Why Social Justice Is Satanic And We Need Religion To Defeat It

A small group of fanatics has risen. They are so extreme, so dangerous, and so removed from reality that the entire Western world is at stake.

These fanatics claim to be above religion. But it is important to realize that they are not devoid of religion. The feminists who are social engineering Western civilization into oblivion may not profess a personable God, but they are more religious than anyone. It will therefore take religion to overcome them. You cannot sit idly on the sidelines. It takes a belief system to overcome them.

Early Man’s Struggle Against Social Justice

Skylitzes Chronicle

The top priority for social justice is to destroy the authority of men. Actually, this is nothing new. Since the dawn of developed man, fanatic minorities have sought to destroy personal liberty and dictate an “equal” society.

The Egyptians said there was the way of Thoth or the “way downward.” Early Christians taught that there was the way of life which opposed the way of death. With each religion, belief falls into one of two categories, right or wrong. Each time, theology was tailored to counter the flawed human philosophy of social justice.

Yet all the successful religions turned out to be remarkably similar, indicating that the same flawed philosophy crops up time and time again.

Many people don’t know that ancient Babylon was proudly feminist. Elite women held prominent positions of power and built huge monuments of themselves. Babylonian women received education, did business, rented apartments, administrated in the temple, owned property, and even got alimony.

Divorce settlements “could require husbands to compensate ex-wives” if he initiated the divorce. Wealthy women frequently went after men who did not pay up, even ordering their lawyers to acquire slave boys to wash their feet:

“Women wrote many letters about the support men were legally obligated to send them, especially letters of complaint when the rations were not received, were insufficient, or were of poor quality or spoiled. One woman wrote a letter complaining about the quality of the sesame oil she had received and told her agent to be present when they were extracting the oil to make sure she got the best quality… One woman asked for a slave girl to grind her flour and a slave boy to wash her feet.” (Elisabeth Tetlow, Women, Crime and Punishment…”)

We imagine that the ancient world was primitive and superstitious, but social justice was actually more popular in ancient times than it is now. The Athenian lawmaker Solon personified his social justice reforms, as quoted in the book Social Justice in the Ancient World:

“[Social justice] shackles those who are without justice… checks insatiability, and blackens hubris.”

“They are wealthy, swayed by deeds without justice, and not caring at all about sacred or public property… they do not heed the holy institutions of justice.” (Solon fr. 4:32-36, 7-16)

“…when the base decide to behave with hubris, and when they ruin the community and render judgments in favor of things without justice for the sake of profits and for the sake of power, do not expect that city to be peaceful for long… when the base decide on these things, namely, profits entailing public damage.” (Theognis 39-52)

The “holy institutions of justice” in late Egypt and Babylon “motivated the high moral status of women” and established “legal equality between men and women.”

Social Justice Opposes True Religion

Nicolas Poussin golden calf

In Babylon’s holy institution of social justice, evil was symbolized by Tiamat, the goddess of motherhood and beauty. Just as feminists despise the motherhood role of women today, they concocted this character Tiamat, as “a mother who put her children’s well-being before her own.”

Tiamat was brutally killed by a shining hero named Marduk. Marduk did away with the old conservative ways and issued in progressivism. He altered the natural universe into a new order, and enslaved Tiamat’s followers, which symbolized mankind. He then took a partner named Sarpanit, synonymous with Ishtar, the goddess of sex and prostitution.

In the Epic of Gilgamesh, the divine princess Ishtar gets her daddy to take revenge on Gilgamesh for refusing her sexual advances, and he ends up losing eternal life. Babylon was a feminist dream.

It is not by coincidence that Hebrew and Christian theology is a polar opposite of this myth. In their theology, motherhood and family is not evil, but is celebrated. The “woman in the wilderness” is taken care of by God and symbolizes the church. Marduk is not the hero, but is the villain Lucifer, whose plan to enslave mankind fails.

Study carefully the devil in the bible and you will find an oppressive dictator who seeks universal equality. The Hebrew religion subverted the progressivism in Babylon with its own theology of personal liberty and responsibility.

Ezekiel spoke harshly against those who supported Babylon. “And the Babylonians came to her into the bed of love, and they defiled her with their whoredom, and she was polluted with them.” (Ezek 23:17) He compared these supporters to sexually addicted young whores, and upbraided young women who traveled to Babylon to be part of the flashy new culture. These apostates denied the patriarchal authority of the prophets, and they sought a code of social justice that focused on the worldly.

Patriarchy Is Social Justice’s Main Target


Fast-forward to 20th century Socialism. Radical politicians mandated laws that they said empowered women, but which really destroyed the family. They attacked people who were successful, destroyed personal liberty in the name of public welfare, and tore down the “hubris” of people who did not serve the needs of the community, the way they wanted.

The veneer may have looked new, but this revolutionary movement was no different than in ancient Babylon. The secret subversive efforts in Socialism created slaves, as an oppressive government dictated every area of their lives, every behavior. Billions suffered.

Look at social justice warriors today and you see the same doctrine of universal salvation. The popular motto today is “equality,” but this American value has become so twisted that anyone who stands out gets pulled down to the lowest echelon. Your behavior must fall exactly in line with their strict regiment and communal ownership.

One man recently found it hard to support both Christianity and social justice causes. You can’t serve two masters. So he left his church to fight against “racism, sexism, ecological devastation, human trafficking, war, corporate and governmental corruption.” Interestingly, with his embrace of social justice came a profound disgust for the priesthood. He simply couldn’t believe that a “prophet is infallible.” The SJW movement is the church for people who reject patriarchy.

Feminists attack patriarchy because they recognize that patriarchy in religion opposes them. Patriarchy fulfills man’s need to excel above the rest and take full responsibility for his triumphs and mistakes.

“The aggression suffered by many women as a result of an unjust social and economic system is so widespread and so heavy that we often deem it better to let them find in patriarchal religion a temporary consolation for their afflictions…

Many women end up, by reason of their need for consolation and protection, strengthening the traditional roles of priests or pastors and of patriarchal religious institutions as a whole.” (Pui-lan Kwok, Hope Abundant: Third World and….)

The indoctrination and propaganda has become so loud, I don’t think people have the slightest clue about men’s rightful authoritative role. The truth is, men have a natural role as spiritual leaders, a role that women do not have. Paul made it very clear that the head of man is God and the head of woman is man. It is man’s right to communicate to directly with God and lead as patriarch.

This is a very liberating doctrine. We don’t need a coddling government or cultural celebrity to tell us how to live or what to believe, to take responsibility for our mistakes and triumphs. As men, our ability to communicate and our right as leaders is inherent. The government’s role is to provide for temporal welfare, but our western government long ago crossed the line and interfered with spiritual welfare. The inevitable result is a state-religion of social justice which tears men down, making them slaves or subject to women.

Religious patriarchy is the time-tested opposition to feminism and all forms of social justice. This is why spirituality is so important for men today. Satan is every bit as real as God, and Satan’s plan for the world is feminism and social justice. Satan wants a world where men get publicly shamed for lifting too many weights at the gym or hassled by the school administrator for using gendered pronouns.

These may be small points in a big scheme of things, but hell is not some deep pit with grinning demons and flaming pitchforks. Hell is a classroom with angry, androgynous teachers and a skewed grading system.

We should not consider these social justice warriors atheists, even though they claim to be atheists. Their zealousness betrays a fanatical belief system, a religious theology that follows the same pattern all the way down human history. They are best countered the way Ezekiel boldly shamed them and the way Paul laid out the natural order of priesthood.

Our greatest potential as men is realized by embracing this idea.

Read More: One Way To Defeat Your Social Anxiety

350 thoughts on “Why Social Justice Is Satanic And We Need Religion To Defeat It”

    1. Most non-State universities across the West were established by, and funded by, religion. There is a Leftist myth that says that religion = “teh stoopid people” that is pounded into our heads day in and day out. In reality religion acts as a kind of social glue that gives a culture a shared set of morals, ethics and virtues that cannot effectively be provided in a non-religious culture. Like it or hate it, religion really does help keep society and culture functioning on a high level.
      Does this mean everybody needs to be religious? Probably not, I strongly suspect that many of the “leaders” of churches in the past were not religious at all, but they did recognize the important role it played in their countries, so they went along with it.
      And ultimately there are far too many examples of extremely smart religious people, of many faiths, to call people who are religious somehow deficient intellectually. Leave that sneer to the Left where it was invented.

      1. SJW’s always project. It is a fact of life that atheism correlates highly with low I.Q and high IQ atheists correlates highly with autism and wasted potential.

        1. lol, only SJWs pull bullshit out of their ass without any evidence. I’ll ask you again, give me a proof that atheism correlates highly with low IQ and autism.

        2. don’t know about the legitimacy of either claim, but quick Google comes up with stuff from 2011 and varying credibility:
          Note: not saying its true, didn’t even read the articles, but here’s what I found.

        3. Haha, I didn’t even know they would do such study. But this appears to give a plausible explanation:
          “Speculation is that the high-functioning person’s penchant for
          logical reasoning and concrete thinking, and their discomfort with metaphor and figures of speech account for the findings.”
          The key point is that these are people with high-functioning autism.

        4. LOL, they study mating habits of squirrels and whether alcohol has adverse effect on the mind’s ability to coordinate motor skills, they’ll study anything so long as there’s funding.
          I’m too cynical to place much trust in studies done through mercenary ethics, but it is what it is.

      2. One of the reasons I never discount the Bible (or many other religious texts) is that because read as analogy, metaphor, etc. it contains many universally applicable truths.
        Due our “now bias,” I think we are predisposed to repeating the mistakes of the past, because we believe as users of the modern tech, we are superior to the creators of the tech. Biblical lesson parallel: Man becoming so egotistical he thinks he has risen above what created him (Tower of Babel, I think).
        We then can be convinced that a failed ideology was the fault of its earlier proponents or “bad” folks getting in the way of the glorious “new world” (instead of flawed from inception as an ideology) and we can do it right this time. Wrong.
        The imaginative part of my mind says that mankind has built up technological marvels to rival our current standards before (perhaps many times) and led to our collective downfall (the mythical? Atlantis might be such an example). If so, then religions might be warnings to the future put into terms that seem simplistic/unscientific as the writers would have no way of predicting their exact audience outside of the constants in human nature. Of course, we conveniently ignore or marginalize the envelope containing the warning as “the product of lesser minds.”

        1. With so much anti-religion going on today, we fail to learn what wisdom the old texts provide.
          Aesop’s fables was an entertaining method I used to learn about human nature when I was young, and also bible text was hard to comprehend as a kid.
          I’m actually surprised that these fables are no longer mentioned in schools.

        2. Love Aesop’s Fables, the copy I have was actually being thrown out of the local library as a discard and no intention to replace it, sad times.

      3. ” In reality religion acts as a kind of social glue that gives a culture a
        shared set of morals, ethics and virtues that cannot effectively be
        provided in a non-religious culture.”
        Yep, and this affects everyone. SJWs want to tear religion down because they want their acts to seem justified and well received by all. Right now, there are plenty of us pushing back because their behavior does not align with everyday morals, ethics, virtues, etc….

        1. One need only read Marx’s disdain and outright hatred of religion, and note the subsequent communist and socialist platforms crafted around this hatred, to start to figure out that perhaps religion isn’t a bad thing after all.

        2. Yes…even though I am an agnostic/nonbeliever type I still think religion is needed and important. I am a right leaning atheist ( there’s like 4 of us…) but I would never advocate that religion “go away” like the snarky a-hole leftist atheists. Religion e.g Christianity mostly is a good thing….Does all that author says it does.It’s a counter to the SJW’s .

        3. One curious thing about Marx is that in his youth he wrote some verse that was actually somewhat satanic. Literally. His hatred of religion didn’t spring from nowhere

        4. correction, Christanity is the social glue of the west. this is why the sjw dont attack islam hinduism ect. it represents no threat to them because its is alien in nature. if the church became strong again it would wipe them from relavance. because real Christanity either catholic or protestant would never accept this garbage as moral. the west was built with Christanity and they know if our culture returned to it they would be destroyed

        5. Right. That statement would apply to western culture (its religion). Others have their own (the statement was more or less a broad statement that applies to all – religion is based on region or culture). I think everyone got the gist of it, though.

