by on
The average human being, described originally by Karl Marx in an unexpectedly anti-egalitarian fashion, is so dull, senseless and uncomprehending as to barely even constitute being classified as alive. These humans: the rabble, the canaille, or as Marx termed them the “Lumpen Proletariat”, are not concerned nor are biologically capable of being in any way concerned with socially revolutionary ideas or political dissidence.


Such dissidence would be in contradiction with their sub-rational desire to prolong their miserable lives for as long as possible, using whatever means available to do so. Unlike those of a greater existential class, characterised by the great warriors of the ancient Aryan past, any sense of existence that transcends the present time and space is hidden behind a veil of fear and inherent biological dullness, and thus they are incapable of understanding the virtue and logic of self-sacrifice which came so naturally to the noble and transcendent men of old. They are ideologically immovable in as far as a newly proposed societal construct exists outside of the mainstream collective consciousness, after which point it is readily absorbed into the permeable cell membrane of the Protozoan Slime.

Said term, originally coined by the 20th century poet T.S. Eliot, in many ways crystallizes the essence of Fallen Man, tending always towards that which is easy and that which is perceived as safe, a conglomeration of insignificant and simple organisms clinging desperately to the sustenance of the structure of their amino acids, feeling a “oneness” in the characterless, formless biological mush. The modern-day human amoeba is only capable of respiration, a small degree of movement and reproduction, though even this most basic of tasks is treated as overwhelmingly difficult by the homosexuals. In the words of Julius Evola 98% of the human race are “a violation of the Cartesian Axiom “I think, therefore I am”: they do not think, yet they are.”

It was the great reactionary conservative Joseph de Maistre who once said that “A country gets the government it deserves”. This is demonstrably true. We have moronic leaders because our leaders are elected by morons because human beings have a naturally tendency to connect to those who are of a similar nature to themselves, demonstrated by president Barack Obama, who scored a meagre 102 on his presidential IQ test and barely qualified as intellectually average. This observation produces a vast body of conversation in of itself, and provides the basis for understanding why ethnic identitarianism is the only political ideology which aligns with primordial human nature and has been discussed in other writings.

The 2% that make the difference: For the the few, not the many

To apply the aforementioned figure of 98%, it must be said that this number wasn’t randomly selected. Despite assertions in recent years that IQ is an inaccurate means of measuring intelligence, mostly coming from those who have a low IQ themselves, the figure of 2% corresponds on the Intelligence Quotient to those with a score that exceeds 130, the borderline that defines those of a highly superior intellectual predisposition. This level of intelligence has significant implications in terms of the social, cultural and political determination of a functional society. The reason for this is that 130 has been argued to be the threshold for those whose minds work not based on binary interpretations of reality, but based upon a system termed “Fuzzy Logic”.
To elaborate on this, and to explain its significance to political debate, one must have an understanding of how human psychology influences decision making and ideology. The intelligence of a human being relates to their ability to divulge information from stimuli and to interpret this information, often with what is known as “imperfect information”; this means that an individual does not have information concerning all aspects of a problem, and must make a decision with limited information. This of course, is a necessary skill for any politician, or any kind of leader at all for that matter.
Considering this, it should become apparent that the in-fighting currently occurring between the centre-left and the centre-right regarding “debating all the facts”, is a ludicrous one, because in real politics, and in all aspects of life, decisions are made based on limited available information, a reality that any true leader understands. The mainstream plethora of pseudo-intellectuals can only operate at this plebeian level of intelligence, debating and endless supply of labels, factoids and trivialities that have no connection to the heart of the principle being debated. This relates to a term in rhetoric known as “Fuzzy Logic”, referring to the idea that whilst Absolute Truth and Complete Fallacies do exist, there also exists a spectrum of truth in which there can be degrees to which a statement is true or false. Generally speaking, Fuzzy Logic is implicitly understood by those who operate at higher intellectual echelons, but is alien to the minds of the general public.
Applying this principle, it becomes obvious that the plebs in government (the super-plebs), elected in turn by the plebeian population (the sub-plebs) are ill-equipped to deal with the problems of our age, because they cannot understand the levels of the problem, whether they are of a right-wing position or a left-wing position. We are no closer to dealing with the predicaments of the modern age if our leaders do not have the intelligence to deduce the root of the problems, and insist upon attacking the symptoms of problems and not their genesis. Attacking feminism without attacking its cause, Egalitarianism, and the foundation of this cause, which is 17thcentury Enlightenment Philosophy, is doomed to failure because it does not exist as an independent principle, and is only fallacious up to a certain degree in of itself. Understanding the various levels of a problem and having a vision to produce a counter-proposal that transcends and eliminates the principles behind a problem are the components of a true leader that will never be elected in any democratic system.
Herein lies the perpetual Catch 22 for any prospective Philosopher-King: to effect any change within world, one must influence this lumpen rabble, to influence this lumpen rabble, in this day and age one must be elected democratically (for any exercise of primal force and usurpation is treated with scathing condemnation) and to participate in a democratic procedure would be to perpetuate the idea that this rabble is entitled to these democratic procedures. The great curse of the anti-egalitarian: he needs the masses more than they need him, or at the very least more than they think they need him, for the masses have no profound understanding of what is truly best for them and never will.

References & Further Reading: 

Characteristics of various IQ levels, in relation to their ability to understand problems:

Gaining an understanding of Enlightenment Philosophy and the Counter-Enlightenment:

Imperfect Information: