Sentry Page Protection

Why Those in Theocratic Cults All Parrot the Same Things

One of the many great things about "No Kings" is the variety of messaging we saw. Which means a variety of thoughts. For the progress side of America this is both good and bad because messaging can be scattered. As historically, there will always be the "free Tibet" Berkeley hippies there with those fighting for civil rights, affordable healthcare, and upholding the constitution. For the regress side of America, they're messaging is often more homogenized because there is less variety of thought. This unfortunately means its messaging can be parroted and echoed quicker. 

When we look at the phenomenon of theocratic fascist cults, whether they arise in the deserts of the ancient world or the digital jungles of the modern mind—we are observing the triumph of ideology over experience. These people, who we've said it before and we'll never stop saying it, in their latest incarnation, are in a fascist MAGA cult, nested in a regressive red cult, nested in a faux Abrahamic supremacist religious cult. So these thrice cult fervent disciples speak in unison because the narrow structure they inhabit demands it. Language, that great frontier of the individual spirit, within these tight canyons is commandeered, reduced, and weaponized into a tool of control. The spontaneous bloom of personal insight is replaced by the same dozen tired selfish asshole tropes, "You Marxist", "You Communist", "We're a Republic, not a democracy", "You wanna raise my taxes", etc... SNORE!!!

In such systems, the logos—the living, breathing word—is no longer the voice of mystery but the echo of dogma. The cult member is taught to fear ambiguity, to distrust nuance. Their inner world is colonized by slogans masquerading as truths. Of course historically given to them by hate radio and now more manosphere casts. Theocracy in its fascist form functions as a linguistic parasite: it replicates by infecting minds with prefabricated phrases that suppress doubt and exalt obedience. This is why, when you listen to them speak, you hear not individuals but a kind of psychic hive narrating other lies they heard echoed within their chambers.

And yet, beneath that monotone, there remains a faint pulse of something human. People are indoctrinated into these cults not out of evil but from hunger—for meaning, for belonging, for the comfort of certainty in a world where everything seems in flux. The problem is that when the search for meaning is outsourced to a garbage authority, it ceases to be a quest and becomes a prison.

So the sameness of their speech is not just mimicry; it’s the linguistic manifestation of fear. Fear of the abyss, fear of freedom, fear of the self unmoored from the collective trance. The vast majority are permanently lost to never return, but because it's finally now affecting them personally, some are now going through the de-conditioning process, beginning to have courage to listen ever so slightly to their own higher selves which they have been previously closed off too. Plato's Cave style.

American Reactionaries Want to De-Evolve Instead of Evolve (Exclusive for Members)

The other day, on some of our content, we had a troll attempt to sling mud. They abided by the same exact pattern we see with every troll, who were triggered because what we were saying threatened one of their underlying fictional operating systems. Not to mention one of their multiple nested cults which they are in. We encourage you to listen to our previous insight titled "Regressive Reactionaries" because that is the pattern. Which is that we have never seen an American imperial advocate, meaning regressive, otherwise called a heavy "right winger" leave a proactive, or insightful, or considerate comment. Instead, the comments are always, always, always reactionary. 

The term reactionary is very precise, and when applied to those who claim to call themselves conservatives helps us overstand what is really happening beneath their false slogans and their terrible policy which hurts the average person, including themselves. A reactionary is not simply someone who holds traditional values. A reactionary is someone who defines themselves by opposition to change, someone whose entire political energy comes from the desire to reverse history, to roll back the clock, to resist the forward momentum of culture.

In America, conservatism has always been a peculiar hybrid. Before we were born 45 years ago, at its noblest, it was about conserving the liberties enshrined in the Constitution, conserving a suspicion of centralized authority. But in its current darker manifestation, it is reactionary: clinging to a mythical past — whether it be the 1950s suburban idyll, or the frontier individualism of the 19th century and seeks to impose that simulacrum of stability upon the present.

The problem is that time does not flow backwards. Novelty is the very nature of existence. Change is not a choice, it is the ground state of reality. To be reactionary, then, is to place oneself in a posture of perpetual resistance to the inevitable, like a person who insists on rowing upstream while the river of history flows toward the ocean. The more fiercely they row, the more exhausted and embittered they become, and the more they lash out at those who ride the current with ease. And the more the current regime gets more wanna be authoritarian against the American people.

This is why American reactionaries so often become entangled with said wanna be authoritarianism. To hold back the tide of novelty, they turn to rigid hierarchies, to strongmen who are really pathetic, weak men, and to myths of purity. They convince themselves that if they can only freeze the cultural flux, then meaning will return. But meaning never comes from freezing the dance of history (HIS story) let alone the mystery (MY story). Meaning comes from participating in it.

So from a self-development standpoint, the American conservative, insofar as they become reactionary, is tragically engaged in a losing battle against the very fabric of time. Their fear of change, and make no mistake, they are fear based, blinds them to the possibility that change is not annihilation, but transformation. And this is why we would argue that the true radicalism today is not the reactionary fantasy of going back, but the courage to go forward.

Regressive Reactionaries (Exclusive for Members)

These insights, and our essays, and our documentaries are not for the faint of heart. They are not shallow fluff but hopefully hard hitting, paradigm crushing, and dogma challenging. They are our attempts at having a memorable body of work to help the development of you dear watchers, readers, and/or listeners but are also obscure and relatively unknown. So we very sporadically get feedback but it's few and far between. When we do get rare feedback, 2/3 of the time it's impressive, thoughtful, insightful, even educational, but most of all proactive. But the other 1/3 of the time the comments are so staggeringly poor they are laughable. We've noticed a consistent pattern in each and every one of these really atrocious comments - They are regressive and they are reactionary. Not to mention always coming from someone who is anonymous - A troll.

We have, at times, put the following text in the info of our video channels - "Due to the nature of our work often challenging people's dogmas (and catmas), reactionary comments are not worth the time but proactive comments are encouraged!" There's a hilarious old website called dontevenreply.com which is subtitled "E-mails From An Asshole." It's since concluded but was posts from a guy who messed with people on various internet classified ad sites. He'd pick the most goofy requests posts that were just asking for it and just continually mess with them, in a proactive way, with an ultimate goal of trying to string them along for as long as possible so it was good content for the site. We took it as a lesson in not even engaging with anonymous internet reactionaries in the first place, as the troll's goals are to get you to engage. We've also further remembered this wisdom after hearing Robert Anton Wilson, the wonderful author and sit down comedian say this in regards to debate - "Don't teach a pig to sing, it will only upset you and annoy the pig". Which is a hysterical R.A.W. way of saying don't even try to debate. Debate and respectful discourse is important in healthy democracy though, so we would say you should absolutely debate if you are moderate and they are moderate and both want to find common ground in good faith and this "don't teach a pig" quote only applies if the opposition is not extreme and in good faith - as then you won’t even agree on definitions of terms. So because of these two bits of comedy wisdom from the past, we basically do a quick glance at the reactionary comments, roll our eyes and or chuckle, delete them, and try to at least respond proactively back with the proactive comments, only giving those our time. See our piece "Proactive vs Reactive" on the massively important quality of being proactive in one's personal and professional life.

We know the left vs right binary political framing to be a binary trap. It's never our intention to turn our personal outputs, this podcast, our future creations, into just a left to lib vs con to right polarized battle and saying things within this framing certainly can trigger tribal trolls. Our podcast, which these insights go out to as audio only, mixed with our longer narrated essays, always has a foundational component which is balance, and liberal democracy, with a healthy mix off public social and private capital is a true center point and the farthest thing away from both left extreme communism which has the gulags and right extreme fascism that has the camps, both of which become authoritarian starvation nightmares but one of which our country is far away from while the other is trying to be implemented as we speak so being an "enlightened centrist" doesn't work half way between democracy and authoritarianism.

Although we are an independent who cares deeply about progress and society evolving, we could have a very left-wing communist come at us and say the government should be making our shoes and television sets and we would vehemently disagree that should be left up to corporations. We could also have some crazy extreme ideological person come at us that says there are more than two sexes and men can get pregnant and we would also vehemently disagree. But to date, neither has happened. What has actually happened, is that anytime these very unimpressive regressive reactive comments have come at us to date, we can tell they have been coming from an extreme right wing point of view and have been triggered with a “how dare you challenge our underlying dark hate based imperial religion” attitude. If they were intelligent and proactive they'd punch through a maybe influence a bit, but because the more heavy the conservatism the more it protects hierarchy, (and is usually built on a foundation in religious patriarchal hierarchy), the more the underlying ideologies are pro-morbid rich, pro-oligarch, and thus pro-authoritarian. They don't propose anything to help the working middle class, those words don't even exist on heavy right wing regressive media, but instead have been spending years getting working class people to fight each other over those culture wars.