        6. im sure they did, but the dicussion was trashing Christanity in genral which pisses me off because Christanity is the west and the west is Christanity and people cant seem to graspthat

        7. Well, the other side is that Muslims are supporting them right now (despite the fact that Muslims would slaughter them if it were only SJWs and Muslims) and Hindus are actually Matriarchal/SJWs themselves.

        8. I see your point. They tried to have America as the ‘melting pot’ at one time but what we’re seeing is that just doesn’t seem to work. It hasn’t (in the past) anywhere else so why would it work (here) today.

        9. it worked in the past because we forced immigrants to assimilate none of this for english press 1 garbage

      4. In religious cultures the social glue contains values that are transcendent, no matter how secularized. In non-religious cultures the social culture contains “human all too human” values like feminism and Marxist notions of equality etc. There is no sense of otherness, reality is never transcended, the world is merely posited as a future utopia waiting to be born, such worlds cannot have values that can bind people to greater things. Ultimately the left will loss as it contains nothing greater than it own man made articles of faith.

  1. “Childish leaders oppress my people, and WOMEN rule over them. O my people, your leaders mislead you; they send you down the wrong road.” – Isaiah 3:12
    If you want to know the truth about what’s going on in the world, look no further than the Bible. It’s all there.

      1. A “key” to understanding the Bible is to look at a recurring theme of the young and rebellious given instruction time and time again not to follow unwise paths and choosing to ignore this. Much depravity and violence ensues. Many times you will see this pattern in the Bible.

        1. My grandfather hated Jews and tried to say that The Bible was written to make them look good. My wife and I laughed because the Bible makes the Jews look like freaking idiots over and over again.

        2. The bible, meaning old testament, abridged:
          God: Don’t do this thing.
          Israelites: Ok. You can count on us.
          Proceeds to do thing and gets punished.

        3. That made me chuckle. Reminds me of a little joke I saw on FB the other day:
          “Let’s be honest: Jesus wouldn’t take the wheel. Jesus would let Peter drive, fall asleep in the back seat, wake up to the sounds of the other eleven screaming in mortal terror (while Peter bellows expletives at the car in front), and get them out of a fatal car accident at the very last second by rebuking the speed limit.”

        4. Lol, y not. God chose a race dumb enough to look him in the face and tell him we believe and as soon as he leaves say:
          I wonder what will happen when I…

      2. “Do not waste your strength on women, on those who ruin kings.” – (Proverbs 31:3)
        “Resist Satan(Social systems, false doctrines, feminism..etc), stand firm in your faith(values, morals, truth), knowing that the same kinds of problems are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the world.” – (1 Peter 5:9)
        “For Man is the image and glory of God.” – (1 Corinthians 7:11)
        Why do you think the media, the feminists & SJW’s despise the Bible so much? Because God’s word is the only standing and unchanging authority against their plans to corrupt society. Its the only thing left reminding them who’s Boss and that their plans will fail.
        “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.” – (Matthew 24:35)

    1. People often don’t realize we all live in a system which constantly struggles for balance. Part of the system is having agents that go against it to test its strength. Over time the system weakens and another ideology takes over and te process repeats itself.
      In modern times, we have come to realize that the thinking of the ancients in relation to the relationships between men and women and the unity of the family is what keeps the system balanced. When either side desires to disrupt the balance by being superior to the other and wishes to attain more power, it renews the process of the balancing act and the cycle continues.

    2. Wait, Abrahamic religions were misogynistic thousands of years ago? I’m shocked, shocked I tell you.

    3. Yes look at the story of Noah and come to the conclusion that we’re all just inbred swine fucking our siblings. That’s the truth of this world.

  2. The leftist is a privileged white male that takes the fact for granted.
    A rightist is a privileged white male that does not.
    Part of the reason they’re so fanatical about ‘helping’ the underprivileged is because they, unlike us, think they can get along just fine WITHOUT privilege.
    Young white men with 6 figure student load debts must be made to understand that they cannot afford to NOT be a privileged group (that ‘underprivileged’ black man that didn’t go to college isn’t in debt).
    This, I think, is a better approach than trying to tell them that their gods aren’t real.
    Here’s another example “We got a humpteen gazzilion immigrants entering the country after YOUR job and you DON’T want privilege?!?!”
    Appeal to their selfishness!
    That is, after all, the real reason all those butthurt piss ants with short man syndrome became SJWs to begin with.

  3. I drive my SJW relatives crazy when I argue that they have joined a cult – then point out all the magical thinking required in their belief set.

        1. Keep using 1996 as a starting date for your models, that’s not cherry-picking data at all, is it? If you look at the last century, it shows something very different.

        2. Ok if you want to go further back in time then yes we have been warming the past century BUT that’s because the earth was coming out of a mini ice age. The “warming” was actually the earth’s temperature normalizing. Whether you believe the earth is warming on not, it is not due to anything humans are doing. We are a blip compared to what Mother Nature herself does to the earth (think gasses emitted from volcanoes).

        3. The C02 released by Mt St Helen was a fraction of what this country alone puts in the atmosphere that year.

        4. Keep using 1997 as your starting point, it really almost makes you sound like you know what you’re talking about.

        5. And here we are at the crux of the argument; the assumption that co2 is a pollutant and is contributing to global warming. No I mean real pollutants, the shit that cause people in developing nations health issues and make up smog. Like I said in my original comment, all models predicting global warming were wrong because they assumed co2 was the culprit. You do realize according to al gore places like Florida should already be completely underwater right?

        6. C02 is a greenhouse gas, which is not poisonous to humans unless it displaces oxygen. It is however, a greenhouse gas, which affects the temperature.
          Wait, you expect models of something as complex as the climate to be accurate? They don’t have weather prediction down pat yet, and the climate is much, much more complex.

        7. It’s not that I expect them to hit the nail on the head but none have even been in the ballpark. By your own admission we shouldn’t listen to anything these scientists are saying about global warming/climate change because after all, they can’t even predict the weather for the week.

        8. Wow, I just used a whole lot of information derived from scientists, but you just see an admonishment of science. Science is not perfect, it is made my humans after all. But neither can it be discounted so easily. Every objective indication shows that the Earth is getting warmer. Last month was the hottest month EVER RECORDED, as was the month before that, and the year before that and the entire decade. You can make a graph that starts on an extremely hot year and say it hasn’t been getting that much hotter, while if you look at all of the data, it is irrefutable that the Earth is getting hotter. Get back to me when you you can accept this simple fact that everyone else, in the world knows it’s happening.

        9. Well, if you look at the actual Nasa release, it says that the CO2 in the thermoshpere(the upper atmoshpere) reflected heat from the energy of a solar flare out into space. Just like CO2 reflects heat from earth back to earth. That discovery is three years old, of it actually debunked climate change, I would have heard about it.

        10. Actually, the Antarctic ice is spreading, while getting thinner. And we’ve set heat records lately. I know you guys are divorced from reality, but I didn’t know it was such a bitter divorce that the two of you aren’t even talking anymore.

        11. I don’t know how many people have done research into the whole CERN thing. However, I think their research might also be affecting the climate.

        12. CERN is a supercollider, it smashes sub-atomic particles together. It has nothing to do with the climate.

        13. Correction: It has a supercollider. They are also experimenting with extra-dimensional gateways. Depending on what you believe is motivating their work is a topic for another day. However, one cannot ignore the ramifications of what amounts to attempting to open mini black holes.
          I stumbled across documents online that state that a lot of the mobilation of 1st world special forces to “somalian pirates” are actually in response to the ramification of their projects.
          Just saying.

        14. Let’s assume that it is true, that doesn’t give leftists the right to add yet another tax under the form of carbon credits etc. Their only goal is to create yet another tranfer of wealth.

        15. Yes, and Wisconsin and Europe were under a mile of solid ice about 10,000 or so years ago. What melted it dipshit? Camp fires?? Intelligence def is a virtue. You should give it a go sometime.

        16. The exact same thing changing the climate today. The climate is changing naturally, but the pollution humanity puts out has accelerated the process.

        17. Too much CO2 is pollution, why don’t you put a plastic bag around your head until you have nothing but CO2. The tax is an effort to reduce CO2 pollution, it’s obviously not going to stop anytime soon.

        18. Strawman argument. The levels are nowhere near what would happen if I put a bag over my head. Moreover, CO2 is plant food.

        19. Some plants are adapting to increased CO2 levels, but not all can or have. Rising CO2 levels have a myriad effect, greenhouse warming is only one of them.

    1. Same here. I usually infer they belong to a “Jim Jones styled cult” to emphacize the insanity.

    2. An acquaintance said he’s not religious. I said he is. He said he isn’t. I asked him if he believed in free will and human rights. He said, “OK, I’m not religious, but I am spiritual.”
      LOL dumb ass, religion is what you get when a spiritual person opens their mouth or acts on their beliefs.

      1. Religion is what you get when a bunch of people want to force their spiritual beliefs on others. That´s why most religions always have been dangerous and always will be dangerous. Religion keeps people from using their own brains and makes them dumb.
        Spirituality on it´s own is different.
        I´m pretty sure I´m living my life way more “according to the bible” than 80% of hardcore christians and church goers. I know a couple of them and they´re mostly hypocrites. Religious and pious on the outside but nasty and fucked up on the inside.
        Spirituality you can live on your own, religion is a pack mentality thing for people who need some kind of leadership (sheeples).

        1. Most people I know have difficulty adding more than four digits at a time without screwing up. Hell, few Americans can’t conjugate their verbs in a way recognizable to any earlier period of English speakers.
          Does that mean arithmetic and simple grammar are stupid/enslaving/sheep-like or hypocritical?
          The question answers itself.
          Your anger speaks for you. It is too bad you hate the very system that made you possible and I will pray, right now, you find your way back to sanity, God’s sanity.

        2. Religion is acting and speaking according to your beliefs. If you have beliefs but keep them private and never act on them in any way, then you are not religious. But that is impossible. You cannot have beliefs without acting on them at all. Nor can you NOT have beliefs. Everyone has beliefs that are not natural, beliefs like free will, morality, values, justice, etc.
          If you vote you are forcing your beliefs on others. There’s no way around it. So just pick the right religion and at least be honest about the facts. Everyone forces their beliefs on others.

        3. “Religion keeps people from using their own brains and makes them dumb”
          Read friend. The entire university system was concocted by the Western church and the height of science in the middle ages came about under the theocracy of the Byzantine empire.
          “I’m pretty sure I’m living my life way more ‘according to the bible’ than 80% of hardcore christians”
          That pride right there says that you aren’t friend.
          We are all sinners; Christ’s church isn’t a place for the perfect: It’s a hospital for the sick of the soul. All mankind suffers from this malady, but those who feel that they are not in need of treatment are the most far gone.

      2. How is believing in free will and human rights spiritual? Maybe I’m misunderstanding, please explain

        1. Because free will contradicts materialistic determinism and the concept of human rights requires belief in a universal atemporal morality.

        1. Nevsky, perhaps one definition of “spiritual” or spirituality is living in the presence of Jesus. Perhaps it is a conscious effort of remembering that God loves me as God loves God, therefore I live to please God according to his Word.
          How is that?

        2. I’ve heard this from many people “I dont believe in God, but I am spiritual”. So whatever they mean by that, I dont think God is part of it. For me “spiritual” came to mean a Liberal, hipster wierdo who read too many “live in the moment” books

    3. Make not mistake. The WHore of Babylon has her religion. The Beast is rising up from the sea. CERN is opening up the Gatges of hell.

    4. My entire extended family are liberal idiots – this is why I’ve distanced myself from them. It’s grueling having to tolerate them soewing Marxist propaganda.

  4. Don’t conflate SJ with Satanism. Satanism is a fine religion and in many ways more moral than other religions including Christianity. SJWs are not Satanists. Review the 11 Satanic Commandments and THEN tell me it has anything to do with social justice.

