Gnostic Themes in Contemporary Pop Culture; God = Gnosis = McGoohan = Gaga?

Been awhile since the "entheogenic heavy metal" theme popped up here, eh?

Essentially the intersection of two, overlapping spheres, the Vesica Pisces (including the interior portion of it, and/or the more common two dimensional version) represents, among other things: 1) The joining of God and Goddess to create an offspring,

2) A symbol for Jesus Christ,

3) In art a pointed oval used as an aureole in medieval sculpture and painting,

4) The vagina of the female goddess,

5) The basic motif in the Flower of Life,

6) An overlay of the Tree of Life,

7) The formative power of polygons,

8) A geometrical description of square roots and harmonic proportions.

Citizens use the phrase "Be seeing you" as a farewell, accompanied by a waving gesture consisting of thumb and forefinger forming a circle over the eye, then tipped forward in a salute. This may be a reminder that in the Village you are under constant surveillance; anyone may be a Warder, a stooge working for Number Two .... In their book, The Official Prisoner Companion, Matthew White and Jaffer Ali state that actress Norma West said that McGoohan told her the gesture was used by early Christians; it was the sign of the fish (the documentary The Prisoner Video Companion, originally released on VHS in the 1980s and later on DVD by A&E, also makes this statement). In Danger Man and Secret Agent, John Drake uses that expression often.

It was February of 1974, and the American science-fiction writer Philip K. Dick was in pain. The man whose darkly comic novels of androids, weird drugs, and false realities stand as some of the most brilliant and visionary in the genre had just had an impacted wisdom tooth removed, and the sodium pentathol was wearing off. A delivery woman arrived with a package of Darvon, and when the burly, bearded man opened the door, he was struck by the beauty of this dark-haired girl. He was especially drawn to her golden necklace, and he asked her about its curious fish-shaped design. "This is a sign used by the early Christians," she said, and then departed.

For Dick, the ichthus was a secret sign of an altogether different order: it was a trigger for gnosis. As he wrote later in a personal journal,

The (golden) fish sign causes you to remember. Remember what?...Your celestial origins; this has to do with the DNA because the memory is located in the DNA...You remember your real nature...The Gnostic Gnosis: You are here in this world in a thrown condition, but are not of this world.

2009 brought us a [lousy] remake of The Prisoner, the appearance of Valis in the canonical Library of America, and this:

Can't read my,
Can't read my
No he can't read my poker face (she's got me like nobody)
Can't read my
Can't read my
No he can't read my poker face (she's got me like nobody)

Lady Ga-wd? Can't read my face? Got no body?

"Six of one, half dozen of the other"

Is "Bad Romance" the true remake of The Prisoner?

"I am a free man!"

"I'm a free bitch, baby!"

"Who is Number One?"



Number 6 descends the staircase with a fire extinguisher. The butler has shifted allegiance to Number 6, and they fight off the hooded guards. They set Number 48 and 2 free. The quartet picks up machine guns and instigate a violent, chaotic revolt, to the music of the Beatles’ All You Need Is Love. The missile launches and rises over The Village. Rover shrivels away accompanied by an odd song.

Episode 17: Fall Out -- "Dem bones, dem bones, them dry bones"

Oh, and this too:

Libertarian NY Mayoral Candidate Uses "Prisoner" Sing-off?

New Poll Shock: Americans Ruled By An Alien Elite!

No, really?

The poll took samples from two groups: common, ordinary, everyday people (i.e., you and me) and members of the Council on Foreign Relations, an elite group of foreign policy-oriented intellectuals, policy wonks, and high muckamucks. The elite group disagreed sharply with the general public’s view on virtually every important question: for example, none of the CFR members thought we should mind our own business – a policy that would go against the group’s history and orientation, which has always been pronouncedly interventionist.

