About Civilization & Natural Habitats

Bulgarian. MagyarSerbian. Spanish.

How many times have you not heard praise of ‘civilization’ and the ‘civilized’ man? These city-builders and city-dwellers are universally praised as the most advanced of men. But are they? But were they really?

The first known (…) civilizations on this planet were all built not by Neanderthals, not by racially pure Europeans; not by the Nordic man most European racists today think so highly of. No! They were built by mongrel populations; in Mesopotamia, in Egypt, in Persia and in the Indus Valley. Later the Greeks built cities too, but only after they had been sufficiently racially mixed not to look like Nordics anymore. Later the Romans too built cities, but only after they too had been sufficiently racially mixed not to look like Nordics anymore.

The civilization we have in Europe today too was built by ‘mongrels’: the Romans. Yes, if you are in doubt, know that all cities, all civilization, in Europe, is based on and stems directly from Roman and Judeo-Christian civilisation. The racially pure Europe was barbarian and uncivilized. Britannia. Gaul. Germania. Scandinavia. Baltica. Slavia. Dacia. Aquitania. Suomi. Scythia. Sarmatia. Illyria. Thracia. Etc.

If you think I am wrong, then think about this for a minute. First of all, take a look at cities today: who are drawn to them? Compare them to the countryside and then tell me: where do you find the most mongrels? Exactly: you find them almost exclusively in the cities. And if they can choose, almost all of them go live in the cities. Why? Because that is the natural habitat of the mongrel. The natural habitat of the racially pure individual on the other hand is the pristine nature; un-touched, un-soiled, un-polluted, wild, dangerous and beautiful. You find close to no mongrels there, and if you do you probably do because some racially pure individual has dragged them along.

Civilizations are horribly self-destructive: with time they all eventually fall. They all go down in tragedy and leave the citizens dead or dying, eliminated by their own decadence, crime, stupidity and the degenerative life-style of the city, and not least by epidemics. The few who escape these death traps quickly die in nature, because they are no longer naturally fit for life, after living for generations in ‘cities’.

The ones who are the most likely to survive the collapse of a civilization are those who do not live in cities: the commonly much more racially pure individuals living in the countryside, as close as they can get to their natural habitat: the pristine nature…

PS. You live in the city, and you hate it? Well, maybe because you are not meant to live there.

So why do you?… 


114 thoughts on “About Civilization & Natural Habitats

  1. Pingback: A civilizációról és a természetes élőhelyekről | Magyar Thulean Perspective

  2. Pingback: Au sujet de la technologie et des compétences naturelles | Thulean Perspective Français

  3. As concerns cities I believe U to be correct. Without an agricultural hinterland they are unsustainable
    These are places that thrive on the ridiculous. Professions like advertising, fashion,gyms ,banking the rise of the merchant. All unnecessary.

  4. Hello, with all due respect I believe you have it the wrong way around with regards to civilisation de facto being mongrel. Civilisation has many stages in its life cycle, initially it is not mongrel, but after a civilisation has PEAKED and exhausted its native biological, genetic ‘capital’/ ‘wealth’ whatever, then it begins to suction in a replacement demographic. The modern western civilisation for example had a declining birthrate and its consumerist/ technocratic imperative drove it to import millions of racial aliens.

    This is a fact though: the civilisations begin their lives as homogenous ethnicities and cultures that outgrow their genetic seed as a dominant community conquers and enslaves neighbouring tribes (who are initially similar enough to be compatible with the culture) but as they grow larger over a more diverse population, the genetics then becomes the limiting factor and steady decline begins. Genetic attrition.

    Judeo-Christianity in Roman Empire for example, was when the Roman Empire outlasted its usefulness and conquered alien genes i.e. the Jews which then began to express themselves not explicitly through military conquest, but through a corrosive cultural subversion. ALL CONQUERED TRIBES DO THIS and every conquest has its price to pay — it’s a two way street.

  5. I also hope to goo where I belong, Europe and I am currently working towards that goal.

    I don’t belong in South Africa, I’m German and Scandinavian by blood and that’s where I should be.

  6. Well, I see people from all parts of europe commenting on his dream of living in rural parts, and I tell you, do not give up this, my situation is worse than yours, I live in a small town in southern Brazil, almost immigrants will not and things like that, most of the population (around 90% each) are descendants of Europeans, like Northern Italians who came from Veneto, or southern germany (yes there is white people who live in Brazil, more than you think), but lately in Brazil has been an increasing number of factories and enterprises, including in my city, and since then imported here some Haitians and other African immigrants, something a bit worrying in my view, what I mean for you, born in Europe, which is a Brazilian white boy never gives up some day be able to return to his true home, you who are already in your home is that they should not give up. I hope you understood my point of view, my English is very limited, because it rarely post on the blog.

    To conclude: Varg, may not look it, but a lot of people will be with you, from different parts of the world. And continue with your blog.

    • I liked your comment, for me people like you are very welcome to the blog, I believe that Marie and Varg have the same opinion as me about it. I know very little about their country, but unfortunately, what I know and hear speak, does not encourage me at all, miscegenation, crime, pollution, not to mention more. I could not believe when you said was Brazilian, you by your picture appears to be a German-Slavic blend, good to know that there are still white people and blondes in Brazil.

      greetings from Austria

  7. Pingback: New TP posts | Ancestral Cult

  8. Pingback: Цивилизацията и Естественото Местообитание | Езичество

  9. Pingback: Sobre la civilización y los hábitats naturales | Hermandad Pagana

  10. One thing I have the need to say is that cities are not meant to be lived on,cities are not meant to be a place to raise children,cities were used as means of political centralization,as a fortress,as a place of gathering resources and stacking up,in some cases as trade centers,etc,but in the past regardless of how big a city was,people would always live in farms,camps,very small villages,or forests,around the city, Around,not inside the cities,except for some individuals usually related to politics and military business.

  11. Question: You have been talking a lot about Indo-Europeans in this blog, as well as other cultures. What’s your opinion on Kurds?

  12. Because I cannot afford to live anywhere else. I escape for a few hours as often as I can and living on the edge of a city there is greenery where I live.
    My town was a farming town until the industrial revolution and only after the last war did the farms began to disappear to make way for people fleeing the now colonised inner city.
    It retains it’s beauty in areas but more of the cities bilge pours in, mostly English but often underclass types. Perhaps living on the edge of civilisation will give me a chance to escape it’s destruction? Who knows.

  13. How could more likeminded people get support in survivalism?
    I have one illusionary and one more practical suggestion

    Illusionary: If it should ever happen, that the leaders of a whole state adapt to the idea of survivalism, then they should introduce the tool of a two-years-civil service, where all the willing city-inhabitants (maybe also the non-willing 😉 ) have the chance to re-learn such essential skills like lifestock and crop farming, slaughtering, proceeding and preserving food, cooking, hunting, gathering, self-defence, making clothes, understanding the cycles of your countryside, building or restoring your own cottage, traditional medicine, repairing farming machines, building and operating ecological wastewater systems around your cottage, etc.
    Each such ‘subject, which should be learnt by doing aswell, may last at least about 2 months and one could choose some elective subjects to deepen the bacic knowledge.

