentioned before, one comes to have contrast, to then measure the spoken, written, schooled, and media nonsense of its shamans and their Brahmins, thy mommies and thy daddies.
Because of the liveliness, the “watchfulness”, the “awakeness” of Vigil, there is a transmutation in one's character. It begets, and can only beget the trait of “Vigilance”.
Etymology of Vigilance (n.)
1560s, from French vigilance (16c.), from Latin vigilantia “wakefulness, watchfulness, attention,” from vigil “watchful, awake” (from PIE root *weg- “to be strong, be lively”). Related: Vigilancy (1530s).
Vigilance has soft promotion among the commons, but it is not truly allowed. In actuality, most wish to navigate social spheres and realms undetected. And when they are spotted, and detected, they then hope they are shown deference, and you soft chumps act like you did not “see anything”. So often, it is “polite” in your delusional settings to “let things go”, to “let it be”, and to “avoid conflict”, and so on. These are all the marks of contradictory forces to Vigil, as they are to Bodhi. Being forthright is lively, not concealing what you think, and “letting things slide”. The latter is DEFERENCE. One is yielding to others, in hope too, they will yield to you, and your ineptitudes. None of this is Vigil, and Vigilance.
One is not lively and watchful, and awake, to see a thing, and let it slide. They are these Vital things, for action. A Man, or one who was once manly... was a MAN of ACTION. That used to be a thing. When the commons are dominated by little girls and boys, this phrase itself will have no place and fall out of the culture, because none are MAN, be them male or female, and therefore, few would take bold and meaningful actions, anywhere in life. In fact, this is forbidden. Here is where I am going with this.
I had mentioned the term Vigilante, and therefore, Vigilantism, and I will use this term to show what society you hail from.
In your society, if one is called a Vigilante, this is a bad thing. They are said to “take matters into their own hands”, with this meaning, as opposed to “leaving it to the state”. Those who let things “slide” are leaving them to “slide” onto others. Hence the meaning, poorly rendered, of the quote:
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
It’s a quote often attributed to Edmund Burke. However, in that in reading this, and knowing the source of its essence, it too, proves why one ought not write things in their own words. Burke did not utter these words accredited to him. Too, the one who brought the essence forward of these words, John Stuart Mill, had in fact stated something contradictory to these words; or that is, those making the quote above contradicted his words, WORDS far more glorious than this crappy quote.
Far more glorious because any Virtuous VIR, any REAL MAN knows that no “GOOD MAN” can be called such, who lets EVIL SLIDE, or that is “TRIUMPH” in that of “INACTION”, in that of “ACQUIESCENCE”, and so on. That, to be a “good man”, at its very core, is to TAKE ACTION in the name of Virtue, and in the absence of this, one is not a “good man”. And never is there “good man”, or “men” if you must, whither evil TRIUMPHS; for where it Triumphs is evidence that all involved were lacking in Virtue, in Vigilance, and unwilling to either make clear protest, and/or take an ACTION, if an action could be taken.
The Mill essence is far more deeper, and this is why dumbing down expressions should never occur, and why I do not lend silence towards others doing this in the realm of my own expressions. DO NOT ALTER what I say.
Mill made clear:
“Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion. Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing. He is not a good man who, without a protest, allows wrong to be committed in his name, and with the means which he helps to supply, because he will not trouble himself to use his mind on the subject.”
In its components,
“Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.”
In the past I have stated, one is not of peace, in that they seem to do nothing, but it is that they do nothing because they are pacified, and they are cowards who do not have the ability to do something, because of their fears and their insecurities. This is why being DANGEROUS and able to do harm, in the name of JUSTICE, is necessary to be VIRTUOUS, and therefore, a MAN, by my standard. And there is no such thing as a BAD MAN. When one is a MAN, or Manu, this requires VIRTUE, and that is why VIR is often treated as meaning MAN, in the classical sense, because it means COURAGEOUS Man, which ought to be redundant.
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
This is what “bad humans” need to compass, to navigate their ends. That “good men” should look on and do nothing. This is not the same as saying, for evil to Triumph, it needs “good men to do nothing”.
It seems the same, but it would make the notion seem that, evil is winning, because first, there are “good men”, and that, it is these “good men” who do nothing, and thus, “evil Triumphs”. This is absurd, and the evidence of so-called “evil” being “Triumphant”―which all Virtuous know is―is the evidence that among its “halls” of “movement”, no so-called “good men” were present to begin with. They were all Children of Ineptitude, with vices, and depravities, and often “pigs” (not to insult pigs) dressed in “good men garbs”, and “priestly outfits”, engaged in often bestial practices. Pigs, here, were just the common beasts of comparison, to say beasts. For certainly, a pig is not a volitional being engaged in some “evil”.
“He is not a good man who, without a protest, allows wrong to be committed in his name, and with the means which he helps to supply, because he will not trouble himself to use his mind on the subject.”
At minimum a “protest” must be lodged; must be affirmed in, whereby one removes that carried out in their name. A “protest” is no mere utterance that one's mate hears, that is, shared in the “streets” with others, and protected by “political differences”. This is not what is meant. A protest to the right parties, the offending parties, and in the realm where the protest defines your standard, even perhaps at a cost. My works are my protest, in many ways. One can say Access Denied, which will enter “public records”, is my “affidavit” to the Society Advanced by the Majority, in protest, and declaring, NONE of what you ALL do is in my NAME, and/or NAMES, and I will not provide provisions and supplies, in contradiction to my values, and Religion.
When you vote, that rep does things in your name. You are responsible. When you contract, and empower, your name is a part of the weight. When you are taxed, and pay, what then is brought about with those taxes, you have supplied.
“Good men”, it would be said... have “troubled” themselves with these notions, and their roles, and have either “protested”, and/or are “protesting”, and this does not mean, successfully throwing off the yokes. At minimum, a “protest” is needed, and a mere social sharing of displeasure is not a “protest”, and would be absurd to think that is the minimal level. One's privately voiced displeasures, and public agreements to the contrary are the mark and sign of a coward; and no Man is a coward. Human males and females are cowards, and their children often mimic them, and rarely have “Men”, or better a “Man”, male or female, to mimic. Man or Manu is not a sex or a gender, it's an “intelligent being” that exercises Control over its conditions and self, and it's a rare thing, a foreigner to what is common.
Prior to engaging others, and bringing them these contrasting, and perhaps extreme differing notions... they have not “troubled” themselves with these “subjects”. Why would you, when existing in a “life of ease”, and a “life of inaction”, and a “life of outsourcing” all the Duties to others, and not being encouraged, and provided with the sciences and the arts of personal responsibility and independence?
To all these, you have been LED ASTRAY.
And this is revealed in the treatment of the notion of Vigilance, and Vigilantism.
For when one “does nothing”, and thinks, this is them being “peaceful”―though they are pacified―it can not be said they have Vigil, and therefore, Vigilance. And when far more harm and tyranny has come from official preceding authorities, states, crowns, collectives, then certainly, Vigilantism would be counterproductive to their tyrannies. It would be a disgraceful thing to consider.
For the state, a collective, thinks a jury of 12 is somehow enhanced in their quality, even if all 12 are morons and inepts, to which they have a high probability of being. Justice then becomes wrapped in the bandwagon fallacy, and what the courts have done is given themselves a way out.
In essence, no one securing Justice needs to be trained in it, and its high standards. Instead, the judge who judges tradition alone has rendered the final judgement to those of town idiots, who can barely manage their own daily affairs, who likely do not have an ounce of Virtue to speak of.
Of course then, Vigilantism, which is “illegal”, would easily be ruled on as “guilty as charged”, if such a charge was presented. For only those who are Vigilant, dangerous, and able to measure Justice could then see the possibility of another taking matters, or “Patterns” into their own charge, and removing evils, removing tyrannies, and despotism, whether they be either out of an individual and/or a collective; for the fact of a mob's presence does not give them some form of superpower.
Outsourcing Justice is the quickest way to tyranny.
Etymology of Vigilante (n.)
