One question people regularly think of when I tell them that Satan made this world is “why isn’t it worse?”, meaning, why are there good things in it at all then?

I went through that in the last book, but there are some things that may be added.

First, he didn’t actually get what he wanted. He didn’t actually design the world; he made a wish list of parameters he gave to the Jewel, who did all the heavy lifting. Sanat Kumar was like an idiot boss who has a genius employee. He makes his idiotic requests, and the employee figures out how to get the closest to that with what’s actually possible. There were things about the world Satan didn’t like. Like, at all. He tried to change them, but then the world didn’t work. Like, the matter didn’t fuse on nuclear or chemical level. Life didn’t happen, or it remained single-celled forever. Or life happened and was quickly extinguished. Or the species that he wanted got extinct. Or the souls didn’t bind to the bodies. Basically, this is as bad as he could get it before the whole thing became unliveable.

Also, the Gods had a say, as I wrote in the book. They intervened to a point; its very foundations are cracked, allowing transcendence to manifest despite Sanat Kumar’s intent and commands, because the most fundamental layer of everything exists because of God, and the Jewel exists because of God’s plan and intent. This forced Sanat Kumar to just live with some things he absolutely hated, and wouldn’t have allowed them to exist if it were up to him. So, he intervened on the more superficial layer of civilization, when the layer of world architecture couldn’t be pushed beyond a certain point.

The thing is, Satan was never quite happy with what he got, or how it evolved. Some things he hated always seemed to emerge, no matter how hard he tried to suppress them. He would design the system so that oppressing and abusing others was more profitable and effective, and people would still find a way to love someone and care for them, making him irate. The selfish properties he promoted and tried to make more effective ended up creating profound unhappiness despite his propaganda. He designed everything so people would win by playing according to his rules, and most chose “mediocrity” or even “loss”, completely eschewing his rules and the game itself. Almost nobody wanted to win according to his definition of a victory. Instead, they instinctively approximated behaviours they remembered from Heaven, on some layer that wasn’t memory, so he couldn’t completely suppress it. When people embrace his rules and ideals, the entire structure collapses and they notice.

That doesn’t mean that this place is good, and that God is happy with it. Quite the contrary. It’s terrible, but not as terrible as Satan wanted it. He didn’t get his way completely, because his ideas are so fundamentally bad, that reality collapses when they are implemented fully. This leaves a broken compromise with what Satan wanted, and what he could realistically get, softened additionally by the fact that he was allowed to do this in the first place because God had his plans and ideas that had precedence.

So, that’s why beautiful things exist here; that’s why this place is a mixture. That’s why brahman permeates the world the way butter permeates milk. That’s why baby wolves are cute, and societies function when people instinctively emulate aspects of heaven on every level, and they fall apart when Satan gets his way. He designed it, but everything is made upon God, and within God’s mind.

I understand there’s a problem with communication that I tend to have when I write something.

It’s very concentrated. When I make a statement, I usually invested quite a bit of thought in it. Found out the facts, thought about them a lot, thought what they actually mean, explored the corollaries, mapped out the entire network of ideas around it all, and when I give you the conclusion, it looks like complete nonsense… and then you spend ten years slowly thinking about it, observing how things work, and you eventually get there.

One of those ideas, that I expressed in my latest book, is that the entire system of belief behind the French Revolution and American independence is essentially Satan’s ideology that is being sold to people in order to destroy them. The point of the whole exercise is to sell you ideas that will make you more like Satan, and less like the Gods.

Just listen to the words: independence, liberty, freedom, empowerment, emancipation, rights, democracy. You are conditioned to automatically feel good about them. You automatically assume they are good. And yet, if you take a look at any Satanic church, you will see that they profess the same ideals. They worship the same concepts. They think God is the problem you need to be emancipated from. They think heaven is an oppressive system and Satan is offering freedom. They think service degrades you, that transcendence is an illusion and you are an animal that needs to embrace its animal nature. The difference in belief between modern America and outright Satanism is essentially zero. This is not because Satanism is using American ideals to advertise itself. It’s because America is a Satanist project from its inception.

