The State

by Principius

Final part of my trilogy of Callo, the mad Khajitt prisoner of the Vogons. WARNING: racist content

The State

I have never made a fuss about political theology. Sifting the truth out from the nonsense is infinitely hard. Clear to us is that we don't really control these elements, but the elementary is left to us in a concrete way. We realize that our constant striving, in fact, can only be proved in the Reality that we strive for. Political theology is, therefore, the only way to consider the State. Let us not forget how important it is to talk about all this, and how little we know about it. So much has been made of explicatives like 'Kafkaesque', but clearly, the real issue is the continued existence and health of the state. After all, the state protects us against niggers.

& ,

(-1

My state gives many cities law - as far as I am concerned, states are made through moments of barbarity against laws, which political theology counters somewhat by limitations on our imagination. Living with states, I would say, really makes it hard for us to understand what we experience in a way. I search then for ways out of the conundrum. As I believe, the state cannot be totally in our lives: it must be reduceable to a minumum. I don't like the state. I don't love the world. But the world that has a state is nice. So, perhaps, good people like the world, even as they shy away from loving evil. The politics of liking are integral to understanding the state.

& |. `

Here we can't be random or abitrary. Our state-program is a good enterprise. Entrepeneurally, the political theology of senses in ourselves is easily resisted, partially because we like the world, as our grasp of the state, somehow, someway, begins to localize some force in a way to maximum alterity, researching this, finding these exclusive aspects, to rehash the factual within the political. We can then only think about the whole of any rehashing of political establishment within in a lawful climate and in a way, a resolute or coordinate system. Therefore, all we do can achieve, resolutely, the lessons of humanitarian extradition, and this makes it work, because it begins to do things for us, for the sake of the world, and this makes it better, really; at least at some point. To explain what we do when think theologically about politics, is to rehash already, usually too much. We are worn out and we feel poor. I will say, then - with my own approval - to think better, more clearly, about the good aspect of knowledge; indeed. Wisdom flows, together with virtue, from actuality, from revelation: in a very real way, our approach to knowledge must be our guide here, that we try to sustenance; in a very real sense, our life is barely capable enough for people to do what we all do, which we have made possible, for some reason. The whole project of thinking about the state seemingly never really begins. I feel strongly about the subject, but somehow never want to describe it any more clearly than I can, and so on - it never seemingly begins. Nor does it end - I think I wrote this when I did. But so much can be made of the project of writing what I will. To properly see the measure of the state, our aspect is cultivated, also, automatically; making our work ever so arduous. Clearly, we are tasked by our mind to do one thing, even though others forceably demand time from us. I read many books. I also write books. Both contribute to the state in Germany: Germany is the place to be. I know this because German means neighbourly, and you shall love your neighbour as yourself. German, Deutsch, is then the main excuse for progress, into desire and into nationality, not for the republic, but for Germany. The language protects the Germans. State-growth can be controlled by express notionality: a grievance to world-beliefs, world-segments. This is where I find my main motivation to make anything cohere in a way that is appropriate to us. Nothing receives anythingified notions to oneself - and, logically, our main fear is the state of something, somethingness. To people, states interfere or not. In America, state discourse explains this acutely, discretely, which means that the whole system of the entrepeneurial class is aware of this, which increases the acumen of the system. In the same way, a wise scholar finds a way to prospr, even in a wicked or dangerous state. We realize, after a fashion, that we allow ourselves to create real-systems, but this must bring a man to glorify his personal pursuit of success, for example in his career, which complexifies the direct situation that is his. For the sake of topical expansion (knowing what one means) the glory of a citizen is not the reponsibility of the state, but rather of the people she employs. Bureaucracies, by this token, are a mark of centralized power, but they can also express power-struggles, that be dangerous for the democatic parliaments, the constitution and the spiritual authorities active within the state. Surely, the realization that what our task is or was or has been is hard to determine exactly for ourselves, is very complicated, for the world. What I have claimed, in the past, is that everything that I wanted in the past is what I deem as important in what the mediocre deems to be universal, but we don't do the right thing in the end, hard as that all is, and we are convinced, fullwell, of our non-demand, our nihilism. States are, for this reason, very much to be celebrated if the state keeps bad elements in check. All states make use of a thing or sense-unitary that becomes official - political, I guess - and this is potentially liberty, a good state-friendship, that allows for us to have friends, as a bare minimum, potentially allowing for everybody to treat each other to actual friendship. When we speak of union, we mean our collective will aimed at individual freedom. Can I really describe political theology? No. I rely on no technique and barely know about what all this stuff is. When someone relies on technique, he has to speak about the crafty or resolutely vindicative aspects of the universe, it is clear that it still doesn't matter to who we are and what we do. In such a concrete sense this writing is for me an experiment, to discover the contents of the absolute totality, totalities, an totality's visage, that hides forever in our mirror. I believe that political philosophy has nothing to do with political theology: here, then, all has been said. The paradigm in existence seeks to unite everything people say with the personal gunmen of the writer. Clearly, I am that writer. Like any Jew, the style of political theology cannot be derived from state-discourse, instead delcaring itself, by its practice, to be based on a kind of brain-washing, in the most positive sense, that is to say a hygeine of mind-body thought an cultivating God-fearing sentiments. Not being Jewish, my writing is aimed solely at writing a wordly or personal book, that shows how big and determined one writer can be, despite the subject, then, being strongly traditionalist. In so many ways, my personal life has been derived from seclusion, loneliness, or perhaps, isolation. The main thing, that drives us, is our uncaring unfeeling desire for great or necessary life. What our world shows is a need for malignancy, perhaps, or a full-well drive, to maintain a sensibility, against others, but above all, against selfhood, both in a strictly personal and strictly humanist systematization, that, in due time, becomes a grievance made entirely useful in a material sensibility, and the state brings its rewards from this. The state can be exploited for insane or even illegal ends, but it doesn't really matter. We are all just individuals. The state can't take note of everyone, and so, many are helpless: this is another formula for us:

_|_ |_| x=x

| .

- . .

The sword represents x = x, that doesn't entail individuality.

I can't make the mesmerizing attitude of things usefully. Whatever happened to the entity that has been called up by heaven. Clearly, certainly, our mystical unity with the Lord is no credential for what we deemed the state-power. If there is madness in me, certainly it is tied only to our fear and ignorance of the fundamental fright that is notable in a certain way. I can't think. I don't know which easy street exists to make me see the way forward, to a life that can be lived freely, if this is at all possible. To us, in a very strict sense, the things we do can only be realized in a totally non-profound, in a sense superficial sense. The work of the written prophecy that mad us know the theological to us, who are there for many reasons, was based on concentrated activity, mostly mental - it does cost energy. No matter how important the work is that we do, we find strict acument not in the activity itself, no. This means that the political nexus of lawful theory, perhaps, is not to be found in our principle mathematical longing for a bigger, higher or more effective truth-exploration or base. Politics are denounced easily, yet it never means that our work should be considered in the paradigm that are traditional; until it is too late, perhaps. But to the mind, politics are useful only up to a point, after which the become ablatedly significant to oneself. Their focus in our personal, tableau-like sense, is on the way we cannot tear ourself loose. Other people's argumentation is way too coherent and so on allow us to think clearly. As our age increases, people are in no sensible way after us, to make anyone feel the way we do about our future selfhood, the desire that we have for the way forward or anything like that. Teachers should take this to heart, relying not on grudges, but always on a message of derivation to get the main thrust of an argument worked out. Time never takes sides, yet it waits on so many people; clearly we are way to trapped by our desire to grow powerful: I see, then, that it is all bullshit; - really. The real question that political theology asks is: Why is there no way to a real democratic constitution? After all, states rely on the mythological to justify their innate ideas about who we are. Like in Germany, the Jews became an enemy as part of the legend-story of Mein Kampf that was Hitlers blueprint, for his Blitzkrieg. This gives us a powerful idea of theory. I realize that, for some reason, I am channeling intellectual work here, almost cosmically: happy thoughts. I realize that, in a way, no other way to life exists, except for us to find happiness. The state that knows unhappy masses is unhappy forever. Our personal consciousness needs a real way out: for us, it is necessary to get at happy thoughts even though people see it is a dangerous thing. They don't realize how they are probably already losing their real life. To realize happy thoughts, the state has to be thought in a political theological way, I think. So the conclusions of political philosophy, we must redeem the main crucial notion, to do anything we might do - the fact of the matter, then, is really quite necessary, but only in some cogent or trivial way. So to get our argumentative high-ground and walk in the light, the only real way we have to get-figure out happiness wouldn't be gravitational theory itself, therefore, never in the way we plan but a wayfairing, happy theory must be, in fact, one that can uncomplexify the entire world. So, even though we know everything systematically and are activated to life through complex systems, the greeat moment of self-identification is the prime thing, happiness itself; which we determine, always, through the logically most easy way to explain empirically simply theory. And that will never deviate from Newton's equations, because they are all based on a strict logic. I am not sure what the truth really means. The essence of the world can't work in our personal will-surrounding, and sure, we live in the world - the world as representational will, or perhaps will-free existence. The to come, as we said, to others, and many say it: the to come; all this works on a real, total principle, a principle that is totally what we ned it to be. As far as I know, political theology always workes that strange need in anyone. The to come, as a principally conceptual mentality, can bring us very near to the maniacal situation of state-sanctioned activity, which is always lawfully ordained, or, perhaps, lawful as a programmatic consequence, a real discovery and that kind of stuff. The highness or majesty of a functionary of the state, I see, is not releant to political theology. The big question of political philosophy is definitely what we think is our total idea or musical chemistry of a nation, that is itself part of the state-power, even as it rests only on the resources of a power held commonly by universalized functions, dereproduced by functionary figures: these live only as the politicians, as far as the citizenry can tell itself apart from the strict, theological universe of states. Let us make an attempt to get the resolute direct to direction, getting the truth out to believing what is known to feeling feelings, but what we believe is invisible to everybody. Our univrsitaries are universities, so intellectual proceedings go through the naturality of an universe. Getting the truth out, about good worlds, is difficult, especially if the state is not healthy. That makes it so extremely hard to get the main points done in a resolute sense of thinking up, definitely; but this is, indeed, the truth about what we know, and we never do anything right. This is the uneasy reality in which our earnestness lies forever, to make-believe the reality for the state, as far as we can tell: our time is running a little bit out of pace. Obviously, the resolution of our strict logical state-citizenship can in nothing exceed the absolute determination of our formulae. State-sanctioned services are no that impressive: taking mighty state as example, we immediately see that no person is really capable of creating bureaucratic divisions - this is the indeterminancy, in fact, towards any absolute a reductionist segmentarium, and that is just what is true in a clear or revolutionary sense. Because nothing is strictly createable under the laws, laws that come from God tend, in a freaky sense - |B_BA and so on, a formulaic mastery is demanded also in such decrees, and for all this, the citizen is a masterful creator, which clearly needs don't thinkeably condescend our drives, our striving and so on, finding little to no, real realities finding little reality in the logic, that we must or may call, realism.

