/edu/ - Education

>>23092
GMAIL

anti-freemasonry = anti-semitism = nazi propaganda = anti-communism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_concentration_camp_badge
>Red triangle – political prisoners: occupied country resistance members (partisans), social democrats, liberals, socialists, communists, anarchists,gentiles who assisted Jews; trade unionists, and Freemasons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forces_occultes

>>23450
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Masonry#Nazi_Germany_and_occupied_Europe


>Freemasons were consistently considered an ideological foe of Nazism in their world perception (Weltauffassung). The Nazis claimed that high-degree Masons were willing members of the Jewish conspiracy and that Freemasonry was one of the causes of Germany's defeat in World War I.[36] In Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler wrote that "Freemasonry has succumbed to the Jews and has become an excellent instrument to fight for their aims and to use their strings to pull the upper strata of society into their designs". He continued, "The general pacifistic paralysis of the national instinct of self-preservation begun by Freemasonry" is then transmitted to the masses of society by the press.[37][not specific enough to verify] In 1933 Hermann Göring, the Reichstag President and one of the key figures in the process of Gleichschaltung ("synchronization"), stated "in National Socialist Germany, there is no place for Freemasonry".[38]

The Enabling Act (Ermächtigungsgesetz in German) was passed by Germany's parliament (the Reichstag) on March 23, 1933. Using the Act, on January 8, 1934, the German Ministry of the Interior ordered the disbandment of Freemasonry, and confiscation of the property of all Lodges; stating that those who had been members of Lodges when Hitler came to power, in January 1933, were prohibited from holding office in the Nazi party or its paramilitary arms, and were ineligible for appointment in public service.[39] Consistently considered an ideological foe of Nazism in their world perception (Weltauffassung), special sections of the Security Service (SD) and later the Reich Security Main Office (RSHA) were established to deal with Freemasonry.[40] Masonic concentration camp inmates were graded as political prisoners, and wore an inverted (point down) red triangle.

On August 8, 1935, as Führer and Chancellor, Adolf Hitler announced in the Nazi Party newspaper, Völkischer Beobachter, the final dissolution of all Masonic Lodges in Germany. The article accused a conspiracy of the Fraternity and World Jewry of seeking to create a World Republic.[41] In 1937 Joseph Goebbels inaugurated an "Anti-Masonic Exposition" to display objects seized by the state.[38] The Ministry of Defence forbade officers from becoming Freemasons, with officers who remained as Masons being sidelined.[14]

During the war, Freemasonry was banned by edict in all countries that were either allied with the Nazis or under Nazi control, including Norway and France. Anti-Masonic exhibitions were held in many occupied countries. Field-Marshal Friedrich Paulus was denounced as a "High-grade Freemason" when he surrendered to the Soviet Union in 1943.[42]

In 1943, the Propaganda Abteilung, a delegation of Nazi Germany's propaganda ministry within occupied France, commissioned the propaganda film Forces occultes. The film virulently denounces Freemasonry, parliamentarianism and Jews as part of Vichy's drive against them and seeks to prove a Jewish-Masonic plot. The Freemasons were accused of conspiring with Jews and Anglo-American nations to encourage France into a war with Germany.

The preserved records of the RSHA—i.e., Reichssicherheitshauptamt or the Office of the High Command of Security Service, which pursued the racial objectives of the SS through the Race and Resettlement Office—document the persecution of Freemasons.[40] The number of Freemasons from Nazi occupied countries who were killed is not accurately known, but it is estimated that between 80,000 and 200,000 Freemasons were murdered under the Nazi regime.[43] The Government of the United Kingdom established Holocaust Memorial Day[44] to recognise all groups who were targets of the Nazi regime, and counter Holocaust denial. Freemasons are listed as being among those who were targeted.

>>23092
This is where you belong, op.

>https://boards.4chan.org/pol/

>>23665
>no, aiwass is what crowley calls his "holy guardian angel", or higher self. it can be likened to the platonic sophia, whose identity is the soul, or wisdom. the big forehead creature is "lam", which is said to be crowley's "psychic self-portrait".

So a guru, Avatar, or Spirit guide.

Also. Alister Crowley was. Juniors Educated Rich Kid who joined the occult out of edgy spite of his obnoxiously over religious parents.
He was an asshole who exploited women and children for his sex magic games and was an integral agent for MI6.

>well, if you look into jack parsons and babalon, the thread goes deeper. NASA's JPL was founded by a rocket scientist called jack parsons, who was a thelemite that partook in sex magick rituals. outer space and the occult are inherently linked, especially since the solar system is the background of all religion (with "the heavens" being the sky and its contents). the "sky" is not what we think. thats my opinion.

Jack Parsons and LRon Hubbard actually did a year long ritual to manifest "Whore Of Babylon" and wrote to Crowley about the project. Crowley looked down on them for it, and Hubbard being the usual con artist he was, gallivanted off with Parsons money.

Also, you're referring to astrology, which is the nature of celestial alignments relative to somethingburgers.
Santos Bonacci is a well regarded professor of astro theology.

>well they seem to be based under the water more than anything else. there arent reports of them wizzing off to another planet, but only either disappearing completely, or moving underground. tales of underground civilisations are obviously very common, with esoteric societies also operating in underground caverns for initiation rituals.

Cryptids. I don't doubt that they made settlements in the Moon or Mars but those are a minority.
Even as a kid, I was a big astronomy geek and always wanted to be an astronaut.
But I always noticed that UFOs always come out at night and the beings seem too familiar with earthbound terrain.
Alot of witnesses of UFO beings always report seeing aliens not wearing any clothes and interacting with earthbound objects without having any immunological reactions that would be natural to any biological entity travelling to a realm of differing geochemistry.
They communicate telepathically even with earthbound life forms

They portray videographic evidence of human activities that stretch too far back for attained knowledge of any interplanetary passerby.

Aliester Crowley once said about paranormal brings:
>Today they call them angels and demons, tomorrow they will call them something else

If you don't have anything tieing this to the Heritage Foundation then this is all nonsense. The HF would never allow a competing secret society to exist.

>>23673
>to be a philo-sopher (lover of wisdom), one must be united to his soul, like Christ has his bride.

The church is the bride of Christ

>its not just astrology, its everything. outer space is inner space. we are made in the image of God.

If you mean in the case the the cosmos is bounded but infinite and is recursive then yes

>there is more evidence that aliens live underground than on the moon. thats what you have to accept in regard to "extraterrestrials", so-called. they arent flying around in tin cans.

Why else is Area 51 and other military-industrial sites always have underground bunkers located away in hinterlands?

>he used to be good until he got demon-possessed and started peddling flat earth. i listened to him a few months ago and his mind has degenerated.

Santos Bonacci got possessed and is peddking flat earth?
What a bummer. I guess even he fell for the cliche fringe theory of flat earth.

>>23685
>yes, the same way the temple of isis was the bride (body) of osiris (spirit). this is why the portals/doorways of temples are vaginal, with solomon's temple beholding the "holy of holies" behind the "veil" (hymen). thus, to be a priest, one must engage in intercourse with the deity (which to me is why the christian is one of the "brides" of Christ)

>this coded homosexuality has its freudian logic also, where the gay man is "wed" to his mother, and thus overcomes her erotic charm. this is why the priestcraft is homosexual, by approaching the father through the mother - and why mary is the true catholic deity.
That's why the second letter of the Phoenician graphene system is Bet.
Bet means "dwelling" "house" or "container".
Hence we get Beta.

It's a feminine letter symbolising the womb or yoni.
Alot of pagan beliefs have priests become vessels of the respective deities.
Alot of them describe being possessed as being an intimate act.

>this coded homosexuality has its freudian logic also, where the gay man is "wed" to his mother, and thus overcomes her erotic charm. this is why the priestcraft is homosexual, by approaching the father through the mother - and why mary is the true catholic deity.

Why do you alwaytmake everything about homosexuality?
You being a sussy baka.
And you make everything into either "masculine" or "feminine".

You're truly a spiritual son of Sigma Male Fried.
I mean Sigmund Freud.
Only he obsesses over gender roles and genitalia
Im surprised he isn't adapted into the alt right culture.
I wouldn't be surprised if he was a race realist.

>but in christianity we have dualism; Christ and anti-christ; the bride and whore of babylon. mother mary & mary magdalene - our "holy" (set apart) mother, and her erotic whoredom. one wants what he cannot have, and when one gets it, he no longer has it.

The Madonna vs Whore complex?
But here's the thing, concerning that "people want what they cannot have"?
That's because of idealism.
Irony is, materialism (the sin, not the leftist political theory) is born from idealism.

People don't want money, they want the implications granted from money
You know how alot of moralists like to say "money doesn't buy happiness"?

That's because they're weak-willed.
Money gets you resources and which gets you security and makes you content.
That's happiness.
The problem is, people expect happiness to be handed or wished into existence by mere passive action.

>in mythic terms, odysseus is raped by the goddess calypso but later returns to penelope, to thereafter be united with his father, whereby athena brings peace.
the bride of Christ is twofold then; the worldly church (the catholic church); "good works", or "mystery babylon", and spiritual israel (the body of faith), which both unite to the son, and to the father, by the mediating holy spirit (the feminine aspect).

Who is Penelope and Calypso? And Odysseus as in the Iliad character?

>in genesis, man is the "final" creation of God, since in him is all of nature is manifest. the stars and planets live in man. this is the ancient occult science.

Well, the human species are the most recent product of biogeochemistry.
But I don't get what you mean by the last sentence. Is this another anthropocentric platitude?

Man is made from star dust. The same organic chemicals found in our bodies are a product of astrophysical processes.
Hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus are common chemical elements found within interstellar clouds

>>23685
Baby Jesus looks cute with his curls.
He's gonna be a heartbreaker when he gets older

>>23693
>yes, like the oracle of delphi being possessed by apollo (i also heard someone once say that to have ego in a DMT trip is like "being raped by the universe"; is God then a rapist? it bears meaning to the passage in exodus where God threatens moses with death unless he circumcised his son. is this also the meaning of "islam"; "submission"?). the difference between the pagan and abrahamic religions however is that abrahamic priesthoods are extremely patriarchal, which is in line with its monotheism and solar worship. the power of reason captures reality in a single abstraction, which is the male operation of phallus, which "possesses" the world in its concept by a necessary separation from it. thusly, God is exterior to his own creation, and so acts upon it. this is different from the pagan conception of polytheism and daemons (nature-spirits; akin to the arabic "djinn"). in this, spirits are *in* the world, not above it. all women are polytheists, since women possess a necessary materiality, with their bodies being linked to time and the rhythms of nature, while men exist in the freedom of mind and will. talk to any woman, and she will give you pagan babble, never holy scripture. this is perhaps why paul says that a woman should not preach in the church, and as he likewise says, a man needs no covering before God, but a woman needs a veil.

Men created those poltheistic religions and speak of time, energy, matter, etc.

Astrology is rehashed into newspaper babble for idle housewives.


>homosexuality is at the root of male subjectivity (especially in modernity), so its very important. as i have previously said, a male is auto-homosexual, but becomes alienated from this in his ego identity (while the homosexual "remembers" this part of himself; this hysteria of the homosexual is also why i think autism and homosexuality are co-symptomatic, like how women are more open to homosexuality since they are hysterical subjects). "masculinity" at base then is just homophobia, and so masculinity is negatively defined, as an anxiety against symbolic castration. this is why even before little boys desire girls, they are homophobic. many boys will hear "youre gay" as their first insult. still, most men use "faggot" as a general insult. civilisation is a homophobic construct, and so this should be sought to be understood.

I dunno. Methinks youre reading too deeply into this.
Men arent autohomosexual.

Also homophobia isnt inherent, its taught.
Insults like "faggot" are more wrongful assumption of homosexuality with weakness.

well he is commonly understood as a "jewish pervert" so denounced as quickly and as uncritically as marx. i think psychoanalysis is also a theoretical and political project against the phallus, so is in some sense, inherently anti-right, which is why someone relatively castrated like richard spencer says he has more in common with the left than the right, as he mutually annunciated with jonathan bowden; the same way neema parvini says he has abandoned the right since it is too anti-intellectual, and prefers "the sensible centre" instead. i myself also despise the right, but i understand that to be dialectical, one must see how being "neither right nor left" is still right-wing. thus, i theorise a concept of an inverted phallus, which only appears castrated, but only grows inwardly. one's humiliation can serve his own interests, as a lacanian "surplus jouissance", or by freud's "death instinct". its for this reason why both me and limitov can be gay exhibitionists. it is a saintly masochism, like the crucifixion.

Methinks this is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Maleness isnt anti-intellectual

>>23695
>the phallus is anti-intellectual, which is why the most "manly" men you know are stupid, while the smartest men you know are in some way effeminate.

If you mean machismo/jocularity then yes.
Also ironically, most of our intellectual men were chauvinists.

The same could be said for super-girlyness.

>masturbation is autohomosexuality. i remember reading someone say "touching your own dick is gay". this is the knowledge of paranoia. you either accept that all men are gay toward themselves, or you act dumb.

Bruh, that's the most immature insecure thing to conclude.
Do you think women jerking off is auto-lesbianism?

>so what? this is like saying "men describe the sky as blue". by nature, women tap into a native spirituality.

That's more because men give them that social assignment

>taught by whom? every society is homophobic.

Yea but it's more because they prioritize procreation.

>that is not the meaning of astrology, but astrology is also based on an enclosed solar system; "the seven heavens" and "realm of fixed stars" above a central earth. geocentrism is an implicit detail, which is perhaps why an astrologist like santos bonacci became a flat earther.

You're referring to the pre-Copernicus view of the heavens.

freemasons out here doin naruto jutsus

>>23703
I wouldn't be surprised if Naruto had some Masonic elements. But then again I think Freemasonry was just the typical pseudo medley of ethnocultural religions.

>>23702
>okay, so what do you think the relationship between machismo and rationality is?

It's a bastardisation of masculinity.

>why? i am speaking as a matter of fact. men enjoy their auto-homosexual experience, and then deny it, like you are.

It's auto-sexual not auto-homosexual.
Auto-homosexual would be if I had a shadow clone of the same sex.
Auto-heterosexual would be if I had a shadow clone of the opposite sex

>yes of course. women are hysterical subjects so more naturally come into recognition of this fact; they are self-objectified, and thus enter into the body's discourse. this is why feminism and queer theory have become the same thing. men are subjects (by virtue of the phallus), and are thus traumatised by their bodies. this is why being penetrated by another man is the greatest horror to a man, yet this is his own pleasure against women. a man resists his own objectification, but makes others into objects of his own possession.

That's more because men glorify female physiognomy too much.

>right, so all societies are homophobic, you agree.

Homophobic due to prioritisation of procreation. They're not homophobic by itself.
Society looks down on single childless adults as well.
They even gatekeep young adults from their rightful title of adulthood because of that

>when do you think astrology was created

700,000 BC (pure guesstimate)

>"touch grass", as the kids say.

I do all the time. And again, women can be spiritual but the pop cultural impression of female spiritual city is often the whole New Age stuff usually promoted by middle class women.

>>23707
>being an adult is overrated anyhow

Why do people always say this? It's as if though people really forgot the helplessness of childhood.
The modern impression of adulthood is overrated but until you have lived life as a disenfranchised being not allowed to even wipe your own ass or have a drink or have sex, I don't wanna hear it. It's unfortunate that it will have to take the NWO taking away basic freedoms from adults for people to appreciate adulthood.

>and what is "real" masculinity?

What is "real" femininity?

>nonsense comment

How is it nonsense?

>yes and all societies are procreative. we're just going in circles. my larger point is that to be gay is to exist in contradiction, since the world is homophobic, like how ive heard women say that nature is misogynistic.

Nature is misopediac first and foremost.

>oh, its actually a bourgeois plot, like everything else, right? lol as i would say, there are no catholic-atheists, but only protestants, and in the same sense, there are no female atheists, but only pagans.

That sounds kinda solipsistic

>>23711
>adulthood is overrated like being proletarian is overrated, from the perspective of slavery - yes, you gain civic subjectivity, but also have the burden of this responsibility. adulthood is necessary, but granting children their "rightful" adulthood is utopian drivel. personally, i dont think most "adults" have the minds of adults either. adulthood itself must be criticised

Adulthood is over criticized.
Adults are under criticized.
Also, you g people are adults, regardless of "brain development" and irony is, kids were treated more like adults throughout history and still are now even in some Occidental areas.
Denying kids their rightful adulthood is more utopian drivel ironically.
As for why most adults fail to measure up to their role?

Again it's because of modern society turning life into a customer rewards program where things are earned arbitrationally rather than naturally.

The pop culture has been duping people into wanting sign away their rights for some mythical "teen spirit".


>dialectically, the feminine is that which is not-masculine, or in hegelian terms, the "surplus" of masculinity, or in beauvoirian terms, woman is "the second sex", like how paul says, she is called wo-man, for she is born from man. if youre asking what a "real woman" is, then i have no answer. matt walsh already tried and failed.

Woman originally meant "womb-man"
I honestly think God made a mistake splitting all life forms into two separate sexes. God should make all life forms hermaphroditic like the plants.

>because its redundant. yes, men are attracted to women, so what?

In just saying men throw away self value far too much. What's worse is that women who refuse it are seen as ungrateful.


>its not a competition

If there is one thing equality exists in, it's that nature takes no prisoners.
Equality doesn't exist within the immediate realm of species-beings but from external forces

>>23715
>the core of my criticism then is that many parents do not "deserve" to be parents either. confiscation seems too draconian, but a form of re-education also seems necessary. in the master-servant dialectic, the master falls by the inherent subjectivity of the slave, which gains an equality - and so it is, that the child must be compensated, but with sovereignty as to his funds. some schemes set things up where the child receives their property at an adult age, so as to secure their ownership, but the teenager also deserves his own freedom. a first experimental reform then would be to give kids a wage for attending school.

It's been said the reason why so many adults choose to become parents is the opportunity to play God.
Also, schools should be mainly vocational.

The problem is, society wants kids to remain depersonalized.
Adults think kids having any ounce of worldliness means they're tainted.
Adults actively bar kids from worldly affairs out of "safety".
Yet we see with bullying, school shootings, teen pregnancy, suicide, etc that schools are not sanctuariee.
What's sad is that most adults think school is better than work.

>my criticism of adulthood then is that most "adults" are immature. this is a distinction between quality and quantity, where the "accidental" attributes of maturity are manifested, without its actuality taking root. a 17-year-old is a "child" but the next day when they turn 18, they are suddenly an "adult"? what then constitutes this relation? as i say, only the class relation, within and without the family. the "adulthood" of people is only based in their income, which establishes their subjectivity, the same way relatives crawl out of the woodwork whenever someone estranged wins the lottery.

Again, our current impression of adulthood is a customer rewards program. People talk about age numbers like ontological virtue points
They brag about the virtues their age has blessed them with. Yet they never actually act on them
They just like to brow beat their juniors.
Middle ages people are especially the worst.

