“Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand.

  • Matthew 12:25

It’s almost impossible to walk through any inner-Portland neighborhood and not see at least one of the above-pictured signs adorning someone’s lawn.  The signs themselves are the product of a group called “Nasty Women Get Shit Done PDX” (PDX being the airport abbreviation for Portland) and came about as a reaction to the election of Donald Trump to the presidency.  The group itself was formed to “actively resist the xenophobia, racism, misogyny, ableism, anti-LGBTQ, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic, anti-Earth platform and policies of the new administration.”

The Nasty Women and their supporters view these various “anti-isms” as the antithesis of what they see as “their America”, and warranted or not, President Trump became the symbol of these things.  But the real problem with all of this “Our America” business lies in that the America that exists (or is desired to exist) for those that sport this sign does not represent the America and the American ideals of many, many of their fellow Americans.

America has become a nation so diverse in values and ideologies that it no longer really has any.  There is no longer any sort of real unifying common overarching mythos or set of ideals to unite the American people.  Meanwhile the old unifying values of freedom, liberty and self-reliance, along with the mythos of the Founding Fathers are quite-often scoffed at by those who see the aforementioned things as relics of a “white supremacist capitalist patriarchy“.  The leaders from this school of thought have long-sought to replace the old American mythos with one that is a complete inversion of the original.

Although the new American mythos has its origins with the Neo-Marxist cultural revolution of the 1960s, the roots of the rift in ideology goes back to before the American Civil War and stems from the differences between urban industrial society and rural agricultural society.  The modern left-leaning “liberal” ideology comes forth from the cosmopolitanism of urban society and reflects the needs, desires and values of such a society.  Meanwhile, the modern right-leaning “conservative” ideology derives from the homogeneity of rural society and reflects the needs, desires and values the people within it.

However, when the needs and values of one group clash with another, conflict arises, and with conflict there is the inevitable creation of the “enemy”.  This is what happened with the Civil War and only continued through the 20th century and the rise of Hollywood and the saturation of Neo-Marxism throughout academia and the media.  The white rural “redneck” is consistently portrayed as being the lowest form of humanity, possessing the both most ridiculous and vile character traits by Hollywood and pop-culture, as well as the “news” media.

This cultural rift is what led to the so-called “whitelash” that caused so many urban and urban-minded Americans to experience a severe and traumatic cognitive dissonance, as they were faced with the shock that the America and the “American values” they believed in (the ones that are portrayed as near-monolithic by the media and academia) is NOT the America that a large section of fellow Americans want or believe in.  This in turn led to said section of Americans being labelled as “wrong” in their morality by a less-than-humble establishment media and their parrots in social media.

However, I would argue that this ultimately isn’t a matter of anyone being ignorant, immoral or “evil”, but rather yet another affirmation that the virtues and ideals of urban cosmopolitan society are NOT universal and do not work for those who live in rural America (despite the haughty ivory tower pundits who insist they do).

When the virtues and ideals of one party don’t align with the other, that means the relationship isn’t working.  So how long do you stay in a relationship with someone whose values are the polar opposite of yours?  How long do you stay in a relationship that is filled with resentment?

How long can America maintain this relationship that isn’t working?  And how long should it?

Namaste and God Bless.








“Sometimes people don’t want to hear the truth because they don’t want their illusions destroyed.”

  • Friedrich Nietzsche

Most people don’t care about facts.  Most people don’t care about evidence.  Most people don’t care about logic or reason.  And most people certainly don’t want anything to do with truth. What most people care about is whatever they can latch onto that affirms what is typically an emotionally-charged worldview.  They want to affirm the belief systems that are supported by the leaders of their “gang”- regardless of how contradictory many of these beliefs are. As a result people are often times hostile and completely intolerant of anything counter to all that worldview.

Modern society is ruled by identity cults, herd mentality and a sycophantic worship of authority figures, celebrity “idols”, and the so-called expert class. And all of this is because we never really grew up. The old trials and initiations that transformed children into adults are gone, and in their place was GIVEN TO US a culture ruled by dogmatism, playground mentality, and of course, fear. Emotional reasoning, need for instant gratification, this incessant desire to be coddled, and a complete lack of any real self-sufficiency have become the virtues of the modern western mind.

Seek Strength.  Seek Virtue.  Seek Truth.  Seek the Light.


Namaste and God Bless.




“Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”

– Luke 22:36

When the argument for guns is centered on pleasure, leisure, or even rights/entitlements, we are missing the mark (pun intended) and once again demonstrating how far removed from Nature we are and how deep into our own collective Artifice (i.e. Mass Mind) we have become.  There are no “rights” when it comes to owning a weapon in any real or absolute sense outside of man’s law.  However, there is a RESPONSIBILITY that every organism on this planet has to be capable of defending themselves and their progeny (except the ones that try to eat the babies…).  And for humans, I would extend that responsibility outwards to those whom we have pledged some sort of bond of allegiance or service to through exercising virtues like Honor and Courage, and the underlying Love and Compassion.

In the world of men, weapons or “force multipliers” have been part of that equation since for at least as long as man has had a physical body, if not longer.  It’s the tool as weapon, which has allowed man to survive our descent through the densest of physical form and existence.  In other words, until all the guns in the world disappear or are rendered obsolete (and they aren’t, or else the government wouldn’t use them), owning one and knowing how to use it safely and effectively isn’t living in fear, it’s practicing common sense and taking ownership of the defense of you and your loved ones.  The real fear is among those who argue against all of this; the fear of the spectacularly (although statistically unlikely) violent death and the weapons that cause them.

Namaste and God Bless.





Whether we are talking about the conquest and subjugation of indigenous populations by European colonialism; the displacement and replacement of white western populations by the massive influx of migrants from the developing world; or the enslavement of all peoples under corporate globalism and globalization, the Spiritual Laws of Nature and Creation remain the same.  THERE ARE NO VICTIMS HERE.  There are only those who live in alignment with the Laws of Spirit and those who do not.  When we as individuals and as a people are spiritually strong and live according to Nature’s Laws, we cannot be conquered.  It is only when we allow ourselves and our cultures to become decadent, weak, and unaligned with the Laws of Nature and Creation that we can become slaves.





“In order for something to be spiritually true, it MUST be scientifically true.”
– Father Paul Blighton: founder of the Holy Order of MANS

In a blog article out of The Mystery of Christ from back in 2012 entitled, “Religion, nationalism and the illusion of separation”, author Jim Myst states:

Both nationalism and religion have also resulted in much division and bloodshed because they are founded upon the illusion of separation.”

Myst then cites an unnamed author with the following quote:

We are born into the world as blank slates. Every moment from birth we develop an identity which mirrors the environment within which we grow… As we identify with the not self, we act out according to these false beliefs. This is how men and women are able to rationalize killing one another… Our self centered perspective enables us to easily believe that “they” are the bad guys because they are different. The concept of “me” and “mine” and we will fight for what is “ours.” This mentality destroys the goodness, compassion and connectedness which is within us all. This fragments whole peoples, resulting in polarization and division… This is not who we truly are, this is who we have become.”

The above pair of quotations sums up the general attitudes of the New Age Movement towards the resurgence of nationalism and the increasing polarity of the socio-political discourse in the West. But is this true? Is this desire to reassert and maintain cultural and even ethnic homogeneity in the West something that “is not who we truly are” but rather an assertion of the “illusion of separation”?


The news pundits and the academics have been lamenting for quite some time now, the “scourge” of this new Nationalistic fervor that is sweeping the West and how it threatens the “Liberal World Order” of mercantile “interconnectedness”.  Nationalism, of course, is the more modern, statist and arguably less organic form of a far more ancient human social institution- Tribalism.

While I am not a scientific materialist by any means, and I certainly do not agree with a great deal of the science around human evolution as it is taught by modern-day academics, I will concede that humans by and large are a “pack animal” (or in a more modern sense, a “herd animal”) – we are tribal.  I say this with absolute certainty because despite the best attempts of modernity, it is empirically observable in pretty much all human activity.

While we have constructed a largely cosmopolitan civilization and a global marketplace that tends to somewhat obfuscate this truth, when we see events like the clashes in Charlottesville and elsewhere, with one “team” pitted in violence against another, we realize that despite Coca-Cola ads and political marketing slogans of “We Are One”, human tribalism is not going anywhere anytime soon- if at all.

American biologist and University Research Professor Emeritus at Harvard, E.O. Wilson stated the following in a 2012 article for Time Magazine entitled, “Why Humans, Like Ants, Need a Tribe”:

Have you ever wondered why, in the ongoing presidential campaign, we so strongly hear the pipes calling us to arms? Why the religious among us bristle at any challenge to the creation story they believe? Or even why team sports evoke such intense loyalty, joy, and despair?

The answer is that everyone, no exception, must have a tribe, an alliance with which to jockey for power and territory, to demonize the enemy, to organize rallies and raise flags.

And so it has ever been. In ancient history and prehistory, tribes gave visceral comfort and pride from familiar fellowship, and a way to defend the group enthusiastically against rival groups. It gave people a name in addition to their own and social meaning in a chaotic world. It made the environment less disorienting and dangerous. Human nature has not changed. Modern groups are psychologically equivalent to the tribes of ancient history. As such, these groups are directly descended from the bands of primitive humans and prehumans.

When groups of “anti-racists” like ANTIFA protest and attack White Nationalists because they have an exclusionary tribalism (as any real tribalism is inevitably exclusive in some capacity) that is deemed as “fascist”, “hateful” and “dangerous”, they are being tribal and exclusionary as well. They are a group that is banded together for a common purpose and they see themselves as having a common enemy, whom they hate and want banished from society, not necessarily because of what they look like, but rather because of what they believe in.