These conclusions then shall speedily cause political theology to be that very truth we looked for in any real way, perhaps because we are so totally oppressed in the life we have been forced into. Why this is the case, nobody can really see, because the fact of the matter is that sick citizens have stolen, murdered and so on, never seeking forgiveness, and this has made their apologies ring hollow; the evil, that all these freaks do, means nothing and is totally useless. But only because everything they do is just inverted by an insane reasoning, that is based on their incapacity to make due. Everything. The foundational regression of the sick, meaningless work of these sick people, I find, is really totally weak, it can't help us feel the thunder of evil - the evil lies in their abolute evil. Even, then, forgiveness can flow from simple things, but the remembrance still can cause repercussive acts to find a basic elucidation, that is to say, a great and dangerous helplessness, to be felt: crime. Crime then is more intensively evil than sin, but judgement, a consequenceof sinfulness, is worse. So the question is never whether a crime has been perpetrated, but whether it has been commited. To continue, please let me be non-deductive in any realizeable sense, for my own pride, because the political evolution of our makings are, absolutely, predetermined by a hell existing in the distant future: a factoid that we learn to come to live with. Here we see the constant threat battering stalward reason. I can once do everything done - eventually our essence, really, is grown with strict eventualities, and so on. Therefore, I think it all really does make sense. Truth is, our limited power is resolute to get what we desire, actively, completely, generationally, into mastery, dealing much and realizing our deepest resolutions, which might, in the end, come down to the state becoming a universal. This really meaningfully relates to everything happening, everywhere, that this world needs. Life in the state is complex, and most people don't really realize the deep truths the state complexifies, but this is the main presence of the state in familial, familiar, everyman daily life, at the level of universal abstractness. We calculate. The people I know to behave wrong are not necessarily calculating or non-calculating. Not at all. I find that they mostly just behave criminally, as far as their power, calculated or not, allows them to do. Bad people are truly horrifyingly preoccupied. To a sane man, everybody who behaves inhumanely or frustratingly is in fact not ever commended, so they are jealous, petty, wicked and stupid. Today there is a reign of stupid. That is truly significant, because our states tremble under stupidity. Some countries respond with callous bureaucracy, maintained by a strict, demanding order. Others respond with revolt. On the whole, states are so oft diseased, because of an overly historicst attitude towards intelligence. In states where communication is non-existent, like The Netherlands, dialogue between state and people happens entirely institutionally. Senselessness proliferates, in the wake of this. In most cases, this doesn't bode well for the state, which becomes an exceptional phenomenon in people's lives. Instead of the state, all society becomes is a syndicalized alienation. This horrifying phenomena is caused by niggers. We can't assume anything based on this, though, however, we realize the danger of black people is mostly economic. From the exmaple of The Netherlands, we learn, mostly, that inhumanity can be part of an ostensibly institutional order, meaning the state is only a law-giving aspect, and all other facets of the law, including the police, are potentially run privately, sometimes breaking the law. Interaction within any state is clearly just a matter of thinking up the best way forward. We don't get to citizenry by misfortune. As far as anyone can be sure of the situation, our way of life is indeed meant as our concrete attempt to accomplish higher goals. Political careerism can contradict the shackles of man's inane striving, and this can be polluting for the whereabouts of powerful agents that residually remain alive within the state-system. To maintain structure, organization in any state takes place on different levels. Realizing how the state actually gets from different situations, as it tries out its great resolutions, is a crucial question, that preoccupies fascist theologistics as well. Mein Kampf is, because of this, extremely advantageous to any political theology, because it admires and mobilizes the fascist theologistics in service of Darwinism biological dictums. Fascism and Nazism have important conflict-aspects, in some ways, simply eying the blind nonsense that irredeemable resolutions, difficulties of intransience, reproduction and evolution, ultimately as a progress inside nature. The political theologian