June 10, 2019

Morality

Morality
«Article written by Universal Order contributor Thomas Hauser»

The Issue with Morality

Morality is, and will be, the only thing that keeps our civilization together. Plain and simple. I will not pull punches when I explain, that if our goal is to destroy this entire country, we MUST disregard anything related to morals. Ill explain using a hypothetical, but familiar image.

     1. You are a civilian of a Police State.

     2. The majority religion on which the basic laws are made dictates the attitudes and thinking of the average Joe.

     3. They do this by fear of condemnation from a higher power.

     4. Anyone advocating political change is met by social condemnation if the change does not include “progress”.

     5. Those who advocate political change fail due to the inability to work within the current police state.

     6. Those who advocate political change fail due to inability to use methods other than diplomacy.

Sound familiar? Its close to what we are living in today. Yet I will draw some attention to the last two points as being conditional, as anything remotely “left-wing” as it is called has more of a chance than anything considered “right-wing” to even be considered as a realistic change without needing violence. The System feeds off of political change, either it be right wing or left wing(which in itself is a System component!). It does not hurt the System to change it without totally overthrowing it, which, until now, had no threat of ever happening. Political change is done by the people, which is why it has always been accepted with open arms, since the majority rules in America. The change is usually accepted and celebrated after the cool down of protesters actively fighting against the change.

An example is the Race Riots, the White majority did not accept the Niggers forced integration into White society, yet once they got what they wanted (using the same Establishment they claimed that kept them down), and all the counter-protest to the new laws cooled down, it has become “immoral” to even question the position of Negros in society. So what of this example, is it now immoral for any racial equality to be abolished, now that there are “laws” in place to protect it? Of course, majority rules, if our masses think its wrong, then it surely is, isn’t it?

The Systems components such as the Church will use any means necessary to back up its societal change using faith and constructed fear of condemnation of the soul if one does not comply with it. A member of a church who is an open racist will many times hear of Bible quotes which loosely promote racial peace in an attempt to convert him to be as socialized as a “normal” member of our society would be. A normal member of society is conformed to the System in every way, and our society is shaped in a way that we are so ingrained with morality, no one at all is completely moral in eyes of society. Everyone hates something, yet we are told not to hate as children, and those who are open about their hatred are struck down and shamed. We are expected to keep shut and conform in this System, and we will continue to function that way unless we are done and through with morality. Some may critique this article as defining morality as the laws within our System, as they usually define morality as being religious law, such as the Ten Commandments from the Bible, and morals from Bible stories. They have a good basis for this, and they are correct in the case that our society’s morals where based off that of the Bible, so was the basis of our laws.

But as everything seemed as sacred, they always disintegrate into a shell of its former self. While these laws have Christian origins, they over time, has dissolved itself to be a total disgrace to anything related to Christianity, with one of the most notable examples being the recent gay marriage legislation which allows gays to marry in all 50 states under federal law.

Since then, any urban city church is well entitled to preach love and compassion, no matter what sexuality one is. It has gotten to the point to where there are even openly gay priests and they desecrate the church with the LGBT flag. But this is just urban, what about the rural parts of the US which adopt a more traditional version of morality? My observation of rural America is that they are in fact, the most in line with Biblical morality, yet they are not the ones of defending or fighting any immoral activity. These people adopt more of a territorial way of life, that the only reason they will fight someone or something is if it infiltrates their home territory, for example, a mosque is built in a small Christian majority town, this causes attitudes to stir, as it wasn’t a problem before hand, the introduction of a foreign idea/building disrupts the daily life of said rural American, whose morals are in line to be only loyal to Christianity and oppose any foreign religions.

This is not the case in any other part of America, where Systematical morality rules the land, and a tamed lemming will shrug off and continue its oiling of the Systems cogs while mosques, synagogues and abortion clinics are built on the corner where the old ice cream shop was during the mans sheltered childhood. This change very subtly will annoy the average Joe, and any comment made about the changes will certainly end in the shame of him. The sad reality is within America, whatever isn’t the majority, and isn’t working to become the majority, will almost always become obsolete/nonexistent, and in the case of Biblical morality, and its adherents being unwilling to fight the evil they claim to be against, it will soon be gone and Systematical morality will rule the entire playing field.

This is why I am against the entire idea of morality, since our goal of National Socialist takeover of the entire United States during and after the collapse will require us to break free of preexisting barriers of right and wrong to keep us above the average lemming, in both physical strength, and intelligence. I will go in further detail on how to live without morals later in this article. But for now, I will express my concerns and critiques on “moral” National Socialism.

National Moralists

I see time and time again where National Socialists who want TOTAL SYSTEMATICAL CHANGE, yet wont sink down to anything worse than a traffic ticket, and feel horrible and paranoid over a petty theft. The attitudes of said National Socialists, which I call National Moralists, only prove true that my position to totally abandon morality as being true.

The common symptoms of being a National Moralist include;

     1. Becoming squeamish when they see degradation in the society, feeling weak and sad when they see something such as Homosexuality being paraded in the open.

     2. Idolizing men who speak out against the evils in society to the point that they expect the idolized man to carry them to victory, instead of idolizing oneself to be greater.

     3. “Punching Right”. Not in the case that in the worry that it divides the abhorrent movement, but punching right to the extent that it interferes with your own growth and path.

     4. Using fear tactics to divert people away from certain ideas and tactics.

While defining the National Moralist, I imagined a common question that someone may ask, which is, What does all of this have to do with National Socialists who are more concerned with Morality? In my numbering of National Moralist characteristics, all of them include attitudes that interfere with the entire SIEGE mentality that we attempt to promote using SIEGECulture. I only label such people as Moralists because they often complain and slander about SIEGE and its true adherents behavior.

