Friday, September 4, 2009


Allism is the name I gave my philosophy, and in various essays I call an interpretive method “allistic” or a set of philosophical set of principles “Allism” – but in this essay, I present Allism as a system for global politics and world religion. It stands yet in need of further work from greater experience; yet I am satisfied it holds the germ to grow to what I wish it to be.








With Antecedents




WITH antecedents;        

With my fathers and mothers, and the accumulations of past ages;         

With all which, had it not been, I would not now be here, as I am:            

With Egypt, India, Phenicia, Greece and Rome; 

With the Kelt, the Scandinavian, the Alb, and the Saxon;              

With antique maritime ventures,—with laws, artizanship, wars and journeys;    

With the poet, the skald, the saga, the myth, and the oracle;     

With the sale of slaves—with enthusiasts—with the troubadour, the crusader, and the monk;  

With those old continents whence we have come to this new continent;             

With the fading kingdoms and kings over there;                 

With the fading religions and priests;     

With the small shores we look back to from our own large and present shores; 

With countless years drawing themselves onward, and arrived at these years;  

You and Me arrived—America arrived, and making this year;     

This year! sending itself ahead countless years to come.              




O but it is not the years—it is I—it is You;             

We touch all laws, and tally all antecedents;       

We are the skald, the oracle, the monk, and the knight—we easily include them, and more;      

We stand amid time, beginningless and endless—we stand amid evil and good;               

All swings around us—there is as much darkness as light;             

The very sun swings itself and its system of planets around us; 

Its sun, and its again, all swing around us.            

As for me, (torn, stormy, even as I, amid these vehement days,)             

I have the idea of all, and am all, and believe in all;          

I believe materialism is true, and spiritualism is true—I reject no part.      


Have I forgotten any part?          

Come to me, whoever and whatever, till I give you recognition.               


I respect Assyria, China, Teutonia, and the Hebrews;     

I adopt each theory, myth, god, and demi-god;

I see that the old accounts, bibles, genealogies, are true, without exception;       

I assert that all past days were what they should have been;      

And that they could no-how have been better than they were,

And that to-day is what it should be—and that America is,          

And that to-day and America could no-how be better than they are.      




In the name of These States, and in your and my name, the Past,              

And in the name of These States, and in your and my name, the Present time. 


I know that the past was great, and the future will be great,       

And I know that both curiously conjoint in the present time,      

(For the sake of him I typify—for the common average man’s sake—your sake, if you are he;)  

And that where I am, or you are, this present day, there is the centre of all days, all races,           

And there is the meaning, to us, of all that has ever come of races and days, or ever will come. 


Walt Whitman:  Leaves of Grass.



                Thus Whitman felt, in his cosmic consciousness, of America as the unifying of the world. This same sentiment is the germ of Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil, the very reason for the book, which he summarizes in Book 8, section 256, a center of gravity and double mirror by which the preceding seven books are consumed and epitomized, and spread again through book 9: “What is Noble,” an extended footnote on the type of person 256 presents as the unifier and purpose of a unified Europe, the master race, the best of all Europe’s races, brought together and stratified into high mountain air of Europes Owners.



Book 8: People And Fatherlands, Section 256


Owing to the morbid estrangement which the nationality-craze has induced and still induces among the nations of Europe, owing also to the short-sighted and hasty-handed politicians, who with the help of this craze, are at present in power, and do not suspect to what extent the disintegrating policy they pursue must necessarily be only an interlude policy—owing to all this and much else that is altogether unmentionable at present, the most unmistakable signs  are now overlooked, or arbitrarily and falsely misinterpreted, namely, this: EUROPE WISHES TO BE ONE.


With all the more profound and large-minded men of this century, the real general tendency of the mysterious labour of their souls was to prepare the way for that new SYNTHESIS, and anticipate in imagination the European of the future; only in their simulations, or in their weaker moments, in old age perhaps, did they belong to mere ‘fatherlands’—they only rested from themselves when they became ‘patriots.’ I think of such men as Napoleon, Goethe, Beethoven, Stendhal, Heinrich Heine,  Schopenhauer: it must not be taken amiss if I also count Richard Wagner among them, about whom one must not let oneself be deceived by his own self-misunderstandings (geniuses like him have seldom the right to understand themselves). They are akin, fundamentally akin, in all the heights and depths of their requirements; it is Europe, the ONE Europe, whose soul presses urgently and longingly, outwards and upwards, in their multifarious and boisterous art— whither? into a new light? towards a new sun?