So, a statement that is so concentrated that it sounds absurd is in fact something that can be easily unpacked and verified. But let’s also dismantle those modernist mantras. Oppression, emancipation, empowerment, rights, democracy and so on.

Democracy is what exactly? Everybody gets a vote? Even Socrates understood how that works and why it’s a terrible idea. If you give everybody a vote, it means you’re empowering demagogues, not the people. Basically, most people are ignorant and disinterested. They don’t know how things actually work or what should be done, and they don’t even care. So, people who are experts in manipulating the masses will sell them propaganda and use them as means of empowering themselves. Since the demagogues are among the worst people in the world, this is whom democracy empowers and this is who actually harvests votes – the propagandists with money and an agenda. This was sold to you as the superior form of government – by the propagandists with an agenda.

Rights also sound good – I have rights, you can’t fuck with me. Until you understand that the people giving you your supposed rights are the ones most likely to fuck with you. In America, police will treat you like a slave; they will command you to lie on the floor like a slave and put you in chains, they will steal any cash you happen to have with some false excuse, they will pepper spray you or taser you if you show any reaction other than absolute submission to their authority, and they will read you your “rights” that essentially say that you are a slave and they are so hostile to you that whatever you do will be used as evidence against you, and your only recourse is an attorney who will represent you in a court system that’s basically been put there by the same system that put the police there to keep you enslaved and submissive. I explained the concept of rights to my son by saying that those are basically things invented by the state in order to sell you the idea that they are the ones you depend on in order to have them. Since they invented the concept of rights, they can also revoke it or modify it by making it into a mockery, for instance giving obvious enemies of everything good more rights and protections than they give normal people. They can also import hostile foreigners and pretend those are some victim category that requires special protections. There’s no end to the abuse of the concept, since it was originally designed with malicious intent in mind. I also told him that this concept was invented because they wanted to remove religion from legislature, because the concept of law was originally seen as provided by God, and implemented by the state. God said “don’t kill”, and the state then made it into laws against murder, with the entire infrastructure that enforces it. God said “don’t steal” and the state translated it into laws that protect property. God said “do not covet” and the state translated it into laws that define and protect the public morale and decency. Essentially, the state used to be an extension of religion, and certain Satanist groups hated that and invented an alternative legal system, based not on obedience to God and on the concept of duties, but on inverted assumptions; essentially, that killing you or stealing from you is bad not because God forbade it, but because you have inherent rights to life and property. Everybody has been brainwashed to no end into accepting this idiotic concept, and now you can’t even question it without zombies looking at you as if you questioned the existence of gravity. However, how is a right to life even a thing? Life by default ends in death. Not even life itself believes in the right to life. The state that claims to protect your rights will be the first to get you killed if it needs soldiers to defend it. The terrible slaughterhouses of first and second world war were a great example – oh, we’re secular states that believe in rights, so we’ll forcefully or deceptively recruit you to die for some foolish reason we made up. We’ll also kill people who disobey our authority. But yeah, we’re guaranteeing your rights.

I told my son that the worst thing that can happen to him is to be reduced to a situation where the state gives him what they think he has a right to. Basically, you’re doing fine not because you have rights, but because I have duties. It has absolutely nothing to do with the state, and everything to do with my relationship with God. Without God, you would have hell, of the kind my parents created for me, or the kind the state creates for people who are reduced to asking for social care. God is not some heavenly tyrant you need emancipation from. God is the silent source of good things that have happened to you. God is the reason why good people are good, and absence of God is why evil people are evil. God is the light and love behind duty, and absence of that light is why Satan invented the concept of rights and had his servants promote it. You don’t need rights when you’re surrounded by people who love you, as God commanded. You think you need rights to protect you from the godless people who want to hurt you and take advantage of you, and when you are in danger of them you get to understand that those exact ones invented the concept of rights so that they could cut you away from God’s love.

