Tag Archives: Evil

The Psychopathology of the Sect

The Puritans left England for America because they belonged to an exclusive and intolerant sect. They simply could not get on with others. Sadly, they are at the root of both religious and secular North American culture. This explains why North America is today the source of most of the world’s sects.

In order to enter a sect, you must give up something very important: freedom. Anyone who breaks out of a sect, breaks out of the communicational, political, ideological and cultural circuit constituted by the individual sectarians and retrieves his freedom. You can only reach the conclusion that a sect is a kind of secret society. And its closedness or sectarianism increases as the threats to its reign over the souls of the weak, the naïve or neophytes increase.

For all sects start from a notion of ‘exclusivity’ associated with a certain ‘exceptionalism’ or esotericness. This justifies different treatments and understandings which defy all logic. Sects are always irrational. Sects are the foundation of a ‘unique’ culture, Divinely chosen to lead the world. Sects have a Divine, ‘extra-terrestrial’ origin.

It is in this exceptionalism that individualism is rooted. It is opposed to a more collective and cooperative vision of humanity, the Catholicity of the Church. It is in this exceptionalism that the logic of competition is founded – the theory is that the best wins (meritocracy) – as opposed to the logic that founded all human societies – cooperation, the ability to work together.

All sects have their own esoteric jargon and introversion or self-absorption, which originate in the closed circuit in which they operate. The greater the inability to establish bridges and contacts with others, the greater the radicalism of the sect. This embodies a contradiction which sects cannot escape: the more they want to drag normal people into them, the more normal people flee them.

If the vast majority of Orthodox do not fit into the narrow minds of the sect and its followers, then it is they who have to mould themselves to its ideas. This is why sects are always so small – though they may have a huge internet or virtual presence. When reality stubbornly insists on not validating the irrational presumptions of the sect, the sect chooses to wage war against reality, identifying the agents of reality and electing them as its enemies. The result is predictable: either you are with me, or else you are against me! The sectarianism of the sect leaves no room for compromise, co-operation or any kind of mutual understanding.

If you analyse the cultish sect leaders who constitute the sect superstructure and their deeply ideological stance, you will see the irrationality of the sect: it is a cult which is in accelerated divorce from the real world. The constitution of the elite of the sect represents its aristocratisation. It is a return to the time of feudalism, whose lords dress in exclusive bling.

As in all sects, it is the ‘dogmas’ of the duty ‘theologians’ which define from the outset the lines to be strictly obeyed. They produce the centrifugal force that binds the ignorant, weak and naïve periphery to the centre, trying to create a dependency on themselves, at least until they grow up and see through the nonsense and realise that they have been ‘had’. The repetition of their dogmas until exhaustion has a ritualistic function. It aims to keep even the most peripheral neophytes as faithful to the centre as possible, literally like a prayer or litany.

Sects have problems in dealing with the reality that increasingly eludes it. Since reality does not conform to its pretensions, any sect has the option of hysteria, demagogy, hypocrisy and slander. In essence, sects wage war against reality. For example, those who leave sects always do so as the result of the ‘uncontrolled madness or illness of one man’. Of course, this is something that does not play, either in appearance or in substance. It results from the inability, proper to deluded sect ‘logic’, to analyse objectively, to see reality.

Typical of sect ‘logic’ is the claim that its actions are all justified, acceptable and benign; whereas the ‘enemies’’ actions are always ‘evil’. The cultish, supremacist, closed world behind the schizophrenia, paranoia and narcissism of the sect attacks all those who do not uncritically and blindly follow it. The sect is in perfect contradiction with the real and varied world. As was said 2,000 years ago: ‘The truth sets us free’. The idea that ‘in war the truth is the first casualty’ is also just another dogma invented by sects, so that they can lie without being held accountable for it.

The Myth of White Supremacy

With such a title some might be expecting me to affirm simply that the idea that white people are superior to other races is a myth. That is so obvious that it is not what I have to say. The real myth is far more radical than that.

White supremacy began in the eighth century when the tyrant Charlemagne massacred 4,500 Saxons at Verden in October 782: this was white against white, the white elite against the white people. There is no such thing as White Supremacy – only White Elitism. After a period of nearly three centuries of chaos, White Elitism raised its ugly head again in 1054 when the spiritual descendants of Charlemagne broke away from the Christian Church and founded their own self-justifying, pseudo-religious organization in Rome, once the capital of the incredibly cruel and barbaric pagan Roman Empire. Again, it was white against white. The whites have always been the first victims of the White Elitists.

