670 Comments

The ultimate EMO is playing God, substituting our own moral framework(s) and authorities for His singular, unchanging one. Thus, the first commandment: "You shall have no other gods before Me."

Expand full comment

Exactly right! "Satanism is not a 'belief in Satan' but the false pursuit to self-deify oneself."( Dr. Taylor Marshall in "Antichrist and Apocalypse".)

Expand full comment

There are SO many false gods in the Mystery Religions - Baal, Venus, Zues, Odin, Molech, Marduk etc - but all point to the same evil self-centric obsession with power and forbidden knowledge whereby these people feel imbued with special knowledge and privilege over the masses

Expand full comment

And a whole lotta false Christian shepherds, disguised as angels of light but bearing bitter fruit.

Expand full comment

As shepherds they have forgotten to scout for fresh pasturage and toss dome pap now and then.

Expand full comment

What's funny to me is people are worshipping at the alter of Viruses to avoid bad-bad viruses that the Virus gods have made so abundant that we are just one ingredient in their "soup".

I've said this since Warp Speed was announced:

The vaccines are not the Idol, it's the VIRUS.

Expand full comment

Or is it possibly whatever the “cure” from the pseudo “science” gods?

Expand full comment

Yes and... funny you should mention the enemy souls.

See my comment five minutes before posting this one:

https://cjhopkins.substack.com/p/the-big-smoke-and-mirrors/comment/13603007

Expand full comment

Art: I liked your writing asking “ who will you serve.” I like to encourage people to get off the fence and choose too. If they’re not convinced about Christianity or need more info, I like to refer the book “ Mere Christianity” by C.S. Lewis. He was an atheist that came full circle. He keeps it simple & not preachy.

Expand full comment

He was an anxious neurotic who found the treatment that suited him.

Expand full comment

PS: We need "serve" no one. Not every conception of the Divine has the master-servant paradigm.

Expand full comment

....rejecting the morality of the True God, erecting a new morality of their own.

Expand full comment

EMO? I am so out of it I didn't even recognize this. For other ancient folks like me, or others who are not in with cultural trends, I will help.

"What is emo slang for?

Teenagers use this slang term to characterize sensitive kids who follow emo music, dress in black, and have self-destructive tendencies. The slang term is derived from fans of emotive hardcore punk rock."

"What is emo vs Goth?

Emo belongs to post-hardcore, pop punk and indie rock style while gothic rock is a form of punk rock, glam punk and post punk. Emo rockers preach release of primal energy with abstract and chaotic sub structures while Goth are recognized by emphasis on darkness in their tone, dress, hair dyes, make up, emotion, etc."

"What is emo behavior?

Defining Emo Subculture and Identifying Subgroup Members

Emo music is characterized as emphasizing emotional or personal turbulence, behaviors, attitudes and values. Themes include despair, depression, heart break, and self-loathing."

Or maybe EMO means something totally different

Expand full comment

Whichever way you slice it, emo or EMO means you follow your own emotional path, regardless of its degree of illogic, selfishness, or outright malignancy. Versus understanding that perhaps there is a higher Intelligence (I call Him God), Who loves perfectly and in that love, defines a greater and universal Truth than our puny minds and selfish hearts could initiate or define without Him.

Expand full comment
Mar 15, 2023·edited Mar 15, 2023

The mathematics of nature (the human genome, the complexity of information embedded in even a single cell) indicate the neo-Darwinian synthesis is dead. Intelligent Design is a mathematically validated model. So there has to be a "designer" behind the design. The Great Mind behind the universe. Huamans did not create God as a kind of infantile wish fulfilment for a sky daddy as the sciffers say. The universe as it exists and humans as they exist were designed and the created by God. So we had better start looking for Him and stop pretending he is not there!

The globalists hang onto the old corpse of the neo-Darwinian synthesis. AKA Materialism or scientic naturalism. Human beings are reduced to being "hackable animals" - not people made in the image of God who are called upon to be their brother's keeper. The globalists set themselves up as the

'confitioners' of the hackable animals (as described in the final chapter of C S Lewis's book "The Abolition of Man". But rejecting God they have nothing to guide them but their own urges, impulses and transitory self-created ideals which will turn to dust in their hands. But they will never say "Without God, I too am just another hackable animal as well!" In their vanity they really think they can be the masters of the universe, that they are destined to be the Nietzschean Ubermensh. If they ever pick up a Bible they should read Psalm 2 first. Their mission will fail. Jesus Christ really did rise from the dead.

Expand full comment

Never understood why Jesus’ sacrifice was special. If I knew I was the only begotten son of the almighty creator of reality, “death” is no biggy. Realizing this, the celestial power behind the narrative collapses.

Expand full comment

Duncan - AWESOME!

Expand full comment

And here I was thinking it was slang for that 2003 Pixar flick, "Finding 'emo".

You're welcome. :)

Expand full comment

In this article, "EMO" stands for Exogenous Moral Orientation" (per the study discussed early in the article. Took me a minute to figure that out, too!

Expand full comment

It is the most important commandment. They want us to worship our earthly gods not the real one.

Expand full comment

Starting with worship of self:

"...you will be like God..." (Genesis 3:5)

Expand full comment

Ah yes, the religious nutcases showing up again. The people Eugyppius are talking about here. But you were too lazy to read his article and don't want to know the facts in it, so you grandstand a little and quote from the Bible instead. The usual.

Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Scientific Progress - Thx so much for this comment here which helps immensely to put this in some chronological,

historical context.

Expand full comment

I looked at Gates's "philanthropy's" track record. He is NOT a good man.

Expand full comment

IKR that is my thought exactly. and his divorce - I wonder what more his ex is going to dish on him over time.

Expand full comment

yes yes yes to all of what you have written. what about all of this - population control thru eugenics. vaccines are killing and killing and killing. . . . just saying

Expand full comment

Funny how you don't comment on anything Eugyppius wrote, instead just push your own nutcase book. FREEMASONS! Racism! Anti-Semites! Darwin! It's all connected to the DEMOCRATS! Abortion is part of the plan! You guys didn't disappear together with Infowars, that's a shame.

Expand full comment

what in the hell are you talking about? nutcase indeed. . .

Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Mar 14, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Sterilization also produces the result of less children being born and is evidently a side effect in some cases of mRNA vaccination. If the Vaccines are the mechanism for depopulation and only the blindly trusting and obedient who refuse to think for themselves would defer and inject such, then it seems that would be a reasonable way to go at a depopulation event eh?

That there still is no accountability to be had anywhere says alot about the whole Farce.

Expand full comment

I'm just going to be disappointed if I paid for a vasectomy but could have done it for free with the jab...

Expand full comment

With a side of lifetime cardio and neuro issues (if you survive a few)

Expand full comment

What's a few strokes among friends? 🤪

Expand full comment

Love is fruitful. That's why they declared war on human love during lockdown.

Expand full comment

I didn’t think I could hate Gates more. After reading your info., I sure do. In “ The Real Anthony Fauci”, book, I was shocked by all the “philanthropic” vaccines that made their way to Africa by Gates & Fauci. Experimental, at best, these vaccines killed and permanently injured so many innocent lives. So much so, I believe, the African gov. refused the Covid vaccines from the U.S. And Africa came through the pandemic brilliantly with their abundant Vit. D from the sun, and NO poisonous bioweapons. ( shots)

Ivermectin is used regularly there as well.

Good for them!

Another big chapter in the Fauci book was about AIDS. Again, many deaths from experimental vaccines and drugs ( AZT), in Africa & the U.S. In 2003, Gates & Fauci opened trial clinics in Africa. An associate said ( about Fauci) basically that Fauci was powerful & scary-

used his funding to get whatever he needed or used it to cover up his corruption too. The Real Fauci book is just as much about Gates & their deadly “ philanthropic adventures”.

Fauci received many awards for his AIDS work. Let’s make sure he doesn’t get positively acknowledged for Covid -19.

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023

"In the nineteenth century, somebody like Bill Gates would be far more likely to run domestic charities, but in our present hyper-EMO world, he spends every waking moment thinking about Africa, and how he can help Africans". I think the many Africans who have lost family members to Gates' insane drive to vaccinate everyone on the planet, as often as possible, would beg to differ. I think Gates wants everyone to be vaccinated because he makes money out of it, not out of philanthropic motives. If he really wanted to help people in Africa he would spend money on getting clean water for them, which would be far more effective.

Expand full comment
author

Gates also puts money towards water and sanitation initiatives.

Expand full comment

A quick search shows Gates spends millions on water sanitation in Africa and billions on vaccines for Africa. I agree the problem is much larger than Gates, we have an ideological enemy but I contend Gates invests the way he does only to increase his own wealth yet pretends to care about the great unwashed.

Expand full comment
author

I don't think the two motivations are mutually exclusive: You can invest for your own benefit and because you believe it helps people. Also, vaccine technology massively more complex and expensive than clean water.

Expand full comment

Experimenting on Indian & African orphans with the type of bypassing informed consent like we've seen here also more recently, truly shows how much someone cares for humans, vs. useful biomass.

Expand full comment

"Also, vaccine technology massively more complex and expensive than clean water." Good point! You made it clear, but not what you think. The truth is:

"Vaccine technology massively more complex and expensive than clean water AND clean water is massively more important to health than vaccine technology".

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023Liked by eugyppius

Your article here is really good, really good to know about the EMO

Expand full comment

Yup. I learned a lot.

Expand full comment

Author has Bill Gates wrong.

Gates and many others want to reduce populations because they believe they own the world, and us. Of course they're using healthcare, food, and education, its called controlling your herd. Pike made it clear, we are beasts of burden, and meat on the table, by choice and consent.

Bert Russel said it plainly, too.. "Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible."

If you send Bill Gates to India, they'll show you what he is guilty of doing.

Mass murderers must always face justice, else you may be next. Its why we care about such things. We are next.

Expand full comment

Your article is very well written. But in regards to the reply your replying to here and your reply, most of what he and others like him have done in Africa *appears good* but what it seems to really be is tax deductible PR work while reputation boosting themselves and the local political cliques they work with and patching up holes in local governance that they themselves are responsible for. Over the past thirty years they've really done a number on African societies and governments: 1) as is mentioned in other replies, much of what "they" do, such as in the case of pharma giveaways, is actually largely paid for by Western taxpayers and they profit off of it. But more importantly, when they ushered in the era we live in now, back in circa 1980, they began a process of hollowing out African societies and governments, starting around the year 2000, they actually began to deindustrialize developing states and sending their manufacturing to China! On on hand they may care about the environment, but on the other they use "green" policy treaties to not just override labor laws in countries for metals mining but even environmental regulations. I agree with you that their likely not part of some super evil cabal with extremely malevolent intentions, but they men who are ruthless to the point of being, at least in the colloquial definition of the term, psychopaths.

Expand full comment

Excellent comment....until you got to the extremely naive and apologetic part of "likely not part of some super evil cabal with extremely malevolent intentions..."But, of course, that's exactly who and what they are in spite of your wishful thinking and erroneous belief...not only psychopathic but diabolical in that they have caused an enormous number of deaths and suffering for their innocent victims while enriching themselves in the process.

Expand full comment

Get real! Yeah, millions on water and billions on vaccines! See something wrong and out of balance with that argument!? But your final statement is accurate; he is as much a charlatan and psychopath as Fauci !

Expand full comment

Gates’ projects in Africa are perfect for him because he makes alot of money while gaining a great virtuous satisfaction too . It’s weird to me that people like him have such hubris--it never occurs to them to learn what the people they purport to help really want. However that is a feat of the elites, right?

Expand full comment

Not religious, yet as far as deadly sins go, I used to think they were all about equal. Now I think that wrath, envy, sloth, gluttony, lust, and even greed, pale in comparison to the corrupting power of pride. Hubris is pride.

Expand full comment

Being new to this author, it’s not clear from reading his post, whether he supports urgent worldwide action to address the climate crisis, or whether he is instead a soft or hard climate denier.

I have criticism of Gates and his approach to climate action, but I don’t question his sincerity or motives.

I am a strong advocate of medical freedom, but I have found to my dismay that most of the folks I run into who also support medical freedom, minimize or deny the reality of a climate crisis that is fast becoming the largest threat that the human race has ever faced with the exception of nuclear warfare.

Expand full comment

Spend some time with "Watts up with that". A couple of decades of discussion regarding climate change. We are at a climate optimum for humanity at this time. There is no proof of anthropogenic warming. We are still rebounding from the previous ice age. The idea that the climate is in crisis is simply a tool to generate money for bureaucrats to stuff in their pockets.

Expand full comment

Back in the 70's all the climate panic was that we were heading for another Ice Age- being of a young age at that time, this caused me to fear for the mankind's future (I know, I know). Having now learnt about the Roman warming and Medieval warming periods and becoming much wiser to the manipulations (both of data and people) by those seeking to gain advantage from creating a crisis, I am forever grateful to the much maligned army of awkward sods who see through the "we must do something to save humanity" hubris and clearly and carefully set out the opposing case- such as the WUWT website does.

Expand full comment

From what I understand, too, we're heading into a colder era after a period of warming. So we're going to need all of the energy advantages that we can muster - that includes the use of energy from nuclear and fossil fuels. To ditch them in favour of renewables, which rely on more unpredictable weather-related sources, seems foolhardy in the extreme.

Expand full comment

Actually, the next couple of years are likely to be even more disastrously hot then the past 50

Expand full comment

Thanks for that website resource, Michael. I look forward to exploring it. I can see I have much to learn. My eyes were certainly opened during the Covid insanity, and how crisis can be manufactured and/or exploited for gain - and always for the gratification of petty bureaucrats and tyrants, of course. This climate grift seems to be no different. The overnight pivot by MSM to start peddling shrill "climate crisis" narratives has been almost laughable. Suddenly "poof!", Covid was gone, now climate has its time in the "crisis sun". On and on, ad infinitum.

Expand full comment

I don't think we have "Global Warming" or "Global Cooling." I think for the last two or so decades we've had "Global Staying the Same."

Expand full comment

What we definitely have is global dumbing-down. Amazing what protracted fear-mongering and opportunistic catastrophy-porn does to our communal psyche. Once you realise that "Science" is more interested in chasing grant money than vigorously testing questionable premises - as has been so patently demonstrated during the Covid Shitshow - you start questioning and suspecting every single bit of "expertise consensus" that gets ladled out to you. That in itself should have had everyone smelling the stinking rat. Since when is science ever "settled"? And who gets to decide there is "consensus" and any questioning must therefore stop?

