Thoughts on a new religion - crossposted from /s/altreligion

submitted by Ponderer from self.debatealtright

The following post is originally from the /s/altreligion sub, which is basically an attempt to formulate a right-aligned belief system from first principles.

There's been several discussions about religion here, including this recent post, so I figured these thoughts would be a good fit. Let me know what you think in the comments, and definitely visit /s/altreligion if this concept interests you.

I can't recommend the following article enough. It's titled "The Right Religion" and covers all the topics you'd want addressed: https://archive.fo/tgvjZ

I'm not sure about "Hierarchy" being the supreme value, but it's definitely a good suggestion.

As a highly successful religion that's been established relatively recently, Mormonism may be worth taking lessons from. This is an excellent (but very long) article about the history of Mormonism and what's made it so successful: http://archive.fo/QRavm

If you're going to read just one article though, read the one above this.

It's hard to argue against the Nine Noble Virtues of Courage, Truth, Honour, Fidelity, Discipline, Hospitality, Self Reliance, Industriousness, and Perseverance.

https://infogalactic.com/info/Nine_Noble_Virtues

Indo-European mythology is worth considering. I strongly recommend you read about it if you're not familiar: https://infogalactic.com/info/Proto-Indo-European_religion

Even if they cannot be proven to exist in reality, several of the deities and stories mentioned tap deep into the Jungian collective unconscious.

There's a major discussion to be had whether the religion should have deities or not, and if so, what role they should take. If it's decided the religion should have deities, invoking the collective unconscious could work to explain this.

The following video is long, but has a great breakdown on Eastern religions and the yugas. Might be worth watching for context or inspiration.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/HUWPua648Jk/

One compelling post I remember seeing stated "What will unite us moving forward is an ideology based on the fundamental laws of nature - hierarchy, identity, differentiation, upward evolution and struggle, to name a few - one that supports virtue and promotes excellence, strength, beauty, and honor. Most importantly, this ideology will need to be one that can accomodate those of different religious inclinations."

One interesting concept from NRx is the entity of "Gnon", an anagram of the acronym for "Nature Or Nature's God". This is mentioned in the first article I linked. In short, Gnon is the underlying rules of nature and reality. One of the best explanations of Gnon is in Kipling's poem, The Gods of the Copybook Headings

Gnon does not have a consciousness or personality. It is just a set of rules. However, while no one would pray to Gnon, it could be an object of respect, or maybe even of hope.

No matter how crazy society becomes, there are limits to how far insanity can go. Evenutally, Nature itself will step in and restore reality.

I could see Gnon becoming a sort of guiding principle in a new religion. Perhaps he could even have a female counterpart - while Gnon represents the unchanging and unfeeling laws of the Universe, his female counterpart represents a nostalgia for the past and a hope for a glorious future.

all 22 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]NayenezganiNot alt-right 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (19 children)

One interesting concept from NRx is the entity of "Gnon", an anagram of the acronym for "Nature Or Nature's God".

As a girl I feel nothing but infinite contempt for nature and cannot comprehend why moronic feminists claim to love it or are so fascinated by animistic faiths. Nature is nothing but rape, murder, abuse, torture, starvation, disease, and agony. Only the enslavement of nature can provide a foundation for true civilization.

If (this type of) God exists, he shall have to beg for my forgiveness!

Anyway, there's something I noticed about people in the true crime community. I feel like they despise the weak, resentful incel shooter much more than the competent normie killer. Look at the reaction to Randy Stair (effeminate, jejune proto-tranny whose favorite films were Inside Out and Frozen) in comparison to someone like Anders Breivik. Randy Stair only killed 3 people but people rage at him like he is Hitler. They really want to put him in his place but don't say much against people like Anders Breivik unless it is to express dismay at his "evil". I guarantee that so many regular people, even those who claim to be against racism, would rather flay an irrelevant incel like Randy Stair than someone who wreaked significant damage like Anders Breivik.

People who watch nature videos are the same.

