Cults of "Innocence"

We conceptualise existence in order to understand it but the conceptualisation and the actuality are not the same
This is not a problem as long as we understand the distinction and do not start equating the map with the territory

All language is an abstraction and the things that it describes are entirely separate entities in and of themselves
Existence is hard to truly describe because we are only an infinitesimal part of it that is merely passing through

A human brain cannot understand the absolute scale of existence because it is simply beyond comprehension
So saying that it is open ended is probably the best way to conceptualise it from our very limited perspective

Yes…and because an organic brain has to reduce the phenomenon to a level it can process.
A dynamic cosmos - energy - has to be conceptually “frozen” and simplified/generalized into a representation of it - an idea/ideal.
All language is representational art.


All is flux, nothing is stationary.
All is in flux - interactive.

War is the father of all, and rules over all.
Εν-Εργο…energy. At work, in the process of. In a state of turmoil, agitation.

There are no innocent in war.
To be alive is an agressive act. To take up space - possibilities - is to deny it to another. An act of appropriation.

The Cult of Innocence is the Western Shrine of “Privilege”.

Those who are “Privileged”, can do no harm, are never responsible for harm, and always viewed positively, “untouchable”. This is the perception and ideal of the Liberal-Left. They want to be the “Chosen Ones”, and they want the power of control, allowing in or expelling who they want. This is also what “Power” leads to, as a conclusion, to them. Thus power is a means to an end, that end, is becoming ‘untouchable’, all positive, no negative. It’s obviously a delusion, schizophrenia, as you say. It’s an ignorance and intellectual blind-spot, a Neurosis.

I believe this is the reference to modern-day political “sickness”, cultural disease, or “western decay”. The more delusional the mass of population becomes, a crash becomes inevitable. These factors are being perpetuated and strengthened in children, in the public schooling systems, and the partisan atmosphere. Impartiality is a moot-point. Nobody really cares or wants impartiality. Reason and rationality are luxuries that few can afford.

To claim innocence is to claim ignorance, and ignorance is not innocence.

To act is to accept the responsibility of your actions - the repercussions and the consequences, whether you’re aware or not; whether you’ve judged accurately and expect them or not.
Intent can be self-deceiving. In fact, it almost always is.

Doesn’t the hypocrite always come bringing great gifts and declaring his good intentions towards you?
Does he not pretend innocence and claim to be on your side?

Does the liar not tell you he is your friend?

The bigger the lie, the bigger the seductive promises he offers.

I missed this video, just found it tonight, it’s between Tim Pool and Twitter Executives, concerning banning, deplatforming, and censorship concerning “rule-breaking” on public platforms (cyberspace), in this case, “misgendering” transexuals.


When god was prematurely declared dead, he resurrected as abstraction.
He became an idea/ideal. His words an ideology.
It was renamed, ‘one’, or ‘absolute’, to preserve the innocence of the believers.
His will be done…on earth as it is in heaven - hard, cruel, unyielding determinism.
The chosen have been chosen for the task of suffering - universal ideal victims, against which all victims shall be compared, henceforth.

Who shall be strong enough to live up to their standard; enduring hatred in their profound innocence?

Cults of Innocence impose a rule on thoughts and behaviours.
If you do not identify with one of the victim protective classes you are not permitted to feel pride.
Pride must prove itself worthy, through humility before the collective…not before reality.
We get an underserve arrogance, in relation to reality, and a feigned humility before the in-group.
This si distinct within the triad of Abrahamism: Judaism/Christianity/Islam.

Anything that does not show the appropriate degree of deference to this collective victimhood, is a ‘fascist’ a ‘nazi’ or some other label associated with vileness and evil.
The idea of ‘evil’ has been renamed, after Nietzsche influence eon the nihilistic zeitgeist.
Abrahamism has become abstracted to evade his critique of one of tis branches - i.e., Christianity - and Beyond Good and Evil forced nihilists to adopt new labels to express the same ideas.
A general repackaging has occurred.
Even Christianity is currently being reinvented using new names for the same concepts.
This is clear in the Marxist denial of Christianity, and in the justification of Determinism, as a form of fatalism, that has simply replaced the one-god with ana abstract concept of universe, or oneness, defined as absolute order.

Adaptation at work.
The threat is selectively integrated into the adapted new form, by transforming it into a form that can be integrated into the same dogma, with the substitution of words.
The threat is presumed to be eliminated by integrating it through relabeling.

Cults of Innocence are rooted in good/evil dichotomies, even if they personally and consciously deny any such prejudices.
The innocent are always the ‘good’, bridging into the world some form of salvation; the ‘evil’ are the ones who deny this offering, or expose the underlying motives and strategies.

Be weary of the gift giver and the salvation peddler.

Parasites emerge in the darkness, when they feel safe.
When they infest a host, they imitate its internal - esoteric - processes, seemingly belonging to the host they infest.

Parasite-memes stand forth as belonging to the elite when they feel safe; when they fear that this will draw unwanted consequences they return to their other, ideological, identity.
From genetic to memetic identifiers, depending on what aids them in disappearing or as belonging to the group that dominates within the host they infest.

Adjustment in terminology.
Innocence = piety, contrition, worthy of salvation, god’s minion.
Victim = Ignorance. Sinner.

God = Order, Universe. One, Absolute.

The names have been updated (brand names, packaging), the concepts remain the same.

History repeats, but never exactly as it has in the past, due to the element of chaos - properly defined as random energies; energies lacking patterns.

Does anyone doubt that Abrahamism’s longevity is due to tis ability to adapt, through tis obscurantist narratives, to modern circumstances?
We’re expecting an new branch to erupt, from the spiritual triad (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), now that secular variants have failed to produce the earthly Utopia they promised.
Mediocre masses need lies to cope.
Every age had the layman to placate and integrate. Every age had to sell a literal interpretation of its world-views. An occult obscurantism for the average man, seeking relief from himself and existence.

The most comforting lie would be that of his own “innocence”.
As if the very act of existing is not aggressive, but passive.

With all this talk of ‘consent’, what is being evaded is personal culpability.
In an age of romantic idealism, and emasculation (feminization), any sign of harshness and indifference is reacted to as a personal affront.
Concealed in mystification, demystification is an attack on their very survival.
As if the very act of copulation were not interventional, requiring a psychological adaptation to enduire and enjoy it.
The madness of lust; the self-numbing of love.

So many centuries of lies and hypocrisy cannot be erased.
Minds born and raised in twilight, would be permanently blinded by the sunlight; their delicate, unhabituated, hides burned away.

The innocent have already found their destination, and only wish to validate it.
The innocent have already declared their innocence, because they’ve found the one(s) who are always culpable for their errors and constant fallings and failures.
The innocent seek salvation they’ve decided they deserve; and they know the absolute, so what’s left but to passionately believe in it, compensating for the absence with emotion, with conviction?

A victim is always innocent.
Innocent of what?
Of what happens to him/her?
He is always not responsible for what happens to him, or as a consequence of his actions, his choices…his willful, intentional, behaviors - both those consciously made and those unconsciously performed.

Usually such a coward is selective.
He is proud of positive consequences, and always innocent of the shame negative consequences ought to produce.
This is why these types are usually narcissistic, or undeservedly arrogant.
Nothing they’ve ever done ro said, with a negative consequence, can be blamed on him/her, leaving only the positive ones to acknowledge and inflate his/her fragile ego with.
Because this is a defensive choice.
A fragile, insecure ego, refuses anything that may puncture the hot ait it uses to inflate itself into proportions it wishes to be associated with.

Like a weakling who has to exaggerate his physical strength, or a poor man his riches.

The occult can be an effective foundation for establishing a cult.
In the mysterious one can project any hypothetical and justify it emotionally, seducing and attracting those who share in the need and the desire.

Nothing softens skepticism than need/suffering.
At a high degree it completely destroys reasoning.
See how the dying grasp to any superstition, any irrational hope.
Desperation is what superstitions exploit.
Existential anxiety, the anxiety of an emerging self-awareness, makes nihilism a perfect defensive reaction.
The absence of absolutes, allows for the mind to justify anything, if it is presented in a cohesive and positive packaging.
Subtlety, obscurantism, permits the target to fill in what is missing. His/her own needs/desires projecting the clarity ni the obscure - filling in the vagueness.

This is why obscurantist philosophies always use prose, and innuendoes - novel, unconventional, ways to use words, hinting at something profound and different.

Cults of Innocence are built no either/or absolute dichotomies.
The other is either demonized or sanctified, beyond the real.
In relation to the demonic, evil - though in a post-Nietzsche era they will not admit to calling it so - the victim identifies with the innocence - sanctification and idealization of himself and his own.
In relation to the sacred, the sanctified, good - in-line with Abrahamic ethology - the individual feels unworthy, imperfect, forever wanting to make amends to purify self, to become worthy of eternal return - or eternal life, as they now refuse to call it.

Other becomes the one the innocent victim unloads his/her own negativity, to purify self as a mind motivated by the best intentions, the most noble principles, the more pure ideals.
He is constantly being misunderstood, misinterpreted, misjudged in relation to how he/she perceives himself - as pure ideal.

The masses need the irrational.
Throughout the ages, and across all racial and tribal lines, the average man and woman needed a literal interpretation of their metaphorical spiritual beliefs.
Every age had tis occult obscurantism, and every age had those that exploited them.

It is during Dark Ages - decline of dominating Empires - when they reach an apex; superstitions flourish, old wives tales are repeated and believed in, lies usurp the slightest hint of truth.
As Darkness increases so does desperation and degeneracy - darkest before the dawn.

Modern prejudices come to settle upon the easy solution that philosophy is a discipline of coping and finding ways of dealing with existence.
A prejudice firmly rooted in human anxiety.

They come to philosophy expecting, demanding, solutions to their woes and cares, and are disheartened by anything that increases them or shatters those they’ve already adopted.
If this were so, then philosophy would be common, and the gifted not so rare.
Coping is psychological; a part of philosophy but not its main focus.
The main focus of philosophy is reality, even when it is disheartening, cruel, vicious, unflattering, because reality is indifferent to human cares and needs.

Feminization implies that all is feminized, including philosophy.
Studying how females use words, and what they truly care about, will help in understanding what the present state of western man is, and of her philosophy.

Ageam, thu crux of it if there be a philosophical shortcut to it, risky the ’ magic’ of coincidence.

Your thesis is dripping between the transcendental ego and/ or it’s absence, if it has to do with Your intentions. What are their naive presuppositions.

Why not try to bring those to the surface?