Expand full comment

You illustrated my point perfectly by demonstrating out your complete and total ignorance of a climate crisis that has been acknowledged by every one of the 200 nations of the world those on the left those on the right those rich those poor those on every continent.

And your proof of no crisis comes some obscure blog?

Tell the people of California or any country with glaciers or people in the Amazon or people in Siberia, etc. etc. that there’s no climate crisis. I can only imagine the look you would get.

Expand full comment

Science is not a democracy. Only data and facts matter as determined from a repeatable experiment, not by the number of people voting yes or no. And the data are in on the global temperature via monitoring with satellites. The globe has not warmed in the past 30 years, less than a fraction of one degree. Yes, there are weather extremes in local areas but they always happen, both in the past and now. By the way there are more glaciers now globally than there were 30 years ago, and it looks like the global temperature trend might well be toward cooling, not warming.

Expand full comment

Herb your ignorance is quite revealing. R U smoking too much herb or is it edibles?

Expand full comment

Global climate change indeed happens. Just as sure as the glaciers, that spanned the globe 12 thousand years ago receded, ushering in the 3rd major diaspora of our species.

I doubt you'd be typing on a computer about another ho-hum interglacial period, on the pale blue dot, had that not happened until 5 thousand years ago. And if our brief time on earth hadn't just happened to coincide, at virtually just the right time, with an interglacial...well then there's a chance mother nature just used us as kindling earlier than she would've otherwise. So there's that at least

If humans are contributing at the margins; well that's just the cost of doing business when you live in a universe where evolution is the driver of survival.

We are just another species that will adapt and survive or denude its niche. IMO if we're contributing (which is possible but not falsifiable), and face a species level event, then we'll either figure out how to stem it or be consumed by it.

I think we attribute too much importance on our species in the grand scheme. Survival is not a species birthright. You're only given the "right" to struggle.

Expand full comment

Excellent, Ryan. Thanks

Expand full comment

I love this response. Encapsulated, neatly. A Luta continua!

Expand full comment

Even if we were on the brink of catastrophic mad-made climate change, it's possible and perhaps probable that government responses would be even more catastrophic. In order to fix things, we have to know how to fix things.

Expand full comment

What we have is man-made pollution and man-made habitat degredation. Also injudicious use of arable land. We can certainly do something about these. Many are starting to re-look at how we produce food and utilise our land. If we don't all stop listening to the doomsayers and collectively losing our sh*t, and start calmly fixing things, there is no reason why we can't live happily and prosperously on our beautiful world for a while to come.

Expand full comment

They'll fix er' right up it with lockdowns and chemicals and maybe plastic pig ears instead mask.

And "mistakes will be made" for thee but not for me.

Expand full comment

I think people can be concerned about the environment and climate change without believing that we are in an "emergency" requiring the imposition of crippling top-down policies.

Expand full comment

The vaccines rolled out in Africa and maybe India were deliberately designed to leave young women infertile.

And possibly unrelated to Gates, not sure, apparently there's research to develop gm corn that lowers sperm count.

The global depopulation agenda sounds very likely to me. It's the ultimate logic of a scared culture that has a linear view on a meaningless world.

Expand full comment
author
Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023Author

even if you accept that HCG was deliberately added to WHO-administered tetanus vaccines administered in Kenya (the claim is far from uncontroversial), that changes nothing about what I argue here.

Expand full comment

The lead author of the study now lives closeby.

I will try to ascertain if there was any doubt about the HCG additions.

Certainly RFK Jr. was confident enough to present the story and does not appear to have been sued over the report.

Expand full comment

Also, the depopulation agenda runs very deep in our culture and subconscious. What the likes of Gates do is just the tip of the iceberg.

The whole idea that humans are separate from nature, that humans are destroying nature, that the only way forward is to reduce human impact are the basis of depopulation. We all believe these things to various degrees. Reducing human impact, our footprint, is depopulation. At least in a linear dead universe worldview.

Seeing ourselves as being an integral part of nature, we are nature, seeing processes as cyclical, realizing that the universe is alive, might allow us to see impact as both unavoidable but also something that can expand life as oppose to necessarily destroy life.

Not hinting at any kind of religion. Mainstream religions set the foundation for this disconnected and linear worldview.

Expand full comment

Those people who think that a radically reduced population would be ideal don't realize that people are what make the planet worth living on. It's people who love and create us, who grow our food, heal us when we are sick, teach us, entertain us, build our houses, invent and repair the appliances (including cars, planes) that make us comfortable and give us leisure.

What a horrible, frightening world it was for early humans. Eventually the depopulated elites would find themselves reduced to a very primitive existence with no one to make the goods and services they depend on.

Expand full comment

I suspect they are a fig leaf to cover his ambition, which is to increase his wealth and the wealth of the Foundation, which gives him more power and influence. The Foundation invests in research and technology to produce more vaccines which further enrich him. The Foundation increased its wealth by $25bn in the five years prior to 2020. He uses Africa as a test environment for his toxic drugs, as he knows he would not get away with the most egregious malpractices in developed countries, and that is saying quite a lot considering the benign regulatory environment in these countries.

Expand full comment

Sure he does and as a smokescreen for all of his other sponsored nefarious activities; he and his cohorts have been responsible for countless innocent African lives where Africans, especially women and children, have been used as guinea pigs for untested and unproven drugs and "vaccines"; it continues today in the attempt to inject the African population with the latest poisons from Gates and his colleagues at Big Pharma!

Expand full comment

And buying up thousands of acres of farm land, investing in imitation meat , masks for cows (just read about this one) & seeding the sky to deflect sunlight. Whatta guy

Expand full comment

GatesofHades is no more a true loving philanthropist than a virtue signaller. And the world knows his efforts toward hell are far greater than his few efforts toward good.

His strategy off the hot seat of monopoly in the 80s was to get to work to save the world. Only fools see good in his net effect on the world: evil.

Expand full comment

Experimenting on Africans with vaccines with a horrible safety protocol is the ultimate form of racism. Doesn't it imply that blacks are expendable?

Expand full comment

We now realize that the evil ones are way beyond racist. They have gotten away with murder that is indiscriminate. Everyone gets a chance to die from the bioweapon created by the US government. Not to forgive racism at all, its unacceptable to all right-thinking people of the world. But mass murder isn’t at all racist, or targeted to a particular group: its worse. How wonderfully inclusive for us all to be so equally treated by our murderous governments!

Expand full comment

Just for his own toilet when he visits.

Expand full comment

It is an interesting conundrum. If I understand properly, Gates hopes to reduce the growth of the population of Africa by bringing them into the modern World. But it has been the introduction of modern sanitation and medicine to Africa that has caused child mortality to plummet and the population to explode. One would think that the easiest way to curtail population growth in the Third World would be to leave these populations to their own devices.

Perhaps it is not the reduction of mortality in modern society that causes people to have fewer children, but the introduction of significantly more entertainment options.

Expand full comment

Please document this water issue & that it not really in actuality to just to one of his own entities. Thank you.

Expand full comment

Didn’t Kaddafi build a huge water distribution project for irrigation that was blown to smithereens by “the West?” How would that be interpreted in this theoretical framework?