Asking the ghost in the machine what "Reactionary politics" is and it says: it refers to a political ideology or movement that seeks to return to a previous social or political order. Characterized by a desire to reverse or counteract social, political, or economic changes that have occurred in society. Unlike conservative politics, which may seek to preserve certain aspects of the status quo, reactionary politics aim to roll back progress and return to what they perceive as a better or more traditional way of life. This can include the re-establishment of heavier hierarchies, the reversal of progressive reforms, or even advocating for the restoration of monarchies, which is certainly firing on all cylinders in the US of A by dark agents. Reactionary politics often arise in response to perceived threats to traditional values, institutions, or ways of life and advocate for authoritarian measures to turn back the clock on social progress and return to a perceived period when things "used to be great" but in no way had liberty and justice for all.

Now, as an example, if you’re a regressive reactionary, no need to listen to this final 2 minutes of the light of truth, as it will trigger your dark shadow dogma of lies.

We’ve said the following before, we’ll say it again now, and we’re going to keep saying it. Women control access to sexual intercourse. Birth control and abortion empower women and give them more options and freedom. And the regressive, Christian Right are not real Christians but Talibangelical Hypochristians whose crusade against abortion is not about life. It's about dark imperial hyper-patriarchal love lacking sexually repressed religions that want to suppress the empowerment of the feminine and make them inferior to men by telling them what to do and limiting their rights and freedom. This devolution, retrograde, regression is owned in the United States by right wing "conservatives" most of whom now seem perfectly fine with fascism mixed with idiocracy. As the majority regressive right wing Federal Supreme court rolled back a nearly 50 year right given to women in Roe v. Wade in the Dobbs decision and the right wing Arizona supreme court rolled back women’s rights in Arizona to 1864. The most regressive legal move in our country in our lifetime and even our parents' lifetimes and women who support this, are self hating. They hate their backwards selves.

No Kings and The Pro-Democratic Movement of Joy

The No Kings protests are a marvelous eruption of the human spirit into the political landscape. To see people in the United States of America, a society long habituated to the theater of managed choice and the soft hypnosis of consumerism, awakening and dancing in the streets beneath banners that declare the blatantly obvious “No Kings” — well, that is the body politic rediscovering its pulse and deeper spirit.

Democracy, in its truest sense, is not a system of bureaucratic rituals or a cold architecture of laws. It is an ecstatic phenomenon. The collective imagination made flesh, the many realizing they are, like an ant hive or mycelial network, one organism with countless voices and are the most powerful. More than pedo oligarchs, or a nightmare fuel supreme court, or a deeply mentally ill criminal shitler clown president gone rogue. The No Kings movement, in its humor, in its refusal to genuflect before the false idols of authority, is a reclamation of humor and joy as a political act. And joy, my friend, is one of the most subversive forces in the cosmos. Tyrants and bureaucrats cannot understand it, for it arises from a source beyond fear or control so the MAGA cult of fear is so jealous of their joy because they have no joy and will have no joy until they leave the cult.

What is happening in those gatherings — the laughter, the music, the dancing — is not mere peaceful protest; it is ritual. It is a spontaneous remembering that the divine spark within each evolving person is sovereign, that no flag, no corporation, no wanna be cunty king or technocrat can claim ownership over the ecstatic pulse of life. The No Kings protesters are saying: We are not subjects; we are participants in the cosmic drama of becoming. And that is where the real revolution always begins — not in the corridors of power but in the liberated imagination of those who refuse to bow to dumbfuckery. When joy becomes contagious, the old order trembles. The empire of control will not survive the laughter of awakening souls. So let's keep doing it funny and joyful patriots.

Conservative/Regressive Media is Sycophantic

What we are witnessing in what calls itself conservative but is really just regressive media in the west today is not journalism in the classical sense - it is court ritual, a choreography of flattery and fear. It has become sycophantic because it no longer serves truth but instead power and no longer enlightens but anesthetizes. In periods of higher consciousness, we had counsels of wise elders in democratic organization. In dark age kingdoms, monarchs were almost never the Walt Disney version of a philosopher King or Queen but we're instead more Alice in Wonderland "off with his head" egomaniacal psychopaths. Thus empires had to be built on lies where the person at the top was told they were good when they were instead really bad. Courtiers surrounded them echoing his words, magnifying his myths, and shielding him from the murmurs of the real world. The same drama is now enacted nightly across millions of glowing screens from thousands of different grifting sources.

A sycophantic media ecosystem thrives not on inquiry, but on affirmation. It tells its audience what they already believe, and praises them for believing it. It replaces curiosity with certainty, complexity with outrage, and civic responsibility with tribal belonging. The news anchor becomes a priest of grievance, dispensing indulgences to the faithful and casting heretics into the outer darkness. The result is a kind of psychic feedback loop, where propaganda is mistaken for revelation and emotional arousal for insight.

This sickness—because it is a sickness—emerges when truth itself becomes secondary to allegiance. When the purpose of communication shifts from discovery to domination, from illumination to the maintenance of hierarchy, the collective mind begins to rot. You can hear it in the language: repetition, simplification, scapegoating. The vocabulary of power replacing the language of understanding.

And yet, this sycophancy is not merely a media problem; it is a societal symptom. When people feel unmoored, afraid, and disoriented, they long for voices that promise stability, even if those voices lie. Con man media has learned to exploit that longing, converting insecurity into obedience. It does not speak truth to power; it speaks comfort to power and fear to everyone else.

But the antidote lies, as always, in self-education and awareness. To recognize sycophancy for what it is—a theater of control—is to rob it of its enchantment. Real journalistic media, the kind that nurtures democracy, seeks truth, invites discomfort, encourages doubt, and awakens thought. It treats the citizen not as a customer or a convert, but as a participant in the great conversation of an evolving civilization.

Casting Spells and Chanting over Thoughts and Prayers

The fabulous comedian David Cross, whose comedy decades ago first raised our eyebrow to lowest common denominator political American stupidity, has a great bit where he says “I would like to officially change and substitute 'casting spells and chanting' in place of 'thoughts and prayers'. Hilarious and even more American!

This is not only wonderful and delightful because it draws attention to the fact that language itself is micro magic. When a likely fake Christian politician stands at a podium after a 2nd Amendment related tragedy and utters that eye roll worthy, tired, and empty phrase, “thoughts and prayers,” instead of passing very popular common sense policies to help reduce gun violence, what they are actually doing is a kind of spiritual bypassing substituted for spell-casting, though a spell so worn down, so emptied of intention, that it has become little more than background noise. The words drift out, ritualistically, to soothe and placate, but not to transform a culture into something better.

Imagine if instead of that hollow incantation, they were to admit what it actually is: “We are casting spells and chanting" or "engaging in magical ritual and doing incantations”. Because that is precisely what speech is. Every utterance is an attempt to shape reality through vibration and symbol. To speak is to weave the air with intention. The tragedy of “thoughts and prayers” is not that it is mystical, but that it is virtue signaling stripped of potency, a ritual gone unconscious. The vast majority of stuff in Abrahamic faiths, which at their most water down easily consumable and thus least spiritual, are exoteric, meaning outer, are borrowed and co-opeded, if not outright stolen from older, esoteric, pegan, dreidic, indigenous, deeper esoteric practices.

So to say “casting spells and doing incantations” would be not only to ground it more in nature, and thus real spirituality, but to bring the hidden truth back to the surface: that language has power, and that power can be wielded authentically or cynically. The shamans of old did not speak words lightly; they knew that syllables could open doorways in the mind, that the right phrase in the right moment could heal or destroy. In our society, we have forgotten this, but are surely starting to realize it now due to the increase of harsh rhetoric, even though clichés are still babbled as though they were somehow sufficient.

