The chariot symbolises the willful Ego open to a vulnerable landscape of the psyche. I personally think (from my own psyche) more in terms of a dynamic and often stormy ocean (collective unconcious) where a saling ship (Ego) navigates: yet this my own journey. Do you see it as navigation rather than a conquest?
Where is the relationship to the Anima in the neo-masculine movement? Personally the Anima might have been a force strong enough to burst my own Ego in two pieces — rocking the boat too heavy and water drowning the enterprise and the rest of the crew with it. What do you think of the mermaid as an archetype?
The ethnic opens to the elementary — this is what I believe in the sensibility of the forms that is beyond our representation of pairs of opposites. This is where a ethnos can only point towards a universal. The rational mind is not the prime mover but the body. The brain is a secondary organ. The dark side is the archetypal possession that often comes in the form of a Luciferian intellect who thinks it is running the show as you clearly points out for a lot of people. The promethian spirit.
Where In the world will be relatively safe to avoid the transformation to the new world? Would be good to get your thoughts. Most readers of your work will be well aware of the coming chaos/transition and be making appropriate preparation. But the transition to a new world could be 10 years in the making. This is along time to batten down the hatches.
This is well written and polished, however, it gets somethings wrong historically and has a possible large and core contradiction. This is because the essay laments how current day Western systems are hollowed out and unresponsive, but then attributes this to democracy itself while pretty much completely ignoring the massive post WW2 and especially post 1970s transformation of the western-West’s actual institutional architecture which, at least in the case of the USA and UK, effectively undid or (in most cases) effectively nullified the lower case "d' democratic governance structures that were what democracy actually was.
Historical Western “success” was fundamentally built on highly pluralized lower case “d” democratic structures, locally weighted fiscal systems, federated and internally contestable civic structures, municipal developmental authority, geographically distributed and deeply pluralized banking and industry, localized civic institutions, legal/regulatory variability, policy variability, and broad public access points into governance and economic decision-making. And again, ironically, many of those structures were dismantled or functionally neutralized during the very era that produced the crises the essay now laments.
And there may be a big contradiction in the essay, and that is that the system the essay now condemns for managerial failure, technocracy, social alienation, and centralized elite rule is actually much closer in topology to the “Eastern” or supra-national command structures the essay implicitly admires than to the older Western systems that generated broad-based development and civic vitality. The essay attacks modern centralized technocratic governance while simultaneously advocating an even more centralized, mythicized, ethnos-heavy vanguard structure “above” democracy, without recognizing that the West’s earlier strength largely came from distributed institutional density, overlapping civic sovereignties, and broad participation in governance rather than from decision-making-access-exclusionary central-command structures or a permanent mobilized politically-privileged class that had been contrived into existence
"By contrast, our European forebears are half-a-millennium-plus older, scarred and scabbed by countless wars of unification, conquest, and defeat."
Our European forebears are vassals of the US. The power elite owns the United States. All presidents since November 22, 1963, have been titular to an increasing degree. To regain control of this country, the power elite must be destroyed.
You missed my point - it is the fact that DT et al are under the influence or controlled that guarantees their downfalll, and thereby opens the door to reclaiming the “empty summit” to restoring the ethnos to power.
Let go of the fantasy that “elites” have any clue wtf is going on because they lost the plot a decade plus ago.
"...the false god of democracy is the last paradigm holding us back."
A desperately needed white pill, and fantastic article per usual.
Hey Cameron, great article, as always.
You talk about cheap energy and cheap credit, I think these two authors might be of interest regarding that.
Tim Morgan
https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/
Warwick Powell
https://warwickpowell.substack.com/
Thanks for the recommendation - I will check it out.
Also what does the mandala represent to you? A spiral or something static?
The chariot symbolises the willful Ego open to a vulnerable landscape of the psyche. I personally think (from my own psyche) more in terms of a dynamic and often stormy ocean (collective unconcious) where a saling ship (Ego) navigates: yet this my own journey. Do you see it as navigation rather than a conquest?