Expand full comment

The media would sensor but if that failed they would deploy fact checkers to dismiss the water plant theory and say it was a chemical weapons facility.

Expand full comment

I am shocked at this drivel being posted by Eugyppius, it's hard to believe something this worthy of CNN was written by the same author I have followed through many dozens of articles.

Expand full comment

Clearly you don't actually read his essays carefully. This is classic Eugyppius and he's right.

Expand full comment
Mar 15, 2023·edited Mar 15, 2023

You have your traditional Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, War, Famine, Plague, etc. and then you have Bill Gates on a sick pony, “Vaccination” extending a helping hand, offering protection from those Meanies. Only when you reach up, you get his 20,000-volt electric handshake buzzer! Sure, if you would have survived, who knows? You may have actually eventually reached a First World Lifestyle which, after a generation or so would have forced you through exhaustion to not have so many kids, but that promise was only the bait.

Expand full comment

Gates grand-pa wrote the books on EUGENICS

Hitler was was brought to power by GATES, FORD, BUSH in 1920's UK developed Hitlers "eugenics model'

Little Bill Gates III, just inherited a family legacy, not unlike Frankenstein ( mel brookes )

Expand full comment

The point is that in his mind he is “helping Africa.” It doesn’t matter that he ISN’T, because he has a different idea of what helping- and Africa—mean. If you don’t understand that, you don’t understand him.

Expand full comment

That is absurd and baseless nonsense

He deliberately profited from selling BANNED vaccines to third world countries, planned and profited enormously from the Death Jab, and has stated that his Vaccines push is designed to reduce the population.

Do you need him to spit directly in your face?!!

Expand full comment

Shameless plug, "Water For People" is a worthy charity.

Expand full comment

Clean water and cheap, RELIABLE, energy. Imagine the difference!

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

When I was an adolescent, a long time ago, I posed one of those idiot moral quandary questions kids are prone to imagining to someone--"If there was only one pair of breeding rhinos left in the world, and you could save them or your own child, what would you do?" And of course I was thinking, at that age, that I'd have to sacrifice my child to the Greater Good of the Universe.

A quarter-century later I did have my own child, and I can say, without the least shred of moral ambivalence, "fuck them rhinos."

To have the world run by simulations of my adolescent self is a pretty grim thing.

Expand full comment

That's exactly what I was thinking as I read this. How did this bizarre EMO take root in the first place? It's because it is the soft, feel-good morality of a child brought up in luxury who has never had to face any want. The child has no grounding in reality. The success and prosperity of western civilization is what has created a unique cocoon for EMO (among other maladies) to exist. Reintroducing an appreciation for how close to want and suffering any of us could become if society dysfunctions would fix a lot of this.

Expand full comment

The lower-middle-class commonplace post-war upbringing I had was undoubtedly remarkable luxury compared to the struggles of my immigrant grandparents. It was a unique bridging moment in time, where almost everyone's mom was able to stay home--at least during the kids' elementary school years; once the kids were older many women chose to work so they could have a little independence.

What's been lost from the middle-class experience now is adolescents having first jobs that required responsibility and common sense--babysitting, a paper route, etc. Now they're too busy with college resume-building extracurriculars that keep them in a state of overgrown infancy.

Expand full comment

Agree. My first job was driving a tractor and working cattle with my Dad. I got a house, food and love. My first job that paid cash was working at a cattle feed yard driving a truck to feed the cattle, mixing the feed ration in the feed mill and eventually running the entire mill on weekends. That was my junior and senior year in HS. God I was lucky. Today I’m retired but still do ration formulation and forage analysis for two 2500 cow dairies. Man I was lucky as a kid and I’m still pretty damn lucky. Livestock teach us we’re all part of Gods creation. “All Creatures Great and Small. The Lord God made them all”.

Expand full comment

It’s partly because various social and political movements have eclipsed religion in the West. The same impulse that naturally causes people to align themselves with something greater, and with divine things, now causes highly educated people in the West, and those influenced by them, to devote themselves to “the environment,” and “the planet” as transcendent goods. Bill Gates can think he’s “helping Africa” by keeping Africans from reproducing because he thinks only stupid, poor, unenlightened people reproduce more than once or twice in the first place, and if they don’t understand how much better of they (and the planet) will be now, they will in the future and will thank him for it. They look on people who don’t agree with them as poor, benighted heathens who will one day see the light.

Expand full comment

I also think their obsession with helping blacks in this (mainly) indirect way is a kind of cover-up for their hatred of poor whites, who they allow themselves openly to despise. They in fact hate the poor everywhere but hide this fact from themselves by devoting themselves wholeheartedly, or at least in between yoga sessions, lattes, board meetings, and TED talks, that they're actively combating racism, helping the environment, ensuring "sustainable" development, etc.

Expand full comment

These are just new religions, or modern expressions of old ones. Remember when it was all the rage to talk admiringly of the purported wonderful symbiotic relationship Native Americans had with the environment and its animal inhabitants? (The animal inhabitants might disagree.) These latest fanatics weren't the first to conceptualize a Mother Earth who needed to be tenderly cared for by her children.

And an awful lot of "highly educated people in the West" have devoted quite a lot of their fine brainpower to things like Christian apologetics (truly I love that word) or laundering of Buddhism into "it means anything I say it does" and for some baffling reason they get less scorn than the hysterical climate apocalyptics. Wherever one stands on anything, there's someone standing on the other side, laughing, sneering or shaking their heads in bemusement. Same old same old.

Re reproducing: I'm not a fan of coercion but I'm a huge fan of intentional childbearing, and I've lived in a poor country where otherwise intelligent people I've known have declared their desire for and have worked quite hard at having more children than they could afford to raise well, and the moral/ethical questions around that can be debated forever with no satisfactory conclusion.

Expand full comment

The lesson is at its own making as we blissfully type... in Blogri-La.

Expand full comment

I believe that you have hit the nail on the head. Eugyppius mentions apart from nature. That is accurate but so is apart from so much of life that isn’t one’s own version. There is a lack of understanding and a lack of empathy. I was at a funeral gathering and was speaking with a person in his 80s who was talking about the loss of employment in upstate New York. Those polluters like glove makers etc are long gone. Surely that improved the “ environment “. We were joined by a young person who visits the area occasionally who said , “ It’s okay again now. There are lots of boutiques.” There was no understanding that boutiques do not equal factories in employment. This person has a well paid federal government position. So, we are in that world run by simulations of your adolescent self. I wonder why you matured and this 40 year old with children hasn’t?

Expand full comment

Well, when I had my kid, I stopped the almost annual rereadings of "The Lord of the Rings" that I'd been doing since I first read the books in HS. Real life had finally become more meaningful.

I still love those books; Tolkien is matchless. But I didn't need to get lost in fantasy any longer.

Expand full comment

the critically thinking adult in the room at the time you were positing this question should have had the stones to point out that what you were engaging in was more accurately defined as a "false equivalence", a logical fallacy being used liberally these days to justify bullshit....from all sides.

Expand full comment

If I'd had critically-thinking adults in my life at that age, I might have avoided all the idiotic things I did later. I was denied such good counsel and thank God for it. I am the shining example of accidents of fate working out astoundingly well in the end.

Expand full comment

Wonderfully argued and communicated, Eugyppius!