What would it mean if public officials more deeply understood their words as spells? It would mean that every promise and proclamation would have to be crafted with the care of a magician drawing symbols. It would mean responsibility for the energetic resonance of speech. And perhaps it would mean fewer empty rituals and more beneficial actions that actually change the fabric of the collective psyche for the better. To evolve it instead of devole it.

A Description of the MAGA Cult's Supreme Leader (Exclusive For Members)

Oliver Kornetzke had a great summary of the American president in office in the year of our lord 2025 / otherwise called the imperial roman calendar which was co-opted and stolen from the more sophisticated indigenous to pagan lunisolar calendar. Fake pharisees Christians, which are the ones who are not love and light, loving their neighbors, but instead hate (just because they fear) everyone not like them and think they are supreme, which would be the subprime Christian Nationalists, and thank you non supremacist real love and light Christians who support us in also calling them out, think their fictional male sky daddy version of God works through imperfect people. The current one being someone who has been a lifelong criminal who should have been in jail since the 1970's and the Russian's have had kompromat on since the 1980's thus never should have even been allowed to have any sway in local New York City politics, let alone federal politics, let alone even run for office, let alone get elected to federal office, let along fail upwards as an entry level political position to the highest office in the land while continually committing crimes all the way up.  

Kornetzke, with some of our additions, amply describes him as "a festering carcass of American rot shoved into an ill fitting suit: the sleaze of a conman, the cowardice of a draft dodger, the gluttony of a parasite, the racism of a Klansman, the sexism of a back alley creep, the ignorance of a bar-stool drunk, and the greed of a hedge fund ghoul - who wears shoe lifts to falsely claim he's a scooch more tall, spray paints his face orange (from bronzer, the revealing of which on a white KN95 mask was the primary reason he didn't want to wear them) and is paraded like a prize hog at a country fair with fake toupee hair. Not a president. Not even a real man. Just the deceased distillation of everything the United States swears it isn't but has always been - arrogance dressed up as exceptionalism, stupidity passed off as common sense, cruelty sold as toughness, greed exalted as ambition, and corruption worshiped like gospel." All with the stinky smell of constantly filling adult diapers from his fecal incontinence. And that doesn't even start to touch on his close buddy relationship with one of the world's formost child moelesters that co-enegaged with him in juvenile human trafficing and we would not be suprized to hear outright teenage rape and perhaps even House of Cards style adolescence muder for adreachrome taking purposes and that's the only reason he's lived as long with such horrible mental and physical health. It is America's shadow made flesh, a rotting pumpkin idol proving that when power centers of a nation kneel before money and spite, it doesn't just lose its soul - it shits out this bloated obscenity and calls it a leader. 

So as a member of the freedom loving democratic world who cares about freedom of truthful speech, the best thing you can always do on a regular basis, is to mock this clown and his Nazgûl crew which indigenous cultures call a "Heyokas". Who, even though he and his minions have spent way too much time taking a wrecking ball to the rule of law, and the worst thing about them, short of their massive damage to American democracy, is changing America from a somewhat respected country to one which is a joke on the world stage. Most Japanese cities were flattened to rubble after World War II, and within a decade we're roaring back again. So America, let's keep fighting back, stronger and louder than ever, to restore rules of law, democratic government, and the US of A's global reputation. Which will take time. But continuing with humor combined with action is the best counter remedy. Which is effective against his fasch cult who just wants to spread cruelty and own the libs because they refuse to see their gluttonous emperor has no clothes and is in bed with Satan. 

Hope is Catalytic (Exclusive For Members)

Hopium. That curious neologism of our digital moment, a word forged in the meme-forge of the internet to describe hope as if it were a narcotic, a delusory vapor inhaled by the naïve to dull the sting of reality. The cynic wields the word as a weapon, sneering: “You’re just smoking hopium,” meaning your optimism is not courage but a chemical fantasy, a way of refusing to face the brutal truth.

And yet, let us examine this more carefully. Is hope always a drug, an intoxicant that blinds? Or is it sometimes a medicine, a plant ally that expands the horizon of the possible? The line between anesthesia and initiation is thin. Yes, hopium can be a form of anesthesia—think of the endless promises that “change is around the corner,” while the machinery of exploitation grinds on. In this sense, hope becomes not an act of courage but a sedative, keeping populations passive, docile, always waiting for tomorrow’s miracle rather than demanding transformation today.

But dismissing all hope as “hopium” is itself another kind of intoxication—the intoxication of despair. For despair, too, is a drug, a narcotic of certainty: “Nothing will change, nothing can change.” The problem is not hope itself, but the quality of the hope. False hope—hope that demands no action, that requires no imagination—is indeed hopium. But fierce hope, hope that burns, hope that drives people into mass organizing and uprising, into art, into experiment—that is not narcotic, that is catalytic.

So when someone accuses you of inhaling hopium, you might ask them: “What is the alternative you are offering? The opiate of despair?” Better, perhaps, to risk the hallucination of hope, for at least hallucinations have a way of becoming reality if believed in strongly enough. All great changes, all revolutions, began as “hopium”—dreams derided as naïve until they crystallized into the world we now inhabit.

The real question, then, is not whether hope is a drug, but whether it is the drug that numbs or the drug that awakens. Psychedelics themselves are often dismissed as delusion, but we know they can open the psyche to realities more real than the so-called real. So too with hope. It can sedate, or it can illuminate. The work is to learn the difference.

The Asymmetry of American Violent Rhetoric (Exclusive for Members)

Our work of sharing self-development is to help make sure you continue to move toward love and less toward fear and hate. Or to say that more philosophically, less a part of the Empire - which is a movement of assimilation or slavery or death. And we're very transparent in saying that in the United States the lion’s share of its Empire comes from the rightward side of the house, the old confederacy, who with all their disparaging of the government working for working people, turns their version of "gov mint" over to American robber baron criminal oligarchs - who, along with Israeli and Russian Oligarchs that co-fund it, want the working people in-fighting, which is called divide and conquer. As that's the whole point of conservative media.

The contemporary vector of that oligarchic grift money fueled media is regressivism - as everything is about going backward. To channel the spirit of the Wild West founding when violence was sanctioned and sanctified in the birth story of the Republic. So to the backwards mind, to speak violently is to speak authentically. Now, in 2025 we had a key propagandist co-member of such media and co-member of their end times death cult die, and before even knowing who did the killing, the cult was calling for more death. And since it thrives on outrage the fear based gun culture rhetorical lie machine ecco chamber results in cultists all trying to out hypocrasize themselves via an atmosphere of embattlement. Presenting the world as a zero-sum struggle, a war of “real Americans” against shadowy others - immigrants, intellectuals, bureaucrats, globalists, thinkers, non-oligarchic ball garglers, multiculturalists, religions actually coexisting in harmony, etc... That multiethnic, multicultural, multi-religious community, which they call "The left", for all its challenges, problems, struggles, and rhetoric of revolution for the people, tends toward protest action and its disruptions can be irritating but rarely lethal and within said groups, violence is overwhelmingly denounced. But for however many progressives in that camp that slip through and celebrate a killing, you'll find 1000x more regressives doing so because for them violence supposedly becomes not only permissible but virtuous, and is viewed as a defense of civilization against decay. And since their cult is based on projection, inversion, and confession the opposite is true - as they are the primary group in a devolutionary decay.

For example, around 80%+ of shooters all fit the same profile - internet radicalized slep fascistic white males that have spent way too much time in the darker corners of the internet, who are in some variation of theocratic end times cults such as Mormonism which thrive on guilt and shame, not to mention sexual repression - as one of the incubating factors to fascism is based on sexual insecurity, they nurture a fetish for weaponry cause they are their dark falices. But beneath their BBK's they wish they had is a deeper psychological crisis. The right-wing fascination with violence is a symptom of their unprocessed grief. The world they thought they owned—the stable hierarchies of race, gender, religion—is dissolving before their eyes. Instead of mourning that passing and seeking renewal, they mythologize it as a battle to the death. The violent word becomes a spell against the chaos of change, a way of insisting that the old cowboy order is still alive.

The real antidote lies not in counter violence, which only fuels the paranoia, but in each of us in the pro-democratic majority continuing to become active - speaking out, acting and participating locally, engaging in non-violent civil disobedience, which is as American as apple pie, and the general sharing of better ideas to continue the construction of a richer cultural story. One where strength is measured in resilience. The right-wing obsession with violent speech is a symptom of it's spiritual impoverishment because virtually all of them are in these not only sexually repressed but also spiritually bereft perverted supremacist cults which are just factories of hate. And until they address that poverty, until they are offered alternative visions of belonging and purpose that are more compelling than their fantasies of civil war, the war will continue to be in their own minds.