    Now my modest suggestion: For example, people with a farm, who have the need for some seasonal help, but who also would like to “teach” other likeminded people could arrange some harvesting-holidays on their land …

    • “Now my modest suggestion: For example, people with a farm, who have the need for some seasonal help, but who also would like to “teach” other likeminded people could arrange some harvesting-holidays on their land …”

      I really like that suggestion. Many times one wants to do something but lacks the connection with important people to do it. They did something similar in the “cob” house building concept with “workshops” and such. The key is creating at least a network where like minded people can find resources of people who already have the knowledge and more importantly want to pass on that knowledge. This takes a very patient and understanding farmer. Not sure how realistic it could be but hey…

      • Then again…the human component always tends to complicate things further than needs to be. Sometimes when things get too “organized” in a sense…”groupthink” becomes a bad thing. Its a delicate balance…one I don’t pretend to understand. Personally I’ve always felt much more comfortable on the “outskirts” looking in. Anything too organized tends to get farther away form its original purpose. Even with good intentions…

        • hehe, … yes, when I once had been at a workshop for interested, potential dropouts, I suddently felt I am a person who maybe still hasn’t found the suitable group OR I am a person who actually likes to be at the ‘outskirts’ of the ‘outskirts’

    • I’m pretty sure NS Germany did that exact same thing as your first suggestion.

      You’re second suggest actually exists already. There is an organization called WWOOF (World Wide Organization of Organic Farmers) that does that exact thing. The basic premise is that they hire people to do various activities on their land such as you listed and accommodate with food and shelter. It is all year round typically and most require a minimum of a week stay. It is worldwide and requires no previous experience.

      • The suggestion of a civil-service – even for the unwilling – was not meant seriously (it was just a joke in brackets). Thank you for helping me to clear this self-produced missunderstanding. And thank you for the WWOOF hint … 🙂

        But, isn’t it sad to see, how easily the reflection of archaic wisdom nowadays can be stigmatized or misunderstood as an epigone of the civilization-product, named NS (which actually never intended to support a fragmented society, tribal communities or any other state-independent forms like survivalism)?

        Actually the current German state also reveals some political aspects of paternalism, which I would rather match with civilization in general (along with NS, SU, USA, UK, etc.), than classifying these aspects within a political worldview stipulated by them: left vs right, state vs economy, etc (all these huge systems which historically more or less lead to the increase of Hybris and to the alienation from nature).

        Let me show a seemingly small but very contradicting example: According to the Germany law each household has to pay a special television/radio-tax for supporting the so-called independent, state-owned TV-stations – no matter if you have a TV or not (I don’t have one).
        So, they force each household (including survivalists for example) to pay for the system-friendly coverage of news, they still demand money from the brainwashed for their brainwash. Maybe such social mechanisms of power always existed, in different forms, maybe somehow even in tribal systems. But the one fact, I cannot ignore is that the so-called liberal states always brainwash their people with the slogan: “Except the good modern western states all other nations are not free societies.
        Imagine how the subconsciense of a young boy or girl will be adjusted by permanently listening to such comments …
        For three years I had also lived in a communist country, before I “escaped” to the “west”. After having experienced both, and when comparing the mainstream in the current western societies with the mainstream people in a communist county, I come to the conclusion that most of the “eastern” people at least are less brainwashed with the illusion of a life in a free country. Further they are less hysterically talking about values and emotive terms and most of them much earlier know how to focus on the practical, achievabel things in life – whatever it might be: maybe spending more time on your summer residence (Dacha) instead of having to spend many years to release yourself from a very very subtile ideological brainwash or instead of engaging in civil society groups which later reveal themselves as instruments or at least frequently instrumentalized organizations (e.g. AI, Greenpeace, etc.).
        Many NGOs started with good intentions when they had been underdogs, but in the course of becoming established organizations many of them, to some extent, are getting dirty in the mud of global political, do-gooders’ contradictions.
        You can find the case of the persian woman ‘Ameneh Bahrami’, where AI insisted on the state of Iran (in the name of human rights !!!) for prohibiting the tragic female victim of an insane acid assault taking legal revenge.
        (By the way, after having been given the right to take revenge, she voluntarely abandoned to do so. I think this is a model case for justice, dignity and forgiveness in a very tragic case)

  14. Pingback: О Цивилизацији и Природним Стаништима | The Call of Thule

  15. For me, I would love to live in the country. But since I am only 14, and have to live with my parents, I have no choice. And of course money will be a problem in the future, getting a countryside house here in Sweden. But in time, in time…

  16. I’m peasant, was born in a family of peasants with all ancestors being peasants from the both sides, I even was born in a village I live now near to it. Now I have to live for some periods in a city because of the studies in an artistic craft I don’t need for survival per se but which I need for satisfying my metaphysical needs. The city I live is a capital, and you can hardly call it a “city”, it’s rather a settlement of united villages, with some Neoclassical buildings left from the times of Russian Imperial occupation, and some ultra-ugly buildings here and there from Sovietic times. Ironically in this “city” you find more forests inside it than around it, it is totally sank in trees. With all that I hate living here, every time I go to my home in countyside it’s a real holiday for me, there I find myself alive, there I find myself as human being. In countryside I was born in countriside I will die. I better die of cold sleeping in the fields than live in “comfort” in an ugly urban area.

    • You see, the people I make part of never were city or “civilization” builders, nor in ancient times neither now. They were always tightly bound to the ground, and always lived a simple and harsh live. Even in our days, many(if not the majority) of those living in the “city”/capital have a house with a garden in the coutryside were they always go to work at, and in most cases they don’t even use the “newest” technolgies to work the garden were they grow their own food, but do this as many centuries before.

      Even in Romania, the most of the cities/towns weren’t build by natives, but by germanic or hungarian people I think.

      My people remind me of Saxon people of Britain during the Norman conquest, this conquest started aproximatively almost 2 centuries ago here(and still continues), only now the Normans are “Russians” who came to save us from our uncivilzed way of life and to make us be a part of their great civilization.

      • Yeah, and all of this started to change so rapidly during the industrial revolution. The rural population shifted towards urban centers, the railroads also affected a lot the growth of cities and towns. Today we can see megacities (concrete jungles) that can even be observed from space, like a spreading cancer.

  17. Pingback: About Technology & Natural Abilities | Thulean Perspective

  18. Pingback: New TP posts: About Civilization & Natural Habitats & About Technology & Natural Abilities | Ancestral Cult

  19. I’m actually not originally from a big city, but I fell into the trap when i was younger and stupid. And trust me: it is a trap. You need to work your way out, and it might take all your effort. But trust me kids… when the family unit has been destroyed, and society is multicultural, being in a big city with some tech job is the last place you want to find yourself in when things go wrong. I don’t want to sound like a jaded old man(I’m neither) but think of yourself in a big city when employment runs out, or the world faces some very difficult situation. There is nothing and nobody(of value) for you to turn to. You need nature, and you need people who are like you and who you can cooperate with quickly, and easily.