Whenever you acknowledge that there are groups of people who have separate and conflicting interests from your own, you are being tribal. Whenever you join a club or group, regardless of how “open” they are, you are being tribal- if simply because of the fact there will inevitably those that will be on the “outside” of that group.  Families are tribal.  Political Parties are tribal. Religions are tribal.  Gangs are tribal.  Places of employment are tribal.  The military is tribal.  Sports teams are tribal.  12-step groups are tribal.  Sewing clubs are tribal.

A tribe is a group of people that have a shared identity and mission, giving them an inevitable separateness from those who do not share that identity and mission. And because they have a shared identity and mission, they have an interest in promoting that above the identities and missions of other groups. While the expressions of this have become at the same time more sophisticated and more superficial, it is ultimately ingrained in our biology, as E.O. Wilson states:

The drive to join is deeply ingrained, a result of a complicated evolution that has led our species to a condition that biologists call eusociality. “Eu-,” of course, is a prefix meaning pleasant or good: euphony is something that sounds wonderful; eugenics is the attempt to improve the gene pool. And the eusocial group contains multiple generations whose members perform altruistic acts, sometimes against their own personal interests, to benefit their group. Eusociality is an outgrowth of a new way of understanding evolution, which blends traditionally popular individual selection (based on individuals competing against each other) with group selection (based on competition among groups). Individual selection tends to favor selfish behavior. Group selection favors altruistic behavior and is responsible for the origin of the most advanced level of social behavior, that attained by ants, bees, termites—and humans.

Yet another fairly recent Time Magazine article from May 2014 entitled “What Science Says About Race and Genetics” goes even further and states that due to discoveries in the human genome, it can be asserted that tribalism has a racial/ethnic component in us that it literally part of our DNA- further cementing the scientific “correctness” of human tribalism :

Conventionally, these social differences are attributed solely to culture. But if that’s so, why is it apparently so hard for tribal societies like Iraq or Afghanistan to change their culture and operate like modern states? The explanation could be that tribal behavior has a genetic basis. It’s already known that a genetic system, based on the hormone oxytocin, seems to modulate the degree of in-group trust, and this is one way that natural selection could ratchet the degree of tribal behavior up or down.

Human social structures change so slowly and with such difficulty as to suggest an evolutionary influence at work. Modern humans lived for 185,000 years as hunters and gatherers before settling down in fixed communities. Putting a roof over one’s head and being able to own more than one could carry might seem an obvious move. The fact that it took so long suggests that a genetic change in human social behavior was required and took many generations to evolve.

Tribalism seems to be the default mode of human political organization. It can be highly effective: The world’s largest land empire, that of the Mongols, was a tribal organization. But tribalism is hard to abandon, again suggesting that an evolutionary change may be required.”

DNA and the human genome are not discussed a great deal in regards to mainstream spiritual and religious philosophy. However, one only needs look at what is left of the indigenous tribal traditions with their concepts of ancestral “blood memory”, to see that these new discoveries of modern science indeed have a supporting spiritual tradition behind them- a rather ancient one at that. DNA has both a material and immaterial quality to it, and research done on the mysterious “junk DNA” has drawn conclusions that it could perhaps be a repository of “past lives”.


As I concluded in my previous article on Metagenetics, it would appear that the genome is the structure that connects the purely electrical spiritual body to the physical body, and as such, would give a spiritual component to things like ancestry, ethnicity, race and the tribalism that is inherent in these things.  There is a reason they say, “blood is thicker than water”- because it holds truth.

In his book, “World Priest”, Rev. Michael Maciel states the following:

The physical substance of blood carries the spiritual vibrations of the heaven worlds—the intelligence and characteristics of our soul. Just as our soul is in continuous contact with God, so is our blood in continuous contact with our soul, primarily through the air we breathe (pneuma, ruach, spirit, prana). And in turn, our physical structure, our body, is in continual contact with our blood. Correlation. These systems are nested within each other; they form an unbroken chain from the Godhead to our being in the world…

Reach up through the octaves of your being and feel the spiritual presence within your blood—the light, the consciousness, the Christ. This is where your life is! When you focus your attention there, you are inviting the Christ Being into your body. Your blood is your point of connection.”

And while DNA, genetics, and the spiritual component of blood often tends to be absent from New Age discourse, one concept that does pop up quite regularly is the idea of “Soul Groups”- a term that seems to have originated in the work of early 20th century psychic and mystic Edgar Cayce. Through his work, Cayce found that humans travel in “soul groups,” which are people that incarnate together so they can work on whatever life lesson is necessary. These are the people that are brought into our lives in both a familial capacity as well as those people that we develop strong bonds with- the brothers and sisters in our “tribe”.

Other New Age thinkers have since expounded upon this idea, and different ‘categories’ of soul groups are often named. Likewise, Cayce and his ilk are not without their controversies and inconsistencies, which is almost inevitable with any attempt to interpret the spiritual realms, regardless of how gifted or “in tune” the interpreter. Regardless, the takeaway here is that this notion of the soul group points toward a deeper esoteric view around the concept of tribe. And with the understanding that the “Soul Body” is the substance which generates the Spiritual Body, we can begin to build a deeper picture of our tribal nature and how it fits the axiom of “As above, so below”.


One of the biggest criticisms of Christian European culture- from the Roman Catholic Church, to the Puritans, to Victorian England, to the modern American Fundamentalists- has been the fairly valid point that it has a repressive attitude toward sex and sexuality. The reproductive instinct is the second most powerful instinct we have. There is a lot of power in sexuality and the act of sexual intercourse (on many different levels)- and it is fairly certain that those in power knew this, which is why they sought to control and suppress it to something that was ultimately seen and shameful and “impure”, which became reflected in the various Christian societies. In many respects it could be concluded that Christian society feared sex.

Freud, though most certainly not without his faults, did get it right when he concluded that the conscious mind repressing base desires and instincts (specifically those of sexuality), would create a form of destructive neurosis that would play itself out on the level of both the individual and of society. This thinking would eventually culminate with the “Sexual Revolution” of the 1960s, which, for all its promotion of degenerate hedonism and toxic sexuality, did make sex something that was brought back into the light. The Sexual Revolution, along with the New Age Movement, was instrumental in allowing a more open, natural and even spiritual outlook on sex and sexuality to surface in Western culture.

But with the advancements towards embracing the second strongest drive into our culture, we have simultaneously moved towards increased repression of the first- survival; and in particular the way that the survival instinct surfaces in our evolutionary need for tribalism.   Humans, like most other animals, depend on cooperative groups with a common purpose to survive.  And like every other species in the animal kingdom, humans thrive amongst those that are most like them- birds of a feather flock together.

Like attracts like– this is a law of nature. This is pristine Nature, which is the opposite of the artificial mishmash of multiculturalism and of atomized “individuals” that we find in modern Western materialist society.  Lions and tigers do not live amongst one another- except in zoos and circuses, where they are reduced to caged dependents that live in an artificial environment, perform “tricks” for consumers and rely on an external authority for food and security…

Since the latter-half of the Second World War, we have been increasingly told that we need to become “global citizens”, who see and know nothing of borders, boundaries, or distinctions between groups, or even individuals- just like the global corporations who promote the exact same ideology and have put it on every commercial for every product they own, on every news station they run, since right about the same time.

We are told we are allowed to have groups and clubs that have superficial, non-threatening identities, but to have any sort of real organic tribalism is akin to sacrilege, and is punishable by ostracization. People have been taught to fear anything that sounds like ethnically-based tribalism (particularly among Europeans), with their minds trained and programmed to conjure up the most horrific Hollywood-ized images of war and genocide at the mere mention of it.

Children in schools are taught that we are “all the same”, and that any sort of tribalism is bad. These children are taught through operant conditioning to “think correctly” and repress any sorts of thoughts or feelings that could be “racist”. This of course, favors the multinational corporations who write the textbooks, and prefer people who are interchangeable human resources and consumers.

This has ultimately led to a lack of direction and a lack of connection.  We have no real purpose other than to work to feed an economic system that wants us as atomized consumers, united around our love for I-phones, Facebook, pop-culture and “world cuisine” (cause that’s why we love multiculturalism, right??).  Meanwhile, any sort of real and authentic way living, being or even speaking is to be shunned in the name of safe, consumer-friendly irony and political correctness.

You MUST assimilate into the Hive Mind of the Borg.  We Are One…

However, nature cannot and will not be repressed in this manner, and once again, the belief in separation from nature, creates neurosis. This is particularly true among white Westerners- the same group that Freud saw as most afflicted by the sexual repression neurosis. The backlash of this repression has led to the resurgence of Nationalism, that large scale, somewhat less organic form of tribalism, and the attacks against it by those who believe it to be an instrument of inevitable oppression and genocide.


Just like the how movement of human beings en masse, further and further away from nature through mercantilism, urbanization, and industrialization caused a disconnect from nature that led to the various mental/physical health and ecological crises we face today; so too will the artificial attempts to divert and suppress man’s inherent tribal nature no doubt have dire consequences.  And just like the attempts to repress and deny human sexuality, this attempt to suppress organic tribalism will continue to develop neurosis and conflict within us causing a lashing out.  This is what happens when man believes he is separate from and can “improve upon” nature.


Tribalism is part of our inherent nature. It is our nature to care more for our children than somebody else’s. It is our nature to care more for our family and our close friends than for people we have never met.  It is our nature to prioritize those whom we live amongst over those who live in a faraway land we have never been (and probably never will).

This is not to say that we should not care for others who we are less connected to, but we need to understand that we are incarnated in a in THIS body with THIS family, living in THIS specific locality and surrounded by THESE specific people whom we call our friends and neighbors for a specific reason.  We are here first and foremost to help THEM.  We only have just so much time in our finite lives.

Tribalism is not “selfishness”, it’s having our priorities in order; it is the Virtue of Fidelity- being true to family, friends, kindred and those to whom you have pledged service.  It is putting these people first in your thoughts and in your actions.  This does not mean you have to “hate” or seek conflict with another tribe, but it does mean you need to defend those in yours and make sure they are provided for- and sometimes interests conflict.  Like it or not, tribalism will be with us as long as there are threats to human survival- which pretty much means as long as physical death exists.

I invite you all to ponder this philosophical conundrum for a moment:

There are two people hanging off the edge of a cliff.  One of them is your friend or family member.  The other is a stranger from a faraway land who looks as different from you as you can possibly imagine, and has values and morals that are the polar opposite of your own; you might even say that in a relationship or roommate situation, this person would be “incompatible” with you.  But that person is also someone from a group that is commonly depicted as “oppressed”.  You can only save one of these people.  Whom do you save?

Okay, too easy?

How about two people hanging from a cliff and one person is a stranger from the land you inhabit who is of similar ethnicity and/or shares similar cultural morals and values, and the other is the same “oppressed” stranger from the faraway land, with the incompatible morality and outlook.  Who do you save now?  Why?

While we can and should aspire to take on and embody the “Universal Love” of the Creator in our lives as much as possible, we must reconcile that with the fact that we still live in a physical dualistic world that demands we make choices between one thing (or person) or another on a constant basis and function in alignment with Nature’s Principles- because they are God’s Principles. We are not of “this world”, but we do need to be in it in a functional capacity. This is not living in “illusion”, this is living in reality.

The true “separation” occurred as a byproduct of our necessary evolution, when we descended out of the pure bliss of the Mind of God and came into physical form so that we could come into evolutional maturity as beings.  As a result of us needing to develop our physical faculties, we had to be shut off from being able to sense the finer realms of the spirit.  This was not some mistake or wrongdoing on the part of man, as both fundamentalist Christian doctrine and “channeled” New Age literature like “A Course in Miracles” would allege.   This was the evolutionary impulse coming out of the Mind of the Creator- this had to happen.

The gift of the last incarnation of the Christ was the ability to experience and develop the inner Light and Life once again, but this time in a new, more developed way.  This is a process that requires major internal “house cleaning” in order to bring out the true unification of Mind, Heart and Will necessary to consciously move forward to the next stage.  This process requires us to get our own house in order first.  This is a process that both needs to happen internally as well as externally as a society.

When you are doing this kind of internal work, you need to maintain strong boundaries and a strong container so the seed being germinated can be allowed to grow.  This is not a time when you should be “taking in”.

And we should be aware that the people flooding into the West en masse are from cultures that are far more tribal than we are, are constantly warring amongst themselves in their own lands, and have morals, values, and ethics that are quite different from our own.  We are inevitably importing more conflict.  Meanwhile we ourselves have become so divided in our values and so unclear in our identity here in America and the West in general, that many say we are either on the brink of a civil war, or just a total societal collapse- which just may need to happen

But Nature is indifferent to the fate of nations.  The Laws are what they are and they will manifest regardless.  So rather than attempting to suppress our own tribal nature and condemning it as “the illusion of separation”, our quest should be to refine it; to move towards forms of tribalism that are in tune with the evolving Higher Man who lives in harmony with the Laws of Nature and Creation that are the part and parcel with the ALL IN ALL, while recognizing the Divinity within himself and his fellow man.

This would occur through the taming of the “animal” within man by bringing animal into alignment with spirit; by bringing it into the FULLNESS of Nature.  This is in stark contrast to the sort of psychological “taming” that is being attempted, which is solely the desire (once again) of the lower egoic mind to subvert and subdue the animal nature that it does not understand and fears.

This spiritually enlightened tribalism would ideally be one that would be able to cooperate with its neighbors (so long as they were willing), while maintaining a specific uniqueness that is necessary for the further development of a particular group of people in a particular place.  Remember, culture in its most organic state, an expression of a specific people and its interaction with the surrounding natural environment.


Be it through the bond of blood and soil; the bond of initiation; or simply the bond of a common, unending group identity and mission- we need the deep, natural and spiritual interpersonal connection that can only happen through the organic “tribe” of a limited number of closely connected people (remember Dunbar’s Number) acting in accordance with the Laws of Nature and Creation.  The author of an article entitled “An Introduction to Tribalism” put it best:

“[..]each member of the society has something called ‘tribal consciousness’, which is a type of altruism given to each individual which ensures the prosperity of the tribe. This ‘tribal consciousness’ requires a deep bond with each member of the tribe, and can only function among a unified body of individuals. For example, a tribal society cannot exist on a large scale; there are too many individuals within the society (in a large society) for a deep bond between individuals to transpire, and thus the ‘organic society’ that was idealized cannot be achieved”

Organic spiritual evolution can not truly happen within the mass blob of global monoculture that has only ever existed for the benefit of mercantilism and resource exploitation.  This global society would be one that completely erases all differentiation of organic culture, while simultaneously imposing a uniform artificial one.  With a population of 7 billion people, any institution or system that vast would be completely unmanageable unless it was able to accomplish the complete separation of man from Nature and his full insertion into the Machine.  This is what Rudolf Steiner referred to as the “Incarnation of Ahriman”- the coldest depths of materialism.

We should not and cannot allow this to happen.

We do not need artificial sentiments, disingenuous morality or the false reality of pop culture and social media.  What we need, now more than ever, is real life connection to Nature and the people we truly love, care about and trust in a real, organic, and genuine way.

In closing, I would just like to thank all of you who have read my work here for the last three years.  I hope in one way or another, you have enjoyed it and gotten something positive from it.

Namaste and God Bless.




“It can be said that the ‘reality’ of the world we live in has two aspects, that which is Created and that which is Made. That which is ‘created’ is God’s reality or that which is not dependent on mankind’s involvement; in other words, Nature at its most basic, pristine level. That which is ‘made’ is what we, as co-creators, have layered upon ‘creation’ or Nature. This applies to our own Nature as well as to the natural world in which we live.”

  • Master Matthias

 A common goal among spiritual seekers of all varieties is the quest for connection with a Divine Higher Power- whatever name or form it may have.  And among those of us who have an esoteric or “mystic” element to our spirituality, we all tend to agree that we are working towards some sort of re-unification with the Divine.  We all agree that connection with the Divine in some form or fashion is the optimal state.  However, what is not necessarily agreed upon is what the opposite of connection with the Creator looks like- the state commonly referred to as “separation“.

Separation is a word that often comes up in various socio-political conversations between those of a “New Age” persuasion (particularly around mass migration and the refugee crisis).  I have often heard that those who wish to keep certain groups of people from entering the country for various reasons, that these people are “part of the problem” because they are “othering” and ultimately confirming “illusion of separation”, by wishing to live separate from differing groups of people, regardless of their reasons.

This is a somewhat complex and complicated topic, but it is one I have wanted to unpack for a while.  But before we begin adding on interpretations and connotations, let’s go ahead and look at what this word “separation” actually means

1. The action or state of moving or being moved apart.

ex. “The damage that might arise from the separation of parents and children”

(synonyms: disconnection, detachment, severance, dissociation, disunion, disaffiliation, segregation, partition )

ex. “The separation of the two companies”; “her parents’ separation”

(synonyms: breakup, split, parting of ways, estrangement, rift, rupture, breach, divorce)

2. The division of something into constituent or distinct elements- The process of distinguishing between two or more things.

ex. “prose structured into short sentences with meaningful separation into paragraphs”

ex. “religion involved the separation of the sacred and the profane”; “the separation between art and life”

(synonyms: distinction, difference, differentiation, division, dividing line; gulf, gap, chasm)

So from the outset of the first definition we already get the assumption of the word meaning something “bad” when it speaks of the “damage that might arise from the separation of parents and children”.  This gives us the impression of something traumatic, harmful or undesirable.  This feeling is amplified by the first few synonyms: disconnection, detachment, and dissociation.  Like the example describing childhood separation anxiety, that these three words are also linked to negative psychological conditions caused by physical, mental, and/or emotional abandonment and isolation.  Another synonym listed is a word that has a huge level of emotional baggage in western society- segregation.

But as we move into the second example in the first definition, things become a little more “gray”.  Here we are now dealing with separation meaning the end of a relationship with its synonyms of breakup, split, parting of ways, estrangement, rift, and divorce.  While breakups and splits both in business and personal life can be hard and often times painful (sometimes more for one side than another due to varying levels of attachment), I don’t think any rational individual would say that ending a relationship that is no longer productive or healthy is inherently a “bad thing”.  Who honestly believes that a couple that has an observably toxic relationship should stay together because breaking up would serve to validate “the illusion of separation”?  Under that premise, even the separation of the American colonies from the British Empire back in 1776 would be viewed as a “bad thing”.

Moving on, we come to the second definition.  It is worth noting that in many dictionary sources, this definition is the first one listed (this particular definition was just the one that popped up when I did a Google search).  This would make sense as the etymology of separate is from the Latin word that literally means “to divide”.  Divide is a funny word, as it can have radically different connotations depending on the context around the word.  Cells divide to create new life.  Cells also divide to create cancer.  In order to survive and thrive, a species must “divide” itself; or at least its DNA and create children.  In order to conquer and dominate, an occupying force will find it most effective to “divide and conquer” the occupied populations along tribal and cultural lines.  Division is both a creative and a destructive force, which might begin to move us into a deeper, more alchemical understanding of this word “separation”.

The second part of the “second” definition simply refers to “the process of distinguishing between two or more things”.  Another word for this is “discrimination” (another word with some baggage).  This is something we do every day when we are picking out clothes, choosing what to eat, or crossing the street.  Hinduism and Buddhism talk about the practice of “spiritual discrimination“, which is discernment in regards what is of the true mind of Brahma or Buddha,  and what is of the illusion; of “Samsara“.  Of course, the Hermeticists might argue that it is technically ALL of the mind of God, but that is another conversation.

