html_raw:
<!DOCTYPE html><meta charset="utf-8"><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"><title>The Genocide-Correct - The Degeneration of the Nation</title><link rel="icon" type="image/png" href="../favicon-192x192.png" sizes="192x192"><link rel="apple-touch-icon" sizes="180x180" href="../apple-touch-icon-180x180.png"><link rel="canonical" href="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/en/night-life65" /><meta property="og:image" content="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/img/embryo.jpg" /><link rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../styles.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../column.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../article.css">
The Degeneration of the Nation

The Genocide-Correct

It excites me so much to be crushed beneath my wife that I start to provoke her to crush me again, more, heavily, strongly, to choke me with her two enormous breasts, to shut my mouth by simply covering my face, to feel the inferiority of man beneath woman in our times, and the spiritual, physical, and sexual superiority of woman, which arouses me terribly, and especially the full realization of a woman's right over her body

By: The Demographic Threat

An Arab fetus passes by. Just kidding, a Jewish fetus. Just kidding, a German fetus (Source)

I dreamed that my wife says it's scary to have children these days and that she doesn't want to be pregnant. And that's enough, there's no need to have children nowadays, and children aren't good for the environment. So I go and arrange a backup for us, just in case, with the help of the German government which provides funding, to clone two twins who died in the Holocaust, my uncle and another uncle of mine, to have for now. This way she can change her mind when she surely wants children later (she is still a woman despite being my wife, isn't she?), and we'll raise them. We'll be parents without her being pregnant. And I don't understand how the German bureaucracy actually allows me to raise these two, since I know them, and I know what will become of them in the end, and they didn't die in the Holocaust, but like a good Jew I don't argue with bureaucracy, certainly not with German bureaucracy, if the mistake is in my favor. I don't point out their error, even though it seems strange to me that the Germans are mistaken. If they give you something - take it.

And I go to the less successful twin, the one who converted to Christianity and disconnected from the family, and tell him, to help him in advance, to be aware that he has bad genes and he needs to overcome them, that he's such an angry and unkind person, and it seems the child-baby doesn't take well to what I'm saying. So I soften it and tell him: not angry, but stubborn, you're as stubborn as a mule and therefore you can go far, like my uncle (who is you in a previous incarnation) who eventually became a distinguished scientist but a recluse and complete gentile, meaning you have potential. And he makes very difficult faces for a baby's face, of anti, and I tell him it's just genes, it doesn't have to be you. But I no longer believe he'll really overcome it, and I feel bad for him that we revived him, the poor thing, unlike the successful uncle, his twin brother, who is great in the mystical teachings. And I don't really understand why I revived both of them, what, did it come in a package deal? Why didn't I think a little.

Maybe because they barely survived, and grew up with nuns, because the mother gave away the twin babies in '42 and then didn't come back, didn't come to take them, and the Germans think maybe they died, and that they killed them, and therefore approved this strange grant for me. Because there's some kind of global leftist trend of reviving genocide victims through cloning under the responsibility of the murderers, something that replaces political correctness, and therefore whites from the South raise blacks who died as slaves, and in the western U.S. every family raises Native Americans. And this trend has reached us too, and there are leftists who raise an Arab at home and the right-wingers are angry that it's not true and a lie that we killed the Arabs and that this is how the left cooperates with antisemitism and the false propaganda of Deir Yassin. But now, at least I've also taken advantage of the trend to raise secular Jews in an ultra-Orthodox family, and ultra-Orthodox in a secular family, in the cuckoo's nest method - and especially these two prodigies. And maybe it's they who have my grandmother's brain, which I too was blessed with such a brain, maybe they will indeed use this brain as children at the beginning of the 21st century to do something real, which I can no longer do. Because I grew up in a place that didn't allow development.

And I go to my wife and tell her look what I got in a deal two children we can raise if we want, who are growing by themselves in a daycare for now, like in an incubator made in Germany (I emphasize so she knows it's a good incubator). And my wife is shocked at me what are you crazy what have you done, I didn't want children and now I have two? And I also realize I don't understand what I've done, how could I do such a thing, after all they're not our children at all, and if we barely want children, surely I don't want to raise children that aren't ours. And I leave them in the German daycare. Let them learn Goethe and Schiller. And even Heine.

And I stroke her belly in bed and tell her why are you afraid to raise children, they have a Jewish brain, maybe something will come of it even in our times. And she sits me on the bed next to her, and it seems something will happen in bed, but instead she starts arguing with me (because she too has a Jewish brain, and she's suddenly a brain scientist in the dream or something, or at least someone who read something about the brain on the internet on a site for Jewish mothers): Children's brains are severely damaged today. Don't you see what's happening? This is the beginning of a neurological Holocaust. Like the wars of the twentieth century, of physics, because that was the science of the twentieth century, so now there will be wars of brain sciences. You don't understand what impact a child has who has an android already in the womb. That's the next thing. A child who doesn't kick his mother from inside during pregnancy, because they put a smartphone in the amniotic fluid so it won't disturb. And even during birth he doesn't cry because he's glued to the screen. This is the child of the future. Do you want to raise a monster at home?

And I look at the bed: because of this not to have children? Because of this yes to have them. Stop being such a mother of meat and schnitzel and belly and pregnancy. Everything is backwards with you. The best thing for the brain is to grow in an environment where it will be required to function in the future, that's why it comes out of you immature and learns to adapt, unlike animal brains. And therefore we need to raise children nowadays inside the computer - because as adults they will live inside the computer. And we are the desert generation that won't merit entering the computer - but only to look at the future from afar, from Mount Nebo. And precisely because of this - we need to be the generation that receives the new Torah, for the new land. And this new space is the promised land of the future, which is not a real land but virtual, so that we won't need to conquer it from the Canaanites and commit genocide against them and then everyone will have to raise a Girgashite, Hivite, Perizzite and Jebusite at home.

And now my wife, who is much bigger and stronger and fatter than me, pounces on me in bed, and presses me to the mattress, but instead of doing what I want (because it excites me very much!), she says: You won't tell me what to do with my belly. Just as I won't tell you what to do with your brain. Dream until tomorrow about pregnancy. Brings me two children from the Holocaust from the supermarket in a buy-one-get-one-free deal. Don't you know not to buy in sales, that what costs little costs dearly? And I say (and it excites me very much to lose to her in an argument): It's made in Germany! Not good enough for you? What Judaism was ever better in the history of humanity than German Judaism? And my wife crushes me: You naive fool perfect in his generations. Don't you understand what happened? It was too good. Don't you understand why the Germans are raising them again? How every German wants a Jewish child at home?

And it excites me so much to be crushed beneath my wife that I start to provoke her to crush me again, more, heavily, strongly, to choke me with her two enormous breasts, to shut my mouth by simply covering my face, to feel the inferiority of man beneath woman in our times, and the spiritual, physical, and sexual superiority of woman, which arouses me terribly, and especially the full realization of a woman's right over her body. And all this becomes absolutely perfect, because meanwhile I start to hear from outside the noise of Arabic music (and it's known that Arabs love enormous women. And a fat woman is a beautiful woman, and it's her right to eat as much as she wants!). Because the child of the leftist neighbors, again they're playing Umm Kulthum for him at full volume, to let him express his Arab culture, and not appropriate him, and already from age three his mother pushes a hookah on him so he won't turn out Jewish, instead of who he is.

And then all these children all over the world (and the Germans suddenly have the most child-rich families in the world, because they're also good at industrial cloning - and also at industrial extermination), reach the age of bar mitzvah and they have a coming out ceremony for them, and tell them who they are, and what was done to them, and that their parents are to blame for what happened to them, and so all these children hate their parents (to the cheers of the right-wingers). But the parents say it's good that they hate, we mustn't rob them of their rage, their protest, it's good that they break objects at home and beat their siblings and curse the adults - we need to let it out. Whoever takes from them even the right to be angry - is taking from them themselves and their heritage, and these are bad parents, who raise children for themselves, and not for the children themselves - exactly the definition of bad parents. And the fact that our children hate us - that's the proof that we are excellent parents.

Nightlife


source: degeneration-of-nation

source_format: html

domain: literature

html_raw:
<!DOCTYPE html><meta charset="utf-8"><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"><title>The Housing Crisis and the Jewish Problem - The Degeneration of the Nation</title><link rel="icon" type="image/png" href="../favicon-192x192.png" sizes="192x192"><link rel="apple-touch-icon" sizes="180x180" href="../apple-touch-icon-180x180.png"><link rel="canonical" href="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/en/night-life13" /><meta property="og:image" content="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/img/dreamhouse.jpg" /><link rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../styles.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../column.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../article.css">
The Degeneration of the Nation

The Housing Crisis and the Jewish Problem

They should have long ago separated into two states as happened in the Bible: the State of Israel on the coastal plain and the State of Judah in all the rest. And it's not clear to me why the Israelis agree to be ruled by the Jews, contrary to our ancient tradition of always quarreling and splitting up

By: The Minister of Finance

My wife is driving me crazy because we don't have money for an apartment  (Source)

I dreamed that the State of Israel decides to disguise itself as the State of Judah. Although in my opinion, they should have long ago separated into two states, as happened in the Bible: the State of Israel on the coastal plain and the State of Judah in all the rest, including the territories. And so Tel Aviv would stop subsidizing Jerusalem, and Jerusalem in turn would stop embarrassing Tel Aviv, and in general, there would be embassies in both Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, and everyone would be happy. And it's not clear to me why this hasn't happened, why the Israelis agree to be ruled by the Jews, contrary to our ancient tradition, which always involves quarreling with each other and splitting into factions, even in ghettos. So the result of modern Israel's increased appetite to swallow Judah is that Judah struggles from within Israel's belly, and they decide that everything is Jewish: there's Jewish law, and Jewish government, and in school they teach Jewish mathematics, and then they ask why there isn't a Jewish economy, after all, Jews are good with money, right? Let's manage the economy according to Jewish sources.

And they decide to search in yeshivas [Jewish religious schools] for someone who will give the Jewish perspective on economics, and they take me as the Jewish-Israeli Minister of Finance who asks: How do we overcome the crisis of housing, infrastructure, and congested roads? And I answer him like a good Jew - because I understood that's what they expect from me - with questions: Why do you think the Temple failed and the Torah succeeded? And he answers: Because in the Temple they sacrificed cows. And I ask: And what do you think the Torah is made of if not a cow? Why did the Bible conquer the world and the Temple didn't even conquer the Temple Mount? Why did the process that the book went through not happen to the house? Why did the book and even the computer become accessible to every dreaming soul, and I can write at night while my wife sleeps, but I can't buy an apartment and sleep peacefully? Thousands of years have passed, so how is it possible that still the biggest expenses for both individuals and countries are on buildings and infrastructure? And these are also the s l o w e s t investments, inexplicably lagging behind every other technology. Are the materials so expensive? How does a house, a technological product from the Stone Age, cost a thousand times more than a computer, a product a thousand times more technologically advanced?

And the Israeli Minister of Finance gets angry and asks: So what's your Jewish answer? It's not clever to just ask questions. And I answer: Your question shows that we've already made progress! The Jewish method of answering any problem is that the problem itself is the problem - to find the answer within the question itself. So the answer is in the question - the construction field hasn't even gone through the industrial revolution and mass production, and it's the last area in the economy stuck in the Stone Age with manual production, unlike the printing of circuits in computers and pages in books. If it were possible to print a house or an interchange from an architect's file in a 3D printer of plastic and concrete and metal and asphalt, like they print circuits in the heads of black roaches [Translator's note: "Jokim" in Hebrew can mean both "roaches" and "chips"], or roaches in the heads of black circles... If it were possible to order a structure from a selection of models on the internet with standard industrial quality, without chasing after the contractor who will chase after the workers who will end up doing waterproofing with leaks... In the construction industry, you find the least intellectual people in the population, and therefore there's no Jewish innovation there but only Israeli chutzpah and Arab humiliation. How hard is it really to develop a robot that builds the skeleton of the building?

If you really want to make trillions, turn Israel into a high-tech superpower in the field of structure printing. A mobile printer the size of a truck can change the way the world is built. Affordable housing is printable housing. Do you know how much my wife is driving me crazy because we don't have money for an apartment? Even the word work was mentioned, imagine, work! Do you know what that means for a dreamer like me? So I hope you'll read this and take up the challenge. Because only thanks to printing does an Israeli like you meet a night dream of a Jew you'll never meet in your days, and the Israeli super-ego can once again cover the Jewish subconscious, and go back to sleep.

Nightlife


domain: commentary

html_raw:
<!DOCTYPE html><meta charset="utf-8"><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"><title>The Future of the Left - The Degeneration of the Nation</title><link rel="icon" type="image/png" href="../favicon-192x192.png" sizes="192x192"><link rel="apple-touch-icon" sizes="180x180" href="../apple-touch-icon-180x180.png"><link rel="canonical" href="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/en/alternative-commentary50" /><meta property="og:image" content="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/img/titus.jpg" /><link rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../styles.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../column.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../article.css">
The Degeneration of the Nation

The Future of the Left

Bibi is not to blame - he merely accelerates the processes of disintegration and internal contradictions that were embedded in the Zionist entity from the outset. He is not the cause but the catalyst. How will the great explosion of the right and left in Israel look? In the Land of Israel, two Jewish peoples arose, where their spiritual, religious, and political character was shaped

By: I Am I Therefore I Am I

What will the left take with it into exile from Israeli culture?  (Source)

When today's individual waits in line at the polling station, they undergo an unpleasant experience and feel humiliated: why is their individual, unique vote equal to the votes of all others in line (whom they don't really appreciate)? Since the ballot is the same ballot as everyone else's - they must find at least an individual rationale for their decision (they're probably voting for the same left-wing party as always - but at least the reasoning is original, or the deliberation, or perhaps... they've found a new mood party? A scent of renewal in the air!). For why should an individual participate in a ritual that lowers their self-esteem and narcissistic equilibrium? They of course know that their influence on the outcome is zero: so maybe that's really their value? Is the value of their opinion equal to others? Democracy is, after all, the worst form of government (except for... dictatorship) - for recognizing their value as an individual.

In contrast, the collective type approaches the ballot box with joy and elation. They feel they are part of something. Part of their group. They haven't lost the primitive ability to be part of a collective - and voting is a ritual that confirms their belonging, just like going to synagogue, attending a performance, or watching a football match (or in our days: watching television). There's no doubt that this is an inferior type compared to the individual (not to mention being a right-wing voter). But what can be done? Individuals don't win elections - collectives do.

What will the individual do when the collective slips from their grasp? Individuals will never produce children at the same rate as the collective types, and the collective rather despises them (it's mutual). In the absence of the ability to consolidate individuals into a majority, the left currently faces three options, all three rooted in different stages in our people's history. The most preferable option for it is the First Temple option: if the left were life-hungry, it would simply split from the right, refuse to continue funding the State of Israel (which is a state where the left funds the right in every sense), and launch a widespread protest to establish a state between Haifa and Rishon [Lezion] with Tel Aviv as its capital, without a border with the Arabs, with equal civil rights, one of the highest GDPs per capita in the world, and proper relations with the nations of the world. In short: a state that doesn't embarrass itself - not Bibi's state. The Western Democratic (and wealthy) State of Israel would live in peace with the Eastern Jewish (and poor) State of Israel, which would live by the sword. This split would only do good for the Jewish people's public relations, as it would divide Israel into an enlightened state and a backward state, allowing economic and diplomatic foreign relations to be conducted through a proxy of an entity accepted in the world, which is our beautiful face, and does not bear the hump of occupation on its back. In such a scenario, the wall of mutual hatred in hearts that Bibi built would materialize into an actual border - in a disengagement and separation plan between the two camps. The united kingdom, whose days were short even in the First Temple period, would end - and long live the split between the kingdoms. Each man to his tents, O Israel. This is, of course, the only way in which the people of the left will return to control their destiny and not become captive in the hands of the people of the right, that is, their last chance for sovereignty.