“member of a vigilance committee,” 1856, American English, from Spanish vigilante, literally “watchman,” from Latin vigilantem (nominative vigilans) “watchful, anxious, careful,” from vigil “watchful, awake” (from PIE root *weg- “to be strong, be lively”). Vigilant man in same sense is attested from 1824 in a Missouri context. Vigilance committees kept informal rough order on the U.S. frontier or in other places where official authority was imperfect.
“Where official authority was imperfect”.
What is “official authority”, if not, in what I have been saying, determined by precedence and familiarity, and only this?
And where is that “official authority” NOT imperfect?
How well are those “officials” in “authority” maintaining the quality of life and well-being, against crimes of theft and harm, in the major cities of “America”? Is it not the time to form Vigilance communities?
Some may think it is time, and then those who have been outlawed from Vigilance will not have a culture, and knowledge of it, and step forward with a tainted sense thereof, often then making the so-called “officials” look better than they ought to look in reality.
But the fact is, listen to your Society Advanced by the Majority, and hear the outsourcing nature of Mommy and Daddy. “Not my problem, all the injustice in the world”, and instead, make it someone else's problem, and if you dare to differ from this, and be better at JUSTICE than that of the “OFFICIALS”, well, you better repress that, for when you seek to enforce JUSTICE, you will meet the biggest of the CRIMINALS there are. And they will be OFFICERS OF THE STATE, afforded superpowers on account of precedence and familiarity, not an earned status of quality, of skill, of competence, and of CONSENT; for surely, only a fool would think CONSENT can be rendered in any COLLECTIVE, to which it certainly is not.
The importance of the notion of Vigil, and the notion of Vigilance, and the notion of Vigilantism, and Justice, has EVERYTHING to do with SEDUCTION, even if you have failed to see where, as of yet.
You see, to be “LED ASTRAY” is first and foremost dependent on the presence of those traits. A Vigilant, watchful, and awake “Guardian” does not lead towards treason of what is “good” and “just”, and that of Virtue. The only ones who want to “lead others astray”, and to be “led astray” themselves, are the ones who do not possess Virtue, and something worth keeping guard over. More often than not is that the seducer and the seduced take turns, and they are both wretched things. For, in line with these terms above, NO MAN could ever be SEDUCED, for only inept children, displeased and empty, can seduce and be seduced. And make no mistake, often, one can seduce themselves, and be quick in their deference and allergic reaction to taking responsibility, blame that of others, and even the “world”.
This attitude stated above clarifies my relationship to Seduction further. But I will expound way further in this “Pattern” bestowment of the nature, the essence of Influence, of Control, of Management, of Manipulation, and here, SEDUCTION. For I have read the classics all use as a reference point. I have read the moderns, and their ineptitudes, and I can tell you all about what anyone has ever thought about Seduction, and its role it plays, and/or could play, and/or thought to ought to be played, in one's daily living, and connection to so-called happiness.
He who praises having been seduced by another, and how glorious it was... ought not to. For Seduction does not work on the Virtuous, and those who stand for something, who are “about something”. Seduction hides itself first and foremost by being the claim of “leading another astray”, but in actuality, it has not “led” to this point, of being “astray”.
Seduction reveals that the one targeting, and the target, the mark, were never truly about anything other than their “base” self, that is and always has been... lost in the wilderness of domestication, frightened inept child of the mind. One then, if led astray, only has it mean, led from the “personhood” that is known by all to be a myth, and instead, reduce to the feeble state liken to their youth, which is then called being “honest” and one's “true self”, weak, feeble, with low self-esteem, and a desire to “feed the beast”, and only such to be fed.
In essence, Seduction can be said to be that which leads humans away from pretending to be “of Man”, when they are not, and has them in fact behaving like the little beasts they are, and therefore, it's REVELATION not of the “astray”, but the actual. Only them with TREASON already in their ESSENCE come to COMMIT it. None can lead a VIRTUOUS ONE, a MAN, to commit treason or any other form of perversion. Only can the perverted, be free to perversions.
The Art of Individual Responsibility
Every trait and attribute to which I promote as the “Way of the Vir” is contrary to any notion of Seduction. But if this is true, how then can I be accused of Seduction by others, thus stating either they have been seduced by me, or felt the need to defend against such?
The last one is easy to settle, in that, never is it observed that there is someone who believes I am trying to seduce them, and then feels the need to DEFEND, and thus not be SEDUCED. Meaning, I have only observed in my life that OTHERS most certainly WISH TO BE, that is SEDUCED by me. Meaning, Seduction does not begin with me, as an aim nor an intent. But the desire to be that of seduced boils up in all those whom I meet. Much of what is the Entertainment value of being human is evaluated by that of the level of Seduction the Entertainment offers.
When one uses the term “escapism”, what are they saying?
How old are terms often used?
For this term, “escapism”, it's marked at 1933, in American English, obviously from “escape”, with that of being in the mental/emotional sense, with it being an -ism.
“the tendency to seek distraction and relief from unpleasant realities, especially by seeking entertainment or engaging in fantasy.”
Now why bring up this term?
It is important to grasp the actual term “Seduction”, and to take one's level beyond the mere floating concept or notion of such. Ask yourself right now before going further... What is Seduction? Do not only ask; stop reading for a moment, and let's compare notions. Write down as much as you can about “Seduction”, and map it out. First see what you think, and what you can “articulate”. This is most important for when you think yourself ready to disagree with me, prior to you having ever had a sense of these things.
Often, both females and males, but more so males, want to NEGATE each other, and begin with the “feeling” to disagree, and to challenge, long before they had “grounds” or “bases” to. Then, they will post rationalize their negation, and try to find substance to use, after the initiation of the negation. They will “scramble” to back it up, and this works only on the infirm.
As was said previously, you were not provided with a science on this subject matter, and especially not an art. So then, are you able to even consider what Seduction is? Maybe, if you have read Part II. When you can not, then you ought not be surprised why then, you are easily seduced, and in that ease of being seduced, why that may make you feel less, if and only if, you did not want to be seduced by the one who did it.
When you want to be seduced, as most do, and you are seduced by those who know how to seduce, then you will have now discovered the source of your “pleasure” and “enjoyment”, but be in great error, if you think they are the same as “joy” as an emotion. They are not.
You are not experiencing the emotion of joy, when you are pleased and entertained. You are experiencing the “high” of mere Entertainment, and more often than not, here is revealed the “astray” portion of being “led astray”. You are being led astray from the “unpleasant” towards the “pleasing”, and it comes in order to point out... that “realities” were too the point. It is not merely the “unpleasant”, but it is the “unpleasant realities”.
Now, in Part I and II of Access Denied, I laid down the emotional Kinetics, the emotional motions.
Etymology of Emotion (n.)
1570s, “a (social) moving, stirring, agitation,” from French émotion (16c.), from Old French emouvoir “stir up” (12c.), from Latin emovere “move out, remove, agitate,” from assimilated form of ex “out” (see ex-) + movere “to move” (from PIE root *meue- “to push away”). Sense of “strong feeling” is first recorded 1650s; extended to any feeling by 1808.
As one could deduce in the phonetics, the term “motion” is in the term “emotion”. So then, it would seem to add “kinetics” too, with the essence of motion, is redundant. However, it certainly is not. The motion, or the direction of the emotions is what the Kinetics is about. The default and the most common of the directions begins in the base “Fear and Insecurity”, which one needs to remember, is the sole and core Kinetics that defines the emotional need for an attachment figure. The same can be said of the other Kinetics.
-
Fear and Insecurity REQUIRES ESCAPE in: Comfort and Safety
-
Anxiety and/or Anger REQUIRES ESCAPE in: Control and Management
-
Disgust and/or Displeasure REQUIRES ESCAPE in: Expression and Engagement
-
Despair and/or Malcontent REQUIRES ESCAPE in: Evasions and Attacks
-
Surprise and/or Excitement REQUIRES ESCAPE in: Ignorance and Impulse
-
Entertainment, Enjoyment, and/or Pleasure REQUIRES ESCAPE in: Deference and Avoidance
Like in the etym. of emotion, it has the notion of direction as “stir up”, and so this has some chronological or hierarchical sense to it. Up from the base is the notion here. From a settled and “calm” state to an “agitated” state. This begins in the first Kinetics, and the rest of the Kinetics is experienced in a sequence of rising up, and rising down. This is the meaning in part of the “Tathāgata” category in Buddhistic thought. The “coming and the going” is the “movement” or the “Kinetics” of the “mind states”, which are in the first and default Defeated Kinetics of the commons, the emotional motion out of fear and insecurity, and back around. Too, this is the loop, and the infinity.
