Administrative High Priest
- Sep 19, 2017
Every community, especially ones that consist of empathic people, want peace, nonviolence and pacifism as they're the most sought out ideals in human history. Apparently, it has a strong basis in civilization. Pacifism, or non-violent activism, is a belief that war and violence should be condemned, and matters must be settled peacefully. Apparently, Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. were hailed as champions of nonviolent protest, using their voice; they speak with utmost conviction that love, compassion, and empathy would make tyrannical governments listen to the protesters message and have a change of heart. Unfortunately, pacifism and nonviolence, and more specifically, the perspective that people ascribe to, is not as effective as many people like to think. It's a socially great idea for people to go by on paper, but in practice, it only works when at least two parties are in agreement on a deal/treaty/declaration. It's not as (for lack of a better word) universal an ideal as people like to think.
A change of perspective must be in order: Eliminating the standard perspective of pacifism and nonviolence, a new, alternative, and admittedly more unorthodox view must be called into light, one that hasn't been explored before with a question: What if the opposition to violence and war is expressed not to bring peace and compassion, but lure communities into being oppressed and victimized instead? As far-fetched as this kind of view can be, it doesn't sound like something a pacifist would do... Unless they're the tyrant. How would a pacifistic person be a tyrant and oppress people if they don't fight themselves? The answer is obvious: Through lies, misdirection, laws that protect the pacifist, and (indirectly) drugs. When the pacifistic diplomat has more power over the people and choose to abuse it, they realize they can get away with any lie and and abuse of power as long as they say the right words to calm people down. This kind of pacifism makes other people drop their guards; a loose, pragmatic type of pacifism/nonviolent resistance, for lack of a better term. It's similar to fishermen using bait to catch a fish. Once upon a time, my father once talked to me and his friends about how barbaric fishing can be: you use a bait to catch fish, and the fish is attracted to the bait, lowering its guard. Once the fish is caught and reeled in, it could be killed and used for food. Thinking back to it back then, it's a great analogue that can be applied to empathic people. Hardworking people who are blindly empathic and compassionate tend to fall for this very often, and, because empathy and compassion are pushed more than necessary in the present day, they're little the wiser about it; they think they can solve everything peacefully, and pacifistic tyrants can simply spin everything about the information against them, claiming it to be a slander or a false report.
This pragmatic, unconventional outlook on pacifism is deceptive and unpredictable. No one else understands this viewpoint better than the Jew: The Jew knows they can't win in a direct fight, so they have to undermine the defense of victims. There's a question that has to be asked here: How is it that the Jews took down the Roman Empire after they were crushed militarily? My hypothesis is this: Through their claims that Christianity, and then Islam, is a "religion of peace." Because the Romans over-emphasized empathy and compassion and partially because they were rigid with the other part of reason owing to ignorance, a majority of the Roman officials took all the fictitious stories at face value, not realizing that these "teachings of nonviolence" from Christianity were meant to undermine Rome from within; Roman families had their guards dropped, allowing the Jews to conquer the Roman courts via infiltration and spying, then followed by laws (from banning meat to forbidding occult magic) that slowly weakened the Romans over time, ultimately leading to the collapse of the Roman Empire itself. Islam, however, doesn't claim to keep up the peace as long as Christianity does. The Jews partially repeated this application of pacifism into the present day.
Thank you for bringing up this very important subject.
When there is too much pacifism, there will unavoidably be a breakout of major, large scale, blinded and illogical wars. Pacifism forsakes the power of control and says that one must avoid all conflict no matter what. This straying from conflict then becomes straying from internal conflict; you don't control yourself, you expect falsehoods that don't exist in the universe and you live in delusion. This delusion brings eventually death.
This power to be a non pacifist is also the power that acts as deterrence for wars. The way to peace is when people are too strong to wage wars and equally strong to restrain from doing this. Weakness of the passions will cause outbreak of wars with high certainty.
Pacifists are under a large scale delusion which is fully inconsistent with the nature of reality, beings, or existence in general. The existence of pacifism is not true in any of the kingdoms of the universe, human, animal or any other level. It's a state of living in denial of dangers because one is too cowardly to accept their valid existence. This cowardice is then cloaked with great words on how everyone "must be" a society of "little angels", yet all of these "little angels" who preach these messages are actually very evil and fearful themselves.
Due to high degree of fear and wanting to avoid any conflict, they want to neuter everyone else, hoping that this is what will let them have their peace. But this is against reality, it's only a matter of time until natural laws of brutality will encounter the so called "pacifists", where they will be found in a weak state, only fit for annexation or slavery.
Many pacifists are actually good people that want to avoid conflict, but the above denial makes them actually the perfect targets for any form of conflict or injustice. Through this stance, they perpetuate more injustice. The pacifism movement in the United States and other Nations tends to arise where there has been too much mindless and unnecessary warfare, as the other logical extreme. It's equally imbalanced and equally dangerous as the other aspect which is mindless war.