Why is this obvious solution not feasible, and doesn't even cross the left's mind? Because it is, of course, a very collective solution, requiring the building of an ethos on the scale of Zionism, including a shared dream and broad organization, and therefore individuals will never be able to realize it. Therefore, in the absence of the ability to translate protest and frustration into independence, the left faces the Second Temple option. True, power is not in its hands and will not be, and its political-state fate has been expropriated from it, as was the situation of the Pharisees. True, the zealots and Sadducees and Romans will eat each other (and probably even bring destruction in the end), and it is their captive and of their whims. But instead of engaging in politics - it can engage in Torah [Jewish learning]. It can establish a new culture, a Hebrew culture, for in culture, qualities determine, not quantities. After the destruction - its culture will win, and maybe even Rome (eventually... through Christianity). In such a situation, the left would seclude itself, alienate itself from the state, and engage in establishing a shared cultural enterprise (Haredim [ultra-Orthodox]... anyone?). In this way, the secular left would internalize that its advantage over the religious right is actually a spiritual advantage, while the other side has the material and quantitative advantage (and therefore power), and give up on trying to communicate with it and influence it (i.e., on attempting to forcefully recruit culture, which turns it into an inferior culture), and adopt an ideology of "Torah for its own sake" - culture for its own sake. For this purpose, it would have to abandon the obsessive preoccupation with occupation and Arabs - that is, with power - or with money, and completely despair of the material dimension of life, in favor of developing spiritual life (morality is not spirit! - just as preaching morality is not prophecy). A central step in such an enterprise would be an attempt to create, edit, and consolidate an exceptionally high-quality literary corpus - a new Bible, or a new Talmud, or a new Zohar (but not pale "secular" copies of all these - a new form is also needed!) - that is, a masterpiece that can leap across periods and cultures. The Renaissance path is also open to it: an attempt to create a new Sistine Chapel and a structure with exceptional artistic qualities at the world level. Even the model of German world culture before the Holocaust could work: a sequence of creators of unique stature in all fields, who fertilize each other.

Why does this solution also seem lost? Because the ethos of "culture" is not identical to the individual ethos, and as long as the individual does not prefer their culture over themselves - we will get at most narcissistic culture, that is, at a low level. Therefore, the likely solution will stem precisely from the third, and closer, stage in Jewish history: exile. To go into exile, you don't need a mass movement, you don't need organization, and you don't even need a dream - just its shattering. Because going into exile is not necessarily an exodus from Egypt, and exile is a flow of individuals, dispersion, disintegration. Exile is not of collectives but of individuals. No one will exile the left, it will simply exile itself, from a combination of ideological, economic, and cultural reasons. It's not fun to live in Bibi's state (which will remain Bibi's state even when there's no Bibi. The people are the problem - not the leader). But even for such a movement, it's better to formulate an ethos, and such an ethos will probably look like this: The "Return to Exile" movement is a movement for a return to Jewish normality, it is a movement against occupation, and it is a movement for a return to the great (and always individual) achievements of Jewish genius. The symbol of this exile will be the aspiration to stop creating as part of Hebrew culture - and in the Hebrew language - and reconnecting to world culture. A central and worthy challenge for the new and ideological exile will be the establishment of Jewish communities in China, Japan, Korea, and India, and the spread of Jewish culture in the Far East - on the way to a particularly original cultural synthesis that we have not yet seen in the history of Judaism.

Alternative Current Affairs


html_raw:
<!DOCTYPE html><meta charset="utf-8"><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"><title>Every Publisher's Wet Dream - The Degeneration of the Nation</title><link rel="icon" type="image/png" href="../favicon-192x192.png" sizes="192x192"><link rel="apple-touch-icon" sizes="180x180" href="../apple-touch-icon-180x180.png"><link rel="canonical" href="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/en/night-life37" /><meta property="og:image" content="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/img/pornographystatue.jpg" /><link rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../styles.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../column.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../article.css">
The Degeneration of the Nation

Every Publisher's Wet Dream

By the authority of the place and by the will of the people - I am being excommunicated even from Facebook. To what lower place can one descend? Where are the people? Where are those who are truly interested in fantasies and the repressed, persecuted subconscious world, but with libido? And I remember the most popular search result that brings visitors to my site, only for them to be immediately disappointed and flee, causing me to sink even lower in Google rankings - "Haredi sex"

By: A Black and Dry Geometric Shape

Intellectual Pornography (Source)

I dreamed that I was trying to log into Facebook when a screen appeared with a message stating that Facebook had received a report about me from one of my friends, claiming that Black Circle is not my real name. Therefore, in accordance with Facebook's policy, my account was closed. But if I believe this is indeed my name - I need to prove to them that I am a Black Circle. How? By submitting a photo of my ID card, Mr. Black Circle. I look at the screen in disbelief, realizing that everything I've done has gone down the drain. What can be done?

I could still go to the Ministry of Interior and try to legally change my name to Black Circle (a Hebraization of Schwartz?), but it's very dangerous. In the end, the Facebook employee checking the documents won't believe such a name exists and will think I forged it - so even that won't help. Worse still, it's a matter of life and death because they could sue me for forgery, and I'd be handing them a sword to reveal my true identity and erase me not just from Facebook, but from the outside world. Then my account in real life would also be closed, in accordance with real-life policy, and I wouldn't be able to show my face anywhere, forced to walk around with a black circle on the street. Even then, they wouldn't believe I'm truly a Black Circle. It occurs to me that even if I were to take my own life - the Chevra Kadisha [Jewish burial society] wouldn't agree to write Black Circle on my tombstone beyond the fence. Then I'd be an outcast in this world, the next world, and most sadly - in the Facebook world. I could never be a circle. The world is against Black Circle.

Even though I've only descended and degenerated further and further down over the years, from holy and pure dreams written in the radiance of the night sky and soaring in the heights of the world, to material handwriting in a private dream language in the attic, and from there I degenerated to a dream book trying to speak the language of humans, and from there to a newspaper of entertaining dreams on current affairs, and from there to dreams on a remote website about nocturnal matters, and from there to Facebook with dreams that are posts (!), I still haven't managed to reach the ground of reality and haven't managed to find any audience, not even one person - or, more importantly, one woman. Therefore, by the authority of the place and by the will of the people, I am being excommunicated even from Facebook. To what lower place can one descend? Where are the people? Where are those who are truly interested in fantasies and the repressed, persecuted subconscious world, but with libido? And I remember the most popular search result that brings visitors to my site, only for them to be immediately disappointed and flee, causing me to sink even lower in Google rankings - "Haredi sex" - and I understand how much further I can degenerate. If they've closed my Facebook - I need to open a porn site.

And the porn site of the Black Circle is sex for intellectuals. The actors' faces are hidden with black circles, and they play out the sex lives of all the greats, the renowned figures and geniuses throughout history, allowing the small to peek into the lives of the great, and understand the origins of their thoughts. We have various categories on the site, so every intellectual can choose their preferred perversion. For example, sex of writers, like Joyce, Dylan Thomas, Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald (excellent performance), Nabokov (hardcore), lesbian with Woolf (who's afraid?), Agnon with his young mistress named "Shira", Bialik with Ira Jan (amateur category), Yaakov Shabtai in an orgy ("Oy, my heart"), Gnessin doing Brenner, Arthur Miller and Marilyn Monroe (leaked celebrity video), Proust with Albert (gays in French), Philip Roth is a highly sought-after actor with many sequels, all according to reliable historical sources (we have an entire department in academia working solely on this), period-accurate reconstructions with costumes, paying attention to the small details and in some cases the tiny ones (there's even one painting where Rembrandt sketched his own genitals! But you need to be an expert on his work to discover it).

