top of page

Pull The Veil 2/2

Law/Proxy Law

The largest misconception of Law, is the idea that humans created it.

Law is defined as a set of rules which are enforceable by authority. But humans, by nature, do not contain authority over others.

So then what is the truth about Law?

It is inherent in the Universe, and enforced by the functionality of Creation, which is the only true authority. Humans can not impose something that is functioning on a higher level than them. They will only be crushed by it.

So then, what is it that humans have fabricated?

It is proxy law; a faux placeholder for the real thing, almost never in alignment with it, and unnecessary when it is.

If some paper documents state that ‘murder is wrong,’ then it is a redundancy. Sane people understand that, and when they also understand the right to self-defense, they can put down those who attempt murder, and the issue is resolved.

If, however those same papers say that ‘taxation is good,’ the proxy law is in total disharmony with principles, and is unacceptable in EVERY INSTANCE. No one is obligated to obey those mandates; under the real Law of Creation, there is no right held by anyone to enforce a wrong.

Man’s laws are subjective, preferential, null and completely without right to exist in a Universe that has eternal Laws of its own. Why create any laws when they are in Existence without fallacy already? All of man’s laws are made purely to gain advantage over those who did not make them, and do not reflect truth in Creation. Even if laws do hold some moral integrity; you cannot enforce something that is already inherent to the universe, by merely writing it down. If a wrong has been committed, then correct it in a moral way, immediately. Writing stipulations and arbitrary rules around moral conduct is akin to telling a dog that they may only defecate at particular times of the day, and may only have the need to eat at other times. It would never work. Nature has rhythm, and trying to enforce it to work at a different frequency only brings about chaos, as the Universe will always balance itself to return to its natural cycle, with no regard for who stands—ignorantly—in the way of the pendulum.

Now, in the discussion of proxy laws, it is important to look at those who create it, and those who then enforce it—wrongfully.

In both cases, they develop a god complex. Those judges, legislators and members of the political landscape have an internal belief that they can create rules out of thin air, and then have those arbitrary dictates enforced violently because they happened to write it into books. They are simply the first stage of the process, and the least involved in the implementation of those laws.

The most accountable party in the discussion of tyranny, is that of ‘law’ enforcement. If the strong arm of the government was labeled correctly, it would be named ‘the slave drivers.’

To fully demonstrate this, I will demonstrate the full psychosis that these ‘people’ show on a regular basis.

1. There is no proxy law too small that the enforcers of the state will not kill you for.

In example: If they gain a warrant to search your home for suspected drugs, you might try to keep them from invading your property. They push in, you try to defend yourself and your property, and they kill you for ‘not cooperating.’

A truly atrocious example is Eric Garner, murdered for selling cigarettes on the street, because he was not paying taxes on the sales. Mere cents, and the worthless thralls killed him over it, because they were so loyal to their owners in government, and because ultimately, they were psychopaths. Anyone who witnessed that transgression should have ended that policeman’s life, even before he had actually killed Eric Garner.

And countless nameless victims have fallen to death for just as meaningless ‘crimes.’

People will rise up in the police’s defense, of course. Saying that it is only a couple of bad apples. But the truth is, most would succumb to such actions, if anyone put up a fuss over it. Almost any traffic ticket (a completely immoral concept) could escalate to deadly circumstances, if you tried to avoid getting robbed. All because these demoniacs don’t know when to back down, don’t know how to admit that they are in the wrong.

2. Even by the admission of these slave drivers, an overwhelming number of them abuse their spouses, fabricate even more proxy laws in order to incriminate people, discriminate by race, and purposely break their own codes whenever it suits them. That is just what they admit to.

3. Just from the nature of the job, these enforcers are instilled with the lie that they somehow have more rights than other people, even the ‘right’ to enforce a wrong, which is false on its face.

Police can speed on the highway as much as they like, but a citizen is not allowed to go a few miles over the limit? ‘Law’ enforcement can shoot violent people at their own discretion, but a citizen could lose their freedom because they didn’t ask for police to do the dirty work in their stead? That is just what counts as ‘legitimate’ in proxy laws. The countless transgressions which they perform, just to be overlooked by their peers, is too great in number to fathom. Because they are in the mindset of having more value than everyone else, of retaining more universal rights than others. Truthfully, once they have committed their first great transgression, they retain none of those rights. Under TRUE Laws, anyone would have the right to defend themselves however necessary from these demoniacs, but under PROXY laws, people who righteously defend themselves are almost always punished.

4. The final point seems rather contrary to the previous three, yet it shows how utterly scrambled their brain-balance is.

They see the makers of fake laws and their personal commanders as their superiors, believing that these ‘people’ have yet more rights than themselves. They believe that they have no choice, and that they owe the state their total obedience, without ever questioning what it is they are doing. And let me make it definitively clear; those who have a conscience and begin to question their own position, never stay in these industries.

So no—there is no such thing as a decent soldier or police officer; they never last because of the nature of the environment. They will get discharged before they are allowed to stay and do any good in the group.

Let it also be clear that all of these psychotic tendencies are shared amongst the militaristic forces, except that the focus of attention is on other countries, and often in a more violent manner.


Now, for a good understanding of how man’s laws are inconsistent with moral laws, let us look at some major dictates which are approved legally, but are immoral to comply with, much less enforce with violence.


1. TAXES

Taxation is theft.

Let me redefine what theft is so that the point can be understood. Theft is taking something which rightfully belongs to someone else, without their consent.

Taxes are levied on everyone. Yet no one consented to these taxes; they are removed from a person’s earnings before they even see it. No one asks permission to take out taxes, because the answer immediately would be a ‘no.’ Idiots will make excuses for taxation, such as their use in making roads and sewers. But nothing TRULY good can come from a wrongdoing. And taxation IS a wrongdoing.

If you were to not pay them (by some rare bypass which you can take to avoid them) the government’s minions would eventually seek you out, wrongfully DEMAND payment, and if refused once more, cage the outlier and steal the other assets of the ‘criminal,’ such as their house, car and valuables.

These all too common strategies of the government show it for nothing more than a den of thieves, who value monetary gain over morals—in ALL cases.


2. ABORTION

This subject has already been discussed, but in terms of laws, humanity has let it become so accepted as to become a routine occurrence. The cultures of the world simply ignore it as a background event, when it has consumed more lives than any genocide in history, barring even those (few) done to preserve the life of the mother. Attention has gone to getting rid of pregnancies, rather than preventing them when they are unwanted. It is always masked as a ‘choice,’ or a ‘freedom,’ when in fact it is just a transgression under Creation’s Laws.


3. IMPRISONMENT

The majority of prisoners (so far as is concerned in the USA) are non-violent ‘criminals.’ Which means, they did nothing wrong, under the Laws of Creation, and are being wronged by suffering through imprisonment. The remainder of prisoners are violent and have committed some type of wrong. Yet, among those, a severe comeback of self-defense, at THE MOMENT OF THE CRIME, could have demonstrated to them that bad behavior is unprofitable. The remaining psychopaths are terrible enough, that death at the moment of their error would have been just punishment for them.

