User blogs

Tag search results for: "behavior"
My Review of the film:  "Are All Men Pedophiles?"  It's a bit long but it covers a variety of topics.  I tend to think as I go, I rarely, if ever, plan out what I want to say.  It's general thought vomit but you'll get the point.Incidentally, the producer Jan-Willem Breure fell under fire after its release on Netflix.  It didn't get much air play prior, aside a few showings at independent film festivals.  After it aired, blowback from the SJW's forced Netflix to pull it.  It was re-released but a shorter much edited version was made available.
The very title of this blog can be disputed as all of us here have our own values.

But that is not why I chose it.  The strongest law in nature we should agree on is the law of self preservation.  Part of this rant was inspired by Neil's recent essay on the futility of taking media to heart.  Much of what we see in the news is only part of the truth even when those telling it take the time to share all the details in the proper context, which I have little hope they will.

There is a lot of conflict in the world, always has been and always will be.  The types and locations of these conflicts are what paint history myriad colors shaded with the blood of the dead.  Taking Sandy Hook as one such example, this one event has led one of the most sweeping political movements in the United States since the 1960's and racial equality.  We don't need to debate whether or not we are all equal because if one thing is certain we are far from it.  

We have come to see laws and cameras, locked doors and guns as guaranteed visages of protection and safety and this is a fallacy.  It is a vivid dream of bright colors stretching over the sky like a rainbow towards Neil's pot of gold.  

I gave an example of this in his blog.  A camera as a defender of the innocent which failed in its perceived duties.  It isn't the cameras fault.  Do not blame your burned lips and tongue on the "Caution: Contents may be extremely hot" written on the side of your coffee cup either.  The truth simply is you put your faith and safety in an inanimate object with no power.  I can use the same analogy to make the argument that laws are exactly the same as the camera and coffee cup warning, and just as effective.  Locks on doors and windows are there to make sure innocent people stay innocent.  Less incentive means less crime.  More bullshit.  Fences don't stop deer from eating your garden, and walls do not stop criminals from robbing your house or business.   Survival demands action.  Might is right and might keeps you alive.  Being aware of your surroundings and those near you keeps you alive.  My profession demands deliberate observation and action when needed to ensure my personal safety.

It is in my nature to be protective of myself and my family.  This is how I was hard wired from birth and it affects every thought and action I take every day.  Something as trivial as walking into a store for coffee has me eyeballing each and every man, woman, and child for threats or body language.  Although I am not in law enforcement this is the same techniques used to find those not wanting to be noticed.  Animals in the wild are no different.  

There is much talk in these walls of what constitutes sinister.  

Nature by itself is balanced.  There is no right or wrong, no good or bad.  There is only circumstance and action.  You cannot talk nature into submission so debating the merits of language or thought is irrelevant.  Nature demands action only.  Would you call a grizzly bear mauling a human being as evil?  Or when a shark bites a child in half as they wade in the shallows when their family is nearby?  

Even animals in the wild have a pecking order.  We like to call it stratification to make it sound more important but it is no different or less important.  The natural order is neither sinister nor good.   Your chosen philosophy or skill at debate means nothing when you have an ax buried in your forehead.  I  feel secure knowing the truth in this.  It is a level playing field as long as you know and understand that laws written on paper have no bearing on your actions, nor should they.  That is what Satanism is to me.  That is who I am.  I am a force of nature, disregarding all laws moral or amoral in favor of making my way and facing my enemies/obstacles head on and overcoming them.  Should I chose to dance with laws or ideas, that will be determined when the ends justify playing the game.  

Terrorists, criminals, grizzly bears will do what they do ignorant of how right or wrong we feel.  It is our own personal responsibility to act in our own best interests.  Either proactively or reactively, the latter being the lesser of the two.  Your nature is your own.  The nature of those around you should have no bearing on your survival when you apply the law of the survival of the fittest.  

Ghostly1 Nov 20 '13 · Rate: 5 · Comments: 18 · Tags: behavior
I've written plenty in the past about facing extreme challenges to your own psyche, in fact this is the overarching theme of ADM. Yet,there is another aspect to the LHP that is often given a nod of the head but seldom engaged directly, and often ignore outright..and this is pushing the boundaries of the more mundane aspects of existence.

Often it is said that there is no real sense in putting thought, time or effort into how one presents themselves on the web. After all it's just the web, it isn't the real world. Right? None of this matters, so why put out any real effort. So they say.

The same can apply, and does apply, to the 'real world'. Often I am surrounded by those that do the bare minimum to get by in any given situation, scrape past 'life lessons' without learning anything, doing things but never improving..not because they can't, but because they don't care. Why give 100% when 50% will do? So they say.

They coast through life on the path of least resistance, while they provide a support structure by making no demands of themselves, or of those around them. They facilitate mediocrity, and demonize those things which are hard, those things which take effort. They take pride in their failures, minimizing the importance of success, contextually speaking, and of improvement in general. 