But who would attempt to express accurately what all these masters of new modes of speech could not express distinctly? It is certain that the same storm and stress tormented them, that they SOUGHT in the same manner, these last great seekers! All of them steeped in literature to their eyes and ears—the first artists of world literature—for the most part even themselves writers, poets, intermediaries and blenders of the arts and the senses (Wagner, as musician is reckoned among painters, as poet among musicians, as artist generally among actors); all of them fanatics for EXPRESSION ‘at any cost’—I specially mention Delacroix, the nearest related to Wagner; all of them great discoverers in the realm of the sublime, also of the loathsome and dreadful, still greater discoverers in effect, in display, in the art of the show-shop; all of them talented far beyond their genius, out and out VIRTUOSI, with mysterious accesses to all that seduces, allures, constrains, and upsets; born enemies of logic and of the straight line, hankering after the strange, the exotic, the monstrous, the crooked, and the self-contradictory; as men, Tantaluses of the will, plebeian parvenus, who knew themselves to be incapable of a noble TEMPO or of LENTO in life and action— think of Balzac, for instance,—unrestrained workers, almost destroying themselves by work; antinomians and rebels in manners, ambitious and insatiable, without equilibrium and enjoyment; all of them finally shattering and sinking down at the Christian cross (and with right and reason, for who of them would have been sufficiently profound and sufficiently original for an ANTI- CHRISTIAN philosophy?);—on the whole, a boldly daring, splendidly overbearing, high-flying, and aloft-up-dragging class of higher men, who had first to teach their century-and it is the century of the MASSES—the conception ‘higher man.’


Let the German friends of Richard Wagner advise together as to whether there is anything purely German in the Wagnerian art, or whether its distinction does not consist precisely in coming from SUPER-GERMAN sources and impulses: in which connection it may not be underrated how indispensable Paris was to the development of his type, which the strength of his instincts made him long to visit at the most decisive time—and how the whole style of his proceedings, of his self-apostolate, could only perfect itself in sight of the French socialistic original. On a more subtle comparison it will perhaps be found, to the honour of Richard Wagner’s German nature, that he has acted in everything with more strength, daring, severity, and elevation than a nineteenth-century Frenchman could have done—owing to the circumstance that we Germans are as yet nearer to barbarism than the French;— perhaps even the most remarkable creation of Richard Wagner is not only at present, but for ever inaccessible, incomprehensible, and inimitable to the whole latter-day Latin race:


The figure of Siegfried, that VERY FREE man, who is probably far too free, too hard, too cheerful, too healthy, too ANTICATHOLIC for the taste of old and mellow civilized nations. He may even have been a sin against Romanticism, this anti-Latin Siegfried.




            Nietzsche speaks of a generation of experimental thinkers seeking European Unifiers – “Napoleon, Beethoven, Goethe…” – yet this unifying of a continent, as necessary and inevitable as it is, fell down upon a few false tries: Napoleon and the Nazis were driven by the same desire by solidarity, however misguided their execution proved to be. And that same desire exists in all men, not simply a world crystal, One world Government, and only one government for all men, but layers and spheres of government, a heavenly music of the celestial spheres, and this is the song that itches in our ear as well. The nineteen hundreds suffered greater injuries than warfare. The intellectual lineup more than equaled Nietzsche’s unifiers. We had our Freud, Eliot, Picasso, Stravinsky, Einstein, Schoenberg, Joyce – brilliant men, and hence horrible. But also necessary, for the heart of romanticisms could not immediately transfigure the mind of enlightenment – the disintegrative interplay was needed. Economy too is mere superstructure: the foundation lies in the living philosophy of the world’s best men. This alone is fate and fatal.

* *
* *

I will speak briefly to you of Allism.

            Allism instructs: Affirm everything, and affirm it all in the direction of growth. Affirm some things dead, affirm others whole. Give your yes to all things, a qualified yes that loves like a mother or cuts like a razor.

            A union of unions of course includes a union of West and East. If you follow my flight of fancy, I can spiral you a little closer to the heart of Allism.

