You just want it to be in the name of your own chosen god, at least for a very long time.

This god decides what's possible. This alienated idea of yourself, of subjects, of the social order - it is the arbiter of what's good, what's clean, what's damaging as far as you care.

Why bother chasing after a given order if it's not gonna lead to freedom?

It's clearly not the best solution for all if you can't provide for as much as possible.

You know, if you have to determine what's best for one to want based on something that's proposed as forever being alien to us.

Out of our reach.

Take your order to its highest conclusions and it will change and its previous form will die.

There's always a new challenge.

Every order crumbles before the void of the undifferentiated and unknown.

The arms of this monster from beyond the horizons of what we know sweep inside those horizons, and regularly - with every question that we ask ourselves and every move that we make.

We must capture the monster and enslave it, ready to face a new one.

All gods must be thrown onto the fire!

Nature, Jehovah, 'Humanity' (as an abstract ghostly entity;read Stirner), 'the will of the collective', *capital*.

There's always a degree to which one is cucked, but it is not a fixed degree.

again with teh destruxction

you arent doing any thing you keep saying we

We aim to be the destroyers of identity, of ourselves as fixed beings.

you are alwas a fixed being

you just exchange gods

Nope, I just changed. I'm thinking a different thought.

I construct gods.

I tear them down.

I build new ones.

seems very unproductive

...only to a person who encourages subservience to a single god, maybe any old god, but a single god.

but yor god is the collective and ist will wheer ever yhis is commiuning from

The god is the collective that wants to change itself.

It is identified with us as we actually are to the greatest extent that we can know ourselves at a given time.

Where others do not care, this ghostly 'collective' does not intrude.

Where they do care, the ghost (used to represent the other participants in the social world) wants to talk and work towards a mutual solution rather than enforce something for any length of time beyond an acceptable interim period.

This ghost kills itself and rises again into a new, revitalised form.

And then it dies again at the commands of everyone.

Or at least as many as possible if there is still a lingering incompetence with regards to coming to mutual solutions in all cases.

So ppl kills other ppls gods

again, your view is oppsressive destructive and unproductive

We kill gods ourselves, we advise others on which gods to kill and build.

Also >killing gods is oppressive if it's others' gods

Smells of idpol.

Oppressive to those who want to keep their gods for no reason. Destructive to those who want to cling onto their ways of life because they've resigned themselves to a certain way of life.

*And unproductive only to those who judge 'on behalf of' their gods.*

If you insist on actively obstructing everyone else for the sake of propping up an order which will always leech off you despite everything you tell yourself as an ordained priest for that order, then yes, since we cannot resolve any dispute with you, you will have to go. You would be representative of a vestige of bourgeois politics.