Closer to God: The Dark Enlightenment and Conservative Philosophy

An unemployed high school teacher can be given a job and tasked with teaching a curriculum while managing a new group of students in the blink of an eye. It was a few years ago when, literally overnight, I went from job beggar to the Special Education teacher at a small conservative private school.

Shockingly, at the time, I was told that I would mostly be a math teacher for the few Special Education students of the school. I had never been a math teacher and math was even something of a weakness of mine during my own high school experience, but their desperation for a teacher met with my desperation for a teaching job, we shook hands, and I went home to prepare.

I was competent, as a somewhat intelligent adult, that I’d be able to “stay a few pages ahead of the kids,” as the Rabbi Principal had suggested, but I felt a sad void in my enthusiasm for mathematics. I had never really studied math, and while I was certainly excited to grow intellectually while getting paid for the privilege, I didn’t think my own enthusiasm for learning was enough for High School students to manifest the same enthusiasm.

I had anticipated the inevitable question: “why does any of this matter?” And, outside of intellectualism for the sake of intellectualism, I didn’t have a reasonable answer… Until I came across a quote from Euclid that engendered the first cracks of daylight that would ultimately transform the way I thought about everything:

“The laws of nature are but the mathematical thoughts of God.”

Something clicked, I had an epiphany, and I saw the beauty in mathematics.

The Meaning of God (AKA: Internet Atheists are Basic Motherfuckers)

I was able to use the Euclid quote to frame my classes because I was working at a conservative religious school; it was something permissible, it was something that the kids could understand, and even if it didn’t provide them the motivation to enjoy math class, they certainly could better appreciate going through the motions.

I wished that my education in mathematics was framed that way, but God is seen as a dirty word in the modern world. The word God is associated with anti-intellect, anti-equality, anti-science, and anti-cool; it is associated with simplicity and hate; unintelligence and unhip culture. The only way God is understood is as the bearded-man in the sky, with the son who is only good for getting pissed on

Identifying as an Atheist, even if your only conception of God is the bearded-man in the sky, will grant you immediate Progressive credibility as you justify the relentless mocking of Believers with the rallying cry of “truth seeking.”

I can relate to truth seeking, and acknowledge that the truth is often pretty fucking ugly (especially compared to the world of pretty lies that our modern society has constructed). So when I would come across the typical outspoken Atheist, with their constant stream of venom being spat in the face of Believers, I would get super excited. Fantastic, I would think, another gritty truth seeker! My favorite kind of person! Okay, so after we deconstruct why the bearded-man in the sky doesn’t exist (this should take less than two-minutes), we can be free to move onto other pretty lies like Feminism, Democracy, and Diversity!

And that’s when the outspoken Atheist calls you an asshole and walks away.

Because being an outspoken Atheist is fucking basic. Atheism, in itself, is an acceptable choice for someone to make; if a person wants to reject a belief in God there shouldn’t be much to say after that decision has been reached. Anything further is touting intellectual superiority for the sake of intellectual superiority; in other words, creating an identity around being a pretentious asshole. The claim of truth-seeking is a red herring to justify behavior that would otherwise seem unacceptable (picking on Believers).

But, what if we understood that the mythology behind religion existed in a time when intellectual superiority wasn’t a social necessity? That the bearded-man in the sky made the realities of being a self-aware human with the capacity to feel fear, loss, and emotional pain a little bit easier? That the idea of a bearded-man in the sky helped people find a strength inside themselves that may have been previously inaccessible? It may seem silly, but maybe this belief of a bearded-man in the sky is important to people who don’t possess any kind of utilitarian use for the truth and maybe those people should be left alone?

Now, what if we didn’t define God as a bearded-man in the sky at all… what if we defined God as the first-cause in a series of events that created the Universe and dictated how this Universe became structured? And, what if we called this structure-of-the-universe “nature”?

The Fallacy of Progressivism

The outspoken Atheist is creating a paradox by claiming to have a strong allegiance to the Truth while also feeling outraged by arguments that do not fall within his narrow definition of that Truth; this is not something unexpected or inexpiable. The outspoken Atheist has replaced the socially outdated Religion of Christianity with the contemporary Religion of Progressivism.

I’m not a historian, but the Religion of Progressivism has much of its origin when Martin Luther posted his Ninety-Five Theses on the door of All Saints’ Church in Germany. Luther preached that there should not be a hierarchical order between a person and God, that the Holy Bible is a direct link to God (bearded-man in the sky) and that anyone with a Bible should be able to personally access God without the intervention of a Priest or other sanctioned Church official.

This idea created Protestantism, and set-into-motion the idea that a hierarchy is archaic and oppressive, and the notion of equality- that all people have equal access to all matters of higher intellect- is modern and preferable.