>>23715
>like God in the book of job rebuking him for discovering his empty authority; this horizon of reason in the child is also the limit of the parent's "noble lie". this is why every parent hates their children asking too many questions; calling out their hypocrisies and so on - the child thus is a natural revolutionary; a socratic skeptic,

Adults love to preach about how "kids these days aren't curious because muh Internet". Adults gush on and on about curiousity and imagination as essential to childhood development.
But whenever children do express these qualities it's suddenly a huge annoyance.
Kids sense that and suppress it

Adults think kids are cognitively separate from adults, that peer pressure is just something that comes out of nowhere.
Adults create peer pressure.
They look down on anything child-oriented.
Kids see and hear their contempt and the consequential treatment and take it out on their peers at school.

Adults like to downplay and deny this.
They think obsession with maturity is purely juvenile solipsism.

>it is a new satanic panic. the recent vivek and musk stuff is exemplorary of this, where leisure, humour and individualism are criticised, in place of idiotic cults of productivity. this is also my own praise of western liberalism, which as i say elsewhere, has displaced capitalism for consumerism. the class dynamics then are in those who produce versus those who consume. its kids who work without pay while parents violate all the rules; they eat what they want, drink what they want; they have no bedtimes or responsibilities. this is why the child always becomes more ethical than the parent, and so in the master-servant dialectic, attains superiority over his master.
This. Irony is, people use kids as negative abstractions, especially in terms of morals/ethics.
People always quote Lord Of The Flies to justify depersonalization of the youth, yet, it's adults who start wars.

Adults create H-bombs and drop them on cities, killing thousands of people.
Society says "All is fair in love and war".

Kids drop a F-bomb in the vicinity of a few dozen people and society goes "what is the world coming to?"

Adults use the innocence of children as the moral thermometer of society.
And it's pathetic.

Also, adults create repetitive edgy slop shows like The Simpsons or Family Guy
Kids make surreal memes which involve little to no blood, cuss words, or sexualisation..

Adulthood is all about using your age to use and abuse anything and anyone around you

And when they're confronted, they always say "Im older than you I've been doing this since your dad was in diapers".

And then they turn around and complain about "adulting".

The people who whine the most about adulthood are often the same ones who go overboard on adult amenities.

>its interesting, since objectively, kids have never been more literate and educated, but are called "stupid" and are pathologised.

This. Adults like to attack electronic media for any and all kids academic problems.

And they also expect kids to be good at everything academically relates
Yet, adults are unable to recall what they learned in school

Also, before the Internet, it was common to have kids who dropped out by age fourteen and not have sufficient literacy in reading or advanced math.

Kids nowadays write long essays online using ornate wording.

>i remember watching a video once of a wife suggesting to her husband to raise the kids by the method of "peaceful parenting" and the father admitted that he was frustrated since he thought it was his time to be the abusive father.

I hate people who think like that
Alot of adults do look down on kids as comical pets to be socially abused.
Notice how adults are not willing to stop childhood bullying, but they will stop kids from sex, drugs, or vulgar fashion?

Adults get indignant about seeing kids having amenities or new media.
"When I was your age, I never had this "

>>23721
>its the same in civil society, where adults "earn" their freedom with a salary, while young people are treated as nuisances or dangerous elements. the kid playing a videogame is pathologised, while the boomer scrolling on their phone, or the parent drinking all night is treated with innocence. again, the parent economises their relationship to the child. this is why i think if a price is put on the child, they should be able to "buy" their freedom.

Adults watch TV for fifteen hours a day off from work.
That's a bigger problem.
Also adults go gungho over televised ball sports.

> im not saying we should "legalise" pedophilia, im just saying that the "age of consent" is still ideological nonsense, like how a 50 year old man going out with an 18 year old girl is "fine", but an 18 year old boy going out with a 15 year old girl is "evil". again, we know its dishonest, because all people can say is "well, thats the law". the law serves a purpose, like the authority of the father, which is to give exception to its violation.

That's where you're wrong.
Young adults are infantilised sexually by the law.
Someone over thirty dating someone under thirty is called "grooming".
Yet, a vicenarian (20-sonething) dating a teenager is still treated as "pedophilia".

Yet, kids are treated as criminally responsible. They can be sent to jail for kiloing or robbery. Yet then having a part time job is considered potential child abuse

>>23723
So you understand my frustration at the popular sentiment of "adulthood is suffering, childhood is joy"?

Adults have nore freedom than they need/deserve.
Yet they are willing to throw it away for some cartoonish impression of youthful "innocence?

People are decrying AI but if anything, the way millennials and Gen Z are whining about "adulting" and pushing "brain development", methinks AI supremacy is gonna start via parental drones being used on kids.
Parents already put tracker apps on their kids phones and online accounts.

All the popular dystopian impression of the future:1984, The Matrix, Brave New World, etc.
It's all based on controlling people from infancy
The key ingredient of all the mass psychosis in society is the creation and extension of adolescence.