      1. Sorry Abe, but “The Church of Satan” is a CIA creation. The Synagog of Satan on the other hand……

  5. Pointless and weak article.
    All this article states is that Christianity = Patriarchal = good, then makes vague connections between Social Justice, Babylon, Socialism, etc. And therefore, Christianity vs. Social Justice is Good vs. Evil.
    Yeah, very insightful.
    First, most societies in the past were patriarchal regardless of what their religion was. This includes, Confucianism, Ancient and Greek and Rome, Confucianism, etc. This argument that Christianity is somehow the only patriarchal ideology that will be the white knight in shinning armour to save the West is absurd. I can also point out many examples of ‘Social Justice’ within the Bible, but it seems that the book is so large that anyone can interpret it the way they want to see it. And if Christianity is so righteous and powerful as our god-fearing men of ROK claim, why is it losing its ground to Progressivism so easily while Muslims are more faithful than ever? When Nietszche said ‘God is dead,’ he wasn’t proclaiming the death of the deity, but of the Christian cultural and moral dominance in Europe.
    Second, I still don’t buy this connection between today’s ‘Social Justice’ and Progressivism with Socialism and ‘Leftism’ as a whole (not to mention the more ludicrous Babylonian or “Satanic” connections). I know their rhetoric is the same and there are definitely overlaps, but I see them as two separate things. For example, Soviet Union back in the day was more patriarchal than today’s West. How many gay pride parades did they have in the USSR? How many Feminazis were screaming rape culture and having slutwalks at Red Square?
    It’s clear to the ROK readers that Social Justice and Progressivism together are a disease that needs to be countered. I just don’t see the point of bringing in Christianity and throwing in silly labels and comparisons into the mix.

    1. The article mentions several other religious sources than Christianity. This isn’t about propping up Christianity. All successful religions embraced patriarchal priesthood, and they all tailored their theology to counter their culture’s social justice movement, which tends to be remarkably similar. “Patriarchal” means giving all men individual liberty and leadership. The Soviet Union did not do this. Rather, the Soviet Union destroyed men’s ability to be fathers and excel on their own merits. In this respect, they are much like Babylon of old, and therefore like the original inspiration for Satan. If you can find an example in the bible or any other holy book that glorifies the theology of Communism/Socialism/Social Justice I would love to hear it.

      1. Almost all societies in the past were patriarchal and religious. I just see religion and patriarchy as two separate entities. I think the modern Christianity’s shift to progressivism is a good proof of that. You can be traditional and patriarchal without religion.
        And why would the Bible mention anything about Communism/Socialism/Social Justice? Those are all modern creations that came about as a result of industrialization. I doubt Bible even predicted industrialization.
        I just don’t see the point of lumping everything into two categories of Good: Religion & Patriarchy and Bad: Satanism/Feminism/Socialism/Social Justice/Whore of Babylon/Stalin/Cthulhu. Black and White thinking is blindness and it’s unnecessary and even harmful in battling modern Progressivism.

    2. Think the author was saying that SJW/leftism is a religion ( I say cult) that needs to be countered by an opposing religion . I agree with that concept….

      1. It will be countered by islam since it is the only patriarchy they embrace with open arms. They literally cut the grass under their own feet.

    3. Read about Russian Communism’s efforts to undermine the family. Available at any Internet hot spot near you.

    4. In response to “why is it (Christianity) losing its ground to Progressivism so easily.” Basically American Christianity is Progressivism enshrined.
      Western Christianity is dying because it is an apostate fakery of Christianity.
      (Catholicism not included, that is a whole other issue)
      I place before you that the Bible specifically denies women the role of leadership.
      The few new testament examples of women mentioned were assistants to the men and the one old testament example of a woman in battle was still an assistant and was mentioned as a way to show that the general was a coward, hence the victory was a Godsend not accomplished by human strength.
      Now realize that the vast majority of American Churches allow women in as clergy. These churches are anti-Biblical, they have to denounce Biblical authority or defrock their women priests and admit to their own lies, which will never happen. So they denounce the Bible, their own holy book, and spread (google it) the “social gospel,” which almost no one cares about and people leave those churches out of disgust and boredom.
      Please note that the Presbyterian Church in America (it broke from PCUSA, which is very PC, lol) it is Patriarchal and growing extremely rapidly because it is selling the pure stuff, Biblical Truth.

  6. This is especially funny in light of the Pope’s visit to the US and the conservative media reaction to his social justice agenda. So religion is the anti-SJW?

    1. Not modern religion, no, and I suspect that the author was not really talking about the modern Church-Circus thing we have today, which is fully Feelz and Leftist infiltrated. His examples are from history, not contemporary times.

      1. Churches are indeed infiltrated by social justice proponents, and it is nothing new. One religion infiltrating another. Look at the history of popes and you have your good and bad. This should be the subject of a future article.

      2. I’m atheist but if I believed a god existed I would be in line with islam. They seem to be pretty patriarchal.

    2. The pope is just a proxy for the gay mafia nowadays, organizing in their headquarters with literal “christfags” gay priests on the gay mafia H.Q: The white house.

    3. You catholic? Pope is a Jesuit from South America. I knew what he was before he ever opened his mouth.

  7. And this is why I’m not big on religion… Every team just claims to be the “true” religion… Because reasons.

    1. Yep..religion is like a club, which one to belong to? Lutheran , Catholic, Episcopalian , Methodist? Most people join the religion of their parents or the region they live in not cause it has some special revealed truth… I know some people who joined a church cause it was “fun” or “cool” or had daycare during services…

      1. Like my cousin who had never voted once in his life but joined the local republicans club in his home town because the meetings get him away from his wife and kids and they serve beer and play darts

      2. I technically converted to Islam in 3rd year university.
        A couple Muslims told me that there is technically no hell in Islam… And that I can have sex in the afterlife. So I told him to sign me up and he did. I just had to say a couple prayers and hang out with them for an hour.
        Sweet deal if you ask me.

    2. You are always in a team. Get over it. Whether it is America, Canada, any of the various European Nations, Latin american, muslim, etcetera and etcetera.

    3. Religion: authority by virtue of some guys on the internet minus a few thousand years of technology

      1. I gotta admit lolknee that as time goes on my mind is changing. If religion is what the average person needs to live a virtuous life than I’m becoming more and more for it.
        I’m not convinced that the average person has the sense or foresight to deal with a nihilist or existential worldview.
        You understand that I’m generally skeptical and curious, but if a religious society is more just and affords me greater freedom than I might consider compromise.
        Toronto’s secular society is a wasteland and I don’t want to invest in it.

        1. Oh I agree with you whole heartedly. But in my mind that is more about the person than the religion.
          Whatever makes a man feel comfortable in his head and his heart and gives him an impetus towards self improvement and virtue is ok in my book. I am not such an arrogant prick not to realize that in many ways the gym and my other hobbies stand in for religion in this regard for me.
          It is the people who want to believe that religion is the only path towards this virtue that scare me. What if I were to go into a church and tell everyone that if they can’t deadlift 2.5x body weight they will burn in hell or start a war with everyone who couldn’t properly roast a chicken?
          What if I were to say that if you aren’t fashionable in an urban way you are simply a bad person?
          It isn’t the inclusion of religion that bugs me. It is religions exclusion of other forms of solace. Quite simply, religion (and subsequently SOME religious people) treat religion way too fucking seriously….as if it mattered or something.

        2. I think I would have enjoyed some of your philosophy classes. I dropped a Nietchze class in undergrad because it seemed ridiculous to get lectured about the übermensch by some miserable liberal pussy.
          Considering the direction things have gone in academia I’m actually proud of my arrogant younger self.
          But if I had a teacher like you I think I would have enjoyed it. You helped me deal with a few of my more frustrated days in my recent masters program and for that I thank you.

        3. I think you would have. I was a fun professor. Also; I agree with your diagnosis of modern academia which is why I am in corporate construction
          Always happy to help

  8. I am sorry, too much hypocrisy here. You are whining about social justice warriors and you sound alot like one. I am not quiet sure how you aren’t one. I do agree that the athiest are full of hot air. They clearly have a religion and pretend not to.

  9. The Babylonians were quickly conquered by the Persians, which is not surprising. But the Persians had a very different take on women as shown in the first chapter of Esther (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Esther+1%3A15-22&version=ESV):
    ’15 “According to the law, what is to be done to Queen Vashti, because she has not performed the command of King Ahasuerus delivered by the eunuchs?” 16 Then Memucan said in the presence of the king and the officials, “Not only against the king has Queen Vashti done wrong, but also against all the officials and all the peoples who are in all the provinces of King Ahasuerus. 17 For the queen’s behavior will be made known to all women, causing them to look at their husbands with contempt, since they will say, ‘King Ahasuerus commanded Queen Vashti to be brought before him, and she did not come.’ 18 This very day the noble women of Persia and Media who have heard of the queen’s behavior will say the same to all the king’s officials, and there will be contempt and wrath in plenty. 19 If it please the king, let a royal order go out from him, and let it be written among the laws of the Persians and the Medes so that it may not be repealed, that Vashti is never again to come before King Ahasuerus. And let the king give her royal position to another who is better than she. 20 So when the decree made by the king is proclaimed throughout all his kingdom, for it is vast, all women will give honor to their husbands, high and low alike.” 21 This advice pleased the king and the princes, and the king did as Memucan proposed. 22 He sent letters to all the royal provinces, to every province in its own script and to every people in its own language, that every man be master in his own household and speak according to the language of his people.’

    1. And then we see the example of a good woman, Esther, who is diligent in efforts, maintains her beauty for her yet-to-be husband, is honest and virtuous.

  10. 1. Satan is the father of (transgender nonsense, gay “gene”, gender fluidity)
    2. Liberalism, feminism, socialism, etc were promoted by the Rockefellers, rothchilds, both being part of the “council of 13” of the illuminati who serve lucifer and the antichrist.
    3. Morality has been displaced with social justice, as the new standard of righteousness. Aka= my “right” is more important than the actual moral implication of said “right”
    4. As for atheism essentially = satanism – “the greatest lie the devil created is to have believe he is t there”
    5. Abortion = ancient Baal child sacrifice, also abhorred by true Jews. No wonder so celebrated by left.

  11. You don’t need to believe in a god to see that women’s sexual freedom has turned into a social disaster. I keep telling these clueless progressive atheists that patriarchy as a secular world view makes sense, while theism doesn’t, because we can’t observe “supernatural” beings, but we can observe men and women in the here and now and we can draw scientific inferences about their differences.

    1. You’re missing out on something that the vast majority of people understand. You are handicapped.
      Perhaps observing and using scientific inferences is not good enough for the vast majority of people? Perhaps they do not share your fetish for scientific inferences. Perhaps you have placed science as a religion for yourself.
      Perhaps the vast majority of people understand that you cannot derive an “ought” (morality) from an “is” (science) and you are the simpleton who thinks that science can answer the most important questions the vast majority of people ask themselves. Perhaps you are the clueless one?

        1. Followed by Oprah’s take on the old Manichean heresy: “spiritual (whatever that means) good, material bad.”

  12. This is one of the best articles I’ve read. Very eye-opening. Though I’ve never been religious, I do respect religion and it’s articles like this that makes me want to learn more about it and what it teaches us.

    1. I like how he pointed out that Satan is a SJW who wanted Adam and Eve to be equal to God. Mind. Blown.

      1. What else should blow your mind is that if Feminist were honest with themselves, they would:
        (a) See that their very nature was part of the original curse God put on woman
        and more importantly
        (b) See that, just how everything Satan, the first SJW, explicitly promised them, where things God had already given em implicitly, all most men want to do was find a women worth the effort of giving the world to.
        Just saying, Feminism is just women being shortsighted.

  13. Look it’s simple in the bible God makes all the rules, he creates race, he makes one race superior. He create male and female he makes the male superior. He sets up rules on everything. The devil wants the opposite he wants one race, he wants males to be females, females to be males. Anyone who goes against Gods order works for the devil.