So why in all the world are we locking up millions globally? Sucking away at society to maintain huge facilities, and creating cesspits of evil and unjust environments. Those who were innocent become corrupt by going through it, and those who aren’t either could have learned through simple lessons in punishment, or should be dead anyways for what they have done. There is no logical or utilitarian use for prisons, which makes it unacceptable in the judgment of Creation.


4. ANIMAL SLAUGHTER

It has already been discussed why using animals as food in a non-survival context is wrong. Yet governments wholly back the enormous industry and all its hidden cruelties. It is also inconsistent, because governments will guard the lives of certain animals, even to the point of disallowing them as pets. And yet, somehow, countless evils are ignored, so long as it is in a slaughterhouse. It all comes down to what is profitable for the state, and has nothing to do with moral behavior.


5. ‘OWNING’ LAND

There is a stipulation here. Owning land isn’t a wrong automatically. What defines it as right or wrong is the quantity. If you can not possibly use all the land that you ‘own,’ it is a claim of ownership that does not exist. You can only own those things which you use and care for legitimately. If you use several acres of land to grow food and care for animals, and to keep your home on, there is no issue. If you own square miles worth and only stare across it for scenic value or hunt on it for selfish pleasure, it is not a human right you have. You can’t own swaths of land you do not use, and hoard it away from another’s use. This exact strategy is what governments have used in order to make it more difficult for citizens to have their own homes and live a healthy life. Instead, most of the land is ‘owned’ by the super rich and governments, forcing citizenry to live in cramped, hellish cities in order to survive.

So to summarize: If you can use it practically, that land can be claimed legitimately as your property. If it is so large you can’t even utilize it aside from looking at it from an airborne vehicle, you do not, under Creation’s Laws, have a right to claim ownership of it.


6. COUNTRY ‘BORDERS’

Similar to the previous subject, country borders are a claim on an entire region, sometimes a whole continent, where an imaginary line dictates whether you are a ‘legal’ resident or not. The idiocy that on one side of the line, something may be accepted as moral (or not) and on the other side, it is somehow immoral (or not) because of phony laws created by man, is hard to fathom. You do not have a right to impede peaceful travelers, because your government ‘owns’ the land on one side of a line, and says they are not legitimate. The whole of the world is open for humans to explore, no one can dictate where it is acceptable or not.

If overpopulating a certain area damages a frail ecosystem—as some will point out—it should be commonsense decency that keeps you from tromping on it, not the threat of violence by patrols.


Now, in contrast to all of this, the following is a list of laws which restrict behaviors that are perfectly moral to participate in.


1. DRUG CONTROL

Your body—so long as you are not carrying a living fetus inside you—is yours to do as you will. If you are responsible for others and are failing that duty due to a drug addiction, you will feel the repercussions. But in any other case, you can do whatever you like to your body, with no moral consequence, only the effects of bad substances. Still, it is NOT the state’s right or responsibility to criminalize ANY substance for people’s consumption.

Protecting you from harm really is not their objective, because you could drink paint thinner or inhale exhaust fumes. Nor is it about protecting others from potential acts you may commit after taking the drugs; alcohol violence far surpasses violence caused by drug ingestion.

So what is the driving force for this? Frightened people, and a system that wants to have ultimate control. If government can dictate what you put into your body, it can choose whether you live or die, as the slavery becomes more extreme. It is ultimately a claim of ownership over your own body, which is the height of physical slavery.

So, if you want to consume potentially harmful drugs, beware of the impending consequences. You will feel the affects, and suffer any negative circumstances that arise from your potential misconduct. But until you do act out terribly, no one has the right to harm you over what you decide to intake.


2. TRAFFIC ‘VIOLATIONS’

The idea of traffic ‘violations’ outside of harming someone or damaging their property, is a foolish one. Unless harm has actually occurred, there is no crime under the Laws of Creation. So to punish someone for a victimless ‘crime’ is actually the immoral part of the equation. It is quite literally highway robbery. Until someone is actually harmed, no one can demand reparations, certainly not a third party which has no property involved in the accident.

Governments demanding payouts for crimes, when the harmed party has been duly repaid for all damages, is just idiotic.

The contradiction is likewise incomprehensible. The dangerous chases that police will commit to, only to gain dollars for their government. Or the extreme maneuvers they will commit, hurting others to get them to halt, just to demand that they hand over their wealth? Atrocious enough to warrant instant, deadly retaliation.

So again, these arbitrary rules are immoral, but unfortunately enforced with the strictest discipline, making it difficult to avoid if highway patrol singles you out.


3. PROSTITUTION

I am not championing the industry of prostitution here. What is important, is that a physical interaction between two CONSENSUAL adults, is not to be infringed upon. Men and women do the same kinds of things just as shamelessly without business involved, but as soon as MONEY gets between them, suddenly the government wants to control what happens. Likely because it is a form of business that avoids taxes easily, and because they want more say over what a person RIGHTFULLY does with their own body. The very same sexual acts happen between strangers at nightclubs and bars. So, who is being protected by these faux laws? No one. It only benefits the government and its aims.

To make a comparison, let us examine what soldiers do in the military, to disprove the inaccurate points that religious zealots might argue.

A soldier ‘sells’ their freewill to the state, as well as their whole bodies and lives. They sacrifice themselves at the whim of their commanders, doing no moral vetting of the orders they receive. They will kill or be killed at will for meaningless and evil causes. They actually HARM someone in their profession.

A prostitute, on the other hand, sells their own physical body at their own discretion, to do an activity which is their choice to participate in, along with their client. They don’t commit harm in that situation.

Compare the two. And then ask, WHY does society respect soldiers more than prostitutes?


4. IMMIGRATION

This is very much related to the borders of countries. There are many forms of mass immigration which are wrong; the newcomers bring murderers, rapists and thieves, and then lay claim to land which belongs to the native inhabitants, while the government gives handouts to them, at the expense of the natives. What takes place is more an invasion than peaceful immigration. But that is built up of many individuals violating singular rights; it does not define immigration as a transgression in itself.

Those who go to other countries and make genuine lives for themselves, without violating others, are doing no wrong. And for the government to demand that they sign ridiculous papers and make arbitrary oaths in order to become ‘legitimate,’ is just another claim to own an entire region or continent. It has nothing to do with ‘national security,’ or anything valid, because as described earlier, governments will give handouts and welcome practical invaders when it suits them.

As ALWAYS, discernment is necessary on an individual basis. You can not label all immigrants as criminals because one happened to be evil out of a dozen. You can not blame someone for the transgressions of another, simply because they fall under the same heading of ‘immigrant.’

In reality, the world is free for ALL to walk. The Universe did not set down lines for certain people to remain trapped within—HUMANITY did.

Which maker of Laws will you acknowledge?


5. ARMS CONTROL

Removing the tools of self-defense through actions that should be stopped by self-defense . . . it is a paradox in itself.