In the human psyche, the job of sorting, dividing and “separating” belongs to the ego.  The word “ego” has become akin to a four-letter word in the world of New Age spirituality with its heavy Eastern influence. With talk of the talk of ego death and the like, it can be easily to mistake the ego as being an altogether negative thing, but the fact of the matter is that the ego is a vital component to what makes our experience of the physical world possible.  In its basic function, the ego is the component of consciousness that enables you to perceive where your body ends and where another form begins. It is a survival mechanism that prevents us from seeing ourselves as “being one” with an oncoming vehicle. Without the ego, we would not survive long enough to have a spiritual experience in a physical body outside of death.


In the beginning, it is said that there was ONE.  This ONE has been called many things.  Some say the ONE came from a great Nothingness or Void.  Some say the ONE has always been and always will be.  Some say both are true.  In any case, at some point, the ONE divided itself into two.  This was the formation of the Principle of Duality, best known through the Taoist concept of Yin and Yang.  Then, after there were two, the two formed three, and then the three became four, and so on ad infinitum.  In short, ALL of Creation- Life, Nature, the forces that create them and the things they create exist because The ONE separated itself into many.  This process has never stopped.  The end of the separation process would be the end of manifestation- i.e. the end of life.

However, we do NOT exist separately from God- we can’t.

One of the many descriptions of God is “that in which we live and move and have our being”.  If we were to imagine God as a colossal, yet-invisible body, we would be akin to cells within that body.  The entirety of creation- Sun, Moon, the planets, the stars, the Earth and all life within can be best understood as cells, organs, and all other “materials” that comprise the body of God, which is primarily “mental” in its nature.  This is why He is called ALL IN ALL.  Just as the cells in your body cannot really live outside of your body (at least without using artificial means), so too do we have our life in the body of the ALL.

And just like how your cells are not “you” per se, at the same time they are.  Your cells carry the information needed to construct your form (and some might argue your essence) within the mysterious and enigmatic structure they contain known as DNA- just as you too carry the essence of the Creator and are “made in His image”.  Cells are autonomous in their own way, carrying out “missions” completely independent of what you are putting your attention on right now.  The same can be said of you as a cell within the body of the Creator.  And sometimes, cells become cancerous and need to be dealt with accordingly.

Within the body of THE ALL IN ALL, as in yours, everything has a function– a specific purpose and a role.  This is where the Laws of Nature and Creation come in as a means for making sure everyone “does their job”- one way or another.  The natural world is a perfect example of how all things perform a function to keep things in balance and operating as they should.  Nature is self-regulating and self-healing.  Of course, the self-regulating and self-healing mechanisms of nature are at times, unpleasant, but it is only when men who do not understand or respect the Laws of Nature intervene in some way, that things go “wrong”.

Suquamish and Dkhw’Duw’Absh leader, Chief Seattle famously stated:

Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things connect.”

One of the most famous “separation” myths is that of the Garden of Eden.  Now, there are many interpretations of this story, and like most myths, it is a story that will inevitably many-layers of allegorical truth to it.  Esoterically speaking, it is generally understood to be detailing man’s somewhat unpleasant journey from being a completely non-physical entity in a state of blissful (albeit child-like) union with the Creator, to being incarnated into bodies of increasing degrees of density.  Another level has to do with the conscious and subconscious mind.  There is also a part about sex in there, too…

However, another interpretation of the Garden of Eden story that I came to independently when I was practicing Shamanism (although I’m sure I’m not the only one to come to this conclusion) is as an allegory of man’s separating himself and his identity from the natural world, and the trauma that this created.  This would be man’s mindset beginning to shift in a way that saw himself on some level “at odds” with nature.  Now, I realize that this happened in different ways for different peoples.  And it should be noted that many esoteric scholars see the Adam and Eve story being about a specific group of people, while many others also speak of “Pre-Adamic” races- but that is another story in and of itself.

Due to dramatic and traumatic shifts in the climate and makeup of the Earth (as well as his own physical makeup), man ultimately came to view nature as an increasingly hostile place and sought to use his ingenuity to make it somehow less threatening to his survival, while simultaneously seeking to tame and utilize nature for his benefit.  Again, this happened in varying degrees for different peoples.  The peoples of the tropics, for example, would not have developed the same perception and means of dealing with the natural world as those who needed to survive the harsh winters of the northern climates.

This was a benign, and even necessary quest at first, however, over time, this quest to be sheltered from nature grew into an almost neurotic desire to separate from it.  This can be readily evidenced in through the actions of the old Roman Catholic Church, which turned the ceremonial reverence of nature it into a “demonic” practice, punishable by death.

As a whole, the philosophy of the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) and the societies they created tended to foster and promote disconnectedness from nature, quite often seeing it as something to be controlled, dominated, and exploited.  This happened when respect turned to fear.   It is worth noting that Judaism and Islam in particular, were also religions of nomadic desert wanderers- merchants and bandits who would have had no real connection to the land outside of what could be taken in the short term.  It is also worth noting that this is the same essential philosophy of the trans-national corporations that currently shape human society and its ideology.

However, it was when man moved into the cities that the neurosis of this separation anxiety really began to kick in. Although not necessarily connected with nature in the same way as a hunter/gatherer society, the ancient agriculturalists were very much in tune with the land, and the cycles and forces of nature- they had to be.  However, life in the city with its consumer markets and its artificial paths and structures, created an environment where men no longer needed to be connected to the cycles of nature to survive.  While the benefit of comfort was there, this move was what really kicked what some refer to as “human domestication” into high gear.  And like any other highly domesticated animal, a certain increased propensity for disease and neurosis comes as a price.

Alexandria was perhaps the first major cosmopolitan metropolis in known history… and with it came all of the things we associate with modern cities of this type- poverty, squalor, crime, disease and isolation.  This was the birthplace of Gnosticism.  Gnosticism was founded on a sort of “separation anxiety”, and saw the material world as an evil place run by a false god known as “Yaldabaoth” (aka the Demiurge).  The Gnostics preached “salvation” through following the mysteries of “gnosis” and being able to escape the suffering of this material world.  Buddhism in the East also had a somewhat similar view, expounding on the idea of this physical world being Samsara- the land of suffering.  These were religions that formed as man grew increasingly disconnected from the natural world and its Laws- and this includes the Laws of the spiritual worlds, because in truth, the spiritual worlds and the physical worlds are just varying levels of the same reality that adhere to the same overarching Laws and Principles.

Fast forward a good 2000+ years into the future, and we now live in a world dominated by this metropolitan, cosmopolitan, domesticated culture that began in the cities of the ancient world.  And with the advent of technology and the Internet, we have only worked to put even more layers between the natural world and us- between the world that is created and the world that is made.

Just as we are not, and cannot be separate from God, we are not, and cannot be separate from Nature (the active Principle of God as Life), and this includes Her Laws and Principles- even though we’d like to believe otherwise.

Namaste and God Bless.


“Care is the ultimate Generator of the quality of our experience”

–          Mark Passio


 Last week I opened my Windows 10 (Worst. Operating system. EVER) internet browser, which automatically brings me to a newsfeed, and I saw the following headline: “United Airlines passenger was dragged off flight because he was Asian

I immediately rolled my eyes and did not even bother clicking on the obviously intentionally racially provocative headline.  I knew what the purpose behind it was, but as an act of defiance, I refused to give it my attention.  Of course, it was not something that was just a one-shot headline.  It was turned into a sort of international incident (the man in question was apparently Chinese) and became yet another news soap opera.  The headlines were all over my Twitter feed, so alas, my efforts to ignore this story was somewhat thwarted.

Apparently, the doctor was flying United Airlines, which, in my opinion, was his first mistake.  When it comes to customer service and overall comfort, United Airlines is probably one of the worst airlines that I have ever flown (and I’ve flown it FAR more often than I would have liked to).  They apparently oversold the flight to the point where they couldn’t fit some of their employees on the flight, so they selected this Chinese man to give up his seat.  He refused, stating he was a doctor and had to be to work.  A conflict ensued, which resulted in the man being dragged off the plane by law enforcement.

Not a shining image of customer service to say the least, but the immediate headlines, not surprisingly, became about the man’s race, and the idea that he was selected to be taken off the plane “because he was Asian”.  So why was such a racially provocative spin used?  My best analysis would be that it was focused on and put into the mainstream media echo-chamber to foment racial division and resentment among the Asian community, who by-and-large have been left out of the racial victim narrative fueled by the media over the past few years.  This is an ethnic community that has fared quite well in Western society, so the outrage factor has not been as “organic” as it has been in the Black and Latino communities, and was obviously something that the Hollywood-owned, corporate-government-run media felt needed to be stoked- divide and rule.

Of course, now the man is suing United Airlines and their name is being dragged through the mud- which I can’t say I’m overly upset about.  Conducting your business in such a way warrants these sorts of consequences.  However, at the time it was certainly not an issue that made me care to the point of being compelled to write a blog article about it- that is until someone attempted to foist it on me as something that I SHOULD care that much about.

A few days ago, I was sitting on my couch writing out (on physical paper no less!) ideas for a story when my roommate, after coming home from work, posted up on the couch on the other side of the living room and proceeded to read news headlines aloud to me.  In my perhaps, over-politeness, I refrained from explaining to her that I did not need her to read me news headlines, nor did I really want her to, but instead I let her proceed without any protest.

Eventually she came to the story about the Chinese man on the plane and asked if I’d heard about it.  I told her I had, and regurgitated the initial racially-charged headline I had read (with which she was unfamiliar), and that I didn’t spend much time on it because I felt it to be little more than a distraction piece.  She then took this as an opportunity to fill me in on more details of the event.  My response was that it was “messed up” and that United Airlines was “garbage” and that they deserved to get sued.

However, apparently my simply acknowledging the event as unfortunate and as a prime example of bad business practice did not suffice.  She remarked that I seemed like I was being un-empathetic and acting as though I “didn’t care”.   It was at this point I remarked that I simply felt this was not an issue that warranted an outpouring of emotional outrage, or that there was any productive purpose to feeling that way.  I then asked why it was that I should feel as concerned or upset about this as she obviously was.  Her response was that “it could happen to you”.  To which I responded that any number of unfortunate incidents that were reported on the news could potentially “happen to me”, so that was a non-issue.