This is gold. "The banal truth is that Gates is an unoriginal flabby Western liberal. He’s worried about the environment, about population and about disadvantaged brown people, and he thinks he can solve all these problems by improving healthcare."

This attitude, which is absolutely, positively, what Gates has, really pisses me off. My favorite way to summarize my disgust is this statement. "The last thing Africa needs is another white boy trying to save it." This protective benevolence narrative animates so much of "flabby Western liberal" thought. I find it tiring as hell. And typical. "Disadvantaged brown people" are not pets, needing to be adopted.

This is also gold. "It’s a world where millions of people share the ideological anxieties of eccentric children like Greta Thunberg, manifest escalating indifference to adverse policy outcomes in their own countries, and dream of a future earth devoid of humans like themselves."

This snippet summarizes, wonderfully, an admission made by Melinda French Gates during an interview. She admitted that they *knew* we should lockdown but did not fully anticipate or understand the negative ramifications thereof. This is, chapter and verse, the type of "escalating indifference to adverse policy outcomes" you note from Greta Whats-Her-Name! (Of course, we know, and frankly, they should have known, that locking down was a horrible, shitty, knee-jerk idea, but that ship has sailed.) What animated them, what continues to animate them, is a vapid belief that their concerns for Mother Earth, and their pure hearts will make their dumb-assed, banal, short-sighted ideas and decisions work out for the benefit of all in the long run. Bullshit.

"How bad things have to get before this happens, is the terrifying question." The answer from my standpoint is, pretty effing bad.

Expand full comment

💥👏🏻🎯👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

Expand full comment

Yes! Thank you!

Expand full comment

The love of the distant idea of some group rather than one's actual neighbor is so unhealthy. Of course, they really don't love the distant people. They world hate them too as soon as they meet them up close.

Expand full comment

To paraphrase from an author whose name escapes me "There is no one more vicious than a man who pontificates his love for all of humanity."

Expand full comment

It allows for dehumanization of those nearby, but lets the sociopath still think they are a good person for their love of an idea.

Expand full comment

yes I see it in my organisation, the progressive filtering towards these types of utterly certain, sanctimonious do- gooders, virtue-signalling on every " current thing" who are in fact bullies when their power and ideology is challenged. socialism ingrained as " altruistic" indoctrinated from very young in (some) schools, combined with hubris... run amok. EMO- exogenous moral orientation is why hannah arendts eichmann was able to be not evil but simply "thoughtless and concerned with his own advancement" to the point of becoming monstrous.

Expand full comment

They treat exogenous groups like caricatured pets, and that leads to dehumanized thinking. This is how, in U.S. liberal socio-political circles, instead of evaluating an individual's moral behavior, they portray LGBT people as sex clowns, people of color as uniformly good victims, and white people as uniformly bad oppressors.

Expand full comment

If they portrayed LGBTQ people as sex clowns, wouldn't that be closer to the truth? They seem to me to portray them as relentless victims of relentless cis-/straight/white patriarchy or tyranny or victimization, each one a Matthew Shepard (another fraudulent story) in waiting.

Expand full comment

It's time we cranked up our much hallowed Oppressor skills. The Oompa Loompa are driving us all toward Bedlam!

Expand full comment

That's right. One thing, among many others, that often strikes me about the leftist, "liberal", regime toadie, elite, NYT-reading, latte-sipping set is their immense snobbery. I overhead one at the dog park this morning saying to another, "The only good thing about Texas is Austin," to which the other said, "Austin? You're lucky. My daughter wanted to go to grad school in Oklahoma. There's NOTHING good about Oklahoma."

Expand full comment

The key word in your statement, for me, is "pontificates". "Preaching" versus "Being" (walking the talk) are two different things.

I had an experience of feeling "love for all humanity". It was a quite intense, overwhelming and brief feeling that put me in awe to the point of tears. (No, no drugs were involved, haha, I was just standing in an airport). I struggle with even saying that, because I know that my daily life does not reflect that experience. What it did do, is give me a brief insight which I aspire to. Only God can truly love all humanity.

What has been a recurring thought in my mind lately, are the words, (from the Gospel of Matthew) "love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you" "Love" , to me, does not mean to agree or allow with what others may do, but to see beyond their actions. What if we all focused on the good inside each person and worked to bring that out, rather than harping on every negative action they have done?

I get worked up listening to pontificating leaders and media pundits... but there is not much I can do beyond turn them off and pray for them....and note that I do the same to a certain extent, and must continue to work on my own behavior. My real work is in loving/accepting my self and those I interact with on a daily basis. Family, friends, community.

There I go, down a rabbit hole...I hope it does not sound like pontificating.... ;)

Expand full comment

I agree whole-heartedly. The hardest work is to acknowledge ourselves as imperfect sinners and to forgive and try our darndest to love and forgive those who are near and dear and those who irritate us the most. If we can manage to be decent and thankful for the good that is done to and for us; that is as much as most of can do. And maybe all that is needed in this world. That and the 10 commandments, of course.

Expand full comment

That kind of transcendent experience is precious! And yes, totally different from what’s generally meant by saying “I love humanity.”

Expand full comment

Reminds me of a quote I love.

"People travel to faraway places to watch, in fascination, the kind of people they ignore at home."

~ Dagobert D. Runes

Expand full comment

“I love mankind, it’s people I can’t stand.” — Tom Lehrer

Expand full comment

Indeed, that dysfunctional brand of love depends upon its ideal remaining at the safe distance of abstraction. The long-long distance relationship (seeming light-years).

Expand full comment

In the Screwtape Letters, the eponymous devil says something like "Our aim is to move all the patient's [= the person they're trying to tempt into hell] charity to the outermost circle, to people he's never going to meet and who, for all intents and purposes, might as well not exist to him, and all his selfishness to the immermost circle, to the people he interacts with every day. Thus the charity becomes largely imaginary, and the selfishness all too real."

Expand full comment

Thank you for this nuanced perspective, eugyppius, and while I still think you underestimate the philanthropaths (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/anatomy-of-a-philanthropath-dreams), I appreciate the amount of thought you put into this analysis.

I know you’re not giving Bill Gates a pass, but you do seem to believe his cover story that he’s trying to help the poor Africans and so on, but then why were the tetanus vaccines his foundation helped distribute to Africans laced with infertility technology (https://rumble.com/v184bw8-infertility-a-diabolical-agenda-2022-wakefield-kennedy-chd-documentary.html)?

And what about Klaus Schwab’s mentor Maurice Strong (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/letter-to-klaus-schwab), who once mused under the guise of “fiction”:

“What if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it? The group’s conclusion is ‘no.’ The rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

Since you mentioned the Club of Rome, you are likely familiar with this Dennis Meadows clip (https://rumble.com/v14uz0z-depopulation-i-hope-it-can-occur-in-a-civil-manner-club-of-romes-dennis-mea.html), but it merits inclusion in case you haven’t seen it:

“Globally, we are so far above the population and consumption levels which can be supported by this planet that I know in one way or another it’s gonna come back down.… I hope that it can occur in a civil way, and I mean ‘civil’ in a special way. Peaceful. Peace doesn’t mean that everybody’s happy, but it means that conflict isn’t solved through violence, through force but rather in other ways, and so, that’s what I hope for, that we can, I mean—the planet can support something like a billion people, maybe two billion, depending on how much liberty and how much material consumption you want to have. If you want more liberty and more consumption, you have to have fewer people.