Satan used to spread propaganda about how he left heaven because he didn’t want to obey God, didn’t want to serve, didn’t want to live in tyranny. Sure. In fact, he couldn’t bear people being happy, free and loving each other. He wanted them to cry in oppression so that he could feel powerful, because when he saw powerful, free people in heaven, he felt hatred, and some kind of a miserable combination of envy, fear and deprivation that weak, depraved beings feel when they see strong, fulfilled ones. That’s how all his propaganda always worked – re-package depravity as emancipation. Re-package being small, hateful, envious and evil and hating the people whose magnificent, fulfilled and radiant state made him feel the full impact of his depraved nature by providing a point of reference, into being oppressed by them and unwilling to take it any more. It’s what you get in every single instance when you scratch the surface of all those modernist people supposedly fighting for emancipation, progress and liberation. You get a depraved Lesbian hating the fact that all normal women want to get married and have families, so she invents feminism – trying to convince them that they are oppressed and in need of emancipation, and finds support in rich people who want women as cheap workforce, and the state that wants women paying taxes. You think that’s exaggerated caricature? It’s the actual history of feminism. Look it up. All the women who came up with feminism in the first place were the rock bottom of the pool of human depravity. You would be hard pressed to find worse people anywhere. All their intentions were selfish and evil. Feminism exists because Satan hated women, and hated men and women being happy together even more, so he invented a “cure” for that. He thought if everybody was miserable, he’ll at least feel some malicious glee that is the equivalent of happiness in his depraved existence, as if that would help him.

Yes, that’s the root cause behind all those “mantras” – democracy, emancipation, freedom, rights. Hatred of God, pain of seeing fulfilled and happy people just hanging out, loving each other, respecting each other and praising God’s light. That’s what you’ve been sold, and why.

I was just thinking how the opposite of minimalism isn’t necessarily only one thing. Also, how most of those things seem to easily converge into extremes and become as dysfunctional.

Those opposites, to name a few, are fancification, hoarding, and chasing performance.

Chasing performance is easy to explain – it’s belief that you need top performance gear in order to get good results at something. It’s sometimes true, and mostly it’s not. For instance, you might need a Macbook Air, but you might not need the model with the most storage space and most RAM if you’re using it in order to write text. You need it for the small size, great performance, great screen, keyboard and touchpad, but you don’t need the extra performance one would need to run Lightroom and process 61MP files. If you’re into landscape photography, you need a camera and lens with great resolution, contrast and resistance to flare. However, you don’t need a lens with great maximum aperture since you’ll mostly be at f/8-f/16. You also don’t need a camera with the greatest frame rate and autofocus in the world. You just need it to be good enough to catch the occasional specimen of wildlife that happens to wander into the frame. Everything past “good enough” is in essence a waste of resources. You might need 5 FPS, but not 25. What you need is excellent weather sealing. Chasing performance after a certain point is useless and wasteful, and yet people do it because they think more is better. Sure, you want your car to be fast and to accelerate well. It’s important for safe overtaking and safe acceleration to highway speeds. However, after a certain point it becomes excessive, and if you push it far enough it becomes so wasteful and unnecessary it borders on insanity. Also, the more you don’t need it, the more money it tends to cost, and yet people develop some kind of tunnel vision where they rationalise it with spiritual projections of all sorts – oh, a fast car makes me remember the feeling of the astral plane, of freedom and power. Excellent. Work on being on the astral plane then because that’s the actual thing you want. Fuck cars, they are just an illusion that makes you think you can get that in the physical world which you can’t, and it’s fatal to try.

Hoarding is also very easy to understand – you accumulate stuff with little to no consideration to what happens next, chasing that dopamine kick of getting a new thing. Soon you have so many things your place looks like a Chinese $1 store. You also can’t make yourself get rid of things, despite the fact they have zero utility, negative decorative value, and they make it difficult for you to clean and maintain the place. Hoarding is the obvious reason why people thought of minimalism as a solution, often going so far as to make the cure as bad as the disease.