She then lamented about how awful it was that this man was humiliated and that he lost money (both things I regard as superficial problems of ego).  I reminded her that he was getting compensated and that he was not maimed.  However, she still insisted that I was not “getting it”.  Becoming frustrated, I stated that at the end of the day, this man has no connection to me as family or friend or tribe, etc., so why am I going to bleed out emotionally for someone who is, at this point, a hypothetical man in time- so no, I didn’t “care”.

After hearing this, my roommate was beside herself in disbelief, perhaps viewing me as some sort of sociopathic monster.  I should point out that this particular individual has a tendency to get very upset to the point of rage when people do not share her moral views or challenge her beliefs and opinions- and when that does happen, she immediately seeks to shut down the conversation, demanding silence from the other participants.  This conversation style does not work well for someone who detests people attempting to force their morality on them or attempting to censor them- which is why I am never the one to initiate conversation with her around current events and broader socio-political issues.

I did have one other thing to add, which was met by verbal hostility and a demand that I cease speaking (which of course I didn’t), and that point was this- even if I was to get outraged and upset for this individual’s situation, what would that do to ease his suffering?  However, my roommate had become enraged that I had dared continue speaking after she demanded the conversation end, to which I explained to her that she did not have the right to demand my silence, but she did have the right to leave the room.

She was yelling at this point, saying I was verbally harassing her and “coming at” her.  To which I had to respond by pointing out the hilarious fact that she had gotten up from her seat, thrown a pillow at my head, and proceeded to aggressively advance towards me, and was now standing right over me- all the while I had not moved from my seat.  Yet somehow, I was the “aggressor”.  Frustrated, she stormed out of the room and went to her bedroom.

While my prime motivation for writing this may very well be cathartic, I think there is an opportunity to address a bigger question here, which is the one in hindsight I wish I had asked her- why do YOU care?  Sure, in the case of my roommate and the United Airlines story, I have my hunches, such as the fact that unfortunate man was a doctor and that she has an almost worshipful admiration of doctors.  It definitely had nothing to do with the racial narrative.  I don’t know for certain, and at this point, I want to shift focus to the larger issue, which is this: when certain stories are brought to our attention, what is it about them that makes us care?  And should we?

First, let’s take a moment to set our definition of the word “care”.  The word care stems from the Old High German word, “chara”, which translates to “grief” or “lament”.  Care is one of those words that is both a verb and a noun in modern English, and as such, has several definitions.  As a verb, it means either to “feel concern or interest; attach importance to something” or to “look after and provide for the needs of”.  As a noun, it means either “the provision of what is necessary for the health, welfare, maintenance, and protection of someone or something” or “serious attention or consideration applied to doing something correctly or to avoid damage or risk”.

In these definitions, we actually see a process being described in which a concern driven by a sense of being troubled causes someone to take action to remedy that trouble or disturbance.  The movement through distress to a place of empowerment makes “care” a particularly potent alchemical and creative force.  Occult practitioner, lecturer and activist, Mark Passio had the following to say in regard to this principle of “care”:

The ‘Lost’ Principle, is the dynamic of CARE.  What we care about on a day-to-day basis acts as the driving force of our thoughts and actions.  Care is the ultimate Generator of the quality of our experience.  For this reason, Care has been called the Generative Principle by many Wisdom Traditions.  The word generative is derived from the Latin verb genere, which means ‘to create’

However, as with any expression of human power and potential, there are always going to be those who wish to use the power of others to strengthen themselves in a parasitic manner.  I have written at length about the media and how it uses images and simplistic emotional narratives to trigger the emotions and override logic and reason.  I have also talked about the “echo chamber” the media creates to force certain stories, perspectives and moralities into the public consciousness.  When certain what could be called “outrage” stories are grabbed by the media, they are given certain talking points to shape the narrative of the story, and are then repeated on station after station, and publication after publication creating the perception that THIS is what I SHOULD care about right now.

However, no one is going to care about something if someone flat out states: “This is what we want you to care about, so care about this right now!”  This is why the media needs a “hook” into your emotional psyche; something that is going to mimic something or someone you already care about.  Like a vampire, you need to invite it into your house before it can drain the life out of you.

I’m sure everyone remembers the image of the drowned Syrian child washed up on the beach that was plastered on literally every news media outlet a couple of years ago.  Despite the inconsistencies, the constantly changing backstory around the incident, and the politics involved, the image of a dead child was enough to “hook” many people in spite of  the actual story.  The image of a dead child was so traumatizing for those in our western ‘bubble’ (particularly for people who had children of their own), that it resulted in an outcry for the sorts of social, political and economic policies that will ultimately serve to displace their own children.  It is through manipulation of emotions that people can be made to support things that are in fact quite detrimental to their own interests and those of the people they have real life connection to and their descendants.

Everyone has these sorts of inroads to their psyche that can be exploited and used to make them “care” and feel outrage about things, which often stems from their own personal sense of morality.  For me, this is obviously stories that detail things that appear to potentially threaten my own personal freedom and survival like war, the surveillance state, globalism, and the disenfranchisement and demonization of white men.  But the other sorts of emotional hooks for that some may be less familiar with tend to be stories that involve people abusing children, animals, the disabled, or the elderly.

Much of the reason for this “opening” has to do in part with a strong desire to protect those who I see as genuinely needing protection.  The need to protect is a primary function of the natural man.  I also understand that there are other more personal reasons like my family history, my profession, and past as well as present personal experiences that are going to play a role in shaping who and what I care about when it comes to strangers in news headlines.

However, outside of instances of rape and torture, when it comes to stories of general violence towards mentally and physically capable adults, I am far less apt to have any significant emotional reaction to it (although it is admittedly MUCH harder for me to see a woman get assaulted than a man).  Case in point, the Chinese man on the plane.  Yeah, it probably sucked to get smacked and dragged off the plane, but at the end of the day, he’s gonna be alright.  He got banged up, embarrassed, and lost some money.  Again, that sucks, but at the end of the day, he’s gonna be alright.

So, now that we have established that the media uses “hooks” that mimic people and situations we already care about on some level, so we care about what they want us to, the question becomes, “is this a good thing?” or better yet, “is this a PRODUCTIVE thing?”.  While we are infinite in a spiritual sense, our psychic and energetic resources are very much a finite thing, and can be drained- and emotions are great at facilitating this draining.

When we are allowing these, for all intents and purposes, hypothetical stories and people to take hold of our caring centers, there is inevitably something or someone else that is NOT getting that energy at that moment.  This energy is already being designated to caring about this other situation that we have no real connection to.

Personally, I know that I have just so much energy and care I can afford to give at a given moment until it becomes detrimental to my own health and well-being.  As an empath with anger issues and a history of addiction, I cannot afford to get emotional or outraged over everything that the news media wants me to be emotional or outraged at.  I cannot give true care to everything (and if it isn’t true care, it’s just virtue signaling).  This has been at times, somewhat of a hard reality that I have continually had to reassess in recent days, weeks and months.

The other thing that is finite in this equation is time.  What could I be doing with this time I am choosing to be outraged over this situation involving these people I have no real connection to and probably never will?  Is there someone who is in my life and important to me, that I am neglecting while I give my attention to this?  Is there someone I could be praying for?  Is there someone I could be reaching out to and connecting with?  Is there someone I could be helping within my personal sphere of influence that needs it?

But perhaps you are genuinely moved by the plight of this Chinese doctor or some other stranger that you read or hear about in the news.  Perhaps something about that story moved you to the core of your being.  If that truly is the case, and so long as you are not being harmful or neglectful towards the people you already have responsibilities to (family, friends, tribe, etc.), then by all means, reach out to that person.  Write them a letter; ask them if they need or even want your help; set up a fundraiser or a food drive; perhaps even organize a boycott if applicable- but DO SOMETHING.  Show that person that you care through ACTION.

But take a moment to reflect on why it is that you care.  Take a few moments to pause, look within for a moment and ask Self, “Is this a genuine care and purpose that I should follow?  Or is someone just manipulating my emotions so I do what they want me to?”

And if you do find yourself “caring” about a stranger you read about, please, don’t just use their plight simply as an excuse to be angry or self-righteous about something and “rage”; or to virtue signal; or to justify an attempt to force your personal morality onto those of us who have different values or care about different things than you.  When you are careless with your Care, you will inevitably suffer as a result.

Namaste and God Bless.


“Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.”

  • Galatians 6:7

“The Law of Karma is also called the Law of Cause and Effect, Action and Reaction and ‘as you sow, so shall you reap’.”

  • Sham Hinduja

Agriculture concept, wheat in hands and green field


A lot of people get offended by the views and opinions I express here, as well as those I express across various social media platforms.  This has led to numerous online debates and conflicts with not only your typical ANTIFA and SJW-type folks, but with folks within my own Esoteric/Gnostic Christian Order.  The increasing controversy surrounding the various positions I espouse to has ultimately culminated in my being discharged from the position of service I held in the spiritual community I was a part of.  This dismissal was at the behest of the master teacher, who requested I no longer serve in the sanctuary, although still welcomed me to attend services and classes as a congregant.

In hindsight, I could see this split coming from a mile away, even though it still hit me pretty hard when he requested I step down.  And while my sermons were typically pretty tame and more esoteric/universalist in nature (although I did incorporate Nietzsche into a sermon once), it was what I was saying outside Sunday services that was often running counter to what the rest of the group went with.  This was creating conflict with multiple members of the group who could not reconcile how someone who said the things I said could also be a priest in the Order.

There are certain expectations many people have for spiritual leaders in New Age-type circles.  Unfortunately, one of these is the unspoken expectation that we should be in full agreement with the Liberal/Marxist ideals that pervade our modern culture (especially here on the American west coast).  And if you aren’t necessarily in full agreement, you should certainly not speak aggressively in counter to them- especially when it has anything to do with race or any of the other more controversial topics I tend to speak on.