    • You’re not sounding jaded to me. You are speaking the truth. Reality is a hard pill to swallow. The fact is that this “trap” is harder to get out of then most people believe. I speak not only of the physical, but the spiritual , the mind. Yes, absolutely. People in the countryside have a completely different view of nature and the world. They are forced whether they like it or not, to deal with the earth and all its constituents on a daily basis. Therefore the mindset becomes ingrained. It becomes a part of the person. Just like when you are forced to thrive in a “modern city” , you adapt your mindset to be able to exist and thrive; also to just keep your mind and soul alive. People underestimate just how hard it is to get from one frame of mind to the next. Let alone, actually take the plunge. The plunge is only half the battle. Their is a lot of mental work then that must happen before, during and after. Its not to be taken lightly just what an undertaking this is. As humans, yes we need nature. But recall, that nature is also not kind. Too many “fairy tales” and not enough reality of what it really is. Nature doesn’t bend to you, you adapt to it. You learn to work symbiotically. That’s the opposite of what most people do on a daily basis. Even some who already live in the countryside.

      • Reality is a tough pill to swallow. I don’t know how many people truly understand what distaster they will be in if their lifeline is cut in an atomized world. Multiculturalism won’t save you. The grocery stores won’t give you their food to you for being a good guy. And I am just speaking about a personal crisis. I am certain that the coming generations will be devasted by a poverty they didn’t see coming. This will awaken Europeans as it has before. I think I am experiencing the cusp of the starting point.

        Perhaps some countries have more generous welfare systems, but at least here welfare does not even come close to supplying average rent, let alone any food. And I’m not speaking about a free handout. I’m just stressing that when things go wrong in a big city, you can expect your face to smack into the pavement without the kindness of others, government, or the kindness of nature. Yes, nature has cruel aspects, but so does our unnatural world. At least many of the hardships faced in nature end up improving our resolve in ways which we are designed for. I’d rather work hard in the forest hunting an animal than I would working on construction site where the art form is lost, all the materials are poisonous, and everything is powertools, and maximum speed and production. Even the “human” arts are detached, and you slave unnaturally. There are some types of effort which energize and others which dilapitate.

        I agree that living in the country does not necessarily lead to living symbiotically. The media and technology is still available to them and people there can still be prone to using modern machines and chemicals and using them in a reckless manner. I will say though – something which I’ve said before – I cannot SEE MYSELF in a big city. Everything is obscured. In the country, just as the space is open, so is my ability to see myself. That can be a hard pill to swallow, but there is also a great satisfaction found in this. If this is life, I don’t need to run away from it. In this state I can understand the old tradition directly. In a big city it is just a longing. Of course, I would not be singing the same song if I was in the Amazon or something. I am speaking about the Northern Hemisphere, which I am designed for.

  20. Citing the destruction wrought on nature by civilization and city sprawl as a claim for superiority has always been an idiotic claim to me. Yet many in the so-called “White Nationalist” movement will immediately point to this aspect as “proof” of superiority. If they so emphatically believe this, then perhaps they are in the wrong movement. Perhaps they should join those who so avidly embrace and do everything they can to promote such a life. Europeans never were meant to live in the decay and rot of the cities; surrounded by metal, stone, concrete and gray monochromatic structures. It is voluntarily imprisonment. I cannot comprehend how anyone would want to live in such a dismal way. Drugs, crime, rape, dark skin, long noses.. everywhere. It is just depressing.

    Land is hard to come by these days. Perhaps I’ll just build a shack in the woods 😉 I’d encourage everybody else to consider it also. Building your own cabin and living Thoreau style would be a great experience I think.

  21. What if I am a “mongrel” that wishes to live out in the countryside/wilderness? I am a North Indian Brahmin, currently living in America, planning on moving to India (specifically Kashmir) later in life when I can afford a move. I take not much offense at the term mongrel, I guess I must acknowledge with the history of conquest and colonization I must be one.

    • You can see what I say this way: if you feel drawn to cities, then you are ‘mongrel-minded’. If you on the other hand feel drawn to the countryside, then you are ‘pure-minded’.

      So you need not take offense by anything I said here. 🙂

      PS. Hinduism is the last Pagan religion still big. Treasure it!

        • I wouldn’t call myself domesticated, Drēogan, I actually take some offense to that. If you are not calling me that, then I apologize as it is hard sometimes to tell intentions on the internet. Anyway I have been discontent with city life and the state level society as a whole for many years ever since I was 14 (I am almost 22 now). White folk aren’t the only ones dissatisfied with the sheer insanity of our current unsustainable type of society. I think to an extent all people have some inclination to want to be immersed in nature (away from the city in the countryside, forest, desert, etc…), maybe I am wrong. Personally I feel much better out distanced away from all the metal, concrete, and large crowds of people living their lives like pigs festering around.

          I recently went into a desert in California with some of my friends and it was an amazing trip. WE heard coyotes, avoided snake holes, and watched the night sky (not fully like man once did, but nevertheless it was beautiful). Have you seen with the grey vision of our animal brethren? It is something amazing to be out away from the confines of a city.

          • I wasn’t referring to you. I just meant the people who prefer city life. They are domesticated. They are artificially altered humans.

        • Yes, ‘domesticated’ is probably the best term for those who feel drawn to the cities.

      • “PS. Hinduism is the last Pagan religion still big. Treasure it!”

        I do!

        And I am so happy to see the rise of Buddhism and Hinduism throughout the Occident.

        I wish I could read this blog but the background makes it difficult.

  22. Some thoughts as an encouragement for all who wish, but still cannot settle down in the countryside at the moment

    The longer I am still forced to live in a city, the more I hate it! So, for several years already my belief in civilization is somewhere within the minus degrees. I absolutely agree that civilization inherits the “ideal of HYBRIS”. According to our experience ‘civilization’ aswell as ‘nature’ in general, they do reveal a basic principle of ‘life’, which is also one of the main issues of all mythologies, and which we can never escape from: the principle of ‘rise & fall’
    But, this does not at all make me thinking in a relativistic way. The opposite is the case: wisdom is, to know, to learn, which kind of ‘rise & fall’, which modus of ‘rise & fall” does really suit to me, when I wish to live a healthy life – healthy for body and soul, as two aspects of the same. I think the healthiest life, no matter if for a single individual, for a family, a community, a race or even in case of a whole species will always be the life according to the principles of the certain land, where you live, the certain landscape, your homeland or whatever you would like to call it.
    In my opinion only a life (including the childhood) in such archaic modus of ‘rise & fall’ can guarantee, that we can live in accordance with this principle with honour and courage, far away from self-destructive hysteria and hedonistic greed.