            The East is circular, the West linear. The East is about the Tao, the way, the womb. The sun is given birth in the East. It is all intuitions – “the Path that can be passed is not the eternal path, the name that can be named is not the eternal name.” Escape your habits, drop thinking, hum the holy Om. And the universe is one thing: drop distinctions. It all is a great circle, the wheel of dharma, the eightfold path. Breath in breath out, around around we go – samsara! cycles!  And the circle becomes a nightmare – Buddha begins to worry! How do we escape the wheel of samsara? How do we get at the nothingness at the center of the wheel? We must cancel our flame and cease to strive, cease to be – Nirvana!

            The West is linear. Starting with the pyramids: straight up to heaven. History is a straight line. Everything runs by logos, and logos is that which can be known, said, spoken—the spoken word. Logic is a three part succession: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore Socrates is mortal. The sun dies into the West. It goes under. It is mortal! Mother earth eats him back into her womb. All good things must come to an end. History too is a great straight line. And then the Western nightmare: Does history just go on for infinity? Even after we die? Yes, the line of history branches in two: either a straight line forever in heaven, or a straight line forever in hell. Hell is the parallel line to heaven, lower in fire. History will come to an end. On the last day, the earth will be destroyed: choose your eternal destiny.

            Circles and lines, lines and circles. The circle is a nightmare: how do I escape the circle? Go to the center. The line is a nightmare: how do I escape the line? Ride it upwards.

            What is Allism? It is line and circle. The sine wave is line and circle. Forever a repeating rhythm, forever a novel melody. Like the strings of a guitar. They have a limited length, but you can play infinite melodies upon them. The string vibrates in sine waves, and the sine waves make an infinite amount of overtones. Strings that are alike resonate alike.

            The West is materialism, the East spiritualism. Perhaps the spirit is a form of matter? Perhaps matter contains spirit? Like the sine wave: both circle and line. One thing with two tendencies.

            Science is the schism, the breaking down of matters in analysis. The sun is devoured. Art is the synthesis, the combining of all things together. The sun is born. And thus matter is the mother who eats and breaks things down, and synthesizes them again in her womb to make a new thing.

            All things beautiful, powerful, glorious, true, subtle, perfect, and lovely in the world resonate to each other. They combine towards a greater whole. All that is great becomes greater, for eternity more. A straight line of every increase, a circle of resonance.

* *
* *

I am a Monist, who believes The All is the greatest existing thing, and deserves our contemplation, and therefore not our praise.

            What is the All? This you do not know. I listen to the religious men, I listen to the atheists, I listen the philosophers and I am sick with contempt as I am for all suicidals. Man proper is humanist. I am all. As it is we have suicidals. They all know it is sui or suicide, selfish or selfless, and they choose suicide. But not being man enough to kill themselves, they choose the coward’s suicide, which they call faith, conviction, reason. If faith, reason, conviction, society, family, or any other deceive, even if it is truth and calls itself truth, if any of these offend you, pluck it out, crucify it, stick it down and burn it. What matters to me in all the world is me myself.

            So far, the all of mankind is approached statistically. A country that consumes a given amount of coffee will change its group spirit. Collectively, they are that much more energetic, that much more irritable. National diets determine national temperaments, and this affects and infects those who don't drink coffee or eat fast food, or whatever else the group does.

            Just as a few cancer victims sink their pain into the group-mind, a few zealots zing the hearts of thousands, and so forth: the diet and exercise of every man feeds into the Leviathan, the group-feel, the group-think, the group-spirit. Nothing you do is without consequence. Every little choice is thick with significance.

            And still, the less one belongs to himself, the more he wants to belong to the group.

            Therefore, amidst my selfishness I see this: A man, when he is centered in his place, is by consecutive spheres, alined with the world and universe as a whole, in which case – selfishness is his duty. Allism is the overmap, the overgoal, which orients each man to his own best interest which is also the best interest of the whole.



One world Religion


            This One World we seek implies our One World Religion.

            What will the one world religion look like? If we find so many absurdities and crimes in each of the established world religions, how could we possibly unite them all under one banner? What banner would they all agree to?