    1. American woman gonna mess your mind
      American woman, she gonna mess your mind
      Mm, American woman gonna mess your mind
      Mm, American woman gonna mess your mind
      Say A
      Say M
      Say E
      Say R
      Say I
      Say A
      N, mm
      American woman gonna mess your mind
      Mm, American woman gonna mess your mind
      Uh, American woman gonna mess your mind

    1. Reason? Against a movement that is 100% “Teh Feeelz!”? Have you ever, just once even, convinced a tried and true Leftist that one of his stock, hard and fast positions was in fact wrong using only reason?
      With action however, I agree.

      1. It is reasonable that you hit an irrational animal when it misbehaves, because you can’t reason with it, the same goes with SJWs, they are unintelligent, irrational, basically animals, and deserve to be put into their place, I don’t reason with a sack of rocks but I can tell an intelligent man how to behave and keep order.

        1. Agreed, sometimes you just have to know that people aren’t worth arguing with. But I find it extra funny they keep picking fights with the people who have all of the guns. The amount of self control normal people have is truly remarkable.

        2. It appears I misunderstood the gist of your post. I was thinking you meant you could sit down at a table with Leftists, hash out your differences and use reason to dissuade them from their chosen path. My bad.

        3. I’ve said the same on other boards. They keep trying to piss off 110+ million gun owners enough that we start dropping them like Thanksgiving Day turkeys from helicopters (cryptic reference). What can they possibly win by doing that? We outnumber the standing military nearly 100:1. Throw in the entire Chinese military (just as an example) and we still outnumber them 50:1. It makes zero sense, unless they really are that suicidal.

        4. This article is supposedly aimed towards rational males, and tries to use religion to justify the fight against leftist degeneration, and that is the mistake.

        5. We have a winner!
          “With God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly….”

        6. Heh. We are about the same age and used to be a few counties apart. It isn’t like there was much TV to choose from in those days.

    2. Unfortunately it would seem that the zealotry many oppose within “religion” is prevalent within this same degeneration. The result being that lesser churches or cults, if you will, form around a centralized idol whether it be Climate Change, Marxism, Science, Media, etc.
      The difference looks to be that central to traditional religions (excepting a few such as the Greeks) is an infallible god(s) figure and not the much more chaotic presence of human nature.
      If a thing is an “opiate of the masses” and likely even necessarily discriminatory/prejudiced then it is very important what its ethical and moralistic standards are. How does it define good and evil, how does it appeal to the emotional, even compassionate part, of the human psyche? As perhaps not everyone is capable of considering the rationality you mention, what other choice to combat one religious tendency than with another (when speaking en masse that is)?

      1. Although I agree religion is just a way for the weak minded to find comfort, trying to use christianity and Satan to prove your point will bring you nothing but laughter. You need to ridicule them, show what a piece of shit they are, heal the damage and damage the degenerates, not in the name of god.

        1. You do make a good point. I used to say I don’t need religion to tell me what is right from wrong with the fear of the wrath of God. I’m still not religious but am finding interest in learning the wisdom contained in the Bible.

    3. yes, reason, action and masculinity. The day men remember what it was to be men then they will change the world. Men being men is the only thing that ever has changed the world. If christianity (or any religion) does it for them than that is no different than the darks 30 blocks north of me getting cellphones bought for them with the tax money I spent.
      It is just another brand of socialism only you are replacing the government with the church. The fact that you like the values more only makes it more tempting.

  14. Religion’s are like sports teams. You root for the city you’re from, or cheer for the other team purely to spite relatives.

  15. I am not religious, but I do respect religion. All major religions serve as a guide for how to lead your life with some sort of punishment for leading a bad one. I believe that Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and Judaism were created by very intelligent men. The only problem is I can’t bring myself to believe things like a boat with two of every animal on it.

    1. If you believe a metaphysical infinite/personal omniscient power MIGHT HAVE created the entire universe, including humanity, then is a boat with animals on it really that much of a leap? I mean, come on.
      So you have chosen to NOT believe in the Abrahamic God because you can’t believe in a boat miracle. You have it backwards my friend. Logically, you must choose not to believe in miracles BECAUSE you don’t believe in God. Disbelieving God comes first–before disbelieving his miracles.
      So you have two options: 1) You must be open to God and miracles. Or 2) you must be a dogmatic “positive atheist”
      …which would make you a very strange specimen to go around “respecting all religion” and it would make the “men who invented religions” less than “very intelligent men”

      1. why do you want an organization to keep women in line. If men would man the fuck up and find their fucking nut sacks they wouldn’t need anyone to keep their women in line for them.

    2. Very intelligent men who knew how to control people into giving them social and political power through lies.
      Fuck religion.

  16. Few people appear capable of rational thought. Fewer still apply rational thought and logical analysis to everything they see. Frankly, there aren’t enough hours in the human life to create logically-based belief systems entirely from scratch.
    Because we are pattern-making creatures, we create generalizations and abstractions to simplify our lives. Only a select few individuals have the time and insight to create their own generalizations on ethics, morality, and philosophy.
    As a consequence, we are creatures of religion and metaphor. Both of these lay out basic patterns of behavior and philosophy that even children can follow. Thus, those of lower intelligence and/or intellectual rigor are educated in the proper ways to think and live.
    The myths of each culture reflect the philosophical tenets held by the elite. The Greek myths reflect the virtues of Honor, Courage, Strength, and Duty. The Egyptian myths reflect the virtues of piety, spiritual reflection, and right living. The Icelandic myths reflect the virtues of discipline, courage, strength, and harmony between the beast and spiritual natures. Even the classic American myths reflect the virtues of Honesty (Washington), Liberty (Patrick Henry), and Duty (Nathan Hale).
    What myths do we hold in our modern culture?
    Evolution (whether true or no) is a myth that reflects the “virtues” of Progress, Individualism, and the Struggle for Dominance.
    Socialism is a myth that reflects the “virtues” of equality, blind denial of the bestial nature, ignorance of history, and theft.
    Feminism is a myth that reflects the “virtues” of emasculation of men, masculine traits in women, transgenderism, sloth, gluttony, victimhood, and censorship.
    If we embrace the truth that religions WILL exist (for even within atheism there are common beliefs and myths held in common, whether arrived at rationally or embraced in a spirit of rebellion), we must ask ourselves which religion we wish to reign over us.

    1. Don’t drag the rest of us into your backwater. Atheism is a religion like abstinence is a sexual position.

        1. Being atheist has no bearing about how one feels about themselves. It is what they belive about the universe.
          The religious certainly don’t keep their beliefs to themselves.

        2. No one keeps their beliefs to themselves. Every time you talk, type, do, and otherwise interact with the world, you are superimposing your will on reality with various degrees of force.
          One thing I do think you have yet to consider is that whatever you believe about one thing affects your guiding philosophies that you use to conduct yourself.
          With that said.
          Do you really believe that those who believe they are made by chance do not let that affect they way they live?
          What governs the Hows and the Whys of their actions?
          Atheism is a religion, you just don’t see the holes it creates now that it takes away fundamental things like purpose. How can any atheist be against SJW when they have no laws they recognized as non-negotiable.

  17. The only problem I have with the premise of the article is that we forget where the SJWs learned the ropes.
    It was from moral outrage specialist religionists.
    The SJWs have the same pattern of rhetoric and outrage of the “moral majority” types from the 1970s – 1980s, the people who played heavy metal albums backwards and went about clearly suffering from “Bellicose Christian Syndrome”, everything having to pass the filter of “of the Lord” or not.
    And those people touted a very high standard of “being”, morally upright, who you hang with and what you say and how you say it.
    Does that look familiar to anybody?
    The only reason why it seems like the SJWs have some kind of Sith power is because the internet and Cathedral (gee, “Cathedral”, once more, pattern here?) signal boost them. Look at what Google did recently, with their panel of SJW bullies in their photo op as some panel on cyberbullying. It’s not that far different from seeing TV preachers who we know are carousers and scum standing by podiums being touted as “moral”.
    Imagine if the PMRC and Tipper Gore and that ilk had hashtags and social media in their day. (If you don’t know what I refer to, look it up).
    While there is much to be said for old religion, it’s the new “Yankeeistic” “we know what’s good for you” neurotic religionism, the “it’s not of the looooooord!!!!!” crowd, that gave birth to the SJWs. The Neocons finished the job: how many kids were raised in front of a TV where they saw cable news talk shows which, around 2001-2003 was little more than “Oh, you are not in favor of bombing Iraq? You must be an anti-Semite!!!!”. Much of what the millennial SJWs have learned came from the Neocons, who were Trotskyists in their founding. They just figured out how to deploy the tactics of religionists.

  18. Don’t necessarily need religion, just need people to start taking a stand, en masse. People need to be vocal and refuse to be silenced for fear of being called misogynistic, racist, homophobic etc.
    Break the invisible chains and spit out the gag. When only one person does this they will make an example out of him. We must be ready to always stand up for those that get attacked by the PC jackals.
    Don’t be afraid to voice the truth, online AND in the real world. The only way this gets fixed is by taking a stand.

  19. What I’ve come to believe regarding religion and both the fanatics and fanatical periods such as the Spanish Inquisition is that its not the religion per se, its a certain kind of people, that exist everywhere irregardless of race or sex etc, that are the real cause behind this. The same kind of people who several centuries ago committed the inquisition are in fact the today’s sjw’s. This is revealing, since the sjw’s hate religion, but in reality, and this is key, at the fundamental/doctrinal level i.e. what Jesus actually did and said, DOES NOT support and even engender this kind of behavior. Christ, for instance, would have never supported and would have openly condoned inquisitions or religious wars et al. If only we all could be more like him…because its the kind of person that we all know who is susceptible to fanaticism that goes nuts and they’ll use any medium such as religion or political ideologies to act out their fanatics. In fact, there are plenty of them among the atheists – trying to remove crosses from veterans graves and such. That’s why the “progressive” stack is leading us astray. Indeed, we can be described by race, sex, “orientation” etc, but, its hardly the matrix to confront the real roots of evil. As we are all seeing, there are plenty of “victims” out there waving the banner of “woe is me I’m oppressed” who are incredibly intolerant and oppressive to others.

    1. Indeed. I’ve always wondered what is so terrible about having a cross displayed out in public or having the word God in the pledge of allegiance. If the SJW’s are so tolerant, then these symbols of other people’s religious beliefs should not bother them.
      I’m not Catholic, but many of my friends are. I attend their masses for a wedding or funeral or baptism or whatever and I go along with what they’re doing simply out of respect. They were kind enough to invite me to join them in their church and I do not find any of their practice offensive.

      1. I’ve been to Pentecostal weddings and Sweet 15s and I find it weird and wacky how they don’t drink and listen to modern music at their parties and yet they still seem to have a good time. And fortunately, for once, I felt at ease since they were too busy having fun to try to convert me.

      2. because Christanity whether youpratice or not is the bais for western civilization it formed our art our music are basic morality andthis reprsents a threat to them

        1. Aristophanes would agree but, ya know, he was dead before christ was born.
          Christianity has had a huge impact and, in turn, was impacted by shit before it. It is a never ending cycle that goes back long, long long before jesus had his foreskin lopped off.
          I don’t find it offensive to put a cross anywhere, or a jewish star or a muslim shit. I don’t care what brand you like best. What bothers me is government interference in just about fucking anything.
          When the government puts a cross on a federal building they are making a claim about where they stand on something. I don’t want to know where the federal government stands on any moral, philosophical or ethical issue. Allowing government to take part in religion is just as bad for us as allowing religion to take part in government.
          It was wise for the founders to see this. They were trying as best they can to limit the powers of the government over its citizenry. This was a really fucking good idea.

        2. I tend to disagree with you.
          Reading about the bizantine empire, I’m even more and more a fan of Caesero-Papism.

        3. I know you are. Do you think Eugen Fink is? What about Martin Buber? There is more than one way to skin a cat

        4. Oh please. In real life on a real chessboard, I would annihilate your nihilist little person while eating saucisson. It’s just that I can’t focus on screens.
          Tell me when you want to fall even further in the giant trap I’m building for you through my apparent defeats, trap from which you don’t even suspect how far and how multidimentional its ramifications are going.