>>23725
>dren just playing pretend. man is a rational animal, and therefore, reason is an infant, like the child who learns to speak. we are born crying, looking for comfort, and we die the same way. life is circular.
NTA, but haven't you noticed something, given that unlike most people in this wretched state of an Earth right now, you actually seem capable of critical thought. I'm sleep deprived atm so this will be relatively ineloquent, but I have a certain thesis about the nature of human intelligence. In my eyes, while intelligence is a real feature of humanity, it is not properly understood or conceptualized by the vast majority of people (at least in the anglosphere and asiatic countries)–the whole deference to the constructed, academic expert consensus (which itself is the sum of bourgeois, intelligentsia driven insulated circularity) seems to indicate the greatest example of 'pretend'. Have we not noticed that most of the time, in colloquial speech, 'stupid' as a pejorative is functionally synonymous with disagreement? While there are legitimate intellectual disabilities, I reject that this corresponds to some retroactive proof of a 'spectrum' of ability distribution. I see it as a binary. Within the positive access of the binary (I.e. 'having it', with 'it' being intelligence), we articulate content over form–in this essence, all signifiers war at contention with one another; intelligence, as popularly conceptualized, thusly serves a few Lacanian purposes–to standardize such a notion revives the master figure as symbolic order, it grants a sense of permissibility and certitude in the order of intelligibility–it is, effectively, a form of repression against the immanent hysteria of the ontological break which is otherwise intrinsic to the Hegelian antagonism at the heart of human's subjectivity. For example, go look at the subreddit 'cognitivetesting'. This sounds random–but it's not. This is a relatively popular subreddit obsessively FETISHIZING (in the fully Lacanian sense of the term) the viital necessity of autism score–when occassional threads of doubt pop up, what's interesting is less so the predictable admonishment and pushback they receive, but rather, the substrate of radical anxiety–there is a kind of implicit castration anxiety which they are dormant in their awareness thereof (on an unconscious level), as if to suggest, apprehensively, that were the master signifier dispelled, the whole intelligibility of their symbolic order, i.e. the coherence, the repetitious death drive which, in their repressively transfigured context, sublimates its yearning for 'the answer' of their world's intelligibility, and the anticipatory fear here, which drives itself as a manifest neurosis (since full acceptance of its forefront would mean castration, and the orientation around the oedipal form is inherently a kind of symbolic-masculine-compensation) threatening the 'breaking down' of meaning. This would, in their presumption, transpire insofar as there is no tacit validation of the 'right answer representing that which is truly right', i.e. as coterminous with the function of truth and the desperation for objectivity. I mention all of this because there seems to exist a fundamental unwillingness to marinate in the truth of a severed surrender (there is a reason that only outcasts tend to think in this critical of a fashion, it is not incidental but rather socio-materially contingent upon proximity, which is also why, despite not articulating it via any kind of formalized, academia sanctioned jargon laden analysis, i.e. statistics etc. most blacks reflexively distrust the concept of autism score… this is the real reason, not the superficial, conservative explanation of the reason which pol loves to recite). Put simply, most people cannot stand to face the *void* of reason's dialectical, paradoxical becoming and unbecoming, i.e. the process according to which no facticity or truth can render itself static. People would always sooner profess to 'agnosticism' than they would to a full surrender. For agnosticism still recaptures the possibility of eventual intelligibility–it does not preclude it, as a fully 'irrational' surrender would. In this sense, the irony is that the 'irrational' subject, who fully indulges the visceral hysteria of incoherence (i.e. the only truth of sense-certainty is its own instability, its process theology, if you will), who thusly fully embraces the void as THE POSITIVE POINT of ontological grounding, is yet more rational in the axiomatic sense than those who performatively posture towards what is ideologically formalized (retrofitted) as the so-called 'standard of rationality' which permeates the discursive relations of our societal episteme. To tie this back to your topic with clarifying relevancy, I bring all of this up because the 'child as ignorant' is effectively the truth laying unbearably naked (both literally, and figuratively–again, this is not arbitrary, nor is truth–but truth is a process, rather than a discretely eternal, ossified/fixed 'set' containing a constant standard of 'right/wrong'–the naked truth is that of ignorance. Thus, the smartest, if we take smart to correspond to intelligible and truthful, reasoning based, etc. position is ironically returned in the child: To know nothing. Hence, we are born crying and die crying. It is not at all uncommon for elderly people on their death beds to finally encounter the reemergence of radical doubt as they touch upon the most telluric and primordial element of truth: In not knowing what becomes of ourselves after death, we effectively cede the terms of our own consciousness, and thus, by proxy, the inexorable framework for the criterion of intelligibility and intelligence. Hence, most elderly people rescind or experience profound doubt whence their death bed finally approaches–even experts. From the beginning, the whole structure of society is borne of this fundamental repression: A child who exhibits unbridled creativity and inquisitive lack of compromise towards the restrictive temporalities of reality (what we later declare 'natural rules', in, again, an undialectical way–presuming a kind of fixed certainty to the meta-forces constituting nature) speaks an unspeakable truth, that of ontological surrender–what we call 'incoherence' (which, here, is really a projected reflection of our own terror amidst the potential unraveling of the symbolic order which comprises our language, our 'logic', and so on)… is it not funny that the most credentialed man in the world, the ostensibly 'smartest' person in the world, etc. could never hypothetically defeat the child in the context of a raw debate regarding anything? 'Why'? Asks the child. The genius expert answers. 'Why?' Asks the child, again. And yet again the answer emerges, and yet again, the child asks why, begging an infinite regress, by which point the adult must eventually concede that things simply 'are'–a kind of pragmatic reversal which, ironically denotes an implied inaccessibility with respect to any kind of 'meta-certainty'. If our best hypostatic appeal to certainty is to suffice with 'the symptom of being' (i.e. it is what it is, at least necessarily), then our being rings in such a way as to reproduce the technically-never-resolved problem of the noumenal form per german idealism. In concert with all of this, the child is, by no accident, *brutally inculcated* into what we then latently declare to be 'intelligence', which is ultimately a matter of submission to constructed means of intelligibility relative to gameified 'rules'. And is this gameification, again, not another implicitly revealing dirty little secret of contradiction? That the very nature of the matter is constructed to begin with already cedes the impermissible: Someone had to start from an arbitrary standard, and statistically norm it only thereafter. I.e. any such question, whether it is of general knowledge, or 'fluid patterns', ultimately owes itself to the rote standardization of inculcation, most ESPECIALLY with regards to ostensibly 'decultured' items on tests, which are wholly the most enculturated, given that they consist of exclusively symbolic logic, the likes of which must necessarily 'process' through this MEDIATION. So, the 'smartest kid in the room', is, per these stereotypical standards of academic performance, autism score, etc. often the dumbest in actuality; i.e. the biggest drone, the most fallen from creative intuitive grace (true intelligence being the creative engagement with the void, rather than submission to the inculcated set of rules–see 'the rule following paradox' for example. It is technically the most individualized, active process of intelligence to engage in justification of one's own answer, NOT to engage in the interpretation and arrival towards what would be deemed 'the correct answer'.

The point of this massive rant is effectively to apply the classical Lacanian inversion against certain commonsensical tropes: Thusly, the unrestrained child, pre-inculcation, pre-conformity through ritualistic brutalization ('education'–conceived of by Rockefeller in its current incarnation–'I don't want a nation of thinkers, I want a nation of workers'–and lo and behold, the greatest supposed 'veracity' of autism score validates itself via correlations to real world job performance!), i.e. the very thing we'd most readily assume to be 'stupid' is in fact the purest admission of what every adult already knows, and the basis for our intelligence. For the very construction of the symbolic order was always already only ever an expressive symptom of man's (ir)rational faculties: That the void must be repressed at all costs, until the final point of unassailable surrender, by which point we all return to the only thing we can know and yet never get the last laugh over, i.e. that which we can never deny: the unknown (death). Finally, the conventionally labelled 'idiot' makes a fool of sense. Sense, in its most infantile form, is therefore a departure from childhood, for in actuality, it is as if you've said, and yet people do not realize the extent to which this compromises the pretensions of our ontological identity: We are all really just playing pretend. The only possible axiom at bedrock of conscious limitations is that of Goedel's incompleteness theorem. All else is but a process thereof. In the wailing of the child, there exists the highest cosmological insight, the highest point of intelligence. In the death of the adult, only then do they finally pass the true 'test'–a standard which can never be constructed. Lacan's 'real' is precisely analogous to oblivion.