Pacifists thought that this was the way to make governments stop useless wars, but the reality is, that unless citizens are powerful enough to fight, the Nation also has no defense. And the government won't take seriously the pacifistic elements especially when it is a government built on terror. So the founders of the United States and other wiser men have put clauses in the Constitutions so that citizens remain aware, armed and strong, not only for deterring external threats, but also in case the civilization drops into barbaric states.
The barbaric states are conquered by higher states of power, which power in the best form should carry empathy and common sense in equal measure. That's the only way to restore order in societies. Same goes all the way down to a school or a family unit. This power here is not the abusive form of power that comes from barbarism, it's the opposite form of good power.
Pacifism is essentially suicide. Everyone must be war ready, war wise, but also simultaneously understand that wars are only the last resorts. Those who are war ready and war wise, are those who least want wars, but they are realistic enough to understand that they can actually break out and that one must be ready to handle them. Able and sane military is in this category.
The weakness inside which the pacifist dwells into, will eventually give rise to monsters from within one's self, reckless desires, and other dangerous forces, which were not fought in an internal war and were not commanded by logic to be managed. These things lead to brutal wars and other resentments which are a hundred times more poisonous than even declared wars.
The worst and most gruesome wars have been waged by the religions of "love" such as Christianity and Islam, which used the most sly and cowardly ways of war.
Pacifism is a brain virus that disables a being that was born by nature to be able to self defend, rendering it open to all attacks. Your immune system goes pacifist for one week, you will die pretty quickly. Ultra pacifism preaches that if you neuter human beings, then they will be good.
But if you neuter their combative or other drives, you will eventually die out or not progress, since the major impetus for growth which is of a combative nature, will be disappeared from mankind. Life has conflict whether pacifists or other asleep individuals want to accept it or not. Life is not "ALL CONFLICT", most of it is actually co-operation, but conflict unavoidably can arise due to clashes between beings.
The less reason, the worse the clashes can become. Pacifism is not a guarantee this won't happen, pacifism means that when this happens, you won't be ready and that you will be at the mercy of an evil force.
The idea of Spiritual Satanism is to take the combative force and instead of it being blind and destructive, to give it REASON and to turn it against evil, towards progress, creation etc. The Gods also teach Black Magick for retaliation, but the Gods [as I will explain in the fully updated Ethics section] do want us to use these wisely and not just throw these around for no reason. Wise use means not only to use these wisely but also use it when your life is under threat or where there are things that can destroy someone.
Beware of those who preach pacifism it's just disarmament of human beings. Then when everyone is disarmed, they annex them as slaves. Those who envision pacifism for humans the most are those who seek to enslave humans, they want easy prey. All the enemy rhetoric is about having zero defenses. Defenses make you strong and impenetrable to damage. Strong ethics also reassure you will survive and also respond in the sights which are detrimental to existence and that of others.
If we had stronger ethics and a non falling society, we would not accept children being taken in and dragged to have gender change before they even developed a logical judgement about this decision. People would not accept these practices. Since society is dwindling ethically, pacifism is the next consequential result: As there is no barrier of defense in the ethical human, so all other barriers give out, including also physical war barriers, borders and systems of filtration such as evaluating invaders with values contrarian to your own that come to conquer you and even enslave you.
It is power that saves from wars, power to self control, regulate reckless feelings, power to be sensible, power to see the light where the darkness whispers of mindless warfare that will lead nowhere.
Pacifists are not emotionally empathetic they are emotionally retarded as they don't understand creation and that certain things going out of hand such as them being annexed, will result in catastrophic consequences. Only rule of power and kindness based on divine wisdom and can truly avoid wars. But since that is rare most don't value it at all.
The more pacifistic the West has become the more crime and all other war conditions have arose in it's midst. That's not empathy that's being a monster and deterring one's responsibility to protect those who require protection, such as the weaker elements who need more empathy.
When the force of combat meets love and wisdom, this is where true justice can be created. All of these on their own represent perils in the extremes. That is the foundation of all the Ancient Greek philosophical thought. That's why Ares, the God of War, albeit respected, was called a blind destroyer. Athena represents the full power of Ares, which is about wisdom in war, non reckless wars, wisdom even in war, avoidance of war unless necessary for reasons of justice or for strong reasons.
The lesser the state of an evolving nation [the more it is disconnected from wisdom, knowledge and the supernal light] the more it will want to wage wars, because it will see parasitic formations of growth, instead of growth through positive means, co-operation, or investing in it's own citizens to develop it.
The same goes for a human being, the lower towards barbarity, the more one will engage in reckless combat and reckless wars, because they have nothing to "lose" and don't know how to create much of anything. This leaves the combative force blind and will consequently create only disasters for those around these human beings.
-High Priest Hooded Cobra 666