Chastek Nails It

Reading Romans 1, James Chastek reads it into modernism, to devastating effect:

If one doesn’t see the universe as existing for God, he starts seeing it as existing both for itself and for human use. But this idea will get quickly and inevitably extended to that part of nature which concerns what we most desire, i.e. the objects of erotic desire. These desires then become the paradigm cases of what is both divine-eternal and yet merely for human use, thus making sexual imperatives simultaneously the voice of God and yet only the commands of “my body”. Like anything tied up with the reward system of the brain, however, if we try to make it infinite it leads to a ratcheting-up effect that demands greater and greater novelty, though this novelty becomes difficult to find without transgression of the boundaries of behaviors that were once kept off limits. At this point, the human person becomes simply a transgression machine, seeing in the infinite possibility of spirit only the limitless boundaries to destroy.

He has here in a few sentences summed the entire discourse of the orthosphere upon the modern disease.

It is very old.

28 thoughts on “Chastek Nails It

  1. Pingback: Chastek Nails It | Neoreactive

  2. At the top of his article, James Chastek says, “… a commenter referred to Romans 1: 20-32 as a “homophobic rant”. While I’d concede this so far as Paul’s language is polemical, I think Paul is describing an archetype which, if it were simply described another way, would be agreed to by more or less everyone.”

    So Chastek, right at the start, holds out his wrists for the shackles, and registers his enslavement to the Zeitgeist. It is one of the crippling realities of the framing of contemporary debate that obeisance must be repeatedly paid to the greater and lesser cults: feminism and homosexuality. Like old-fashioned Catholics crossing themselves when passing a church, or priests doffing their hats at the name of Jesus, whenever the conversation strays within the gravitational pull of “women” or “gays,” a quick litany of of homage and apology is required before proceeding.

    Take the Red Pill, Mr Chastek.

    • I didn’t read it that way at all. I read it the *opposite* way. I read him to be saying that if they understood Paul properly, even those who support the homosexual agenda would agree with that passage in Romans.

      I think he’s actually wrong in that particular point. I think the better such folks understand Paul, the more they disagree with him.

    • “a commenter referred to Romans 1: 20-32 as a “homophobic rant””
      I always enjoy when Modernists apply their made up maladies to historical individuals who would have had no clue what the heck they were talking about. Might as well diagnose ‘microagressions’ in Leviticus.

  3. Now… If Orthosphereans would take the next simple step in recognizing that Modern “white” “man” DESIRES de fact homo* lifestyle, ie., has EMBRACED the homosexual “nature,” THEN the process of putting things back into the closet so as to tidy up the room can begin.

    *Where homo = same = EXACT SAME = self… Homosexuality = sex with self = self-annihilation.

  4. The physical reality (exacerbated and amplified by the death of the spiritual and intellectual selves) is that instant gratification is literally “in hand” for those under relentless temptation to instantly gratify. But the base mechanics are just not yet socially acceptable without the cover of another. So the Self seeks Same “outside” the Self to provide cover for the base desire: radical sexual autonomy… Sex with Self. And applied with “principle” equals total annihilation.

    • Thordaddy, I think I am finally understanding your linkage between homosexuality and self-annihilation. Homosexuality – and other defective forms of sex – are species of masturbation, because they are fundamentally ordered inwardly. They are acts of worship of the self, of autolatry. And like any idolatry, autolatry is *completely wrong* about what is most important, and thus to be worshipped and served. It mistakes a creature for God. And so it is oriented in the *completely wrong* direction, and works death rather than life (this being why such acts are inherently sterile). Thus the self-annihilation.

      Proper sex, on the other hand, is outward looking, productive, and oriented to Providence. As a sacrament, it is an act of worship of God. So it is at least potentially fertile.

      • Yes Kristor… The key breakthrough being a simple equation that even Neo’s Reaction cannot buck…

        Homo = same = exact same = self…

        And so the fundamental deception has revolved around the public’s concept of “same” NOT BEING UNDERSTOOD as “equal to” the “self” BY THOSE very same individuals who demand that A = B if enough people believe it so.