But nevertheless, the more vocal I became with my views, the more people within the group became upset when they found out that I was an ordained priest within that Order.  I was no longer in full agreement with what the master teacher saw as the mission of the group he was leading.  I had unintentionally become a subversive element within the group, the bulk of which consists of Liberal baby-boomer, ex-hippie types.  And through my conversations with these folks, many tend to carry the sorts of Liberal/PC ideals and beliefs you would ascribe to that particular group.  This does not exactly describe me, so it made sense that I should step away from a leadership role, which for the time being, has equated to me stepping away from any kind of role.  And while there is no “de-frocking” within the Order- i.e. I am not ex-communicated and will remain an ordained priest until my death (and beyond), I am just now sans congregation.

The really interesting thing about what has become the dominant socio-political ideology represented in the members of my ordaining Order, is that the founder of the Order, Father Paul Blighton, was known for his favoritism towards J. Edgar Hoover and owning a copy of “None Dare Call It Treason”- a book written by famous American Protestant anti-Communist author and former Council for National Policy member, John A. Stormer.  In this book, Stormer warns America about the Communist infiltration of American society, politics and culture- something that turned out to be true in a number of ways.  Jewish-American intellectual and critic, Richard Hofstadter called the book a “masterful piece of folkish propaganda.”

A man from their grandparents’ generation, Father Paul’s socio-political leanings seemed to contrast the “peace, love and social justice” baby-boomers that studied and were ordained under him.  Father Paul was bringing the essence of what had begun to manifest during the various New Thought and Occult Revival movements of the pre-World War II era that were based off a sort of infusion of Hermeticism and Eastern spirituality, to a wider, younger audience.

However, what seemed to happen in many respects is what happened to the New Age movement as a whole, which was that it got diluted with the Neo-Marxist social programming that the baby-boomer generation were the real beta-test subjects for.  Father Paul’s message appeared to become mixed with the message of Cloward and Piven and “A Course In Miracles”, creating what at times appears to be a sort of dissonance of thought and an incompatibility of ideology.  This seems to have become magnified in this new more polarized political paradigm we seem to have entered.

Of course, from the perspective of Self none of this really matters, but when it comes to doing functional work in the world of duality and manifestation that we live in, it quite often does.


The biggest areas I have found myself in disagreement with what seems to be the majority of the members of my ordaining Order has been my position on socio-political things like equality, rights, privilege, racism, multiculturalism, and the overall moral stance of the “Regressive Left”- and the belief that holding to these ideals is somehow synonymous with spiritual virtue.  My position continues to be that these ideals are little more than abstractions- fabrications that do not exist in any true form.  Not only do I contend that these ideals do not exist outside of utopian fantasy, but I argue that the constant attempt to force them to exist runs counter to the Laws of Nature and Creation whose function it is to keep all things in balance and harmony.


Social justice and the notion of “privilege” (i.e. white male privilege) have their roots in Neo-Marxist Critical Theory.  The basis of this thought is that there is a class of “oppressors” and a class of the “oppressed” (i.e. victims).  The oppressors are traditionally whites, and in particular white men and the “white male patriarchy”.  It is this group that Critical Theory describes the need to re-educate so that they do not oppress, while the “oppressed” are completely blameless and faultless.

The idea of “privilege” in Neo-Marxist theory is incompatible with the notion of karma.  Wellesley professor Peggy McIntosh- the lady who essentially defined the modern concept of “white privilege”; describes this as an “invisible package of unearned assets”.  If we understand karma, we understand that NOTHING we have in this life- good or bad- is “unearned”.  The only wrong done when it comes to “privilege” is when we don’t have gratitude for our situation.

The founder of the Order, Father Paul Blighton, when asked the question, “Why do some people seem superior to others?”; had the following response:

“We begin each incarnation where we left off in the last, and a little higher.  If the last one ended with high aspirations, with no hatred, no injustices, or cruelties, then early in this incarnation this higher development has to manifest, regardless of the station in life, the environment or outer education.  In this sense we are not all born equal, because our present life is due to a great extent to what we made it in our last incarnation.  There are those who start early in this life to overcome the bad effects of the last incarnation, and finally end this one in a much higher state than they came into it… Past experiences have become amalgamated into the reality of what we are.”

But despite this very clear position that we essentially have and get what we deserve in life, a great many members of the Order and the New Age community continue to pay lip service and attempt to give legitimacy to the concept of “white privilege” and its relation to the “oppression” of minorities.

The definition of white privilege is a direct contradiction to the law of karma and the teaching that we reap what we sow.  This notion that we do not earn what we have, good or bad, is contradictory to spiritual teaching and the notion that our lives are the result of our living prayer.  Unless we believe in an unjust universe where karmic law does not exist, how can any “privilege” carried by an individual or group of individuals be unearned or unfair?


The idea behind karma is that there is Justice in the highest, most true sense woven into the fabric of creation itself; and that it is self-regulating like the processes of the human body, as we are a microcosm of the larger processes of Nature and Creation.

Many esoteric traditions, including my own, also acknowledge the existence of freedom of choice and free will when it comes to the situations of our lives.  This not only has to do with our chosen actions or thoughts and what those will bring to us, but the idea that on the Other Side before incarnation, we have a certain amount of choice as to the experiences and tests we will be put through that are not necessarily part of any karmic debt.


Now, it is worth noting that it is known in many esoteric circles that karmic debt can be absolved in this lifetime by manners other than suffering and tribulation.  And there are even methods of lessening the karmic impact of intentions through use of proxies and patsies, most of the general public remains ignorant of these things.

And since we do reap the fruits of the thoughts and deeds we sow in this life and the previous one(s), there are no real victims in this world, only volunteers.  In the cause and effect scenarios of our day-to-day life, this rings true for every physically and mentally capable adult.  Our lives are the summation of our choices and deeds.  When we squander opportunities or make poor, lazy, or ignorant choices and act on these, we suffer and we do not thrive.  You choose whether you will work that easy, low-paying job or figure out how to be an entrepreneur.  You choose to spend your money on a new flat screen TV or a new I-phone rather than saving it, or investing it something that will benefit you and/or your family in a more long-term and meaningful way.  You choose whether you act like an  self-respecting adult or a self-absorbed child.

From a spiritual perspective, and from the teachings of my own spiritual lineage, it is argued that we ultimately choose what we will experience in this life from the perspective of Soul/Self.  Now we are not just talking about karmic baggage from past lives, but the actual gaming out of a life mission of sorts in the higher realms before incarnation.  We choose much of what we experience from the perspective of an undying Soul and Self that can never truly be harmed or destroyed.  Remember, from the perspective of the eternal Self/Soul, suffering, oppression and death don’t really matter as they have no effect on the Self, which is eternal and unchanging.

Now there are some that are somewhat uncomfortable with this hardline karmic perspective.  These are people who are easily caught up in the emotions of suffering and ask me questions such as:

Would you be comfortable telling a child who lost a parent or a person whose family member was killed through some act of brutality, or a child tormented daily by bullies that it’s their own fault that they are suffering, because they asked for it and wanted to have it happen?”

To which I reply:

No, that would serve no useful purpose except to further traumatize the child. A child cannot emotionally process and understand things in a way an adult can (although sadly a great deal of modern adults are emotionally children). That’s why we typically delay talking to children about complex issues. You teach the child how to cultivate strength and cope with these things in a healthy and productive manner so they don’t fall into a cycle of victimhood for the rest of their lives, perpetuating their own trauma.”

But I will not treat adults like children- regardless of their emotional capacities.  Adults need to understand the consequences pf their actions (or inactions) and learn to accept them, not be shielded from them.  It is this acceptance of hardness of reality and the weight our decisions truly hold, that breeds strength to rise above our shortcomings and understand just how much power we really have.

And while it is appealing to that part of ourselves that identifies with “the victim”, this Critical Theory/Social Justice belief system is just that- a belief system.  It is the low-hanging fruit that those who might seek to embody true compassion and justice can grab onto and keep company with those who care little about spiritual development and seek to do little more than lament about their own victimhood and perceived powerlessness.  This is done while seeking to take away the free will of those they see as their “oppressors”- as all social justice-inspired policies inevitably seek to do.  On the other end, those who have been indoctrinated to believe that they are part of this “oppressor class”, have the sort of “original sin” complex that you described.

Ultimately, Neo-Marxism and all of its fruits lack any sort of spiritual foundation or practice, but rather seek to change behavior through a form of human “dog-training”, while using subtle nuances, doublespeak, and schoolyard-style peer-pressure and bullying.  This has resulted in a sort of dogmatic neurosis among “believers”.

As far as my feelings surrounding oppression, I am not denying that certain forces and institutions exist, which I have discussed in depth in the past.  However, the effect they have on us is less out of our hands then we think.  And let’s be clear that I have never said anywhere that the people that run things are necessarily doing so because of “good karma” in a moral sense. They run things because they are focused and tireless in their intent and “mission”; they understand how to utilize the Law of Manifestation in a way others do not; there is not an element of their psyche that disagrees with their moral convictions or their actions- and inner unity is the key to utilizing the Law of Manifestation; and they know the value of using other people to do the real dirty work, thus skirting a good deal of moral karma and passing it onto the patsies.

We need to understand that when we’re talking about “karma”, what we’re ultimately talking about is the Law of Cause and Effect, which, like the other Laws and Principles, works on a level beyond our own limited self-interested senses of morality.


It was taught in my Order that one should not necessarily move out of sense of guilt, obligation, or pity and give money to a homeless man, as we are not privy to his karma or mission of his soul.  Rather we are encouraged to listen to the voice of Self for guidance as to how to proceed as it knows truth.