“Conversely, you can have more people … we could even have eight or nine billion probably if we have a very strong dictatorship which is smart. Unfortunately, you never have smart dictatorships. They’re always stupid. But if you had a smart dictatorship and a low standard of living, you could have them. But we want to have freedom, and we want to have a high standard, so we’re going to have a billion people. And we’re now at seven, so we have to get back down. I hope that this can be slow, relatively slow, and that it can be done in a way which is relatively equal so that people share the experience and you don’t have a few rich trying to force everybody else to deal with it. So those are my hopes.”

Expand full comment
author

1) The tetanus vaccines: Even if they did contain HCG (and for various reasons I think this claim is far from certain) that wouldn’t contradict anything i say here. In fact it would even be consistent. But otherwise, note that African population has continued to grow in accordance with projections during the entire existence of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. They’re plainly not depopulating Africa.

2) Yes, wealthy businessmen have power fantasies and one of the reasons they participate in elaborate charities and orgs like WEF is to find a way to translate their economic wealth into social and political power. What I don’t find very convincing, is the use of these out-of-context quotations (this one has been circulating since at least 2010 in various contexts) to comment on or explicate current policy. If you think specific policies are inspired or orchestrated by Maurice Strong or by something Gates said or whatever, that’s a thesis requiring proof. It doesn’t automatically get to be true because it sounds convincing.

3) Club of Rome-style overpopulation hysteria was a thing in the 1970s, around the same time ‘global cooling’ was a thing. This was a period in which an elite with increasingly radical EMO was struggling to formulate an ideology. What we actually ended up with was *not* overpopulation anxiety, but climate change concerns tied to CO2 emissions. Is population still a worry in this ideological system? yes. but it’s tempered by subordinate moral instincts that favour racial out groups and 3rd world populations over the developed west. Again: African population has continued to increase (approaching a limit sometime before 2100) for the entire period the BAMGF has existed.

Expand full comment

I think that is a measured and sensible response, eugyppius. You’re right in that we need explicit smoking gun documents proving collusion to orchestrate an intentional depopulation pogrom. Unfortunately, that evidence may not be forthcoming as totalitarian genocidal bureaucrats have a history of covering their tracks and not putting things in writing to avoid prosecution (hence the coded language used in memos about the Final Solution, for example, as Hannah Arendt discusses in “The Origins of Totalitarianism”).

Meanwhile, we have the real-time unfolding of millions dying and being maimed while the philanthropaths, tyrants, corporations, and organizations responsible for the policies causing this mass harm let it continue on ad infinitum. So they’re guilty of second-degree murder by neglect and failing to stop these lethal products at the very least.

Expand full comment

Violations of Bioweapons treaties must be pressed in court. Unfortunately that court will likely have to be on another planet, considering global corruption at every level of authority. Oceanic Billion$ have imposed the darkest of novel realities. Pray for an intervening cataclysm - it'll likely be less worse. A virus in caviar & truffles...?

Expand full comment

Indeed, the very fact that there is no stopping condition for these products that anyone paying attention knows are maiming and killing millions establishes the predator class’ malevolent intent. This is a planned genocide. And Gates is undoubtedly a person with knowledge.

Expand full comment

Wonderfully articulated and contains the common sense to explain why there is no reasoning with the EMOs in our sphere. It’s their moral imperative and religion. It explains things so clearly that I cannot unsee it!

Expand full comment

They are self-exiled in a (nihilistic) moral superiority, though it's we who die. Damn! Let us invoke a new counter-deity: Luciferian Cancer.

Expand full comment

I do believe that Gates in his world does believe he is helping the “poor” - however, I have seen too many video clips of him & his statements & one specifically with his awful grin & comments of injecting little kids in their arms with vaccines that raises the hair on the back of my neck. He.has.ALWAYS.given.me.creepiest.vibes.

And of the six decades of life so far I have learned to listen to my God-given conscience & the intuitions that I have had for decades. EVERY time I have paid attention to my inate intuition coupled with my eye-gate & ear-gate (what I see & observe & what I hear the person say) & compare it to where they are putting their $$$ & time - it has proven to be trustworthy for me - it does not matter whether it is political or religious.

Expand full comment

Thank you for your input here, Margaret Anna Alice.

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023·edited Mar 16, 2023

For a nuanced article I acknowledge the omission of Mr. Gates' decades long intimate friendship with the global Mr. Epstein industry complex, which go as far as murdering inmates, getting rid of any evidence.

Mr. Gates is not a person. Mr. Gates is a straw man, a policy.

One can argue the Gates-policy has no other choice but to do what it does, or it will be replaced by the next in line of a legion of straw men.

Expand full comment

A very original viewpoint! Just a cog in the Kalki Juggernaut, dispensable, replaceable.

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023Liked by eugyppius

From what I've observed, the basis of these ideologies is, "I'm smarter, more moral & ethical, and virtuous than others. Therefore, I can live my moral, ethical, virtuous & intelligent life anyway I choose. You, on the other hand, lacking all my fine qualities should do as I say. You must submit to my wise world view. It's for your own good"

The response to this is, "Kiss my ass."

Right now my overriding concern is whether the US voters will be able to elect in 2024 a new president and a majority Congress who will FIX THIS MESS.

And you are correct that it is not a matter of "conservative" or "liberal." It's sensible versus crazy.

Expand full comment

I think you have confused a consequence of the basis with the true basis itself.

These ideologies are all founded upon the idea that man can become God. There is no higher power except man, and therefore morality is whatever the most powerful God (man) defines it to be.

This is of course the original sin - the temptation of the serpent in the Garden of Eden.

And we are facing today exactly the same battle Christ fought two thousand years ago.

Remember Satan was the first liberal, rebelling against God in the name of freedom from the tyranny of heaven.

Expand full comment

Could Lucifer's story have been the countervailing protest of unhappy (oppressed) monks who relished eating ergot fungus, magic mushrooms, etc?

Expand full comment

Agree, Horace! 👏

Expand full comment

Great post, but no election is going to "fix this mess." That's based on observation.

Expand full comment

Perhaps not even elect-rocution.

Expand full comment
founding

There it is! Augustine called it the libido dominandi, the lust to rule. It's the original Satanic impulse. Envy, misanthropy, etc., they can be manifested in various ways, but the decline of the sovereignty of the Church into the epoch of "man's reason" at the summit seems to have a lot to do with the emergence of secular Western forms of government that are decadent with various authoritarian and decivilizing impulses.

Expand full comment

Just as a minor point I believe the first Satanic impulse was the refusal to obey - the non serviam.

It appears, both from the bible and more recent political and philosophical history , that the libido dominandi is an inevitable consequence of non serviam. Once you refuse God then, without any anchor, it seems that man's thought inevitably arrives at a Nietzschean will to power. But the "non serviam" comes first.

Expand full comment
Mar 18, 2023·edited Mar 18, 2023

...to Power, and nothing more! (except unimaginable destruction & suffering - mere side-effect). Is it the great moral leap into the abyss after shattering the dark mirror of bad conscience? Ideal vanquished and regression to bestiality? The second coming. . . of humankind, sans conscience. . . God, in any trace, eradicated. Ultimate temptation of what's possible? End o' Earth.