  5. I originally wanted the post to treat the term “homophobe” but it proved too much of a digression. One difficulty is that the term is a slogan, and so asking who is a homophobe is like asking who is a Hulkamaniac or an Unamerican – presumably the only answer to the question is the one given within the community that takes the slogan as useful or meaningful, and, as far as I can tell, any negative polemic against homosexuals is homophobic within the community that takes the term in this way. Why would I bother to dispute this? Who can refute a slogan? If McDonald’s wants to write “I’m lovin’ it” across all its copy, who am I to judge?

    The deepest irony in all this is that, while homosexuals take it as an important milestone that they are no longer classified in the DSM, they fail to see that it’s equally significant that there is also no entry for “homophobia”, even though if the word was anything more than a slogan it would presumably have to be there.

    • But the true spiritual capitulation is in not identifying those that self-identify as homosexuals AS self-annihilators… The ARCHETYPE biological self-annihilator… And the matter of nature versus nurture entirely irrelevant within the context that this false dispute is wielded.

      Fear of self-annihilators is a LEGITIMATE fear.

      • I suppose there are people that would take it as a great moral fault that I am not a Hulkamaniac. If I were to argue against them, I don’t see why I would have to deny that their name for me was correctly applied.

      • Yes James… One can maintain multiple frames, but this does nothing to stop a cabal from imposing a single frame on all. So because homosexuals GENUINELY deceive themselves as pure “lovers” does not invalidate “our” assertion that they are indeed self-annihilators and the frame that they hold dear to is merely a mechanism of self-denial. To waltz in and declare that both frames are equally legitimate by way of genuine conviction is to merely show “us” to what degree that you submit to the “Equality” doctrine.

    • The way things are going, I’m sure that “homophobia” will soon be added to the DSM. This raises the question: how much of the DSM is nothing more than officially sanctioned slogans?

      • In reality, NOT FEARING he with insatiable sexual appetite is pathological. In truth, anti-homophobia is self-destructive. The evidence is literally everywhere. Homosexualism is, for all intents and purposes, endemic to “white man” having reached past critical mass and infected the super-majority across ALL manufactured divisions. A nation of de facto homos. DOA.

      • Strange to us. Racism and sexism could also end up in the DSM. So for that matter could denial of anthropogenic global warming.

        I doubt we will get so far before the pendulum swings back to the right with terrific force, but the logic of the social discourse on sexual perversion tends now ultimately to verdicts that force e.g. monasteries to house active pedophiles.

      • But isn’t that part of the deception… To make us believe that we are a nation of racists and sexists SO AS TO OBSCURE the reality that we are in fact a nation of faggots?

      • I doubt we will get so far before the pendulum swings back to the right with terrific force, but the logic of the social discourse on sexual perversion tends now ultimately to verdicts that force e.g. monasteries to house active pedophiles. — Kristor

        But herein lies the seeds for future manifestations of radical sexual autonomy… That *you* may be bringing into existence for the first time that not ever previously conceived… Pedophilic “Monasteries?” I struggled with the question of whether introducing “radical autonomy” would then lead many to CREATE example of thus. Which bring us back to the problem of the “intellectual right” and its contribution to Liberal creation myths that INEXPLICABLY originate in “spirit” and “intellect.” “We” are WRITING into existence of every bit as much of the Liberal narrative as any “intellectual leftist.” This is a problem is need of a sound solution.

      • Amongst men and women is a media-manufactured schism that is merely a projection of the battle between homosexuals and dykes and their actual “default elite” hierarchy. The “Butch” archetype is the logical choice as top “alpha” dog, but there is clearly a covert homosexual class PLAYING heterosexual white male still fully entrenched as dominant power brokers in all white nations AND EVERY INSTITUTION within. The force of “equality” must eventually devour its creator(s). And this process is infinitely regressive until all is devoured. Only the anti-Equalist can hold strong (but then only passively as mere rejection), but he won’t last long until he converts to white Supremacy. Only then, FROM THIS aggressive ORIENTATION, can one truly combat the psychological onslaught that viscerally registers like a real physical imposition.