I will now go more in depth on why the characteristics of Moralists are a problem. In my first characteristic, while Homosexuality is truly disgusting in any form, one must be able to turn that disgust into anger, and realize that homosexuality and degeneracy will be the downfall of this civilization, and if we are to push the end, then homosexuality should not be stopped, it should continue to corrupt our society to its downfall, while SIEGEists live out the end-times.

This does not advocate for one to consume themselves in Homosexual activities (I could see that accusation from miles away). Moralists see the world as totally corrupted, yet bathe in their own tears instead of planning to separate themselves from it or plan on destroying it. In my second characteristic, I describe the average “based activist” National Socialists, who are so caught up in Internet blood-sports that they find entertainment and inspiration out of others peoples public “redpilling” of normies, of course, idolizing the person who does this to the point where the National Moralist expects them to carry them to victory, which since we live in a world without another man such as Hitler, is impossible and idiotic. In my third characteristic, I criticize those who “punch right”, in other words purity-spiraling, BUT I do understand the importance of purity-spiraling in the right circumstances.

In the case of Iron March, being a strict community of like-minded people, purity-spiraling is necessary to keep the purity of the forum, and in the condemned Movement, purity spiraling is needed due to open recruitment usually bringing the worst out of society.

We as SIEGEists do not need any purity-spiraling, as we are not a part of a forum, or the Movement, therefore, any recruitment done would be done on the grounds that they are already in line with SIEGE and National Socialism, if someone isn’t, they wouldn’t have been even thought of being recruited in the first place. My opinion on this matter does not invalidate ANY of Alexander Slavros’ works and my opinion only realizes that there is certain circumstances that one must take in account of Slavros’ work and when to apply it.

In the case of the Atomwaffen Division not having open recruitment, instead having very strict and precise recruitment of certain individuals who have the right mindset to become Atomwaffen, purity-spiraling is not necessary because the person who is being chosen already lines up correctly with the SIEGE mindset, which is different in any other organization that has open recruitment, which relies on people who THINK that they have the correct mindset to join it, which means that the recruiters need to make sure that they agree 100% with their mindset using purity-spiraling.

In my fourth and final characteristic of a National Moralist, I criticize the fear tactics they use to divide and conquer any ideas that do not fit in with their mindset. While it is important to be purely adherent to a certain worldview, it does not harm a person or an organization to dabble in different ideals to be able to apply that to their worldview. We have already understood that there is a lot to be learned by reading books of other viewpoints different than ours.

The National Moralist chooses to use fear and insults to prevent people from reading such things. Since we don’t follow their strict National Socialist ONLY reading list, we are somewhat everything negative in the books that we promote. This is only considered true when you look at the failure known as the Satanic Panic, which conjured a boogeyman to help condemn a group due to the reading list of its websites library. This relates to moralist ideals because the perpetrator of the defamation campaign attempts to play with peoples emotions and to divide a group due to whether its good or evil.

The moralists try their very hardest to portray themselves as good, they wear this Good Guy Badge to be able to convince their peers that they are in fact, more righteous than the (usually) stronger leaders. They do this not to become righteous by living a life which leads to men believing that they are good, they do this by convincing other people that they are on the side of the good, even if the evidence of that is strictly off-limits to question. The characteristics that I have listed are but a very few observable traits that, in full, can span across an entire book.

The next type of moralist I will now describe is one that disguises themselves as a SIEGEist, yet when exposed, they shrivel up, and ditch their former beliefs to protect their comfortable life. What I mean by exposed is, since at the time of writing, snake-tongued journalists are currently looking for a raise by “exposing” members of revolutionary National Socialist organizations. While this is unavoidable due to the resources Jewish media has at its disposal, ditching beliefs and ratting to protect yourself is one of the most cowardly acts of all time and only proves yourself to be not fanatical at all.

Where we see the media as a pest, moralists see the media as a predator. Being confronted by an investigative journalist is one of the least of your worries, and if you do get confronted, it can easily be dismissed by a simple phrase… ”No comment”. There, you have all your answers for any question a journalist may confront you with. Only the weak cowers at the hand of the Jew.

Alternative Living – CONCLUSION

Now what is the solution to living without morality? Moralists and Worriers would assume that this means total degeneracy, since they are naturally whiners when it comes to not obsessing over New-speak. Living without Systematic or Biblical morality is quite simple. Living without morality means that your life is dictated by yourself with your Fascist worldview being the basis of your life’s dictation. Ted Kaczynski’s Morality and Revolution gives an example of Six Principles that may be used to substitute morality(more specifically, a universal code of fairness, he explains more of this in his essay), which has been linked below.

In ditching Systematic Morality, one must also ditch the System all together as well. This doesn’t necessarily mean living as a hermit somewhere in the woods(although I totally advocate someone taking notes of Varg Vikernes’ style of living), it simply means that one must either become totally self-sufficient, or one must suck the System out of its own funds (Welfare, Food Stamps, visiting local food banks).

When the System collapses, you will rather be able to sustain yourself using gardens and livestock, or you will be stocked to the brim with the food that you have taken from the System for free, reminiscent of the quote by Vladmir Lenin “The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them”. I believe that failure to ditch systematic morality is one of the reasons that we are so far behind in achieving our goals, and in reading this article, I hope that you stop feeding into the Movementarian slop that is morality.