    Probably most of the people here, who are really fed up with the so-called (modern) ‘reality’, but at the same time still lacking in opportunity for starting a life in the countryside, for many of them – I guess – it often can be very frustrating to live a life as a misplaced. So, thanks to Varg, who already managed to drop out and become a survivalist, we all can share his experience and the spirit of what we once might achieve if we try hard! But it will be hard indeed, because for all who have grown up in a city it first requires to beat the threshold of civilization which had been implemented inside of us. And then, once we really dare (or have the opportunity) to truly drop out, then we will have to redo, we have to re-learn all these necessary and important skills of a rural, of a hunter-gatherer’s life.
    And once we have managed to do this successfully, we need to take care, that our offsprings will not make the same failiure as our past generations did, like the greed and illusionary hope for a better life, which made hundreds of thousands of rural people in Europe leave their villages and move to the cities, where they had been lured by entrepreneurs and companies. ‘Greed & Luring’, “Risk & Chance’ like ‘Rise and Fall’ which is not bad in general – but it depends on which modus is made for us to live our life in dignity and sustainability.

    Finally an example from the daily life:
    Due to an excessive overloading with the myriade of unconscient sensory impressins, our ability for a deep perception of a single situation within a crowd is degenerated. But every single day I am doing some kind of consciousness-training, some kind of perception-training against this degeneration. A simple example from daily life: today, when taking the escalator at a place I had to go to, I realized how unnatural it is to stand in a crowd, to stand on the step of an escalator (!) and don’t care about the stranger who is standing next behind you! This would never be the case in a natural life situation, where you first have to check out carefully, if the stranger, who came across by chance, has friendly intentions or if he has hostile intentions with you.
    This is a very simple but helpful exercise for all, who wish to, but still cannot leave the city at the moment: in every single moment of our city daily life, we can easily try to imagine how we behaved as dwellers in the countryside, as a member of a tribe …. doing this as often as possible in daily life situations, is very motivating to finally surpass the threshold of civilization in ‘Reality’.
    Varg, I hope your positive neighborhood relationship with the villagers where you live (according to an interview I saw on Youtube) still remains positive and will not influenced by the defamatory and sensationalist media coverage.
    I think for people who really plan to become a ‘drop-out’ the neighborhood issue is a very interesting question

    • Saumakos,

      You make some very practical and logical statements here…thank you for that. Many who have had to endure the modern infrastructure at some large part of their life, lack the insight to even perceive what it is to do the opposite. Thinking you know and KNOWING are two very ,VERY different things. Not to discourage, but most people who have had to thrive in modern life in some way wouldn’t have the slightest clue how to deal with the opposite, let alone re-learn. Its much, much more difficult than what people “imagine”. It takes a very, very strong courageous person. A person who has a strong will and endless amounts of determination. The wisdom to listen to their intuition and the wisdom to know you also can’t do everything alone. As you said Saumakos, wisdom to to KNOW, to live, to learn. That is a very powerful statement. Most people here sorry to say…don’t KNOW. They think they know, they imagine they know, but experiencing so is very different. Not to discredit those that come here to Thulean Perspective but some of you are living in a little bit of a “dream-world” when it comes to this subject of going back to the countryside. That concept is much different when you live it. Most will go back to some form of comfort as it is very hard to become almost child-like in a sense and have to re-learn even the basics to sustain yourself let alone a family. Some of us already have that background, myself included. I grew up in survivalist family in my formative years. Yet, if you have found yourself in a position where you have had to somewhat adapt to the modern due to some difficulties getting out of it…its actually quite hard to step backward. In fact, its a huge challenge. Then, beyond that…once you get over that hurdle re-learning life as you know it is a lot different than what people “imagine”. Many people think they are practical/logical when they haven’t the slightest clue. Many people think they can adapt much easier and then reality will knock them to the ground time and time again. Not trying to be overly pessimistic here…just being kind of realistic towards this kind of transition from one life to another.

      • Who’s most people here? did you take as survey or..?

        I think that when one is living in a town or small city has no other choice because different circustances, work or study. If it’s work well, it depends, if it’s study they can move out from cities after they finish (my case). Also if one is only interested in lets say, finances, high tech dependant studies and professions,etc. then the countryside lifestyle wouldn’t be for that person (yes, there are some people who abhor that kind of life and believe cities are the best thing ever and will last forever) they have become ‘urbanites’.
        The one who’s commited and did a research of the basic stuff, books or simply getting experience first hand by a family member or a friend, can and will reach his goal to live that life.

        • “Who’s most people here? did you take as survey or..?”

          In reply: I was pointing to most people whom over time have made comments linking the fact that they don’t live in the countryside or have desires to get to that. Inference based off of factual comments. Not saying that is not prone to error.

          My comments are not meant to offend. Or even if they do, I hope it at least gets someone to think more practically about what it actually takes to do something like this. Its not what people may “dream” it to be. Not saying that’s necessarily a bad thing, just may be very different from what one “imagines”.

          You can do all the “research” you want and yes it may give you a “leg up” in one sense or another. But, what I am saying is that the reality may be very different from the perception or “research”.

          More power to anyone who has family or friends doing this. That’s a wonderful support system. However, that is probably not a reality for a good many. Even so, one must learn to be self-reliant and find their own strengths and will.

          As far as survivalism and lifestyle…it has its practical and not practical sides. What you choose to do with both is to the person’s discretion. It is easy to go either way but hard to find the balance in life and with nature and still keep your natural logic in place.

          Personally, I’ve never wished to be “normal”. What in hades is that anyway!? Following the “norm” to be aligned with everyone else or “connect” with certain people? No thanks! Being true to my individual nature and blood is way more important even if that falls in a realm far from all. As I have gotten older and see things differently than when I was a youth… I strive for simplicity and naturally that means being in accordance with nature (good and bad). I have seen the good and bad from my years growing up and use BOTH accordingly to find balance and truth. Reaching for certain things doesn’t always mean the outcome will be what you expect or want…but all is valuable in the realm of learning and growing as a human being.

          It is wonderful that a place like Varg’s blog exists and presents topics and notions, even truths that are not otherwise seen. As such…many wonderful human beings find themselves here. But one thing to always keep in mind…is the answers are rarely ever simple to many things…such is life. The simple can be complicated and the complicated can be simplified. One must find and put into practice their own truths and not rely on others’ accounts of what “reality” or “the right way to live is”. Being honest with yourself is a good place to start…what lies ahead of that is a lot of hard work and sacrifice.

          Just all opinions of course…

          • Fair enough. Is just sometimes you have to clarify a little more so it makes it easy to understand what you want to express. Of course that getting the experience first hand will tell if one is ready or not, but research will always help compared to those who come with nothing. I agree with the normal part, if by ‘normal’ you mean as the measurement standard of modern society, because connecting with likeminded kinsmen is a great thing.

            • The internet medium…got to love it. Everything that’s said can be misconstrued a thousand ways…the purpose gobbled up by the “perceptions”.

