Posted by DanielS contra Church of Entropy on Tue, 16 Apr 2019 11:46 | #

An exchange that I had with “Church of Entropy”

Church of Entropy

Streamed live on Apr 15, 2019

From Claire Khaw (to Church of Entropy): Our next stream should be about which of us should be teaching immature males the ways of establishing truth, exercising logic and following the rules of morality.

Daniel Sienkiewicz
1 day ago (edited)
While my notion of reincarnation is likely very different from yours (Church of Entropy), it does provide for happiness in a basic sense of being true to one’s self and thus staving off the anxiety of not knowing where to go argumentatively - but rather in service of coherence to one’s own nature and one’s species system; that is to say one’s reincarnation is through children and grand children, particularly if they remain within the parameters of one’s human species, reconstructing one’s social systemic homeostasis. It is an activist truth to one’s self and one’s species which differs from the passive acceptance of the speculative Abrahamic after life and probably Hinduism (about which I know little, including its notion of reincarnation - though I gather that it is not preoccupied with our coming back to life through the next generation of our consistent species - quite otherly, it suggests that we might come to life as a completely new species, no? And that we should perhaps accept that? If that’s true of the belief, then it is not being true to one’s nature as natural systems seek replication and reconstruction of their systems - they seek homeostasis (stasis is not enough). With the idea of reincarnation through species progeny rather, there will be suffering, but not on a deep level of unanimity (to thine own self be true and all of that).

It is true that one may argue that hybridization can lead to improvement of one’s progeny and the system of which they partake, but that is a hypothesis that is likely to be more speculative and ought not be imposed on those who value their inherited forms and systems and see the experiment of radical transformation as ecologically irresponsible and destructive - rather, requiring that any such radical hypothesis of hybridization or reformation in a new species be subject to control variables of accountability to the extant, functioning bio-social system. Not saying that this is necessarily what you advocate, but the call for passive acceptance of arbitrary reincarnation would appear to be more liberalism (thus, not the way of happiness, particularly not for most males) in the name of false “that’s the way it is ness” in service of a puerile female wish to remain powerful gatekeeper through a shallow incitement to genetic competition.

Church of Entropy
23 hours ago
Reincarnation is what it is, you cannot change it. The “we life on through our children” idea is a foolish one embraced by genetic determinists and fools who believe that traits reside dormant in genes. The truth is the complete opposite: genes are activated by the mind, and the mind reincarnates to the flesh with which it is most coherent.

If you are going to take the position that accepting reincarnation doesn’t improve one’s state of mind, you must substantiate it with evidence, which of course, does not exist. The desire to ascribe nefarious motivation to natural processes seems the effete path, to me. Denying reincarnation has numerous easily substantiated bad consequences and accepting it has many easily substantiated benefits.

Daniel Sienkiewicz
23 hours ago (edited)
@Church of Entropy I am not a genetic determinist in any strict sense other than recognizing the clear fact of patterns derived of genes (which are open systems, not so lineally deterministic). While the genes can be selected for with some deliberation (“mind”), I would not take it as far as you apparently do either, reading that rather as “Cartesian.”

I did not deny that “accepting reincarnation” improves one’s state of mind, I said that I have a different idea of reincarnation and what makes it important for happiness, at least to some of us.

I don’t ascribe nefarious motives to natural processes, I see potentially nefarious motives in denying aspects of natural motive, i.e., the desire to reconstruct one’s species, as opposed rather, to being told that one must accept arbitrary reincarnation. And that people might read you that way, of trying to promote passive acceptance - for example of race mixing and replacement - by proxy of passive acceptance as that being just another form of “reincarnation.”

Church of Entropy
22 hours ago
that is a projection of your own mind, and has nothing whatsoever to do with my views. if you want to understand my views, you should read my blog and not take these shit streams with Claire as an indication of my worldview.

Daniel Sienkiewicz
22 hours ago (edited)
@Church of Entropy what happened to the rest of my comment? (there were several paragraphs after “Cartesian” which are important to the understanding). It seems to have gotten chopped off ....