If governments have any type of weaponry, it is ESSENTIAL that the oppressed have that same weaponry, or else they will forever be under the foot of tyrants, ready to be slaughtered at whim. It has happened in history countless times. It will happen again if humanity does not take the initiative, arm itself and throw off the blanket of slavery.

It is an obvious fact that an armed society is safer, because psychopaths will realize that their behavior will have deadly consequences. Hence, in the USA, at least, absolute tyranny has not progressed to the same level as other countries, who are disarmed.

So in this case, it is another obvious example of evil, man-made laws attempting to usurp a natural freedom, which is acknowledged by the Universe itself: Everyone has the right to defend themselves from harm, even to the point of lethal force.


6. EXECUTION

Under the actual Laws of nature, everyone has the right to kill those who are abusing them in a truly harmful way. This has been discussed previously.

Yet governments make it difficult to perform this except in the most extreme of cases. They charge individuals for ‘criminal’ behavior when they kill someone who was attacking them. They spare rapists and murderers by placing them in prisons instead of executing them. Make no mistake; hardened criminals in most cases are fully psychotic, and will never improve in their lifetime. And the atrocities they have committed already determine that their life is forfeit. Yet these criminals are often released after relatively short periods in prison, and no one is to touch them? And if they act out again, they simply get locked in a prison where they can abuse others who are often innocent?

When someone is being dangerously violated, it IS your right to execute them on the spot. Man’s phony laws yet again simply stand in the way of real justice being carried out, causing greater chaos in the end.


By now, it should be clear that man’s laws have no legitimacy, and the hyper-fixation that humans attach to them is wrong. The only way these arbitrary rules can be overturned, is by rejecting them on their face. It may require sacrifice. It might even lead to injury or death. Yet, deadlier wars were fought for lesser offenses. Why act weak now, when the game of humanity is coming to a close?


An individual’s goal should be to understand and abide by the inborn Laws of the Universe, NOT to follow the random dictates of other individuals.








Self/Other

This is an important topic that correlates with rights and transgressions.

In example; if you decide to hurt yourself by injecting toxic drugs or by cutting yourself, the feedback loop is instantaneous. You feel the pain, and pay the price for what you have done. Hurting yourself is not right in nature, but it is not anyone’s business until you begin to harm others. No one has the right to forcefully interfere with your self-abuse, because it is your internal struggle to deal with. This is the best example of instant karma, or in terms more in line with this book; the effect follows immediately after the cause, without a need for nature to organize the world to give you a consequence.

Once you commit the acts against someone outside of yourself, then it becomes anyone’s concern to deal with you accordingly.

Now, very logically, the subject of ‘self’ and ‘other’ comes down to the primal part of ourselves known as the ego. Although many cultures and traditions will teach people to tamp down their egos, to try and destroy it as much as possible, that is a wrong approach. The ego is a survival instrument within our psyche just as much as our instinct of fear is. It allows us to differentiate ourselves from others. Without it we would function more closely to ants or bees, with no individuality of our own. So it is most definitely an important tool, but as always, needs precision and control, otherwise it will take precedence and cause unexpected chaos. Just as an inexperienced carpenter will not have control over his creations when he does not know how to master his tools.

To continue in relation to the subject: The ego is an aspect which defines the self from the other. When it is healthy, it is used in conjunction with principles, and applies them in relation to itself, while maintaining individuality and preserving its own rights. When it becomes demonic, it elevates itself above all others and claims godhood, by valuing itself over the rights of others, and it can even delude itself into believing that it can make up what is truth. Or claim the right to own another being, which is something that does not exist.

To maintain a healthy ego, it is important to understand that we are individuals with our own interests, yes, but we are also bound together as one, in the sense that we ALL share the SAME rights. When it functions optimally, the ego respects the rights every other, and is also willing to defend the rights of the self.


If one suffers, all suffer. What you do to others you do to yourself, and what you do to yourself, you do to others. No one is unaffected by each other, but we all have individual wills. The most essential lesson is to respect those wills, and their inherent rights.






Objectivity/Subjectivity

True objectivity is that which is true, regardless of perception. Subjectivity is based upon emotions or reactions to the truth. Subjectivity does not define what is true; it merely defines how one reacts to truth. Notice how it is subject to the object, which is truth. You are subject to the truth, and the subject cannot define what the object is, for they are a part of it, not an outside force able to reshape it. This is very much the basis for the dynamic of preferences versus principles. However, both of these are defined by the objective and subjective. When our perception sees the object not as a whole, it comes up with a subjective opinion, which turns into a preference, which could be correct, incorrect, or irrelevant to matters of reality. When our perception becomes accurate and encompassing enough to understand the whole of the object of reality, our understanding reflects the truth, and comes upon a principle, which is correct.

For example: society has created a false paradigm where a pregnant woman can go to a ‘doctor’ and have the fetus killed at any stage of development for unnecessary reasons. In the subjective mindset, many people see this as correct and moral, if the woman really wants to remove the fetus for selfish reasons.

Objectively, in reality, a living, developing being was killed for no reason other than convenience, which makes it murder. That makes it wrong, and individuals who come to this conclusion have developed an understanding of a principle, by applying an objective mindset, removed from the possible subjective preferences they may have.

Now, if a person says that they like to wake up late in the day rather than have an earlier schedule, that is a preference which bears no importance to truth. It is their subjective opinion, and there is no correct or incorrect view on the matter.


It is important to maintain an objective view on characteristics in the world which have a factual, unchanging nature. AND to be aware of genuinely subjective matters which you may not like. Remain unyielding on the former, in order to uphold truth. And be tolerant of the latter, so as not to get stuck in the weeds on a crusade against something harmless.
















Principle/Preference

These two subjects are some of the most terribly confused in human culture. They are constantly switched out for the other, because people are confounded, or they are steadfastly solipsistic.

Solipsism is a word of redundancy; it comes from the Latin words ‘solus’ which means ‘alone,’ and ‘ipse,’ which means ‘self.’

It is the belief that you are the only being that truly exists, and everyone else is a construct. As a result of this, truth is whatever a solipsist imagines it to be, and no one can convince them otherwise, even through demonstration.

Although most people would n0t agree to follow this ideology, they take on some of its false beliefs, when they think that truth is whatever they want it to be.

In other words, when they switch out real principles for their own preferences.

This is often seen when you are stating objective facts, and you get shot down by ‘oh, well that’s just how you see it.’

Or when you point out someone’s utter folly in thinking, and they claim to have the absolute truth, when it is nothing but a comforting lie that they shelter under.

One of the best examples in our world for this false paradigm, is the mentality of most religious followers. Most of what religion propagates is mere preference. Most of it is false: Because they preach those preferences as true principles. It is exponentially more harmful when those preferences end up becoming truly immoral, and are propagated in the light of day as truth, which blind masses will swallow like water.

Like how a certain race has somehow been ‘chosen’ above the others, and has greater value than any other. (Judaism especially espouses this.)

Or how having sexual intercourse before marriage, or being attracted to the same sex is somehow an evil in the eyes of Creation. (Christianity focuses on this as if with blinders to anything else.)

And then, somehow, SOMEHOW, it is ordinary and acceptable for a man to marry a girl child, or to rape women not of the same faith. (Islam.)