Never Be Scared By (Wanna Be) Fascists

Fascists, when you strip away the theatrical suits and the jargon, are not only professional liars but terror engineers. Their business is not merely trying to win arguments with rapid fire lies; it is manufacturing a climate in which people feel so besieged, so atomized and frightened, that they will surrender their freedoms for the promise of safety. They want your imagination hostage. Fear is the lever they try and pull to make moral and political reasoning inert; fear makes weak and spiritually undeveloped people, the bottom floor of which would be the lemmings in de-spiritualized supremacist religious cults, clutch whatever talisman is offered—whether it be a uniform, a charismatic demagogue, or a fantasy of ethnic or cultural purity. Once fear is doing the thinking, consent is engineered rather than earned.

After they cultivate that fear in their core cult they aim to spread it to the larger population, such as members of non supremacist religions, or secular folks, in highly specific ways. They invent enemies and inflate small problems into apocalyptic narratives; sound familiar? They turn complexity into a simple story with villains and a promised clean solution. They stage spectacles like unwatchable cringe worthy rallies, paramilitary displays, dramatic denunciations - that function like ritual to normalize aggression. They flood the information space with lies, half-truths, and conspiracy so that trust in institutions and in one another corrodes. They weaponize humiliation and shame, making people afraid to speak, to question, or to reach across divides. And crucially, they cultivate the false fantasy that violence or authoritarian rule is a noble instrument of regeneration—this is how they sacralize intimidation.

But here is the crucial, empowering truth: they are trying to scare you because your fear is useful to them. Fear is fuel. Whatever terrifies you, they will try and amplify; whatever solidarity you allow yourself, they will try to fracture. So the answer is not bravado and not denial; it is clear-sightedness. When you study their techniques - endless gaslighting, name-calling, scapegoating, backwards conspiracy, lack of empathy, internal weakness - you demystify them. Once a trick is recognized as a trick, its power evaporates. The magician loses the audience when the audience finally looks behind the curtain and gains gnosis that the false emperor has no clothes.

Now when a specific pathetic excuse for a human being says "he hates the left" what he is really saying is he fears the left. Because hate is just fear. So never be scared, or defeatist because fear narrows the mind and shrinks the possible. Courage, in the political sense, is not the absence of fear but the refusal to let fear define the terms of your life. Continue to build your life in ways that are robust to intimidation: continue making durable ties of friendship and community across cultures, faiths, and belief systems, continue cultivating institutions of mutual aid, start your own pro-democracy media, support non corporatized independent real journalistic media, support real education, and practice humility and curiosity. These are the real bulwarks against authoritarian temptation. Fascism does not succeed where people have thick, overlapping networks of trust and a lively culture that can absorb and transform shocks.

Humor, irony, ridicule—these are not frivolities; they are social immunities. Satire punctures the grandiosity of demagogues; art expands the field of possible futures; philosophy teaches us how to tolerate ambiguity. When we refuse to reduce ourselves to the binary frames offered by fearmongers, we reclaim the narrative. We say: the world contains more than your enemy, your scapegoat, your emergency. We insist on complexity, on moral imagination.

History is not a single arrow marching inevitably toward darkness. There have been countless victories over tyranny and they're will be many more: labor movements won protections for workers; civil rights campaigns unraveled legalized bigotry; subterranean networks have protected the persecuted in dark times. Those victories were not the product of some grand, heroic violence but of persistent, creative, and often humble forms of resistance: decentralized media creation, strikes, legal fights, boycotts, culture-making, sanctuary networks, mutual aid. That is the ongoing template for answerability. So do not meet their spectacle on their terms. Do not let your life be rearranged into eternal vigilance against invented monsters. Learn their methods, deflate their myths, and invest your energy in the fabrics of ordinary human life that they seek to degrade. When the politics of fear encounters a culture dense with empathy, wit, and durable relationships, it loses its purchase because fear shrivels in the presence of a sustained, creative community.

Supremacy is a Problem

Supremacy — whether painted in racial hues, religious banners, national flags, or even the smugness of intellectual elitism — is the metaphysical disease of our species. It is the conviction that my group, my tribemy castemy mental software configuration, is not merely different but somehow better, ordained, inevitable, the top rung on some imaginary ladder and that all other visions of tribe or the sacred are false, dangerous, or subordinate. This is not merely a potential theological position; it is a psychic enclosure, a wall built around the infinite to make it manageable, controllable, and ultimately usable as a weapon.

The trouble with this is, the ladder is a hallucination. Biology doesn’t operate on "supremacy," it operates on diversity. Evolution thrives on variety, mutation, and various oddball experiments. If one strand of life declared itself "supreme" and wanted to exterminate other aspects of itself, it would also be sawing off its own branches.

Supremacy as a mental program — let’s call it an ideological virus and spreads because it offers an easy, narcotic hit: "I’m more important because I was born into this group." It saves one the trouble of self-examination. But with a very high price of self oppression, ecological destruction, and a nervous system tuned more to fear and resentment than to joy or curiosity. From a third eye vantage, the whole thing is also a grotesque narrowing of the possible. The divine is not a one-language, one-costume performance; it is a vast, multiversal chorus. To claim that your tradition alone holds the truth is like staring at one star and declaring the rest of the night sky an illusion. The sacred is too big to fit into any single scripture without spilling over its edges.

The opposite of supremacy isn’t "inferiority" or "sameness." It’s mutuality, synergy — the recognition that no single perspective holds all the cards. When one lets go of supremacy, they gain the freedom to actually learn from a larger group chorus with a greater data set, rather than trying to hammer every anomaly into a pre-approved rigid hierarchy of suboptimal people always defending lies and corruption.

In short: supremacy is the error of confusing one reality-tunnel for the reality. It is mistaking your map for the territory, and then trying to burn all the other maps. 

The Asymmetry of Violent Rhetoric

Our work of sharing self-development is to help make sure you continue to move toward love and less toward fear and hate. Or to say that more philosophically, less a part of the Empire - which is a movement of assimilation or slavery or death. And we're very transparent in saying that in the United States the lion’s share of its Empire comes from the rightward side of the house, the old confederacy, who with all their disparaging of the government working for working people, turns their version of "gov mint" over to American robber baron criminal oligarchs - who, along with Israeli and Russian Oligarchs that co-fund it, want the working people in-fighting, which is called divide and conquer. As that's the whole point of conservative media.

The contemporary vector of that oligarchic grift money fueled media is regressivism - as everything is about going backward. To channel the spirit of the Wild West founding when violence was sanctioned and sanctified in the birth story of the Republic. So to the backwards mind, to speak violently is to speak authentically. Now, in 2025 we had a key propagandist co-member of such media and co-member of their end times death cult die, and before even knowing who did the killing, the cult was calling for more death. And since it thrives on outrage the fear based gun culture rhetorical lie machine ecco chamber results in cultists all trying to out hypocrasize themselves via an atmosphere of embattlement. Presenting the world as a zero-sum struggle, a war of “real Americans” against shadowy others - immigrants, intellectuals, bureaucrats, globalists, thinkers, non-oligarchic ball garglers, multiculturalists, religions actually coexisting in harmony, etc... That multiethnic, multicultural, multi-religious community, which they call "The left", for all its challenges, problems, struggles, and rhetoric of revolution for the people, tends toward protest action and its disruptions can be irritating but rarely lethal and within said groups, violence is overwhelmingly denounced. But for however many progressives in that camp that slip through and celebrate a killing, you'll find 1000x more regressives doing so because for them violence supposedly becomes not only permissible but virtuous, and is viewed as a defense of civilization against decay. And since their cult is based on projection, inversion, and confession the opposite is true - as they are the primary group in a devolutionary decay.