            The banner they must agree to: the humanist banner. All the world religions are followed by human beings, living on earth. This is no mundane detail, but the essential fact. That each of us is a human being, and each of us lives on the planet earth is a great unification.

            What are our preliminary goals? We seek to optimize humanity. Humankind is each human’s highest object of concern and adoration—all else are traps and beggars away from his best purpose. Humankind undoubtedly wastes much of its resources on wars. How much of our creative life, our money and daily concerns, are spent on wars and governments? These efforts detract from human happiness, even though they may pay dividends here and there. We are familiar with the statistics that show that starvation could be solved a hundred times over if we gave in our arms. Assuming that the world’s population wouldn’t simply double double double until there would be more starving people than ever, what’s stopping us? In a word: fragmented government. And the solution is the better word: One World Government.

            Our goal is no less then this: One Government, One language, One Religion, One Currency, One set of Rights, One Law. We do not oppose diversity, but are its best defenders, because we wish one law to allow diversity as well as unity, to allow correspondence as well as shared effort. How rich is the world and impoverished the nations. We are cut off from each other. Language and politics separate. See now how the world learns English, and after that the One Language it will become, how it connects to the Internet, and after that breaks the barriers of custom and distance.

            English is working itself out, but the specific language we share matters less than the unifying function of whatever language we gain. We require the world language and our own language. The world language is the basic language we all share, let us cling to our local dialects as we wish. In the same way, our shared world religion will be a skeleton readily recommendable to this religion or that, and yet limiting all religions in relation to each other, and setting them in global order.

            We have fate on our side. The world unites, one world government already exists, between the sub-governments, one world language grows, one world religion emerges: they already live in the world. The One World: we must scent her out and make her over in our image: we must invest our lives to uniting the world, to speed the inevitable, as we ourselves are inevitable. For the future is not set: one world yes, but whether good or better, that is for us to determine.

            “One world religion.” Religion is systematized importance which emphasizes supernaturalism. Philosophy is systematized importance which emphasizes rationalism. But we redefine supernaturalism as consciousness, and consciousness as a property of all matter. But to make the terms useful and meaningful, we will say that with regard to importance, religion is the heart, philosophy the mind, and both become parts of our lifeway. A philosophy is a worldview, but a religion is an attitude. They combine in one life.

* *
* *

            Every worldview is implicitly Allistic, for since it is a worldview, it must view everything in the world, including contrary worldviews, sympathetic worldviews, attacks and benefits, and also itself in the action of looking at these other worldviews. Any system that is complete must at least attempt to explain all the other systems.

            Thus, Christianity must explain Judaism, must explain Islam, must explain Mormonism, cannot stay neutral on any other religion, but has to be fundamentally against them in order to survive. Mormonism must judge traditional Christianity corrupt, “the church of Satan,” in order to justify its own existence. Every worldview must be self-legitimizing. Insofar as any group intends to persist, it must believe in its own right, its own necessity for existing. This is what we call “faith in yourself,” “believing in yourself,” and ultimately, all faith and all believing in is faith in self, believing in self, the group, or whatever wants to survive. Not that groups admit this. Christianity believes God invented and intended Christianity, and that the Church exists as a “wife” to Jesus, that the Church is there for “the greater glory (and pleasure) of God.” But insofar as a group justifies itself by any rationale except the very joy of its existence, the group is spreading propaganda. “Art for art,” “Truth for truth,” “education for education,” and we get closer to the true reason these groups exist. Of course, to those outside the group, we care only how to use the group and avoid being used by the group. We wish to exchange money or words with the group, but we do not care why the group exists, unless we wish to dissolve it.

            Every belated group must rewrite history. Islam pretended that Adam, Moses, and Jesus were all Muslims, were all Islam before God, and that the appearance otherwise is because the Jews corrupted their religion. In order to justify himself, Muhammad had to rationalize how everybody in the world was wrong but him. He alone was the “seal” of the prophets, the only true spokesman for God, and his transmission of God’s words alone would never be corrupted. Why God didn’t give him the original Bible of Moses, or the original Gospel of Jesus, by which to blatantly expose the corruptions beside his freshly returned original? but instead only gave some desert poems about a pissed Allah?—only he knows that. God’s prank on the world is that he only reveals himself in such a way that an honest intellectual could never believe in him. He is like the hyper-intelligent aliens in UFOs who only kidnap drunken hicks, because in the end, who is going to believe their word?