  6. Homosexuality contradicts procreation and is a form of sexual misconduct. Sexual misconduct is forbidden according to Buddhism. The Five Precepts prohibiting killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, lying and taking intoxicants must be followed. If homosexuality becomes legal, then the human race will vanish. Why will it vanish? Heaven will punish us. Homosexuals exist due in part to the influence of a certain religion. This religion used to be underground and did not dare to promote homosexuality openly, but now that we’re in an age where Dharma is on the decline, all kinds of strange phenomenon are happening. Consequently, these people protest, join parades, and lobby for legalizing homosexuality. This is essentially an omen for doomsday. We should know this because if everyone recognizes this as a fault, people may live a little longer. Otherwise, everyone will face cataclysm, a catastrophe of inordinate proportion that brings death to all. Since all the perversities and wickedness in our world now are too awful for words, people who still feel that this time and age is not bad might be crazy people, more or less. — Master Hsuan Hua

    • nilakantha…

      Correct if I am wrong, but Buddhism ultimately asserts the primacy of self annihilation such that its “prohibitions” represented in the The Five Precepts ONLY ESTABLISHES the most corrupt paths to self-annihilation AND DOES NOT speak to an abhorrence for self-annihilation in principle?

      • You need to see it in the proper context – i.e. what is understood under the word “self”. It is largely those things that are also considered bad in Christianity, such as hatred, desire or jealousy. Here the “self” is that thing which says “Oh, I like that, and I don’t like this”. This deserves to get rid of.

        Nobody really knows what the long-term outcome is in Mahayana and Vajrayana levels, because bodhisattvas promise to keep coming back and back i.e. fundamentally exist until they helped every sentient being.

        The short-term outcome is that they become the kind of fellow you would probably approve of – wise, fearless, compassionate, and joyful. If it helps your model, the term used for that which gets annihiliated in the longer run is the “ego”, not the “self”, which is the part of the self that sees itself separate from everything else.

        The ultimate result would be not necessarily becoming nothing but becoming everything, or one with everything (cue the usual hot-dog jokes), not separated from anything. Nothing and everything on this level mean the same thing: blue is only meaningful term because it mentally separates the blue things from non-blue things, hence “everything is blue” and “nothing is blue” mean exactly the same thing: the lack of such a separation, or the meaninglessness of the term.

        But again this long-term result is a bit speculative. If you meet people, teachers with long-term results, their students claim that since the masters are less separate from everything than average people, they are wise because the less separation gives them a kind of ESP, they can just feel how things are, they are fearless because nothing can harm the “everything” they re connected to, they are joyful because being linked with everything isn’t exactly boring, and they are compassionate because they cannot separate others suffering from their own i.e. feel others suffering.

        And this, to me, sounds like a good thing.

    • I assert that all religions outside of that which establishes the fact of The Perfect Man are self-annihilating, including Buddhism. The attempt by the Equalists, both true believers and opportunists, is to media narrate a perception of Christianity as “self-annihilators for salvation.” Neo’s Reaction runs with the same m.o. The purpose of this media manufactured misperception is two-fold. First, normalize self-annihilation amongst white Christians (equalize) and then next hide the self-annihilating “nature” OF ALL anti-Christians and their liberated “Christian” useful idiots (again… Drive to equalize). The speed and intensity of the descent is truly in some small respect in each and everyone of ours hands depending explicitly on the degree to which one embraces or rejects “equality.” Just like it is ultimately futile to half-heartedly embrace Christ, it is equally senseless to half-heartedly reject self-annihilation. Your exceptions will the become the rule.