If real logic and wisdom is applied, all of these are false, and end in real harm.

1. Saying that one singular race is more valuable as compared to the rest is obviously arbitrary and biased. And worse yet, it leads to devaluing the rights of anyone who is not in that segment of the population. More simple yet, ALL humans have the same rights. In the design of Creation, it is undeniable that all humans are born and judged equally, according to the Laws of nature.

2. Having sex before marriage (or between adults of the same sex) is a consensual act between two people. It harms no one, therefore can not be described as a wrong. Further, the concept of marriage itself is an artificial and social construct which changes nothing, in reality, except in relation to more artificial human constructs; (false perceptions of loyalty, insurance, government papers.)

3. Marrying a child and forcing them to do sexual acts is rape. Full stop. There is no excuse, cultural or otherwise. And the abuse of foreign women in addition to woman of the same faith needs no explanation of why it is wrong.

So here, it is seen in blazing clarity how preference can be placed in the stead of principles, wrongly so.

Now the reverse can be as simple as holding real moral grounds—such as choosing to not abort an unborn child, or refusing to eat slaughtered animal meat—and then subsequently being told that you are only following a preference, rather than true principles.


Some see the way things are. Others have simply convinced themselves to believe in a falsehood, claiming it as ‘normal’ and necessary, because it is easier to believe in an illusion, than face a terrible reality. And because of people like them, others who DO see it, and who refuse to cooperate with the falsehoods, suffer.









Nature/Nurture

If I were to summarize this chapter in two sentences, it would run like this:

Nature constitutes the Laws binding human beings which can not be changed. Nurture is the factor which affects humans and how they express their freewill.

But of course, more details always help in understanding these concepts. Even a genius would be left with many gaps to fill in, if left with those two sentences alone.

Now, in this section, when I use the term ‘nature,’ it is in relation to human beings, not to the natural world, the wilderness, or chemical Laws in the physical realm.

The true nature of human beings is choice. Depending upon our environment, (the nurture aspect) we are influenced to choose how we will behave, and it will edge us either towards rightful action or wrongful conduct.

But, the greatest gift of our nature is that we can enforce our freewill to behave in opposition to the nurturing influences, and we can overcome what instinctual creatures can not. We are not hardwired to any form of behavior, good or bad.

Too many do not realize the power of our freewill, and claim that bad behavior or mediocre attitudes is simply the ‘nature’ of human beings, when it is just the affect of being nurtured towards a choice in conduct. It is a pathetic excuse, made in an attempt to give up on improving the current state of humanity.

Our nature of choice gives us unlimited potential, which means that our way of living in society is never permanent, and can swing infinitely in either direction. I will illustrate this point further:

In the book ‘The End of All Evil’ by Jeremy Locke, he states that humans have infinite value.

I would make the more precise statement by saying that humans have infinite POTENTIAL, through way of our freewill, which is our nature.

If that potential is flouted, and we do not apply ourselves to become worthy, our value is fundamentally zero. Evil people detract from the evolution of Creation itself; and as a fact, even in mathematics, that makes them worthless. The only worth they have in that condition is the raw material of Existence that they are formed of. Like raw ore, they can not serve a good purpose in that state. Either they change their condition and become someone of value, or they persist in being a negative force, and Creation will eventually ‘smelt’ them as an individual, and re-purpose their raw Existence into something that is an additive force. As an individual, Creation will treat them as we treat useless stone; grind it into something unrecognizable and turn it into a constructive material which resembles nothing like its first form.

Now, if we do not dismiss our own potential, our area of effect can become infinite, and used in ways which aid Creation’s own objective to grow on itself. That is where the value of the individual lies, but only if their presence ultimately progresses the aspect of evolution. Once they cross the line from the negative and into the additive, then they become invaluable, and have limitless potential to go further.

This positive potential, which can become a truth rather than an idea, is what all people should strive towards; as more create their own unique sphere of influence, and endeavor to grow that creative power, they will affect others to change in a similar way.

If enough individuals make the effort to do this, the world can change.

The only question, is if humans will decide to make this change.

It is their nature to choose the path they go on, whether consciously or subconsciously.

We can only hope that humanity will begin to make the right choice, soon, before we are too far gone to reverse what we have done.















Education/Schooling

True education is brought about with studies, comparisons and a skepticism that remains until something is determined as truth.

Schooling is based in belief, not knowledge or deep understanding. Humans are taught to accept falsities, or even truths, without inspecting the accuracy of what is being taught. I would go so far as to say that modern schooling is preached, rather than taught, because no one learns anything from it. They have to apply their own effort to get anything from the system, because all it aims to do is force attendees to believe rather than know. Because someone who has true understanding is dangerous to the system—those who are really educated can see all the strings holding the facade in place, which hides the ugly destination of schooling. Which is to create slaves, not to free people with truth.

One of the biggest determining factors to school (control) a person is their culture. All cultures have huge misconceptions which are accepted as fact. Some believe in certain things which are truth, but only because they blindly accepted it. More often than not, they accept a falsehood, however contradictory it is to other things that they accept. The worst aspect of culture is that humans are steeped in it from the moment of their birth, with no help from almost anyone to instill true knowledge in them. It is a self-propagating machine because it affects the sub- and unconscious mind the most, which determines a person’s behavior far more than their conscious mind. And since it touches them in such a way, someone does not need to participate in any school to be indoctrinated by it; other people in society will do it to them by acting out its false principles, leading by example in the most literal way.

One cultural misconception which many people get ingrained within them, is the idea that wealth is the highest obtainable goal. They may not say it, yet they prove their outlook everyday by concerning themselves with money, riches and more methods of increasing their monetary digits. In a world ruled by money, it is legitimate to concern oneself with procuring a lifestyle with it. But, too many people find a wealthy position in life, where they are wanting for nothing, yet waste every precious moment on a search for more, even though they don’t have a use for it. The whole thing becomes a game with no point, and ultimately they regret it later on, realizing that they could have done something more fulfilling, which would have followed them out of this life, into the next, like deepening their soul with true knowledge and a connection with other beings.

Yet another cultural concept we are schooled with involuntarily is the belief that human rights can be granted, rewritten, etc., depending on what collective groups decide, so long as they have buildings to operate from, write in strange ways on pieces of paper, and officiate it by citing themselves as an authority. All this has been disproved earlier, but it is a good example here of what cultural schooling accomplishes—which isn’t anything good.

Now in contrast to all this, what is education?

In essence, it is what every parent should provide for their children, yet almost never do. Most parents allow their offspring to be schooled and enslaved by government.

Education is the only proper and effective way to raise children well, and to make them grow into fully realized human beings—not the sad excuses we have sleepwalking about today.