For each one, we've dug through archives and works to find their preferred perversions and psychosexual profile, and thus we can finally understand the source of their creations through sex, and indeed, it turns out to be the best explanation, intellectually speaking! Suddenly all of history looks different, and all thinking changes, because the first thing you ask about a figure, a creator, a person, is how they were in bed. And this is the broadest field for speculation, learned hypotheses, and new and daring insights into exemplary figures and the sources of their thoughts. There's nothing more enriching than reading someone's work and thinking about how you believe they were in sex, what they liked, what turned them on, it's a penetration into the depths of the intellectual and creative libido, and this becomes the first thought about every person (even on the street, even at work, even relatives. Because it's precisely the works that teach us how to guess hidden preferences). And it all starts with the most basic questions in culture: How was Freud in bed? How was Tolstoy? How was Caravaggio? How was Kafka? And we provide answers!

And the categories on the site keep multiplying. There are, for example, philosophers whose sex lives shed an entirely new light on their thoughts (Plato having sex with his student Aristotle, Kant tying himself up in bed, or when Wittgenstein's student goes down on him and he has new insights into the philosophy of language). And due to demand from the browsing audience (that is, the people), we're also adding politicians (our most popular video on the site: after an air force attack, the Prime Minister comes home late and is punished, tied with a collar, licking the evil black shoes of his queen wife, and it turns out his entire career was a power play that got out of hand - being Prime Minister is a sexual perversion. The "Don't Shower" video of Napoleon and Josephine is also doing well).

And from here we spread to all fields: Einstein serially falling in love with relatives, Freud and his sister-in-law (including cocaine), Kafka who loved bites and scratches and rough sex, Houellebecq with his tiny one (a genre of comic sex), Ben-Gurion and Moshe Dayan and their premature ejaculation problem (yes, there are academics with strange perversions), Classisex (sex of composers to the sound of their works timed with the movements, with huge demand for Paganini's performances), or sex of painters with their male or female models (works from all art history, for example Michelangelo having sex with the model for God in the Sistine Chapel). And you can also do a reverse search, of the greats by perversion, and then a search in BDSM female domination leads among others to Bibi and to Bruno Schulz and to David Vogel (who is also found in the mother and daughter category) and so on, and there's an important social goal here of normalizing the deviant, or the deviation of normalization, or any other nonsense that deviant intellectuals tell themselves to watch the site.

And we have an entire department of researchers dedicated solely to searching for celebrities from the history of the mind who have special perversions, because the audience has long since stopped getting excited by mere serial adulterers, or they're looking specifically for intellectuals with an asexual image who are suddenly caught in the archives with their pants down engaging in a unique kind of sex, and then we make it accessible to the general public and do a service to the entire world of the mind, and even ordinary people now look differently at scholars, and hold culture and the classics in reverence. And now you often hear from someone who comes to read some writer or philosopher that they came to them because of their video, and that the 14th-century book excites them after understanding the sex behind it. And a new renaissance of interest in the writings of past libertines begins, called Rensex, and a few pioneering professors working on changing the entire research paradigm (every porn trend eventually reaches academia) decide to rebrand the Faculty of Humanities with a new and more fitting name - "Sex Sciences" - and there begins a rush of students, and the crisis in the humanities is solved.

And once again being a writer is a sexy thing and a poet is a sex icon altogether and young men are again devoting themselves to creation in order to get a girl, and a great cultural flourishing begins, and girls chase after painters and philosophers, because it's known they're creative in bed, and female creators are also known for their insane libido, and every high-tech guy dreams of one such woman who will drive his nights wild and burn through his money. And it's already clear that genius and sexuality are synonymous, and intellectuals again (as always) complain that after the democratization of sex in regular porn we've suddenly returned to aristocratic desire, and this creates unrealistic expectations for ordinary people about sex and ruins their lives and instead of imagining a porn actress they imagine Sappho.

And only one Black Circle remains outside the celebration, because no one can imagine him in bed.

Nightlife


html_raw:
<!DOCTYPE html><meta charset="utf-8"><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"><title>Why Should We Replace Democracy with Matriarchy? - The Degeneration of the Nation</title><link rel="icon" type="image/png" href="../favicon-192x192.png" sizes="192x192"><link rel="apple-touch-icon" sizes="180x180" href="../apple-touch-icon-180x180.png"><link rel="canonical" href="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/en/alternative-commentary43" /><meta property="og:image" content="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/img/wonderwom.jpg" /><link rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../styles.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../column.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../article.css">
The Degeneration of the Nation

Why Should We Replace Democracy with Matriarchy?

The solution to the crisis of democracy cannot be democratic, but it must stem from the spirit of the times - and can even integrate with the great shift in power relations between the sexes. There is only one basic system of government that has not been widely tested in history, particularly in modern society: matriarchy. A world where the weaker sex takes positions of power - in a kind of inherent balance between power and violence - is bound to create a human society we have not yet known, with new politics and administration free from the ills of testosterone poisoning. All it takes is an ideological shift and a referendum - women are guaranteed a 51% majority. After all, female rule is certainly the worst form of government - except for all the other forms that have been tried to date

By: Me_Too# - Bilhah vs. Reuben

The main (and perhaps only!) advantage of female leadership: that it's not male leadership (Source)

Can you imagine a female Trump? Can you imagine a female Bibi? And Lieberman? And Putin - could he have been a grandmother? Arafat with a headscarf instead of a keffiyeh - is that possible? And if we drift to more important examples - can you imagine a female Hitler - Mrs. Hitler orchestrating unprecedented violence under her shrill, thin voice? Can one imagine a female Stalin, indeed without a mustache but with no less murderousness? Is it just habit that makes it difficult for us to imagine the great historical villains, or just unrestrained corrupt individuals without inhibitions and conscience, as women?

A certain percentage of the male population, about 1%, are psychopaths. How did such people survive in evolution? Apparently, not only in our time was there an advantage to the uninhibited use of force. The 1% rate grows immeasurably when examining the population of male leaders, whether CEOs or politicians - for there is no doubt that an unbridled lust for unbridled power is a motivation that can lead to a position of power. When such a psychopath reaches a historical position of power - the result is often one of the great historical catastrophes (or just a murderous war - or "just" a foolish one). Therefore, psychopathy is not just a psychological phenomenon - it is a historical phenomenon.

Not only is the psychopathic personality vastly more prevalent in men and almost absent in women, but also several other personality disorders, such as narcissistic personality disorder, are known to be common among them, and we would not be surprised by its amazing prevalence among male leaders. The most common disorder in men - which is therefore not classified as a disorder but as a normal historical phenomenon - is physical and sexual violence. It's hard to imagine the rates of violence, murder, rape, wars, civil wars and genocide known in history - that is, the most dangerous and terrible historical phenomena, which have given humanity a bad name - if our species had been under matriarchal leadership. Perhaps regarding poverty and hunger rates - another dominant historical phenomenon - one can still doubt the matter, although there is reason to believe that women would have been more compassionate and generous as leaders, relatively speaking, when it comes to matters of life and death.

No sane person would argue that phenomena such as wars would completely disappear if history had taken place under female leadership, and we would expect world peace. But if the weaker and less violent sex were in power - it is very likely that these phenomena would have been significantly reduced, both in their frequency and intensity, if only because of the tension between female rule and the army and soldiers (who, for reasons of excess physical strength, would certainly still be men in any reasonable alternative history). This does not embody any claim that women would have better judgment than men. But even if we accept the claim that the opposite is true (or at least that the pool of leadership talent doubles when both sexes participate), the main requirement from leadership is not excellence but reasonableness, because the price of a leader who leads to a violent catastrophe is much higher than a mediocre and reasonable leader. We would certainly be willing to give up Churchill - if that's the price of giving up Hitler. In leadership - we have enough of banality, boredom and conservatism, which are much preferable to adventurism and excess testosterone.

Today, we are close to understanding that the reason at the center of human bloody history is not this or that political problem, or one that stems from specific historical circumstances, but a neurological problem, constant and eternal: in the human species, the male brain tends too much towards violence, and leads in this tendency by a considerable gap compared to the female brain. It is not human nature responsible for atrocities - but the nature of man (the name of a male of one of the higher primate species). If the world were suddenly handed over to gorillas - wouldn't we prefer a system of government where the female apes rule and not the male apes?