In 1066 the White Elitists in Rome used their Norman shock troops to massacre 100,000 English; white against white. They continued to massacre in Wales, Ireland and Scotland. There followed the barbaric ‘Crusades’ when white elitists massacred members of the Orthodox Christian (white), but also Arab and Jewish races. However, that was exceptional. Most of the Middle Ages in Western Europe was the history of the bloodshed of white people by the White Elitists, for example, in ‘Wars of Religion’. And in fact it was only really after 1492 that the White Elitists began to massacre other races systematically by organized violence through elitist projects like the Spanish or French or British Empires.

And even then they did not stop massacring other white people, as, for instance, the English Hitler, Cromwell did in Ireland, massacring a million. In the 20th century the White Elitists continually massacred white peoples, and over 40 million white people died in two European wars, 30 million Slavs alone. This was the White Holocaust. Why? Because the White Elite had renounced Christ. White ideologues like Lenin and Hitler made their atheism plain. The people were oppressed by the Elite. It can be seen today in the Brexit debate, where the White Elitists are ready to betray the People, as they have done in England for the last 953 years. And they claim to run a ‘representative democracy’!!!

In New Zealand, a pro-Kiev regime white terrorist who had murdered whites in the Ukraine, murdered fifty Muslims. He was not a White Supremacist, but a White Elitist. As the old proverb says: ‘A fish rots from the head’.


Why the Western Elite Loves Lenin and Trotsky

Before the birth of Antichrist there is to be called an Eighth Universal Council of all the Churches under the One Head, Christ, and the one Protecting Veil of the Mother of God (according to St. Nilus the Myrrh-Giver: ‘A last and Eighth Universal Council to deal with the disputes of heretics and separate the wheat from the chaff’). Its aim will be to unite and reunite all the holy Churches of Christ against increasing anti-Christian ways, under the single Head, Christ the Life-Giver, and the single Protecting Veil of His Most Pure Mother, and to deliver the final anathema against the whole of masonry and all the groups like it (by whatever name they call themselves), the leaders of whom have one common aim: on the pretext of complete egalitarian earthly prosperity, and with the aid of people who have been made fanatical by them, to create anarchy in all states and destroy Christianity throughout the world, and, finally, by the power of gold concentrated in their hands, to subjugate the whole world to anti-Christianity in the person of a single, tyrannical Ruler, who fights against God – one Ruler over the whole world.

Prophecy of St Seraphim of Sarov

One of the mysteries of the Western elite is whereas it hates the Georgian Stalin and Stalinism (that such a murderous monster is hated is not surprising), it adores Lenin and Trotsky. After all, Lenin and Trotsky both lived for years in England, Switzerland and the US under government protection and patronage and the then governments of Germany and Canada respectively made sure that Lenin and Trotsky returned safely to Russia in 1917. Given that both of them in their very short reigns were far more murderous proportionately than Stalin, why this love for them?

First of all, we should understand something vital: neither Lenin nor Trotsky was Russian. The well-off father of Lenin (real name Ulyanov), was an Asian-Russian (as his facial features suggest) and his mother was German-Swedish and Jewish. An intellectual snob, the Bolshevik leader believed that other European countries, especially Germany, were culturally superior to Russia. From his youth he had wanted Russia to become more culturally Western. On the other hand, the family of Trotsky (real name Bronstein), came from a non-practising family of wealthy Jewish farmers in the Ukraine. He had no Russian blood at all and was a Russophobe just like Lenin, whereas the Georgian Stalin declared himself to be ‘Russian of Georgian origin’.

In other words, both Lenin and Stalin were Anti-Russian Zionists. Not Zionists in the Jewish sense, of course (Lenin probably never even knew that he was a quarter Jewish and Trotsky probably never even set foot in a synagogue), but in the modern sense of the word that they were globalists. Now we know why the Western elite loves these criminal monsters who killed millions in just a few short years: unlike Stalin, they were not nationalistic ‘Socialism in one country’ followers, but globalists, the modern code-word for Zionists. What difference between them and the Russophobic Western neocon elite, which like them also creates anarchy and bloodshed wherever it can?