Video where someone hunts a polar bear: https://invidious.hub.ne.kr/watch?v=VvqtprAz7fM

Video where hungry polar bear tortures seal to death: https://invidious.hub.ne.kr/watch?v=tyyoYPma-Qo

The first video is massively disliked with a like:dislike ratio exceeding 1:3. Meanwhile commenters seem to be extremely supportive of the polar bear in the second video, with some saying that they enjoy watching the polar bear torture a much smaller and defenseless animal because it is "nature".

Some women are so stupid that they think climate change or species extinction is a bad thing. Those types of people don't even deserve Islam, or Haredi Judaism, but some obscure Melanesian cult where unwritable things happen.

[–]Erasmus 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

As a girl I feel nothing but infinite contempt for nature

This is why women are not allowed any position of real leadership.

[–]NayenezganiNot alt-right 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

This is why women are not allowed any position of real leadership.

It is impossible for us to assume leadership according to the laws of nature anyway. Ironically the vast majority of straight women adore nature, which is probably why they also love serial killers. Sometimes I think MGTOW is right about straight women chasing all the bad boys. There's no reason to like nature unless you are a sadist, masochist, or male.

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Nature is too complex of a topic to either 'like' or 'dislike' IMO. Men that do express a 'like' for nature are really just expressing a respect and an appreciation for such a powerful force. Nature humbles even the strongest of men so we have a complicated relationship with it. Since women deal more with a social world and a world of of men's creations they are much more disconnected from nature. You can't appreciate something if you're constantly sheltering from it. Men get together in teams and attempt to tame and harness nature. That's akin to a religious experience for us that women largely will never have.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    females seem to idealize nature when we suffer from it.

    Arguably a fairly regular occurrence.

    As for watching 'gore', that seems more like familiarizing yourself with the wider laws of reality. In my perspective, 'nature' is more of a subset, as in the following definition.

    Nature: the phenomena of the physical world collectively, including plants, animals, the landscape, and other features and products of the earth, as opposed to humans or human creations.

    One of the problems with overpowering and enslaving nature is that one could end up with a civilization and world like we see today. Even though we typically consider ourselves an intelligent species, we're obviously incapable of managing our own affairs.

    We know about the boom and bust cycle in mammal populations, yet here we are nearing the peak of our own boom...

    We've also created a shitload of technologies that we can't handle, simply because we could. I do agree that an intelligent species could theoretically step outside of nature and manage their own environment, but even SETI hasn't found one yet.

    [–]Ponderer[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

    Anyway, there's something I noticed about people in the true crime community. I feel like they despise the weak, resentful incel shooter much more than the competent normie killer. [...] They really want to put him in his place but don't say much against people like Anders Breivik unless it is to express dismay at his "evil". I guarantee that so many regular people, even those who claim to be against racism, would rather flay an irrelevant incel like Randy Stair than someone who wreaked significant damage like Anders Breivik.

    Dang. I totally agree and hadn't really considered that before. Kind of messed up.

    As a girl I feel nothing but infinite contempt for nature and cannot comprehend why moronic feminists claim to love it or are so fascinated by animistic faiths. Nature is nothing but rape, murder, abuse, torture, starvation, disease, and agony. Only the enslavement of nature can provide a foundation for true civilization.

    This is irrelevant to the thread, but I honestly believe that in-vitro fertilization should be legally mandated to only select female embryos, until the sex ratios at birth are closer to 1:1 instead of something like 1.05:1.

    A policy like this would ameliorate an incredible amount of social issues, and since IVF is a voluntary procedure it shouldn't even be that controversial or difficult to do. It would cost nothing and I can't imagine why any group, left or right, would want the number of males and females to be unequal at birth. It fucks up both sexes and destabilizes civilization.

    Not sure if you knew about the sex ratio at birth thing. As far as I can tell, it's the case in most species. If you hate nature, it's just one more reason to do so. But fortunately it can be fixed, as long as there is the popular will to do so.

    [–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

    This is irrelevant to the thread, but I honestly believe that in-vitro fertilization should be legally mandated to only select female embryos, until the sex ratios at birth are closer to 1:1 instead of something like 1.05:1.