            Mormonism, coming so late in humanity’s prehistory (history proper is just starting!), adds as a sacrament to Christianity the baptism of the dead, by which to make their religion related to the last four thousand years which lacked it.

            Atheism has spent much time destroying the claims of religious groups, especially Christian claims to truth, for of course Atheism is the final sect of Christianity, is more serious about God than any believer, because atheists are willing to doubt him to his face, and thus at least look upon him directly. Atheism grew out of France, where the first Christians threw off God and believed in reason alone. Since then, the work of Feuerbach and others has been to psychologize, mythologize, historicize, evolutionize, and moralize away everything preached under the rhetoric of religion. It is precisely this obsession with the deceptions of Christianity that make Atheism a denomination of Christianity, just as Muslims who worship God by destroying idols are therefore idolaters by that very act.

            These inherent and insoluble tensions, which being only as ideas and philosophies, and finally destroy whole continents – must be negotiated by the higher sphere of their unification. The antagonisms on a lower lever are united at a higher.

            Every worldview held by a human is necessarily a humanism. In this, we have different types of humanism, the different philosophies and theologies, the sorts of creativities that each religion supports them by.

            Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism—all humanisms, all focused constantly on humankind, all incapable of speaking of anything nonhuman except in relationship to and in terms of the human. Man is the center of every system. There is no escaping this.

            Humanism is the purified world philosophy, the purified world religion, which symbolizes and expresses them all. It is therefore necessarily the controlling element of the world religions, simply by ratiocreative irresistibility. It rules by meritocracy. There is no revolution, no violence, no propaganda necessary for this ruling of the world through humanistic philosophy. It is as it always was and always will be: the way of man.


Many World Religions


            Nothing single has integrity. It grows monstrous. Everything great requires checks and balances. Thus our One World Religion must be inwardly divided. A house undivided will never stand.

            Thus diversity must be part of the one. We call it harmony, even if it clashes. The clashing of the cymbals play their part too in a greater harmony.

            Right now we live under an impossible tree with countless trunks all twining and strangling each other, and above the vines and branches, the crowning flower of humanism. They all share this crown, they all depend thereon.

            Now we must flip the tree upside down: bury the crown as the tap root, and let all the religions spread as branches, each with their peculiar fruits, all from the one trunk of humanism.

            That is, we require systematizers and popularizers of the humanist agenda as the ideological solvent of the world. We require a basic humanism that everybody already agrees on, spoken in such a manner so they will realize they agree thereon, and by this we will be able to share a brotherhood. This is our unique millennial agenda.

            All the religions grew by chance. Crises were transformed into opportunities by the clever priests; Bibles were fashioned; cults were christened. Now we have something new in our view. We know of civil engineers, also known as “civilians who engineer,” but we have always had a few bright stars who were civilization engineers. To script countries, nations, the world!

            Yes, and why not religious engineers? Why not study the world religions, study human needs, and discover what beliefs best fulfill man? Why not create religions like technology? Indeed, they are created this way, but by writers and poets. More rigorous and exacting work needs doing to explore the nature of human religiosity.

            Emerson was given a dream from his inner God: the angel said to him:  “eat the world,” and grasping this apple, he ate. He is the first of us. “I am the universe” Emerson said. Yes.

            Either one is great in himself, or he is great in nonself: the group, humanity, charity, God, saints, church, state, or whatever else. What does a man pride in: his accomplishments, or other’s recognition of his accomplishments? Insofar as a man refers to another in explaining his own worth, he is a man of the people. Most people are: they are not grand, but they belong. They follow, they socialize, they run with the race.

            Not so the creators. Not so the brilliant, the artists, the ubermensch, the Gods. Geniuses start religions, fools follow them. The world is necessarily foolish, needs his leaders, and the leaders themselves are refined followers.

            Grandiosos make for poor leaders. They are too inwardly focused to concern over a group. A leader is a follower who obeys the group mission. “The leader is a servant to all”—not quite. He is a controller of the group, and thus focused on the group. A leader is essentially a symbol of the group, and is thus controlled by the group. Insofar as the leader needs no group, he is grand, and sloughs off the others. But a good leader follows the possibilities and ideals of a group, and thus depends on it.