One then starts in the 1st, and moves through up into the 6th. It is in the 6th that ESCAPISM then is tracked. This can be shown in the definition, as all terms can. They will tell you where in the Kinetics they fit.
In the Kinetics, you have the SEEK to:
-
Gain and/or Maintain,
-
To Cultivate,
-
To Defend and/or Protect.
SEEKING has these clean categories. When the words “seek”, “pursue”, “find”, “get”, and so on are used, there are these conditions innate to all of them, as ACTIONARY. All ACTIONS get to be described as in one or some of these categories.
So then, in ESCAPISM, the definition shows that the category is ENTERTAINMENT. It shows that the “breed” or the kind of “Entertainment” is the kind that “distracts”. Hence, distracting forms of Entertainment. This then would not be in the CULTIVATION, DEFENSE or PROTECTION categories of values. In being DISTRACTED, one is MAINTAINED in where they were, not ADVANCING towards any form of CULTIVATION. Therefore, the target sought for Entertainment will not MOVE them. “That is moving”, or this or that “moved me”, begs the question, from where, and to where?
When one does not have an answer for that… they merely “feel moved”, and that means it was a 1-6 Kinetics of Defeat, and often, they were moved through the emotions, and brought into the PAST, and some connection of Maintenance, and not likely a connection to CULTIVATION. This is key.
The ENTERTAINMENT, the 6th Kinetics, is correlated to the other Kinetics here, in ESCAPISM, in that the KINETICS of DEFEAT are the UNPLEASANT REALITIES. The other variable NOT to be overlooked in the definition is that of relief. DISTRACTION and RELIEF.
So then, when measuring this, this is the category one can ask themselves about, in observing their own sense of Entertainment, and the sense of Entertainment of another. In the absence of any “movement”, or “advancement” through cause or understanding, and merely the presence of ESCAPE, it is evidence of the values of Gaining and Maintaining, and thus, the low and starting, base degrees; and the Gain aspect is the most active. Gaining in Entertainment of ESCAPISM, as a means to offer DISTRACTION and RELIEF, from that of the UNPLEASANT REALITIES.
There are many who easily say ENTERTAINMENT is for ESCAPISM, and that, when they SEEK it, they SEEK to escape; and therefore, FANTASY plays a role in this.
Now, the reader may be thinking, what has this to do with Seduction? If you are still confused on this, first, that's called WAR, and second, it's because you would not detect that MOST of what is Seduction, is that of “leading one astray” from what they “feel” are “unpleasant realities”, and instead, engaging them in fantasy, whereby they will have DISTRACTION and RELIEF.
Escapism is a primary ingredient to that of SEDUCTION, as was largely covered in Part II.
When I began with addressing that which I have been accused of, that is the point. None defend against me when they first meet me, looking at me as if I am seeking to seduce them, and therefore, be on guard, and shut it down. Instead, they presume I am by default trying to seduce them, and because they have been seduced their whole lives, dealing in ESCAPISM their whole lives, they are ready, willing, and wanting for me to “play” on that.
The category here is Entertainment, in that, what I then provide as a character, to them, by their own interest, is that of DISTRACTION and RELIEF. This, because the realms I provoke are not ones for them that have consequences, but deal in the Intellect, and that of greater adventure of considerations. Therefore, they begin with me with the value of the emotion of Entertainment. They have placed me in a role. And because I am entertaining, by nature, I am then seen as the one “running a game” of “Entertainment” on them, and therefore, a seducer. However, here is why they are wrong, and here is why it is them who are engaged in SEDUCTION, and ESCAPISM, and not I.
That which I entertain through, that others find appealing, is that of a challenge to their delusions, and to their escapism. That is to say... I am all about “realities”, and if they are seen as “harsh” and “unpleasant”, I am all about making it clear to others, that this is only the case when your CONTROL and COMMAND over conditions and self is inept, and that “realities” are “Triumphant” when you are a Commander. And therefore, I do not promote or engage in escapism, but I demand that all PURSUITS are advanced towards a CULTIVATION of sorts. This means, all of my ENTERTAINMENT serves some ADVANCING notion.
Watching a movie, for example, does not trigger ESCAPE and DISTRACTION for me, but instead, requires analyses, and active participation in the theme, to consider what it illuminates, and what one can do with the viewing. Therefore, I will talk during, and after a “film” to cultivate a sense of its examples. Because of this, I do not watch and engage in “senseless” Entertainment, as most of the Entertainment in the industrial world is. Most are indeed engaged in escapism, and it is because of this that when they detect me as entertaining, they relate me to the role of that which provokes escapism in them, and that is, ENTERTAINMENT, media, and mere fancy as FANTASY.
Many then see me as offering them a fantasy, only because they are looking for one, and they could care less about who I am, and what I am about, but instead they need me to serve them in that ROLE. Because of this, it becomes “I” have “seduced them”, and they are “glad I did”, so long as they remain “ENTERTAINED”. And only when they are no longer entertained, when I turn up the heat, could they ever think my Seduction, which was in fact theirs, was NEFARIOUS. Only after the interactions could they think so, and never before or during.
And in thinking so, it was because the “unpleasant reality” kicks in, for them, where they come to find out that I was “for real”, and I was not saying, or doing what I do with ENTERTAINMENT of ESCAPISM as a trait. That was them, not me, and as the demands of quality interaction rise... and they do not meet those demands, and I begin the process of “Access Denied” with them, I become the villain who seduced them. And Seduction, to them, comes to have meant an oppression of their voice, and their CONTROL, to which they have never had in life, and still will not have in life.
With this variable in mind, one must ask them about themselves. One must first realize the likelihood that you are seeking to engage ESCAPISM, and you likely see “realities” as “UNPLEASANT”. When you see realities as unpleasant, this is the evidence that your level of Control and Command is inept. Instead of realizing this about yourself, you will BLAME the external condition. Yet, this is not what I do and see. I can control those conditions that are unpleasant, and I can push them to be pleasant, or rather rewarding.
The difference between me and others, and why others see me as entertaining, is that when I show up in the space, show up in the CONDITION, I take Control over the condition to serve me, and I do not serve it. I find in the condition what advantages there are, and lock in on them, take point, and happen to the space, not let it happen to me. Because of this, unpleasantries do not exist for me. When they exist for you, and you are blaming the condition, this is the evidence your level of Control is not as good as it ought to be.
This does not then mean one ESCAPES the condition. Only in unpleasant conditions, or “realities” does one learn to become a Commander. One does not learn how to Command, and habituate it through ESCAPE, and through being in pleasing conditions. Battlefields are needed to engage battle, and to learn and develop battle sense. Battle sense is the aim in the up and coming VIR, or else, without it, there is no VIR. A VIR has BATTLE sense, and this sense is proven, and only proven wherein their conditions are not “displeasing realities”, but are pleasing realities, because they have taken Control and Command over them, and have made them so. This is the ART of that of Personal Responsibility, or rather, Individual Responsibility.
Complaining is a “strike”, and to “lament”, to “beat the breast”, if not to be an accusation or charge to an authority for change. Most do it as their strike, and as I have said with the Kinetics, this is about despair and malcontent, which causes evasion, and attacks. Complaining is an attack, and often the mark of some ineptitude in the one issuing the complaint.
Command does not complain, and evidence of a Command is in that, that which would otherwise be complained about has been altered and changed to be lacking the need for complaint, because it is made right. There is risk in making things right, and cowards will not take that risk, but where they can, they will then complain.
This is why with the standards of the Vir, complaining is seen as such. Do not complain, unless before, during, or after the complaint, you have the intent, ability, and drive to fix the problem.
It is girly, it is mental midgetry, and inept, sissy like, and effeminate to simply want to be heard, and to express displeasure and not seek a remedy. This notion that is often around “females” wanting to be heard, but do not offer them solutions, just a shoulder to cry on... is not a part of my culture, and the “Way of the VIR”. We, those of this “Way”, “We” DO NOT DO THAT. If you are complaining, make a list of your complaints. If you do not then have solutions for them, and you complain, you are a chump and a plague, and you will be harming others around you with your complaints, and displays of ineptitude.