              Connecting is good…reflecting and acting better…finding out for yourself through yourself, BEST.

              HAHA 🙂

                • I use smiles sparingly as to put an emphasis on them when I use them. Too many smiles= up to something or delusional. HAHAH In real life…I am the same. 😉

                    • Over in Russia and many other countries…you are considered “up to something” and not in a good way. This is one of the cultural misunderstandings that run replete. That and things like inflection and tone. A Russian for instance may seem “loud” and “cold” to an outsider, but the fact is that they simply have a different way of expressing themselves in tone and “looks”. Arghhhh, it’s one of my pet peeves…the levels of ignorance by the masses.

              • Well, everyone has their own style of writing and expressing himself on the internet, so not everything can be misconstrued, unless one is being incoherent.

      • It is interesting, several times already, I have heared, that children having grown up in survivalist families, later they wish to become ‘normal’ and adapt with the mainstream. It must be very dissappointing for their parents … but probably they didn’t find the right means to avoid this. Maybe a good mixture of (semi?)-liberal homeschooling and a (practical) belief/cult/’religion’, which can vividly be perceived in daily-life, in the nature. Maybe this could be a good way to avoid one’s children falling away from you … but this is a very difficult question, which perhaps always needs a bit individual adaption, needs wisdom and empathy from case to case.

        It is a natural thing, that the administrator of a group has to make the decision between “I only want to allow the very few, extremely likeminded people taking part” AND “I could allow quite different opinions, as long as they are respectful to each other and as long as they have at least one crucial thing in common”.
        So, I really cherish Vargs attitude to enable such an inspiring blog together with people of different background, but who all might somehow contribute and learn.

        All the politicians and media representatives, who are believing that they are the defenders of democracy, would be proven wrong, if they were willing to understand Ôðalism and different inspiration for Survivalism (see: Varg’s friendly but authentic answer on Shivnaz just a moment before).
        Exactly because several people might have an illusionary image of a survivalist life, I regard it as very important and extremely valuable, that he also posts such practical issues here – and he is convincing, because he IS really DOING it! This blog is really holistic, it is connecting the practical aspects with the spiritual aspects.
        I have to admit, that it is the very first and only social-network I have ever posted in.

  23. Also, not sure about the Aztec and Inca civilizations. They seem to have developed independently. And I don’t know of any climate impetus.

    • I guess “why at that time?” then. Just happened to reach that population level after so many years after the Ice Age (which I assume would have restricted population size)?

      • I think the most interesting question to me is where we came from. Why the fossil record of our ancestors appeared a million year ago or so. And don’t tell me it’s “evolution”. I’ve mathematically proved that impossible.

        I am less concerned about technology. I think it very important to live in a rural environment and keep in contact with nature as much as you can. But I also see the value in participating in our society today, with the challenges it brings, etc. I want to grow and be challenged. I can do that in pure nature, in street fights, in studying, in modern struggles, in video games, in books, etc. Obviously, I’d prefer to do it in pure nature, but I see the others as opportunities as well. I think if our modern society wasn’t so corrupt, we might think a little different from some aspects of modern life. I prefer to correct each specific case, rather than toss it all out.

      • But you fail to address the MAIN point here: GOOD versus BAD technology. yes, the Vikings had technology, but it was GOOD technology, so your whole point in relation to that is seriously flawed. 😉

        • The Vikings chopped down trees, but only so many that the forests recovered sans problems, so even their ship technology was still GOOD.

          The ship building turned into a BAD technology when the age of colonization began, and left almost all of Europe’s forests with ‘broken backs’ — unable to recover anytime soon.

          No, I don’t say anything is 100% good or bad. I speak in general terms.

          About your exploration dream. Sure, that’s fine, but you also have to relate to reality, and reality is that there is too much radiation ‘out there’ for us to survive even on short trips in our own solar system. Yeah, those who claim the Moon landing was a fraud are actually not that ‘far out’: you will probably need something like 50 cm of lead covering your entire spaceship in order for you to survive even a trip to Mars, and how on Earth are you going to get that load off the ground? And how cost-effective will it be to do so — only to send you away into what is essentially certain death (because as it is today, you would not even know where to go, to be able to find anything useful).

          Oh, and I can add that the Mars colonization plans we hear about in the media these days are just about some people (‘you-know-who’) who try to make rich people (who dream about space travel) give them all their money, and then they will say that “we didn’t get enough to complete the mission”, and then they all stay here on Earth… (or they make [another?] scam film, making us all believe they actually went there).

          Further: is man ready for space? Would you send the modern man, essentially a complete moron, into space, and hope that he will do fine? Maybe we should actually wait a bit, and let us live healthy lives for some thousand years, and become better men, before we even start thinking about that.

          Right now, our biggest concern is to fix the world we live in. That’s it, really.

          Yes, I agree that we could keep a lot of technology, ideally everything, and use it for good, but…. as it is now, technology needs to be removed, because it is causing our own destruction.

          • Varg,

            Your comment about “you know who” benefitting from space exploration possibilities is actually part of a hysterical plot in a Russian movie called “Русалка”. In the movie, one of the main characters works for a company that is actually selling plots of land(or something of the like) on the moon. Its funny in the movie and just plain impetuous that in “real life” people buy into this drivel. I mean seriously…who would be daft enough to blindly buy into this notion?! Wouldn’t one at least try to see whether that even makes logical sense?! I don’t believe Varg’s that far off there with that comment. I don’t personally know enough about space exploration or physics or astrophysics to even delve into this but both of your perspectives are quite possible.
            Problem is that in the realm of possibility…most things actually can tend to make sense. The world needs a lot of “fixing” but I don’t see all that much action just reaction. People believe they can inherently change…but I beg to differ. Its just a bit more complicated then one cares to admit perhaps.

            • I think that conscious change is quite rare. I thought the other comment you made in this regard explored this topic quite well, and thoroughly. For me, this comment ties a few things together, because of the rather extreme notion of space exploration. Here people debate the idea of a “means to an end” in a rather symbolical fashion.

              We speak about morals, good and bad technology, habits, abilities, and potential European migration from the Middle East to Ireland. There are some possible contradictions which trouble me a bit in all of this. For starters, it seems that most people believe there are too many people. So, why try and wake more people up? Are there not enough people already living in the countryside to fulfill the population goals? And if this elimination of the excess is positive, than why try and convince the excess to overwhelm the countryside? Often times the disaster scenario seems to be one which relates to excessive human causation. So, is the threshold going to change? I don’t think so. I think there is simply a limit, so let the limit be broken. Can any of us really stop it? And if you do halt it then you what will do if humanity doesn’t destroy itself? You will be stuck in limbo for that much longer. Perhaps best to let it run it’s course.

              All I can see is that there is the need to secure survival(to the highest degree), and a sort of buffer of protection in light of the modern world and the destruction it causes and will pursue to it’s possible exhaustive and deletory limits and conclusion/renewal.