This is not a matter of affirmative action or even feminism. As human death tools are becoming more sophisticated, to the point of being able to destroy the planet - there is enormous importance in reducing the likelihood of violent, forceful, obtuse and cruel leadership. Women are not angels - but they are certainly less dangerous to world peace than men, and the psychological profile common among them is different from the common male profile, and more adapted to current challenges, which require cooperation, negotiation, nurturing and balances - at the expense of uninhibited competitiveness of self-perceived alpha males.

We will not get rid of the problem of democracy if we replace the leaders. Bibi and Trump will be replaced by other Bibis and Trumps. And sooner or later a new Hitler will arise, or an updated male leadership type of totalitarian dictator of the information age (a man, of course!). Therefore, the solution is a world where men indeed have the right to vote (in order to protect their rights) - but not the right to be elected. Female values must defeat male values - and these are definitely two competing human cultures - if we want to overcome the competition of who is more manly, who has the biggest, and who screws others more.

Alternative Current Affairs


domain: culture

html_raw:
<!DOCTYPE html><meta charset="utf-8"><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"><title>On the Edge of the World - The Degeneration of the Nation</title><link rel="icon" type="image/png" href="../favicon-192x192.png" sizes="192x192"><link rel="apple-touch-icon" sizes="180x180" href="../apple-touch-icon-180x180.png"><link rel="canonical" href="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/en/culture&literature2" /><meta property="og:image" content="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/img/womanlegs.jpg" /><link rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../styles.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../column.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../article.css">
The Degeneration of the Nation

On the Edge of the World

Her legs are the boundaries of the world itself, her face is no longer visible at all, and now it's clear that the world will end in a very embarrassing connection between the two legs

By: Crooked Leg

If only she had covered them with a dress (Source)

A woman stands at the end of the world, and spiders weave webs between her legs. It's clear she hasn't closed them for a long time. The wise men say: If only she had covered them with a dress. But the end of the world is approaching, and who still listens to the wise? One wise man, moments before the world's end, sits and explains that the woman needs to give birth. That's why she doesn't close her legs. A second wise man argues the opposite, something needs to enter. As we approach the end of the world, the woman's two legs stretch beyond the horizon, and it's no longer possible to know how far they reach. Some wise men claim that her legs are the boundaries of the world itself, her face is no longer visible at all, and now it's clear that the world will end in a very embarrassing connection between the two legs.

The wise men close their eyes. Those who are less wise put their hands over others' eyes and peek themselves, as curiosity overcomes fear. But in the end, fear prevails, and even the most base people close their eyes. The unmistakable smell intensifies, to everyone's embarrassment, and now one can feel that a special heat is emanating from the end of the world. Many remember ovens, furnaces, the many holocausts that have passed, but the heat actually reminds one of body heat. Yet many wise men tremble. A cry is heard: What has God planned for us? Holocaust or redemption - both are far more logical than this end.

It would be one thing if it were the heat of hell or the vegetation of Eden, but here everything begins to fill with hair. And a giant mouth - now enormously larger than the entire world - gapes at an impossible height, at an utterly imaginary depth, but almost closed to a thin line in width. Lips kiss each other hermetically.

At first, the wise men fear she will swallow them and don't dare to approach. In subsequent generations, they try to penetrate inside. Initially with gentle fingers or feathers or threads, and later with fingernails, sharpened pencils, and needles. Nothing passes through, except thin pages. And on these, the wise men begin to write requests, or poems to impress the woman, and there are also wicked ones who insert mere grocery lists, or others who push in the most terrible secrets and the most personal things in hope that this is what will open her.

This matter, it must be admitted, is ultimately quite rash. Because no one knows what's on the other side. Or what might suddenly be born from all this writing, whose recipient could be very different from what we thought. There are also those who push in jokes aimed at making the woman laugh until the gates shake and open, or banknotes to bribe her, or those who think she only understands threats. In the end - after tearing out entire prayer books page by page and pushing them inside, whole libraries, including encyclopedias, and the entire human race, even the wisest, has nothing left to innovate for the woman - everyone sits and waits endlessly. And this is the end of the world.

Culture and Literature


text:
The Degeneration of the Nation

Third place in The Degeneration of the Nation's short story competition: "The Kiss with the Secular Woman"

Judges' reasoning: "The Kiss with the Secular Woman" is a story that combines the experimental with the emotional to create a fundamental exploration of the connection between the two - and the price of experimentalism, its power and weaknesses. The story masquerades as an ars poetica manifesto, reaching the point of theoretical conceptualization, but ultimately reveals itself as a deeply personal story of one whose life is his creation, and has no existence outside of it, and therefore his soul-searching - including the accounting of his romantic life - is a creative accounting. Above all, this is a story of connection between cultures - secular culture and religious culture - where the twists and failures of this connection represent the Jewish condition. And also the circular condition.

By: Black Circle

The Kiss with the Sphinx - Franz von Stuck (Source)

The Kiss with the Secular Woman

I dreamed that we are white and black - a secular woman and an ultra-Orthodox man - and we're not holding hands, so people won't look at us. And we're thinking where we can go where there are no ultra-Orthodox by definition, so they won't see me with her. And then she discovers there's an immodest exhibition at the museum, and no ultra-Orthodox would dare show his face there, and if he did - he would be more afraid of us than we are of him, and the secret would be mutual. And then at sunset, when light kisses darkness, when the museum closes and the guards are chasing people out, we walk back from the sculpture garden, and suddenly - we kiss. In public. I mean, there's no one there. But it's the first time I - - and then I see someone there taking a picture. It's probably quite a photo for the newspaper - an ultra-Orthodox man and a secular woman kissing! And I run away and she calls after me, and I chase after him, asking the guard: Did you see a photographer? A tourist with a camera? Please! Someone, he has something in his bag that could ruin my life. And he's sure to upload it to the internet, and then one day someone will discover, or the algorithm will identify, and it could still come back to me from the other side of the world. Such a picture could wait for years in an obscure Facebook album, until one day such a kiss might gain attention, and then that ticking photo on the other side of the world will explode in my face.

\- I want to understand you. You live with a huge secret, and yet you're religious.
\- It's precisely the secret that makes you religious. Every secret creates a religion around it, not the other way around, and that's what secular people don't understand - secrets. And they ask me about a contradiction, what was the secret world of secularism when it was a successful religion, and why it disappeared. I thought it was obvious. The secret world of secularism was sexuality, both in the literal sense, and in the interpretive sense - in the Freudian movement. If you open average secular literature you'll find that it progresses from one sexual encounter to another, presented as the peak of interest and fantasy, and I'm sure many readers skip and read only the "interesting" parts. But like a process of revelation, not concealment, it's a self-consuming process. The moment sexuality lost its secret, for example through pornography or sex education, secularism died (just like a religion that has ossified), and it only works on young people, who go through the "discovery", and not on older people, or more precisely those who have matured. A typical narrative is I discovered myself. Read the secular media. Discovered, we discovered, he discovered, it was discovered, incest [Translator's note: In Hebrew, "incest" contains the root for "discovery"]. No covering and no secret world. Discovery and discovery in language. Discovery and discovery in sex. Disclosure of opinion and scientific discovery. An ecology of culture cannot be based only on discovery and burning forests. It consumes itself. It's a classic sin of knowledge. Let's say you took off a woman's clothes, what's left skin, you went under the skin what's left, fat, you went under the fat, what's left, bones, great, you went into the bones, into the skull, what's left? Brain, you went into the brain, what's left, gray matter, you went into the gray what's left, neural networks, you went into the neural networks what's left, thought, you went into the thought what's left, consciousness, into the conscious what's left, subconscious, into the subconscious what's left, dream. Meaning dreams are the elementary particle physics of the world. And cracking the dream is a revolution like splitting the atom. The collision of broken dreams at high speeds will teach us about the basis of the spiritual world, and enable a spiritual doomsday weapon. This is what culture should be engaged in, in accelerating dreams. And what's exciting about the secular dream, freedom that is vacation? To travel abroad? To discover places? Come on. Only the discovery of times is interesting. Either discovery of the past, through culture, or discovery of the future, through dreaming. The current culture is constantly busy only with the discovery of the present. Addicted to updates. To the new, to news. The dream deals with the combination of the ancient with the futuristic, and it is the strongest weapon against the present. Covering the present with a blanket that stretches from the ancient to the future. I wish it was possible to skip from night to night without the day in between. To become a secret and disappear into the darkness.