Of course, old news to those 2 or 3 dozen readers of this "right wing Nazi wing-nut" :

Not only Europe, but also the American People, lost the War. Since the Revolution of 1933, this People has been working, producing, and exporting. It has given its treasures and the lives of hundreds of thousands of its sons; it has blindly obeyed Culturally alien leaders not of its choosing, and in obedience to them it has curtailed its standard of life and parted with its soul — and in return it has received nothing of any kind, spiritual or material. Nor is its time of sacrifices over. It will continue to pay for the Second World War, which it lost, for many a year. In America’s cup of “victory,” there was poison for the soul of America.

Nah, who needs this loser. Look at those handcuffs! Wiser to listen to calm, well-dressed spokesmen for the elite that only wants the best for us.

White People With Guns

Peace. Prosperity. Freedom.

Any questions, Senator Schumer?

"Left" Embraces the Hitler Meme; or, Obama Jones and the Last Crusade

Having already drawn attention to the rather, um, Hitlerian cadences of Dear Obama's peroration at West Point, it was interesting to find them taken up by his Kool-Aid swilling supporters, such as this no doubt typical liberal 'perfesser,' one Jerome Slate, at HuffPost [aka the Obama MiniTrue]:

Since the international, strategic, moral, and even the ultimate economic consequences of whatever we do are unknowable, we might just as well make the relatively more knowable domestic political consequences in the United States the decisive consideration. And that leads – at least for me – to one conclusion: the best thing for Obama, and for the Democratic Party, and indeed for the cause of liberalism in this country, would be to give the military what it wants (within reason), if the new troop commitments prove to be insufficient to turn the tide in Afghanistan.

"If the military gets what it wants and the tide turns in Afghanistan, Obama will get some of the credit; if it doesn’t, at least Obama and the Democrats can say they gave the armed forces what they said it needed. But if the military is denied and then we lose, Obama and the Democrats will get the blame, with electoral consequences likely to reverberate for many years. In the worse case, a Taliban-al-Qaeda victory followed by a massive attack on the United States, for years to come we can kiss good-bye to liberalism in this country, and maybe even to minimally rational foreign and domestic policies."

So, since law and morality are just piffle anyway [as a liberal 'perfesser' Slate is too chic and sophisticated not to have assimilated the po-mo point of view; but also compare Hitler on treaties and Bush on the Constitution: "a scrap of paper"], we should judge our actions by what really matters: the electoral success of liberal politicians. The overwhelming mandate of Liberalism trumps all, and if thousands of Afganis, and even Americans, must die to pass healthcare reform, then so be it.

Notice, by the way, that while traditional skepticism [Pyrrho, for example] was supposed to produce the blissful state of ataraxia by removing all fears produced by ultimately unprovable opinions, here fashionable Foucaultianism leaves the reflexive bien-pensant academic's liberalism as the 'natural' response; could there be any more proof that Liberalism not an intellectual position, but a mental state, perhaps even, an illness?

Someone once described Himmler's Ahnenerbe as "The faculty of the New School, with guns and uniforms." Leave it to the Liberals to bring that analogy to life, but replacing Himmler's cool occultism with their own dreary Sunday School manias. Thanks, Liberals, for once again sucking all the life and fun out of things.

It's also interesting to see the supporters of Dear Obama driven to actually acknowledging and accepting ["Yeah, I am, so what?"] the argument, once confined to the "kooky" corners of "revisionist history" on the "Loony Left" and "Moonbat Right," that despite the rhetoric of the educated classes, the facts are that America's wars have all been started by Democrats, mainly because of their need to "look tough" in order to stay in office. From today's blogs, take this example.

The Obamites have even kindly removed the one counter-example, the Bush Iraq War; that was the "wrong war;" that idiot Bush invaded the wrong country; now we Democrats will get the job done.

"Der Fuehrer's Face"

Since "Sully" thinks the Swiss are Nazis for banning minarets, I wonder what he thinks of this:

"It is easy to forget that when this war began, we were united – bound together by the fresh memory of a horrific attack, and by the determination to defend our homeland and the values we hold dear. I refuse to accept the notion that we cannot summon that unity again. I believe with every fiber of my being that we – as Americans – can still come together behind a common purpose."


