Perhaps The Schizos Have a Part to Play in All of This

The Schizo Screeds - Part 3

Having discussed the dumbs and the chumps in the previous sections, we ought to have a talk now about the rare few individuals that are able to perceive Evil and contemplate the possibility that Evil is actively working to wreak its agenda on the world. As we’ve established previously, their worldview is in stark contrast to the group that sees nothing but a series of mistakes of varying moral severity, but not a coherent agenda, just the occasional, unfortunate eclipse of Good.

Because Evil as a concept never got its day in the sun, it is my belief that our society’s immune system was weakened and the masses became sheep after they lost their sharp horns. That is, the minute that they were convinced to let their conceptual guard down, they became easy meat. At least that’s what I think. Again, I have no proof, really. Perhaps people are the way the way that they are by nature and the effects of nurture are accorded far more weight than they deserve. In other words, a new chump is simply born every minute. Basically, we left the question open-ended last time. No one knows, definitively, why a significant swath of the population are such hopeless chumps or if there was ever a time when this wasn’t the case in our world. Perhaps the problem is getting worse. Maybe it’s even getting better (unlikely).

We can easily observe though that the message of “no one is bad, really” is reinforced continually in school, in the media and by religious institutions. It is unclear whether this actually has an effect, but, you’d think that it would otherwise they’d just give up trying to indoctrinate people. Westerners, in particular, have been shorn of their defenses because they’ve been taught that defending themselves, categorizing others and noticing patterns leads directly to Fascism. The Slavlands dwellers, in contrast, being more boorish and uncooperative by their nature, have managed to avoid the same levels of domestication up until now. They were also exposed to a far more harsh reality than their coddled Western counterparts who basically lived in the land of milk and honey for close to a century.

Today’s post is a screed about the other group of people, the ones that we affectionately as a society like to refer to as "schizos” or “autists” are also the ones who can conceptualize and recognize threats and see a deadly logic at work where others simply see a series of unconnected and unfortunate events. This threat-detection ability is probably the most fundamental difference that sets them apart from the masses. As a result, they are marginalized and maligned, naturally.

Politics and social-climbing generally, is mostly dependent on the ability to manipulate chumps. That is, the people who try to educate and warn normie chumps of the dangers in believing in 5D religious/political/economic/whatever narratives or, more accurately, blindly believing the lies of psychopaths in positions of power, incur the ire and wrath of the very people they are trying to help.

Constantly coming face to face again and again with the seemingly almost innate desire of the sheep to be fleeced would cause anyone to recoil in shock and alarm. But, unfortunately, quantity has its own quality in our world. The more people that adopt your worldview, the safer you, personally, feel. We seem instinctively inclined to try and convince people to subscribe to our particular worldview. “Safety in numbers” is the logic at work behind our efforts to reach out to others, even though maybe we wish we didn’t have to, really. Or worse, because we are dependent on others around us, we realize that if the whole ship begins to go down, we stand a good chance of going down with it. Put another way, if I had a surefire way to divorce myself from the dumbs and the chumps and not suffer any adverse consequences from them continuing on their current path of self-destruction aimed at, say, an iceberg at sea, I’d wish them bon voyage and paddle to shore in my dinghy.

But, sadly, society doesn’t work that way. No one would let me have the dinghy. It might cause a panic, see? If a group of people got in a dinghy, others might start worrying, or even imitating them. So, even if we want nothing to do with the direction that the ship is heading, we’re basically all stuck for the ride. As a result, our only recourse is to try and convince enough people around us to help us storm the captain’s deck.

On a deeper level though, we ought to consider that the people around us are as necessary for our existence as the organs in our body are. It was Lev Gumilev who came up with the idea that the tribe could be conceptualized as an outgrowth of the individual. That is, just like a boar grows sharp tusks and a bristly hide to defend itself, so too does a person create or join a tribe to defend himself as well. The tribe functions as our claws and our fangs and as a warm pelt all at once. Here we can get into Heidegger’s musing on the nature of Being to really round out our point. Although you don’t really have to read Heidegger to understand the point I’m about to make next, don’t worry.

See, Individualism doesn’t really exist. That is, firstly, take a man and strip him of his surroundings, his family, his friends, his culture, his language and so on and you’ve stripped the man of what makes him himself. Secondly, this cannot even be done, so it’s a moot point because man isn’t created and doesn’t exist in a vacuum. That means that the kook concept of an “individual” that Western thought is so obsessed with and from which its political and economic philosophy is derived, is largely just a phantom in our minds. Much like choice, really. Nothing more than an abstract thought, or, more likely, a faint memory of a higher place in which such concepts actually existed … But I’ll leave that topic for the next screed.

What many consider to be an “individual” is simply an arbitrary classification with no real relation to objective reality. Calling someone an individual is like mistaking a tree trunk for the whole tree. Without the leaves, the roots, the soil, the water in the soil and so on, the tree could not live. And where is this mythical individual man that all the classical liberal thinkers like to pontificate about? You see him referenced in all their great works. Just look for yourself. “Man” they say, and then proceed to make their next point. But, me personally, I’ve never seen this “man” that they are referring to. I’ve seen Englishmen, Frenchmen, Chinamen and so on. But never just a “man”, you see? In just the same way, I’ve never seen a tree just floating in space. No one has. So, as it turns out, these classical liberals were basically seeing and writing about figments of their own imagination.

Perhaps they were the true schizos, no? But I’ve veered a bit off track here. You’ll get that with stream-of-consciousness screeds, I suppose. My point was pretty simple though, so let’s get back to it.

Basically, we are bound to others, even the others that we hate and that, for better or for worse, we cannot amicably part ways with a significant portion of the society that we belong to in any meaningful way. So, despite me ragging on the chump masses over the last two essays and a small part of this one, I can only shrug and say, “ey, it is what it is, we just gotta learn to deal with ‘em”.

But then, being me, I decide to take it a step further. I say, we gotta understand them, yes. We also gotta understand why we need them too. And we gotta understand why they exist in the first place and why we share the same reality with them as well.

Now, fundamentally, I attach metaphysical significance to ethnos and society. In other words, I believe that there is a spiritual reason for us having been born to the group that we were born to. This means that our individual souls are different, and really, what we consider to be an individual soul isn’t anything without the roots and the leaves and the environment that it shares with other souls. I postulate that there has to be a kind of collective ethnic oversoul that we are connected to. And, our membership in that oversoul doesn’t take away from our individuality, mind you, it simply anchors us in something greater than ourselves. To conclude otherwise is to basically to say that while certain elements of temporal life reflect higher realities, others don’t and have no connection to anything of any real significance or meaning. In other words, while I take the view that everything that we see here is either a reflection or a dim memory of something up there, many mainstream religions declare the complete opposite, thereby rendering large parts of lived experience utterly meaningless. A tree is no longer a sacred bridge between three worlds, it’s simply something to be chopped down to upset the country folk and force them to pay tithes to a Yidividual cult in Rome. Ethnicity also, becomes nothing more than an optical illusion created by the Devil himself to contradict the dogma of all people being identical on a soul-level that all the powers that be seem to agree on for some reason.

But I’ve said all of this before in some shape or form in previous essays. I plan to go much further today to justify the paywall and the support that my readers have so generously shared with me!