Identity and Modernity

If one had to source the main cause of existential misery the modern western man faces in the postindustrial nightmare, I would have to cite a lack of belonging. Not so coincidentally, during the industrial revolution, a man by the name of Emile Durkheim came to agree with this sentiment, sparking the foundation of the field of sociology. Durkheim had observed drastically rising suicide rates within his lifetime and he set out to quantify and correlate factors that could lead him to the cause. What he found was that the men that were killing themselves were commonly those who had lost a sense of belonging in their community, as well as those who had lost a sense of societal moral guidance. These individuals were people who had found themselves relatively isolated and lacking in true fellowship and spiritual reciprocity. Durkheim claimed that while both of these causes of suicide were distinct, they were very clearly related and commonly went hand in hand. Thus, two separate names were coined for each cause: Anomic Suicide and Egotistic suicide. The former caused by the absence of a societal standard of moral discipline and the latter by a lack of belonging in the context of the societal collective.[1] Today we see much of the same reality. The highest risk factor for suicide remains isolation and a lack of connectivity to one's society, which is a problem that is only getting worse.[2] [3] [4] [5] Clearly, a situation only being further aggravated by the increased baselessness and perceived subjectivity of our moral structures.

And what does this grim statement have to do with identity? Well, I must explain that this profound proof of suffering that is suicide speaks volumes as to the basis that the soul sits centered upon. Identity is how a given being is related to it's existential surroundings; how it interacts with them, what the nature and inclinations of these interactions are and where this specific being finds its reality amidst all of this. It is not a subjective concept, but one based in the deciphering of the divine intellectual systematic backbone that comprises our world. In other words, it is not for us to decide in subjective emotion but only for us to discover in objective fact. The modern existential misery I speak of stems from the divorce of one's life from this reality.

In truth, people kill themselves not because they are alone - many of the loneliest people in the world only have to walk outside to be around others and they know it. No - these people put an end to their lives because of the societal changes enforced by industrialization and secular enlightenment philosophies - ideals which have forged states centered upon the notion of materialist efficiency, propped up by iron, machinery and all likenesses of material hedonism. One no longer works intimately with 100 other potential friends on a farm or in a guild from a common background, but instead sits in a cubical, isolated from even the few 5 people they work with. They don't work with those they grew up in cultural commonality with or any sort of family - they are instead shipped halfway across the country to fill a corporate void, interacting maybe a handful of times a day with strangers of different ages, races, creeds, ethics and tongues. Deeply rooted friends - particularly friends that one interacts with on a daily basis - are nearly impossible to make and retain in a society isolated by machinery, computers and technology filling the gaps of mutual human collaboration at every turn. Subsequently, it goes without saying that the necessary intimacy required to find a proper spouse in this context also goes largely unmet by a growing segment of the population - which is evidenced largely by our record divorce rate of roughly 50%.

Additionally the structuring of western democracies around secular individualism only further festers the wound in the form of anomic listlessness. People are taught their entire lives that they are an "individual" which has "rights" to "freedoms" entitling them to do as they please without repercussion, creating a dumpster fire of a selfish and libertine society structured around surrogate pleasure. All of this occurs in disregard to an organized cohesive societal consensus on morality or even the aspiration to improve society, itself. The victims of this mindset hysterically spend their days partaking in material pseudo activities or direct drug use predicated on achieving a bodily chemical reaction to dull the pain of a void they cannot quite understand or quantify. Needless to say, these individuals are wholeheartedly ineffective in their aim. Their methodology is an equivalent of using dirt as a disinfectant.

To fill this spiritual void the answer is quite direct: one must belong in his surroundings. This is not something a person can will by changing his perspective but something that stands ipso facto in existential reality. One may either have found a place in his prospective environment in which he fills a role to occupy the meaningful purpose of the life he's been gifted with, or he struggles as a spiritual outcast and failure within not only nature, but divine providence, itself. In essence, one can feel a multitude of miseries while occupying a meaningful state of being in possibility, but if one does not occupy a meaningful role in his divinely purposed existence, he will certainly and always be plagued with not just misery but emptiness in his soul. From this we can deduce that meaning and fulfillment are not only exclusively divine and spiritually affecting matters, but subsequently entirely in relation to our environment around us. This is the intellectual beginning of the notion of identity; whether one is a thief, a saint, an artist, a fool, a giant, an occidental or an oriental - these are the empirical relations of one form of sensory input to the rest and they are not limited to living beings. Take for example the notion of a spoon being identified with a device relative to eating, the chair relative to sitting and the javelin relative to war. Voluntary fulfillment of the meaning in which our lives were engineered to pursue is predicated upon the possibility of finding an existential niche in relation to which the virtue of man can blossom. One must find his place in society or his potential and performance will be sparsely different than those of a spoon being used for weaponry or a javelin being used as a seat.