              Since there is an element of impossibilty in changing the course of mass movements of unconscious hordes, is it then wrong to ride this wave in order to secure your own protection? And is it possible to secure your own survivial and protection without it, since it engulfs everything within it’s reach. If you are not extending it’s reach(can you?), then you only serve to push the monolith to it’s determined endpoint, and to add your little bit of force which may or may not matter. Hard to say. So in this sense, you aid it’s destruction. Planes, cars, computers, guns, electricity, hollywood, etc, might not be in any way the world of good, but if you use it to destroy itself and secure your own freedom and good, then perhaps you are still good in doing so. The playing field is not level, and this must be taken into account, I think. Perhaps, I am wrong, but I have been entertaining these thoughts.

              • It’s just about waking up the right people, and ensuring that the right people survive. So there is no contradiction.


                Am I not releasing CDs? Am I not driving my cars? Am I not using my PC and internet to spread Pagan ideas (in an attempt to ensure their survival)? Etc. So that can be explained very simply: I am not a hypocrite, and I am not self-contradictory. I am in fact riding the tiger…


                • I think it clicked shortly after I wrote my message. I think I understand better what you are you doing, and of course that you are riding the tiger. It was over a month since I read that book, and I thought I understood it, but I was also unsatisfied with my understanding. Apparently my mind was still trying to piece it together, and your recent writings seemed to have contributed to this. I understand that although paradoxical, it is not really a contradication or hypocritcal.

                  If I analyze your use of a car, you use a car which needs little repairs and so can cause the least damage in that you don’t need to replace it and it’s parts, too often.
                  If I analyze your music and blog, I can see that you use it to promote good things where you could be using your name in many other ways that wouldn’t benefit anyone but yourself and your family. You don’t need to do this, but you do. You make the best of the situation for others, I think.

                  My trouble is has been that I don’t want to ride the tiger because I think that at first you will be involved in things which you don’t want to be, to a higher degree. It goes against who I want to be… I think that as long as you keep the good in sight, and always strive to continually minimize the degree to which you have harnessed the harmful in life you can be OK. And once you get to higher ground, you do what you what you are doing: minimize your harm, and do as much good as possible. But first you need to get there.

                • One more thing I want to mention: Since the path is the only path worth taking, I see that it must be taken with a fixed-purpose, willfully, and without any trepidation. The fact that it goes against the true sense of good, makes the act accurately described as one ultimately of honour and courage. If there is any fault to be found, it is with the ones who made the rules.

          • Well, I think we would want and also need to build civilizations again. I think it is perfectly possible to build civilizations that will work, as long as they are homogeneous and have a totalitarian system (ref: Sparta).

            PS. I am glad to hear you enjoy ‘The Ways of Yore’. 🙂

          • I’d thank you but really I owe credit to the brilliant woman who actually put together the article. I am glad you enjoyed it…nothing makes me happier than sharing great things with great people! 🙂

        • The curiosity of discovering something new and the joy of creation seem to be an inherent aspect in all of us, more or less – but at the same time it is a paradox.

          There is a paradox in history (including the speculation about the future) and for me there is also a strange paradox in studying history, because in the course of reading and reflecting about history I didn’t only gain a better understanding for recent politics and crises, I also lost my remaining little belief in civilization (which can make quite depressive). But luckily I still love reading all these interesting stories of history, which means I am not bored to death  and I can distract myself from anger about contemporary society, since I still don’t have a garden to be busy with every day. But isn’t that paradoxical?

          Reflecting history I learnt that the evaluation of a historic event or maybe of the whole civilization heavily depends on the specific zoom and perspective of a historic question. But in general there are two opposite tendencies of possible evaluations: the cyclical worldview versus the worldview of progression. A paradox?
          For me there is one derivative of civilization which stands like a metaphor for this paradox: stock market!

          At the beginning the invention of stock exchange didn’t really harm the economy. At the beginning it was even quite beneficial for the development and progress of the whole society. However in the course of time the stock exchange based economies started revealing negative effects in the form of the emergence of globally thinking elites, who didn’t have real attachment for the land and for the people in the regions they eradicated with their egoistic interests. At the beginning it was helpful to calm down the masses by providing them with the fruits of this stock exchange based economies, like TV, cars and entertainment, etc. and by telling them that these negative social and environmental phenomena were just preliminary side-effects. But several decades later people were not so easy to convince, that there is no need to worry about the accelerating rotation-speed of stock exchange based economy – a magnet-like economy, which productivity and growth was only surpassed by its vulnerability and the fatal spread of social distortion, even into the most remote corners on this planet. Everybody knew that this acceleration once would lead to a huge implosion with annihilating result, but meanwhile people got used to this madness. Everybody knew that every progression will once have an end and everybody knew the later the regulation comes the more devastating the turn will be. However just few people were willing to end their free-rider lifestyles or stop hunting for illusions.

          Economics is still teaching the students these theories of progression, although many of them have been proven wrong after the staccato of crises. Economics want us believe in eternal (linear) progress and self-regulation of markets, while politicians want us believe in the benefit of manmade regulation and control.
          Maybe similar tragedy always existed, but the more global and interdependent the economy becomes the bigger the threat for each of us. This is one of the reasons to prefer smaller-scale, independent, decentralized and sometimes even less technique-based structures. To achieve this step “backwards” into a wiser lifestyle we must achieve some kind of modesty, the ability to regulate our curiosity and our pleasure of creation, at least in crucial matters.

          Even the best intentions often worsening things more than really help to solve a problem. Of course man can and shall always search for improvement and knowledge, as long as he doesn’t get addicted to hubris, as long as he doesn’t think his intellect could be a better regulation-mechanism than the mechanism of nature.
          As Varg said: better searching for applicable wisdom here and now, better than always searching for diffuse accumulated “technical” knowledge (which is most times for the benefit of few)

      • It is rapidly easy to agree or disagree with someone or something and leave it at that. It is much harder to try to find the balance looking from both sides. Even harder is looking at your own shortcomings and seeing how they affect the entire picture. Most things of value may present themselves at a time when you least expect…thus leading to people missing the mark. The Hardest is enacting a lasting change, therefore and in my far reaching own personal theory…changing the structure of your DNA for the better (adapting better to change and environmental stimuli allowing for optimal assimilation with the surrounding environment, no matter what is presented).

        -The agreement/disagreement is pretty much modern society( see right vs. left, etc.)

        -The balance are those that realize something is wrong, change temporarily or even for extended periods of time…but eventually revert to their old ways or something of the like. Actual lasting change is harder than many like to admit.