And the secular woman waits for me crying: Where did you disappear to? The whole museum has already closed and I looked for you in the garden in the dark. Why do you always act like a paranoid? And I say: I'm sorry, I really am paranoid. And she drives me in her car because I don't know how to drive, and I keep thinking if the cars around can see inside that a secular woman is driving an ultra-Orthodox man. And she asks: Why do you even talk to a secular woman if you're so afraid?
\- The religious elite rejected dreams. So I thought that the secular elite...
And she stops looking at the road and looks at me, and I don't understand how there isn't an accident: What does this have to do with the elite? I'm a woman!
\- No one wants to communicate with me. Why shouldn't I at least talk to a woman?
\- What was wrong with the religious elite, why did you start writing to me? You claim that no one reads? Because it's exactly like in elections, every people deserves the leaders worthy of it. So in that sense - replacing the people is really a joke. Even if you write to secular people your people will only absorb what they are worthy of. Not what you wrote. That's why everyone who complains about Bibi doesn't understand anything. The people are the problem - Bibi is the symptom. It's not you who's the problem, but your readers.
\- I thought like that for many years, you know? But the dream needs reality, just as reality needs the dream. And the same goes for the ultra-Orthodox and the secular. A person is like a coin, black on one side white on the other, night on one side day on the other. Psychology made its big mistake when it placed the dream under the conscious, or sometimes in the superconscious, because that's the wrong axis, but the right-left axis. The mistake is looking as if the dream is inferior to reality, and not its other side. Instead, we need to understand that the dream is on the right side - on the side of what we want. It's reality that's on the left side - in the other realm. In my dream, the secular elite understands what I'm saying even in reality, while in reality the secular elite doesn't understand what I'm saying even in a dream. I came out bald from here and there, from the blacks and the whites. Is it any wonder I keep my hat on?

A secular man with a huge shtreimel [Translator's note: A fur hat worn by some Hasidic Jews] that grew on his head enters the doctor's office. The doctor asks: What's the problem? The shtreimel answers: Doctor, look what grew on my bottom! Whoever is part of the dream of culture, of religion, when he dies he gets to return to the dream sleep of the spirit, to join the dream of the world, which is the world to come. His soul becomes a shtreimel. The soul candle is the tail on which the soul burns. Blessed is his portion. But whoever is only part of reality - in reality he dies. And that's exactly what will happen to those who write thick realistic novels these days, whose fat bottom sits on your head, instead of a shtreimel. A shtreimel is made of foxes but they're arranged like a hedgehog, and therefore it knows one round thing. While a novel knows so many unnecessary things, it's so smart and boastful, unlike a dream. That's why in dream sleep blood flow concentrates in the brain and the sexual organ, because that's the essence of man - knowledge. Dreams: what a stream of thought that isn't a stream of consciousness at all, but a stream of learning, meaning a stream of conceptual creativity, it teaches how to be creative with cultural materials, in our case Judaism, so it's Torah study and not Torah. After all, the biggest problem in the world is creative blockage, on one hand the secular barrenness, of empty creativity, and on the other hand the religious barrenness, of creative emptiness. It's male infertility versus female infertility, both in content and in form. What happened here was an attempt at sex between cultures, opening up spaces that were blocked, and this attempt failed completely. There is religion, and there is literature, and there is no religious literature today. King David, the jester of God, as written in the holy books, who runs jokes with God, the Messiah who will be a clown, is not considered at all as a serious possibility, and is perceived as a parody, as satire, as performance, as nonsense, God forbid not as joyful. They took away the fun and enjoyment, what's left of sex, of the text, maybe some message from another world, black. This is the problem why they can't make contact with aliens. That they're looking only for the information, the message, not the fun mating with another world. Forget aliens and angels, that's ten levels above your head, and certainly not a creative connection with God. Take cultures on Earth, take Arabs, ultra-Orthodox, take autistics. Even take animals. You know what, even take women. You think the stream of semen is a technical thing. You've lost the meaning of sex. The universe has become dead matter. You sit all day with your head in the computer, and one day artificial intelligence will go to the doctor and say: Doctor, look what grew on my bottom!

I dreamed that the secular woman takes me to her home and sits me on the couch, and I notice to my horror that it's also the bed, and I ask: Just to understand the situation, so am I an attraction for you? That you'll exhaust?
And she sits next to me: I'm the number one fan of your dreams. You know?
\- So now I understand. You brought me here to discover my secrets? Because you're also the only fan, you know.
\- I read the two books and immediately identified you in them. Thank you for sharing with me. I know it's not trivial for you, with all the paranoia.
\- But I didn't write them.
And she laughs: So who did? Black Circle?
And I don't want to answer that. So I show her a passage from a dream I didn't publish:

The construct that every text has an author is a new idea. And it simply didn't exist in the biblical period. It's not that someone forged it, or wrote a text without an author, this idea simply didn't exist, there was no such function. And only when the idea was born did they try to say that the Torah was written by Moses, or by God, even though before that no one felt the need to ask the question who wrote it at all, and even the person who technically wrote it didn't feel that he was writing it. Hence the ability to write a text like the Torah stems precisely from the lack of awareness that you are writing a Torah. And the danger is that you write a Torah without being aware of it. But nowadays, it's probably not about a Torah for humans, but for future generations, for computers. A computer won't believe in a text's author, but in the result of a calculation, and any text that was written is not the result of your personal calculation - in your head as a processor - but of a much larger calculation, which includes all your inputs, a calculation of the entire culture, that is, of the network, and it's also not the final result of that calculation but a part of it, of that huge calculation that never ends. In fact, the text itself is an attempt to expand the connections between the processors of culture, and therefore the text by its nature is a thing without an author, and so the perception will reverse and return in a full circle. And the claim that a person wrote this text will be identical to the claim that a word processor wrote this text, or that the screen wrote it, or that the eye wrote it, or that the pupil, or that the black circle.

And underneath it there's another passage:

Situation Report
I have no one to talk to. Many writers in this situation talk to the past. I talk to the future. There are only two possibilities in the current culture: either pornography, or disappearance. Meaning nudity in the light. So what's left in the darkness? The clothes. That's what's written that the garments of skin will return to be garments of light. And what's the next stage? Garments of darkness. Both disappearance and pornography - that's the challenge of culture. To combine these two formal logics. Not like today, where either everything is outside or everything is inside. But that everything is both outside and inside. To understand that it's circular, and when cultural pornography reveals more and more, not just the body, but also pornography of the soul, and not just the soul, but pornography of the spirit and the soul, and so on, up to the innermost core, whose exposure turns reality itself into a secret, the light itself will be darkness, and what is a sun of darkness? A black hole. Not a covered moon, not passive darkness, but active absorption of light, something that can take the light back from the world, and precisely the exposure of the skin will be exposure to darkness, and then pornography will be disappearance. The appearance of the world comes back out of the eye, the reversal of Kant, to the point of sucking the appearance in closed eyes - the dream.