It trains an individual to actually harness the real potential of the brain, by activating all of its segments in tandem. Whereas schooling will demand either the right brain to gain obedience, or force the left brain to overpower all else in the name of technicality, education teaches the mind to use both at once, pulling on either as the situation demands, and using them in healthier ways. The right brain is utilized for creativity and intuition, sometimes bypassing problems which the logic of the left brain struggles with. On the other hand, the left brain can compute technical and repetitive subjects through practice and puzzle-solving techniques. And below both hemispheres, there is the brain stem, or r-complex, which handles deep instinctual drives, which with balanced intelligence, an educated person can learn to handle, resist, or indulge in as necessary, without ever being ruled by it.

Above all of these is the neocortex, the most developed part of the brain and most difficult to activate properly. It is a more highly developed and integrated form of the two hemispheres, intuitively combining senses, emotions, logic and memory retention in an outer brain layer. When a human uses this to greater effect, it is a boost to the more specific functions of the hemispheres and the brain stem, and adds its own enormous abilities to a person’s tool set.

These of course are simplified explanations for neuroscience, but generally outline the roles of the human brain.

It can be surmised that schooling does not activate the neocortex at all, and overexerts the other parts of the brain in unhealthy ways, with one always dominating over the other at certain times. But education, on the other side of the line, teaches an individual to properly use all parts of the mind in an integrated fashion, allowing a person to not rely on belief, but to search for truth; to not be a slave to instincts, but to listen to their deeper guidance; to not cling to mere facts which have been discovered, but to look for what is missing in the greater tapestry; to not use only portions of one’s overall intelligence, but to combine all the forces at hand to develop wisdom.

That is what true education allows for, and to revive this lost art is of the utmost importance to bring up this fallen society, by influencing the young to become truly wise, rather than allowing them to become enslaved.

This book itself is education, every segment is a freeing truth, which you can evaluate, learn deeply, and utilize in your life.


Schooling teaches on one side to blindly accept all that is given to an individual, while also making them reject anything that is not part of the approved ‘science.’

Education, however, trains someone to neither reject nor accept anything until it has been tested. Once the truth of a matter has been decided by the outcomes of reality, the educated person can then implement that knowledge into their life as a very real tool of wisdom, which they can then act on.

Knowledge/Belief

The search for knowledge versus the search for belief has been a tight race. But in reality, only one is necessary, and the other leads to stray paths of falsity. And in most cases, knowledge, which is the higher attainment, has been usurped by belief, and few people actually obtain it, whilst thinking they have achieved it.


What most followers of religion fail to realize, is that they are participating in the largest cults of the world, all the while maintaining harsh judgment for those minor cults which sprout up over the centuries. This attitude extends beyond ‘spiritual’ religions to the false beliefs in authority—such as government—to the lies of fake ‘science,’ which people will follow even if it (literally) kills them. Those who ‘support their law enforcement,’ would look down on anyone pointing out the tyranny of their oppressors, and say that the messenger of truth is the problem. Personally, I would like to see that devout follower of authority get caught doing something perfectly moral, which has become arbitrarily banned. And see how kindly their ‘god’ would treat them, for all their loyalty.

In that particular situation, it is seen that one of the most effective breakers of belief is when the object of belief lashes out against its own followers.

Now, what is belief as a behavior, and what does it do to a person?

It is a blinder on the mind’s eye. It forces people to act on ideas they are not certain of. When someone says ‘to believe in God’ or ‘believe in yourself,’ there is no certainty involved. There is always a suspicion that something will fail, or that the object of belief does not actually exist. Belief is more akin to a false hope. And humanity needs certainty, not false hopes in something, if it is to ever create a thriving, moral society. Even in the case where someone has true conviction in their beliefs, they never have the knowledge or understanding to prove their ideas except for a ‘feeling.’ In this regard, it could be said that the emotions of a person are being utilized in an area of function better held for the mind. Emotions are a guide sign; you have to observe them objectively to see which ones lead to truth.

Now, belief has also infested the front lines of ‘science,’ where knowledge should take place, and in more cases than not, the pursuit of ‘knowledge’ is actually a shot in the dark based on false or unconfirmed beliefs.

What is true knowledge?

In the ancient trivium learning method, it means to acquire information on a subject. In the context I have been using it for, it is contradictory to belief. It is absolute certainty of a subject because through experience, the truth of the matter has been observed and repeated. Very few people in all the ages of humanity have ever operated on knowledge, especially when it comes to the functions of nature’s Laws.

Humans make suppositions on what morality is, and rarely hit on the actual mark, choosing to focus on trivial subjects instead. They also either believe that the Universe does not create consequence, or they falsely believe that the rules of consequence function differently than they actually do.

With real knowledge, you will understand what must happen to get certain results, and how Creation reacts specifically to certain actions. You will KNOW what is right and what is wrong, based on the consequences of those behaviors. No longer will it be a supposition. And that leads a person on the right path, because the moral path is always the most expedient.

Now, for the largest examples of belief in society.

1. The worst, perhaps, is the belief of authority, in any subject. It automatically puts the believer in a lower position than the supposed authority. This could be in government, in science, in media, etc. This will lead the individual to think that they are less valuable than the ‘authority.’ And that only leads to the further belief that some people have more rights than others, which has already been thoroughly explained as false, and evil.

2. As another example, one of the largest propagators of belief is the savior complex. It is a mental illness that spreads easily because it is comforting. It gives the absolutely false notion that upstanding behavior is not required, only belief in a person or deity which will save the person based on their loyal belief alone.

This is absurd, and one of the most childish mentalities anyone can ever have.

Meanwhile, people in this complex will condemn and tear down people who point this out, or who do not follow their cult. Knowledge of truth and actual moral principles are left at the wayside—because such understandings would completely undermine the belief, and lay responsibility not on some imaginary savior, but firmly on the individual. And humans hate being responsible, because it is difficult.

Now, in these passages, I am not condemning the spiritual religions entirely. The traditions themselves are often not the problem; the religious mindset is the issue. These religions always contain truth within their teachings, but whereas most people will accept the whole of it, a few intelligent souls will be able to draw the line and reject obvious flaws in the traditions of these religions. It is important to not swallow the whole poisoned morsel in order to gain the seed of truth within.

Islamic Sharia law, for example, is upheld by religious zeal—and has no redeeming qualities or seeds of truth in it. The whole of its law is garbage and rooted in evil—it degrades, smothers and denies the rights of humans, especially women. And it arbitrarily states that swine can not be taken for food—yet every other animal on the planet can be butchered for any reason whatsoever.

Where is the sense in any of this?

Too often, religion is followed without the use of senses, and so what may have started as true philosophy, becomes so degenerate and harmful, that the original intent is lost on people.

Blind compulsion is the real issue with religion; society has no discernment, which is why immoral practices are adopted. And what good has it brought about?

We have a religion which is based on a desire to overtake the world, (Islam) another one that believes its own people to be superior and ‘chosen’ above all others, (Judaism) and a third that beats down on the lifestyles of others because they believe that they have the answer to salvation (Christianity). And none of the others have done anything remarkable in their own rights, although they may be more peaceful than the major three.

The so-called morals that religious people take on are obeyed out of FEAR. Which means, they do not act out of understanding OR empathy, and as soon as something more terrifying comes along, they will abandon all previous loyalties and bow to their new fear.