        -The last, looking at your own shortcomings is where most people fail. This is why modern society is where we are at today. That is just the beginning though, that is precisely where the change must start. How can you get better or find better ways if you aren’t even familiar with who you are?(“good”, “bad” and everything in-between). It is only after identifying the problem, you can begin to fix it. The fixing part is much harder than people think. Why? Probably because change is something genetically we have gotten so bad at. Was this the case in the past? Sure…but perhaps in a different sense, something we yet cannot identify and maybe never will. Honestly, one can only hypothesize or at best argue…but no one really knows. Personally I prefer it that way. It leads to great incentives and stepping outside the realm of what we think ourselves capable. I believe what may escape most is that change is not definite…its not this or that or anything we can point to. Its something that forever must be morphing to actually be. Note I say morphing and not completely switching gears. This is where people get stuck. Oh, so now I have changed for the better and now my work is done and if I continue on this one path then it is right and the end all do all. Harder than staying on a path, is knowing when to get off of it in order to get back onto it…in order to find a better way of doing things. Not enough people step outside their own little realms(whether they like to admit it or not), outside of their notions in order to see that there may be something to that. “When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.” That right there is a really hard concept for most to grasp. Why? Well, perhaps it is because most are looking for something else. Back to the initial point which was, often things of value present themselves when we least expect that is why it is so easy to pass them by.

        Not that I am any better than the next…but I simply refuse to just take a notion and make it a truth just because. Neither history or people find truth for me. I have to actively seek it and In my humble opinion…my work is never done. That’s a hard route to follow. Much easier said than done.

    • That’s true, even critical minds only have more or less vague images of the past. But I’m sure, that even without much knowledge about ancient life, it’s only a question of time and of course a question of the right attitude, then many ‘drop-outs’ should be able to develop new forms of magic, sorcery, cult, survival techniques or even morals. These will be derived from the nature they are living with, the certain place, the landcsape they respect and love. (I guess “The Ways of Yore” is also very much inspired by Varg’s life in the french countryside and his enthusiasm to sense this part of Europe).
      I once got to know some people from a ecological movement who were drop-outs, and I really respect their choice for an alternative lifestyle. However I feel, they are to much idealistic and by this – I would say – they are still remaining inside the mind-setting of modern society.
      Accordingly, many of them follow the do-gooder’s Zeitgeist of an arbitrary usage of idealistic terms like ‘human rights’, ‘freedom’, ‘solidarity’ or ‘democracy’. In general these ideas which might be not bad, but unfortunately they will degenerate to empty words and even become moral clubs as a tool for controlling the masses. I think sooner or later such ideas/ideals will always degenerate, if they are not grounded by the practical, non-idealistic but respectful life in the nature.
      Once I read a very convincing sentence from a drop-out: Those drop-outs, who start this new life with too much idealization, they will fail and give up early. But also the careworn ones, the cynics, who are not bluffing themselves with a whitewashed image of the nature, they might also do something wrong, in terms of dropping out. The right way of dropping out probably lies somewhere between.
      If you do it right (right attitude or belief) then you know a self-sufficient life is not easy, but you still finish all tasks with an inner willingness and dignity.

  24. I live in the city because i have no money and education to buy a house away from it, i left school when i was 16 but had to get back at it again last years because i was wondering what i could do because i was so lost, i chose sound technician because i had some experience into it and enjoyed it.(i alway like to record music) But the thing i want the most right now is to leave this stinking pile of shit town for the country side, where i can have some peace and some animals. but this only may be in a few years. I’m sick of fighting against how ”society work” and being broke as fuck since i have no real ”Education” for this system, so i ”hooked” back into it. Why cant we all be raised and be teached a traditional job. I wish i could have been raised in this kind of family but i have been thrown away in the realm of school like most young fellow out there. Sometime i want to throw it all away and ask my buddy who’s building log house to be his apprentice and to go live in that 413 citizen village with him and my family.

    My situation is pathetic. Struggling to find my way since im fucking 16 years old. but i can feel something changing.

    Sometime i wonder, what about your child? What will they do for a living? Yes being homeschooled is wonderfull, but what after? send them as an apprentice at your local freemason?

    • Unfortunately I have experienced that one’s ‘career’ also can get stuck, no matter if you have a higher education or if you have foreign country work experience, if you can speak many languages or if you had been willing to move for a job-offer, etc. (this is the reason, why I still didn’t have the chance to make my drop-out-plans come true)
      It is a worldwide phenomenon, the poor academics, who not only don’t achieve what they hoped to, but who also invested time, money, diligence and hope, invested in vain. (At least I do understand how hollow most of these “well-educated” busybodies actually are 🙂 )
      So, I suggest you to choose your profession carefully, but maybe sth. like handcraft or maybe an apprenticeship on a small-scale ecological farm would be reasonable for a future dropout.
      Referring homeschooling: For me, as a former teacher, it is one of the best things Varg had chosen to do. Thanks this is (still?) allowed in France. In Germany it is not possible to withdraw your children from state-influence. So, in the future it might be good to link up with similar-thinking families in the region to enable contact to other children when they grow up.

  25. I think it wise to differentiate between urbanization and scientific knowledge, yes? Since both are commonly understood as “civilization”.

    Also, it is clear to me that the first “civilizations” (highly-concentrated population centers) were in Mesopotamia, in Egypt, in Persia and in the Indus Valley, because these were the only fertile areas in a large desert that formed at around the year 4200 BCE. The different tribes living in the vast area had to migrate to the green river valleys. Naturally, the more industrious and intelligent tribes ended up ruling the population centers and planned out cities using slaves (which people of equally industrious and intelligent tribes like in Europe could not subjugate to an extent anywhere near comparable). So cities were “invented” out of necessity, not because they were better in any way. I think this is the only way to explain all these civilizations appearing at around the same time and in a desert region. The technology etc eventually spread to Europe, with Greece as the gateway.

    • But… those areas weren’t desert at the time. Ancient Egypt for instance, was forested, just like the rest of Northern Africa. I think the other areas you mentioned were forested too.

      • That was during the Ice Age. I’m talking about a period between Ice Age and current situations. It was some kind of savanna climate I think, but not desert.

        • Ok.

          I am not sure what to think of the ‘urbanization versus science’ part.

          Today we obviously at least need much technology (a result of science), not least to defend against hostile powers with much technology, but ideally… technology is holding man back, and keeping him or making him a degenerate. Lazy. Stupid. Worthless. We are probably better off without most of it. Science in general is a good thing, but it is best when not dependent on technology.

          • I agree certainly with the defense technology. We should have an impenetrable shield of super lasers or whatever we are able to do. I guess use of technology in our daily lives is just another moral thing, in that we should use moderation. Sitting in a chair all day eating chips/crisps with A/C units blowing on you and playing computer games is equivalent to sleeping with a bunch or prostitutes or whatever (well, perhaps not, but you know what I mean). They are both immortal, both unhealthy.

            I kind of think of “technology” in each specific case that arises. I think calling “science” as a unit is a mistake. It is just propositions that can be used in any way intended. Just don’t get lazy, or use it as a crutch.

        • Ah, but Egypt is not like the rest of Sahara… I think the Nile makes and always made a huge different.