For example, around 80%+ of shooters all fit the same profile - internet radicalized slep fascistic white males that have spent way too much time in the darker corners of the internet, who are in some variation of theocratic end times cults such as Mormonism which thrive on guilt and shame, not to mention sexual repression - as one of the incubating factors to fascism is based on sexual insecurity, they nurture a fetish for weaponry cause they are their dark falices. But beneath their BBK's they wish they had is a deeper psychological crisis. The right-wing fascination with violence is a symptom of their unprocessed grief. The world they thought they owned—the stable hierarchies of race, gender, religion—is dissolving before their eyes. Instead of mourning that passing and seeking renewal, they mythologize it as a battle to the death. The violent word becomes a spell against the chaos of change, a way of insisting that the old cowboy order is still alive.

The real antidote lies not in counter violence, which only fuels the paranoia, but in each of us in the pro-democratic majority continuing to become active - speaking out, acting and participating locally, engaging in non-violent civil disobedience, which is as American as apple pie, and the general sharing of better ideas to continue the construction of a richer cultural story. One where strength is measured in resilience. The right-wing obsession with violent speech is a symptom of it's spiritual impoverishment because virtually all of them are in these not only sexually repressed but also spiritually bereft perverted supremacist cults which are just factories of hate. And until they address that poverty, until they are offered alternative visions of belonging and purpose that are more compelling than their fantasies of civil war, the war will continue to be in their own minds.

Life Taking Vs Life Giving Systems

Life-taking systems compared to life-giving systems are the essential polarity of human civilization’s spiritual, economic, and ecological struggle. One paradigm consumes, extracts, commodifies, and alienates; the other nurtures, regenerates, harmonizes, and connects. These are the forces that either nourish or vampirize the living world.

A taking system is built on extraction. It is the foundation of empire which sees Earth not as a living web of relationships, but as a warehouse of resources to be plundered. It views human beings as units of labor, as consumers, as demographic segments to be manipulated. These systems — settler colonialism, unbalanced industrial capitalism, and technocratic surveillance states, are obsessed with control. They create scarcity in the midst of abundance to maintain leverage. They produce alienation by severing people from land, from each other, and from their own inner depths. 

In such systems of death, the metric of success is monetary growth at all costs. GDP increases while ecosystems collapse. Profits soar while human mental health deteriorates. The feedback loops are ignored because they threaten the narrative of perpetual expansion. These systems are thermodynamically non-resilient and unsustainable because they devour more energy than they return. They are like tumors - cells that have forgotten they are part of a larger organism. Strong courageous people will need to conclude them or else this system will conclude entire planets.

A giving system, in contrast, is built on the logic of reciprocity. It understands that no being exists in isolation and is based on regeneration, not extraction. In such systems, economic activities are designed to enrich the commons - not to privatize them. Agriculture becomes permaculture. Industry becomes circular. Governance becomes participatory and deeply local, with decisions made in alignment with ecological limits and human well-being. Work is not divorced from meaning - Craft, creativity, community rituals, these are not side projects; they are integral to the fabric of existence. Success is measured not in accumulation, but in the health of relationships: between people, between humans and ecosystems, between inner life and outer action. Moreover, such systems operate on biocentric time. They are patient. They value cycles over deadlines, depth over speed. 

The essential difference is taking systems treat everything as a means to an end while giving systems recognize that life itself is the end. The “resource” is not a commodity—it’s a relationship. The tree is not lumber in waiting; it is a co-creator of the biosphere, a being in its own right.

Taking systems are loud and institutionalized. Giving systems are often quiet, local, and mimic nature. They grow in gardens, in co-ops, in community gatherings, in regenerative farms, in art collectives that refuse to be commodified. They are rhizomatic—networks without a center, spreading invisibly until they reach a tipping point.

The real future is to conclude them, render them obsolete, by nurturing life-giving alternatives that are so compelling, so nourishing, that people naturally gravitate toward them. The question is not whether we can transition to life-giving. It is whether we will remember that such systems are not utopian inventions, and short of natural anomalies like caldera volcanoes erupting or meteor striking, both of which happen every few thousands or millions of years, are how life in the natura world wants to organize itself.

Improving the Masculine #3: Bro Lone and Male Loneliness

Human beings are social creatures, yet there is a noticeable difference between how women and men engage with friendship and emotional intimacy. Across cultures, women consistently demonstrate stronger social ties, richer networks of support, and more emotionally fulfilling friendships. In contrast, men are often more socially isolated, with many struggling to form and maintain close friendships, especially as they age. This disparity reveals both deep-rooted cultural conditioning and unaddressed emotional needs among men.

Women tend to be more socially skilled, not because of innate biological differences alone, but largely due to how they are raised. From a young age, girls are encouraged to nurture relationships and value emotional closeness. As adults, this translates into friendships that are often more intimate, communicative, and mutually supportive. Women also tend to prioritize connection and community over competition, making it easier for them to sustain long-term bonds. 

By contrast, men are often socialized to value independence and emotional restraint. Vulnerability is lameley seen as weakness, and emotional expression—particularly toward other men is discouraged. As a result, many men rely heavily on their romantic partners for emotional support, leaving them particularly vulnerable to loneliness if those relationships struggle or end. Since we'll just come out and say it, women are better socially than men, it's such that women typically excel at relationship based professions, such as nursing. While men, who play with toys, become mechanics, or drivers, or engineers, or software developers so they can sit by themselves alone. 

We've spoken numerous times in the past about how women are more heart, and men are more mind. The ability to reach out to a friend, to open up, and say, "hey man we should get together" is a heart based activity, and is thus more feminine. And the manly alpha macho con bro will often say or think, "I don't need to reach out, I'm good alone".

The “brolone” — this curious term, this symptomatic poetry of our time, names a phenomenon not merely of male loneliness, but of existential drift, a psycho-cultural pathology hidden behind memes and muscle mass, keyboard warrioring in toxic forums, or behind podcast posturing and gym-bro gospel. It is, in its essence, the wail of the wounded masculine psyche adrift in the postmodern echo chamber.

Now let’s understand this not as an attack, but as a diagnosis. The “brolone,” as we perceive it, is the man who has been stripped of myth, of elderhood, of authentic initiation into the mystery of what it means to be a man among beings. He wanders a landscape devoid of soul, surrounded by pixelated idols of success — Lambos, OnlyFans, testosterone boosters, crypto stacks — and beneath this glittering emptiness is an ocean of unmet sorrow. A child’s hunger for meaning dressed up in the Kevlar of performance.

This becomes especially clear in adulthood. As careers, family responsibilities, and geographic moves increase, many men find it difficult to maintain friendships. Women, form tight-knit, emotionally supportive circles. They vent. They hug. They send thoughtful texts and plan wine nights. Thus often continuing to invest in relationships through regular contact and emotional sharing, men may drift apart from friends due to neglect or discomfort with emotional intimacy. Over time, this leads to isolation, depression, and a quiet crisis of disconnectedness that affects health and well-being. Thus, if you look at the stats of mostmen, as they age, they spend more and more time alone. And then into middle age and their golden years, if they're still married, their wives tell their friends, of which they have more, that my husband has no friends.

This isn’t new, mind you. The crisis of the masculine has been unfolding for decades, centuries even, since the sacred rites of passage were replaced by heavily departmentalized Capitalism, external individualism, Americanized rural areas and suburbs both stupidly built primarily around the automobile - with usually single individuals in their separate boxes, not to mention other things such as diplomas, paychecks, and war. Layered now with the digital acceleration of anti-social media and algorithmic isolation, it has reached a fever pitch, because one can easily spend all of their free time, which the Oligarchs want you to have as little time as possible because they work you to the bone, in front of screens. And that's not to mention the drug of mass multiplayer gaming. This is a global problem but is most amplified in countries which have the most grueling work schedules. So it's bad in the US, and it's even worse in Japan for example. 

Relationships, making them and maintaining them, is work. And many men, often tired from their slave jobs, are not as willing to put in the work as women are. And this is something that men need to accept as their fault. Speaking personally, we have buddies we've known from growing up, who we see on occasion, but some of whom we might personally see only once or twice a year now, and that's only because of our spouses being friends. The women maintain those relationships. Our old school mates are stoked to see us when they do, but at the same time are unwilling to put the work in themselves. A lot of friendships are actually quite fragile, and are always a two way street. So it goes without saying that when you do reach out to a friend, to get together socially, and they don't do the same nearly as often, or not at all, well then after just 2 or 3 "I've called him, it's his turn to call me's" the relationship pauses, and then before you know it, it's been six months or two years and you don't really have a continuing friendship anymore. We think anyone listening to this has experienced such.