        5. Ha! What is his from? The Big Book of French Delisions: How To Claim Victory From Utter Defear?
          Maybe later. Heading to gym now. But I’ll be him all day

        6. Man, that was a really really badly written comment, even from my point of view. You should be jailed for this.

      1. whether this is true or not (plot spoiler it’s not) this isn’t a valid source. You can’t link to idioticweakwilledmoronswhoneedtoputothersdowntomakeupfortheirowninadequecies.com to prove anything. This is the very definition of conformation bias. You sitting around surfing the web until you find something that makes you feel like a special snowflake. And you found it.
        This is the problem men are supposed to be fighting against, not doing the same fucking thing from a different angle.

        1. No it is not. I’ve been reading Vox Day for a long time, long before this article was published. And I read him very specifically because he has a very different and interesting take on things which has resulted in me changed my opinion many times. So no, I didn’t go searching for something to source my claim, and I don’t only read him because he agrees with me.
          You, on the other hand, are a random person on the internet making historical claims without any source or justification whatsoever. Your failure does not even rise to confirmation bias, it’s that bad.

  20. SJW ideology does link back to ancient religion; not always explicitly but it’s there under the surface. Blavatsky praised the satanic principle and Alice Bailey the luciferian, the target being abrahamic religion and the object being to restore sexual / gender ‘balance’ something which nearly always translates to the principle of carnality and reification of desire.

  21. Great points. I am starting to wonder if the is a link between the evil of the biblical Jezebel who, I believe, sacrificed children to Baal and the ideology of the magazine Jezebel.
    Notice how feminists embrace demonic entities such as Lilith ?

  22. Uh huh. This about sounds similar to romancing about living in the Medieval Era where you assume you’ll be living amongst the nobility and not be some lowly peasant. By the same token if you’re not a ruler under traditional Biblical society then chances are you’re a peasant or slave and we all know the Bible devotes a piece on how to treat your slaves.

  23. To me, SJW mental retardation IS a religion. It makes as much logical sense as any religion. Instead of logic or facts, SJWs use feelings and unproven statements. You have to use suspension of disbelief to believe any of the SJW shit, just like in believing any religion. Also, SJWs act like a cult, and just like in certain religions, dangerous fanaticism is rampant.

      1. Feminism came from puritanism. Its was and is still all about controlling man’s vices; boning, boozing, gambling, rowdy behavior… Also the civil rights movement where all originally western christian puritans. MLK hated rock’n roll. There is a reason why the countries with the most SJWs are all also evangelical christian countries. Evangelicals pedastalize women and demonize men.

    1. @LePatriote 1980. The number of logical fallacies in your short paragraph, as well as those that followed you, is truly impressive. I stopped counting at ten because I got bored. Also, studying logical fallacies for me is like eating Lays potato chips. I can’t eat just one so if I don’t force myself to stop I’ll waste the entire day enjoying myself. Mustn’t have that! The world needs me to keep it spinning.
      Try it yourself. It’s good practice. Reread your paragraph, and the ones that replied to you, and see how many logical fallacies you can identify. When you get to ten you’ll realize that what you said was actual non-sense. Happy Learning!

  24. It’s a common conservative mistake to assume that because liberals/SJWs attack religion, that religion must be a threat to them, and therefore, religion is the answer. Nothing could be further from the truth.
    Liberals attack religion, not because it’s a threat, but because it’s an easy target. Religion is a crutch for the weak-minded(Instead of defending your position with logic, you appeal to an imaginary authority figure and those claiming to represent him). It’s not surprising then, that when debating a conservative, liberals will always try to grab and pull out his crutch from under him.
    If liberals were truly threatened by religion, they’d try to ignore it, like they do with other secular right-wing philosophies such as Objectivism.

    1. I’m interested in knowing why liberals keep such a hands-off approach to Islam, if you care to share. They have no problem attacking any form of Christianity, but touch Islam and one is called a bigot and an Islamophobe.
      The exception to this is when liberals compare the ideas of conservatism to Sharia law. Somehow it is fair game when taking a swipe at conservatives. Why, when liberals urge us to accept those who practice Sharia law, do they attack conservatives by comparing them to those who practice Sharia law?

      1. My take on that is, you’re welcome to come if you’re Muslim, but don’t think of applying Sharia law here.

      2. Good question. I believe there’s three reasons for the double standard:
        1. Demographics. Most Muslims tend to be brown and/or poor. Criticizing them would go against the Left’s narrative that rich white men are the cause of the world’s problems.
        2. Common ground. Both liberalism and Islam are authoritarian ideologies that hate Western civilization.
        3. Just plain-old fear. Islam is extremely violent, even when you compare it to other violent religions. No surprise then that most people, let alone liberals, would be hesitant to criticize it.

  25. “The Egyptians said there was the way of Thoth or the “way downward.””
    And there was Ma’at, the way upward, which was symbolized by a goddess.
    I find the pre-Abrahamic traditions of Hinduism have the perfect, divine feminine-divine masculine balance. Every goddess has her consort, a god, who stands in his own glory, while simultaneously working with her and together they form a Moity, a Divine Couple. Very rarely in Hinduism will you find a single, unmarried god or goddess.
    Rather than patriarchy or matriarchy, the order is familyarchy and the best archetypes for that are married gods and goddesses.

  26. Outfreakingstanding.
    Amen and amen and amen.
    Addition: everyone here needs to watch Pacino in “The Devil’s Advocate”. He explains why he’s so much better than God the Control Freak: “I let you do what you want. He’s the one with ‘thou shalt this’ and ‘thou shalt not that’. I treat you like a grown up!” or words to that effect.

  27. Quote:A small group of fanatics has risen. They are so extreme, so dangerous,
    and so removed from reality that the entire Western world is at stake.
    They just follow the teaching of their idol. The psychopathic mass murderer of Christian Leon Trotsky a.k.a. Lew Bronstein….Not convinced ?? Read the teaching of this spawn of SATAN taught about 80 or more years ago… This is the results of his followers implementing his teaching upon our World !
    IMHO Stalin should be nominated posthumously for the NOBEL Peace Prize for having eliminated that spawn of Satan & dispatched him to his master…

    1. Awesome observation. For supposedly being atheists, Commies did have their idols. Lenin is still displayed in death. That says a lot.

      1. Judeo-Bolsheviks atheists ?? You can find on google the number of Christian Churches & Mosques destroyed by the Judeo-Bolsheviks, but can you quote me the number of synagogues destroyed by the Judeo-Bolsheviks ??
        To further your research in to this topic I recommend that you read Kerry Bolton book “Stalin The enduring legacy”..
        You can find it on the net….I guarantee that after reading it, your view on today’s world will be not the same as it is today…

  28. The 21 century is definelty in need of religion. no one in their right mind could denied that.

      1. Yep. But it works in a sense that religious society are usually patriarchal, henceforth there is law and order and things are kept in check.

  29. Religion is good for you, until you’re not allowed to drink eat and be merry. Except those on top, of course, right Emir Al Baghdadi?

  30. The government and religion are at war with each other. It is literally one dogma trying to eat the other. Only one can be right “because I said so”.

  31. Social Justice is a component, it is not a key structure. As a phenomena, it is a more recent development designed to shut down dissent using obvious lowest-common-denominator appeals.
    What must be recognized is what I call the ‘Cult of Progress’. This is the religious motivation behind the left, and it has been the same motivation that has existed since their inception during the French Revolution and the ‘Enlightenment’. This is a religion that performs all of the classical functions of other religions, but in a highly unstable and constantly shifting way. Its mission is to usurp all Traditional religions while feigning irreligiosity, hence why ‘secularism’ is a very clever ruse.
    The Cult of Progress itself is what you might call the ‘occult motivator’ of things like Social Justice. It’s the unseen hand. It has no representatives, and its priests have no idea that they are following a religion at all.
    To claim this religion is satanic is interesting, and I have considered it myself. If one looks at religions of ancient times where demonic entities were worshiped (Moloch for example), you find abominable creeds and practices, but still definite traditions and dogmas. What are we to make of the first religion in history with absolutely nothing in the way of revelation or doctrine? The Cult of Progress can be anything. It can be a hammer and sickle or a swastika just as easily as it can be a rainbow flag. This is astonishingly unique, and perhaps you are correct in diagnosing its spiritual cause as being that astonishingly unique character of the disgraced first among angels, first among deceivers I might add.
    Make no mistake, there is absolutely zero escape from religion. If you fall for atheism, secularism, humanism, rationalism etc. you are merely falling for the Cult of Progress. In a left wing society, if you aren’t following a Traditional religion, then you are by default following theirs.
    The only question that matters in a society is which religion is being implemented, and right now your assessment of just how evil this cult being foisted upon us all by force is, seems most accurate. The Slavs seem to be waking up to this, but I fear the average Westerner may be too decadent and corrupt in the spirit.

    1. Great points. I think you are right. All these evil movements in history follow a remarkably similar path, but I don’t think there is some unseen conspiracy group behind it. I think they are all simply inspired by the same spiritual being, the devil. Kind of like Faust. And it will do us well to study the nature of this Cult of Progress.

  32. SJ, feminism, homosexuality, climate change, open borders etc.
    ALL of it is inherently satanic.
    Well said!

  33. Religion is just as magical thinking as the “i’m offended so I’m powerful” SJW culture. Bother are arguments from pure emotion with zero supporting evidence.

    1. Two sides of the same coin… All about using magic “moral” reasons to supress manly desires: sex, violence, creativity, mind expansion, competition, art, ect…

        1. Nope the impulse to create and invent and conquer things has made the world a much better place.

        2. Of course it has! Testosterone could legitimately be called the Creation hormone. It could also be called the Destroyer hormone. Impulse control is one of the first things a boy toddler needs to be taught. The key is to do that while simultaneously encouraging his creative energy.
          My point is that it is a myth that alpha is always good. In fact, it could be argued that alphas fuck things up more than they create. In fact, I might argue that alphas are ultimately destructive, both to themselves and to the culture at large. IF their energy is not harnessed and directed constructively.

    2. Yeeaahhhhh. Right. After all, what did Socrates, Aristotle, Plaro, Thomas Aquinas, Isaac Newton, Galileo, Copernicus, Voltaire, Locke, Kepler, Bacon, Pascal, Pastuer, Kant, Jefferson, et al , know about Evidence? Ignorant savages all!
      Thank God the world has the likes of you to show us the way.

  34. relgion is neccsary because the vast majority of people lack the abilty to behave morrally without outside pressure. ask yourself why feminists marxist ect constantly attack relgion? because it is the foundation of civilization.

  35. This article may or may not contain truth, but I can’t tell because the rhetoric is so thick! It feels like my entire mouth has been stuffed full of peanut butter and the author is demanding I swallow it without question!
    I know its hard to consistently produce high quality articles, but every article RoK publishes like this weakens its brand. It’s not that the article was wrong or even badly written (it was). It’s that it lacks any kind of structural or intellectual rigor. I get the impression the author had just finished reading these various books he poorly cites, and before he’s had a chance to really absorb and understand what he’s read and very excited about, he jumps on his computer and spits out this article.
    Also, he makes reference to concepts unique to his own religious background, I think, but doesn’t explain them because he’s, perhaps, concerned if he reveals his background it will reduce his credibility. Well, not talking about his own religious background at all reduced his credibility since it is essential to his argument.
    I hope this article doesn’t represent a new or continuing direction for RoK! We need articles with strong dialectical and polemical reasoning, not emotion-laden rhetoric. Why? Because we are men and it’s how we roll!

    1. You can find my religious background an inch and a half below my name, next to the title, Tom. I have not seen this kind of discussion in Mormon circles, though in the 60’s communism was sometimes compared to Satan’s “plan.” Everything you read was out of my own head.
      I regret that you did not find the article polemic enough. I’ll try to better control my emotions in the future.