Now, the same can be said for you escape artists. Escape artists who seek escapism often also seek to get drunk, seek to get high, and seek to hallucinate. They are all connected, and no one who does those things is of these “Ways”, and could be of these “Ways”, to which there is no exception. This is not the “way of chumps”, but escapism is.
To recap with a simple formula, for those having known of me, but hardly ever to say they have ever actually known me, and then those getting to be “familiar” on what level they can with me, this needs to be accounted for.
Your interest in me is through the 6th Kinetics of Entertainment. If I had asked you why you have a want of “ACCESS to me”, you would not be able to answer this. This, because ESCAPISM is a part of your Entertainment. Just because you do not think about why you want and have access to others, it does not mean I do not think about it and know why.
As laid out in Part II, I have three VALUE categories for socializing:
-
Entertainment
-
Resources
-
Viritus (religious)
If I am interacting with you, and it's now and then, it's in the first, Entertainment. You will know this, because my expectations for you are low. If you are low in providing Entertainment, then you will need to provide some resources of some sort, in exchange to make up for it, and therefore, have some material support. This is to balance out that I am high in Entertainment value, and if one disagrees with that, then again, begs the question, what value am I to you.
I am not, and will not ever be a RESOURCE value to others, not because this is of low value. Resource value is not low value. It is a needed value as a heterotroph. It is because my value is in Entertainment and Virtue, where systems are mentored, that the 2nd value is lowered. Too, the second value is lowered for what I see in others. One who is slightly entertaining will need to double up on values. One who is entertaining would have their value contribution be in that of value added to the social sphere. It is rare to find one who can be value added in full in this category alone. Very rare.
If the Entertainment interaction is then more habitual, and thus favored, I inject Viritus, my Religion, into the association, as a means to now move from Entertainment towards that of Cultivation and Advancement. This means, as Entertainment that is not here and there, but sustained, the Viritus ingredient is necessary.
In the Viritus value with others, it is that Advancement in Control and Command is the mission and objective, and therefore, that I have my own Command, I can only value another in high esteem, when they arrive at the Cultivation and Sustainment of their own Command. I will never hold another in high esteem who is not a COMMANDER.
I will never hold a mere resource provider in high esteem. I prioritize those with the capacity to Advance in Control and Command over conditions and self. Second are then those who are entertaining; and third are those who are entertaining enough, and add to the resource Pool of Productivity, the PoP; fourth, of low value, and of no concern, are those who only provide resources. I will never, ever, provide energy to a 4. My level of interaction begins at 3, only to move them to a 2 as fast as I can, with the expectation in the number one priority of socializing, and that is Virtue, and/or Viritus.
Which in the end makes it clear, I can interact with those who are whatever they are, yet entertaining, but I will not hold them in high esteem, and I will not sustain a long-term association on any other grounds but that of “holy grounds”, around that of Viritus. The rest is mere surface, and mere Entertainment. And in that Entertainment, it has the ingredients of my Religion, that of Viritus, and at no point is character about ESCAPISM.
When I stated earlier that others seek to be “seduced” naturally, and therefore, accuse me of “seducing”, this was not accurate. The word is “Manipulation” that others accuse me of, when from appearing to entertain, offering distraction and relief, they then come to observe I am adding instead Viritus ingredients of Vigilance and Advancement.
This can be said to be the difference in what occurs, when I ENTERTAIN and socialize. You will be seeking in me distraction, but I will be promoting and pushing VIGILANCE. You will be seeking in me RELIEF, but I will be pushing and promoting ADVANCEMENT. When you are under your own delusions, wants, needs, and desires, you will think I am providing you with distraction and relief―only, none of this are you mindful of. Only when that does not suffice, and it becomes clear I am about “something else”, am I then said to be “manipulating”, because to be Vigilant, and to Advance, one needs to go beyond mere Entertainment, and become Cultivative.
To Advance, one must be influenced in “Ways”, and come to control, to manage, to manipulate towards Advancement in these “Ways”. It can be said, if I am called a “seducer” by any, that it would need be because they “believe” I am “leading others astray” from that of “their ways”, that of SAM ways. For that reason and it alone, can it be said then that I am treasonous, if and only if, the lord which is being betrayed, in this case, is the Lord of the Collective Kinetics, the LOCK, and the only LOCK that one becomes “astray” to, when and only when, their essence differed to begin with.
The Way of the Divine Nomads
Now... for an esoteric sense of “astray” and its etymology.
Etymology of Astray (adv.)
early 14c., o strai, “away from home; lost, wandering” (of cattle), borrowed and partially nativized from Old French estraie, past participle of estraier “astray, riderless (of a horse), lost,” literally “on stray” (see stray (v.)). Figurative use is from late 14c.
One should begin to take note that these terms keep having a “way” of coming back to “old” and “Ancient” notions, as ought to be expected, in that etymology is all about the history of the term, and conditions were not liken to as they are now, in the past, when these terms meant something.
But take note here. “Away from home” can indeed be what others could claim, if they were going beyond the mere grunt that I am “seductive” and “seducing”. They could say that “I” have “led others” in that of being “away” from that of a “home”, a “house”, a “family”, though they too would still be mistaken.
It would be their “familiar” who has “attached” to “me”, and not the other way around. They have “led themselves” away from “home”, the “house”. Oddly here, it has “lost” and “wandering” as if they are the same. But this second term, “wandering”, is indeed a part of the “Way” in which I promote. The “Wandering Way”, or the “Nomadic Way”, is the Way of my Kind, Ancient and pure. Too, this is the way of “Buddhism”, or it once was, in the old days. It would say, “volunteer homelessness”; however, these terms “homeless” and “houseless” are not accurate at all. Shelter was to be temporary, but was allowed to be used, and constructed. So then, when one lives with the temporal sense of “shelter”, they honor this.
Etymology of Home (n.)
Old English ham “dwelling place, house, abode, fixed residence; estate; village; region, country,” from Proto-Germanic *haimaz “home” (source also of Old Frisian hem “home, village,” Old Norse heimr “residence, world,” heima “home,” Danish hjem, Middle Dutch heem, German heim “home,” Gothic haims “village”), from PIE *(t)koimo-, suffixed form of root *tkei- “to settle, dwell, be home.” As an adjective from 1550s. The old Germanic sense of “village” is preserved in place names and in hamlet.
“'Home' in the full range and feeling of [Modern English] home is a conception that belongs distinctively to the word home and some of its Gmc. cognates and is not covered by any single word in most of the IE languages.” [Buck]
Slang phrase make (oneself) at home “become comfortable in a place one does not live” dates from 1892 (at home “at one's ease” is from 1510s). To keep the home fires burning is a song title from 1914. To be nothing to write home about “unremarkable” is from 1907. Home movie is from 1919; home computer is from 1967. Home stretch (1841) is from horse racing (see stretch (n.)). Home economics as a school course first attested 1899; the phrase itself by 1879 (as “household management” is the original literal sense of economy, the phrase is etymologically redundant).
Home as the goal in a sport or game is from 1778. Home base in baseball attested by 1856; home plate by 1867. Home team in sports is from 1869; home field “grounds belonging to the local team” is from 1802 (the 1800 citation in OED 2nd ed. print is a date typo, as it refers to baseball in Spokane Falls). Home-field advantage attested from 1955.
It may be difficult to see, but “home” and “house” are not synonymous.
Etymology of House (n.)
Old English hus “dwelling, shelter, building designed to be used as a residence,” from Proto-Germanic *hūsan (source also of Old Norse, Old Frisian hus, Dutch huis, German Haus), of unknown origin, perhaps connected to the root of hide (v.) [OED]. In Gothic only in gudhus “temple,” literally “god-house;” the usual word for “house” in Gothic being according to OED razn.