"We are passing through a time of great trial. And the message that we send in the midst of these storms must be clear: that our cause is just, our resolve unwavering. We will go forward with the confidence that right makes might, and with the commitment to forge an America that is safer, a world that is more secure, and a future that represents not the deepest of fears but the highest of hopes."


When der fuehrer says we is de master race
We heil (pffft) heil (pffft) right in Der Fuehrer's Face
Not to love der fuehrer is a great disgrace
So we heil (pffft) heil (pffft) right in Der Fuehrer's Face

We bring the world New Order
Heil Hitler's world New Order
Everyone of foreign race
Will love der fuehrer's face
When we bring to the world dis order

[Spike Jones & His City Slickers]

From the Anti-sully:

Yes – mass murder is indeed a common purpose. The common purpose of every army of aggressors. It is a purpose, however, that no civilized people ever takes up. Unlike Obama, I do not long for the return of the darkest days of the Bush years, when fear permeated the air like a poisonous fog, and all those who broke the sacred "unity" of the moment were denounced as "traitors" and "fifth columnists" by the Smear Bund.

So, you thought Obama was going to be different – that he represented “change”? Well, in the end, you got the same blood and thunder, the rhetorical boilerplate common to all demagogues....

The resolve of fanatics and fools is perpetually "unwavering." Aggressors and bullies are always "going forward." And the mighty are always supremely assured of the rightness of their cause. They claim to want only "security," and their appeal is invariably to the "highest of hopes."

And it always ends in oceans of blood.

More Semitic Sleight-of-Hand

"Those Sephardic Jews are nothing but Arabs! They're all thieves!"

-- my [Ashkenazi] former boss

Further to yesterday's blog post re: well, why shouldn't the Swiss toss out the Jews along with the Arabs, consider these tit-bits:

Judaic Times Exposes Islamic Bonds -- A Little Too Late

Any investment vehicle needed to conform to the spirit of the Koran, which forbids any investments that pay interest. No mortgages. No bonds. No clever derivatives. Just tangible assets in the so-called real economy. It was a big honey pot — worth as much as $1 trillion that could yield billions in fees — and the bankers were determined to find a way in.

One discussion was led by a British banker from Barclays who had moved to the region to create an entire Shariah-compliance team. He shared tips about various ways to create “structured products” that would pass muster with Muslim investors. (To me, the investments looked like bonds, walked like bonds and talked like bonds — but he never called them that.) The bonds that Dubai World is in jeopardy of defaulting on, by the way, are Shariah-compliant sukuk. Just don’t call them bonds.

He was struggling to hire enough Shariah scholars, he said, and he needed them to literally bless the investments — apparently there was a shortage of properly trained Islamic scholars who did this kind of work. With the benefit of hindsight — and you didn’t need much — there were plenty of other signs back then that Dubai was building a financial mirage in the desert. As Mr. Buiter described them on his blog, “these were window-dressing pseudo-Islamic financial instruments that were mathematically equivalent to conventional debt and mortgage contracts.” Blessings, alas, can do only so much."

Well, at least these were safe, government-back investments, right?

Government? What Government?

Typical. The Semite shouts and boasts [unlike the quiet and composed Aryan] and waves his arms around, to attract attention to his immense and onerous "piety." [Cf. Jesus v. Pharisees, passim]. When it comes to real performance, whether it's hiring a shabbos goy to handle all the chores on the "blessed day of rest," or sneaking in some interest payments, not so much.

Haven't we learned yet?

"Your father did business with Hyman Roth, your father respected Hyman Roth, but your father never trusted Hyman Roth--or his Sicilian messenger-boy, Johnny Ola."

Or, in short:

"Never Trust a Semite!"

Finally, A Good Idea From Sully

The Swiss pass a glorified zoning regulation, and o' Clever Glutes gets in a tizzy:

Good God. Why not synagogues? Or did a neighboring country try that already?

Sully reacts to a perceived threat to his judaic paymasters

Actually, the difficulty Europe experienced when it tried to dig out the earlier, more heavily entrenched Semitic tumor [for which hubris the Germans continue to pay a penalty, just as judaic-christos insist that mankind must suffer the penalty for Adam's disobedience to the Lord JHVH] just illustrates the necessity for early and decisive action to extirpate this new infection.