And I don't stop, because I feel like for once in my life someone will read all these passages, because underneath this passage there's another passage, right under its bottom:

Why is myth much more developed in the past than in the future
You don't know what you want to say - you produce what you want to say. You don't know what you want to write, but produce it, like an algorithm, it's one-directional, meaning in time, it creates something new and doesn't transfer something from the past to the future, something you knew. And therefore reading also needs to change, because it's not to absorb something that was transferred to you, that the writer knew, it's not information, or communication, but it's material for your algorithm that you will produce something from, and in the best case - it transfers a new algorithm to you. Which is innovative writing. It transfers examples of algorithm operation to you, and you need to learn the algorithm, and add it to your algorithmic toolbox. Culture won't be erased because of artificial intelligence smarter than humans, on the contrary, precisely because current products will seem so simple to it they will become the most basic products, on which everything is built. Our high literature will become classic children's literature, above which is much higher and more sophisticated literature. The computer won't cancel the ABC, or language, just as modern consciousness didn't cancel myths and religions from a literary perspective, despite ceasing to believe. So the computer can stop believing in the human contents of literature, like man and love, without canceling literature itself. Learning will never become a trivial action, and the materials in the canon will remain, only become necessarily more fictional for the computer, and therefore more mythical. Myth is created when past literature can no longer be considered realism. In their time both Homer and the Bible were considered realism, and so in the future love and man will be perceived as myths, and so will marriage and betrayal and war and all the contents of literature. "Crime and Punishment" will be a myth about the murderer, and not a realistic crime book as it was considered in its time. It's not that our literature is constantly becoming more and more realistic, unlike past literature, but that reality itself is changing. Once sex was much more uniform and monotonous, for almost everyone, and therefore not interesting to literature, just as today defecation is monotonous for everyone, and in the future literature might be written that deals with different forms of excretion, if reality there develops into a high culture in the toilet. And if computer reality develops then in the future literature will be able to talk about programming. The pornographic literature of our days is a product of the sophistication of sexuality itself, and not of us becoming more realistic in descriptions of sex, just as Greek philosophy didn't stem from them becoming more realistic in descriptions of thought. And then after that they still complain that dreams are not realistic, and not interesting at all, because it's arbitrary... And no one is interested in something that doesn't really happen in reality.

And so another passage and another passage. And another passage. Countless passages I wrote and published on the website and no one read and no one will read. A whole world. My world. With my imaginary bed. And my imaginary kiss. And my imaginary secular woman. And my dream.

Night Life

html_raw:
<!DOCTYPE html><meta charset="utf-8"><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"><title>Third place in The Degeneration of the Nation's short story competition: "The Kiss with the Secular Woman" - The Degeneration of the Nation</title><link rel="icon" type="image/png" href="../favicon-192x192.png" sizes="192x192"><link rel="apple-touch-icon" sizes="180x180" href="../apple-touch-icon-180x180.png"><link rel="canonical" href="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/en/night-life31" /><meta property="og:image" content="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/img/kisssecular.jpg" /><link rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../styles.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../column.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../article.css">
The Degeneration of the Nation

Third place in The Degeneration of the Nation's short story competition: "The Kiss with the Secular Woman"

Judges' reasoning: "The Kiss with the Secular Woman" is a story that combines the experimental with the emotional to create a fundamental exploration of the connection between the two - and the price of experimentalism, its power and weaknesses. The story masquerades as an ars poetica manifesto, reaching the point of theoretical conceptualization, but ultimately reveals itself as a deeply personal story of one whose life is his creation, and has no existence outside of it, and therefore his soul-searching - including the accounting of his romantic life - is a creative accounting. Above all, this is a story of connection between cultures - secular culture and religious culture - where the twists and failures of this connection represent the Jewish condition. And also the circular condition.

By: Black Circle

The Kiss with the Sphinx - Franz von Stuck (Source)

The Kiss with the Secular Woman

I dreamed that we are white and black - a secular woman and an ultra-Orthodox man - and we're not holding hands, so people won't look at us. And we're thinking where we can go where there are no ultra-Orthodox by definition, so they won't see me with her. And then she discovers there's an immodest exhibition at the museum, and no ultra-Orthodox would dare show his face there, and if he did - he would be more afraid of us than we are of him, and the secret would be mutual. And then at sunset, when light kisses darkness, when the museum closes and the guards are chasing people out, we walk back from the sculpture garden, and suddenly - we kiss. In public. I mean, there's no one there. But it's the first time I - - and then I see someone there taking a picture. It's probably quite a photo for the newspaper - an ultra-Orthodox man and a secular woman kissing! And I run away and she calls after me, and I chase after him, asking the guard: Did you see a photographer? A tourist with a camera? Please! Someone, he has something in his bag that could ruin my life. And he's sure to upload it to the internet, and then one day someone will discover, or the algorithm will identify, and it could still come back to me from the other side of the world. Such a picture could wait for years in an obscure Facebook album, until one day such a kiss might gain attention, and then that ticking photo on the other side of the world will explode in my face.

- I want to understand you. You live with a huge secret, and yet you're religious.
- It's precisely the secret that makes you religious. Every secret creates a religion around it, not the other way around, and that's what secular people don't understand - secrets. And they ask me about a contradiction, what was the secret world of secularism when it was a successful religion, and why it disappeared. I thought it was obvious. The secret world of secularism was sexuality, both in the literal sense, and in the interpretive sense - in the Freudian movement. If you open average secular literature you'll find that it progresses from one sexual encounter to another, presented as the peak of interest and fantasy, and I'm sure many readers skip and read only the "interesting" parts. But like a process of revelation, not concealment, it's a self-consuming process. The moment sexuality lost its secret, for example through pornography or sex education, secularism died (just like a religion that has ossified), and it only works on young people, who go through the "discovery", and not on older people, or more precisely those who have matured. A typical narrative is I discovered myself. Read the secular media. Discovered, we discovered, he discovered, it was discovered, incest [Translator's note: In Hebrew, "incest" contains the root for "discovery"]. No covering and no secret world. Discovery and discovery in language. Discovery and discovery in sex. Disclosure of opinion and scientific discovery. An ecology of culture cannot be based only on discovery and burning forests. It consumes itself. It's a classic sin of knowledge. Let's say you took off a woman's clothes, what's left skin, you went under the skin what's left, fat, you went under the fat, what's left, bones, great, you went into the bones, into the skull, what's left? Brain, you went into the brain, what's left, gray matter, you went into the gray what's left, neural networks, you went into the neural networks what's left, thought, you went into the thought what's left, consciousness, into the conscious what's left, subconscious, into the subconscious what's left, dream. Meaning dreams are the elementary particle physics of the world. And cracking the dream is a revolution like splitting the atom. The collision of broken dreams at high speeds will teach us about the basis of the spiritual world, and enable a spiritual doomsday weapon. This is what culture should be engaged in, in accelerating dreams. And what's exciting about the secular dream, freedom that is vacation? To travel abroad? To discover places? Come on. Only the discovery of times is interesting. Either discovery of the past, through culture, or discovery of the future, through dreaming. The current culture is constantly busy only with the discovery of the present. Addicted to updates. To the new, to news. The dream deals with the combination of the ancient with the futuristic, and it is the strongest weapon against the present. Covering the present with a blanket that stretches from the ancient to the future. I wish it was possible to skip from night to night without the day in between. To become a secret and disappear into the darkness.

And the secular woman waits for me crying: Where did you disappear to? The whole museum has already closed and I looked for you in the garden in the dark. Why do you always act like a paranoid? And I say: I'm sorry, I really am paranoid. And she drives me in her car because I don't know how to drive, and I keep thinking if the cars around can see inside that a secular woman is driving an ultra-Orthodox man. And she asks: Why do you even talk to a secular woman if you're so afraid?
- The religious elite rejected dreams. So I thought that the secular elite...
And she stops looking at the road and looks at me, and I don't understand how there isn't an accident: What does this have to do with the elite? I'm a woman!
- No one wants to communicate with me. Why shouldn't I at least talk to a woman?
- What was wrong with the religious elite, why did you start writing to me? You claim that no one reads? Because it's exactly like in elections, every people deserves the leaders worthy of it. So in that sense - replacing the people is really a joke. Even if you write to secular people your people will only absorb what they are worthy of. Not what you wrote. That's why everyone who complains about Bibi doesn't understand anything. The people are the problem - Bibi is the symptom. It's not you who's the problem, but your readers.
- I thought like that for many years, you know? But the dream needs reality, just as reality needs the dream. And the same goes for the ultra-Orthodox and the secular. A person is like a coin, black on one side white on the other, night on one side day on the other. Psychology made its big mistake when it placed the dream under the conscious, or sometimes in the superconscious, because that's the wrong axis, but the right-left axis. The mistake is looking as if the dream is inferior to reality, and not its other side. Instead, we need to understand that the dream is on the right side - on the side of what we want. It's reality that's on the left side - in the other realm. In my dream, the secular elite understands what I'm saying even in reality, while in reality the secular elite doesn't understand what I'm saying even in a dream. I came out bald from here and there, from the blacks and the whites. Is it any wonder I keep my hat on?