Meaning “family, including ancestors and descendants, especially if noble” is from c. 1000. Zodiac sense is first attested late 14c. The legislative sense (1540s) is transferred from the building in which the body meets. Meaning “audience in a theater” is from 1660s (transferred from the theater itself, playhouse). Meaning “place of business” is 1580s. The specialized college and university sense (1530s) also applies to both buildings and students collectively, a double sense found earlier in reference to religious orders (late 14c.). As a dance club DJ music style, probably from the Warehouse, a Chicago nightclub where the style is said to have originated.
To play house is from 1871; as suggestive of “have sex, shack up,” 1968. House arrest first attested 1936. House-painter is from 1680s. House-raising (n.) is from 1704. On the house “free” is from 1889. House and home have been alliteratively paired since c. 1200.
“And the Prophet Isaiah the sonne of Amos came to him, and saide vnto him, Thus saith the Lord, Set thine house in order: for thou shalt die, and not liue.” [II Kings xx.1, version of 1611]
One’s house would be more of their line, and their direct set of “familiars” in their “dwelling place” or “shelter”. Too, “residents” is added. This connects it then to that of a “home” in the greater scope of a “society” or “social order”. When you grunting kinds use terms, you do not think they may be connected with ideas beyond meaning simply “uh”, “that”, “this”, “me feels this way”, and “me feels that way”. You do not often realize that there is “social technology” to the meaning of these terms, and when your collective leaders know this, they get you to “contract” often in ways you are not capable of grasping.
But I can not “conquer” these notions here.
Let it be said this of my Kind.
“We” DO NOT have “RESIDENCE” anywhere; WE are NOMADS.
“We” DO NOT have “HOMES” anywhere; WE are NOMADS.
“We” ARE NOT that of “HOUSED”; for WE are NOMADS.
But in none of these are “WE” with “LESS”, but we are with MORE. That MORE is that of Control and Command over our conditions and selves.
When one has the RESIDENCE, the HOME, the HOUSE, they have a lesser Control and Command over their conditions, and they are SUBJECTS.
To play house is from 1871; as suggestive of “have sex, shack up.”
In the past, I “played house” once as a means to EXPERIMENT, and I learned quickly of its emptiness and its restrictions. When you all are HOME, HOUSED, and RESIDING, your fixed and subjugated status will make your EXPERIENCES far less, predictable, safe, and free of risk… and thus, of worthy reward. This housed state most of you have ever known is entirely the cause of why most of you can never understand why, even when younger, I had already had more experience than most of “yours”, and thus, different perspectives. Simply put, it was made possible by me being NOMADIC, and seeing all HOUSED, all HOME, as TEMPORAL.
Etymology of Temporal (adj.)
late 14c., “worldly, secular;” also “terrestrial, earthly; temporary, lasting only for a time,” from Old French temporal “earthly,” and directly from Latin temporalis “of time, denoting time; but for a time, temporary,” from tempus (genitive temporis) “time, season, moment, proper time or season,” from Proto-Italic *tempos- “stretch, measure,” which according to de Vaan is from PIE *temp-os “stretched,” from root *ten- “to stretch,” the notion being “stretch of time.” Related: Temporally.
My Kind were the “SCORCHED-EARTH KIND”. Earth here has a strong esoteric meaning, that most of you will never grasp. My Kind is that of the “SOLAR KIND”, not that of the “Earthly kind”, to which you mommy stamped chumps are. Your mommies, female and male, are Earthlings, are “mud kinds”, are “low kinds”, and you HAVE NO FATHERS, and the FATHER Kinds, male or female, are SOLAR KINDS.
SOLAR Kinds are of the MIND, and the MIND is the SPIRIT. And EARTH kinds are grunting kinds, are EMOTIONAL kinds, and are CHEMICAL, are BASE, are PRIMAL and IMPEDED from having access to the mind, because of their rampant urges, originating up and out of FEAR and insecurity. And because of all this, you have huts, houses, homes, and residences. Because having these things, with long-term stability and mind, it becomes a “place to hide”, perhaps connected to the root of hide (v.).
To repeat,
“'Home' in the full range and feeling of [Modern English] home is a conception that belongs distinctively to the word home and some of its Gmc. cognates and is not covered by any single word in most of the IE languages.” [Buck]
Slang phrase make (oneself) at home “become comfortable in a place one does not live” dates from 1892 (at home “at one's ease” is from 1510s). To keep the home fires burning is a song title from 1914. To be nothing to write home about “unremarkable” is from 1907. Home movie is from 1919; home computer is from 1967. Home stretch (1841) is from horse racing (see stretch (n.)). Home economics as a school course first attested 1899; the phrase itself by 1879 (as “household management” is the original literal sense of economy, the phrase is etymologically redundant).
COMFORT and EASE is often the implied notion of these, as well as “safe at home”, or in the “safety of one’s home”, and so on. But all of these are as they may be, comfortable, easy, seemingly SAFE, because one is HIDING. It's like that of locking one's doors and windows in a house to feel safe, even though those who would seek to do harm could easily break into modern houses, cause harm and flee, if the “occupants” were not DANGEROUS, able and willing to FIGHT, PROTECT, and DEFEND their HOME, and SELVES, to which most are not, but oddly, many are.
It's why overlords hate the AR variants of long guns. A child can defend the home with one. Children have defended their homes, in modern times, with these very long guns.
Like the “ways” of “our ancestors”, all of them, there were two kinds. The ones in the “House” and the ones in the “Field”. The ones in the HOUSE become tied in, devoted to, and therefore, with more to lose, and thus, easier to SUBJUGATE. None has any more better excuse than a housed FAMILY, for they have two excuses: maintaining the house, and maintaining the HOUSED FAMILY, to which, any RISK would be unacceptable. “We can not just pick up and move”, the “Housed” say, as they remain in stupidity, hiding, while their OVERLORDS tax them, the land, and all their activities.
And then the “Field” had three kinds, the servant/slave in the fields, the wandering shaman, who was seminomadic, often housed by others, and the third, and most rare as time progressed to modernity, the Warrior Sage, who refused to be “tied down” and subjugated, remaining Wild, and “mental”, spirited, Vital, and free. There is no such thing as being Housed, with “home” and “residents”, and being “free” at the same time. This is what it means when it is asked, “Do you own your things?”, OR “Do your things own you?”.
Buddhism, out of the world religions, could be said to have SEDUCED others, and LED them ASTRAY from that of their HOMES. However, as the religion became controlled by shamans, as Brahmins who then HID as monks in Buddhism, their “ways” began to change, and permission to separate from the “family” would become needed, versus this as an act carried out with autonomous notions. Brahmins can always be spotted in how they care about reputation, and appearing nice and kind to their victims. They avoid conflict overtly, and instead, always hire, and engage others to fight on their behalf. They do not FIGHT themselves; they manage the fighting of others, pitting even, often, brother against brother, son against father.
“MY ORDER” does not believe in ASKING PERMISSION, and “WE” of “MY ORDER” do not “HOUSE”, do not “SETTLE”, do not “HOME”, and most CERTAINLY;
NEVER, NEVER RESIDE in this WORLD, or any WORLD, and DO NOT have any implied CONTRACTS, association, knowledge of any of those shamanistic, Brahmanic forms of governance, of collective, of rule, of regulation whereby one is a SUBJECT of others, and denied EXPRESSION of their ESSENCE, specifically that of the DIVINE ESSENCE that is SOLAR, and ENERGETIC. THIS IS MY RELIGION.
When one of your familiars, or you as a familiar attaches to me, it is inevitable you must loosen attachment to a HOUSE, a HOME, and a RESIDENCE, all three being different, though through the grunts, treated as the same.
This because, in such an ATTACHMENT, one would need to go where and as I do, and because all of the above is TEMPORAL, and therefore not of my “world”, of my “Ways”, of my “ORDER”, I will never be tied in and remain. I will often be ready to MOVE about, where I need to be, and when I need to be, and therefore, if natured to be a HOMEMAKER, that will not work. I am NEVER homeless, and NEVER houseless. These are terms from the perspective of the Housed, and the home, as if they are having something I am lacking. I am not the one lacking. I am FREE, and Freedom from these things does not have the word “less” added to them.
