Sometimes it is good to let a fundamentalist Christian’s comment pass to reply, as I did yesterday and today. However, I would like to clarify a few things that I haven’t made clear on this site.
I discovered the racial right forums very late in life, after my fiftieth birthday. Previously, my intellect was absorbed in trying to unravel the mystery of the psychic havoc that abusive parents wreak on their children, be it a child or a teenager. The result of that research, sometimes autobiographical and sometimes not, was these books written in my mother tongue (I plan to add a final chapter now that my mother has passed away).
Without understanding my first fifty years it is impossible to understand my point of view on this site, and why that point of view differs so much from the common white nationalist, even though we both profess devotion to the fourteen words. The crux of the situation I explain in this post.
It is true that 99.9 per cent of kids who were abused big time at home develop neurotic or even psychotic symptoms. What is not often discussed is that falling into a cult and believing its dogmas (which happened to me in 1978) is also a form of mental derangement. The way I define psychosis differs greatly from how it is defined by psychiatrists, whose profession I consider fraudulent (see pages 105-127 of Daybreak). The way I see psychosis has nothing to do with putative defective genes or putative chemical imbalances. That is bio-reductionist pseudo-science (see pages 21-30 of Day of Wrath).
Many forms of psychosis represent a strong cognitive distortion of the real world, the classic example being a subject who suffers from paranoid delusions of persecution. But if psychosis is a strong cognitive distortion, that means that people who believe in the Abrahamic religions are also in a state of psychosis. As Gaedhal told us in his communication today: ‘There is no empirical evidence that the Christian god exists. Thus, we ought not [speculate about the so-called Trinity] minus an empirical demonstration that God exists. As Rationalwiki points out: discussing the nature of an entity for which there is no empirical evidence is like discussing the colour of the tooth fairy’s dress’.
However, from this angle, all the New Age cults (including Scientology) that have flourished in North America also represent various psychoses, in that their adherents are heavily distorting reality. Ron Hubbard himself was a victim of his mother’s abuse, and instead of autobiographical self-inspection, he elaborated a doctrine inspired by his science-fiction tales that concealed his childhood (see the little book I wrote in Spanish about that cult).
Cognitively I was in very bad shape when I fell into a cult, Eschatology (see pages 11-26 of Daybreak). But thanks to the paranormal sceptics, among whom I include Martin Gardner, I was cured of those dogmas. Unfortunately, most are unable to be cured and remain indefinitely trapped either in the dogmas of a paranormalist cult or of a more conventional religion, among which I include Christianity.
Interestingly, among the racial right, the only one who talked about this subject before YouTube took down his channel was Stefan Molyneux, and remember his sharp analysis of how his mother’s terrible abuse of him as a child drove Charles Manson mad as an adult. In one of his programmes, now deleted, Molyneux said a great truth: that many adults who were abused found in the idea of a personal God a balm for their soul (a sort of substitute Father replacing the abusive father many of us had as children). This unconscious process is something real, but only those who follow the religion of the Delphic Oracle, know thyself, discover these traps of the mind.
Having cleared all this up, the crux of what I was talking about above is the following.
While 99.9 per cent of the reactions to abuse are psychologically dissociative (i.e., neuroses and psychoses), there is a narrow door, to paraphrase the New Testament (Lk 13:24), that leads to even greater mental health than the common man, despite the abuse.
To illustrate this, let us recall that, in evolutionary biology, 99.9 per cent of genetic mutations in a normal organism deteriorate the individual. But there is a fraction that, by pure chance, leads to a better adaptation to the environment: the mutant becomes superior to its peers (imagine, for example, the Australopithecus mutated by touching the monolith in Kubrick’s film).
That is the kind of mutation I talk about in my trilogy, and what I recommend to all those who were martyred at home. But it is the narrow door, very very difficult to find. Almost all the abused go to the wide door: the range of the most serious psychoses—e.g., serial killing and the schizophrenias—to neurotic depressions, addictions, falling into cults or repeating patterns of behaviour with the next generation of children (I even believe that a dude’s perennial homosexuality is a symptom of a strong neurosis).
So when someone points to my abusive past at home to dismiss my ideas he is not only committing an ad hominem fallacy: he is ignoring that a narrow door exists.
I could define this door as an immense development of empathy due to processing past pain (though I don’t mean the crazy empathy of liberals, which I have been calling ‘deranged altruism’). See pages 68-70 of Daybreak, ‘The Ascent of the Soul’, which hits the nail on the head of what I mean by healthy empathy. Interestingly, the following pages of the same book disprove that my worldview is at all pessimistic.
Those books from my Daybreak Press deserve to be edited once again after Lulu, Inc. cancelled my account for my English books. I am a golden ager who barely has time to learn how to design book covers at, say, IngramSpark. If any of my young visitors would like to contribute their work to make my English books available for sale again, please contact me (see the red letters at the top of this page, ‘Contact’).