They form control memes. 'obsessive', 'perfectionist', 'workaholic', while minimizing failure through memes like 'you did your best' and 'Well, I tried' when usually both are far from the truth. 

This is of course nothing new, as it describes the nomian plebe, the common man sitting on his hands waiting to die, but for the contemporary Left Hand Path, it is a sickness. A disease. 

This is why I personally feel little to no pity for those that dig their own graves though their lack of action or failure to take the reigns over their own situations. This is why I feel contempt when I see something written by one representing themselves as a Satanist that hasn't even been spell checked, or provides content that quite obviously has not been thought about, studied, or understood in even a peripheral way.

The fact that no effort has been put in seldom stops these sorts of 'nomian satanists' from expecting accolades for their phoned in efforts, nor does it stop the 'white knight' variety..which is basically the same nomian animal with an added sense of moral superiority, from trying to keep any stratification from happening. After all, demanding any sort of qualitative performance from those you surround yourself makes you an asshole, an elitist, or 'thinking you are better than everyone' 

Here's the thing, most of the time that is true. This isn't because I am smarter, or faster, or able to eat more hot dogs in a sitting than any Japanese gurgitator alive, but simply because I constantly strive to improve in everything I do, and I am sometimes successful. If I decide to do something, anything, it is with the intention of mastery. Self mastery, mastery of others, mastery of my environment. This isn't accomplished by mentally of physically sequestering ones self, but by facing the word and everything in it with full ferocity. 

People say this particular medium doesn't matter, that you don't get a full sense of a person here, and I agree. Yet, you can learn much by how one presents themselves in any medium. You see many here that through the years do not change at all, do not improve at all, make the same basic spelling errors and never seem to learn anything new.  These same people are generally the ones that talk about their Satanism existing not online, but 'in the real', yet I am always left to wonder..if these people can not even improve in a minor way, here, than how can anyone be expected to believe they are conducting serious satanism 'out there'? Should not all that 'sinister experience' out there show though some sort of trail of progression in ones words? In the fine tuning of their presentation, the streamlining of both the 'big stuff' and the details?

When you, dear reader, try to place yourself into this spectrum, where do you honestly find yourself?

Dan_Dread Nov 1 '13 · Rate: 5 · Comments: 9 · Tags: fails, behavior

This is a word we should all be familiar with. Of it represents a danger, threat or adversity to the established order, collective a community or individual. The sinister is a nature. One possessed by the individual. It's arecognition of power and mastery. I do not fear nor deem the powerless or the vacant as "sinister", do you?

So Sinister? The mastery, threat or Adversary. This is a tool of the Satanist or darksider How do you use it? Well, how do I use it?

The sinister is a weapon upon the modern society which has become a breeding ground of dependency and addiction. The comfort zone is something I'm infamous for rebelling against. This is how I employ “sinister” practices.

But that's as far as I'll go in terms of the communal "sinister".

What I really want to discuss and reflect on is the sinister nature and exploration in the individual. Now I previously described “sinister” as a force of destruction, but reflecting back on it, it is the recognition of a driving force. When somebody is purely driven by what they stand for. When I have an absolute motivation for an ideology it will be sinister or destructive to another ideology. And don’t translate this as the victim of “sinister” as an opposing ideology. More often than not, it’s usually two forces of the identical root. An example of this is St Francis of Assissi, he was a figure in Roman Catholicism known for his drastic and extremist measures for poverty and humility. When this guy found out that one of his “brothers” had around only three coins, Francis threw them into some mud and told the guy to pick them up with his teeth. But his activism for poverty and equality had a sinister nature to the modern clerical traditions within the RCC, as well as the rising industrial relationships and establishments in Italy at the time. This was a driving force that was deemed a threat. Yet in hindsight grew to define the church again.

It is a heresy. Formed yet unknown. It can be a glorious darkness or an unruled chaos.

Can we apply the same to the individual? Is there the driving force within myself? Or is it a force I must face? Will it destroy me or will it define me? And where will that take me? The sinister is the recognition that I am a complex mechanism of thought and conscience, and through abuse of this beautiful system I have veiled a self deceit. Something to destroy. The sinister is the driving force that would appear obsessive to the observer. That the followings and beliefs I stand for are things evoking fatal pride. Destroying the very conscience that walked the path of self deceit. I am willing to destroy myself, to destroy an ideology. Through recent time I have grown to welcome others destroy me and what I present. And I am willing to destroy you.

Davidson Oct 22 '13 · Rate: 5 · Comments: 6 · Tags: behavior, fails

Necromancy will be used to describe a particular set; drawing a minor relative reference to its established understandings. The descriptor, Necromancy was chosen due to its association to ‘invocation’ of (working of) past/alternate spirits. It is should be easily concluded that, we are drawing upon its synonymous interchangeability with ‘nigromancy’; meaning ‘black divination’; at least upon the completion of this text. It should be understood, that there is a special context in which ‘invocation’, ‘spirit’, ‘divination’, and other such ‘hot’ words are used . They will always be distinguished by ‘ ‘, as to continually build the context in which they are understood.