Daniel Sienkiewicz
22 hours ago
ok there is the rest of my comment (you had apparently commented before I had finished mine)

I see what happened now… you had commented before I completed the prior comment… it goes on at length, carefully considered after the word “Cartesian” where you picked up. I was not projecting anything, if you would read what I said, Isaid that it can look that way - as if you are trying to deny the importance of actively pursuing the reconstructing of genetic kind whereas passive acceptance of arbitrary recombination can appear liberal - not that you necessarily are, but this is a more powerful position for puerile females than for males broadly - i.e., not conducive to their natural alignment and the deep happiness of unanimity.

Church of Entropy
13 hours ago
@Daniel Sienkiewicz I find it very hard to understand what you are saying Daniel.

Daniel Sienkiewicz
6 hours ago
@Church of Entropy We’ll clear it up when you have a moment. ... i.e., I understand what I am saying - there is a clear logic - even if my way of presenting my point didn’t resonate with you in these particular comments.

Posted by Bad Goy and DanielS Contra Church of Entropy on Thu, 18 Apr 2019 13:09 | #

Bad Goy Fan Account
8 hours ago
By guru Jen’s logic, medical students must be the most unhealthy people on the planet with all the focus they put into thinking about illness.

Daniel Sienkiewicz
7 hours ago (edited)
Probably does over-apply the notion of projection - she did it to me. I definitely was Not projecting here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UT4yQBRIN88&lc=z234i5bp1xf2gfh35acdp435xpq5nnxtmho5obkovylw03c010c.1555366256450929&feature=em-comments

Daniel Sienkiewicz
7 hours ago
If anything, Jen is projecting when she said that I was using “Wizard” terms “like modernity”:

On the contrary, Modernity is clearly defined in my circles, and very importantly defined:

Modernity: pursuit of universal truth from an objectivist/Cartesian standpoint with the conviction that change and what is new necessarily represent progress toward universal foundational truth, necessary improvement, but with the consequence of running rough shod over coordination with other cultures, their inherited forms and traditions and the risk even to one’s own benign traditions and inherited biological forms as a consequence of this (over) valuation of experimentalism, what is new and propositionally universal.

I could elaborate, but that’s enough for now.

Bad Goy Fan Account
25 minutes ago
@Daniel Sienkiewicz I was referring more to her misrepresentation of the law of attraction, but she does also claim any criticism of her is projection which I mentioned in my other comment. “Anyone accusing me of X is only doing it because they are guilty of X themselves”.

Daniel Sienkiewicz
18 minutes ago (edited)
@Bad Goy Fan Account From what I’ve seen so far there does seem to be a pattern of that, yes. In the fist instance that I queried her, I was accused of attributing nefarious qualities to nature (which is an absurd accusation). and then told that this was a projection.

My point, rather, was that in unsocialized human females - prior to the development of their empathic skills, the female inclination to incite genetic competition can be amplified (by pandering, as it is prone to be within the disordering of social classifications as upshot of modernity’s objectivist rupturing). And that IF her notion of reincarnation proposes that males should be made ‘happy’ by reincarnation in another form - whether its a mulatto or a rabbit - that this would provoke justifiable opposition from WN - as we seek the eminently natural end of unanimity with the perpetuation of our specific genetic kind. Whereas IF she is proposing that we should be made happy by coming back to life as just any organic form, that is like proposing happiness by disabling our mature abilities and responsibilities, like a permanently debilitating tranquilizer or even a frontal lobotomy (particularly for a man). Arbitrary incitement to genetic competition and having the more circumspect accept that, may make puerile females happy in the short term, but it is not the road to happiness to mature White men and Women who see the reason to look after our species - and a more humanly natural concern than the naturalistic fallacy of incitement to genetic competition (and the passive acceptance of arbitrary results) as comprehensive rule to which humans should simply acquiesce.

Posted by Contra Jen and Claire on Sat, 20 Apr 2019 09:37 | #

I (Claire Khaw) do almost everything Church of Entropy demands of me except the one thing she craves ... [not render psychiatric charges against interlocutors and not call people who describe Jews (where pejorative) as “haters”.