      • Salvation in Buddhism, at least in Mahāyāna Buddhism, means obtaining an immortal, embodied existence that the scriptures describe as the Perfection of Self and the Perfection of Joy. In this life, we are called to war against the passions, as are Christians, at least in their Orthodox form. I owe fealty to my Lord and you to yours; far be it from me to encourage you to do something as heinous as breaking faith. It’s just that we find ourselves on the same side of a civilizational divide that threatens all of us on the most fundamental levels. I admire the writers of the Orthosphere and intend to stand with them, even if they decide not to stand with me.

    • Well, this is a really hardcore Theravada / Hinayana view. In the Mahayana and especially Vajrayan and especially in the lay / yogi versions thereof, The Five Precepts are promises, vows, samaya (voluntary bonds): people who make the promises should keep them, but it is not required to make them in all kinds of Buddhism. E.g. this guy seem to have liked his intoxicants:

      • The Dharma Master Hsüan Hua was an Orthodox Mahāyāna Buddhist monk who came to the US in the 1960’s to establish the Orthodox Dharma in the West. He was the founder of the Dharma Realm Buddhist Association and its numerous monasteries in North America, Asia and Australia. A small book of his, Smashing the Evil and Revealing the Proper, is a critique of antinomian gnostic Buddhism, largely coming from Tibet and Japan, that has taken root in the West. In this book, the Master clearly sees that what was prophesied in the Nirvāṇa Sūtra had come to pass:

        When Shakyamuni Buddha was about to enter Nirvana, he summoned the heavenly demons into his presence and exhorted them to protect the Proper Dharma in the future. Among the demons some said, “After your extinction, we and our descendants will don the Buddhas kaṣāya (monastic robe) and undermine your Dharma from within. We will defecate on your food!” True to their claim, they have worked their way into Buddhism by subterfuge. They have now succeeded in devastating the Dharma to an almost irreparable state. Their deviant beliefs continue to discredit some of the major principles within the Proper Teachings.

        The Precepts are vows that you keep as a disciple of the Buddha, like the promises a Christian makes before baptism; they’re not optional extras. Even the more sober of the Tibetans recognize that the moral precepts are necessary for Tantric practice, see Asaṅga’s Chapter on Ethics with the Commentary of Tsong-Kha-Pa. The centrality of the Precepts is why the first mark of a True Buddhist teacher is that he maintains the ethical precepts strictly. In the aforementioned book’s final chapter (Buddhism’s Rotten Seed), Master Hua gives us criteria by which we can distinguish true from false Buddhist teachers; among which we find the following:

        Fraudulent teachers do not hold the precepts. They usually lead a life of debauchery—sexual misconduct is the most common violation. Yet they claim such activities to be -expedients of the Dharma. They often act as their own defense lawyers and say, “Because we are already enlightened, we are allowed to make exceptions.” In truth, the more evolved a spiritual master is, the more purely he upholds the moral precepts. Even Buddhas and Bodhisattvas hold the Precepts without the slightest transgression; how much more should common people do so!

  7. Chastek is essentially saying the only way to be a sane / conservative atheist is to be depressed, i.e. the brain’s reward system numbed and thus not being too desire driven.

    Well, that would describe me.

    Sometimes I wonder: if you are sane enough to realize how destructive and futile desire can be, yet you don’t believe in a religion that sets limitations for it, you will end up generally trying to suppress desire overally in yourself and thus depressed?

    I wonder, did it ever happen that a conservative / sane atheist converted and found his passion rekindled because he found a safe space / limitations within which to exercise them safely? He kinda stopped being afraid of himself?

    I will probably not convert any time soon and besides this would not be a properly valid reason to convert anyway… but I wonder, that kind of thumos the Greeks wrote about, that would be surely an interesting experience to discover.

  8. I suspect the transgression itself is arousing to people so it’s not just a matter of transgression being necessary to experience novelty. Transgression IS the point when you’re ruled by desire.


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.