In other words the theory is that if all human beings are given the same set of circumstances, the outcomes will be similar. Since God is unhip and outdated, we can replace the word God with the concept of Education and suddenly it doesn’t seem like much has changed since the sixteenth century.

The problem with this theory is that the vast majority of people are stupid motherfuckers. Most people are not wired for higher-level intellectual thought, nuanced thought, or uncomfortable thought; people are primarily wired to prefer good-feelings, and when intellectual integrity runs opposite to feeling-good, people do not have much use for it.

Take a look at the current state of Higher Education. Higher Education has never been as accessible to the average person as it is today, and instead of the typical student meeting the established expectation of nuanced thought and intellectual growth, the system has instead lowered its standards to allow for mainstream access.

The outcome of doing so has created an Educational environment where the prevalent, feel-good, Progressive ideology cannot be challenged… and since the University system is presumed to hold authority over the definitive interpretation of reality, this feel-good Progressive ideology is considered the unquestionable Truth.

After all, the Universities say so, and Universities need to be careful not to offend their students, their students who have beliefs that are formed by the Media, the Media who look to the Universities for the parameters of modern thought…

This all amounts to one big negative feedback loop. The Dark Enlightenment term for this is The Cathedral. The Cathedral is essentially a soft-conspiracy where special-interests groups with similar goals (power) are able to piggy-back on one another to achieve their own ends. This creates the standard of Progressive thought which is spread by the University system, the Media, and the Government.

Human Nature, Social Engineering, and Intellectual Alchemy 

The Cathedral is mostly flawless in keeping everyone plugged-in, and creating a new power-structure where those aforementioned special-interest groups compete for limited-space at the top. For the average person this can get confusing… like when people feel that the unanimous promotion of  gender fluidity is righteous and Feminists feel as though this compromises the Female agenda, or when people are thrilled to support the YOU ARE WHAT YOU FEEL narrative and Rachel Dolezal comes along to troll the fuck out of them all. 

What makes the Religion of Progressivism flawed and incoherent is its dependence on Social Engineering.

Plainly put, Social Engineering is creating an environment that runs opposed to Human Nature to the point where it purports the Truth as the complete denial of Human Nature. Of course Human Nature still exists, by definition it must always exist, but people are not supposed to be conscious of its existence.

Often when men feel frustrated with their relationships with women- when they either can’t get a date by being the nice guy or their long-term relationship falls apart when they assumed they were being the good boyfriend, a little crack of light will begin to show. Maybe this was the second or third time that it has happened, maybe it’s happened to friends, maybe once was all it took… but a glitch in the matrix should become obvious to anyone honest enough to wake-up and see it.

When this guy has been through enough shit to quit playing The Game of Life without the instruction booklet, he is inevitably drawn to the Internet for help. Reflecting on his own experiences, he can quickly sort through the advice that is counter-intuitive to what he knows as true, and find forums more in-line with his experience.  He’ll first find advice that resonates with this experience while adding to his knowledge base; like how the heart of Masculinity is power, and that women are inherently attracted to power. He will ultimately learn that understanding Female Nature is tremendously beneficial in having a successful relationship with a woman.  

This understanding of Female Nature exists as an inverse to how women have been understood over the past sixty years. For every Hollywood movie with the gritty female character who walks away from the rich, handsome, masculine man because “she didn’t love him” in favor of the hapless geek, for every Women Studies class at a University that is allowed to go intellectually unchallenged,  for every Politician who shamelessly lies to appeal to female voters… An understanding of Female Nature has become the complete inverse of what is socially considered fact; this understanding will place the newly enlightened in danger of being considered hateful, insane, or naive if he foolishly discusses women in terms of Female Nature.

The inevitable question will then present itself: if I have been lied to about Female Nature, how to embody Masculinity, and the way intergender relations work, what else have I been lied to about? 

Social Engineering as Progressive doctrine engenders Intellectual Alchemy. It is a faulty foundation that creates a concrete set of false-premises; with these false-premises, even the most intelligent wanna-be intellect will end up paralyzed with confusion as his understanding of the world becomes incomprehensible.

Human nature must inherently exist as the foundation for all Education that follows.

The Dark Enlightenment: Welcome to the Rabbit Hole

Progressives must feel a smug disdain for humans who lived during the Dark Ages, before the era of Social Engineering; to the progressive, these humans were uneducated, ignorant, childish, and hateful. Depending on the fervor of the particular Progressive, this may be limited to those who lived before the Protestant Revolution… or maybe before the revolution of First Wave Feminism… or maybe before the shackles of female sexual accountability were cast away during the wild 1960s… or maybe only recently.

If you wonder why Social Justice Warriors seem to hate everyone, these people actually believe that the world is still unenlightened, that most people are still hateful, and that the power dynamic between the traditionally oppressed and the traditional oppressors hasn’t changed at all. In the Religion of Progressivism, Social Justice Warriors are your snake-handling fanatics; real fucking lunatics.