Daniel Sienkiewicz comments:

I agree that the Abrahamic religions are Jewish and that Islam and Christianity are conceived to confuse and misdirect the gentiles. Jen can have credit for focusing a little more incisively on the motive to retain the usury advantage for themselves and dissuade the gentiles from it.

And 2) money (usury, rent seeking, etc.) is usually the most important of their power niches, after 1) Their control over religion has hoodwinked the others….. indeed,  with money, the other goals can largely be BOUGHT into line. But there are those other important power niches that they have disproportionate influence in: 3) Politics 4) Law & Courts 5) Academia 6) Media 7)  Other power niches that stem out from the others - Business/International, Military Industrial, NGO’s, genetic engineering..

As far as Whites go, all of this is contingent upon keeping White Right Wingers/Liberals (same thing at bottom) bought off, placated. Jen is distracting and proposing to placate White right wing reactionaries with liberalism, to dissuade them from their proper course of correction.

But the fact that she sees the Abrahamic religions as a Jewish trick is not new, nor the idea that Usury is key to Jewish hegemony. Even the idea that she inferred this scientifically, as opposed to learning from others and then garbing it in scientific attire is more than suspect. At best, her scientific understanding helped her to verify and sharpen a few hypotheses that she gained from others.

It was funny when Claire caught Jen being a hypocrite, after Jen wanted to prohibit ad hominum and armchair psychiatric evaluations of craziness,, Jen said that she might “diagnose Claire’s ego.”

On the other hand, Jen has a point, in that Claire does over-do the psycho analysis - she did it to me from the get go, calling me “neurotic” for observing Jewish power and influence.

Jen has another serious point, - it is unethical of Claire to say that people are “hating Jews” when they are merely describing the truth.

That said, I will say that I think Jen is an ego maniac; intelligent but over rating herself. Nevertheless, ego mania is commonplace among American women ..as I have suggested, for their increased one up position and the pandering it receives within the disorder of modernity, social class bounds and the barriers to various men having been ruptured. Pandered to thus, elevating the predilections of puerile femaleness.

That segues to my next point.

I see Jen as a Gilad Atzmon type, she is good and keen for critiquing some significant aspects of Jews - on their hyper ethnocentric side - but at the same time, not as helpful (if not downright misleading) on the other side of their perfidy, the liberal side - where they disorganize Whites and incite genetic competition.

Like Atzmon’s desire that all should be non ethnocentric and liberal (including Jews) and like the puerile female predilection that would incite arbitrary genetic competition, Jen’s notion of reincarnation seems to be promoting passive acceptance of an arbitrary reconstitution of all but “the personality” ....and the suggestion that males should passively accept this is egregious. Sure, be happy to come back to life as a Mulatto. White Nationalists would be correct to hate her: what she is promoting is like mental castration, a frontal lobotomy, a permanent tranquilizer state to make you “happy” with this arbitrary “natural” outcome, as if it is not Natural for species to try to actively reconstruct their own kind - as White Nationalists are concerned to do - particularly as mature White males and females responsible to human and pervasive ecology.

Posted by More reincarnation happiness with Jen on Sat, 20 Apr 2019 15:00 | #

Church of Entropy

your verbose rants indicate you understand very little about my position. your poopooing of reincarnation indicates you lack the ability to understand the result of embracing such a belief (more specifically: inevitability).

Daniel Sienkiewicz

@Church of Entropy You would say that (in your evasive, hokus pokus wizardry) and I don’t poo pooh reincarnation, as I’ve said before - I see reincarnation as happening through genetically consistent children and grand children - very important.

On a minor note, you said that you did not engage in ad hominum and yet you called me “a drama queen.” ..perhaps I should be made happy that this “drama queen”...

https://majorityrights.com/weblog/news_comments/rapper_films_girlfriend_calling_for_parents_hours_before_overdose_death_400

...comes back to life as a whatever.