functions in this sense, as a great example. He thinks from principles which are unique to him, and his example lights the way for others - then it is simply works. As far as I know, the making of political theology is a profoundly existing happy-tempered task, in the senses that we exercise, because we can't do too much with this. It really seems quite horrifying that the ones who do find it within their power to create masterful entities, are, in this sense, constantly in danger. The force of any particular entity in this world is limited constantly by limited entities, that can not totally work in any direct sense. Who does everything to systematize his own theological resoluteness, receives the salary of the political theologian; truly. If we are limited by our ignorance about anything we know, clearly our position is not for us, but for all time. We don't get what anything about our personal selves is; we only get the resolution that is a consequence of the purely theological. Verily, our theology is pretty much limited to one or two strict distinctions, which are all totally made to be incoherent, if we aren't careful in everything. To every good, nobody can really bring the political in clear focus, not because it is mysterious to us, but because we can't do what we will without it. The realization, in our breast, that this or whatever exponent is definitely resolute, must be regarded in a totally, mightily deferent sense to let true distinction cohere, then, as resolute or astounding revolutions in the meaning we seek out, because we can't do the right thing in any overt circumstance. Any individual, by this token, then seeks to overwhelm a fundamental resolution, fearing the result, good or no, to relieve the straightjacket of resolution, or redemption, to ourselves. What is real doesn't really matter in a concrete way. We don't know what any of this practically comes down to. But I know that for the sake of everything that has happened to us, Hallelujah, Hallelujah! - the harsh truth remains, at all time that, for this basic, painful lot, that we've become, that political theology is the shelter we make for, with endless longing, great speed. For the good return that is, for this world, the main goal. The speedy return of the prodigal proginy these days, as always, must be seen as, in every way, the goal of every aspect that we can do. The message for the person that we see as the essnce, in fact, of what we call the mirage in this desert I call home, and yet, am forced out of, always Elsweyr. The highest products of our schooling have always been mental, so also politically, the mental has the world in an active reality, an active , political institution. A mean version that is magnified or magnanimous, in a total, wandering meaning, these days, these moments, I call political. To understand this properly, you have to do something new, something revolutionary. Thorough description of the state is never the object of political theology - instead, we search for higher purposes, and there are so many complicated, SPIRITUAL issues locked in the study of theological politics. Understanding theology is pointless for the part that conscerns anyone I suppose, and that is because we can't pursue it very scientifically. But politics, being rather simple in its connection to daily life, is much more dynamical, and can, in some cases, allow itself to be understood. Whatever political goals we pursue, theological topics can be indispensible, because we need that kind of storytelling. In so many ways, our miraculous doing to work things out, is entirely devoid of political resolution, which has made us eerily devoid of truth, life and personal growth. Yet, in our world, many dangerous realities contribute in a very concrete-like sense, to, in fact, a great chunk of the political fabric-shaped geometry, so to speak. I see that the whole of our approximations, in theological arguments, are wholly focussed on worlds that barely cohere with reality. To make our question cohere, we must ask what we, really, are doing to ourselves here: after all, none of us know the truth, about our immediate, resistant attitude towards strangers. Through these mechanisms, that have a place in our real-world experience, our reality can't simply be tied down or relunged at enemies, which limits our options. If all political philosophy is, is a cheap commentary on political discourse, then it can never achieve the soaring heights that political theology achieves. For all that, the political in political philosophy, when approached historically, is, for what it is, definitely in high demand - a system, pretty much, that is definitely not all we can figure it out to be; really. Politically, no one really, ever, understands theological politics, because they are not meant to be, in themselves, theological. Here, then, I will brings the soul of the argument, in fact, back to, in fact, happiness.