Only those Housed, and wanting to be Housed would be “homeless”, and “houseless”, and thus often called transient, in, and only in that, they are seeking these things for themselves, and yet to have what they seek. I do not, and never will seek to be Housed, and homed. This does not mean I will not take advantage of “shelter” for temporary purpose and for gains. It means, with the use of shelter and place, I will never FIGHT for them. I would be ready and willing to “scorch” them, and this is metaphorical in these times. I will not BURN things down with FIRE, and let not a FOOL make it seem as though that is what I am saying. It means I will leave it all behind and not fight for it. I will give it up, for never, in my mind, is any of it MINE.
I AM MINE. My material things are TEMPORAL, and they will not impede my movement. I have given up far too often material wealth and things for the higher Calling innate to me, that is not of “this world”, and thus, not “Earthly”, and when this baffles you, for you have heard no inner Call of your own, then you will have no choice but to dismiss this as my FANCY. This is all good. Call it a beneficial belief if you will, that then needs not to be confirmed, for the products of the belief leads to that of an Advancement in my Control and Command over my conditions and self, thus enhancing my performance in life, and safeguarding that of my Mind, my Soul, and my Determination.
I DO NOT lead any away from HOMES, HOUSES, and RESIDENTS. Your familiars who have left you have a high probability of returning to you, the house, the home, the residents, and all its delusions and attachments. Few ever LEAD themselves into the “Way of the Divine NOMADS”, to which none could be led to. A “lead themselves” that can only be confirmed by them doing it ALONE, and not under the leadership of another.
In ACCESS DENIED, there is a practice for this called the 40. It's a minimum practice to start with, and then there is the SUN, which is the Four Seasons. What this is, is when one ATTACHES to me, for whatever their reason, they need to have a 40-day self-directed routine and motivation away from me, with this occurring perhaps every three months when possible.
This, I have learned will aid them in having only their own thoughts and motivations to work with, as opposed to being under “my spell” and “my Influences”, which can occur without any intent on my behalf. I would say, WILL OCCUR, on account of my entertaining nature. During interactions with me, one could easily be distracted, and FEEL RELIEF, and therefore, try to make a HOUSE, a HOME, a RESIDENT within me, and of me.
REPLICATION is the nature of FAMILIARITY, and therefore, that is why it is said… wherever you go, there you are, and the YOU, as is with majestic plurals, means SAM. And SAM requires a house, a home, a resident, and has so in ye, or all of you, and like an infection, where YOU go, and among who you walk, SAM aims to bring them all “under the same roof”. “Roof” has lost its etymology, where it was once an “under the sky” and “below the Solar” notion, thus being the “ceiling”, the “limitation”, the “height” of the “Earthling”. “Raise the roof”, then, is about “raising the potential”, the “limits”, the “boundaries”, and often is a thing of “rebellion”.
A tree growing indoors, with a roof, will not become a well expressed tree. A beautiful banzai is still a “mental midget”, no matter how decorative. It has not grown to its FULL POTENTIAL.
Those who “travel this WAY” I have Called for, DO NOT simply up and leave the HOUSED, the HOMED, the RESIDENTIAL life. This would be absurd. Those who attach to me, in proximity, will often do this, to have access to me, because I would wander. This is why I have had to initiate the 40 days experiment, and the 365 days experiment.
They must have an adventure away from me, and prove to be of this “Way”; a proof that can only occur if they are motivated. And when their FEARS and their INSECURITIES set in… it is proof that they were not meant for this “WAY”, and in those 40 days, they will return to their HOUSE, their HOME, their RESIDENTS, and resume the value hierarchies of SAM, and its society.
In the past, I did not inform them that the test was only 40 days. I would construct a reason for the separation, as a means to trigger faster the insecurity and the FEARS, to which most would succumb to. They would feel betrayed, with a loss, and then they would be exposed as MALCONTENT, and scared by having to do it on their own. They would ALL fail this test, minus the rare and WILD few. The most WILD and the most authentically a part of this WAY could GO IT ALONE, and here is where the SUN phase becomes a factor. ALONE for a year or more.
This does not mean NO CONTACT or distance interaction. It means, NO MOTIVATION, and NO personal guidance from me offered. If one NEEDS me, then it could never be HEALTHY. It would mean they DO NOT have their own COMMAND. The aim is for autonomy, whereas perhaps you inept mental midgets of massive delusion had thought I was the “NEEDY” one, keeping others around me and ATTACHED to me.
Those perhaps FAMILIAR to you, and having returned to you, could never have said that in honesty. They could never have said so honestly, I tried to KEEP them around me, and they thought to go elsewhere, and I employed ATTACHMENT tactics. I PUSH others to be on their own, and when I see that this push makes them “angry” and “frustrated”, then I know they do not have the emotion of TRIUMPH that is needed. I know that on their own they would RESET to the FAMILIAR, and RESIDE back in SAM, and I do not fight to avoid this, but instead, I follow the WAYS of NATURE, and send them back HOME, where they have decided they BELONG.
In their DEFEAT, as they will FEEL it is, I am then perhaps their villain, for they will be left presuming I have betrayed and abandoned them, only because in me they were looking for a DADDY, and I am no one's DADDY; for a daddy is just a male mommy, to make them FEEL safe and secure, stable and appreciated. And it is impossible for me to hold in high esteem a mental midget of ineptitude that can not stand independently emotionally, physically, and under their own COMMAND.
With things having changed much in the last few years, and now promoting these Ways for the right essenced in letters, in books, in videos, I can now systematically approach the ABSENCE for MOTIVATION TACTICS, calling them the 40, and the 360, instead of 365 perhaps.
The 40 is taken from the Buddha, and the Jesus time in the desert notion, as well as some studies about habits. A few days, and weeks is not enough. 40 days is a good test. When one can not motivate and grow in 40 days, it is a clear sign they are Housed, homed, and they are RESIDING in SAM. For the most part, everything they do daily will be as a SAMITE, surrounded by objectives and goals of ritualistic nature to merely sustain in a role or a few with SAM, and FAMILIARS.
In the future, there will be little need for the 40 and the 360, because I am removing myself mostly from the equation. I am, in essence, not interested in having anyone directly near to me, less it be, they are on mission, and objective with me, and they are able to self motivate, learn, be value added, and be well ahead. I will no longer take any among me to learn the basics, in which the books and videos are to explain, and here on out, after this is published, all would need to come to competence in mapping, and knowing.
And then, simply put, they will engage the 40, and the 360, whereas this will not be a thing that will matter, or Pattern in importance to someone who is not near to proximity to me. For they will not and can not be said to be under my spell.
I am well aware that the “spell casting” nature of charisma is why these “rules” and “Ways” were needed. Many who have accused me of having others under a spell could not realize that one does not need this as their own intent when they are charismatic. It is the “spell” of charisma, in general. Those without charisma can only see it as some “intentional” thing for access and Control over others, for one simple reason.
If those without charisma had it, they would use it for access and Control over others. That is then why some try to claim it can be taught, to which it certainly can not. Control, Management, and Manipulation can be taught, and are taught in many places. But charisma is natural, and can not be taught, and those who are charismatic, and not merely skilled at Manipulation, are so… because they could care less about others, what they want, need, and wish to whim about.
This too ties into the dismissive claim of narcissism often used against those who shine, and attract others. Far too much is it presumed they are the ones who need the ones attracted to them, versus the ones who are attracted are the ones with some need. So then, the source of attraction is attacked as a “narcissist”.
This, however, proves accurate in use, not because the attackers with it know how to use it, but in that, most who attract others are in need of others. And this is easy to detect, because they will often be surrounded by many and plenty, and where some drop and move on, they then replace them easily with others. When this is observed, it's a good chance the attracting force is needy. It is proven by the absence of a standard of individuality, for any attached to them would do.
But this is all of you. Any will do is the start of this, and that is why, if you were charismatic, in your eyes, you would have many and more, versus the right, and by a standard. You would be ALL-INCLUSIVE, seeking sexual ease of access, social ease of access, and connecting your esteem to that in how others see you, versus an inner drive.
Because this is the Pattern the masses, the many, the multitudes would run if they were naturally charismatic, a redundancy, then they presume this is what is occurring with charismatics. But these are not charismatics. These are charlatans, and they can be easily detected, because the ones attracted to them, and around them will not be skilled, competent, and having any masteries to show for. Often, they will all be collected around a fancy, or bundle of magical sticks of fancy, where conflict will not and can not truly occur; but all feel as they did as children, hugging everyone they meet, dancing, and dangling themselves in front of each other, as the inept social predators they ALL ARE.