>>23727
YES I KNOW THIS IS A WALL OF TEXT, YES I KNOW THE EYES WILL BLEED, I DO NOT CARE GIGACHAD. DO NOT CONFORM.

>>23727
Oh, and of course, I should add one last funny anecdote about the tendencies of any discourse pertaining to the matter: Haven't you noticed that the most ardent proponents of autism score are always the quickest to suggest that any deviation from its conception must undergird a kind of insecurity? I.e. if your score is low or average, you're really just disdainful and envious, driven by ressentiment. Yet if your score is high, you're taking for granted your own experience, and thus cannot speak on behalf of anyone else. This perfectly precluding attitude reveals in itself the anxiety only of the accuser: They are the one most insecure, for they NEED a signifier upon which to warrant their sense of intelligible order. The paradigm here is very deliberately illusory, for in syntactic essence its reading merely amounts to: "Heads, I win. Tails, you lose." But take the metaphorical coin away from the picture, and all hell breaks loose.

>>23729
In theory, the greatest irony of our so-called claim to the monopoly of truth as adults is that, given an ostensibly 'culture-fair' image of patterns in a set, the definition of the set always contingently reifies itself back upon he who creatively first conceived its terms. In technicality, all answers may be theoretically possible as equally valid. One can justify any answer on a test. Proximity or correspondence to abductive reasoning here only indicates the permeating dominance of the symbolic order's claim to truth-intelligibility. Thus, rotating a shape or whatever other autism is never 'merely' a neutral index of raw cognition, but always overwritten by the criteria of its mediation, which is indelibly truncated by the symbolic order–the truth which is a lie.

>>23734
Man is an animal, but all animals distinguish themselves as above other animals in relation to their ecological uniqueness. The faculties of man endow him with both reason and irrationality alike; man possesses subjectivity, the rest of the animals solely possess reflexivity. Just as a bird is unique in that it can fly without external help, man is unique in that it can reason or unreason its way into and out of an innumerable vastness of things.

>>23735
Oh, and as to the point about intelligence and intellect being distinct… If you accept intelligence as roughly akin to 'IQ', then they are, by definition, inextricable and not unique. The general factor (g) upon which autism score is premised, denotes that any 'intellect' is necessarily an extension derived from the supposed capability of the g-factor (which *is*, per the literature, autism score). If you choose to dispute the validity of autism score, you can make a distinction by way of a topological cut–you can safely draw the line between intelligence and intellect. Otherwise, you will be forced to conflate them. So, whether this is consistent within your framework remains ambiguous thus far.

Amazing how OP was immediately derailed and everyone here is too chickenshit to acknowledge basic and common knowledge.

I'll say right now though, based on a life of seeing this shit unfold: you were never, ever free, and everything you're told about "freedom" is a contemptuous lie. That was never a condition for mankind, save for one truth. That is that the world itself does not care about freedom or slavery at all, and the world has already defeated the human race and human spirit. If you know the basics about Masonic shit, and Morals and Dogma from Pike is the goto that is publicly available, they really do believe the universe works in a way that allows magic to work for the divine, and that they themselves has ascended and can ascend by earning their degrees. That concept, if you use your thinking cap and approach the world with any sort of science, is anathema to any condition of "natural freedom" and wholly opposed to any notion of spiritual freedom. The only freedom in such a system is power for power's sake. People like this, whatever their guise, have done through throughout human history, and they laugh at anyone who thinks it can ever be different. The only way it was ever different is for whatever part of the world we reclaimed, only to see it destroyed repeatedly.

None of this is a great secret. They want you to live in fear and know this never, ever changes. The only difference now is that there is truly no escape from their games, whether you're made a target or not. Any hope you had about a world where nice things can exist is gone forever.

I have to wonder when mass suicide cults become open and normal, in which humanity sees that there is no good reason to carry on with this society. I don't intend to suicide. If I were going to do that it would have happened a long time ago. Very likely I will die of poor health and neglect and I will die within the next 5-10 years, but they could imprison and torture me just to get what they always wanted and "prove the theory" once and for all. I'm past caring. I'll go on for what little in this world I can care about, and because apparently it angers them that I insist on living. But, if you were ever looking for "big, ancient mysteries", you're shit out of luck. That was always just the torture cult you've lived under all of your life, and they do not believe in anything else. I don't believe humans are capable of anything else.

What's with this dumb schizo rambling? The Freemasons are just a theistic self improvement frat group for old people. They do stuff like volunteer work for their communities. They aren't some spookie boogieman just a bunch of goofy dorks.

>>23836
Thats the lower level masons

>>23883
Freemasons became genericised in the world of secret societies

>>23883
>suicide in antiquity was always regarded as noble since it represented man's battle against destiny. women would rather kill themselves and their children than to be enslaved. no one has this ethos today.

Actually, suicide was criminalized in Abrahamic faiths and maybe Buddhism.
Also, suicide is pathologised nowadays as lack of maturity.
>You got so much to live for

Live for what?
More suffering and ennui?

>>23888
Didn't Helen Blavatsky found the Theosophical Society?
Also the New Age stuff started around the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

Also, I always said that Christianity as a spiritual religion died with the founding of Catholicism and was further de-spiritualised through Protestantism.
Even as a kid, I always felt that Christianity, under the Protestant franchise, was more dry, stiff, and political rather than religious.

Especially when I learned about the philosophical synthesis of Protestantism and Anglo American history.
The belief of Providentialism, that America was chosen by God.

Idk why but the ridicule from atheists about Christian platitudes in public institutions always felt a bit absurd.
I understand the worry of religious persecution but I Intuitively knew that those Christian platitudes were less religious and more philosophical.