          • I think it does just around the river, like an oasis, but most of Egypt is pure desert like the rest of the Sahara. There were probably always more people living there than in the less fertile (but still livable) areas. The theory is that when the desert dried up completely, these populations wandered into the river valleys, and like a funnel, accumulated on those zones.

            A good way to solve this puzzle I think would be to see if there were any cities at all that existed before this drying phase. There was farming, so that is a different case. But I’m thinking that urbanization was cased by this migration to the valleys.

            • Also, not sure about the Aztec and Inca civilizations. They seem to have developed independently. And I don’t know of any climate impetus.

              • Hi Drēogan,

                I’m just reading this discussion, and what you’ve written is fascinating.

                As far as the Aztec and Incan civilisations are concerned: The Aztecs came after the Toltec, and the Toltec in turn were after the Olmec. However, even the Olmec civilisation appeared relatively late in the scheme of things. My hunch is that the Olmec civilisation was an offshoot of older civilisations outside of that territory, analogous to the way the Greek civilisation was hugely influenced by the Near East for the creation of its civilisation.

                The earliest known civilisation in the Americas was Caral, in what is now Peru. Significantly, the Caral civilisation, like in Mesopotamia and Egypt, was situated in a fertile river area surrounded by desert… So a similar geographical pattern, but on different continents.

                In terms of how Caral’s climatatic-/crop growing conditions changed though, I don’t know. But as an a priori, it sounds plausible that the forming of civilisation could have been to do with surrounding areas becoming less fertile and that the displaced populations crammed into the river valley. …..

                ….. Though as I’m writing this, I’m thinking it through, and wouldn’t the following also be possible?: That the population size simply increased after the Ice Age; and that when a population had reached a “critical mass” of density, the people started to form what could be called “civilisation” anyway – that is, without the need for surrounding areas becoming less fertile for the process to happen. In other words, the necessary population density was reached because of the innate productivity of food production in such fluvial areas, hence there was local, sustained population growth. And when the population size became dense enough, the part of the population which was strong and inventive enough began controlling the others, and increasingly complex mechanisms were created to allow this: i.e., “civilisation”. So there was no need for surrounding areas to have become less fertile in order for this to happen. Occam’s razor seems to work here…

                Anyway, here is a relevant documentary which I saw some years’ ago: well-worth watching:

                The Lost Pyramids Of Caral

                And here’s more info (in Spanish) on Caral, including nice aerial views:

                • PS: Assuming you speak Spanish, and just as a caveat: it seems that they are exaggerating on that website about Caral being contempory with Sumer. Maybe they aren’t, but it’s difficult to get accurate info on such things due to political and economic motivations. Anyway, the main reason why I linked to that site was not for the text but for the aerial views.

    • Surely, innovation and development to a certain degree comes from the need (will?) to find a solutions in a distress. But on the other hand we could also point on many human’s affinity to greed, getting more, growing higher … or let me paraphrase it in a more striking way: why did our great-great-great…great-great-partents several hundred thousand years ago leave the comfortable jungle (where the gorillas are yet living)? … Why could the Industrial Revolution (IR) happen? If no villagers from the countryside had moved to the cities, to find a job in the factories, then the IR couldn’t have happened.
      Now, it is often said, that the population-pressure on the countryside made this could happen … but, I also would like to remind to the fact, that most people lacking in wisdom (or at least in historic conscience) and many will build their houses closed to the river or beside the dyke … until another 80 years later their great-grand-children will dye in the course of the breaking dam.

      In one sentence: Civilization = getting from bad to worse

      • It is in that struggle some of the most brilliant things are created: i.e. almost every piece of Russian literature, music, etc.

        same can be said for many artists brilliant “masterpieces” through the ages. It’s only in the afterthought that many will see the true picture. Anagnorisis in hindsight. Thus is the human stain I suppose…

        • Surely! Mine aswell not.This metaphor should only express that people in the past lived a much simpler and healthier life in accordance with the nature. Then, as we can see in history many times people became curious or greedy and started to discover new areas, colonized new territories, formed huge unions, etc. I think the spirit of discovery, conquest or the will to develop sth. these are not bad per se, but seen in a sober light it can lead to many complications in the future. Finally life will always be somehow contradictions. On some courses it might be more contradictious on others maybe less, which one can try to find out by experience.

  26. I could never live in a city again. People going from one climate controlled box to another living the majority of their lives in an artificial environment totally disconnected from nature and reality.

  27. How could you raise children in a city environment; it’s filthy with pollution, vermin, high crime and noise. I can’t imagine what living in a city must be like? When I am out in the countryside, I’m so pleased and grateful, I have personal space, breathe the fresh air and drink in the tranquility of my surroundings. I feel I belong, my memories stir of places I played as a child, it’s recurring adventure for me, why as adults do we become obsessed with time? Spending as much time as you like, is the right way. I’m smiling in thought of those halcyon days when I played all day in the summer sun. When I go out I always end up regretting how much time I’ve wasted around the house when there was so much outside to experience. I will have to get my bike out for a bike ride tomorrow, because this post, it’s has made me count my blessings. The cities one day fall, beauty will triumph and nature will reclaim the earth 🙂

  28. I am living more or less on the countryside, but I was studying at the university of Vienna almost for the last 1 year. Vienna was horrible! Everywhere grey artificial stone, plastic and metal. The buildings were too high to see the mountains at the horizon. Everywhere marxist propaganda and strange people. 2 or 3 times within this year I have even seen people with long noses, strange hair, long beards and black clothes and hats. Something I have not seen my whole 20 year long life before except in TV, internet etc. Being there was horrible, I do not understand how someone can live there by choice.

  29. I live in a small town in Paris south-western suburb. 10 years ago it was an incredible place to live. The “best” part, the most green and quiet area you could live when close to Paris. Polite, hard working, intelligent, well… Europeans people only. Too far away from Paris to live when you are a parasite. After 10 years, I came back here and I am forced to admit that another 10 years will put this little town to the same level as the rest of Paris suburbs. Yes, hate comes to mind. But, I still “believe” in civilization. At least, it prevented us to be invaded by other nations (well, they tried several times). But yes I know the price is high.
    Maybe the key would be to have a civilized part (the south) to protect the pure part (the north) of Europe. But obviously, it never happened as the rest of Europe was civilized (corrupted) too. The essence of civilization seems to be to spread and fall.

  30. I live in the city and I hate it too. I want live in countryside in love with mother nature, but my bank account is not cool for this “change in life” …
    but I hope that I can. One day…

  31. I live in the city, and I hate it. But I hope that situation will be different in a few years, that financial situation will allow me to move to rural area.

  32. I’m unfortunately dwelling in a “city” currently and have all my life. Born and raised in one.
    But gradually ever since I “woke up” so to speak I’ve been trying to break from the modern world and its “civilization”.

    I’m not yet able to leave this place but I plan to very soon. And the destination being Europe and its countryside.

    Hopefully I’ll be able to do this “city boy” transition in fast-time.

    It’s a vulnerable feeling having been raised in such a foul environment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s