top of page
  • Writer's picture738

The psychology of Christians

A woman is in the kitchen, she says: “Someone put this glass here.” Her husband is in the bathroom, she knows he’s in the bathroom—she knows he can hear. He comes out and says, “Is there something wrong?”. His wife says, “Wrong? Why would something be wrong? How are you, sweetheart? Do you want anything…maybe a drink?”.

This game, if played to the conclusion the woman secretly wants, ends in the woman being beaten because “did you say something? - no nothing [I know you heard me, I’ll deny you heard me]” enrages another person because it depersonalises them, refuses to grant them recognition. In order to achieve recognition they will beat the other person—which is a way to say “I’m here, you can’t deny I’m here now”.

The woman can then run to the neighbours and say, “My husband is a beast, he’s an abuser”—and then relate a story about how “she literally did nothing, just did the washing up like she always does, because she loves him so much but he never appreciates…”. This can have several goals—to induce another beating (because she likes it really), to enlist other men to attack her husband to see how strong he really is, perhaps to get compliance from him in another regard through social shame (if he’s vulnerable to that—which everyone is to some degree).

The psychology is just the same in this tweet—the female psychology is also the Christian psychology (it’s the Jewish psychology too). It’s why the Christians are often very smug—unlike the Buddhists and Muslims (both masculine religions developed by warriors)—it’s the same smugness and aloofness you find in women. “Because whatever you do, I’ll win, because I’m a woman, and I can make other men feel sorry for me and then beat you up—and because I’m a narcissist, I have a very high opinion of myself. You could say I’m saved.”

That’s right: Christians think their shit doesn’t stink—and that’s why they’re so smug. It’s the same with women, and men participate in that mystique (until they are disillusioned, as in Jonathan Swift’s poem The Lady’s Dressing Room: “Nor wonder how I lost my wits!; Oh! Caelia, Caelia, Caelia shits!”—though some men never wake up and smell the coffee).

So in the above tweet the idea is to deny your experience but in the guise of being “loving and kind”. It’s a double-bind—no matter what you say you are you won’t win; we don’t hear you (so we have power over you)—we pretend to hear you but we won’t hear you, that’s how we win. Obviously, this infuriates people because it denies their experience but does so in a form that doesn’t look like a denial.

It’s the same as when a woman thinks a man likes blowjobs and then refuses to give them but when she has sex with her husband sticks her tongue to her cheek to taunt him (the symbol for a blowjob)—you find the same conceited attitude in Christians.

It’s not like I said, “I think your beliefs are bullshit and your gods are made up. I’m better than you, and so are my gods.” No, it’s the woman who puts a hand on your shoulder and says, “I’m only saying this because I really love you,” as she manipulates you to do something against your self-interests. It’s the same as a dysfunctional family who claims one member is “schizophrenic” and “mentally ill” and yet, “mysteriously”, they “recover” when removed from the family that sent them to the mental hospital in the first place.

Christians, Extinction Rebellion—it’s the same deal. In Ancient Rome, the Christians pulled this “just concerned, really luv u” act as a means to denigrate what other people believed and then, when the pagans cracked and hit back, ran around screaming, “Abuse! Martyrdom! Savage paganism! We’re being brutalised for no reason at all! We are the lambs of Christ!”

If you want to see the same thing play out today watch an irate portly motorist—bacon sarnie in hand—drag Extinction Rebellion protesters off the road. It’s the same dynamic, although the protesters are in the wrong—being the aggressors, the passive aggressors—you can’t help but feel sorry for that weedy vegan as bully-boy Baz drags him about. And that’s how they get you—Christians, Jews, women (with manipulative bullshit).

Just swap Baz for some beefy Roman legionary and you have “the story of the Christian martyrs”—and the same for the persecution of the Jews. The Jews annoy the Germans in deniable but aggressive ways and Fritz starts to punch them but then Johnny English sees this and says, “I say, you beastly Hun, that’s no way to treat your wife! We don’t beat our women here! We’re Christians! I’ll jolly well sort you out, you cad!”. The Jew cries out when you beat him because he’s orgasming (like a woman)—the Jews, with supercilious superiority, have been begging for a good beating for years (no one will oblige).

The game is the same as when a woman plays “outrage” and enlists her neighbours or other men against her husband. It’s why, as everyone knows, if you see a couple fighting on the street you ignore it—because the woman wants to get you in a situation where you fight her man (hence the white knight is a fool, in the genuine sense). “Oh Baz, I always loved you—you’re my beast,” she says as they waltz off fully reconciled (ready for hot make-up sex tonight) while our white knight reels in the gutter with a broken nose.

Why are Christians, Jews, and women like that? Because they can’t express aggression, they’re just too “nice”. It’s like Tammy Wynette beating her fists against a man who looks like John Wayne. He just makes me…so mad! “Got some big trouble from a little lady.” [pats her head—that’s another game]. The anger is linked to being ineffectual, impotent.

