The Randy Orton Question

Wrestlemania is undoubtably the greatest stage of them all. The only thing left that comes close is January 4 in The Tokyo Dome. Randy Orton hasn't delivered a real match in Mania since the start of his decade. His matches Legacy, Punk, Kane, and the Shield were all "revenge" matches given to him merely so he could do something at Mania. It seems that Orton is finally treading the main event spot in Wrestlemania 30 after half a decade of bad booking. The question is, will Randy Orton deliver?

It wasn't always this way. In Wrestlemania 21 Randy Orton just got off from a successful 2004. His match against The Undertaker popularized ending "The Streak", and overshadowed both main events at that ppv. The bout outshined both Cena and Batista's debut world title reigns. Tangent: To be fair, every match on the card aside from Big Show's outshined both main event matches.

Two things crippled Orton's main event status. His illogical face turn based merely on fan reactions, and the fact that his main event match against HHH at Mania 25 was a cricket fest. Don't worry, I'll make a HHH question blog next week as a response. The good news is that Orton's a heel again, despite not being the same sociopathic heel the WWE needs right now. The bad news is that the WWE is getting worse at booking matches. Orton could end up in another cricket fest if things play out incorrectly.

I don't doubt Orton's abilities in the ring. While he hasn't had an interesting match since his feud with Christian he's still in his physical prime. It's unclear who the WWE wants to see main even mania, but if it's Orton they better book it correctly. 

Evola's Aryanism and Feminism

Evola viewed the Aryan and the Jew as being anti-thetical. The Aryan spiritually stands for nobility; The Jew deconstructs these noble virtues as base level desires. The Jew is thereby reducing the Aryan into a negroid level. This gives me better grounding on how to criticize Feminism. Feminists are "Honorary Jews" in that they deconstruct all patriarchal virtues as lowly base desires. Men no longer build civilizations to honor the long dead or to support their distant offspring; They just want to get laid!  If you fail to showcase any Alpha-male characteristics, any interaction you have with a female will be seen like that as well.

The Aryans and the Negroids are described by Evola as Northerners and Southerners. It's interesting how most postmodern/cultural marxist thinkers will try to make the Aryan sound like the epitome of "muh dik".  Evola sees both the Jew and the Judaicized as forces that must be combated. It's a redundant imperative, but one that must be reflected upon. Both Feminists and MRA's are lost souls existing only to deconstruct.

Could the same be said of other Social Justice movements? Gay Rights movements function strictly as a  Brahmin movement, but they make similar deconstructions to Vaisya whites; Minority rights activists Judaicize multiple races and help them deconstruct Whites as unpunished "muh diks" to their ancestors. It's time to rev up those fryers: We're already starting to become our enemy. If Chav and Zef culture isn't a dead giveaway, then I don't know what is.

World of Aryanism

Pan-Seccessionism sounds like a step in the right direction, however it doesn't always correspond with reality. A region with a 100% black demographic isn't necessarily going to worship gods modeled after black people; The same goes for Oriental mongoloids. There is some degree of Aryanism outside of the west, and it's much stronger than you might think.

When I think about Hinduism, I usually think of guys that look like Apu from The Simpsons. That's just what comes to mind. The Hindu caste system actually leans in favor of Aryanism. When I think of the religion of Islam I think about guys that look like French Montana, yet the upper sects of Islam are really White. Mohammed himself was a ginger. Come to think of it, most prophets in non-western religions had Aryan features too.

The idea I'm going for isn't "White Man's Burden" liberal imperialism. Rather I'm showcasing that there are objective aesthetics that pan-seccessionism doesn't take into account. There's a reason that most Black Nationalists like to claim that white civilizations like Egypt are actually their own. There's a reason that black Jesus (even though Jesus wasn't necessarily Aryan) became a relevant meme decades ago.

The concept of an Aryan race has been corrupted by Liberalism to mean Dravidian blacks. It also a received a necessary exaggeration by Hitler at the time as a reaction to the demographic/socio-economic corruption Germany had to endure at the time. Under Hitler's standards, Slavs weren't considered white. Aryanism itself isn't as mythologized in The West, but it's proven to be relevant wherever mankind exists.

Written in Blood

Civilization is rooted in savagery. Savagery alone doesn't make for a civilized man, but it forms an integral role in shaping him. Take Lions for example: The "King of The Jungle" is almost always overthrown. One of the greatest republics was formed from the overthrow of the monarch; The same republic became one of the greatest empires via the overthrow of the dictator. Hierarchy at it's most raw is Mufasa, Simba, and Scar all playing their part in the Circle of Life.

The modern system uses Democracy as a means of preventing this process. President's are assassinated, but presidents merely serve as puppets. Things like the French Revolution, or the American revolution could never happen now: Who would we target? The White House? Wall Street? Hollywood? Golden Dawn was praised by the Reactosphere for killing an anti-fascist rapper; That's cool, but the corrupt haven't been punished yet. Many of the Brahmin activists have no Savagery in them; They're responsible for a lot of bad things, but they're effeminate pushovers.

No monarchs, no aristocrats: For anyone interested in a coup d'etat this is a predicament. Even Anarchists are confused right now; The Marxists have no direction, all they have are their universities and Tumblr. Neoliberalism and Neoconservatives both run the game. It's television that feeds on the status quo. If history is still written in blood, it's hard to decide who's blood it will be.

Fascism looks like it will need revitalization. If not Fascism, then something similar. We need something that can strike multiple targets, multiple groups of corruption. I'm not sure if it's an ideology or a movement, but we need it.

The Totality of The American Left

Democracy is one thing; At it's best it was American's Aristocratic Republic. Capitalism is one thing; at it's best it was the British Empire. Around this sphere of the right wing, both these things can be questioned, but together they're undoubtably malignant. Democratic-Capitalism is destroying The United States, yet it's also introducing a new element to liberalism: Totalitarianism.