Another one is neighbors. If you have crappy, disrespectful, or psycho neighbors, that sucks. If you have nice cool neighbors, into your 30's and 40's, maybe with kids similar ages, then amazing. But even with them, both my wife and I, who have a quite decent network of people we know, are constantly amazed by how few neighbors reciprocate invitations. We know handfuls of kids who always want playdates together, and then the dad's are like "no we cant" or "I got something else to do" or they say, “We should catch up soon.” But they really mean “never.” Yet in reality, building friendships with others in your neighborhood who have kids around your child's age can be priceless. The dads who don't put the work in, even via building relationships on behalf of their children, some of us other dads who are social and do put the work in, replace the unsocial dads last names with - brolone. There goes Nick Bronlne. Who I know this weekend is sitting on the couch by himself watching Netflix or the game. While his daughter also is alone and less happy because of it.

The male psyche, once tied to land, tribe, and cosmology, is now drifting in a matrix of mirrors reflecting only the self. And it is lonely. Not just lonely for connection — though surely it is — but lonely for purpose, for depth, for a place in the grand story. The “brolone” chugs his protein and benches his weight, not because he is strong, but because he lacks mental strength and is terrified of being nothing at all. And as we'll surely get more into in this series, often adheres to dark red-pill ideology not because it enlightens, but because it offers a structure in a void of hollowness. It is, in other words, a poor substitute for the Mystery. Because without myth, without any sort of numinous anchor of a living Earth and a living spirit, the male mind loops itself into absurdity. And so he becomes the caricature — retreating into digital harems and manosphere priests. He seeks transcendence through domination because he has not figured out that true strength is in building real community. Not via a dark imperial hate church, although praise to any more open minded system, religious or secular, which brings community together. 

Which by the way will result in a longer and more healthy life. As one of the primary ingredients of blue zones — places like Okinawa (Japan), Ikaria (Greece), and Sardinia (Italy) which are regions in the world where people are claimed to have exceptionally long lives beyond the age of 100, is continuing rich social interactions, all through their lives. As a somewhat professional, somewhat hobby documentary filmmaker, our closest agescent hobby is a form of documentary photography - street photography. And we'll never forget this shot we took in an early morning walk in Barcelona, of about 30 old grey haired dudes, standing around a fountain. Who would obviously all meet up regularly at this location, easily walkable to in their 15 minute city, to drink their coffee and socialize. And one of the main things we think of when looking back at the picture, of them laughing and chuckling, is these guys are going to live a long time. Way more than the lonely old timer we spoke of earlier who has no friends and just hangs out in his garage. Okinawan elders for example belong to moai — lifelong social groups that offer emotional and practical support. They literally have built-in best friends for life. Meanwhile, the average American man over 50 has fewer close friendships than ever before. Many have… zero.

So the solution, if one dare propose it, is not ridicule, nor another prescription of norms. It is encouraging men to put work into relationships. So reach out to your old friends. Even if it's awkward. and or Make new ones. As men’s tendency to spend too much time alone is not simply a personality trait—it’s a cultural failure to teach emotional intelligence, empathy, and the value of sustained connection. Loneliness is not a weakness; it’s a signal, a social and spiritual hunger that needs addressing. To bridge the gap, society must do more to encourage emotional education for boys, challenge harmful regressive gender stupidity, and create spaces where men can safely cultivate friendship, vulnerability, and trust. In doing so, we not only improve men’s lives—we strengthen the social fabric of all.

And beyond even that, there must be a cultural reckoning, a renaissance of the masculine as steward, as visionary, as lover of life. Not as the CEO or the influencer, with initiation rites that do not involve hazing or humiliation but maturely and sophisticatedly say: “You are more than your cock and your cash. You are a carrier of dreams, a sculptor of meaning, a mirror of the infinite.” Until then, the “brolone” shall roam aimlessly — looking for brothers in the gym and finding only echoes. Looking for God in alpha advice and finding only hunger. And so, with compassion, we must call him in — not to tame him, but to wake him. Not to shame him, but to show him: the journey inward is the way outward. Which will externally then result in better co-masculine communal connections.

Improving the Masculine #2: Dad's Downloads to Their Sons

To speak of young boys and the shaping of the men they are to become is to invoke one of the most delicate and vital alchemical processes in the human journey. For in the crucible of childhood, the psyche is molten, receptive, and impressionable — and it is here that the figure of the father, or the lack thereof, becomes a kind of mythic force, casting long shadows across the soul’s landscape.

In a later part of this series we'll of course speak to the massive importance of the mother, and especially how that relates to a boy's future relationships with women, but for this one, we'll say a father is typically the primary channel through which masculine aspects of culture pours itself into the next generation. And the “downloads” dads give sons are not merely advice, but psychic imprints—gestures, tones, and ways of being that are installed deep in the nervous system before the child even has words to critique them.

Unfortunately, a lot of young boys receive “power dad downloads” from their dads or father figures, which are usually laced with the loveless imperatives of empire: be strong, do not cry, dominate rather than yield, win at all costs, conceal vulnerability, measure your worth by conquest. These instructions are not arbitrary; they are the father relaying what he himself absorbed, the survival codes of a brutal world built on hierarchy and competition. Such downloads harden the son, but they also narrow him. They train him to mistake fear for strength, control for love, and achievement for identity.

Contrast this with the father who transmits love, kindness, and permission to be tender. That father is sending a different and much superior signal into the circuitry: that masculinity need not be armored, that strength can reside in openness, that vulnerability is not weakness but a deeper form of courage. This kind of download does not cripple a son for the world; it equips him to remake the world, to resist the machinery that demands hardness at the expense of humanity.

The difference is profound. The “power dad” equips his son to survive the empire as it is, but at the cost of reproducing its brutality. The loving father equips his son to not only question the empire but help break cracks in it, to imagine alternatives, and to live a more full human life. One teaches adaptation, the other teaches transformation.

Neither father acts in a vacuum. They are both expressions of the cultural field. The power dad is, in a sense, a victim too—he is transmitting the survival program written into him by generations of scarcity, war, repression. And the loving father, if he resists that program, is engaging in cultural mutation—he is hacking the code, breaking the chain of inherited trauma, and contributing to better parenting. And that's exactly what the world needs - More better parents.

Labor Day and Awakening the Dragon

Labor Day, at least in the American context, is one of those curious holidays that has been both hollowed out and yet still retains a subterranean charge of meaning. On the surface, it has been domesticated—absorbed into the consumer calendar as the symbolic end of summer, a long weekend for barbecues, travel, and back-to-school sales. The American empire, as it so often does, has taken what was once a cry of resistance and repackaged it as an occasion for zombie consumerism.

There used to be both labor sections and business sections in newspapers. Now they only have business sections. Also, we used to have newspapers.

But if we peel back the veneer, we find the radical heart of Labor Day beating still. It was born out of struggle—the strikes, the marches, the martyrdom of working people who dared to demand that their lives not be consumed entirely by the hellfire furnace of pure capital. It is a holiday carved out of blood, a reminder that the eight-hour day, the weekend, the protections we take for granted were not gifts from benevolent rulers but concessions wrested from reluctant masters who have skull faces from the film They Live under their rubber masks. (Joke).

So to speak to Labor Day is to remember that labor itself—the act of human beings shaping the world with their hands, their minds, their sweat—is the true wealth of nations. And it is also to remember that labor, when it forgets its power, is devoured. The empire celebrates “Labor Day” precisely because it has, in large part, neutralized the labor movement, diffused its radical energies, and transformed its holiday into just a symbolic nod. Yet the potential remains, waiting like dry tinder.

Labor Day should be reimagined not as a pause before the machinery resumes its grind, but as an annual invocation of solidarity. A day not merely to rest, but to remember and act on the leverage of the many against the few, to recall that no empire, however gilded, survives without the daily consent of workers. In this way, Labor Day is not just a relic; it is a sleeping dragon. Its true meaning is not the picnic but the picket, not consumption but the refusal to be consumed. And the task for us, if we are to honor it honestly, is to awaken that dragon, to see Labor Day not as an end-of-summer sale but as an annual reminder that the world is made—and could be remade—by the hands of those who labor.