The reason Christians, progressives, and Extinction Rebellion people end up with this behaviour pattern is that they have been weak and ineffectual, partly because they cannot be assertive (they cannot use anger creatively). To make up for their ineffectuality they conceptualise themselves as morally superior to effective men and see the effective men as “evil” (Nietzsche’s point). At least they have that over them—and perhaps, as children, they were socialised to be “mommy’s little helper” or “mommy’s good boy” and they play that role out their entire life (they “really care”, like a milky Church of England vicar, like Tony Blair—unctuous).

Actually, as with women, they are colossally angry—but their anger scares them, being effective scares them (so they call it “evil”). It’s just they can’t get the anger out and if they do are liable to explosions where all the built-up anger just pours out (and it frightens them to be that out of control). So they like to tell sentimental stories that gloss over reality and make them feel safe—in the story above, an effective and powerful man becomes weak (at the end of his life) and so becomes just like them. It’s their triumph, in fact.

Although this is celebrated as a “conversion” it’s really gloating, just like women like to gloat over men they have at their mercy—Stephen King’s Misery, where a man is imprisoned-nursed by a woman, is exactly the same dynamic (in the end, as he recovers, his “helper” deliberately hobbles him so he’ll never escape her “care”—and that is the real female-Christian-Jewish fantasy, to help-kill you).

Notably, the man above only converts when he is spent and weak—unhealthy, we might say; and hence Nietzsche would say Christianity is the religion of unhealth. The tale is sentimental, because it’s unreal—and all sentiment is based on lies. Pretty lies—just like the left tells, because Marxism, another Semitic religion, operates just like Christianity. Just like when women get together with the girls and say “loovvveeee you!!!”—and yet they all hate each other and subtly sabotage each other, just like a congregation of Christians.

When SEAL Team 6 blows the head off some hajiis in some “desert shithole” (their words, not mine) and then piss on the corpses and take pictures then that is effective—undoubtably they have a chaplain, as a pro forma, and pretend to respect him but it doesn’t gel. Ultimately, they are being “naughty boys”—because they deal with reality and are effective; they’re evil, from a Christian perspective. Perhaps, as they age, they’ll get maudlin drunk on Budweiser and listen to country music on the porch and cry to the preacher. “I done some things, not sure Jesus can forgive…Lordy, I killed a man…Coke don’t taste like it did when I was a kid…Dang, but got to do a man’s job etc and etc.”

But that’s sickness—even though I’m sure the death and resurrection took place, but it’s just I think there are many ways to connect to the divine and I tolerate other paths (Christians don’t—and neither does the left; they talk about “love” but won’t do what’s intrinsic to “love”, which is to let someone be who they are without judgement; in other words, they lie—they are the great haters, just like women).

Just like some men are still involved in the mystification created by their mother—sometimes with their girlfriend or wife—so many Western men are involved in the mystification of Christianity (Semitic religion more generally, leftism). You see that with Jung and Guénon—despite being really into Hindu religion (mandalas etc), Jung had to assert “it’s alien to Europeans, whereas Christianity is familiar”; and yet Hindu religion is Indo-Aryan (it’s Christianity that’s the Semitic alien religion); and Guénon also liked Hinduism, studied it deeply, but chose Islam because “Hinduism is too alien to Europeans” (admittedly, he chose Sufism—which is Indo-Aryan religion from Iran preserved to survive an Islamic invasion but Guénon still accepted a Muslim meta-context).

What people find it hard to do—a bit like the schizo whose family makes out he is mentally ill when he is the sanest person in the family—is to choose the position of health: the position that takes your own side. It’s because you don’t know how to assert yourself, how to use anger creatively, and so you fear anger, creativity, and effectiveness—turn it into “evil”; and so, like a fuming woman, Christians must have a fantasy “he’ll come round in the end”, “all will bend the knee” (wat, like BLM…?).

Hence these men remain trapped in ineffective “moral” delusions that just weaken them—but let them have a smug, superior smile (like a woman denying a blowjob) because they are “righteous”, while you are just effective and true to yourself (which is “evil”). Deep down, they know it’s a lie—a sentimental lie—and that’s why they try and manipulate virtuous men, flirt with them (they’re asking for a beating—at least it’s recognition). They can’t just say “I agree, I prefer Zeus” because then they wouldn’t be special and superior, like a woman. They’d be judged by what they do, not their smug moralised positions—Christianity is narcissism, because not everyone can actually be special but Christianity, which is for everyone, tells you that you are special “just because”.

It’s not evil to take your own side, though people who want to drag you down will tell you it is.


Recent Posts

See All

Dream (VII)

I walk up a steep mountain path, very rocky, and eventually I come to the top—at the top I see two trees filled with blossoms, perhaps cherry blossoms, and the blossoms fall to the ground. I think, “C

Runic power

Yesterday, I posted the Gar rune to X as a video—surrounded by a playing card triangle. The video I uploaded spontaneously changed to the unedited version—and, even now, it refuses to play properly (o

Gods and men

There was once a man who was Odin—just like, in more recent times, there were men called Jesus, Muhammad, and Buddha. The latter three, being better known to us, are clearly men—they face the dilemmas


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page