Expand full comment

You lost me (temporarily, will continue later) at:

"Gates, who like all globalist elites is worried about environmental impacts".

My God! Do you actually believe they are worried about that?!?!?!?!?!?!

Expand full comment
author

added an update to clarify.

Expand full comment

Read, still don't agree. His sincerity is like my vagina, does not exist. How can you think that somebody that proposes to "cover" the sun cares about the environment? Do you know how many natural processes rely on the sun light intensity to occur or be triggered? It is obvious that the effect would be a debacle.

Besides, and this is speculation, I am pretty sure those people: Gates, Schwab, Soros... also Biden, are racists as hell. So, every time they talk about race, I suspect ulterior motives.

Expand full comment
author

his sincerity just doesn't matter; if it helps, pretend he's a zombie with no interior state at all. I'm more interested in the moral / emotional world that his ideas and statements function in.

blocking the sun I agree is crazy, but it's about trying to minimise or erase (one aspect of) human impact on the earth.

Expand full comment

I think I understand what you mean. The question is "independently of that guy, why the people follow him?"

But, again, nobody can think blocking the sun is a good idea:

- You will not solve that non-existent problem

- You will create 1000 more.

Impossible to justify. But, following your point, we will see even biologists pushing the idea.

Expand full comment

I disagree that nobody can think blocking the sun (called solar engineering to make it more palatable) is a good idea. It seems clear to me that some people *do* think it's a good idea to at least try. There is a lot that has happened in the last few years that was unimaginable to me in 2019. There are nice, intelligent people who loved me in 2019 and who I believe would’ve been happy to put me in a camp for the unvaccinated in late 2021. We cannot speak to what others may believe. While it seems extraordinary that anyone would think blocking the sun is a good idea, we are living in an extraordinary moment.

Expand full comment

Agreed, when they have their bunkers, their jets. Far as I can see they are just 'saving themselves' in their greedy eyes. If and when my little credit union goes down, I have not doubt it will not be bailed out, not like the big banks where the big people keep their 'funds'.

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023

Fortunately, credit unions as a whole are not managed the way banks are managed -- which is to make the bank board and officers richer than Croesus at all costs.

Expand full comment

red pills tough to swallow, because of the implications

Expand full comment

Perhaps in their delusion or perhaps that is just their smokescreen to hide their malfeasance activities from us peasants

Expand full comment

Eugyppius believes he has too many subscribers so he is putting out these hogwashing articles.

Expand full comment

If it was enviro-mental, they'd have to send Bill to China, anti-coal combustion. Burn your neighbor for warmth.

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023Liked by eugyppius

You only have to look at the rate africans, arabs and other intruders and invaders in Europe breed, to know that birth rates are tied more to race and culture than factors of civilisation, technology or economy.

Among swedes, the birth rates dropped sharply from the early 1900s to the 1950s with a peak during the 1940s,and the decline has continued. Among african negroes and palesinian arabs in Sweden, there is no such trend at all, not even among the third and fourth generations of colonists.

The theory, as are virtually all currently accepted sociological theories, is simply wrong.

Expand full comment
author

sort of agree. American abortion statistics and fertility data (with 7+ generation African American population now below replacement fertility) suggests a kind of dark theory on this front

Expand full comment

Excellent comment!!!

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023Liked by eugyppius

You’re right about the Lizard People. Once I complained to my Very Liberal co-worker that I hate wind turbines because they kill lots of birds, and she said, quite angrily, that if we don’t stop climate change, there won’t be ANY BIRDS! She was willing to sacrifice lots of currently living breathing birds and animals, entire ecosystems and forests to burn for “biofuel,” endless farms, fields and meadows for solar panels…all to “save” some mythical future life form that might be threatened. They would absolutely blow up the Earth to save the Universe.

Expand full comment

It seems that the German Supreme Court mandated that Germany has to "protect the climate" even if it means restricting people's freedom because, guess what, if the climate is allowed to change unchecked, future generations' freedom will be restricted. And we can't have that, apparently.

Same idea. Sacrifice the present for an (uncertain) future. OK.

Expand full comment

They think the same way about humans. We must make actual, living humans suffer today so that hypothetical future humans don't hypothetically suffer.

Expand full comment

Yes, that seems to be the idea. Same EMO thing - their concern is NOT the living, breathing creatures of the present, but the maybe living, probably breathing potentially existing creatures of the future.

Expand full comment

Bill Gates does not "worry" about disadvantaged brown people.

If he did, instead of spending billions on vaccines, from which he directly profits, he would spend money building (imagine the economic boom) sustainable infrastructure starting with sanitation, clean and available water, nutrition, education and maybe some basic housing.

These are things which do help the people.

But he does not. He basically pushes vaccines. He make more money.

The elites do not have a too big moral system. They are without morals. They worry mostly about their own mortality and resources.

They are without empathy and can you be moral without empathy?

Expand full comment

"he would spend money building sustainable infrastructure starting with sanitation"

Don't be lazy, read up on those you criticize first. Bill Gates is donating money to projects in Africa. And you seriously think he's pushing vaccines because he wants more money? When he has donated and keeps donating billions? How does that come together, do you think? Oh, you didn't think.

Expand full comment

Despite his "donating" billions, his wealth continues to grow and grow. In Sept 2019, he invested $55 million inn BioNTech, a small German company, that later went on to collaborate on the Pfizer C19 vaccine. He made 550 million on that little deal. In 2020, he said "until every man, woman and child on the planet is vaccinated" we will not get back to normal. He hoped it would be ready in 2 years. In 2 years, most people would have already been exposed to the disease and the pandemic would be fading. Most people would have acquired immunity. So why would everyone need to be vaccinated? Money, money, money.

Expand full comment

RE: "So why would everyone need to be vaccinated?" Kill, kill, kill.

Expand full comment

"manifest escalating indifference to adverse policy outcomes in their own countries" I hadn't contemplated it before but this also city-level phenomena like San Francisco. The elites take a certain grim moral satisfaction in living adjacent to third-world conditions (not in of course, that would be dangerous) because they don't want their local city to be in some way privileged above a third-world city. They also will deny until death that San Francisco is anything other than a great place, even unto its total collapse, showing their globalist sophistication.

Expand full comment

also... the West apparently needs Africa's mineral wealth so the "altruistic" jabs and water investments/ solutions are seemingly run alongside blind eyes to a massive extraction of wealth and resources from self same continent. Maybe this is blindness along the lines of offsets for the private jetters

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023Liked by eugyppius

On target. The enemy is the Liberal worldview that has infected everything. We need to offer a counter-revolution in thinking. We do need a great reset, just not the one Greta and Schwab want.

Expand full comment

It will likely end in a Great Repent - new religion of the 1,200 global survivors.

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023

I ran into this issue teaching first and second year students in university. We discussed the great chain of being, which is a hierarchy with human life at the top. My students objected to it, saying all things are equal. When I asked if that included small creatures, like bacteria and amoeba they assented. Then I asked them if the covid virus was equal to them, with the same right of existence as them. Of course they answered no, but couldn't come up with a coherent case for that conclusion. Then I asked about mosquitos, cockroaches, and other pests and got the same answer. Essentially, "well if its directly affecting me or annoying me or a threat to my health then I can kill it on self defense grounds". Still, they couldn't seem to come up with an argument for why they should have the right to self defense, or why they should be able to own animals as pets or anything else.