This theoretical concept is central to political philosophy, because it does reminds us of the state of nature, which was there in the Garden of Eden. On the whole, our use of theologically motivated words and turns of phrases couldn't distract us from what anything really is. Here, therefore, a lot of problems can be discerned. The idea of political theology is that no matter what we do, there is God to relate his mighty discourse to us and the rest of mankind, in a reflective, erudite and meaningful way. We wonder then, what concepts we can move beyond, and which are forever to stay - for it seems, that mankind, having failed spectacularly in its cosmic mission, needs a resume of life, that can divest all the world from immediately non-intense actuaries, working only to obscure and mistreat truths, at least for the most part. Political theology gives mankind an interspecies discourse, that all can strive for. Not the varous animals, who are well-equipped to talk with humans, but the to come species, that have already, in a way, come into existence, existing, with their own 'states', among the humanitarian order, or should I say, already, tyranny: because it is clear the to come species are not inferior to us, and yet, people judge them nationally unimportant or inconsequential - truly, this is not "evil", because we can't do better or worse, but theologically, everything can be made out as totally wrong, not because it is evil, but because of the identity of a man. Sin is commited for all the wrong reasons. Politically, nothing really comes close to true discourse, but theologically, we realize it doesn't matter. I say then, in evenly distributed populations, the disaster of our personal world is tied to many factors that we don't really get or understand.