Why American Empire Hates Democratic Socialism

The American Empire despises democratic socialism not because it misunderstands it, but because it understands it all too well. For democratic socialism, in its essence, is the insistence that the fruits of collective labor be shared more equitably, that the machinery of wealth serve human beings rather than enslave them. This is heresy to empire, whose lifeblood is the concentration of power in the hands of the few and the perpetual commodification of everything.

Empire thrives on hierarchy, on the myth that some must toil endlessly so that others may accumulate without limit. Democratic socialism punctures this myth by saying: health care is not a privilege, education is not a commodity, housing is not a speculative token, but all of these are human rights. In other words, it asks the system to bend toward compassion, and empire, which feeds on extraction, recoils like a vampire before the dawn.

But beyond economics, there is a deeper reason. The American Empire’s cultural engine is the religion of individualism. It insists that you are alone, that your successes and failures belong to you alone, that solidarity is weakness. Democratic socialism, by contrast, whispers the forbidden truth: you are not alone. You are woven into a fabric of mutual dependence, and when that fabric is honored, all flourish more deeply. This revelation threatens not just profits, but the very mythology of empire.

So the hatred is strategic. Empire equates socialism with tyranny, with gulags, with the death of freedom, because it cannot allow the possibility that people might see through the smokescreen—that they might notice that Scandinavian democracies are freer, healthier, more educated, and less violent precisely because they temper capitalism with social care. To admit this would be to admit that empire is not the pinnacle of civilization, but a devouring machine.

Thus the propaganda of those who wholeheartedly paint any socialism as un-American, as theft, as laziness institutionalized. Meanwhile, the empire loves to privatize gains and socialize losses, quietly subsidizing the wealthiest corporations, bails out banks, and calls this “the free market.” What is rejected is not socialism per se, but the redistribution of care downward rather than upward.

The American Empire hates democratic socialism because it is the mirror held to its face, the reminder that another way of organizing human life is not only possible, but already flourishing elsewhere. And empire, like all narcissists, cannot bear the sight of its own alternatives.

What is a Shaman and What is Shamanism?

Do you like music? And do you care about nature and our environmental crisis? Then you should care about shamanism. Which is one of humanity’s oldest spiritual (spiritual meaning full spectrum nature which then allows for direct experience with the mystery) practices. Older than organized religion, older than written language, and in many ways, as old as consciousness itself. It is as old as the hills. Found in various forms across nearly every continent and culture, shamanism is less a "belief system" and more a spiritual methodology - a toolkit for navigating the spiritual world, healing the psyche, and restoring balance between humans and nature. 

First thing to note here, is there is always a denigration of shamanism from empire - which is the human administration of the darkness of the world composed of anyone who's down for conquest, commodification of the elements, their extraction, not to mention lying and authoritarianism - from kings to dictators. So due to the way our country, the US of A was founded, with some good and a lot of bad, most modern day Americans know little to nothing about shamanism because, while the US was founded with a secular and also freedom of religion attitude, the dark side of extremely Abrahamic religions of Empire tried to kill off all the Native American shamans due to their spiritual power. Through much of South America, and in Mexico, which is ground zero for psychedelics by the way, and has a beautiful history, before being colonized by the psychotic Spanish conquistadors, and now having to deal with drug cartels, there are more reference points on shamanism because their indigenous cultures we're not quite as genocided. As there indigenous people have been the gatekeepers of this ancient technology for the human spirit. 

So what the hell is a Shaman? To answer that question, you must first understand three basic things which the modern day empire doesn't want you to know, let alone even think about, let alone even have the lexicon to grasp. The first is that you are a spiritual being having a human experience. That in no way means we disrespect or discount both the good aspects of organized religion or science and the scientific method. As today you'd be hard pressed to find a scientist who doesn't dispute the intelligence in nature which 50 years ago was rarely the case. But the most free and open society should allow for full freedom to find value in all of these things. In fact, we think of other very old esoteric practices such as astrology and alchemy as ancient sciences. The second is related to time and that due to the processional cycles of the Earth, that we must understand time is not linear but cyclical. So our species evolves and somewhat de-evolves. Increasing in consciousness and decreasing in consciousness, over thousands of years. So during the dark ages, where the church exclusively ruled, was a bottom barrel low point in history, but if one goes back in time, what is ancient is actually more advanced. Think of the phrase, "A Long Time Ago in a Galaxy Far Far Away..." This is most evident by ancient megalithic monuments such as, speaking of Mexico, Teotihuacan otherwise referred to as The City of The Sun which our species could not rebuild now. Instead we currently build Chick-fil-A's and corporate office parks. Speaking of the sun, the third key principle is that we are a part of nature, and if evolving, will as a society have a veneration for nature. One of the main points of that type of relationship is not just a scientific grasp of animals and plants but also their ability to teach us things. For example cannabis, our relationship with it, which ultra-regressive empire and its Rockefeller for profit medicine built a 50+ year war on some drugs to denigrate because of how much it can rock the boat. Yet alone around the dogmas and stigmas of psychedelics, which are more properly contextualized as enthogins, are in reality actually teacher plants that are designed to interface with human beings and one's ability to do so is their birthright.

Shamanism, is not a belief system; it is a map of the experiential terrain of consciousness—a map that predates civilization, religion, and even history itself. It is the original science of the soul, the primal technology of the sacred. When we speak of shamanism, we are invoking a tradition older than time, a kind of meta-language through which human beings have for tens of thousands of years accessed the invisible dimensions of being—not through faith, but through direct encounter.

So shamans are basically medicine people who usually, but not always, work with teacher plants and animals, through their ingestion by both themselves, and the people they are working with. They are medicine people for both the mind and the body who, while working with such teacher substances, from nature, act as an intermediary between the human world and the spirit world. Which again, you are a spiritual being, is absolutely real. 

Shamans don’t gain this role by self-appointment or simple training. Traditionally, it’s considered a calling—often following a personal crisis, illness, or "initiation by ordeal," which breaks down their ordinary ego and opens them to the unseen. They are often called upon to: Heal physical or psychological illness, seek guidance from spirit allies or ancestors, mediate natural and supernatural forces, and/or perform rituals to cleanse individuals, communities, or land. All those things we just said, many people are like, hua? What? I don't get it? This is nonsense right? Because we've become so disconnected from who and what we are as a species.

You see, the shaman is not a priest. The priest deals in doctrine, intermediates between the divine and the flock, speaks in absolutes. The shaman, on the other hand, is a technician of the sacred. A voyager. An empiricist of altered states. The shaman goes into the domain of the ancestors, of the spirits, of the archetypal landscape—not to preach, but to bring back medicine, to retrieve lost soul fragments, to diagnose the illness in the village or the dissonance in the individual. The shaman heals not through words alone, but by navigating the deep symbolic language of dreams, visions, plant intelligences, and myth. Why? To teach something utterly profound—that reality is not fixed, not dead, not inert. Reality is alive. It is a dialogue. And we are meant to participate in that dialogue, not as passive consumers, but as co-creators. The shaman understands this and learns to walk between the worlds, to keep the conversation going.

So when we talk about reviving shamanism, we are not talking about returning to some romanticized tribal past. We are talking about reclaiming our birthright as multidimensional spiritual beings. In a world gone mad with reductionism, materialism, the cult of the machine and weasley utra watered down big religions, the shaman reminds us that spirit is real, that healing is possible, and that the deepest truths are not found in books, but in visionary ecstasy, in communion with nature, in the silent language of the heart. And in the next part of this series, we'll get specific about how it works.

The MAGA Cult is ALL Projection, Inversion, and Confession

MAGA as slogan functions less as a policy platform and more as a psychological spell, an incantation deeply embedded in the dynamics of projection, inversion, and confession. This triad is the very machinery through which the MAGA cult sustains itself, manufacturing an alternate reality while displacing responsibility for systemic collapse onto scapegoats.

Projection (The Externalization of Inner Shadow) is the oldest psychological defense—disowning one’s own flaws by attributing them to the Other. MAGA is a masterclass in this tactic. Fears of lawlessness are projected onto immigrants and Black Lives Matter activists, even as its own adherents storm capitol buildings and revel in anti-institutional chaos. Accusations of “fake news” are projected outward, while MAGA’s media ecosystem fabricates an alternate epistemology, untethered from verifiable fact.