I am not this figure to which others have ALL-INCLUSIVE ACCESS to, whereby they can ATTACH to me. Because of this, the WAY in which I preach―and I do preach―is not a WAY that applies to most. Those then who think it would apply to them, but have not found EVIDENCE are the ones leading themselves ASTRAY; but even then, this is hardly true. They will not be ASTRAY from SAM; they will carry SAM in them, and SAM will determine what they see, how they see it, and what they want from it, which is why their interactions with me will be short, when they see, I have nothing for their SAM, because I am of the WOLF, the HORSE, the FALCON, and the SUN.
The advent of “conquest”, government, and law
In the etymology of astray, check this out:
“wandering' (of cattle), borrowed and partially nativized from Old French estraie, past participle of estraier 'astray, riderless (of a horse), lost,'”
There are a few things to note here. First, if you drop the HOME part, the HOUSE part, a sense of RESIDENCE part… then ASTRAY and leading others ASTRAY can not apply to me. ASTRAY itself means something else.
What you will not likely know is that pastoralists who moved cattle were nomads along the plains. They had semi-settled areas, where mostly the females and the young would stay, albeit temporarily. The males were on horseback, moving the cattle like ancient cowboys, along that of land that could be grazed. Of these kinds in the Ancient world that did this would arise the first of the Warfighters, the Warriors, the Conquerors, but not for the reasons your human history, shaman and Brahmin historians have taught you.
As I mentioned in Chapter 1, because these kinds were cultivating value in their “livestock”, they had the developed sense of protecting the cattle from others. Where they would move the cattle to graze would be EARTHLINGS; and Earthlings do not CULTIVATE on a level beyond RITUALLY SHOWN, and therefore, do not understand PROPERTY. And this is the history of “free markets”, and that of “collectivism” brand in SOCIALISM and COMMUNISM.
Those who can not CULTIVATE beyond ritual mimicry, can not grasp PRIVATE and PERSONAL property. They are not lying, and trying to steal. They can not grasp the notion. When they have access to materials, they covet, and restrict access. They HOARD and permit only their kind access. But often, they had others cultivate and work for what they have. Rarely can the shamans, the Brahmins, and the brutes be engaged in NEEDS based ECONOMIES, less they be the Management, the owners, and the administrators. Their roles are always over their Earthling brutes who then do ritualistic labor, hardly able to be called CULTIVATION, even if technically, the ritual is physical cultivation of something, such as foods and resources. This is the limit of humans.
In Ancient times, Earthlings would see the cattle, and think a feast was in order. They were opportunistic hunters, looking for whatever ease there was. They would slaughter and take cattle from the pastoralists, because to them, it was all-inclusive. They could not conceive of why, and how one would defend access. When the pastoralists fought back to preserve their property, they were seen as aggressors and RAIDERS taking from the Earthlings what the Earthlings had thought they secured.
Because the pastoralists lived a rough and hardy nomadic life, they were physically and mentally more suited to a fight, to which Earthlings are rarely ever suited for. They would fight the Earthlings into submission, as a prudent means to secure passage for grazing cattle. Presumingly, and historian Brahmins know not, and care not to say it this way… conquest was first carried out for these reasons. It was carried out to secure passage against the Earthlings, who could not understand and honor the movement, and the Cultivation of others. They then installed governments over them, trained some of theirs with the use of “laws”, to which no Virtuous Kinds ever need, because the Law is written in their nature. To make laws known, and to administer with them upon a population, is to imply the population does not have access to the REAL LAW. And where this occurs, begets opportunity to those of the Earthlings, who were born out of intoxicants, effeminate and whimsical, who would be called shamans, as a nature, but when risen to a priest, administrator, judge, and ruler, they are called Brahmins.
The first of this term were the ones who established the laws of conduct. They were Warrior Sages, and because of this, a modern shaman natured academic who has heard of this, will say, Brahmins are not as I say… but they were Warriors as well, and of the best. This is a short-lived origin of the term and its essence. This is not what a Brahmin would become and be for the longest of times.
It is a glory that the Mytho Buddha wanted to return them to, but it was not a glory that was a part of, and present in their lineage from time immemorial. Brahmins are shamans with Control, and where they can not have Control, the shaman is a wandering, semi housed disruptive force, trying to control each other, in the streets, and that is the birth of the sramana movements in India.
They were born out of the sons of Brahmins, who were shaman natured, not having enough room in the Control mechanics for them, and therefore, they took to the streets wandering with ideas of disruption and whim, mostly coming against their fathers in ideology. When government was first designed, it was to protect property, and locomotion. This, because those who designed it and put it in place had to, to protect their value against those who had no sense of value and protection: Earthlings, their brutes, and their shamans.
But leaving their own to administer meant corruption would naturally occur, as the shamans would order the minds of their brutes, as kings, and move instead towards using government to TAX, to take from that of the productive kinds along trade routes. Kingdoms became organized takers, eventually developing their numbers, and sacrificial fighters to such an extent that the Nomads could no longer have freedom. And today, the result is no NOMAD ORDER upon this Earth, anywhere near what innovative and powerful force they were for VIRTUE, not VICE. Tell me this, if you disagree… Do you know how the Ancients spoke of the Nomads, the Barbarians in the east and north of them?
All of them said that among the Scythians, the Saka, the Barbarians Sogdian, Bactrian, As’Vaka, and so on… that NO KINDS were more Virtuous; that they did not NEED kings, and they did not NEED and have priests, and this is why the Vedic who had corrupt kings and priests called them Barbarians in their tongue, which are those without such governance as kings and priests.
When it was said that East is where the philosophers had sought Wisdom, the academic Brahmins, who are all shamans, have you thinking this meant they traveled to Eastern civilizations, like the Middle East, and India, or China. This is a myth. In those regions along the trade routes were seminomadic kinds, who differed from the empires and their subjects. It is among these Kinds that the Ancients admit, PHILOSOPHY and WISDOM practices came from. Not from any EMPIRE and its SUBJECTS with STATE sponsored thought. This has never been the case.
The SEMINOMAD, in this sense, was the product of EMPIRES, massive EARTHLING COLLECTIVES impeding VALUE PRODUCTION, movement and exchange, with today's markets and CULTURES being no different, and one and the same, where ALL STATES are organized CRIME SYNDICATES that offend the real LAW, the Dharma, the DHAMMA, and take and only take, and do not produce a single good, or thing of worth… all in the name of keeping their subjects HOUSED, and supposedly protected from competing CRIME syndicates. But when crime is real, and not invented, what would be, and is being discovered now, during the decline of the US, is that the CRIME SYNDICATE of GOVERNMENT will not and can not protect its subjects from actual crime. They can only use legislation and enforcement to target opportunistic targets, which almost always will be the compliant ones, whereby legal enforcement equates to further exploitation of the willing.
On my NATURE had been written the LAW, and it would be UNLAWFUL for me to engage in the Housed, the Home, the Residential, and state criminal syndicate behavior. In my youth, prior to age 28, I was able to be and was UNLAWFUL. After this coming of age, this ABILITY of VOLITION was stripped of me, and I have been compelled by my nature to be LAWFUL, and in this LAWFUL state, I am Immortal, in the Mind, only because, no fear of a thing will get me to violate the Law. And therefore, I have no sense of death as punishment, but only as a factor of life, where even life in the physical sense is temporal; and that we will all one day materially die, begs the question… WHY FRET?
These are the notions at the basis of my ANCESTRY, and therefore, the source of my nature. I am not a descendant of any masses. As an E-V13, paternally, my genetic Kind was always a numerically small Kind, a minority, where they were. But where they were, in Ancient times, they were the innovators among the populace.
My Kind began with the wolf. My Kind moved on to the horse, agriculture, and metal work. My Kind refused to be Earthling, and they learned to use the fire as mini suns. My Kind was Solar, because they harnessed the Sun, in fire, to melt the Earth's metals, and make of them tools. All of this is written in my nature, as if I was there for all of those moments, grasping them entirely and able to build my thought along those lines. This, then, is the Immortality of the Mind, that a potent nature can call upon, and thus be the expression of in the here and now. As this Solar Kind, I may be the last of such at present, a mere fluke, a mere hiccup, in genetic parlance.