Anyone who thinks this is about "religious freedom" is an idiot; in other words, a libertarian. There's nothing essentially "Islamic" about minarets, or indeed, any architectural feature, Islam being pre-eminently a religion of the desert vastness. Generations of Catholics were content to worship in gymnasiums and basements, but then they weren't engaged in a generational struggle to push, push, push the cringing and compliant Europeans out of their own land.

Over on this side of the pond, my Muslim neighbors are content to worship in a one-story brick building on the corner of a shopping block, although they did recently add one of those multi-colored moving-light signboards, broadcasting prayer times and helpful messages, like Allahu Akbar! Ugly and vulgar, but 100% American; as G. K. Chesterton suggested, Times Square would be a magnificent spectacle if one were illiterate.

Juliette Lewis, WildBoy of Fashion

What charms about Lewis, however, is her openness; knee pads, head-dresses, heels, arm-bracelets, ethnic belts and, of course, jumpsuits and swimwear, all get a look in alongside more regular jeans and rock & roll tees. Criticism rains down on her from stylistically-stunted indie music fans and journalists, but she remains as unabashed as her gymnastic live performances.

“I sew all my own clothes; I’ll get a vision sometimes,” she told Trevor Kelley of Harp magazine a couple of years back. “The first vision I had was of a skintight, yellow jumpsuit. On the Warped Tour it was different. It was 110 degrees when we played in Phoenix. My only vision was a bikini and some kneepads.”

Baron Evola vs. "Libertarianism" or, Sisters Doing It For Themselves

Evola discusses this under the heading "The Regression of the Castes" : the cyclical decline in society as first Brahmins, then Warriors, then Merchants take power.

And it's not all that hard either to see why that is. If you let market participants free to pursue what is in their best interests, without forcing them to give priority to society's best interests, they will eventually figure out that the best single investment they can possible make is to buy the government. That allows them to make the laws. Which is detrimental to the rest of society, and leads to the sort of mess we're in right now, which even libertarians concede is not desirable.

So you would have to prevent that from happening. For which you need laws and regulations to keep those market participants out of the government. Since free market guys and dolls don't want regulations, they have no solution to offer. Exit left, center stage.

Actually, rule by merchants would be characteristic of this kind of post-18th century Capitalism as described; Evola had already diagnosed Communism as the final stage, rule by the masses [Shudras], and predicted its take over of the West.

It would appear that we are headed for a different fate: having reverted during the 80s to Pure Captialism [in line with Yockey's idea of America's cultural retardation] followed by a collapse [now], we can look forward to some kind of take-over by "just folks" populists [Palin and the talk-show "conservatives"] who will, of course, be easily controlled by various Occult Forces [see Guenon].

Here's Richard Hoste on Palin the White Goddess:

I really like Sarah Palin. She is as good a person as can get on a presidential ticket in today’s America. But that isn’t enough. There will never be a rising up of “Middle American Radicals” who seize power. If the American elite is ever to be replaced, it will have to be done by people of comparable ability....

But the end result of a Palin victory in 2012 would simply be a globalist that the masses relate to instead of one whom they resist. That’s the problem with hoping for the “Joe the Plumbers” to save the White race. Being deficient in intelligence, they’re easily led in any direction. Whites voted for the Bush that promised a humble foreign policy in 2000 and they died for him in the sands of Iraq from 2003 on.

Of course, one man's "sophistication" is another man's "fashionable manipulation." When Hoste reveals his Dawkinism agenda by mocking Palin for not "finding evidence of macro-evolution," one must really ask if Hoste has any, and if so, pray produce it. Of course, he doesn't have any. Macro-evolution is a metaphysical claim, and a false one to boot.

Palin may be too dumb to grasp the metaphysical argument, but so is Dawkins, it would seem. Palin at least has the sense to take it in its religious form, naive when compared to metaphysical principles, but at least correct, and sufficient unto salvation.