Fancification, on the other hand, is more difficult to explain. Let’s define it as attempt to make each object you own the most exclusive, fancy and expensive you possibly can, often at the expense of functionality and performance. The fixtures in your bathroom don’t just need to be functional, they need to be the fanciest fixtures you can find. You don’t really watch TV, but your TV needs to be the most expensive, biggest, fanciest model. Your fridge needs to be the fancy model that connects to the Internet and shows the interior of the fridge on the screen outside so that you don’t have to open it. Your carpet needs to be Persian, hand made. Your coffee set needs to be handmade vintage porcelain. Where a hoarder will just fill their place with all kinds of trash, you will get very specific, extremely expensive and fancy decorative pieces strategically positioned to start conversations. Nothing you own can be “just anything”, and mere function is something you scoff at. You want it to “reflect your personality”, and you want to show that your personality is fancy and unique, that you’re not satisfied with the mundane.

In my experience, I came to associate those things with certain personality profiles and states. Minimalism, for instance, usually means self-hatred and profound unhappiness. Hoarding indicates mental illness, of a very serious, personality breakdown kind. Fancification, on the other hand, indicates projection; trying to force this reality into conformity with your desires and ideas. It can indicate narcissism, or it can indicate refusal to accept that this world cannot be forced into compliance with your ideas about perfection.

So, where in all of this do I see myself? That’s always an interesting question. I don’t hoard stuff; if trash accumulates, I periodically clean it all up, but I don’t clean everything constantly, because I have better things to do. Rather, I tend to leave everything in good condition so that I don’t have the mess accumulate. I will try to get things that are functional first, and everything else second. I prefer clean, elegant design without extraneous fluff. I prefer steel to gold; gold is for fancy people, steel is for people who get shit done, and I see myself as the latter rather than the former. Minimalism takes too much effort for me to entertain it, but I would subscribe to the Bauhaus ideal of form following function. Also, I prefer not to increase dependency, so I like things that are easy to maintain.

I don’t project higher realities or my true, past self, into either things of this world, or my physical body, because, frankly, I don’t think I deserve it. Vedanta would put identity in terms of realization of the True Self, by which they mean Atman/Brahman, while everything else is either false identification or outright delusion.

I disagree. I see identity as a combination of self, memories, power and circumstances. Self without memories is what exactly? A pathetic, damaged state of being. In case you do remember yourself as being a king in a past life, what is it to you now, if you’re currently an ordinary person without any power? Of what use is a memory of a past self as an important, wealthy, powerful person if you’re a wage slave now? Can you truly claim your former identity? I don’t think so, unless you’re after misery and humiliation. And circumstances, they are perhaps the most important of all. If a huge part of your identity is being surrounded by your family and friends in the higher plane of existence, can you really claim your true self if you’ve been forcefully separated from them, can’t even remember most of it properly, and even the memory you have depends on your spiritual state? Shankaracharya would say that merely saying the words “I am a king” doesn’t make one so, if it goes without commanding an army and ruling a country. To claim identity without appropriate circumstances makes you delusional and an object of ridicule.

So, what does it matter if I remember some of my past circumstances and power, if I have no access to those things now? If I am in a humble state, I would rather act humbly, than make a fool out of myself by claiming something that is out of my reach at the moment. Also, the nature of my memories, those that I managed to reclaim, puts a damper on any attempt to project into my physical circumstances and try to fancify them, because it feels so ridiculous. You can’t substitute spiritual jewels with physical ones, nor can you emulate the Throne of God with physical gold, despite the similarity in colour. It would feel so incredibly ridiculous and pathetic. Things are just things. They can’t reflect my higher reality because if you saw my higher reality, you’d know how ridiculous that even sounds. Am I to try to reproduce Shivaratri here with some pathetic attempt to adorn myself with black jewellery? I am in a pathetic state, being reduced to human existence, but I have some dignity left, so the answer is a definite “no”. A fast car could never reproduce the feeling of true power. No status symbol here can reflect my status “up there”. So, I adhere to simplicity, functionality and dignity of just sucking it up instead of acting childishly in some foolish rebellion.

No fancy things for me here. Just getting shit done. When I reclaim power, memories and circumstances, we’ll talk about true names and identities.