Even reading a lot of Christian politics blogs, it came across as no different from a fantasy-adventure script with the histrionic tone throughout the articles

The only people who can make Christianity feel remotely spiritual are blacks but even that comes off more as superstition.

Even though I grew up in mainly white neighborhoods, I cannot help but feel the worship sessions in church were just not authentic. Idk but I felt they were dry and shallow in their humor.
(And I mean "humor" as in the temperance model)

>>23908
>people dont realise how much of the occult is also just literal scams and pseudoscience, which were rampant during this time. the perpetual motion machine is my favourite, which becomes twinned in all the nikola tesla hype. as others have stated, the occult and capitalism share the same spiritual destiny; of promising to turn lead into gold.

Irony is, a lot of the interdimensional entities responsible for occult practices were known to deceive humans for nefarious purposes.
Alchemy was popularized by King Solomon.
And Solomon was a shameless hedonist.
He was given seals and specialized rings that he used to control demons.

They were used as an illegal alien workforce


>well again, if a prophecy becomes self-fulfilling, it still suffices.

Self fulfilling is not the same as predetermined.
America being "chosen by God" is blasphemy promoted by Anglos.

>the protestantism in africa is also largely pentecostal, which mirrors the tribal worship they still preserve there. this makes it a rather "catholic" syncretism of culture then - like how south america's "christianity" is entirely mixed with heritage. its only in anglo-saxon protestantism that culture disappears from the object of worship - this is also why anglos are most easily convertable to atheists, since their christianity is already "godless".

This. Its why the only the sincere Anglo Christians usually have borderline white supremacist views.

>>23883
> its still for pedos, but more like "local councilman" pedo type conspiracies. its also entirely class-oriented. there are no "poor" masons.
You get that in literally every group including whatever you're in. Class isn't how much money someone has. They dont explicitly keep it based on socioeconomic bracket just it's that people of similar financial levels are the kind to come into contact with each other.

>>23912
>terence mckenna's description of him seeing a UFO is the clearest exposition of this demonic trickery. the unconscious reveals itself in these moments of intensity, the same way the laugh and cry can become indistinguishable. there is something "artificial" about the spiritual, and i think AI has revealed this.


Many scientists have concluded the UFO phenomenon is more magic and religion than science.
Carl Sagan in the early 1960s said in an interview that UFO contact stories are not unlike the religious myths of saviors coming to save humans in times of civil crisis.
He also said the UFO stories have more to do with religion and superstition than science.

As for AI,theres no ontological paranormal element about it. It's just technophobia gone extreme
AI isn't even AI. It's just machine learning.

AI can only work if it was controlled directly by a human consciousness.

>but it becomes the same difference. remember all those weird tales of fate from the greeks like oedipus, where one by his free actions still nonetheless "chooses" his destiny. this is the consciousness of predestination in protestantism also. engels once remarked that this theology is based in the logic of the market, alongside smith's "invisible hand" of providence.

Maybe the spirit world has its own law of natural selection. Also, have you considered that providentialism is based on prior decades/centuries of Europeanisation of Christianity


>yes. well, christianity was also used during trans-atlantic slavery to justify the enslavement of blacks. but in the process, blacks become "more" christian than their masters. martyrs like john brown also used his own christianity to attack slavery. so christianity has this internal battle. i would also claim that ww2 was a christian war, between the liberal protestants, the fascist catholics and the orthodox russians.

Protestants were the ones who promoted Nazism.
The founder, Martin Luther was a known anti Semite.
Also, Protestantism has made black people superstitious and hysterical.
It has dulled their intellectual and empathetic drives.

>>23924
>i mean in the sense that AI videos look like what we think dreams feel like. as lacan says, the unconscious has the structure of a language, and AI is made of language (code) - but this is also the general trend of modernity; of unleashing textuality.

Well, the neural networks of AI generated artwork behaves like the brain reconstructing landscapes and structures based on waking experience.

>luther was not a full protestant though; lutheranism is a mixture of protestantism (calvinism) and catholicism. this also manifests the differences in modern philosophy between the calvinist empiricists (the UK), the catholic rationalists (france) and german idealism, which founds itself by kant as a completion of two by formulating the synthetic a priori.


Luther was a disgruntled Catholic clergyman

>the first christian theologian of predestination was st. augustine in the 4th century. i relate it to the greeks to show how there is something inherently european in the notion of destiny. for example, there are the celtic "morrigan", the norse "norns" and the greek "fates" which become the roman "fortuna", who is the supreme goddess of time and fate (systematised into the wheel of the zodiac). this goddess prevails in western man, which is why he invents history.

Fatalism pre-exists European adaptation, and I know you know that

>it depends on whether spirits are eternal or temporal

That's a good question.
I always wonder can spirits die?
They're eternal compared to the earthly realm but is there any sort of action in the heavenly realms that can stop their existence?

Some people like to differentiate between souls and spirits, even though they're confused for each other

>>23928
>to me, the funniest people in the world are probably african-americans, and they are also most protestant - while contrarily, nothing is less funny than a white christian comic. most comedians are jewish however, who possess this spirit of irony in their texts

Black people are more verbose and exuberant in words and action.
Jews are more cynical and ironic due to historical treatments.
Anglo whites are just dull and self-castrated.

But here's the thing: blacks try to hard to suck up to the whites.
If you ever notice the way black people are hypercritical/nitpicking of each other especially of their children, slapping and yelling at them for any ounce of flaws or nuance.

They even adapt the same helicopter parenting practices.

Black women as Christians are worse than any stauch white Anglo conservative man
I know because I experience it.
Black women with a Bible should never ever be given any authority over an educational institution

>>23937


>also on the point on protestantism, queerness and black people; have you noticed how "gay" blacks in america are becoming? all of rap is basically gay.

It's more the snarky aggressive machismo type tho.
Rap fashion was always more glamor, so queer aesthetic could easily fit right in.

Also, black queerness was a thing in disco and techno/house.

>>23939
Marvin Gaye used to cross dress in his mother's clothing after she died. But he was raised by his mother and father. But his father used to crossdress too and he was a preacher kek. Same guy that killed.

>>23940
Wait I'm stupid he died before her of course. I forget exactly the circumstanced of him crossdressing in her clothes.

>>23939
Jesus Christ does everything pertaining to gender identity always have to be diagnosed with fatherlessness?

>>23940
It was common for boys to cross dress back in those days and it was dismissed as some childhood peculiarity. There are pictures of FDR as a little boy crossdressing.