Human beings are intelligent animals, inherently animals, and civilization is artificial. We can better understand this if we don’t place a value judgment on the word artificial; upon taking a minor step back, our legacy as humans are equal parts beautiful and magnificent- philosophy, literature, art, medicine, history, technology, mathematics… and even if this list is endless, it still does not diminish the hard fact that human beings are primarily animals.

Without our fancy civilization we would roam the earth like wild dogs, the strong would kill the weak, the women would be raped and impregnated, and we wouldn’t be much more than hunting fuck machines. And we’re still hunting fuck machines, only we need rules and order to maintain the beautiful, wondrous, (unnatural) civilization that we have created.

When a man plays violent video games, or competes in sports, he is satisfying his  animistic desire to hunt (consider watching sports as competition pornography). When a woman has a rape fantasy ravishment fantasy, it isn’t the rape in-itself that is the fantasy; this woman doesn’t want some fat geek taking her by force, but in evolutionary terms, rape to her signifies that she is getting fucked by, and hopefully (on a subconscious level) impregnated by, the strongest and most Alpha male. In the modern world this strong Alpha male is most likely sexy and handsome, so it’s win/win.

The modern Liberal will claim that humans have evolved past the confines of their animal nature over the past five-hundred years; the Conservative who is in-touch with Human Nature will understand the absurdity of this claim. If the human being has evolved to the point of his animal nature becoming obsolete, he wouldn’t need the constant presence of an invisible gun to his head making sure of this evolution.

This authoritative nature of Progressivism, the Social Engineering that is inherent to maintaining a Progressive society, not only breeds a neutered civilization, but stands as the true definition of Atheism- the denial of God through the denial of nature.

Follow me on Twitter @KillToParty

Like my post? I accept Bitcoin tips via ChangeTip @



  1. Pingback: This Week in Reaction (2015/07/19) | The Reactivity Place
  2. Pingback: Beta Anxiety and the Vampiric Alpha in Dracula (1931) | Kill To Party
  3. Pingback: “The (Almost) Perfect Guide to Imperfect Boys” and Indoctrination to the Culture of Categorization for Middle School GirlsFr | Kill To Party
  4. Pingback: 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) and the Nature of Evolution | Kill To Party
  5. david · September 6, 2015

    “Human beings are intelligent animals, inherently animals, and civilization is artificial”
    This got me thinking about the civlizations. In Genesis God ordered man to scatter and fill the earth. It wasn’t in Gods plan for man to build huge cities and civilizations. Maybe the author of genesis is aware of the growth of civilization contribuinting to gynocentrism as brilliantly explained in this video:

  6. Pingback: Under the Rainbow: The Inevitability of the Modern World | Kill To Party
  7. B_Tampa · March 3, 2017

    A few things…

    1) Mathematics may be the most valuable of all educational disciplines, not for its utility, but for the experience of doing something that is no fun at all while you are struggling to master it – but then becomes fun, in a very literal sense, once you understand it. This is a principle the student can apply to many areas in life and it will lead to much success.

    2) There are few people more obsessed with God than the typical internet atheist. These are joyless people and their main purpose in pushing their unbelief on others is to take joy they can’t feel, or the possibility of that joy, from others. Contrast this with the biblical Christian who eagerly shares his faith. He isn’t doing it for the reasons unbelievers suppose. He doesn’t need someone else to believe in order to validate his own belief. He isn’t trying to oppress or control them. He has found something so wonderful that gives him such happiness and peace – that he wants to give it to others so they can enjoy the same.

    3) Whether Luther’s ideas were a foundation for Progressivism or not is debatable. What isn’t debatable is that his ideas rest on a very firm foundation of bible doctrine. Since the bible is the only authoritative source for Christian teaching, there is no room for argument with its clear teachings. Some issues are not as clear and believers might legitimately have disagreements on interpretation – but those are few and far between among those who read it to find out what is in it instead of to support a belief they already hold.

    4) Real Christianity fits well with your ideas on Human Nature. Bear in mind, I’m not talking about the easy-believism that today masquerades as Christianity. I’m talking about heaven/hell, salvation/damnation Christianity taught in the Bible. That Christianity understands that man’s nature is bent, that humans are selfish, petty, and difficult – animals, if you will. But it also shows a path to rise above our nature and do better, be better – similar to artificial Civilization.

    5) Yes – the majority of people are stupid and will always be stupid. The notion that “with age comes wisdom” is a fairytale. The truth is, if you were a dumbass at 30, you will probably be a dumbass at 60. Most people have no business even driving past a college much less sitting in its classrooms – yet, there they are. This is why today’s college degree is yesterday’s high school diploma.

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