Endless Night

Occasionally I enjoy reading or rereading an Agatha Christie novel, for light entertainment. I recently finished her novel Endless Night where Mike Rogers, the serial killer and psychopath, the villain and narrator who conspires with his lover Greta Anderson for Mike to capture and marry poor, impressionable, credulous little rich girl, Ellie Guteman to murder her for her money. The villains succeed but are caught in the end. The Rogers build their dream mansion on Gypsy’s Acre, a haunted, cursed, evil place where evil long lingered, and it seems to me that Christie believes in demons—as I do--that some spots are cursed and haunted, and unfit for inhabiting lest, the evil spirits there tempt human sinners to commit grave, serious crimes for gain. The Rogers were warned by the gypsy woman not to build there and live there, but they dismissed her dire warning, so their lives ended up being quite tragic. Far too often humans do not heed warnings as to what they should avoid and stay away from. I enjoy Christie’s remarkable character development, and how true is their hunches about human nature. For example, Santonix, the gifted architect who builds the Rogers’s mansion is part evil, so he knows how evil Mike and Greta are and what they plan, so he builds a mansion to reflect the complex relationship between the three main characters. Let me quote from Page 154 where Christie’s characterizes Santonix as a perceptive genius, almost clairvoyant who knows who people are, even better than they know themselves. He is such a developed individuator, that he has learned about himself, and through his deep, vast, wise self-knowledge, based in truth and reality, he thus is able to know others as they are, even when they have not discovered who and what they are: “’What a strange man he is,’ Ellie said thoughtfully. ‘You mean he knows the future.’ ‘No,’said Ellie, ‘I didn’t mean that. He knows people. I said it to you once before. He knows people better than they know themselves. Sometimes he hates them because of that, and sometimes he’s sorry for them. He’s not sorry for me, though,’ she added meditatively.” Then on Page 156 MIke’s mother chides him for rising above his station, that being ambitious is unnatural, accursed and somehow an affront to God who will strike down the conceited and proud, and this too seems to be a trope which Christie mentions again and again. Here is the quote from Page 156: “’Too grand for the likes of me, eh.?’ I said. ‘I didn’t say that lad.’ ‘But you thought it.’ ‘It wasn’t what you were born to, and no good comes from getting out of your station in life.’” My response: Christie the Dame, millionaire and famous individuator also is a British snob who thinks the burghers, workers and poor should accept their lot in life and not seek to better themselves, which is malarcky. Her nature is complicated and self-contradictory too.

Justice Thomas Speaks

I saw an online clip of Justice Clarence Thomas speaking on The Second Amendment, and the videotaped quote was aired on Facebook on 9/17/26 by American Firearms Association, of which I am a member. Here is the tape: “The right to bear arms shall not be infringed. It assumes the right. It does not grant the right. Yes. And then so you go First Amendment, etc., etc., etc. Where does that come from? And that’s what I was interested in. What establishes this whole notion of liberty? What establishes this order of right? And so it matters if you think the government is the primary giver of, a granter of rights. And you receive rights and benefits from the government versus you have the right and the government receives its authority from you.” My response: Thomas is brilliant and wise for rights come from God to the individual, therefore the government receives its authority from us, the governed, and as individuating supercitizens united in focus and action, we can and should impose our rule upon the government and politicians. I also have a short but rather related quote from Marco Rubio on 9/18/26: “Our rights come from God, not from our government.” I could not agree more.

Natural Gifts

It has long been my contention that all humans are viable candidates to self-realize, that a successful career and life plan of self-realization is much less about one’s natural gifts—yes, geniuses are a bit ahead of the average person—than it is about one choices, one character traits: if one loves and esteems the self so that only life lived as an individuator will suffice; whether one has a vision and is imaginatively creative (aptitudes which develop as one uses them); if one is willing to put in the time and hard work to get ahead; if one has the perseverance, patience to see it through, a willingness to sacrifice short term pleasures for long-term gain