Allism: everything, from good to bad, from success to failure, all that exists and has that holy thing called life, must be put to work. This is Allism: everything works for the glory of working, and for the glorious future of more work. Creativity is everything. We are utter increase.

Consider the failure of pantheism. Pantheism claims that all is beyond good and evil, that good and evil are illusions. But since illusions necessarily exist and are valued, they must also be part of the “pan,” part of the “theism.” As soon as pantheism defines itself against any other school of belief, it contradicts itself. There must be a new synchronicity.

The unifying of all living religions does not mean the perpetuation of them all. Let what dies die. Indeed, I am neither interested in converting the fools to reason nor dashing the gods to earth. Why not? Simple: I do not believe there are eternally perilous consequences for any belief. Thus, while I regard all religions as essentially superstitions (i.e. supernatural), it is not my life mission to dispute this.

Instead, my whole message is addressed only to the intelligent, only to the creative thinkers who glow in the light of their peers. I live with my equals. For you I write, and never stupefy, simplify, or popularize my works.

And this comes with a strong dose of optimism. The world is not “ideal,” nor “perfect,” nor whatever nonsense they speak of. But our attitude is one of optimizing—we make the best living present in creating our best rewarding future.

Allism is the belief that the existence of the all allows all the parts their proper destiny: we can interpret everything positively. Every living word of man can be optimized, systematized, interpreted. We take everything as potentially important, and though we pull out the gold, we do not damn the rock.

Our image is the great Mother All. Like a human being, she grows and improves. She uses what exists to allow what could exist. From out of existence, the glorious insistence.

            The All is evitable as well as inevitable. Resistible and irresistible. Ultimately, we have the world.

            The all is no mere syncretism, for it recognizes the importance of boundaries. Nor is it denominationalism, because it recognizes the universals that surpass and allow boundaries. The All alone has no opposite, is her own opposite, is all things, has no other, is her own other, is all things. One cannot blaspheme the all. One cannot deny the all. One cannot think outside of the all. You are forever part of the all, and every one of your thoughts relates inevitably to all thoughts.

            Thus we take the world.

            We are fate. We are force. We are futurenow. We see the way of the universe, and we align our full power in such a way to let the full force of the universe to flow fully to our own selfish need. And thus we internalize the all, and are truly representatives of her.

            I am all. To be Allistic, there can be nothing you are not. I am Christian. Of course I am Christian, that much is obvious even in a casual reading of my writing. But I am also Muslim. I am Atheist. I am Mormon. I am Buddhist. There is no Jew who is more Jewish than I am.

            I quote the Book of Mormon—living proof that God has grown senile—and say with him in his greybeard boast, “Every book is written by God.” Insofar as we take God to be the creative faculty herself, we must give her the abstract and tautological credit for writing every book. Yet let us slip into spiritual interpretation.

            Every book is the same book. Every utterance the same utterance. We must be utter babblers to hear again the unity off all speech. “A is nonA” in that both “A” and “nonA” are equally concepts. “2+2=5”: I need to be no wordsmith to avoid that obviousness. Ignorance is strength against the learned, freedom is slavery to defending your freedom, and so on and so on.

            Western Materialism is the only successful materialism in the history of mankind. All forms of Eastern “monism” are really dualisms. But true physical blood-and-guts Materialism, from the likes of Lucretius onwards, agree that whatever you have in the universe, whether idea, emotion, stone, plant, God, it is essentially made of the same stuff, we are all the same stuff. Maya and Brahma are both made out of atoms.

            A spiritualized Materialism adds: we are all saying the same thing. And here we become babblers, we become intoxicated with Dionysian Wine that says, “Everything is everything!”

            I experienced this first perversity in my youth. I recall in high school learning that the first protozoan life form may have been made out of primordial clay. Immediately I added, “and his name was Adam!” I wished always to see the same thing, and with the Dionysian gift of psychotic eyes, I was allowed to finally see through the mask of it all. We are all the same. I am an Atheist Christian; I am Buddha fat as a cow on the pleasure of sense; I am Muhammad relabeling and selling back the Jews their own religion, and converting the Semites into Muslims; I am Joseph Smith, sheistering myself to be a prophet and by that very outrage becoming one; I am Jesus, myself a criminal, but by my followers, made to devour Yahweh himself and become World Savoir.

