There was man, and there was woman. Two different beings, separate and unequal. From their differences arose conflict, and born from that conflict: passion.
In time, their passions intermingled, and the two beings found that this combination was to both of their advantages. Society blossomed from there.
A greater, prior age would have called this process “dialectical,” but most today would use the term “love.” This derivation of meaning is an unfortunate reflection of an era without reflection. We will get to that shortly.
If there is one thing you ever take from my writings, let it be this: creation can only be birthed from passion, and passion can only ever exist through conflict.
It’s high-time for the conflict, you ciphering, godless ladyboys.
The vast majority of the gibbering slaves who parade their atheistic headlessness as being morally superior should have never been given tools to achieve such intellectual partial-birth abortions in the first place.
Universal enlightenment is sub-marginal enlightenment: the most existential experience postmodern man has is deciding between sticking something in his mouth or up his ass.
Give a child a priceless family watch with no restrictions or expectations, and the child will likely break the object. To the unsupervised child, the watch has no meaning, nothing qualifying it as being more valued than the plastic shit he bangs together or the sugary shit he swallows for later poopies.
Similarly, giving option/choice to people who never earned such power was the goal of liberalism, and now postmodern society. Option is always earned through conflict, it is through passionate negation of abstract ideals that things eventually resolve themselves to a concrete result.
Postmodernism seeks to achieve the result without the work, to create effect without cause. What you have as a result is meaninglessness disguised as value, partial objects. Such is a world catered to poorly-behaved and destructive children, which is an excellent metaphor for your typical libfag.
Such a regressed society becomes actively opposed to quality, to qualifiers; it loathes an individual that would seek to achieve self-actualization.
Wrap your mind around it: ours is a formless social mass of individuals without individuality. Sabotaged from the start, we are all aimed in varying directions, and yet held together to prevent advance. The West of today resembles a rat king.
…And modern atheism is part of the debris holding you in place.
I call you a Godless cipher because you never understood the idea that you rejected. You thought God was simply the bearded skyman from Monty Python? You thought belief in God only fitting for inbreds and morons? I can’t wait to hear your 30-minute discourse about polycentric order.
“God” is idealization, the ineffable, the unattainable. The abstract. Your own humanity is what supplies the conflict, the negation. At some point you are supposed to realize that you can never achieve the unachievable, you can never surpass your humanity, that you can never defeat reality, and that you can never kill God.
The concrete is an eventual acceptance of both God and your self, that ideals are limitless, and that reality is unceasingly cruel and unyielding in it’s limitations. This is what leads one to enlightenment, to self-actualization, to peace.
But what kind of self-actualization can be achieved if ideals are ridiculed? What if ideals (God) become tied to politics? What if the idea of God is no longer ineffable? What it human whims are catered to without any effort on the part of the recipient? What if life becomes too easy, and thought becomes too hard? What if the negation is instead aimed at your own humanity, if human identity comes to resemble an ouroboros?
Postmodern “God” becomes a skyman, becomes a gag on a movie, and finally becomes a soggy chicken sandwich made in a building some faggots had a make-out session in front of. For some reason. I forget.
God stopped being a vessel to one’s inner peace and instead became a topic faux-intellectuals argue and posture about over sugary lattes in environments conducive to idiomatic and clichéd minds. Such derivation of meaning is an unfortunate result of an era without reflection, a society of children afraid to grow up. This derivation will continue until either a reaction occurs or we finally return to man’s beginning:
We seek Men and Masters to wrest control from the Peter Pans and their whores. To do so, to react against these cobwebs of idiom, to seek to smash liberalism’s profoundly-rotten social constructs, to be Right Stuff, is to put away childish things.
I’m telling you, the prospective masterly man, to go re-read some biblical passages. And this time, take the dick out of your mouth.