      1. It was not your emotion that was the challenge. It was that your reasoning and the structuring of your article did not do justice to your passion.
        I saw my own tendencies when “writing under the influence” in your article. You did not take the time to lay out the conceptual framework of your ideas nor define the terms you should have assumed your readers likely might not know.
        Always be aware of readers who might not naturally agree with you but are not your adversaries. There are a lot of readers like that on RoK and they will benefit from your work if you take them into consideration. I’m not saying cater to atheists or nihilists. But give them a reason to think you’re not just preaching to the choir.
        Your thesis may be true. I don’t know. Take it up again when you have thought of it some more and looked at it from many different angles.
        When Rene Decartes was going to publish his key idea of, “I think, therefore I am,” I forget the title of the book offhand, he first sent it around to respected philosophers and asked for their objections. He then incorporated their objections and his answers into his book. Always write with an ear listening to your critics and answer them before they speak.
        But with just one ear. Don’t obsess over them. Keep studying. You may yet convince me you’re right.

        1. This is a complex issue that I am only beginning to discover, and you are right there is a lot more research I need to do. One reason I am drawn to write for ROK is because of the excellent commenters who always have something important to add. I also give a keen ear to critics who think differently in their articles. This is just one piece of the larger issue I am currently considering, and I am still figuring it all out. But it was a realization that was important to me and I was very excited to get it out there. I see a continuous vein in today’s degenerate culture of social justice and feminism with ancient and even primordial evil. A modern day book “Faust” would star a feminist politician. How that fits in with contemporary movements against patriarchy and efforts against masculinity, and what we need to do about it, still needs more exploration. I will continue to study this through, and toss it around other circles to see what they think. And I do appreciate your criticism.

        2. Thank you for taking my criticism in the spirit it was intended. I write and often speak publicly on different cultural matters but I have not yet submitted an article to RoK because when I do I want it to be something that truly advances our understanding of Red Pill thinkibg and doing in a Blue Pill world.
          You boldly jumped in, ready, fire, aim!
          Good for you.

  36. Why does this website keep telling men to get into fucking Christianity. That shit is pure poison, I got into Christianity because of red pill. It makes you a self loathing, emasculated, self hating sinner. The church I went do did have traditional women who wore long dresses in church and stayed silent. But that part is not worth having to follow a mentally ill poison religion.

    1. The thought of hell and repentance is a sick idea. In no way does this promote mental health. Listen, we can raise our daughters to be virtuous and non trashy with out telling them to go to hell, secular science and medicine points towards chastity and holding sexuality as something very important. If anything, the whole reason SJWism became so popular is because sexually repressed little girls never got to have a balanced sexual life, so now it is in chaos and women are degenerates.

      1. Hell is punishment for turning away from God and evil.
        Eternal hellfire.
        It’s consistent with his love for us and giving us free will.
        Fags like you don’t believe in cause and effect, salvation and punishment. It’s that easy

    2. Most mainstream churches are very much Leftist. Depending on where you go, church can turn you into a white knight mangina. I’m an unbeliever and enjoy this site, but it does appear to be taking more of a Christian angle lately. Religious articles used to be more rare. I wonder if it has to do with the Muslim invasion in Europe.

      1. Joos infiltrated all of it.
        From Seminaries to bible schools. Every bible today, all 50 different versions of them, (chaos) are edited by the council of rabbis before print and publishing

  37. Excellent article. I have realized this for some time. But the hatred of God in our society, even among men, is so deep and pervasive, I don’t know if God can save us this time. Take Aaron (the old captain) for example; he can’t stand Christians yet Christianity is our only hope. Until men come to understand this, there is no hope.

  38. Religions are great for women and idiots, as they believe all kinda shams. But men should be better

    1. Right. Men should know better than to believe in religion.
      Men like Socrates, Aristotle, Plato, Moses, Joshua, Caleb, Gideon, David, Solomon, Maimonides, Hillel, Jesus. Saints like Paul, Peter, Thomas, Matthew, Stephen, Jude, Phillip, Patrick, Aquinas, Augustine. Scientists like Newton, Galileo, Kepler, Locke, Bacon. Statesmen like Washington, Madison, Jefferson, Lincoln, Davis, Reagan. Generals like Washington, Lee, MacArthur, Eisenhower, Bradley. . .ad infinitum.
      For every one atheist man of any accomplishment you can name, I can name 100 outstanding men who were believers.
      If you are going to argue from authority, you have NO case.

      1. certainly don’t need to argue from authority. Faith simply isn’t an adequate technique for acquiring information. That’s why science isn’t just people making stuff up.

        1. Define your terms. What do you mean by “faith”. How does your definition compare to the use of the word by all those men I mentioned? My guess is you have no idea what the word “faith” means as it is used by intelligent inquirers.
          Then, once you’ve done that, go read some Aquinas, some Augustine, some Lewis. No, start with Lewis. You won’t stand a chance of understanding Aquinas or Augustine. By some I mean a lot. Then read some Pascal. Some Socrates. Read Aristotle. Bacon, the father of the scientific method, was a believer. Read what he thought about God and religion.
          The arrogance of the atheist always amazes me. You act like the very act of questioning authorities was invented the first time you told your mommy, “No”.
          Science has nothing directly to say about the existence of God because God is not a physical object. Yet the anthropic principle points us in direction of undeniable design, ergo, the existence of a designer: God. This conclusion cannot be denied, only resisted. Even Bertrand Russell admitted that the argument from design was the strongest of all “proofs” for the existence of God.
          *Personally, I like the argument from Cause and Effect best*
          But within our consciousness, God exists like water to a fish in a world without awareness of the surface. For 99% of people throughout history God is a conscious reality they can no more deny than they can deny their own existence. “I think, therefore God exists.” Which is not to say God is product of our minds, but as the creator of our minds His reality is as real and undeniable as our own. We must be taught to disbelieve in His reality. Like the old joke about the little boy who asked his atheist parents, “Mom and dad, do you think God knows we don’t believe in Him?”
          Do some reading. Stop believing in your own brilliance and look to what men who were smarter than you had to say about God. You don’t have to believe them, but honesty requires you to know what they said and consider it.

        2. No, you are not listening. I said, Define your terms. The first step in any rational discussion. You appear to be using an unaccepted definition of faith. A definition which no one I know of uses.
          So, to begin, define your term. What do you mean by the word, “faith”?

        3. No, actually it demonstrates you are an asshat, that you are so ignorant that you do not know that words have different meaning in different contexts.
          Your failure to engage with me in legitimate debate demonstrates you are a coward as well as a moron, as nearly all internet atheists Trolls are. You lose every engagement with any theist with an IQ above 100.
          All you are capable of doing is shitting all over the comment section of popular websites. Personally, I don’t see what you get out if it.

        4. Jesus wants you to have faith him. He doesn’t prove himself to you. God gave man a choice to have faith In Jesus. You can pretend you don’t know what faith means if you like.

        5. Are you a SJW? You seem to be. We know you’re a Troll.
          You make bombastic statements without proof or evidence. Then, when you are called on it you offer no intelligent response. You are a Troll.
          But are you an SJW? Let’s see.
          You lie, you Doubledown, and you project.
          Yep! You’re also an SJW.
          You don’t deserve my attention or any more response.

        6. So you believe only liberals can be SJWs? You think there are no SJWs on the right?
          It could be argued that anyone demanding group protection for an irrational position is a SJW.
          But perhaps not. Perhaps I am stretching the definition. I’ll have to think more about it.
          However, your phoney wishing of me peace just REEKS of mealy-mouthed SJW.

        7. That’s it exactly. You’re not getting anymore rational engagement. Once I’ve identified you as a Troll I’m just going to spend my time mocking and insulting you for your ignorance and your dishonesty.

      2. Moses, Joshua, Caleb, Gideon, David, Solomon . . . Jesus

        Mythological figures don’t count. I have my doubts about Paul and Peter as well.

        1. And there is no way you could call Socrates, Aristotle or Plato religious men.
          I will give him Aquinas and augustine. Scientists lie newton and Galileo and the rest lived in a time where they weren’t allowed to believe anything other. confession by sword point. Literally. As for what some generals think on theology? That matters about as much to me as what theologians and philosophers think about warfare.

        2. Everyone has a religion. The fallen, natural man is a fool who’s a slave to his own sins and lusts. Parading his ignorance about things he doesn’t understand falls in that category.

        3. Total judaized bs
          Civilization thrived and was far more advanced then vs today unless you like your cable Talmudvision programming

        4. BHill: Do you remember when a muslim terrorist shot up a night club full of faggots and no one blamed muslims, faggots or general social permissiveness but rather they all blamed “toxic masculinity” and the guns? Remember how we were all saying how they are fucking morons who are just going to do whatever they can to get the narrative to what they want because that is the way they cover their weaknesses and general faggary and that they try to manipulate the every single thing to fit their one absurd belief?
          That is EXACTLY what you do here. I don’t know if a couple of rabbis double teamed your sister while you sat in the closet and watched, but whatever it is you are no different than the SJW’s and faggots and arabs and other weak ass, low IQ, uninformed, conformation bias shit heads. You are just bitching and whining about something different.
          Do me a favor, save it for someone who doesn’t see right the fuck through you. I can’t suffer stupidity and when it comes bundled with arrogance and reaction formation it is totally unacceptable.
          Later homo.

        5. Nothing mythological about any of them. They all acted in history. Archeology validates the events they lived. They were historic figures, not myths. Even and especially Jesus.
          The oral histories and traditions of both Jews and Catholics use the names of real persons to trace the genealogy of their teachers. With Catholics this is called apostolic succession and this tradition is unbroken.
          If you really want to know the validity of the histories of these people you’re going to have to study harder.

        6. Where would we be without Joos?
          No communism, feminism, usury, degeneracy, gay marriage, transgenders, interracial marriage, Israel, wars or porn.
          Oy gevalt

        7. I am not aware of a single historian who denies any one of these men existed or that the records we have of them are largely accurate.
          The fact that you consider your arrogant and presumptuous statement an actual argument demonstrates how unread and ill-informed you are. You don’t even understand when a historical fact or claim is accepted as proven.
          Someone announcing himself as “advancedatheist” is the picturebook definition of the Dunning-Krueger Effect.

    2. Real men, Christian men, waged crusades to reclaim stolen land in the Middle East, evicted Joos and Muslims trying to destroy and occupy Europe via the inquisition.
      You only wish you had 1/10th the testosterone they did.

  39. Christianity doesn’t make sense even given its own assumptions. “Going to heaven” doesn’t solve anything if you can rebel against god in heaven, and orthodox christian theology states explicitly that some of god’s creatures have already done this.
    If this huge of a breach in god’s security happened at the very beginning, then what keeps it from happening again and again? The official christian version of events makes god look careless, incompetent or otherwise less than all-powerful.

    1. It is the problem of free will.
      In Orthodox Christianity there is the doctrine of ‘synergy’ (συνεργός, meaning working together), which says that man has the freedom to, and must if he wants to be saved, choose to accept and work with the grace of God. It is analogous to a drowning man: God from the ship throws a rope to a drowning man, pulls him up, saving him; and the man, if he wants to be saved, must hold on tightly to the rope; explaining both that salvation is a gift from God and man cannot save himself, and that man must work with God in the process of salvation.

      1. Great point. The only way we can progress toward exaltation is to be put in a condition of free will where we can rebel against God. Can a son grow into a man if the father is so overbearing that he can’t make choices for himself? The alternative, an overbearing father, is social justice.

    2. christianity makes perfect sense if it is looked at in context. It is a religion founded by repressed jews who sought to undermine the earthly strength that was repressing them. This resentment and a slave uprising leads to the slaves recreating the values and the masters being pushed down. Eventually strength is dismissed as evil and a cuckold nature of weakness grows. It displays itself as strength while it mimics the roman empire, but that is out of spite which is just a nasty form a weakness. Enter the modern age. Everything is permissible. See. Christianity makes perfect sense.