The deep anxieties about economic precarity, cultural irrelevance, and loss of identity are projected onto globalists, urban elites, and progressive movements, as if these external “enemies” are responsible for the hollowing out of middle America—when in truth, it was the very neoconservative mixed with neoliberal policies (neither of those neo's is a good thing) embraced by MAGA’s own economic elites that orchestrated this dispossession.

Inversion (The Ritual Flipping of Reality) is the alchemical trick of reversing cause and effect, victim and perpetrator. MAGA paints itself as the bastion of “law and order,” even though its leader is a lifelong criminal and as it undermines the rule of law through authoritarian overreach and mob intimidation. It declares itself a defender of freedom, while pursuing policies that constrict civil liberties, reproductive rights, and voting access.

The inversion is most visible in how MAGA lies to champion the “forgotten man,” while its policies—tax cuts primarily for the ultra-wealthy, deregulation of corporate pillaging—further entrench oligarchic control. Inversion is how billionaires can convince struggling communities that they are their avatar. It’s a magician's sleight of hand, flipping the mirror to reflect a distorted, comforting illusion.

But perhaps the most fascinating—and psychologically revealing—dynamic is confession (The Unintentional Reveal of Inner Desires). MAGA thought crime rhetoric is laced with accusations that, on deeper examination, are confessions of its own shadow. Accusations of election rigging come from those seeking to undermine electoral integrity. Claims of media dishonesty emerge from those engaged in constant disinformation campaigns, Q-Anon can't see any of the pedocons, and shouts of “cancel culture” erupt from those eager to purge dissenting voices from their own ranks. This is the phenomenon where accusations become admissions—a subconscious leakage where the very things MAGA decries are the behaviors it enacts most aggressively. Beneath the bravado, the movement is whispering its own pathology into the open, but through the veil of accusation.

The Function of This Triad is that projection, inversion, and confession work synergistically to create a closed-loop reality system. Any external critique is deflected by projection. Any factual inconsistency is neutralized by inversion. And any internal contradiction is hidden in plain sight through confession-as-accusation. This triad doesn't just defend MAGA from external challenge—it fuses its adherents into an identity cult, where shared grievance replaces critical thought and as a reult,m for anyone within the cult, they live in halls of mirrors of constant lies.

Archetypes Across Ages

An archetype is a pattern older than any one culture or story, a primordial shape in the collective psyche that keeps reappearing in myths. or fairy tales, dreams, or art and proliferates across geography and ages. Characters, images, and motifs that recur not because someone invented them, but because they are expressions of structures somewhat timelessly present in the human mind.

They're not rigid scripts; but more like the strongest gravitational fields or vortexes in the landscape of human imagination. They pull stories, symbols, and personalities into recognizable forms - humanoid, animal, god, but the details differ through civilizations. As shape-shifters, they don’t exist as neat, singular entities, but as dynamics of energy that appear in different guises depending on the time or location. A Hero in one culture may be a dragon-slayer; in another, a wandering ascetic. A Great Mother may manifest as a caring elderly woman, devouring witch, or even the nourishing Earth. 

From a more mystical vantage, archetypes can be seen as the language of the collective unconscious. Meaning the hidden mind of humanity dreaming itself across millennia. They are the bridges between the individual psyche and the great ocean of shared meaning. And from a metaphysical perspective, archetypes often reveal themselves with uncanny vividness: appearing not as personal hallucinations but as presences woven into the deep grammar of being.

Carl Jung, who popularized the term in the modern West, saw archetypes as psychic blueprints. Examples such as The Hero, the Trickster, or the Shadow are not just characters in stories, but living energies that animate our behavior, our fears, or our longings. When one encounters an archetype in any medium of story - in fiction or nonfiction real life, etc... it resonates because it is not foreign—it is something already living within all of us. They are recurrences that stir beneath the surface of culture and psyche, or can also be thought of as great masks through which the human spirit speaks. 

Jung himself never codified a fixed list; instead, he spoke of archetypes as primordial, universal patterns in the collective unconscious that manifest in myths, dreams, and symbols. They merge and split, they adapt to new cultural contexts, they wear masks. But in modernity, one will often find “twelve primary archetypes” listed as a simplified framework of shorthand groups which are distilled for accessibility. It is like saying there are twelve signs of the zodiac. Not because there are only twelve cosmic influences, but because twelve is a manageable lens through which to perceive the infinite. Like constellations, which are drawn across the vastness of the psyche to make them more navigable, the “twelve” that are often most referenced today are the Innocent, Orphan, Hero, Caregiver, Explorer, Rebel, Lover, Creator, Jester, Sage, Ruler, and Magician. 

The Innocent is the child at dawn—radiant with trust, longing for paradise, embodying faith in the goodness of life. 

The Orphan is the exile who knows abandonment, the one who has tasted betrayal. 

The Hero is the warrior of will, striding forth to overcome obstacles, to prove strength, to bring order out of chaos. 

The Caregiver is the nurturer, the parent, the one who tends and sacrifices. 

The Explorer is the wanderer, the seeker of new horizons.

The Rebel is the firebrand, the destroyer of false structures. 

The Lover is the pulse of desire, union, beauty, passion. 

The Creator is the artist, the innovator, seized by vision and compelled to give it form. 

The Jester, or Trickster, is the clown who unmasks illusion with laughter. 

The Sage is the seeker of truth, the philosopher, the one who strives for clarity beyond illusion.

The Ruler is the king, the queen, the sovereign who seeks order and structure. 

The Magician is the shaman, the alchemist, the transformer of reality. 

Together, these twelve are a chorus of human possibility, each with gifts and dangers. So think of the twelve not as a closed canon, but as a practical map of organizing the infinite archetypal terrain. Beyond them, there are countless others, some culturally specific, some universal, all alive in the collective imagination. Some additional ones which abound the wider Jungian tradition are the Shadow, the Anima/Animus, the Wise Old Man, the Great Mother, the Child, the Self, and more. These don’t always slot neatly into the “twelve,” but they’re no less essential.

Yet to really grasp archetypes we must stop thinking of them as fixed categories, like items in a filing cabinet, and instead recognize them as living forces, autonomous powers within the psyche that are not abstractions but living energies, ancient as the collective unconscious itself. They appear not only in stories we hear but also unconsciously inhabited in people within the drama of our lives. Each of us is a theater where the twelve act out their eternal play. Sometimes the Lover takes the lead, sometimes the Rebel storms the stage, sometimes the Sage speaks through us. 

So here’s the catch: an archetype is not a thing one “sees” so much as a lens they look through. We don’t encounter “The Hero”; we encounter someone who we interpret as fitting the Hero-pattern. To know primary archetypes is to know our inner dramatis personae, the gods and goddesses who move within us, as an ocean of forces waiting to be recognized, shaping our choices, our desires, our fears. To know them is to know ourselves more deeply, to see that life is not a linear march but a dance among archetypes. Sometimes we are Hero, sometimes Fool, sometimes Magician, sometimes Lover. To say, ah, the Rebel has arrived, the Lover is stirring, the Shadow is rising. Because when one recognizes them, they are less likely to be possessed by them unconsciously, and more able to dance with them creatively. 

Each contains both light and shadow and can thus change over time: the Hero can become tyrant, the Caregiver can become martyr, the Sage can become cold, the Rebel destructive. If one is evolving and improving, they will be going through, individuation, meaning living the most consciously and uniquely, part of which requires not banishing these archetypes but to more dance with them in life, to recognize when one has seized the stage, and to invite others into balance.

So an archetype is both ancient and immediate, both inside us and larger than us. It is the recurring face of humanity’s inner truth, wearing different masks in different ages, but always reminding us that beneath the surface differences, our stories are branches from the same deep root. Since an arche, meaning "first principle" is older than us, they had long ago been woven into the very structure of consciousness. Not invented, but discovered. For to discover an archetype is to encounter something that feels both intimate and cosmic at once. With our personal stories suddenly aligning with an eternal drama. This is why people feel seized by archetypal experiences; it is as if something larger than the ego has taken the stage, demanding expression. That’s why myths and religions recycle these figures endlessly—they are ways of dramatizing inner energies. 

So the real task is not to memorize lists, but to develop archetypal literacy, to be able to see when one of these great forces is moving in our personal interactions, or in the culture around us. To know these archetypes is to know the language of the psyche itself—to see that our lives are not random, but mythic stories in motion. Across ages.