One world Language

                All books are one book, and all words are the same word. For us, glossalalia is not a flame, but a flood. We flow our regard of care everywhere. With a simple model of the harmony of the spheres, and the all of the the alma mater, we have our vision, and the rest is joyous detail.

            Flow is the ability to constantly translate experiences into different frames. If a man is allergic to the word “God” or “power” or “duty” what does that matter? Fighting over words is merely swapping spit. What matters is to communicate and express our visions, for all thought is meant to become language, and all language action.

            The ability to shift languages, swap meanings, and metaphorize, parabolize, riddle, turn, and squirm with language, that most pliant of floods, will allow another man to experience what you have experienced. We need factual beliefs in order to habitualize useful expectations. Language is a great success, and mankind is generally happy. But when disputes arise, they cannot be differences in facts, nor differences in self-evident experiences, but only disputes of words. The belief that any one word is important in itself leads to troubles. The needs themselves are a system, not a structure, and therefore, they self-define again and again. The center of man is a fire, every changing, ever the same.

            The central name I am is the same no matter when in history I showed up.

            This book, therefore, may appear heterogeneous, though I have worked hard to homogenize what amounts to a decade of thought—per the principles of Allistic integration of everything, I chose one tome rather than a series of essays—will nevertheless be read to implant only one guiding idea, unspeakable, because all ideas are basically unspeakable, being the means by which we perceive reality, not talk about it, and yet it will change the way you view the world, my purpose for you as my reader. And I call the philosophy Allism, though the name is unimportant. We talk of the idea in terms of an interpreting order of the former world into one complex organism. But the goals of the book, are not the idea I wish to impart, nor can an idea ever be said. Behind every preposition embedded in these sentences, behind all the math of meaning, is the self-same idea. It is gained by severe, insisting, single-minded work, fueled by the passion of a power infused with love.

All thought

            There can’t really be a difference can there? If Allism affirms all that already exists, how can it wish to change it all? Allism must have always existed in some form, and indeed, no belief could stick its head in the sand, but had to at least fudge an explanation of its competitors. The exclusivist religions damned the rival religions, the inclusive religions accepted the rival religions, and we must accept both, accept even the damning and the rivalry, and yet affirm the chronological harmonizing of them, so that discord has its place, and concord as well, all together in a perfect whole.

            The greatest fault in thinking comes from taking the part as the all, or worse, destroying the all in preference to the part. Yet most worldviews are of this nature.

            The crown of Allism is to affirm all that exists, and then to insist on a greater all. Since what exists is already part of the all, has its own history, power, and potential, and cannot be wished nor worried away, it must be used in whatever way it can to flow into a greater all. The problem is when a part becomes fixated so that it no longer flows into the all.

            We aim to overcome the difficulties in language. Violence between men arises from frustrations in language. Wise persons speaking the same language never violate one another. Violence comes from frustration, and frustration comes from miscommunication.

            There are no illusions; the light never lies. Allism sees where the opposites are knotted together. The great lies of mankind are in our NOTS.

            The standardization of English as a world language will last forever—will make history. Christianity was a tower of Babel meant to unify all men under a complex of images (symbolized by glossalia: chanting random noise), which speak to all men: a Godman put on the mystic cross for our sins—and all the rest. Christianity’s strong point was never in telling stories, the gospels themselves are poor stories, but they have strong symbols and deep wit, and that made the difference, the stories themselves were absurd, and because of their obvious absurdity, looked like parables.

            For us, our glossalia, our babble language, is not a set of symbols. It is a series of methods—applied without direct quotations or imitations, but from a masterful insight into their logic, applied to everything important in the world. We write it all over again as one great work. This is our urge, this our ergon.  Our tower to heaven is to heavenize the earth; nor do we wish to scale the sky—technology has already done that! We have danced upon the moon. We have beaten out the small-towered Babylonians with our skyscrapers, our jets, our satellites, our rockets to the mars, because we have the one-world-language of numbers. We achieved everything because the numbers could not be confused as the words were confused. And now we understand even how the words were confused, how warfare was caused by confusion of languages, and we at last speak directly.