I offer no apologies for the institution of specialized language within this/or any other text produced by me. Put simply, it is the nature of language; that words adopt contextualized meaning. Language is a peculiar phenomenon, by its own nature both evolving and esoteric. It is in our very use that we find a vergence . It can be demonstrated that the right set of words, used at the right point in time; can ‘invoke ‘ (open) a channel of understanding in both the conscious, and subconscious often triggering action. There are those that would argue against the merits of N.L.P., hypnotism, and psychology (and whatever else fits into this category of science) as pseudosciences. Yet the proven effectiveness of advertising alone, makes small work of the matter. Reflecting upon, the recent national election ; I am convinced strung together the right way, (no matter the bullshit associated with) words hold power. That ladies and gents, is the key to ‘invocation’ nut-shelled.

‘Spirit’ is a dirty word these days. Which conjures up thoughts of the ‘supernatural’, mystical, and ghostly phenomena. For most these days, those are a hard pill to swallow. Since there is virtually no empirical evidence to substantiate Substance Dualism, this is understandable. This IS NOT the state of what I have imagined ‘spirit’ would be, it has been my understanding that ‘spirit’ was in interchangeable with ‘intensity’. Yet I cannot stress the peculiarity of the sense, I am describing. I contend to be in the ‘spirit’; simply means to manifest traits with intensity.

When you have school ‘spirit’, you emulate characteristics thought to represent that school. When a debate is ‘spirited’; it is because the arguing position’s intensity, gives it ‘spirit’. When your ‘spirits’ are high, we are talking about manifesting an emotional state that is intensely euphoric. If understood properly, it is describing a psycho-transformative state of a physical material. When I more properly examine it, it seems to hold qualities comparable to a ‘possession’. ‘Spirit’ seems to be acted through or itself acts through.

I then can understand where the muddling of ‘spirit’ moves into a ‘super natural’ stigma. A disciplined mind can make the distinction; we are not describing a non-material thing. Rather we are isolating a state/force enacting on a material thing for the purposes of examination, discussion, and enaction. No bogey-men required. Given you accept the premises laid out in the above few paragraphs; ‘Invoking’ the ‘spirit’ of Satan is calling for an intense manifestation of traits thought to represent Satan.

From this we are beckoned the question of why; why ‘invoke’ the ‘spirit’ of Satan? Why ‘invoke’ any ‘spirit’ at all? ‘Divination’ is the answer that firmly resounds to these ‘considerations’. Traditionally ‘divination’ is understood as the use of ‘super natural’ means to find out about the future or the unknown. This definition is deceptive to our conventional senses. What is deemed as ‘super natural’, is often accompanied with a spooky ghostly context; occurring outside the natural order. I contend, nothing can occur outside of the natural order. Even if we construct our model from a traditional scenario, within which we propose a haunting; it still verges within the natural order. I realize this is a plea on The Alchemy, but The Necromancy is not exclusive. The Alchemy tells us all things emerge within the natural order, exist as a transformative vergence; which is interconnected . So why do we in this one occurrence, assume a pejorative correlation to super? Am I mistaken to the paramount qualities of something super? Accepting the traditional understanding of ‘divination’ ; does this not mean the use of predominant, prime, supreme, and key means to finding out the future or unknown? To paraphrase Gurdjieff, one of my main influences; words truly only mean one thing. Words like other tools (means) of man’s design, when studied, understood, and practiced can become ‘super natural’.

Tonight’s word means ‘black divination’ ; Necromancy. ‘Black’ because unlike The Alchemy which seeks purification (simplification) through transmutation, it seeks absorption (complexification) through consumption. Necromancer’s seek to add to their field of influence, assimilation provides a rational means to this end. Not to simply “find out” the future or unknown, but to hold influence over them. To that effect, The Necromancer is a ‘black art’.

“I would like to see the concept of divination more correctly defined. Divination is often assumed to be a quest for information about the future. Rather, it is a quest simply for information, with which the person equipped can design the future.” – Jason Sorrell

An Alchemist’s aim is take something commonplace, and make it rare. Which in the end, alludes to all things having the potential to be rare. Necromancy has a different idea entirely.

In my discussion of ‘invocation’, I pointed to the idea, “words have power”. I hinted to the idea that, by understanding its meaning, relations, and intensities; you steadily tune the ability to wield it. Thereby essentially further complexifying the field of influence. As the intensification reaches iconic proportions, an embodiment of ‘spirit’ is recognizable. It is the ‘possession’ of/by this ‘spirit’ in which, The Necromancer; craft manifests.The Necroma

Issue Reporting

Report any issues to He may, or may not, get back to you in a timely manner.