The reality is, you should restrain from harmful behavior out of true empathy and care for truth. It is easy to fall into apathy, yes, but in those instances, the knowledge of what is right should be enough to push you on to correct action. I have done this innumerable times, when exhaustion or pain kept me from actually feeling empathy.

To put this all in a practical perspective: Belief is the equivalent of operating a nuclear plant based upon a hope and a guess that each piece of equipment works a certain way, with no experience whatsoever of how it all functions.

Knowledge on the other hand, is what comes when someone has studied every facet of the facility, and knows with certainty what each component is supposed to accomplish.

So why, by all paths of logic, would humanity choose to navigate the Universe by ways of belief?

The answer is simple: People are lazy.

Gaining knowledge and vetting it through application is difficult and can even be dangerous. All the more when that knowledge leads to truths which are controversial in society.

Now to end this section on religion: We do NOT need belief. Faith is completely optional; the Universe does not decide an individual’s consequences in life based upon belief, or whatever alleged faith they may have. It hands out effects which are secondary to causes. And how does a human cause something to happen?

By ACTION.

See how belief in something has nothing to do with what effects you bring about? Say that you believe in Sharia law, and falsely think that it is the law of the Universe. You believe that you are in your rights to subdue and harass women, or to marry (and rape) a girl who is only a child. Belief has nothing to do with the effects that will come from this. Your spirit will wither and your life will be one of pain. Even if you escape physical consequences in this incarnation, don’t think you have outrun universal justice. Your actions determined the trauma that you will rightly be subjected to, and your belief will have no effect on the outcome. This is the same as intentions, which was discussed earlier. Belief is a form of intention, without action.

Belief is SO UNIMPORTANT, THE WORD SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN CREATED.

And yet absolute, brain rotted and worthless individuals have touted this as the most important virtue in humans.

If belief has led the world thus far, (and what a cesspool of noxious decay it is now) why not try leading the world through knowledge for a change?

To enact this in your own life, take nothing at face value, run everything you think you know through rigorous studies until you KNOW.

Whatever was left to vague belief in your mind, confirm for truth, or falsehood.

How to do that?

Well, gathering information is the first step. In the ancient trivium method of the past, this step was actually referred to as knowledge.

In this chapter I have used the word in a different sense, yet there is still a link between the two. Gathering knowledge (raw information, whether correct or not) through the trivium method will lead to TRUE knowledge of what is correct or false amongst that raw data.

The second step of the trivium, which will lead towards real KNOWING versus BELIEF, is explained in the next chapter.













Understanding/Ignorance

In its own right, understanding is the state of perceiving all the parts of a concept, after investigating the subject properly.

In the trivium, it refers to the act of the researching through raw information. After the knowledge has been gathered, the process of understanding begins, where the individual investigates the validity of the information, siphoning between what is false and what is true. They do this until they can definitively say what category each portion of knowledge falls under.

The opposing dynamic of this mental equation is ignorance. Someone could have important knowledge right before them, but if they choose not to investigate it (out of laziness or cowardice) they have willfully chosen to ignore it.

Ignorance could also be called negligence of a duty to inform oneself, whilst understanding could be known as practicing one’s ability to dissect information.

Now when it comes to this subject, the state of ignorance is a negative and objectively wrong place to occupy, when important topics are involved.

Not investigating how to bake a cake is not important; that is simply a choice of preference. But when you make decisions which affect others around you, and those choices are made in a blind way, it is a requirement that you investigate properly what you are doing. If you do not, and harm occurs because of your actions, the natural consequences will fall hardest on you.

These decisions could be as simple as learning how to handle a gun properly in order to not harm someone by accident. Or researching your occupation to see that you are in moral standing, and not stomping on another’s rights.

Now, the final segment of the trivium will be discussed in the following chapter.








Wisdom/Folly

And so we come to the fruition of the developed mind—or underdeveloped, as the case may be.


Wisdom is the final manifestation of the mental realm. It is a culmination of the previous two steps in the trivium, (knowledge and understanding) and if the former two are not exercised, then wisdom can not come about.

Wisdom is a form of action, taken after correct thought has been established in the mind of an individual. In other words, when exercised, wisdom is defined as correct, moral conduct in the real world, no longer held in thought, but created in reality through the three steps.

Thus, wisdom could be described as a creative force, which is an instrument of truth, and a fertilizer for freedom.

Its mirror counterpart is the result of knowledge being rejected, and understanding being lost to the individual. Error—or folly—is an incorrect action, leading to destruction by disdaining the truth.

It takes no effort to commit folly. Simply forget knowledge exists and don’t work your mind to understand how the world functions. It will only end in pain for you and others.

The process would go in this way: an individual simply takes the word of someone who is ignorant, choosing to believe without cross referencing. They do nothing to practice on the so-called knowledge, and thus do not discover its impotency. And then they rely on that false knowledge in a situation where they arbitrarily decide it could be used, and get hurt very badly because of the uselessness of the information. This is folly.

As an important note; the elitists who control society act on a form of evil wisdom. They reject morals, yes, but do however act on real knowledge of the human psyche and sciences. In this way, the huge disparity of knowledge between them and the average fool lends them huge influence. They know this, and use it to full effect, gaining an advantage over the populace of idiots. All because they chose to use knowledge over belief and ignorance, which is the opposite preference of society as a whole. They do of course have their own false ideologies which lead to them being evil in nature, and their consequences will reach them in time.


So remember: true wisdom can be difficult to obtain, but it is hard to lose once earned, and prevents much misfortune.

Folly is easy in the moment, but once the consequences catch up, the hardship is infinite until an individual decides to become wise.








Responsibility/Abdication

Responsibility begins in the mind—but its effects are felt nearly immediately in the physical world, once the individual accepts their personal duty and acts on it.


Responsibility acknowledges the reality of ownership. Abdication is a denial of the truth of ownership, which is why communism and socialism raises slaves who deny any responsibility to themselves and their own actions, pinning the duty on their masters.

All ownership implies responsibility, but not all responsibility implies ownership.

Allow me to explain: You may own a house. That makes it your responsibility to maintain it and keep it in functioning order. No one else holds the responsibility of keeping it in an acceptable condition. In contrast, you have a responsibility to take care for those in your charge, such as children or pet animals. But you do not own them. To say that you own their very lives is a claim of being a deity, and is obviously false.

Now, you are responsible for their raising and upkeep, but that does not mean that their chosen actions or behaviors are yours. That would imply ownership, which is strict control over what is within your power. If your influence over them was fair, but in all contradiction they choose an evil action, that is wholly their responsibility. However, if you fed them psychological poison and brought them up in a foul manner, part of their terrible deeds do fall on you, and the repercussions will be felt. That is the responsibility you carry. But of course, they were never in your ownership, so their own actions will affect them the most.

Now, what in essence, is abdication?

It is the denial of responsibility in two senses. For one, it is the denial of your own actions and their affect. Secondly, it denies the reality that you can own objects.