Where is the relationship to the Anima in the neo-masculine movement? Personally the Anima might have been a force strong enough to burst my own Ego in two pieces — rocking the boat too heavy and water drowning the enterprise and the rest of the crew with it. What do you think of the mermaid as an archetype?
The ethnic opens to the elementary — this is what I believe in the sensibility of the forms that is beyond our representation of pairs of opposites. This is where a ethnos can only point towards a universal. The rational mind is not the prime mover but the body. The brain is a secondary organ. The dark side is the archetypal possession that often comes in the form of a Luciferian intellect who thinks it is running the show as you clearly points out for a lot of people. The promethian spirit.
Where In the world will be relatively safe to avoid the transformation to the new world? Would be good to get your thoughts. Most readers of your work will be well aware of the coming chaos/transition and be making appropriate preparation. But the transition to a new world could be 10 years in the making. This is along time to batten down the hatches.
Adjust your mindset. Don’t run, lean into the transformation.
Instead of fear think in terms of opportunity.
Choose the high ground by going where you can best leverage the transition in your favor.
This is well written and polished, however, it gets somethings wrong historically and has a possible large and core contradiction. This is because the essay laments how current day Western systems are hollowed out and unresponsive, but then attributes this to democracy itself while pretty much completely ignoring the massive post WW2 and especially post 1970s transformation of the western-West’s actual institutional architecture which, at least in the case of the USA and UK, effectively undid or (in most cases) effectively nullified the lower case "d' democratic governance structures that were what democracy actually was.
Historical Western “success” was fundamentally built on highly pluralized lower case “d” democratic structures, locally weighted fiscal systems, federated and internally contestable civic structures, municipal developmental authority, geographically distributed and deeply pluralized banking and industry, localized civic institutions, legal/regulatory variability, policy variability, and broad public access points into governance and economic decision-making. And again, ironically, many of those structures were dismantled or functionally neutralized during the very era that produced the crises the essay now laments.
And there may be a big contradiction in the essay, and that is that the system the essay now condemns for managerial failure, technocracy, social alienation, and centralized elite rule is actually much closer in topology to the “Eastern” or supra-national command structures the essay implicitly admires than to the older Western systems that generated broad-based development and civic vitality. The essay attacks modern centralized technocratic governance while simultaneously advocating an even more centralized, mythicized, ethnos-heavy vanguard structure “above” democracy, without recognizing that the West’s earlier strength largely came from distributed institutional density, overlapping civic sovereignties, and broad participation in governance rather than from decision-making-access-exclusionary central-command structures or a permanent mobilized politically-privileged class that had been contrived into existence
"By contrast, our European forebears are half-a-millennium-plus older, scarred and scabbed by countless wars of unification, conquest, and defeat."
Our European forebears are vassals of the US. The power elite owns the United States. All presidents since November 22, 1963, have been titular to an increasing degree. To regain control of this country, the power elite must be destroyed.
Starmer, Mertz, Macron and Trump are working overtime to make it happen 😊
"Starmer, Mertz, Macron and Trump are working overtime to make it happen."
Nothing could be further from the truth. The power elite owns Trump. We inextricably disagree.
You missed my point - it is the fact that DT et al are under the influence or controlled that guarantees their downfalll, and thereby opens the door to reclaiming the “empty summit” to restoring the ethnos to power.
Let go of the fantasy that “elites” have any clue wtf is going on because they lost the plot a decade plus ago.
Sorry, I did miss your point.
"Let go of the fantasy that “elites” have any clue wtf is going on because they lost the plot a decade plus ago."
I agree that the elites are not invincible, but I am not sure there is serious opposition against them.
They think there is, which is why they are arresting and censoring people.
More importantly, a history of revolution shows it is not opposition that brings down governments, it is internal mismanagement.
The mismanagement we are experiencing is existential.
"More importantly, a history of revolution shows it is not opposition that brings down governments, it is internal mismanagement."
During a revolution, it is the opposition's impetus in response to mismanagement that brings down an empire. It takes both.
"The mismanagement we are experiencing is existential."
Only if there is a concerted and systematic effort to take advantage of the mismanagement