      1. Nietzsche seems to have had a rather idealised / romanticised view of Germanic warriors whose idea of a good time might well include raping, torturing, and murdering if that’s what their lust for life required of them. As examplars of all that is life-affirming and anti-repressive there has always been something troubling about that, even if it may be unfair to blame Nietzsche for the Nazis.
        Of course, there’s also more than one possible conception of repression I imagine. Is Nietzsche talking about the same thing as Freud in essence? I do think there was a kabbalistic origin to some of Freud’s ideas, whereby one could see repression in the Freudian sense as relating to the fundamental sexual energy force of the universe? That could be wrong, but it’s possibly what Jung distanced himself from. Where would Nietzsche have stood on the issue? I just don’t see Nietzsche admitting that he ever had repressed desires to sleep with his mother, even if the God is dead idea fits quite nicely with the Oedipal idea of murdering one’s father.

        1. I would say, mobius, with due respect, that your initial ideal of a romanticized view of Germanic Warriors in Nietzsche is incorrect.
          One of the biggest problems with Freddy N is that he is super easy to read while, simultaneously, being almost impossible to understand….especially without a huge broader context. It is why he is so often quoted. You can prove just about anything with a Nietzsche quote and why I often caution, both here and elsewhere, prudence when invoking big N.
          Nietzsche praises to Warrior ethic for its place in history while vilifying it as it turns out. He absolutely detests any form of Nationalism — most especially germanic nationalism –and while he frequently uses war as an analogy and metaphor he talks about war in the way Heraclitus thought of war which was an ontological and ecstatic movement of forces and not men on a battlefield.
          The is another problem with Nietzsche. He starts off as a very serious a studious philologist and philosopher but goes in a route of artistic creation. His method of philosophy is through metaphor very often and because of this it is very easy to read in a superficial way.
          This isn’t the fault of the reader. Nietzsche prefaces Zarathustra with “A Book For All And None” He was an ultra elitist and was writing for the evolved people of a future age. To be blunt, he was trying to be esoteric like his pre-socratic heroes. He wasn’t writing, like Kant or Hegel or Leibniz or Spinoza, in such a way as to try to get his point across as clearly as the subject matter would allow. He was specifically trying to be obscure and in his obscurity he was mirroring an obscurity that lives in the world around us.
          Nietzsche’s repression is, imo, very different from Freuds.Repression isn’t even the right word. The German is Verhexung and is better translated as sublimation. But even that word brings up more questions than answers.
          For freud the verhexung is ideated in such a way as that sublimation is expressed as neurosis but in Nietzsche the sublimated is expressed through the master drive, the Will.
          To compare Will to Neurosis is no comparison at all so I would say to answer your question, no…when you peel apart the onion and all the secondary bullshit and look at the primary sources, Freud and Nietzsche were using the same words at times, but with much different meanings.
          The problem is that they were both trying to separate themselves from the system thinking of people like kant. Kant wouldn’t take a shit without writing 20 pages explaining what he meant by taking a shit (I have literally read hundreds of pages he wrote on his own feces) so when he would say a word like verhexung for the first time in a book it would be followed by a lengthy explanation of what exactly he meant when he was using this word and he would expect the reader to keep this definition in mind throughout the reading.
          After a few nasty wars Europeans were a little more messy, a little less structured. Nietzsche and Freud were not system makers it wasn’t, if you will, the style of the day. This is good because it helps them better capture a wide range of things in a small amount of words (comparatively) but is bad because it leads to very easy to make mistakes.

        2. I am not suggesting Nietzsche was a german nationalist let alone a proto-nazi, and clearly his embrace by people like Herzl might suggest the opposite, but he does idealise strength over weakness, and the kind of aristocratic warrior ethic that embraces the force of life without limit rather than seeking to repress or constrain that force through a “false consciousness” that might disguise resentment or the alien values of “the weak” seeking to constrain “the strong” (i.e. as with his distaste for Christianity). It’s not hard to see how the notion of the superman might have got out of hand though, however much that may (or may not) reflect a misreading of Nietzsche – and why shouldn’t he be misread, or (mis-)interpreted after all?
          Regarding his move from dry philosophy towards “artistic creation’ – while this may be the case, when people like Nehamas adjudge ideas like the eternal return as primarily literary in nature it seems to me to take some of their force away from as applied ethical / aesthetic philosophy. Again there seems to be an attempt to coddle Nietzsche from his legacy and the full force of his words – (mis-)reading is a part of reading isn’t it, and that (mis-)reading is a part of the tragedy of the twentieth century: should we really absolve him completely for responsibility for that legacy?
          I respect your scholar’s take on the contrast between Nietzsche’s & Freud’s Repression, but at a prima facie level these are quite closely related ideas, that surely need to be compared closely: a two second google search came up with the following from the BMJ for example:
          “Results: Concepts of Nietzsche which are similar to those of Freud include (a) the concept of the unconscious mind; (b) the idea that repression pushes unacceptable feelings and thoughts into the unconscious and thus makes the individual emotionally more comfortable and effective; (c) the conception that repressed emotions and instinctual drives later are expressed in disguised ways (for example, hostile feelings and ideas may be expressed as altruistic sentiments and acts); (d) the concept of dreams as complex, symbolic “illusions of illusions” and dreaming itself as a cathartic process which has healthy properties; and (e) the suggestion that the projection of hostile, unconscious feelings onto others, who are then perceived as persecutors of the individual, is the basis of paranoid thinking. Some of Freud’s basic terms are identical to those used by Nietzsche
          Apparently Freud didn’t acknowledge either the influence of Nietzsche, or the Kabbala (Sanford Drob addresses the possible influence of the latter on both Freud & Derrida) yet however different they may be it’s quite possible that there is a degree of genealogy even if it isn’t direct.
          When you say that “For freud the verhexung is ideated in such a way as that sublimation is expressed as neurosis but in Nietzsche the sublimated is expressed through the master drive, the Will” and that to compare “Will to Neurosis” is no comparison at all, I think you are glossing over the fact that drives and the conflict between drives are common to both Nietzsche and Freud. They may address the issues differently, but one might wonder whether they are not proceeding from a similar kind of ontology, even if Freud’s focus is explicitly upon the repression of libidinal energy and subsequent pathology / sublimation etc.
          Will as a master drive, may not be a Freudian idea, but if pathology arises because of conflict or repression of drives one could argue that their respective Weltanschauung are compatible, but that they simply had rather different preoccupations

      2. Ignorant critique. If you want to level contemptible speech at Christianity, at least learn the difference between Jews, Israelites, and Judahites. “Jews” are the antithesis of Christians and “Jews” definitely didn’t start Christianity.

        1. Uh huh. Go back to sites which confirm your confirmation bias. I can actually hear your low IQ, slack jaw mouth breathing through your typing.

      3. This doesn’t make sense at all.
        I hope that you’re not designing the romans as the “earthly strength”that they sought to undermine, because what set apart the Christians from the Jews is that they acknowledged the fairness of the Romans, and did not revolt nor disobey until they were ordered to go against their beliefs.
        . “This resentment and a slave uprising leads to the slaves recreating the values and the masters being pushed down.”
        This nietschzean crap can only be believed if one has a poor knowledge of Christianity, and I’m starting to suspect that it was his case and also yours, with all due respect.

        1. Respect taken. That said, the nietzschean crap makes perfect sense when you stand back from faith and diagnose the issue of Christianity in the west which I suspect you are unable to do.
          Our impasse is well stated

    3. I know this will cause debate among believers, but the Bible does not teach “fallen angels”, “devils”, or “demons”. Space is too short to go into great detail, but if one is interested it can easily be proven studying the Bible with a Hebrew and Greek lexicon/concordance. Here’s even a secular witness to this:

      1. This was great. I have seen it before. I am fascinated with the devil on a personal level. A good post.

    4. You can’t rebel against God in heaven, you fool.
      You either attain salvation or eternal Hellfire
      But keep pimping the Protocols of Zion #14

  40. Religion sounds a lot like a program which holds frame for men who can’t hold it themselves. No thanks. I got this

    1. Oh frack off. Your religion is nihilism and your temple is your new yorkian appartment. Your four cardinal virtues are apathy, selfishness, greed, and snobbery.
      Your three theologal virtues are narcissism, hedonism and pedantism.
      Your sacrements are weightlifting, book reading and fornication.
      You religious nutjob.

      1. I said as much about three posts down. You have diagnosed me fairly well and I have never denied the importance of religion, whatever that religion may be

      2. Two things though. I don’t call it fornication, too much of your brand of shame involved. That and you missed disgust.

        1. How do you call it then ? Fornication is a cool word, used by traditional Priests and Mike Tyson.
          I remember that sentence of yours :
          “The most disgusting thing a women can do is letting me frack her” Lolknee.

        2. I love Mike Tyson but I am not looking to him for vocabulary. I’ll need to think of a good word

    2. Humanism is quite possibly the oldest and most widespread religion of all–from the garden, to Babel and onward–you are a poster child and completely unaware.

      1. Trying to tell me what I am unaware of is like giving arnold lifting tips dude. Back up and realize that you are “some guy on the Internet” before assuming my level of cognitive awareness

    3. Men Can’t hold it for themselves. Nitwit
      Or Maybe you can give us an example of a time when they could with or without it and kept Joos in line

      1. You are living in a fantasy world where you think you are special and people are out to get you: just like feminists and faggots. As far as I am concerned there is no difference between you and all the homos I detest at the parade looking for attention. Go peddle elsewhere.

        1. News flash, McFly.
          People Are out to get me, you and others
          IRS and thought police ADL and splc who monitor the net.
          200 years ago they were rightfully kept in walked caged ghettos to keep mankind safe. It was religious leaders that protected their flock and humanity. And sodomites only exist and have special protection due to said groups. 10 yes ago they were hanged in Christian lands.
          Stick that in your pipe and go watch Seinfeld reruns now Moishe

  41. Social Justice gets its power from the state. The state is satanic.
    Don’t believe that? Watch the opening ceremony for that new Swiss tunnel.

    1. well that’s just the swiss state though. I watched that. It was seriously bizarre, however the pretext at least was that there were some local legends involving the devil. It probably isn’t a portal to hell (and CERN probably isn’t either)

      1. It’s just the most recent example that was put in our faces. Usually people running governments aren’t so obvious, but the state and social justice always get along because they share a common goal.

        1. I don’t know. It was just too weird to mean anything. If it isn’t subtle there isn’t much point. Maybe there was a satanist or two on the planning committee. There’s a few of them around

  42. Jeremiah 51:30 “The mighty men of Babylon have forborn to fight, they have remained in their holds: their might hath failed; they became as women: they have burnt her dwelling places; her bars are broken”.
    Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved. Fight the good fight and hearken unto the Bible everyday everywhere and witness to everyone amen. We need more hardcore preachers and Christians like this man. Let God be true and every man a liar.

  43. This is one of the best articles I have read. And although I do not like MGTOW, I think it is a natural reaction to the “Out of Egypt” theme. Leaving the whoredom of women, ease of material slavery, submission to a foreign pharoh(even if most MGTOW are also part losers).
    Early church fathers were likely disgusted by sins of the city, founded monastaries etc.
    I think when a man has sex with a women, he surrenders part of his psychic energy and power to her. This is why the pill has resulted in the power of women over men.
    This seems to be the implications of certain sex philosophies where the man learns to have sex without ejaculating and thereby reverse the process. It is said that the woman has much more intense orgasms in this and as a result the man harnesses her spiritual power.
    We should all be wary of how and where we spill our seed. Lilith is devouring Adam !
    Men will only get there power back when they recover self-discipline.