To Be Great Is To Be Misunderstood

I can imagine my friends, neighbors and family have been so standoffish for decades due to what hey regard as my megalomaniac sense of self, and my profoundly shocking bragging about my own superiority. If I am lying, mistaken or out of touch with reality, if I am not the great soul and prophet from God that I claim to be, then they are correct and God smiles upon them for opposing my overweening pride, my bald assertions, my outrageous claims. If I am telling the truth and am what I claim to be (I am and know I am.), then God does not smile upon them for rejecting De’s prophet. I am almost 72 & ½ years old, and I am as isolated, unknown, unrecognized and marginalized as ever I have been since I started writing Mavellonialist philosophy in 1974. It occurred to me several days ago that I am a one-man band and that will not change. I will not necessarily die alone, but I will likely go on ignored, not acknowledged or receiving the attention and respect which I have earned and deserve. So be it, the people have spoken. I forgive them and wish them all the best and pray for them. I am not an exceptionally gifted person—I have just done what any human being can do and is to do, answer affirmatively, with one’s whole heart and soul, the divine invitation and commandment to self-realize for a lifetime as a living angel. The paradox is this: as a person grows into his personal great-souledness while alive, his singularity, his individual soul becomes proportionately unattractive and repulsive in social circles to popular, mediocre nonindividuators, the vast social majority of humans. The consequence is the more one individuates, the more the wisdom and advice which one has gleaned and is willing to convey to the masses, to that extent necessarily a sleeping people will ignore, repel and tune out advice beneficial to these persons and their communities, their nation. The masses listen to whom they should run from, and are suspicious of and are hostile to who their real friends and benefactors are. It is the way of the world, and all I can do is get my works published for posterity. That is the best possibility.

Objective Morality

I am a moderate and yet I am mostly an objective moral realist. This may seem fuzzy, contradictory or muddled-thinking, but it really is not. God exists and God is love. God is a moderate too so the divine moral code and natural law which God constructed and bestowed upon us earthlings as our code to guide our thoughts, decisions and actions. This code mostly is objective and yet it is also intrinsic (like Platonic Forms) and subjective and conventional. Moderation is not equivalent to relativism or the stance that anything goes. Still, a clear, crisp, effable moral code to live by is a must for human survival, for human happiness, for humans to be allowed by God to enter the kingdom of heaven after death.

The State Of Yale University

I get a free electronic newsletter sent to my gmail account from The Washington Free Beacon. Below enclosed is their article which was written on 9/18/26 by Eliana Johnson. I copied and pasted it below and will comment on it. Here it is: “ Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more An F for Yale University President Maurie McInnis Eliana Johnson Sep 18 Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more An F for Yale University President Maurie McInnis Eliana Johnson Sep 18 READ IN APP (American Enterprise Institute YouTube) Yale University president Maurie McInnis released a report in late April from a committee on trust in higher education that acknowledged the issues afflicting the Ivy League, from exploding tuition to runaway grade inflation and theatrically intolerant student activists. But the question remained: What would Yale do about it?” My response: Exploding tuition, runaway grade inflation, and theatrically intolerant student activists (woke true believers for their cherished cause of cultural Marxism). Academia is barely functioning, and Dennis Prager warns that it is near impossible for our youth to be sent their and not be culturally and morally corrupted by the conformist insanity which they are inundated with. Johnson: “ McInnis appeared at the American Enterprise Institute on Wednesday afternoon to answer that question. “And yet she couldn’t quite say how Yale is going to tackle this problem,” our editors write. On admissions, McInnis defended Yale’s holistic approach against a “test-based system” because Yale doesn’t want undergraduate classes in which “maybe everybody’s going to want to be a physics major.” (We would like to see the meritocratic, test-based system that produces an entire class of physics majors as opposed to a class of students with diverse academic interests.)” My response: Yes, we need to return to a meritocratic, test-based system which all have to compete inside of. Johnson: “Rather, she said, “I want to be sure that we both have physics majors and arts majors, that we have people who play on 1 of our 35 Division I athletic teams or play in our Yale Symphony Orchestra.” Yale has furtively brought back the requirement, starting this fall, that all applicants must submit ACT or SAT scores. But informed observers aren’t buying that Yale has truly reformed its ways. … McInnis’s response to how Yale will tackle grade inflation was similarly dispiriting. While we might think it’s “easy to fix grade inflation,” she said, it actually requires “multiple institutions,” as well as “K-12,” because Yale students arrive on campus so fragile they are actually incapable of receiving anything but an A. Students “have never seen anything other than an A their entire lives, and it can be really challenging for the faculty who are the first trying to give that student that grade that is not an A,” she said. Maybe it’s time for a committee on faculty fragility?” My response: If professors or students are too psychologically or emotionally fragile to not be given an A when the student doesn’t earn it or deserve it, it is time to kick that student and professor out of college. Johnson: “ Were Yale to implement an honest grading regime, she added, “What you would hear from the students are [sic] ‘Well then, you’re putting me at a disadvantage when I apply to medical school. You’re putting me at a disadvantage when I apply for other sorts of graduate and professional schools.’ So that’s why it kind of needs to be a collective conversation.”” My response: The school is not putting an underachiever or low performer at a disadvantage: by their own laziness, they have put themselves at a disadvantage and cannot be coddled, though they are young adults—it is time to grow up and quickly, taking responsibility for one’s poor choices and lackluster academic effort. Johnson: “ We don’t believe for a moment that graduate and professional schools wouldn’t take into account what a Yale GPA really means were the institution to chart its own course, just as Yale itself takes into account what GPAs really mean from more and less rigorous high schools across the country. But that would mean standing up to activist and entitled students, something McInnis evidently isn’t yet prepared to do. Don’t worry, though, there is a committee, and “we will see what comes out of this committee.”” My response: Student activists and entitled students need to grow up and mature, and earn the grade or flunk, full stop. Johnson: “ The Washington Free Beacon awards this performance no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