The impression I got from this interaction was that claiming all things are equal is what the students believe they needed to say to be maximally moral and good, even though after closer inspection they didn't believe it at all. Despite my leading them into various contradictions, they never openly denied the belief in total equality of everything. I dont think they could muster the will in front of other students.

We ran into several similar problems discussing their apparent moral universalism and their anti-colonialism, e.g. they endorsed intervening in foreign places to stop genocide, but couldn't come up with a reason that didn't also endorse other forms of intervention etc.

The whole pop moral system is an incoherent melange of Christian "be humble and nice" ethics and utilitarianism taken to the maximum, such that all things count as 1 and we need to submit ourselves to being nice even to rocks and single celled organisms.

Expand full comment

Second this analysis. I've seen the same sentiment among peers, but especially younger people. There seems to be a sort of moral/meaning/purpose vacuum with the decline of traditional religion, leaving people with the same impulses toward judgment, a simple perspective of 'good' and 'bad' people, but without any sort of transcendent underpinning. So nothing's left but 'being nice', or 'trying to do the most good for the widest realm'. And they are all trying to bolster that self-image of the 'good person', making them very impressionable and manipulable. 'Those are the bad guys because they hate the earth/other races/animals/the environment, etc.'

Expand full comment

Agreed. Plus there is no longer a big, unfathomable, puzzling body of religious writings to refer to that teaches you that things are COMPLEX. If you refer to the bible, i.e. words inspired by God (if you are a believer), it rarely comes up with ONE answer to a specific problem. It really rubs one's nose in the complexity and neither-black-nor-whiteness of things. In comparison, this ethics of "Wouldn't it be nice if everyone were nice" (Terry Pratchett) is a bit trite and banal and doesn't take onto account that there are situations when niceness isn't the best response.

Expand full comment

Also agree. I was talking with an old friend today and she commented on how little young people seemed to know about anything but how sure they were about right and wrong (without feeling obliged to offer any evidence to support their assertions). I know that older people have complained about the upcoming generation for ever but this is something different. Their vapid assertions are all in line with EMO thinking. (If you call it that).

Expand full comment

I teach history and I have the impression that they are like unmoored boats - don't know where they come from (as a culture, as a people), have no certainties whatsoever where the future will take them, so they sort of slosh around and cling to the loudest idea that's around. But they can not really put it in context or compare it to other things or developments, e.g. in the past, because everything they know is a shifting and fluid NOW.

I am immensely sorry for them, it's such a strenuous way of BEING.

Expand full comment

Partly depends on what is nice. I would call euthanizing a baby born without limbs a nice thing to do. Letting it live is cruel.

Expand full comment

<i>In comparison, this ethics of "Wouldn't it be nice if everyone were nice" (Terry Pratchett) is a bit trite and banal and doesn't take onto account that there are situations when niceness isn't the best response.</i>

Or, for that matter, situations where being nice to one party means being nasty to another. E.g., if the Westboro Baptist Church is having a protest outside a gay couple's house, do you be "nice" to the WBC by letting them protest as they want, or do you be "nice" to the gay couple by shooing the protestors away?

Expand full comment

That is something I try to hammer into my students: every action has a price. You can't close a school and think this will only have an impact on viral spread. It will also have an impact on the students, their chances to succeed in life, their mental health, the mental health of the parents, their immune systems.

No free lunch, anywhere.

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023

i think that in the place of complicated thought, complicated political and moral quandaries and trade-offs, grappling with our complicated human history and realizing that life is not like a comic-book movie where everything and everyone can be easily coded as GOOD or EVIL, the young and educated (who are also mostly secular and deracinated) have taken refuge in a fundamentalist form of Egalitarianism, where no one is better than anyone else, no book or artwork better than any other etc: it seems like an attempt at ego protection (I can't be worse if no one is better), an all-purpose spiritual and political program (finding things to make more Egalitarian is an infinite task), another easy way to signal their kindness and compassion, and also a way to hide in the herd, to escape the shame and guilt that may arise when someone decides to act on their own (what if they're wrong?! what if a thought, word or deed injures someone!!?).

In a way, we've sold the next generation of children on the idea of being helpless, stunted and unable to discriminate (in all the best meanings of this word) as a form of radical liberation.

Expand full comment
founding

Brilliant summation. Perhaps this sort of egalitarianism is a handy defense mechanism against the self-doubt and the slothfulness in their culture, providing a sense of purpose and action where there basically is none. And a rationalization for going with the herd.

We should expect something like that in a meaning crisis, but I ponder at why it manifested as egalitarianism and not something else. Perhaps because that was the weapon du jour of the court ideologues over the last 2-3 centuries (used by regimes to take power, cynically of course)?

Expand full comment

Thanks!

I think there's a case to be made for Egalitarianism being its own religion or at least strand of religious thought in the West, and like you said it's been the "weapon du jour of the court ideologues over the last 2-3 centuries" with obvious cracked misanthropes like Rousseau and Marx pretending that they'd dedicated their lives to "the People"! LOL

In many ways I think a broad, generic Egalitarianism is another piece of Christianity floating around in our post-Christian world, this idea that we're all equal in the eyes of god etc, but often taking a fundamentalist turn and being infused with some self-help self-esteem jargon (I'm OK! You're Ok! We're all OK!)

I clipped this quote from some book or essay about a prof trying to teach English in college and this passage always stayed w me:

"You can’t just deconstruct everything,” I said. “You have to affirm something.” My interlocutor disagreed. "When you affirm things," she told me, "people get hurt."

I think this reveals much about the modern mindset: the paramount value in all settings and all endeavors is to make sure no one gets their feelings hurt or takes an ego bruise.

I don't know how much Nietzsche you've read, but I don't think anyone's described it better than him in his Parable of the Last Man in Thus Spoke Zarathustra.

Expand full comment

There's another point: in virtually every non-Western part of the world, people are dependent on their family and their community to an extent that would make us Westerners run away, screaming. These people know that family is everything - not only their baby sitters and caretakers, but much more - their insurance policy, their support system, their ladder, should they want to try to climb to higher social stratae.

Here, we are not. Every Christmas we're treated to articles by bellyaching 20-somethings who feel they *have to spend Christmas with their obnoxious relatives, whom they seem to hate with abandon on account of their outdated values and morals.

For many of us, family is something to run away from in order to lead a satisfying life. (This changes later in life, I think, and is changing in the younger generations now, who value their families immensely). Why should we care for THEM if we could care for a rock on an atoll in the South Pacific that is neither embarrassing, obnoxious, racist or transphobic? Much more convenient.

Expand full comment

<i>(This changes later in life, I think, and is changing in the younger generations now, who value their families immensely).</i>

Probably not coincidental that this shift is taking place as single earners get increasingly priced out of the housing market, and well-paying, stable jobs get harder and harder to find. When there's a serious chance you'll have to keep living at home even after you finish education, having a close relationship with your family isn't a stifling check on your individuality, but a sensible insurance policy.

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023Liked by eugyppius

Actually, I think Trudeau IS a shape-shifting lizard ...

Expand full comment

Why isn't this top comment???

Expand full comment