>>23939
Also, a lot of dads were domineering and castrative the same way the moms were.
Maternal behavior is an overused critique for "masculinity crisis".

>>23945
Fathers are fickle beings for life coaches.

>>23947
>the good father then understands that rules are meant to be broken, while the bad father internalises the phallus, and so takes the rules too seriously. of course, the abuser is always most abusive when shown to be a hypocrite. women are like this as well - once you logically corner them, they emotionally break down.

Compare Yellow Flash (Minato Namikaze from Naruto) to Endeavor from Boku No Hero Academia

>>23926
>the disney movie "coco" explores this relatively well. the dead "die" when theyre forgotten.

That's a common sentiment in mysticism

>i would say that souls are linked to living bodies, while spirits are more abstract - but then whats the difference between a spirit and idea?

That's a good question

>>23947
>but they are also necessary in representing prohibition from the mother, and therefore allowing us to sublimate our oedipal relation. a mother cannot properly deny a child the way a father can.

Mother's are more consistent in their discipline.
Fathers usually have gender biases in their disciplinary reason. See how most spoil/coddle their daughters or are more sympathetic towards them compared to how they treat their sons?

Fathers will also deny children to the point where they become helplessly dependent on Mom.

Irony is, boys who grow up with strict dads usually aren't so well composed.
Conservatives obsess to much over child control and brutalizing boys especially.
But they cannot bother to wonder about teaching children to survive and think for themselves.

>>23947
>The abuser is always most abusive when shown to be a hypocrite. women are like this as well - once you logically corner them, they emotionally break down

I notice people always either get really loud or really quiet when experiencing moral exposure.
Either as the show contestant or an audience member.

I also notice that most people who like to speak or plaster proverbial statements are usually the least likely to sincere or consistent.
Look at rap and punk.
Again, look at how a lot of commentators take any sort of moralistic quip their favorite musicians are saying as some profound truth.

>>23993
Actually, women can just as loud as men when it comes to ego defense.

>>23993
>in truth then, the sword, the gun and the cigar is the strap-on of the heterosexual male.

Listen to "The Male Disease" by George Carlin. It talks about the obsession with proving oneself that men do. And the coincidentally common male luxury items.

>as i like to say, an erect penis is an artificial penis, like the dildo

Why do people always wanna patronised/demean male genitalia? I get the machismo being a force but that doesn't mean erect penises are fake
Don't confuse the symbolism for the physicality

>>23993
>which is why as lacan understands it, the authority of the father is purely symbolic, since he represents prohibition. this is even why in a situation where the father is too permissive, the mother often substitutes herself for the figure of the father
<doing thing is male-coded and if the male does not do it then the female does it (still male-coded somehow)
bravo philosophers

>>24007
>but he then attributes female pathology to men (as if women cant be "crazy" on their own terms),

He actually says that "Women are crazy, men are stupid". Also at the end of his monologue "The Male Disease", he says "I'm not letting women off the hook either. Women are referred to as 'cunts'. Isn't it nice that cunts and assholes are next door neighbors?"

>and secondly, he thinks of it in diagnostic terms; that masculinity has to be "cured". a more lacanian perspective is that there are symptoms of formal pathologies, but no cures. there are problems, and providing solutions just brings more problems.

I understand somewhat. I say that most human problems are due to humans overestimating their own virtues. People always think themselves as being destined for greatness, that any personal pathologies are caused by willful transgression, that any problem can be solved by mere wit and grit alone.

>>24018
>he says that women are crazy *because* men are stupid

Oh yea I forgot. I hate it when people always nullify women of any responsibility or agency of their own respective gendered flaws.

>well i am quite buddhist in my answer. the biggest issue is ego. people are just so prideful without anything to be proud of. they want to possess objects but cannot even possess themselves. aristotle refers to this state of dependence as natural slavery. a fat person for example is a natural slave. all evil and ugliness comes from this primary weakness, where power and virtue depart from their harmony. this is why the world would be saved if all power was given to the most virtuous, yet only evil men seek this power for themselves. knowledge is not wisdom. riches are not wealth.

Irony is, this what the New Testament talks about a lot.
Jesus and apostle Paul are the main sermon guys on pride and virtue

Pride is the biggest sin towards God.
It was what got Lucifer kicked out of heaven.
It's what drives the doctrine of geopolitical exceptionalism of Anglo-American thought.

Remember, Jesus says that "the children of the world are smarter than my children".
That's something that would sound out of pocket
Most religious figures like to brag about their devotees being the best of the best.
Not Jesus
He said that the people of the church are often out-of-touch with the common folk and thus deserve to be swindled, mocked, and patronised by their opposition.

I remember on the main off-topic board, someone posted a screenshot of an article of an evangelical think tank saying "Empathy is a weakness".

Those are the kind of people that are very prideful and have no self-awareness at all.

In the Bible, notice that most of the divinely appointed figures were common folk who would be mocked and patronised by the masses.
"I will make the last be first and the first be last".

It's unfortunate that Christianity became politicised when the Catholic and Protestant churches were founded.

Protestants especially are main culprits of the de-spiritualisation of Christianity.
They were the ones who popualrised capitalism into a shameless consumerist machine
They were the ones who popularised "fuck you, I got mine".

>>24018
I heard Nikocado started his career as sort a joke/whim.
All the people morally obsessing over him because of his obesity are the reason why shock jock artists exist

People are addicted to indignation. And that addiction to indignantion is what fuels self-righteousness.

Everyone thinks to themselves "That could never be me. I'm too smart/mature for this". And then it happens. They fell into a rut and are desperate for saving face. This is the problem with LeftyPol.
They all whine about the right being hypocrites and cringe lords, yet their own camp does the same shit.

LeftyPol whines about "women are gold diggers". They whine about certain ethnic minorities being troublesome (Indians in this case).
They go hysterical over entertainment franchises having canon-reboot sequels.
Alot of them are NEETs or semi-NEETs who think they're owed free money for being miserable bastards.

>>24021
So that's why Nietzsche says "God is dead and we killed Him"?
Of course, Christians take it out of context and frame it as an attack against their religion.

>thread about the power and danger of freemasonry gets derailed into schizobabble about aliens and a discussion of christianity
Wasn't convinced about a masonic conspiracy until I saw this thread and noticed masons scrambling to divert. Trotsky and Molotov were right. Communists must kill all freemasons.

>>24034
Some of our early post-Revolutionary War American presidents were anti-Masons.

>No mention that Allende was a freemason
Damn