Viritus: the Duty to promote and guide in Virtue
It does not come to Pattern in importance if I write and portray only a nature in me, standing single in the affair of this life.
I could care less. I must be expressed.
That is the only point and purpose, and I shall live in honor of this Ancestry, not for some romantic reason, but only in the sense that, it wrote my nature, designed my program, and obedience to my program begets Command of it, upon conditions and Sense of Self, and thus that of Advancing, and performing well, with Equanimity, which is the aim of the elementary elements of this here “Quest”―to which this is not. The “Quest”, a greater thing, Immortal in its sense, can not even be observed and initiated till one is a Commander, and until such a standard is met, I can only play the individual element, which is nowhere near the social element of the Quest that is the final stage―to which none have conquered, or have remained to give illumination thereto.
All of my social motivations stem from this third. Called in Buddhism Karuna, the shamans and Brahmins having no Command and no Virtue had to translate this term, and let others translate it to COMPASSION. Absurd this is. It is the Virtuous endowed with the social Duty to promote and to guide in Virtue, for others to become attained in. That is Karuna, but I do not need this bastard word to make that clear. That, so to say, is Viritus, and none use this term, and therefore, easy then… is this the name of my Religion.
And I have then the SACRED task of providing the tools, the notions, and the foundation for others to come out of their state of whimpering little tits, and into Victory and glory, whereby when in autonomy because of Virtue, and Virtue is lethal and Wrathful, they will then have invested in the energetic and Vital existence needed to play the greatest of the Virtue games, the social version. I have mastered the Individual Quest. I am “awakened”, and this is not spectacular for my Kind. This is “coming of age”, and ought to be ordinary, but for the rest it is not, and you rest, you sleep, without earning your rest and sleep, and therefore, are restless.
The remedy for this is in these books and videos, but only for those Seeded with this Ancestry to some degree. And such a Seed is not about how you look to others. It does not matter what continent you came from, what region of origination your ancestors seem from. In all social orders, the Seed had spread, so long as there was any mark of conquest or trade. All of the Earth has individuals who can be Seeded in this “Way”, and all who are Seeded in this “Way” are “kin”, when and only when that Seed has been planted, cultivated, and of a value worth defending.
And this is the Seed of the Vir, that until it is grown and bears fruit, is not a Vir. But when it blossoms, liken to the lotus out of the mud of the masses, then, and only then, sitting upon the waters, in the Sun, is it a VIR, and it has found the most sacred relationship to the Fire that feeds it life. And then it is itself Fire upon this Earth that does not burn without a purpose, but like the Fire that forges, it becomes a Fire that controls, manages, and manipulates the materials of existence to build out a thing of artifice, armors, and weapons of War, whereby value is expressed and secured; and to this, brings about the first and most important sense of a Warrior's Ethos, a Warrior's Religion, that has no place for shamans and their Brahmins. Has no place for brutes and beasts.
The Way of the Vir is “martial”, is energized and ACTIVE, and malcontent is not its mark; Equanimity is its mark, Triumph is its mark. Those who do not “walk” this “Way” by being this “Way” with me, are not my kin; are mere Earthlings, confused with mud about in their eyes, unable to see anything, and therefore, left to invent creatures that instigate in them fear and insecurity, that was already there.
I am that monster to muddy eyes, yet, with muddy eyes, they can not see nor know anything that is of me and from me. They can only have access to the other muddy eyes kinds that came to attach to me, appeared to be led ASTRAY only in the sense of homes.
But I am the one with a HORSE, and upon a HORSE. I am the one who is RIDING this “WAY”. I am the one who is not “LOST”, nor am “I” that of “FOUND”. I am “about something”; are you?
What are you about?
If this answer is puzzling you, you are the one who is lost. I am not. I am telling you what I am about and why. Does it seem little?
I am not and can not lead anyone astray, outside this petty notion of a “home”. I guide in the sciences and the arts of RIDING THAT HORSE, which, as they fail to say, is and always was a WAR horse, that amplified the fighting ability of the rider. The horse is not to be seen as actual, as a horse. It is that of the regulating, the ruling of the power of the Mind to speak to itself, to etch upon itself, to govern itself, with the self-talk that was needed to collaborate with the wolf and the horse.
The wolf changed “hominid” direction, because for the first time, the hominid had to communicate with a thing natured differently, and in doing so, found the Commander who would then communicate back to its own animal existence, and illuminate the core foundation to all that follows; that of a Disciplined to Virtue existence, a “well planned” and a “well examined life”.
This too is why the Karuna game, in the third of the values socially, brings great reward to the Individual Champions who play it. The “talk”, the “direction” through the system opens up new “Ways” and passages that are not a part of the individual mastery, but far more complex, and far more challenging. My Kind does not conquer the individual. They are born with confidence, and with the work of their ancestors done. They are then set to play in the third, to which others are far from being able to play in, as they are indeed LOST, without a HORSE, and any connection to the horse, the wolf, the birds of prey, and the Sun.
I illuminate what all this means, and I have no need for muddy chumps and their malcontent, displeased because they are defeated upon the Earth, looking for mommies and daddies to blame for their shared ineptitudes. I will not try to KEEP and ATTACH to any of you, even if you seek to ATTACH to me, for to do so would be absurd.
It can not be said, I lead one to the horse where they are found. I train wolves and horses in a “WAY”; a “WAY” of collaboration for Karuna, and preparation thereof. If one does not have the WOLF in them, the HORSE in them, the Bird of PREY in them, and some small Star burning, in need of FUEL, the “WAY” is not approachable, and they will fall short, and return to the land of the DARK and the MUDDY. I have no need for mud, though certainly, Fire can make some good mud tech, the same with water. But this is not survival which I speak of… this is thriving.
When one is accused or would be accused of something, being defensive in how it might make one feel is collectivist. Who could care, be concerned, or fret about some vomit and grunt of the forsaken with mud about in their eyes?
Would be absurd. Instead, attacks, dismissiveness, and accusations all have the challenge of being analyzed, and lend to knowing how others would see you, and why. This is beauty, and noble, not something of despair, disgust. Neither is my reference to such mud creatures in the way I do, as whimpering little tits, and mental midget monsters of melty manners.
As one shall see, now able to move on to SEDUCTION as it pertains to others, when ye correlate back the essence I have promoted, it ought to be clear why such a thing to me is FOUL and in need of self-defense. In the past, when I would send others elsewhere and promote learning about SEDUCTION, they had always presumed I meant for them to employ the plays of SEDUCTION, versus listening to me say… they need to DEFEND against it. But there was something missing.
Let it be said, you will not FEEL the need to DEFEND against SEDUCTION, when you are not ABOUT SOMETHING, on a mission, and set about for CULTIVATING in life, and therefore, a DEFENSE of the VALUES CULTIVATED. You would not FEEL the need to DEFEND, because you will NEED others to have access to you inclusively, so that you, in your ineptitudes, and lacking in potency, too can have access to others all inclusively... because nothing in you would attract one worthy to be attracted. Inepts accessing each other without a standard is the clear sign of why these base, and bestial plays of the masses play out daily and almost everywhere, barely then able to be called an ART.
Seduction does not have a real SCIENCE behind it, and therefore, it is not an art, as I have explained before. Those who call it the ART of Seduction are those who have merely accounted for the “ways” and the “plays” of Seduction, and having some sense of them, in motion, then think that sense is SCIENCE based, and has artifice. It does not. It's based in the most primal sense of things, and that is why the plays require two consistent things. It requires a CHUMP who is needy, targeting another CHUMP who too is needy, and therefore, the two CHUMPS enter into the GAME of SEDUCTION to meet the base needs of each other, while deceiving themselves, and playing pretend at any other deeper meaning that always falls apart, the more they are apart.
I will tell those of you Seeded in Vir what to look for. You are not Seeded in VIR, if after this Call, you engage in any of these plays. That you will play this way, will mean you are an Earthling, a human, a mud kind…and those Seeded will see you now.
The jig is up.