Condemningly to this noble enterprise, society on all fronts of recent political manifestation works day and night to erode the possibility of identity. We are stripped from an environment that reflects a ubiquitous reciprocity of moral, legal, racial, ethnic, linguistic, religious, and cultural standards by the newfound aggression of materialism, hedonism, individualism, and egalitarian thought - none of which can possibly function in harmony. We wake up and work amongst racial foreigners once divided from us by nature and God. We have to navigate their various accents, and speak in hushed voices to avoid offending their false religious idols and moral belief systems. We have to explain to our children why our neighbors have 5 spouses, as if they are obligated to accommodate their imposed revolting traditions of behavior. We watch as the originally universal law is now applied distinct to the basis of the racial and cultural background of the offender to avoid validating stereotypes already visibly present and distinct to the nature of various anthropological branches of humanity.

Socially, we are being driven towards destruction both on a spiritual plane of nihilistic assault, and physically in the weaponization of miscegenation via demographic turnover. It is necessary for man to recognize this and understand exactly how vital it becomes to surround himself with those of reciprocal background, traditions, faith and upbringing to flourish. For man is not an island, however, it would be better for a man to be stranded on an island, than to be stranded in the captivity of a hostile force. We are social creatures and to live meaningfully, we must live our virtues through others we find compatible enough to bond and relate with. Anything less is self-centered and an implicit pursuit of outward pride over true sincerity - a false altruism and a common plague of the modern self worshipping "progressive". Without being able to deeply establish spiritual bonds through family, faith, work and locality the fabric of society ceases to be and with it the existential meaning of being, itself. Without commonality, one has no bonds. Without bonds altruism becomes impossibility. Without altruism the life of man has achieved total and certain vanity.

Hence, it is fundamentally apparent that the occidental man has been challenged. With certainty, we can say that if his response is to fall into victimhood to this new world, his reward will be certain annihilation. For man to survive he must adopt a life grounded in the piety of virtue and through it, embody a numinous disposition. He must strive qualitatively through the spirit of God until the spirit of God thrives through him. With this and only through this will man lay low the forces that seek to bury all semblance of identity and belonging beneath the borderless egalitarian technocracy we find ourselves stranded in. The external rejection of the false idols of multiculturalism, hedonism and secular anomie in of itself, is not enough. To change the downward spiral of western civilization, man must first change himself at the very core of his soul and worldview; to readopt the divine impetus of virtuosity and moral discipline his ancestors had previously borne and lost.

[1] "Suicide, a study in sociology" Emile Durkheim, 1897



[4] "The Role of Social Isolation in Suicide" Trout, 1980



Dear readers,

I have a question for you: Is there a phone in your room? The vast majority of us would answer “yes”, and frankly, it’s hard not to have a phone. It’s fast, convenient, and often required for many aspects of our lives. However, this also means that our phones are constantly communicating data to government and corporate entities, against our will. This likely leaves you with questions like “How did it get this way?” and “Why?”

The aim of this particular article is to answer these questions and offer advice on how you can fight back against corporate and government surveillance efforts.

The Surveillance State and Our Phones

When most people picture a surveillance state, they picture a government creating spy networks , law enforcement spy vans watching buildings, or agents bugging specific phone lines. While all of these activities are still conducted, they vastly differ from modern surveillance in two key detail; the perpetrator and their scale. The previous surveillance methods involve government agents gathering information on specific people. Whereas in modern surveillance, corporate entities indiscriminately collect information on anyone with a phone and generally, allow government agents to access this information. Fun fact: the government often doesn’t even need a warrant to access information gathered by a corporate entity.