When charity is mechanized through bureaucratic processes and corrupted through special interests in both the government and many of the large philanthropic organizations, it becomes a mockery of itself.  In the case of government in particular, “charity” is typically collected in the form of taxes, which are ultimately enforced by threat of violence.  This process entirely removes the free will and communication with Self that was present in the scenario of the homeless man.

It is important to understand, as anyone who has gone from “rags to riches” will undoubtedly attest, poverty is first and foremost a state of mind.  Anyone who grew up around poor people or were poor themselves can attest to the way that poor people tend to gravitate towards material status symbols to give themselves comfort in an illusion of wealth.  Often, they will prioritize obtaining these things rather than seriously working to understand how money works and how to get themselves out of the cycle of poverty.  Now I will admit this may be considerably more difficult in places like Africa, and parts of Asia and Latin America, but in the western world, there are no excuses except your own- regardless of your race, ethnicity or gender.

For many, these things I say may come off as cold and insensitive, as I am basically stating that people have their lot in life through Divine Justice.  To some, this is reminiscent to many of the Hindu caste system where the poor were understood to be poor because of karmic debt, and therefore, they must not be helped or aided in any way.  Karma is understood to be the “effect” in the Principle of Cause and Effect.

And while I do see the poor as being poor due to the choices mad in this and previous lifetimes; I do NOT believe that this means we should under no circumstances work to help them alleviate their suffering.  We are here to help one another up Jacob’s Ladder towards human godliness.  However, I am of the school of thought that teaching a man to fish is FAR more beneficial to him and the world than simply giving him a fish.



In Zoroastrianism, the ancient Aryan religion of Persia founded by a sage from the Caucasus Mountains named Zarathustra; there exists a philosophy of “Vairya”, which translates to “Desirable Dominion”.  This comes from taking the principle of Asha, which is thinking and understanding that is in alignment with Cosmic Order and applying it to a justly governed society.  This principle was promoted by figures like the legendary Persian emperor, Cyrus the Great.

Cyrus the Great, the founder of the Persian Empire, was renowned for his extraordinary humanitarianism.  Unlike most other imperial conquerors, Cyrus never plundered or had mass-executions, and would actually improve the living conditions of the subjugated populations.  His reputation proceeded him to such an extent that in some cases when Cyrus would come through, the soldiers of targeted area would lay down their arms as they knew Cyrus was going to improve their living conditions and treat them better than the despot that currently ruled.

While Cyrus the Great is often referred to as the founder of human rights, this idea becomes conflated when comparing it to our modern definition of the term.  Cyrus’ policy was very much rooted in the Zoroastrian ethos and worldview, which was essentially a demand for improvement and pressure for the human being to strive for greatness and even godliness.  This idea contrasts the modern notion that you are entitled certain things regardless of the effort one puts into self-improvement and service- i.e. you “get” without having to “give”.  When Cyrus worked to better the lives of the peoples he conquered, it was with the understanding that he was giving these people the tools to help embody the principle of “Spenta Mainyu” in themselves.

Spenta Mainyu” in Zoroastrianism is said to be the main essence of their primary deity, Ahura Mazda (whose name translates to ‘Titan of Wisdom’) and is represented by the eternal flame.  This flame is understood to be Promethean in nature and is the fire of innovation and the creative principle.  Zoroastrian practitioners seek to embody this Spenta Mainyu through the conscientious free choice to champion the progressive advancement of cosmically-aligned wisdom and knowledge on the Earth.  This philosophy is ultimately about taking personal responsibility for the ascension of humanity and giving humans the tools they need to do that.

The idea here is that we look to “raise up” others by giving them the tools they need to raise up themselves, as there is an obligation to cultivate this consciousness of Spenta Mainyu and create the utopia of the Desirable Dominion where we have a society of sages dedicated to living according to Natural Law Principles.  Again, this idea is completely removed from the modern conversation around rights and welfare, where people are “owed” without the obligation to contribute anything more than finance through taxation.

There was also the understanding that the justly governed empire was akin to a walled garden, and required “weeding”, i.e. the removable of incompatible or subversive elements that were incongruent to the values espoused by Spenta Mainyu and Its Six Rays which were Cosmic Order, Best Thinking, Desirable Dominion, Wholeness, Ever-Deepening Serenity, and Vitality.  In other words, there was only a “right” to live within the Desirable Dominion if you lived in accordance with its Principles- you do not have “rights” to the fruits of the Dominion simply because you exist.  While it is the Father’s good pleasure to give us the Kingdom, we do not just get it bestowed upon us without some amount effort and striving on our part.


This desire for equity of chance and equality of outcome stems from the desire to be rid of the Natural Law Principle of Cause and Effect that seems to cause man so much discomfort.  This Principle works to assure stability, order and Ultimate Justice in the Kosmos.  It is also a driving force behind life, death, and the forces of Nature that man has so long attempted to shield himself from to an ever-greater degree.

While it can’t be denied that the ability to ensure steady supply of food, shelter and overall social stability has allowed man to not only survive, but thrive; it is also hard to deny honestly that this natural inclination has led to a sort of neurosis in “civilized” humanity to shield itself from certain processes of nature that it perceives threatens not only the existence of their physical bodies, but the things that it is attached to.

These attachments are those possessions, institutions and beliefs that the various segments of the human population believe is a part of itself.  The natural processes that threaten these attachments and institutions include death, disease, famine, weather and natural disasters, as well as the more basic primal and tribal nature of man’s own being.

However, humanity, particularly those of us in the west it seems, wish to ultimately shield ourselves from the consequences of our own choices and actions.  This desire to remain unaccountable can be found at the upper echelons of government and corporate institutions, all the way down the individual who is on homeless or state assistance, and everywhere in between to varying degrees.

It is the perspective of these “lower castes” that the ideologies of both Marxism AND Judeo-Christianity seeks to appeal to.  This victim theology and slave morality has been used for centuries to create a world of people who are little more than physically mature children- emotional, entitled, self-centered and disconnected from the Laws of Nature.

We must counter this impulse towards our lower nature by moving in the opposite direction towards institution of a natural aristocracy.  Here we seek to become the greatest version of ourselves we can be, while seeking to raise up our brothers and sisters in our spheres of association and influence.  I believe EVERYONE is capable of this in some form or fashion.

In the end, having a world where we are all striving to be as warriors, sages and priest kings (or queens) is going to be a far more positive and productive one than a world where our only aspirations are to be taken care of like children and to make sure we ‘get what we deserve’- because we already do.


Namaste and God Bless.

“I recognize the manifestation of undeviating Justice in all the circumstances of my life”

– from the Qabalistic Tarot affirmation prayer, ‘This is Truth about the Self’


 “Sigurth spake: ‘Better is heart than a mighty blade for him who shall fiercely fight; The brave man well shall fight and win, though dull his blade may be.’”

  • Fafismol


Courage is defined as “the ability to face danger, difficulty, uncertainty, or pain without being overcome by fear or being deflected from a chosen course of action.

When we have Courage, we are able to face the challenges that are put in front of us without being overcome by fear or being deflected from our chosen course of action.  Courage is akin to the Noble Virtue of Perseverance, where one presses on against all odds until the goal is met, the task is finished and/or one has done all they said they would do.

In his book, “The Way of Men”, author Jack Donovan states that Courage is “the animating spirit of masculinity, and it is crucial to any meaningful definition of masculinity… In any gang of men fighting for survival, courage will be esteemed and respected in the living and it will be revered in the dead.  Courage is a crucial tactical virtue.  One can choose to be courageous, and even in its basest form, courage is a triumph over fear.  It’s associated with heart and spirit and passion, but it is also a drive to fight and win…”

Donovan goes on to further define Courage as the will to risk harm in order to benefit one-self or others.  In its most basic amoral form, courage is a willingness or passionate desire to fight or hold ground at any cost (gameness, heart, spirit, thumos).  In its most developed form courage is the considered and decisive willingness to ensure the success or survival of a group or another person (courage, virtus, andreia).”

But Courage itself is not words and concepts and definitions- it is honorable action.

The following story I’m going to retell is a true story about three men who swam through Chernobyl’s radioactive waters to stop a nuclear meltdown.  It is taken from an article out of Oddee.com entitled, “9 Amazing Stories of Incredibly Brave People”:

“In 1986, a sudden surge of power during a reactor systems test destroyed Unit 4 of Chernobyl’s nuclear power plant, spewing massive amounts of deadly radioactive material into the environment. The death toll was unknown and rumored to be anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand.

While many perished, three clean-up volunteers – Alexi Ananenko, Valeri Bezpoalov and Boris Baronov – willingly met their fate.

During the well-documented disaster, a pool of water used for emergencies in case of a break in the cooling pumps or steam pipes became flooded with a highly radioactive liquid that was in danger of blowing up. These three men suited up in scuba gear and swam into the radioactive waters of the flooded chamber, knowing full well they would die as a result. They opened up a gate valve, which allowed the contaminated water to drain out.

Days after reaching the surface all three men succumbed to radiation poisoning and were buried in lead coffins. If not for the bravery of the ‘Chernobyl Suicide Squad’ a thermal explosion would have taken place resulting in unfathomable disaster.”


While it may be impossible for us to fully place ourselves in those men’s shoes, I invite you all to think to yourselves for a moment and ask yourselves, “Would I take on a task, knowing it would inevitably kill me, in order to save my family and my people?

I would like to say I would.  But in truth, I’ll only know when it happens.

Many spiritual traditions speak of “selfless service”, but how many who adhere are willing to knowingly risk their own lives to save another?

Alexi Ananenko, Valeri Bezpoalov and Boris Baronov, displayed Courage by willfully sacrificing themselves to save the lives of their family and their folk.

It is courage; the willingness to suffer and even give the ultimate sacrifice in the pursuit of a noble cause; like dying so that your family and friends can live; that is the hallmark of a warrior.  In an age where so many people, so many men in particular, seem to think of nothing that is worth saving over their own skin, this sort of courage needs to be held to the highest esteem.  This is the sort of courage we as men of European descent, and really just men in general, need to strive for.  This is the model of manhood.