    Aren't most European populations pretty even anyway? I think male overpopulation is mostly an issue in the third world.

    [–]Ponderer[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

    No. I actually lowballed it, sex ratios at birth are closer to 1.07:1, and that holds constant in most countries.

    On this map Europe is almost white, indicating that it falls right on this ratio of 107 males per 100 females when you account for those age 15 or younger. Apparently Africa somehow has more girls, and China and India have significantly more boys, but the latter two may be influenced by sex-selective abortions.

    In any case, sex ratios only tend to even out around age 50, and only then due to higher death rates for men.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sex_ratio

    [–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    Hmm but all the other maps on that wiki page show western countries as having more women than men by a significant margin. An example below.

    https://i.redd.it/0168eu76wurx.png

    [–]Ponderer[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    Women live longer, and men have a far higher death rate due to accidents and suicide. Those women you're seeing are largely 60+. Check population pyramids for men under age 40 to see the difference.

    https://www.populationpyramid.net/united-states-of-america/

    I'm counting a disparity of about 3 million between males and females under age 40. Even if everyone else was paired off, men in that group would be physically unable to find a partner. No matter which way you look at it, that's going to cause problems for your civilization.

    [–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Interesting. I guess that's the consequence of pacified society lowering male death rates. Need a good meat grinder war at this rate lol. I think increasing the death rate of males artificially is more practical than the trillions needed and invasive procedures to mandate IVF across the board. Now if PGD tech becomes advanced enough to guarantee significant gains in intelligence, height, aesthetics, etc then maybe it's worth considering subsidizing it.

    Even if everyone else was paired off, men in that group would be physically unable to find a partner. No matter which way you look at it, that's going to cause problems for your civilization.

    That's assuming every male is actually able and looking for a partner. You can probably count all the socially maladjusted virgins out of the mating pool at this stage. But yeah if it keeps getting worse it might become more of a problem but in the West it's manageable for now.

    [–]Ponderer[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    I think increasing the death rate of males artificially is more practical than the trillions needed and invasive procedures to mandate IVF across the board.

    No, I just mean mandating that existing IVF procedures only select female embryos. If IVF becomes more common in the future, say for 5% of all births, then it could be enough to overtake the disparity. Costs would be very minimal, all that needs to be passed is a law.

    I've also considered something like sex-selective abortions, or financially incentivizing that female embryos are brought to term rather than aborted. But a law for existing IVF procedures would be a lot less controversial.

    Now if PGD tech becomes advanced enough to guarantee significant gains in intelligence, height, aesthetics, etc then maybe it's worth considering subsidizing it.

    This would be the ideal and potentially could eliminate the sex ratio disparity permanently.

    That's assuming every male is actually able and looking for a partner. You can probably count all the socially maladjusted virgins out of the mating pool at this stage.

    The sex disparity is what's causing those socially maladjusted virgins to come into being. This is exacerbated by the influences of modern society.

    Death rates for males are only going to decrease further due to safety standards and helicopter parenting, although you may see an uptick in suicides. Millions of men who physically cannot find a female partner will turn to homosexuality or transgenderism. This is not a good thing and there's no good in ignoring it.

    [–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    As a girl I feel nothing but infinite contempt for nature and cannot comprehend why moronic feminists claim to love it or are so fascinated by animistic faiths. Nature is nothing but rape, murder, abuse, torture, starvation, disease, and agony. Only the enslavement of nature can provide a foundation for true civilization.

    If (this type of) God exists, he shall have to beg for my forgiveness!

    This sentiment is something common among those of Abrahamic faiths, likely stemming from the Jewish belief of the need to improve the world on their terms, Tikkun Olam. I find it interesting that you used a quote from a concentration camp inmate in a sub that's mostly against Jews and Judaism.

    It seems like your view of nature comes from a place of fear and insecurity, maybe from a lack of experience with it. I'd encourage you to go on a camping trip or at least hiking and see how you feel. Most of man's conflict with nature comes from the establishment of urban civilization.