“Corporations (and other non government organizations or NGOs, by the way)? How did this happen”, you might ask. Edward Snowden, former NSA glow-in-the-dark who confirmed a lot of details regarding the surveillance state, explains the legal precedent and technical details about modern surveillance in his interview with retarded man child, Joe Rogan, linked here (hyperlink in .txt?).

Legal Precedent and Incentives

As discussed in the video, the legal precedent that created our surveillance state comes from the case of Smith vs Maryland. The short version is that in the 70s, a creepy incel named Smith. repeatedly called and stalked a girl, had the police investigate, and the police eventually needed his phone number to confirm his guilt. The police went to his phone provider and asked for his information (name, number, address, call records, etc), which they handed over, instead of asking for the police to get a warrant. When the case finally went to court, the incel’s defense argued that the information gathered belonged to the incel, not the phone company, and was gathered illegally by the police because there wasn’t a warrant. Obviously this argument didn’t hold in court. The case remained valid and the incel got punished.

So after this case, the legal precedent has been that you don’t own information you give out when you use the services of companies, to include Telcom, as an industry. To make it worse, governments, businesses, and organizations realized the value and risks held in the data they collect. The terms of service on your phone contract will absolutely state that the data collected about you is information owned by your provider. For legal reasons, they want it outlined on paper that you agree with how they use your data and won’t sue.

However, government and business entities do this for more than just legal security; data collection is a large and incredibly profitable industry. Almost every large entity with information on their users sells the data they collect. Even government agencies like your state’s BMV or DMV sell data (hyperlink here). Businesses also analyze data to try and make decisions that will result in more sales and profits. Amazon collects so much data about their customers that they transport it to facilities with trucks (hyperlink) as opposed to using internet connections. Lastly, the government’s obvious incentive in supporting data collection efforts is the ability to use data to govern and punish.

Technical Details

If you use android and want to understand the details behind how modern surveillance works, go ahead and open up your phone settings, system, about, status and hit IMEI information. You are that number. The IMEI is the number assigned to your device by the phone’s manufacturer. Any time you have signal or wifi texting/calling services, your phone is constantly telling the nearest cell phone tower “Hey, I am X, and I am here”. Back in the status page, you’ll also notice that your sim card has an IMEI, which also gets constantly communicated. The cell phone tower records all of these constant messages from your phone. That cell phone tower is on a network, where all the other towers communicate the messages that they are receiving. All of this communication between towers is the reason calls, texts, and notifications go to the right people. Telcom companies record all these communications and allow the government to access them. However, this is the MINIMUM information that your phone is communicating every couple of seconds.

Go to your home screen and pull up all of your phone’s apps. With few exceptions, those apps all communicate even more data to their developers and administrators. Don’t like that? That’s a shame; a lot of those apps are stock. Google owns Android, so you can’t get rid of things like Google Maps, Google Play Store, or Google app. In some cases, Facebook is a stock app and you can’t get rid of that either. So what all are they collecting? Just about anything seeing as common apps all ask for permission to access to your files, your pictures and videos, your microphone and camera, your location, your contacts, your text messages… Everything… and you legally don’t own a goddamn thing because you agreed to the terms of service and permission requests.

How Can We Fight Back?

Alternative Operating Systems

So, we’re working with the assumption that you need a phone. As we’ve discussed, Android and iOS are a no-go. So we have to use alternative operating systems. There are many in development, but LineageOS is probably the furthest along and most functional.

LineageOS is an open source, highly customizable, privacy centered operating system. It should be noted that technically, it is based off Android, BUT, not a lot of it. When I poked around in settings, the phone displayed that 4% of Android code was present on the phone. So I may still be sending data to Google, but 99% less data, when compared to most Android users. Also, LineageOS’s Privacy Guard can limit what data you send when using more mainstream apps. More on apps, later.

Next thing to discuss is your phone carrier. I’d recommend avoiding mainstream phone carriers, if you can live without unlimited data. The alternative carriers basically rent the infrastructure from the big companies, but they charge way less. Or, for maximum information security, you can go with a prepaid carrier option. These prepaid options have no contracts, so your name and personal info isn’t tied to your device unless you input it into an app. Also, prepaid plans are still cheaper than normal plans with mainstream carriers. The catch to prepaid options is that they’re more annoying, in that you have to refill your plan with cards from the store.

