Libido Dominandi

E. Michael Jones is a genius. He uses pure logic and precedence to make his arguments, not hate. And yet he is censored and ostracized because he says the fnords that trigger our conditioning; that trigger our mental parasite's defense mechanisms.

Don't believe in egregores? You should. Concepts live and breed just as organisms do. They are like plants, except their soil is the mind and their sunshine is cultural stimulation (such as churches or colleges or television).

There are all kinds of these egregores, some worse than others. What matters is being aware of them, not frightfully abolishing them. Because we will never rid ourselves of such entities outright.

Instead, by being aware of them, we can contain their influence; starving off the ones that do not benefit us, and nurturing the ones that do.

Anyway. This book is about how sexual subversion has been used to undermine powerful societies since the dawn of recorded history. Our best intentions and noblest ideals are used against us.

I believe all things, ALL things, have their time and place. The things I don't like have a place, and the things you don't like have a place. But our liberty and tolerance being used against us is a very serious problem. One that must be assessed. Good laws are no substitute for good habits.

And, right now, the majority of our habits reflect a society in freefall collapse. One should observe the "mouse utopia" experiments; compare and contrast their world to and from our own. One could say we are not mice because we have more developed neocortexes; but is that even relevant? Most people operate purely on the drives of the limbic system and r-complex. It is for that reason I say that yes, the mouse utopia is comparable to our society.

They had everything they needed and it destroyed them. Unlimited food, water, space, etc. Yet by the end, they had lost all instincts for survival. They stopped breeding entirely because they forgot how to raise children. Many would mutilate or kill their children; many would stop eating and simply will themselves to death; males would pretend to be females and score with the alphas as part of their harems; and the ones that did not, became the "beautiful ones", which were essentially what we call incels.

We should have the right to make (what I consider) bad decisions, because I certainly refuse to be told I can't, say, smoke weed or watch porn. But I recognize that these things ARE bad and that they come with consequences not only for myself, but my family and my society.

Things that should be contained, minimized, or better yet moderated, are instead being normalized as equally viable alternatives to healthy, traditional culture.

I'm not arguing against liberty, but instead against willful ignorance. And to ignore egregious symptoms of late stage collapse is just that.

I would recommend watching various clown world videos, and/or videos on the current state of IV league schools, to get a feel for how pervasive and impending this subversion is for all of us.

It's very easy to swing toward a conservative mindset when seeing these horrors. That's not a bad thing, depending on what exactly you mean by conservatism. To ME, conservatism is NO DIFFERENT from classical liberalism.

I don't know how, or why, any of my peers could argue against the tenets of classical liberalism. Conservatism does not imply 19th/20th century Democrat-tier racism and civil rights violations. Republicanism has always been about the careful balance of liberty and tradition.

To remove a society's traditions is the equivalent of cultural genocide. Yes. G E N O C I D E. Cultural genocide IS a thing; it's recognized academically.

We're conditioned to not care about our traditions. We're conditioned to think our forefathers were sick, hateful, and ignorant.

This is the work of globalists who know quite well that a people are far easier to control when they are rootless.

Everything I'm saying is true. I already know what I want to do about it. My plan involves full disclosure and giving people the means to create their own homes so they may live as they like. Incompatible cultures can not be seamlessly meshed, because they are *incompatible cultures*. Different cultures MUST segregate in order to preserve themselves and survive. To argue against this would be to, say, argue in favor of the Islamification of Europe or Japan. A culture that considers it an imperative to convert others can not safely dwell inside a foreign host nation without subverting or conquering that nation. This goes for the Jewish diaspora and Christian missionaries as well.

I don't owe it to anyone to compromise on this. And it is certainly my right to express these views.

To ignore cultural subversion because being aware of it is "mean" --- I don't even know what to say about that. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. And it is through these weak links our way of life has been eroded.

Disclosure of crime and aliens and technology is great and all, but those aren't the only things I'm about. I admire classical beauty and no longer wish to see my beautiful hometown be eroded, as it has, and quite disgracefully too.

My home used to be as beautiful as any starting stage of the finest adventure RPGs. Now it looks like unkempt trash. It's ugly now. It let itself go. We let it go. Our parents didn't know how to protect it; they let Hollywood dictate their morals, and now our generation is aimless because of it.

We are ripe for harvest.

All major cities degenerate under "the agenda", and the cities and towns around them decay as a consequence. That is where we are right now.

Also, do remember, I was a full-blown atheist liberal leftist (and somewhat libertarian) who parroted all of the related talking points all throughout my school years. I refuse to be told I don't understand an ideology that I practiced for over a decade and then subsequently rejected. I was never conservative, right-wing, or religious growing up. In fact, for those who ostracize me for my views on gay marriage: I'm not even fully straight. I've said countless times that I'm some kind of demisexual pansexual. But I don't think hooking up with random people is a good idea, male or female, and when I DO pursue another sexual relationship, it will be for the sake of eventually having a family.

Did you hear what I said? I am *technically* a part of the LGBT community, by virtue of being a sexual deviant myself. Isn't that hilarious? And yet people tell me my opinions can't be valid. That's straight up backwards hypocrisy. If anyone should be allowed to reject sexual deviancy, it should be a sexual deviant like me. People think this shit is some trivial choice like Coke vs. Pepsi, when it is NOT. That is what this book is about. The consequences are far beyond what leftists and neoliberals are willing to consider. If it WERE just a matter of Coke vs. Pepsi, I wouldn't say a damn thing about it. But it's not. It is subversion and it is meant to weaken us.

I definitely think my perspective is unique, especially because it looks beyond the scope of the fake political dichotomy and toward the great unknown we have only known small tastes of. Regardless, I will speak until I am silenced. It was foretold that I would be a martyr. I hope not. I want to have a family, raise children, and cultivate my own land. But I'm not putting these subjects down, not even for the things I want most.

I learned a new word the other day. I believe it was, venality. It is the degree to which one is corruptible or temptable. To suffer venality is a weakness of character that I wish to liberate myself from. To give up on salvaging my inherited culture so that I may live comfortable and apathetic would be a disgrace to the past iterations and incarnations of me.