    Anyway, there's something I noticed about people in the true crime community. I feel like they despise the weak, resentful incel shooter much more than the competent normie killer. Look at the reaction to Randy Stair (effeminate, jejune proto-tranny whose favorite films were Inside Out and Frozen) in comparison to someone like Anders Breivik.

    Why is a weak man who killed because of his mental illness more respectable than a strong man who killed for his ideals? Whether you agree or disagree with those ideals, the latter is more respectable. I'm not sure how you got suckered into sympathizing with incels, you really should get out of those circles.

    Some women are so stupid that they think climate change or species extinction is a bad thing.

    Species extinction affects human food chains, the depletion of fisheries and bees for example. Climate change makes it harder to live as humans. Even if you have zero empathy for animals there are practical considerations.

    [–]NayenezganiNot alt-right 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    I'm no philo-Semite but I don't care for mentally quarantining myself from people I don't agree with.

    Why is a weak man who killed because of his mental illness more respectable than a strong man who killed for his ideals?

    I don't respect Randy Stair at all but it's hilarious that he brings out immense rage in people who claim they are against picking on the weak. It's like female SJWs who unintentionally reveal they love White males.

    Species extinction affects human food chains, the depletion of fisheries and bees for example. Climate change makes it harder to live as humans. Even if you have zero empathy for animals there are practical considerations.

    Indeed, though I just feel complete calm at the prospect of my own death.

    [–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    I'm no philo-Semite but I don't care for mentally quarantining myself from people I don't agree with.

    I wasn't sure if you were a jew or not lmao

    it's hilarious that he brings out immense rage in people who claim they are against picking on the weak

    People conflate weak and innocent too much

    Indeed, though I just feel complete calm at the prospect of my own death.

    I'd rather die in a pristine forest than a concrete hellscape. Used to think I liked the city then I lived in North Philly for a while. I started agreeing with Kaczynski and Linkola pretty quick at that point.

    [–]NayenezganiNot alt-right 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Species extinction affects human food chains, the depletion of fisheries and bees for example.

    I forgot to respond to this appropriately. I meant that cultural leftists are delusionally fighting against natural processes when they try to preserve some of its products artificially, death is just a part of life. I don't care for most polytheistic gods but Chinnamastâ does represent what nature really is: ecstasy and horror inextricable from each other. Death and life cannot be separated.

    Nowadays I eat a lot of meat but if the food sources I depend on were to go extinct, that's just how it is. If they had awareness they would probably prefer non-existence than to continue being a slave species. We're projecting too much of our own psychological processes onto animals when we pretend they are having fun most of the time.

    I started agreeing with Kaczynski and Linkola pretty quick at that point.

    You might like Ellul too, some of his books are on my list.

    [–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbE53XUtVw0

    There can be moments of detente, but it's true there's a lot of 'murder' going just 100 feet away.

    Those types of people don't even deserve Islam, or Haredi Judaism, but some obscure Melanesian cult where unwritable things happen.

    Your turns of the phrase are memorable. 👍

    [–]NayenezganiNot alt-right 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    That bear looks delicious.

    [–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Slightly different punctuation.

    That Bear: "Looks delicious!"

    But really, looks more like a "hey fellow mammal" moment, at least at first.

    [–]NeoRail 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    Evola has done massive amounts of work on rebuilding and rediscovering ancient Indo-European spirituality and he also offers very insightful analysis of the mechanics and methods of religions more broadly. I am not sure why he is not more commonly discussed when it comes to topics like these.

    [–]Ponderer[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    That's a great suggestion. The Bitchute video mentions him somewhat, especially his views of the yugas. Do you have any specific books of his that you would recommend?

    [–]NeoRail 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    This is a difficult question. I think the most appropriate suggestion would be "The Doctrine of Awakening". Evola does a great job explaining how Buddhist religious methodology works. It really changed my perspecive on religion as a whole. The book can also serve as a practical guide on achieving enlightenment, since it offers a very simple, albeit hard to follow road map.