Monolog of a [W]hite Supremacist Part V

HitlerHe has a schizophrenic take on the ego. In the past he defended the ego as a vital force for survival. But sometimes he dismisses the ego as an antiquated concept. True to form, however, he does so in a vague and inscrutable manner.

Again, the “ego” is yesterday’s psychological wedge.

By “psychological wedge” does he mean the ego is literally splitting the psyche in two or does he mean the ego is a wedge issue that separates one group of like minded people from another?

Now the “ego” battles multiple Selves and is left susceptible to the Law of Diminishing Return. The “ego,” quite linearly, did not manifest with the intent of “combatting” multiple Selves. The “ego” must now choose which Self to speak to where “it” was once the dominate “voice” in one’s head.

I think what he is getting at here is that the ego is conceptually a different “self” living within the psyche of a person. Clearly people are aware that they have different and sometimes conflicting motivations from time to time. This is evidence of multiple selves. Then there is the part of the self that is self critical. This is further evidence.

I tend to lump this self critical aspect together with the part of the self that is self destructive, jealous, vain, racist etc. and I refer to it all as the ego. It might not be technically correct but that is how I look at it. As I said earlier, in the past he has defended the ego (or the qualities of the ego) as a positive force for survival. It is interesting to think of his preoccupation with race in this context. Really, race to him is merely an extension of his ego through time and space. In this sense his philosophy remains consistent.

But what is an “ego” to “say” to one with antithetical Selves self-created for the very purpose of submitting the “ego” to an internal silence?

From my perspective the ego is the cause of a great deal of suffering in life. It was a watershed moment in my life when I learned to separate myself from my ego and observe it. Through this process I ceased being governed by my ego to a large extent and I also gained insight into how my ego functions and the role it plays within my greater self. This liberated me from a great deal of depression and anxiety which had dominated my existence before hand. If ever I acted in accordance with what he calls “God-ordained free will” in my life this is the greatest example. However, if I take the pro-ego perspective, what I have just described appears as a subjugation of the ego. This is the idea I think he is attempting to convey in the passage quoted above.

Again, at one time the conception of a “man with a ego” was a man very Self-aware and thus very aware of outside his Self [sic.]. His “ego” was that first self-creation that functioned as an “outside observer and advisor” to the dominant Self. Over time, the “ego” was liberated and became only a reflection of the bad Self. Now the “man with the ego” is a stunted man, isolated in his own mind, privy only to a “reality” of his own desires and impenetrable to competing realities. This “ego” is a fundamentally transgressive ego where it was once a self-created feed back loop utilized to obtaining a fuller grasp of the total reality.

I am in full agreement that the ego is a natural process originally designed for survival. To the extent it aids man in his survival it is beneficial. Where the ego tends to run afoul is when it perceives threats that are not real and acts inappropriately to defend itself from these “threats.” The origin of the ego run afoul is typically bad parenting or some other form of abuse. If ego separation is not achieved then it is passed on to the next generation. I suspect this is the motivating force behind his white Supremacy. In a sense it is his ego that is the white Supremacist and he has ceded control of his greater self to his ego.

So now these two extremely antithetical conceptions of the “man with the ego” provoked a reaction from the dominant Self. Which of these “egos” is the one to trust, the one to distrust or how can I, the dominant Self, exploit the trusted ego and the distrusted ego? How can I, the dominant Self, silence the transgressive ego and hear more clearly the trusted ego? Such questions require the application of multiple selves manifested concretely from the dominant Self to test the “ego” in all ways possible. A loyal ego is a silent ego. A disloyal ego is a noisy ego.

There is a choice that must be made. Do you choose the light or do you choose the dark? The ego is tricky and can be very convincing at times. I can now clearly see my ego sits on the dark side of the spectrum and I have made my choice not to ally myself with it. He seems to have made a different choice and has constructed an elaborate philosophical and spiritual system to hold it all together. To the extent he can live a peaceful, happy life and not interfere with anyone else’s life I wish him well.


Tomorrow is the first Sunday of Advent and I would like to shift gears a little. This white Supremacist series, although interesting, has introduced a certain negative energy into my life that I do not want to have present during Advent. As such, I will be taking a break on this subject for a while (perhaps permanently). In keeping with the theme of ego I would be remiss if I did not point out that this series has been ego gratifying for me. If I am being honest I have to admit that part of me (my ego) enjoys the arguments in the comments section. And the times when I felt I got the better of him gave me a short term rush of adrenaline. But this is all ego and vanity. It ultimately does not lead to happiness. In fact, it leads in the opposite direction despite its entertainment value.


Filed under Uncategorized

3 responses to “Monolog of a [W]hite Supremacist Part V

  1. thordaddy


    Those who live by the “evolutionary paradigm” shall die by the “evolutionary paradigm” INCLUDING any and all self-claimed “Christians.”

    If YOUR “ego” is out of control THEN your “ego” is out of YOUR CONTROL.

    This provokes the outside observer to ask a very pertinent question:

    Is that, in fact, HIS “ego?”

    A “thing” not under your control can hardly be claimed a possession of and nearly never asserted to be of one’s own “hand.”

    My ego on the other hand OPERATES UNDER antithetical CONCEPTUAL ASSUMPTIONS. My ego is essentially “factory” form. Made to order… Operating in ideal fashion. Yet, still susceptible to the degradations of all-pervasive “equality dogma.” So my ego FIGHTS ON MY BEHALF…

    Your “ego” is the enemy within “possessing” radical autonomy without.

  2. thordaddy


    There is every reason to believe that your rogue “ego” is simply an “out of control” conceptualization used to “justify” multiple contradictory Selves within you in order to maximize your autonomy. So being a liberal “Christian” is “better” than being just a liberal or just a Christian and certainly much “better” than being a white Supremacist. A rogue “ego,” by definition, is not a trusted ego… Its feedback functionality has ceased formal operations. One needs “specialized” Selves to “test” this rogue “ego” for the purpose of bringing “it” back under control…


    This is merely a CHOSEN FRAME…

    Your ego CAN CONCEPTUALLY become your most trusted internal “advisor” once again EVEN if only for the purpose of consolidating your Selves into something particularly knowable and understandable.

    The culmination of such reframe for the high IQ “white” male mired in radical autonomy is just plain genuine white Supremacy… That movement of white men who believe in and therefore strive towards Perfection, ie., objective Supremacy.

    To deny the above is not just highly irrational… It is highly irrational BECAUSE there is no real sense of what it is that one is EXACTLY REJECTING other than what is EXACTLY EXPLICITLY STATED…

    If one reject genuine white Supremacy then one rejects white men believing in and then striving towards objective Supremacy…

    AND THIS IS EXACTLY our collective reality.

    The ensuing chaos is in the mass denial.

  3. thordaddy


    Just look at the photo… If one didn’t know Hitler and was only in the mindset of fashion… What would he say? Pristine… Sharp… Angular… Rigid… Stern… Now, one learns this man is an anti-Christian. Now what? Then you come to find out that this man was against “Jewish supremacy.” So “we” have an anti-Christian anti-Jewish supremacist who also believes in organizing his nation under a socialist economic order ROOTED in racial hierarchy.

    What does any of this have to do with a white man who believes in and therefore strives towards objective Supremacy?

    When do you “see” A LEARNED mis-association resulting in pathological deracination.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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