    1. Are you suggesting pussy is a kind of Babylonian captivity? Is that why they call them the Pharaoh sex?
      “This seems to be the implications of certain sex philosophies where the man learns to have sex without ejaculating and thereby reverse the process. It is said that the woman has much more intense orgasms in this and as a result the man harnesses her spiritual power”
      It’s curious you should mention this within the context of an article about the satanic force of social justice. Essentially what you are describing is sex magic, something which was only really revealed to the world through Crowley (although it presumably has a rather long history). Directing (or preserving) sexual energy is a pretty fundamental idea, but equally there is a dark side to this kind of practice: when Crowley famously considered the anus to be superior to the vagina (although he referred to it as preferring the eye of horus to the mouth of ISIS) he was thinking along the same kind of lines – the idea that sexual energy could be diverted. from something other than the sex act. I’m not saying your wrong, just that the use to which sexual energy is put, is kind of key to what is happening right now

  44. As a Laveyan Satanist I find this article offensive
    Just kidding, I don’t give a fuck. But, it doesn’t seem very logical to defeat one delusional ideology with another. I mean religion, specifically Christianity and Judaism, the cause of millions of deaths, tortures and rapes of the people of Earth for the last 2000+ year? That just seems fucking stupid.
    Islam is religion and they’re killing everyone that is different from them, so maybe we should follow their lead.
    Fuck religion.

    1. You mean Catholicism and atheism?
      How many acts of genocide have Mennonites or Baptists been responsible for?

      1. Drowning deaths aside, baptists have been single handedly responsible for nearly 60% of the cholesterol issues and diabetes in this country.

  45. They are a bunch of degenerate,atheistic,commie swine.
    I liked it better when everybody except long haired poneytailed pothead college professors hated them.

  46. Anything with a Christian connotation will immediately invoke the ire of the highly tolerant and egalitarian sjw’s (who; for some reason fucking love islam – must be a fantasy about being gang raped by pakis)
    Referring to fags as sodomites; instantly sends them into a chutney ferret meltdown – you could keep warm all winter off of their vein popping, ginger marxist faces

  47. In order to understand SJW hatred towards Christianity, you need to take a look at history. First liberals showed up in Russia, Trocki and Bolsheviks. These are the first liberals that fight for “equal rights”, and in that time – communism. What is the first thing they attacked? God. Their propaganda was very anti-Christian and to make Russian people atheists was a hard job. So they attacked moral and everything that was traditional. They spread their sick ideas through Iskra.(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iskra). After God, their enemy became the Tzar. They literally killed his family on the most brutal way on March 15, 1917, as a result of the February Revolution.

    1. Not that I would defend Jews or anything, but the Russian Orthodox Church often sanctioned pogroms against them in Tsarist Russia. I can see why the Jews who became Bolsheviks would feel that they had some scores to settle with this church when the Bolsheviks came into power.

      1. Pogroms against the Jews in Russia? I suggest everyone who is interested in this subject to read what Dostoevsky wrote in his “Jewish Question”. And Stalin was the one that killed so many Jews and took them of the power in Russia.

        1. Stalin was a joo. He was married to 3 jewesss, married his daughter to one as well.
          His entire party was run and controlled by them. There was a power struggle during his day and he did what they do. Kill his own. Rats eat mice

        2. Stalin wasn’t a jew. I know it would suit some people to have one of the most evil men in history be a semite but there is no evidence he was from his family background. He actually wanted to be a orthodox christian priest when he was younger, the religion of his parents. Huge numbers of priests and churches were destroyed under Stalin’s rule, but so were synagogues and jews and mosques and clerics. The Jews did not cop it as bad as the Christian faith under Stalin mainly because the Orthodox church was much more pervasive and a bigger threat than Judasism which had been persecuted for many decades prior. Stalin wanted total power over the hearts & minds of Russians and was against religion full stop. Jews will network together to further their kind & wealth, and that did not happen with Soviet Russia, after the initial revolution which a lot of jews supported as they hated the Tzar,.

      2. Joos have been. Expelled 108 times and they wonder why they are hated still. Because of what you Do, Joos!
        White slavery, financing Muslim war parties, tax collection, subversion
        Your post reeks of cuckoldry

  48. The SJWs hate anything that is inherently good. They hate success, they hate beauty, they hate God, and they hate it when someone even does a good deed. Christianity is the exact opposite- instead of telling the rich “go kill yourself you racist little fuck”, it says “that’s great and now go do good things with your money”. Good people are celebrated, not vilified as “conformists” or whatever. I’m glad I was born in a Christian family and not a Social Justian family.

    1. The atheist kids are the fucking worst SJWs. they are fanatical about it, it’s a religion to them.

  49. The problem will work itself out as Islam become the world’s dominant religion in this century.

      1. The truth hurts, eh? The expected time when Islam is the prominent religion is 2070 – 54 years away.

        1. 54 years away? I seriously doubt we have that much time left before the Great Chastisement, foretold by Our Lady of Akita.

  50. These days if you want to rebel you become a christian. Now don’t become a christian simply because you want to rebel. Become a christian because you want to become a better person, because you want to do what is right. Because you want, need, the Holy Spirit. Admit that your a sinner and that you want to change, except Jesus Christ as your Savior. Change wont happen overnight, it will be something that you work on bit by bit, day by day. Remember Jesus died for our sins, he loves us just as we are no matter what but that doesn’t mean we can’t show gratitude by living as pure and just a life as each of us can.

  51. You fuckers have definitely jumped the shark. Religion, the antithesis of logic and reason, should be used to fight a group that lacks just as much logic and reason? And since when do real men take advice from a fucking Mormon? I was all for your subversive articles on men’s issues, but this article is pure garbage and playground level shit-talking.

    1. the thesis doesn’t depend on a religious perspective. The idea that ‘progress is satanic’ (or luciferian) comes from theosophy and the occult. Satan equates to rebellion against god, or if you are not religious, against the social order that may stand in for God. Lucifer, is the bringer of light, i.e. enlightenment as such once Satan has destroyed the old order, Lucifer hands us the torch of progress. Obviously there are other ways of conceptualising / describing rebellion / progress, but you need to distinguish between the historical ‘slander’ of the progressives by religion, and a schematisation that is often proudly (if not always transparently) embraced by (some) progressives themselves. It goes without saying that most progressives don’t see this way, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t

      1. Theosophists saw themselves as progressives, from what I’ve read. They saw themselves as part of the movement toward the next evolution, so I don’t see how they stand against social progress. SJWs label their oppressive ideology as “progressive” but that doesn’t mean it is true. I consider meritocracy very progressive. I consider pulling everybody down to an equal level to be old fashioned. That is the issue for me.

        1. My point was about theosophists and occultists who also seem themselves as progressive in the sense that you described (as moving toward the next evolution) as embracing terms like satanic and luciferian (if not necessarily openly). The Christian perspective on words like Satanic or Luciferian is completely pejorative – a negative condemnation, because from within Christianity Satan / Lucifer is the bad guy. From the occult / theosophist point of view those words are more complex. They don’t (necessarily) conjure notions of the devil within the Exorcist etc, but may refer to a force or forces in the universe that move the world forward (towards the next evolution). if you accept that re-framing away from Satan as necessarily the bad guy, but as reflecting a dualistic take on the universe (good and evil as complimentary opposites etc) then occult PR gets to re-present Satan / Lucifer as representing the good of progress, and of God as representing the forces of backwardness and superstition. Personally I think Christians and the religious more generally are being wrong-footed by allowing those who would advocate progress on such a (Satanic / Luciferian) basis, to monopolise the idea of progress – the result is that the Satanic / Luciferian idea of progress is increasingly the only variety we tend to believe in regardless of whether we are for or against.

    2. Think Crusades and Inquisition.
      Glorious time for Europeans defeating Saracen Muslims and joo subverters, who tried to destroy Europe and did for the 600 year occupation. You Have have to have your head out of your ass to really think logically and know your history on this…

        1. You wish you had 1-10th testosterone as our Christian ancestors who kept Joos in ghettos, warred against Muslims, kept order, their women in place and warred to expel Muslim and Jewry.
          You’re an atheist faggot pimping the Protocols of Zion #14

  52. Moral relativism is a side affect of atheism. Do whatever u want or feel. It lets the beasts out of their cages. Wanna dress up like a girl or dog then no problem. Wanna shove that cucumber up your bum then who am I to judge….you get the gist.
    Atheistic societies have been the most violent and evil societies in our history. The main reason appears to be that these societies had many weapons of wars but no guiding light to guide them so to speak. They do whatever serves them and their ideology. Wanna wipe out a million of your own ppl then no problem

  53. Acording to Catholic Teaching before Vatican II,Corporatism(not to be confused with Fascism)is the best economic system based on the Medival Guilds.

  54. Interesting point about Babylonian civilization. Gives a whole other meaning to the terms “whore of Babylon” and “mystery Babylon” and however else it was mentioned in the Apocalypse: from this we may glean it’s talking directly about feminism (along with other things).

  55. It is easier to believe in God by the study of demonology because demons show themselves much easier than God does. Read the Demonologist by Ed and Lorraine Warren and honestly say you don’t believe in Satan and his minions. As they confess, our name is legion. Only power they fear is Jesus Christ, this should give some clue to the truth of Christianity.. The demons can tell between holy water that has been blessed and regular water. Satanists can identify the Eucharist that has been consecrated from many wafers lying in front of them because of the intense hatred they feel for it. Vile sins of those around the demons have been publicly exposed except those that have been erased through the power of confession. Padre Pio once had a vision when a group of people were walking and he was shocked because there were more demons than people. He used to return to his room and many times it was left in conplete tatters by demonic forces. When he was told of those that don’t believe in Hell, he replied “they will believe when they get there.” Our life is a short trial for the fate of eternity, it is a trail of tears for those who walk in righteousness but the price is eternal. The demons are miserabke because of their eternal fate of Hell. Read about the posession of Anna Ecklund, cursed to be posessed by her own father because of her refusal to have sex with hin as a child. Satan himself was present at this posession, one of the most terrifying in American history. We are all free to believe what we like, but only for so long. The biggest trick of the devil is to believe he does not exist.

    1. The Warrens are highly controversial figures, that many regard as having engaged in fraud. I don’t know whether that’s true, but it seems a very dubious basis for drawing conclusions about the truth of religion. Do you really think ‘the Conjuring’ is going to lead to God or faith?

      1. God exists.
        Every living thing is a creation. Some thing has to Create.
        Creations require a creator. Nothing from nothing, begets nothing.

        1. Fair enough, I just don’t think the Warrens are necessarily trustworthy, however one might have enjoyed the Conjurings 1 & 2

  56. These may be small points in a big scheme of things, but hell is not
    some deep pit with grinning demons and flaming pitchforks. Hell is a
    classroom with angry, androgynous teachers and a skewed grading system.
    This may be the best, and most important, paragraph in the whole article. Everyone is looking for Satan a red or green beast with horns, a goatee, a pointed tail, and a pitchfork, when he can take any form that suits his purpose. The form that suited his purpose in 2008 and 2012 was that of a biracial communist bent on the annihilation of the greatest Democratic Republic that ever existed on earth. Sadly many people followed.

  57. In almost every religion in the world greed, gluttony and selfishness is a sin and frowned upon, except that of social justice…

  58. White men especially need to re learn what came naturally to our ancestors. Which is that our women need to be regarded as our property. We need to take responsibility for them. We have let them run wild like bad behaving children and only men deserve to be blamed.

  59. There is a concept recognised within society and the bible that goes like this. “The name giver asserts dominion over the name receiver.”
    Parents name their children, explorers name countries or regions on behalf of their king and so on.
    In Genesis God named the wind and the waves. He proved his authority over them when as Christ standing on the boat in Galilee He commanded them to be still. The disciples reaction “Who is this that commands the wind and waves and they obey?”
    In Genesis it was God who gave the male the name “man”. It was man, not God, who gave the female the name “woman”.
    There has been no revocation of that authority from that day to this. Attempts by feminists to revoke this authority put them in a position of rebellion against both man and God.

  60. One of the things that religion does that nothing else will do is change society’s values at the level of the individual. This is how feminism works and this is why it is religion that will have to be the entity that will defeat it.
    There are those who would get rid of religion if they could. The communists tried back in the days of Lenin and failed spectacularly. Religion is here to stay, our brothers need to get religion, then once they’ve got it, use it to take up cudgels against the feminists and other enemies of religion.

  61. Great thinking:
    Let’s destroy a silly, non-nonsensical, crazy, delusional, blue-pill ideology, with another
    silly, non-nonsensical, crazy, delusional, blue-pill ideology.
    Perfect fucking sense right???

Comments are closed.