A secular man with a huge shtreimel [Translator's note: A fur hat worn by some Hasidic Jews] that grew on his head enters the doctor's office. The doctor asks: What's the problem? The shtreimel answers: Doctor, look what grew on my bottom! Whoever is part of the dream of culture, of religion, when he dies he gets to return to the dream sleep of the spirit, to join the dream of the world, which is the world to come. His soul becomes a shtreimel. The soul candle is the tail on which the soul burns. Blessed is his portion. But whoever is only part of reality - in reality he dies. And that's exactly what will happen to those who write thick realistic novels these days, whose fat bottom sits on your head, instead of a shtreimel. A shtreimel is made of foxes but they're arranged like a hedgehog, and therefore it knows one round thing. While a novel knows so many unnecessary things, it's so smart and boastful, unlike a dream. That's why in dream sleep blood flow concentrates in the brain and the sexual organ, because that's the essence of man - knowledge. Dreams: what a stream of thought that isn't a stream of consciousness at all, but a stream of learning, meaning a stream of conceptual creativity, it teaches how to be creative with cultural materials, in our case Judaism, so it's Torah study and not Torah. After all, the biggest problem in the world is creative blockage, on one hand the secular barrenness, of empty creativity, and on the other hand the religious barrenness, of creative emptiness. It's male infertility versus female infertility, both in content and in form. What happened here was an attempt at sex between cultures, opening up spaces that were blocked, and this attempt failed completely. There is religion, and there is literature, and there is no religious literature today. King David, the jester of God, as written in the holy books, who runs jokes with God, the Messiah who will be a clown, is not considered at all as a serious possibility, and is perceived as a parody, as satire, as performance, as nonsense, God forbid not as joyful. They took away the fun and enjoyment, what's left of sex, of the text, maybe some message from another world, black. This is the problem why they can't make contact with aliens. That they're looking only for the information, the message, not the fun mating with another world. Forget aliens and angels, that's ten levels above your head, and certainly not a creative connection with God. Take cultures on Earth, take Arabs, ultra-Orthodox, take autistics. Even take animals. You know what, even take women. You think the stream of semen is a technical thing. You've lost the meaning of sex. The universe has become dead matter. You sit all day with your head in the computer, and one day artificial intelligence will go to the doctor and say: Doctor, look what grew on my bottom!

I dreamed that the secular woman takes me to her home and sits me on the couch, and I notice to my horror that it's also the bed, and I ask: Just to understand the situation, so am I an attraction for you? That you'll exhaust?
And she sits next to me: I'm the number one fan of your dreams. You know?
- So now I understand. You brought me here to discover my secrets? Because you're also the only fan, you know.
- I read the two books and immediately identified you in them. Thank you for sharing with me. I know it's not trivial for you, with all the paranoia.
- But I didn't write them.
And she laughs: So who did? Black Circle?
And I don't want to answer that. So I show her a passage from a dream I didn't publish:

The construct that every text has an author is a new idea. And it simply didn't exist in the biblical period. It's not that someone forged it, or wrote a text without an author, this idea simply didn't exist, there was no such function. And only when the idea was born did they try to say that the Torah was written by Moses, or by God, even though before that no one felt the need to ask the question who wrote it at all, and even the person who technically wrote it didn't feel that he was writing it. Hence the ability to write a text like the Torah stems precisely from the lack of awareness that you are writing a Torah. And the danger is that you write a Torah without being aware of it. But nowadays, it's probably not about a Torah for humans, but for future generations, for computers. A computer won't believe in a text's author, but in the result of a calculation, and any text that was written is not the result of your personal calculation - in your head as a processor - but of a much larger calculation, which includes all your inputs, a calculation of the entire culture, that is, of the network, and it's also not the final result of that calculation but a part of it, of that huge calculation that never ends. In fact, the text itself is an attempt to expand the connections between the processors of culture, and therefore the text by its nature is a thing without an author, and so the perception will reverse and return in a full circle. And the claim that a person wrote this text will be identical to the claim that a word processor wrote this text, or that the screen wrote it, or that the eye wrote it, or that the pupil, or that the black circle.

And underneath it there's another passage:

Situation Report
I have no one to talk to. Many writers in this situation talk to the past. I talk to the future. There are only two possibilities in the current culture: either pornography, or disappearance. Meaning nudity in the light. So what's left in the darkness? The clothes. That's what's written that the garments of skin will return to be garments of light. And what's the next stage? Garments of darkness. Both disappearance and pornography - that's the challenge of culture. To combine these two formal logics. Not like today, where either everything is outside or everything is inside. But that everything is both outside and inside. To understand that it's circular, and when cultural pornography reveals more and more, not just the body, but also pornography of the soul, and not just the soul, but pornography of the spirit and the soul, and so on, up to the innermost core, whose exposure turns reality itself into a secret, the light itself will be darkness, and what is a sun of darkness? A black hole. Not a covered moon, not passive darkness, but active absorption of light, something that can take the light back from the world, and precisely the exposure of the skin will be exposure to darkness, and then pornography will be disappearance. The appearance of the world comes back out of the eye, the reversal of Kant, to the point of sucking the appearance in closed eyes - the dream.

And I don't stop, because I feel like for once in my life someone will read all these passages, because underneath this passage there's another passage, right under its bottom:

Why is myth much more developed in the past than in the future
You don't know what you want to say - you produce what you want to say. You don't know what you want to write, but produce it, like an algorithm, it's one-directional, meaning in time, it creates something new and doesn't transfer something from the past to the future, something you knew. And therefore reading also needs to change, because it's not to absorb something that was transferred to you, that the writer knew, it's not information, or communication, but it's material for your algorithm that you will produce something from, and in the best case - it transfers a new algorithm to you. Which is innovative writing. It transfers examples of algorithm operation to you, and you need to learn the algorithm, and add it to your algorithmic toolbox. Culture won't be erased because of artificial intelligence smarter than humans, on the contrary, precisely because current products will seem so simple to it they will become the most basic products, on which everything is built. Our high literature will become classic children's literature, above which is much higher and more sophisticated literature. The computer won't cancel the ABC, or language, just as modern consciousness didn't cancel myths and religions from a literary perspective, despite ceasing to believe. So the computer can stop believing in the human contents of literature, like man and love, without canceling literature itself. Learning will never become a trivial action, and the materials in the canon will remain, only become necessarily more fictional for the computer, and therefore more mythical. Myth is created when past literature can no longer be considered realism. In their time both Homer and the Bible were considered realism, and so in the future love and man will be perceived as myths, and so will marriage and betrayal and war and all the contents of literature. "Crime and Punishment" will be a myth about the murderer, and not a realistic crime book as it was considered in its time. It's not that our literature is constantly becoming more and more realistic, unlike past literature, but that reality itself is changing. Once sex was much more uniform and monotonous, for almost everyone, and therefore not interesting to literature, just as today defecation is monotonous for everyone, and in the future literature might be written that deals with different forms of excretion, if reality there develops into a high culture in the toilet. And if computer reality develops then in the future literature will be able to talk about programming. The pornographic literature of our days is a product of the sophistication of sexuality itself, and not of us becoming more realistic in descriptions of sex, just as Greek philosophy didn't stem from them becoming more realistic in descriptions of thought. And then after that they still complain that dreams are not realistic, and not interesting at all, because it's arbitrary... And no one is interested in something that doesn't really happen in reality.

And so another passage and another passage. And another passage. Countless passages I wrote and published on the website and no one read and no one will read. A whole world. My world. With my imaginary bed. And my imaginary kiss. And my imaginary secular woman. And my dream.

Night Life