So how does one go about building this mindset of Courage and the Will to act upon it?  This is where the Warrior archetype of masculinity comes into play.

But first, we need to set our definitions.

In their book, “King, Warrior, Magician, Lover: Rediscovering the Archetypes of the Mature Masculine”, authors Robert Moore and Douglas Gillette define what exactly is meant by the word, “archetype”:

It is our experience that deep within every man are blueprints, what we can also call ‘hard wiring’, for the calm and positive mature masculine.  Jungians (that is to say, followers of renowned Swiss psychologist Carl Jung) refer to theses masculine potentials as archetypes, or ‘primordial images’.

Jung and his successors have found that on the level of the deep unconscious the psyche of every person is grounded in what Jung referred to as the ‘collective unconscious’, made up of instinctual patterns and energy configurations probably inherited genetically throughout the generations of our species.  The archetypes provide the very foundations of our behaviors- our thinking, our feeling, and our characteristic human reactions.  They are the image makers that artists and poets and religious prophets are so close to.

In the book, Moore and Gillette outline what Jungians have found to be the four primary archetypes of the masculine psyche as laid out in both the myths and legends of traditional societies, as well as the roles of men within the societies themselves.  These four archetypes are the King, the Warrior, the Magician, and the Lover.

In the following passage, Moore and Gillette describe the man who is accessing the Warrior archetype in its fullness:

A man accessing the Warrior archetype has a “positive mental attitude”, as they say in sales training.  This means that he has an unconquerable spirit, that he has great courage that he is fearless, that he takes responsibility for his actions, and that he has self-discipline.  Discipline means that he has the rigor to develop control and mastery over his mind and body, and that he has the capacity to withstand pain, both psychological and physical.  He is willing to suffer to achieve what he wants to achieve.  ‘No pain, no gain’, we say.

In day-to-day life, we are accessing our Warrior when we are focused and “getting shit done”.  We access the Warrior when we are holding ourselves and our brothers accountable.

My experiences with Martial Arts in particular, helped to facilitate a development and understanding of the Warrior archetype within myself.  I highly recommend anyone getting at least some experience practicing a form of Martial Arts, if for nothing more than the mental training that will inevitably happen when training in such a manner.

A wonderful example of how the Warrior archetype can apply to the spiritual quest is shown in Carlos Castaneda’s Don Juan series.  The various exercises described in the book that are aimed at challenging the perception, firming the integrity, letting go of old beliefs and mastering the mind and emotions, are definitely worth looking into.

When we are truly in our Warrior, we are in control of our emotions- most importantly the emotions related to fear.  When we have this control, we are able to move beyond desperate attempts to “save our own ass”, and demonstrate acts of courage for the sake of a greater good.

In the Norse myth of Tyr and Fenris, Odin and the gods deceive the murderous wolf-monster, Fenris.  In order to neutralize the threat, he posed to the world, the gods agreed to bind Fenris with magic chains.  Odin baited the wolf with his pride, saying that he could not break the chains, while swearing they did not use any magic on them (which they did).  Fenris let the gods put the chains on him, under the condition that one of them had to put their hand in his mouth as “collateral” in case they were deceiving him (which they were).  Tyr, most courageous of the gods, volunteered to be the one who put their hand in the monster’s mouth.  And sure enough, once the wolf found he could not break the chains due to magic, Fenris bit the god’s hand off and swallowed it.


In this story, we have a sacrifice not of life, but of limb.  Of course, Tyr would go on to die with most of the other gods at Ragnarok.  Tyr knew what was going to happen from the moment he made the decision to sacrifice himself for the greater good of his kin; his tribe of Aesir gods.  Tyr knew that the danger Fenris posed to the gods as well as pretty much everyone else, was a far higher price than his hand.  Tyr knew the sacrifice was worth it.

In the Norse-Germanic tradition, victory was not nearly as important as dying “a good death”- the most noble of which was to die in battle and be taken to Valhalla– Odin’s hall of elite warriors who fought, feasted and made merry until the time of Ragnarok.

We are in a pivotal moment right now.  It is a time when the Divine Masculine Principle of the Sun god is rising in the consciousness of our folk and all of humanity- and He came not to bring peace, but a sword.

True masculinity, especially aggressive and fearless Warrior Masculinity, has always been the greatest threat to any established order or any outside group seeking dominance over a tribe.  This is why such focus is placed on controlling men- making sure that men “behave” and “fall-in-line” in a subservient fashion.  This is why there is such a demonization of men like Trump and movements like the Alt-Right and other Nationalist/anti-Globalist movements for being “hyper-masculine”, “bullying”, “predators”.  This is why children in school are being taught about the evils of “White Patriarchy” and “White Masculinity” and an increasingly young age.

In “King, Warrior, Magician, Lover”, Moore and Gillette stated:

“We live in a time when people are generally uncomfortable with the Warrior form of masculine energy… This is the age in the West of the ‘soft masculine’ and it is a time in which radical feminists raise loud and hostile voices against the Warrior energy.  In liberal churches, committees are removing such ‘warlike” hymns as ‘Onward Christian Soldiers’ and ‘The Battle Hymn of the Republic’ from the hymnals.”

Moore and Gillette went on to state in criticism of feminism and modern liberalism’s attempt to re-design a less-aggressive, less-threatening man:

“We can’t just take a vote and vote the Warrior out.  Like all archetypes, it lives on despite of our conscious attitudes for it.  And like all repressed archetypes, it goes underground eventually to resurface in the form of emotional and physical violence.”

The “Old Order” appears to be in the process of decay.  They desperately struggle to keep their desperate to keep their dead dream alive by constantly attempting to “vote the Warrior out”- and when that works, marginalize, slander, demonize and attack him.  But this strategy will not work because it is attempting to suppress Nature.  Nature will not be denied.  The Warrior WILL NOT be denied.

The time for men of European descent to have courage and tap into their Warrior is seemingly now or never.  Europa is literally being raped while her children in the Occident slowly wither and decay into living ghosts of their ancestors.  But this does not mean directions can’t change.  We just need to have the courage to take right action, even if we are demonized, attacked and even killed for doing so.

To quote Teddy Roosevelt, “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better.  The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

In taking Courageous action, we win no matter what the outcome on paper reads.

In John chapter 15 verse 13, Krist Jesus said, “Greater love hath no man than this; that a man lay down his life for his friends.”

There is honor in sacrifice of one’s self for those you love.  Now am I saying go martyr yourself for the world or develop a “Social Justice Warrior” sense of moral self-righteousness?  No.  What I am saying is that there are things more precious than our own asses.  Be it family, friends, tribe or nation; there should be something that we know in our hearts we would die for.  And when the time comes that those things need defending, we are right there willing to be a human shield if need be- figuratively and/or literally.


We live in an Age where action is the order of the day.  And no meaningful action can happen until we get our Warrior on-line and grow ourselves a set.  Men of European descent as well as men from all races and ethnicities, need to rediscover what it means to have True courage and be a Warrior, if we are going to re-assume our roles as protectors of our family, tribe, and folk, as well as bring honor to our ancestors, and claim our spiritual destiny.

It is the time for Courage now.  It’s time for the Warrior to step into the arena.

Namaste and God Bless.




I am not your oppressor

I am not what you fear

I don’t care if you’re male or female;

I don’t care if you’re gay, bi, or trans;

I don’t care if you’re Muslim, Jew, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Atheist, or Agnostic;

I don’t care if you’re black, white, yellow, red, or brown;

I don’t care if you’re disabled or damn-near superhuman

If you believe in freedom and sovereignty, you can be my ally

If you show me kindness and respect, you can be my friend

If you act with loyalty and honor, you can be my brother (or sister)

If you need my help, I will lift you up

If you want a crutch, I will let you fall

If you choose to come into your power, I will cheer your strength

If you choose to play the victim, I will mock your weakness

If you need to be defended, I will fight for you

If you choose to be afraid, I will let you tremble until you see the Light


I am not your oppressor

I don’t need to fear what you fear

You fear what others have told you to

Teachers and Marxist professors

Politicians and news pundits

Your favorite movie stars and “TV friends”

You fear a grim Neo-Marxist fairy tale;

You fear the nightmare Hollywood has sold to you

A nightmare where white men eternally oppress and rape women

A nightmare where “white devils” genocide and enslave the world

You buy the fad of “revolution” like Air Jordan’s or Pokemon

You get a “Black Lives Matter” sign and bump “F*** Donald Trump”!

You buy a pink “pussy hat” and “stand up for women”- just like Amy Schumer!

You do what all the cool kids are doing!


I am not your oppressor

But I am not your ally either

I don’t want to fight what you fight

You fight Mother Nature and Her Laws

The natural order that sustains all things in harmony

You fight evolution and psychology

“Progressing” ever further away from wellness and peace

You passionately fight for a utopia that has never existed

While blindly pushing towards a dystopia that never should


I am not your oppressor

I don’t need to be angry because you are angry

I don’t need to hate what you hate

You are angry that some are stronger than others

You hate that some are stronger than you

You are angry that some are smarter than others

You hate that some are smarter than you

You are angry that some seem to have it better than others

You hate that some seem to have it better than you

You fear their strength because you feel powerless

You envy their “privilege” because you feel worthless

You resent their success because you believe you’re a failure


I am not your oppressor

I am not who you fear

Neither are those “like me”

You call me “uneducated white man”

This means I’m beneath you

So how can I be the one that holds you back?

How can I be the reason you fail?

Your oppressor is in the mirror

It lives in your mind

Your fear is there too,

It lives in your heart

The one that is poisoned with envy and bitterness


I am not your oppressor

But you need me to be that for you

The object of your resentment, the symbol of your fear

You need me to be your misery and your anguish,

You need me to be your frustration and your pain

This is how it always has been

This is how it always will be

Until we believe otherwise

Until we become what we can become