Totalitarianism is generally applicable to centrist/left-wing reaction. Liberalism isn't usually met with the concept of Totality. Totalitarianism can either mean instituting equality, or turning every institution into one body. All institutions are gradually becoming more politicized; Every creative medium and artistic form of expression is following suit.

In what other era would we care about a Chicken Sandwich joint's opinion of Gay Marriage? The secondary goal of every business nowadays is to represent its thede. Starbucks depends upon it's Brahmin consumers in order to thrive as a business, so they sell Beatles albums and hire dykes.

Academia is less concerned with giving students skills and more concerned with propaganda. The student is propagated to be the revolutionary consumer. The very concept of the citizen has been replaced with the consumer; no longer is the civilian given true duties and responsibilities, for he is merely a bookmark for the producer. Purchasing a product is commonly drawn as voting with your currency. Voting is no longer a civic duty in Trans-democracy, but a mere assertion.

Healthcare is being pushed as our Nation's biggest economic issue. What was once a matter of Fraternal Societies is now a pressing economic matter; As consumers it's easy for us to take something as simple as housing, higher education, and currency investments and turn it into a political dilemma.

The main issue with this strand of Totality vs other strands is simple: Nationalism is now considered largely evil, therefore the body formulated exists to protect an isolated peoples; not a nation, rather a country. While The West is largely suffering a demographic problem in it's major cities, the interests of the people are to mask the problem with democratic-capitalist reform.

The Unexamined World

Socrates said that the unexamined life isn't worth living; I want to take that one step ahead: The unexamined world isn't worth living. My biggest fear is becoming like Jacque Fresco or Nelson Mandela: They're still alive with 90+years to boot, but their worldview sucks. They had all this time to become Emperors of Right Wing darkness, yet they chose a different route. Baby Boomers are nearing the end (finally), yet they still have time to make amends.

One of the biggest critiques of Neon Genesis Evangelion is that Shinji is undergoing so much internal struggle, yet it has little to do with Mankind's Demise. He literally learns nothing about his father's Instrumentality plot, Seele, or the corruption of Nerv. This would be okay if he was a side character, but he's the main character. At one point his role becomes that of a GOD and he doesn't even know it.

Most Liberals would agree with everything that I said in the first paragraph, while being the biggest perpetrators of this delusion. The life of a liberal is the life of a perpetual dream in the low church, and perpetual decadence in the high church. They want Michael Jackson betas and John Lennon Alphas; They want the ambiguously weak and the meaninglessly strong.

Contemplate on your life choices, but also look into the external world. The answers that you're looking for may be on the outside. This advice isn't just something I found on a fortune cookie.

My Top 5 Favorite Wrestlers.

5.  The Undertaker: Both me and my Best Friend had an infatuation with The Undertaker as kids. His character was appealing to both kids and adults. Kids were terrified and enchanted by his character, while adults saw a long-haired badass. Not only did his character become more layered with each era, but he lasted numerous decades with the same name. He's had a 5-star match, numerous championships, and numerous main events in Wrestlemania. I doubt there will be anyone else like him in the industry.

4. Booker T: Booker was my first favorite wrestler: I saw him as a kid back when he had dreads and thought he was badass. He always had a crazy look in his eyes, along with a ridiculous breakdance maneuver: Whether he was in the midcard or in the main event I thought he was awesome. No one else can look like lil wayne on bath salts and make it as masculine as he can. I mostly knew him in his WWF days after the invasion angle; Seeing his WCW work proves that there's more to love (he dropped the n-bomb in the early 90's like a boss).

3. Cody Rhodes: At first it seemed like he was a slave to his past: He's the generic son of Dusty Rhodes; He was the younger brother of Goldust; He was a generic "create your own wrestler" in his rookie years. It's safe to say he would be thrown under the David Flair and David Sammartino rejection pile. That was until someone thought it was a good idea to turn him into Dashing Cody Rhodes, then turn him into undashing Cody Rhodes, then change his character 20 other ways. Around this time I finally got back to watching wrestling, so seeing the way his character evolved caught my interest. I do hope that he wins the WWE championship sometime next year; I was hoping he would win it since 2011.

*Naysayers: The common critique with Rhodes is that his in ring work + lispy,droning mic skills suck. Rhodes has an interesting way to present an in-ring story plus an energetic moveset that both kids and grownups can enjoy. He really gets into his character and is believable despite not having the most elegant voice or movement.

2. Edge: Adam Copeland spent the bulk of his career as a midcarder, yet that all changed when he cashed in his MiTB on John Cena. From then on he stayed firmly on The Midcard scene unlike other perma-midcarders. It's too bad that his neck injuries forced him to retire in 2011. His dynamic in-ring moveset, storytelling ability, and blonde-Tarzan appearance made him cool as both face and heel.

*Naysayers: Edge is mostly a bad boy: Nothing more, nothing less. Yes, he does have a few layers to his character from time to time, yet his character will always say midcard more than main event. Despite this criticism he can play against the big stars more believably than some of our current main eventers. The characters that can become national icons like Hogan, Austin and The Rock are hard to come by. Edge is an awesome main eventer regardless of who's the pinnacle.

1. Chris Jericho: It's obvious that Jericho is my favorite wrestler. He's a badass both in and out of the industry. Yes, he selflessly puts over lost causes like Heath Slater; Yes, sometimes he's demoted to the midcard. But for Christ's sake, the guy is a rockstar. His character always becomes layered; His in-ring ability is still physically intense; He's still creating awesome in-ring promos; and the crowd is still popping. He's a beacon of accolades despite never being a top draw.