What's needed, to revert back to Evola, is a leadership of men as sophisticated as Evola and Guenon, not those merely full of the fashionable nonsense that has brought us to this pass. That is to say, able to recognize Materialism in any of its protean forms, from NeoConservatism to Dawkinsism. Whether this is possible under our "cyclical conditions," which make this precisely the "Reign of Quantity," in which materialistic misrule is inevitable, is another question.

Jack Walker Pale has some respect for Ayn Rand's own way of building a movement by simply ignoring the "sophisticates":

Though not a particularly great writer–though not the bad one her critics took pot shots at–not well-read in philosophy or economics or any of the rest, nonetheless, she defiantly said this is what I believe and fuck you if you can’t take a joke. She’s the closest we’ve had in this country to the Situationists, though she’s the political opposite. And she did it by her lonesome.

She gradually built a following through her novels. She then fleshed out her philosophy of Objectivism in a number of non-fiction works and manifestos. Again, she did it on her own and in her own way.

The Original “Mad Men”

Or rather, the original mad boys, mad girls, and mad Earls [who, like Byron, were mad, bad, and dangerous to know].

Mad World: Evelyn Waugh and the Secrets of Brideshead is another ‘micro-biography’ of Evelyn Waugh, where the author, instead of producing another doorstop, concentrates on detailing some aspect of the author’s life. The Same Man: George Orwell and Evelyn Waugh in Love and War by David Lebedoff outlined the surprising literary and personal connections between Waugh and Orwell [hint: they both hated the future].

Now Paula Byrne presents the Lygon family, whose members, and house [Madresfield, known as ’Mad World’], provided the real-life models for the Marchmain family and castle in Brideshead Revisited.

While this work is self-recommending for any fain of Waugh, arguably the most important English novelist of the first half of the XXth century [forget about all those “Modernist” charlatans read only by the self-perpetuating professorial class], the particular interest for this blog is the elite homosexual angle. Not only is the younger son, Hughie, the first draft of Sebastian Flyte, but the Earl of Beauchamp [’Boomer’ to his friends] was driven into exile not, like Lord Marchmain, by a woman, but by his well-but-not-publicly known homosexuality.

What was the Earl’s crime? Provoking the jealousy of his “respectable” brother-in-law [natch], the Duke of Westminster:

It seemed grotesquely unfair that his brother-in-law should have three sons, a loyal wife, a string of homosexual lovers, a glittering career and great standing in politics, while he himself had gone through three wives without producing a surviving male heir.

That he had killed his only child by forcing him to ride to hounds while having an attack of appendicitis, might lead some to think he had only himself to blame. But, can’t let the boy grow up a sissy, now can we?

So here we have the story of a man with a large, happy family and political talent [heir presumptive to the Liberal Party] driven out of the society he had benefited so much, by a childless, sister's-family-destroying member of the ‘Conservative‘ Party.

Sounds like good old “Family Values” wins again. Which man represents the Aryan Man? Who would have led Athens at its height, and who would have been ostracized? And which side would Limbaugh and Palin be on?

As Byrne points out, the madness of the affair is that everyone involved, except the Duke of course, was quite aware that the best elements of British society were homosexuals. The King was oblivious [“I thought men like that shot themselves?”] but was forced to abandon his loyal friend when it was pointed out that Prince George couldn’t be allowed to marry into such a family -- being homosexual himself, it was too dangerous to be around the Beauchamps. And the even the Conservative Prime Minister, Stanley Baldwin, had a son, also a politician, who was also a well-known homosexual, warmly supported by his family.

Is it any wonder that our "conservatives" are the Stupid Party, since they are led by "family friendly" judaic-christic ideologues such as Westminster, rather than Baldwin, driving culture-creating homosexuals like Beauchamp into the Liberal Party?

As Waugh’s brother Alec wrote earlier, after being sent down from Oxford for such “immorality” and then writing a scandalous bestseller about it, the crime was not the act but “getting caught.”

Such is the self-destructive madness of societies infected by the judaic virus.