            “We believe either/or logic is outmoded. Mankind now needs both-and,” such nonsense they speak, they refute themselves as soon as they define themselves. A mirror with an interior, that’s what they need. Perhaps then they would see that they can’t reject rejection.

            The self-overcoming of all logical distinctions is not the suicide of logical-distinctions, but it is akin to Nietzsche who said what he had to say to the world, and then turned for the last decade inwards:  He turned inwards early; the rest of you are more patient.


One World Movement


            We seek to achieve the inevitabilities of our human world, but in the best manner and not a mindless one;  namely:

One world government

One world constitution

One world currency

One world language

One world religion

            This is an old idea and this is a new idea. But the crucial idea to understand about our New World Order is that it is about decentralizing power. One world government to govern the governments. That is to say: an end to war, an end to rule, in fact, the achievement of the greatest freedom possible, complete freedom, freedom to do what is right for you to do, freedom to do whatever you wish insofar as it does no violence to others.

It is not anarchism, for there must be a legal system, there must be a limited police force, there must be politics. We want political systems, but we desire no government. What man dares govern me? The original needs no governance, and rightly revolts.

Therefore, there can be no “president of the world,” no “king of the world,” not even a “world committee,” but only an enforcement of nonviolence. Cultural wars, ideological wars, championships, competitions, these are good, but the use of violence and murder to promote ideas never made sense, has no basis in right, but only in the power of propaganda to dupe men to fight.

We are inevitability; the internet stands now as our greatest symbol. One world is inevitable, but it is not determined. It could be oppressive. It could be ignoble. It could be wrong. It is our place to create a one world order that works in allowing the greatest men to flourish. This is allowed by letting all men flourish through freedom, and those who are strong to be themselves. We open up a place for the master, race, the elite men of greatness from every race and nationality, to combine into a ruling class of courageous thinkers.

I speak nothing of revolutions, am not a communist who believes in an “end of all revolutions,” for revolutions revolve back upon us. I mean the growth of mankind into an integrated mind.

The One World Government need not be an official institution, but the intelligent dialogue of our wisest citizens, as it already is. This will become more pronounced and obvious soon.

And so the true one world government must necessarily be not “of the people, by the people, for the people,” people who would vote and pander to politicians willing to turn their country into a world enemy, as in early 21st century America, but the government must be a community of the greatest minds in the world, attracted by mutual regard and shared interest for the health and happiness of Mankind. We become official and codified only insofar as this pulls the wisest of us in community. We do not unite by popularity contest elections, be race or heritage, by religious devotion, by devotion to our people, or anything else but by our power of ratiocreativity, humanist interest to empower ourselves, our families, our communities, our states, our countries, and our world on the principle of the supremacy of the individual to the group.

In fact, such groups are scattered throughout the world. Man is a social creature just as much as he is an solitary creature. We all form groups, clubs, coalitions, parties, gangs, armies, asylums, etc. Developing a central consciousness to think through all these parts, that is our task.

As for the typical powers of change, namely, money and violence, these are of secondary interest to us. We are nonviolent; we regard wealth as a limited good. We are free from valuing our ideas economically, or using them as propaganda.


            Allism. No other. I am this I am that. Yes, you are part and you are Allistic. You are All. There is no other. There is no nonall, no nonpart, no separate. And yet you are infinitely important, important in your uniqueness.

            When you say “not,” you knot the stream, you repress the notted thing. You become unconscious of its being, it gains power over you. By denying its reality, you have lost sight on and touch with its reality. You must be free to make the truth. Freedom before truth. You must see it for what it is. Either and or.  All and everything.

            Utopianism leads us nowhere. You must maximize the system from where you are at if ever the system is to self-overcome, to overthrow its contradictions.

            The All of Allism grows from the realities it already holds. We must look at the many potentials in all things, and choose the best overall system, the famous “best of all possible worlds” and work with wisdom and courage for this. This is our place and purpose.




Perfection Is Easy


1 comment:

Bill Chapman said...

You mentioned "one world language" but you do not say which language it should be.I am not sure that English is as widespread or useful as people claim. I would like to argue the case for Esperanto as the international language. It is a planned language which belongs to no one country or group of states.

Take a look at
Esperanto works! I've used it in speech and writing in about fifteen countries over recent years.