The Duty

 

I read many things, and I enjoy Agatha Christie novels. I will quote from her book, Murder Is Easy, and then comment on and develop the theme of her quote.

The murdered doctor’s wife, Mrs. Humbleby warned amateur detect Fitzwilliam that great danger was afoot: “She said, rather unexpectedly, ‘The world is a very wicked place, Mr. Fitzwilliam. Do you know that?’”

My response: Being a Christian and a Victorian, Mrs. Humble by firmly believes in good and evil as real forces at work in the world, at work spiritually, morally, socially, naturally—and that is my view too.

Christie: “Luke was a little surprised. ‘Yes, perhaps that may be.’

She insisted, ‘No, but do you know it? It’s important, that. There’s a lot of wickedness about. One must be prepared – to fight it. John was. He knew. He was on the side of right..’

Luke said gently, ‘I’m sure he was.”

‘He knew the wickedness there was in this place,’ said Mrs. Humbleby.’”

My response: She lays out a moral program which the good Christian is to practice in this Vale Of Tears. She is to believe that evil exists, and that Jesus, God and the good deities lay a moral duty on us to believe such, know such, and to fight such. One is to fight evil, one must be a soldier of God on the side of right, pushing back the darkness and cruelty of evil, for this is the Devil’s world, and we are born sinners. We run in packs, and Satan owns our groups, our group-living, our altruist ethics, so this wickedness is entrenched and institutionalized, widespread, enduring, persistent, almost impossible to dislodge.

Dennis Prager, our wise, decent Jewish elder and mentor, had made a claim nearly identical to the one made by Mrs. Humbleby: That we are not just to be good and loving, but are here to fight evil openly, officially and relentlessly, that is what it means to be good and that may be the primary route to heaven.

I agree with all these views and conclusions and I have incorporated these points within developing my moral system, Mavellonialism.

Now let me point out how clever Satan is: I believe he is most effective when his most ardent followers do not know they are working for him, whose motive is selfless love of humanity, operating and acting to make the world a better place, all for humanity which they do and avow that they love.

The fanatical idealist is cable of utter viciousness and murderous, genocidal violence against those standing in the way of the implementation of his program. This true believer is a lethal, living demon who would be shocked to realize what he is, and how his efforts fail miserably at making the world a much better place.

My conclusion: Yes, fight wickedness, but remain modest, humble and detached as to one’s own capacity to be violent even to kill In the 20^th century, historically unprecedented killing was done in the name of idealism and reform, so this motive to fight evil and do good is easily inverted and one serve Satan rather than fights Satan.