To make the sensible discussion on divinity and states possible, clearly the point of political theology is a meditation on the state of nature, because we realize that God's law is enforced there with justice.

To properly understand political theology, I think I shall engage in this activity, that is clearly a big deal, in the way a little Jew writes his Psalm: namely, to anyone, political theology can on general intention come down only to a restoration-reformation with regards to living our life in appropriate styles. Because the best Herod can ignorantly say destructive, despicable, inhuman sentences, that are state-justice, but it is not the state of nature; no matter. The state of nature is no more than any other state buit by glory. All there is for us to do, is restore the meaningful dialogue, as far as we can tell, between a real disaster and a coincidence. Our personal philosophy can't affect our state-function. Sin, then, cannot worry the state-entity: to it, everything is sinful, and we are letting people sin. Its only purpose, in its own mind, comes down to opposing everybody so far as they shall be considered sinful. Let me say, we really have so little to do whatever there is to do, for the world. I am afraid that only the rush of resolution that can do whatever for us. This really means nothing in a factual informative inquiry into this, or whatever, however we can really know why this or anything else really happens. On the whole, I say, we have the most trouble, in every conceivable situation, when we are left alone in our non-evocative, non-rewarding momentous inception, within the true idea, or form, or politics. Understanding why we start pulling this endless language for the sake of politics is remarkably similar to so-called democratic politics. Finding words is exhausting, on the other whatever, I don't know, because now I am not looking for words, but only meaningfully channeling mentalities, for I am a political theologian, not anything; so I am not engaged in bureaucratic bullshit, or something, but I am oing no mroe than reasoningly determining the truth about the world, as far as I can tell. Yet the master is always in command of what the truth is, to us, which can bring the total situation in full view, allowing for changes to happen in a very real way to a world like this. It is a fact, therefore, and the goal of political theology is divine facts. Divinity, as ever, was the real scholarly study, because it pertained to the highest faculties of the mind, namely the intellect. What the facts teach us is, as far as I know, a true power-geometry, that, in effect, politicizes universality as an academically justifiable unit. When people think about politics, usually, they can't begin fathoming how things really cohere, because nobody can really begin to understand to reveal unto oneself what one does; that is to say, it is only once or twice, in effect, that the world appropriates politics to overwhelmingly take note, in a way, of that truth that holds our political system together. It remains clear, everytime, that our coherent ideas can't make any progress possible, inside our otherwise efficient minds. The questions of political prophecy, with regards to classical prophecy, don't really mean trouble for the standards of any tweed-identity, or God forbid, seersucker identity. Seersucked suits. I say that such things are too weak, in fact, for working anything coherently, and the fact is that we can't do one thing to resolutely deem any problem real or unreal, facts, again; perhaps it will never end.

I can, with this in mind, say nothing more than that I consider the State topically unimportant for every political theology, but that our states can only pristine, useful and, hopefully, republican, if they don't give in, when the threat of totally unfactual or, in many cases, unhappy constitutions adn criminal aristocracies keep the people from doing what they believe is best for them. Here, then, political theology becomes inseperable from physics, which is the cause of some relief. Thanks to Jane and so on, this notebook is now warmblooded and effective at making politics act as a humanitarian, but also a well-lit science, and we should not walk in the darkness, but go into the light and walk tall.