It is amazing how people will say that they do not have the right of ownership over their belongings—and yet believe it is somehow possible for governments to own lands, structures, and even claim ownership over a portion of every individual’s earnings. And in its ultimate conclusion many people believe that governments own the citizenry, by way of controlling each individual’s actions.

But in this, they are wrong: You can never own something that has freewill. Therefore you can not legitimately enslave human beings or animals. There will be consequences. At most you can be a caretaker or guide for them.

And as soon as you cross the line from benefiting your charge to the side of degrading their life, you lose the privilege to care for them. And in this sense government is not a caretaker. All forms of government cross the line towards degrading life. The simple benefits (roads, sewers, military defense) all have equally simple solutions which could be handled without a system of enslavement.

Just as an example: if government was not constantly stamping down on incredible technological discoveries, roads would be obsolete by now. Wars would not be started without governments backing them wholeheartedly, and in any case, a fully armed population would make anyone hesitant to start feuds.

Now to make it finally clear: abdication has brought the world to its pathetic state, along with all the other simple failings in humanity. By abdicating responsibility and handing it to government, we have allowed psychopaths to dictate how our own lives will be handled.


If you deny the responsibility you have to yourself and your property, someone else will take the responsibility, as well as the benefits. Take responsibility back; it may be difficult to take the burden, but the rewards are more than sufficient.
















Care/Psychopathy

Care and psychopathy are principles lying in the heart of humanity. Care is the sign of a highly developed, empathetic nature; psychopathy is the absence of any empathy whatsoever. It is obvious where these two paths lead.


Care, at its foundation, is the willingness to perform self-sacrifice for the right thing, despite the personal loss. Its counterpart, which is psychopathy, is rooted in the effort to serve oneself at the cost of all others. If you do no harm in serving yourself, by all means, do it. And if someone tries to force you to sacrifice something at their command, refuse the demand and make the decision autonomously. Do things for yourself if the aim is to do greater things for the outer realm. But once you stop considering what your desires may do to others when you set out to satiate them, you have stepped into a state of psychopathy—even if you have yet to harm anyone. It swiftly will lead to you violating the intrinsic rights of other beings, once you lose care for all but yourself. In this sense, psychopathy could be described as a perverted form of care, which has directed itself away from others and only towards the self.

True care naturally leads to observation of correct morals. It develops a willingness to perform self-sacrifice for a greater end, whether the sacrifice be of time, attention, resources, or even your very life in certain events.

Psychopathy, on the other hand, completely ignores moral behavior, whether the individual understands that the Universe has constructed consequences for immoral acts or not. They lack care, and are apathetic to the truth, even if they understand it. They have selfish, shallow desires and will fulfill those at whatever cost, even if it backlashes on them in the end. Let it be stated however that psychopaths do not lack emotion; they simply lack empathy in their emotions. They have unbridled desire, anger, fear and glee. They only associate it with their own aims, however, and can not relate it to other living beings.

It must also be understood that psychopathy is not always a genetic disorder, or the result of acute brain trauma. It is a state of mind which many, many people have been conditioned into. The great hope in this, however, is that those who have been conditioned, can regain their care, whereas those who were born with a non-functioning mammalian brain can not develop empathy. At least not with the level of technology afforded to us at this time.

Care leads to greater and more empowering creativity; it aids in the direction of manifestation.

Psychopathy goes down the path of pain and greater mayhem; it leads inevitably towards destabilization and cessation.

Now what brings either of these dynamics about?

To develop care, repeated moral behavior must be enacted. The right path of action must be adhered even through discomfort, and care will result, as in a long, disciplined journey to complete a project. When the rewards are inevitably received (whether directly seen or not) it leads to greater appreciation and further care.

Psychopathy is the result of selfishness, to the point that immoral acts are repeated consistently, until the individual loses sight of how wrong their actions are. It numbs the mind to the point that they no longer give consideration for any consequences their behavior might bring about—even if they understand instinctively that those consequences will fall heaviest upon them.

In the following chapter, observe how care and psychopathy are weaved inextricably with the new subjects: non-aggression and self-defense.















Non-Aggression/Self-Defense

Man has the right . . . to live in the way that he wills to do . . . to move as he will on the face of the earth . . . to speak what he will . . . to write as he will . . . to love as he will . . .

. . . Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights.’

–Liber OZ, Aleister Crowley


In most people, there is a division in the mind, which leads to a division in society. Very few can find the balance which leads to a truthful understanding between leaving others unbothered, and defending oneself from being bothered.

These are the principles of non-aggression and self-defense.

If both are not united in a person’s makeup, then they are unbalanced and have only half the truth.

To lean too heavily into non-aggression is to become a pacifist, who denies the inborn right of everyone to defend themselves from violence. They contend that harm to anything is wrong. They do not understand that once an individual has violated the autonomy of another, there is no consequence for beating off the aggressor, with whatever force necessary.

This imbalance is usually a result of leaning too heavily into the emotional side of the human being, creating an unhealthy amount of empathy, which forgives the failings of violent people.

On the other line, there is the side of humanity which believes that violence is the only answer to their problems. They spend energy in bothering and violating people who have done nothing wrong. In this faction is ALL of military and police forces. They support and often engage in violating the rights of others, while believing that their victims have no right to be left alone.

In this is also the false belief that enormous weapons of untold destruction should be created—and controlled by governments of all institutions. But horrific creations such as the atom bomb have no moral function on this planet. Arbitrarily leveling cities benefits nothing—the actual enemy likely is not located in the area, so only innocents will pay the price of another’s misdeeds. Just testing those atrocities in the ocean are a huge magnitude of misconduct, and the individuals who did it owe a huge sum back to Creation, which may not be settled except by their cessation as an individual.

This mindset of ‘justified destruction’ has been one of the factors leading to the state of our current society. The violators go on ‘defending’ their countries, by subjugating innocent nations, or they simply abuse their own country. And those who are mistreated allow themselves to be abused, and believe falsely that they have no ability or right to overthrow their oppressors.

In all of this, there is a great lie; that harming the one who is abusing you will bring you to their level of evil. Almost everyone misinterprets that phrase. Simply subduing the violent element is NOT WRONG IN ANY WAY. Taking malicious glee and using more force than is necessary for the situation, is when it becomes wrong. Killing a beggar for stealing some food, is wrong. However, breaking multiple bones in someone who tried to violently rape another, is not a transgression.

What matters is the amount of force: what was required, and did you fulfill the specified force necessary?

To add a further note to this, standing down to violence is just as much a wrong as implementing violence. Watching as a child is beaten, or as someone is executed in the streets by an overconfident police member, is wrong. Anything less than ending the violence (or at least attempting to) is a transgression on the part of the observer. In all reality, to stand down to evil, is to comply with and support evil.

There is nothing more to this chapter, other than to rephrase it with a simple idiom:


Don’t start none, and there won’t be none. But if someone starts some, you FINISH IT!

– Mark Passio







Courage/Compliance

It must be made perfectly known: Courage is not a state of flawless tranquility in the face of danger. That way of being is simply confidence through repetition, or possibly apathy towards peril.

Real courage, the heart and meaning of it, is the willpower to act through a veil of fear. And even commit to a moral action despite the pains which will certainly fall on you if the behavior is executed.

Compliance is wholly the opposite. It could be defined as a fearful behavior, but instead of choosing to run from the object of fear, someone who is compliant will obey that object.

Basic fear drives one to escape from danger. Compliance is the act of joining forces with the feared threat, and conforming with it in the hopes of being spared.

It is the survival strategy of an advanced prey animal; it is only ever seen in humans, (as a tactic against humans) and it is a desperate strategy.

It will always end in destruction; whether through moral decay, or literal death when the predator can gain more by killing the complying prey.

In example: a native of an occupied country is seized by the invading enemy. In order to prolong their own life, they sell out the locations of fellow countrymen who are part of a resistance force. The moral decay begins there.

When he sees an opportunity to escape, he tries to leave, but is spotted and slaughtered without exception for his previous traitorous actions. That is the ultimate ending which compliance brings. In such a difficult situation, it would be hard to escape with his life, yet the moral decay could have been avoided.

In a greater, more societal sense: when a government comes out with incrementally small (proxy) laws, which restrict ever more freedom, the willingness of the people to comply with the first laws allows leeway for the tyranny to advance further, without resistance. Easier to have rejected the earlier, smaller proxy laws.

And that is where compliance has brought us today, where freedom is scarcely alive, and barely understood by most, and hardly even desired for.

When compliance with tyranny dominates amongst a population, freedom is lost. When courage takes the place of compliance, freedom is gained and maintained.

It takes courage to follow the Laws of Creation through tribulations. Compliance is a fearful state that puts off action in order to possibly prolong a comfortable position in life.


Courage is the path towards freedom. Compliance leads inevitably to slavery.







Choice/Consequence

The Universe is like a great mirror, especially in the realm of choice: if you make an angry face in front of a mirror, what do you see? An angry face looking back at you.

In the same way, if you choose to use hateful actions in the world, you will get a similar reaction in return.


Freewill has a huge affect on the rights of beings. The more sentience a being has, the more freewill it can exert. And the more freewill a being has, the more rights it holds, which are wrong to trespass upon. This is why animals rightfully own their lives, and should be left alone, as opposed to plants, which are not sentient and do not exert freewill.

Now comes the question that overthinking fools will spew: does freewill exist?

And my answer is, if you did not have freewill, would you not just accept input from outer influences, like a machine? If you do not have a conscious hold on yourself, then yes, your ability to exercise freewill is hampered by your own sub- and unconscious programming. And of course, the part that is not your choice to make up, is the Laws that smash down in reaction to your actions.

But freewill is exerted every time you voluntarily move your body, choose to speak the words that you do, or continue with thoughts throughout the day which garner your attention.

Freewill was the greatest gift bestowed on us—without it we would be empty husks, playing out a predetermined script. It allows us the right to choose any action that is possible. What follows is not our choice, however. The determining factor of the Universe is the effect. We get to choose what cause we put into motion. And we can either understand what effect will follow, or try to ignore it and become roadkill in its wake.

These concepts are very self evident, and have been explored in pieces previously, so that leaves one final point in this chapter to be investigated.

How does choice affect the use of tools in the world?

Many will blame inanimate utilities (such as the internet, or electricity, or firearms) for the woes of the world. As if inanimate tools could decide their own usage in reality.

The truth is, humans made the tools, and as such, the implements are neutral in effect when left on their own. Our choice determines the effect these tools have, which can be negative or positive. A spoon could be used to dig out someone’s eyes. Does that make all spoons inherently evil? No; that would be a retarded statement.

A deadly firearm can be used to defend innocents from evil treatment. Does that mean all acts with weapons are virtuous? Of course not.

The state of our world has been brought about by the freewill of humans. The blame rests solely on the choices of humans throughout history, up until the present moment.

So in conclusion:


Blame humans and their evil will, and their lack of good will to combat it.













What Will You Choose To Do?

If you have read through this whole book, you have just consumed the most basic and essential knowledge of our world, which occult societies and ancient traditions have either kept in hiding, or have been so quiet in their teachings as to be ignored.

None of this knowledge is complex or beyond the understanding of normal human individuals, yet its lack in society is felt deeply through the chaos humans have devised for themselves.

Now that you (hopefully) understand the subjects I have laid out before you and have begun to apply the principles in your life, the question remains: What will you do?

Will you take on the task as I have and begin truly educating others? What other task could be more critical in a time of utter slavery as we live in now?

Indeed, warning someone about the Laws of consequence is just like warning them about the Law of gravity. The effects are just as detrimental to a person if they are ignorant of the principles—the symptoms just do not show up as tangibly, nor do they happen immediately.

In example: would you idly watch someone walk off a building, or would you perhaps inform them that they are heading towards death? Why treat the knowledge of principles any differently? Indeed, why not inform people with even more fervor than the latter situation?

It is not an entertaining position to choose in life. To the contrary, it is perhaps one of the most frustrating tasks a person can possibly take on. To have people smack your hand away as you try to haul them out of shark-infested waters is an accurate comparison. You will try to save them from their own ignorance. Most will push you away, violently and unjustly. Only a few will take your influence in a positive manner and improve themselves as a result. But if no one takes this responsibility to educate others, nothing will ever change.

Remember that. There is no certainty of doom. Brain-dead, useless baggage for humans will say that the current condition of society is locked in place and can never be any different. To limit the possibilities of Creation and a specie’s evolution is implausibly stupid. That is not to say that a huge leap towards spiritual evolution is not very unlikely. It is extraordinarily improbable. But there is no ‘lock’ keeping humanity caged away from it. The choice is ours to make, and our position could be reversed in a day. But that choice has to first be presented, because most do not even realize it is an option.

Now, let me make this clearer to those who are undecided: If you think that following principles will make you ‘feel’ good, reconsider that. In this world—which has been steeped in artificial and atrocious constructs—following absolute right can get you killed more easily than not. But ignoring principles and going the ‘safe’ way will ALWAYS turn you into a slave—and progress the existing slavery of others towards an ever worse tyranny. People in the past were willing to lay down their lives over lesser offenses than this society has been subjected to. To not have the same courage of self-sacrifice is an insult to humanity. It only proves the unworthiness of society today.

If you follow the path of least resistance, I will state this; it always leads down.

And when your life here is over, your choices, the direction you took will lead you to places that really won’t ‘feel’ good—and the torturous crawl back up through your individual evolution will be unimaginably harder than it is here.

However, I have another contrast to present you: We are already in Hell. Earth is a slavery plantation, so tightly managed that we don’t even notice, and believe it to be unorganized, and a mere ‘chance’ that we have ended in this position.

So, the fight against humanity’s chains is a benefit in the long term. If the slave system can be removed, life would become unimaginably better. In this way, those who choose the harder path now, can learn to look forward to the possibilities once the war is won. You could call it being ‘selfish’ for an unselfish cause.

I will keep on this path however difficult the climb upward. I hope you will choose to learn more, and someday, I may see you on the mountain peak.










So, what will you choose?

bottom of page