Now, let’s talk about apps and ultimately about how you use your phone in your life. Every non-stock app you download is a potential information security breach. To minimize or prevent these, you might really have to change how you use your phone in your life. For example, you shouldn’t use Google Maps or Waze on LineageOS, because even with proper use of Privacy Guard, you’re still sending data, which tech companies make money off [of], to a giant ideological opponent, Google. Alternatively, you can use an open source equivalent like OsmAnd~, which I found on F-Droid, a free, open source equivalent to the Google or Apple app stores. Or, you could just get a real GPS to keep in your car.

So this very much becomes a matter of changing how you live your life. What apps on your current phone do you really need? On my normie phone, I had all sorts of bullshit that didn’t need to be there; I really just needed a navigation and private browsing. Are you just trying to minimize the data you send or do you want to be completely anonymous, at all times? Is having your bank app a need or a convenience? Do you really need the McDonald’s app? These ares decisions that are ultimately up to you and how much you want to fight back against the surveillance state.

The Achievement of LGBT

Congress and state legislatures pass laws handed to them by corporate entities and interest groups in exchange for money. Politicians rarely do the actual writing part of drafting legislation; their job is usually to fill in the blanks of a model piece of legislation.

USA Today and the Arizona Republic released a report examining this phenomenon on the state level. The report found that corporations and interest groups draft model bills, get them passed in one state, and then push politicians in other states to pass similar bills. Politicians will usually pass the similar bills because they are an easy way to advance their careers; most of the bill writing is already done and it gets their name on legislation. The report also found at minimum 1000 cases of copycat bills in the past eight years.

As one could imagine, most of these bills are for their own self-interest, often with deceiving titles and language, and at the expense of the constituents that lawmakers are supposed to represent. Two examples from the study include The Asbestos Transparency Act, which made it harder for victims to recoup money and the "HOPE Act" which made food stamps harder to get, in nine states. (USAT) An additional example I've had come up in my life is the requirements to open a car dealership. According to a guide making a dealership in Ohio, "You must have an office in the building that has at least 180 square feet. Your office must include, at minimum, a desk, three chairs, and one filing cabinet or similar furnishings to create an environment conducive to an office and facilitating the storage of records, all of which must be kept neat & orderly". Indiana's Secretary of State site of dealership requirements includes similar requirements such as an 100 square foot office, have vaguely specified office furniture, and overall be "reflective of functional use and operation of the license". Also, both states require that one have a lot capable of holding 10 vehicles. These similar car dealership laws are just one example of copycat bills serving the interests of a corporate entity or entire industry.

On the Federal level, there isn't a need for model bills, however corporate entities still manipulate our legal system to their advantage over the nation's. Inuit (the creators of Turbo Tax) and H&R Block have long been lobbying to keep the Internal Revenue Service from simplifying taxes. According to Pro Publica, Inuit spent $2 million and H&R Block spent $3 million lobbying for a bill that would prevent the IRS from offering simpler, prefilled forms to taxpayers of the nation. To put this in perspective, in my state at least, I paying taxes online is incredibly easy. You just log in and do it.

So the question remains: what do you do with this information? Very simple really; spread it. Americans know the word lobbying, they know corporate entities and special interest groups subvert our politics, but they don't know who's doing it, how, or why. That is the problem. Our government may be corrupt, but they keep lots of relevant information available to the public, to include campaign finance data on all levels of government.

The Federal Election Commission keeps detailed records in their fundraising section of the campaign finance data. Your state's secretary of state should have similar data, in regards to state level campaign finance. I've personally downloaded and played with some of mine for future education efforts. Your county and city/town should also have their own public data as well, though, I have found that they are less organized.

So I urge you, reader, go and learn which corporate entities, groups, and individuals work to disenfranchise you and your people. Identify them and act against them and their interests. Expose their motives to your kin. Boycott and act against these groups and businesses wherever you legally can. Free our nation and reclaim our republic.

If you would like to provide input, comment, or call me a nigger faggot, email me at [email protected]


Header. (n.d.). Retrieved from

Huseman, J. (2019, May 9). Filing Taxes Could Be Free and Simple. But H&R Block and Intuit Are Still Lobbying Against It. Retrieved from

O'Dell, R., & Penzenstadler, N. (2019, June 19). You elected them to write new laws. They're letting corporations do it instead. Retrieved from

Ohio Dealer license Training. (n.d.). Retrieved from