On the Abominable Overpopulation of Mankind (Dec. 2010)

The current world population is far beyond anything that the human race could ever possibly hope to manage. It is wreaking havoc on the balance of nature, destroying forests, having detrimental effects on the climate, sending countless animal species down the path of extinction and making life more miserable for most of our own kind as well. There are a number of potential solutions, but time is not working in our favour.

At the moment, the human population is rapidly approaching 6.9 billion. For many, the sheer size of this number is difficult to even comprehend. To put this in a better context, one should look to the past. In prehistoric times, it is estimated that the mankind only increased by a couple million, every thousand years or so. Around year 1 of the common era, there were roughly 300 million people alive, by most estimates. One thousand years later, that number increased to around 310 million. That puts it above the previous averages, yet still within an easily maintained level. However, with the passage of yet another thousand years, the human population jumped beyond six billion. Within half a century, a few more billion will be arriving. How this can be viewed as anything other than pure madness, I do not know. Our species has truly gone beyond the point of no return.

The causes are many, including the transition from a nomadic to a sedentary lifestyle, agriculture and, most importantly, the industrial revolution. Thanks to mass production, medical and technological advancements and higher standards of living, the average lifespan increased, as did the number of offspring produced. Simply put, less people were dying and more were being born, which has resulted in the horrific parasitic human plague that is currently suffocating the earth and making existence miserable for all living things.

Nature is the main victim. Roughly forty percent of the earth's land is used for agriculture, just to feed our kind. Humans also need room to live, work and create more useless garbage. For these reasons, among others, forests are cleared out and the natural habitat of countless creatures is destroyed. Animal species are going extinct at an alarming rate. With all of the fossil fuels being burned, the high levels of pollution are affecting the climate, which is changing in an unnatural way. Feeble-minded Christians say that the earth was put here for humans, and that it is our right to dominate it and multiply as much as possible. It is foolish thinking like this that has contributed to the current state of affairs. Possibly the worst thing, however, is that the world is run by capitalists. More so than at any other point in our history, the entire purpose of civilization seems to revolve around money. Despite the horrible effects on nature and humanity itself, the corporate powers will maintain things as they are, as long as they can continue making a profit. Similarly, they need as many living people as possible, because each life is another potential customer. This was recognized when concerns of overpopulation were first voiced, in the 19th century, and it was mercantilism that stressed that larger populations meant larger markets. In the process of maintaining the giant shopping mall that this world has turned into, and all of the brainless consumers that populate it, the earth is becoming a darker place.

The sad truth is that most people do not care about things unless they are directly affected. So to continue speaking of the environmental concerns or the dying animal species would only resonate with a very small percentage. What humans care about most is their own quality of life. The fact of the matter is that the standard of living is getting lower for average people and this will only continue in the decades to come. While the earth itself is not in real danger, its habitability will become less stable, as things progress. This has led a lot of people to consider the option of colonizing space. Rather than clean up after itself, humanity would prefer to give up and leave. The truth is that there is another solution.

The current system must collapse and be replaced by a new one. The human race is beyond salvation, as it currently exists. The answer lies in sacrifice. Death is the only solution. Mass murder on a scale previously unknown in the entire history of human civilization is what is needed. Before mankind can rise, it must first crash and burn to a state of near-extinction. No one wants to hear this, of course. The truth hurts. For all those who act as if they are so concerned with the fate of the planet or the future of our species, they should look deep within themselves and understand that sometimes a great sacrifice must be made. Abandon all ridiculous notions of the importance of every human life as well as the religious nonsense that has helped to propagate this falsehood.

The concept that all life is sacred and precious, also known as the sanctity of life, is a weak and pathetic Christian idea. Naturally, they only apply this to themselves, not animals or even other people, if it conflicts with their goals. Human life is only sacred when it benefits them. To support this, it is important to bring up the fact that suicide was condoned in the early Christian era, with certain sects jumping off of cliffs in large numbers, wishing to hasten the afterlife and to seek the rewards that their false mythology had promised them. With dwindling numbers and shrinking collection plates, the Catholic church decided that suicide was a punishable sin. This was also around the same time that they began sending missionaries to convert those outside of the Roman world. Just as the capitalists need a large population in order to bleed them dry, Christians need a large flock of sheep to help them perpetuate the Great Lie.

It is time for people to grow up and abandon childish ideas such as religion or hope. The survival of our species depends on whether or not we can embrace the reality of our situation and to find practical solutions. Mass killings may not be the popular method, but it is absolutely necessary. Civilization is already going to collapse. It is not a matter of if, but rather when it will happen. However, what we can do is ensure sort of a “controlled demolition”, in order to make it as painless as possible. Instead of the whole of humanity being engulfed in chaos, we can be cold and calculating and ensure that mankind is able to rise and to transcend the mediocrity that is has long wallowed in.

While I am not attempting to write a comprehensive treatment on the subject, a few suggestions are offered for the consideration of those who would undertake such an endeavour.

- The advanced nations of the world should take the lead in instituting massive depopulation programs. In theory, all citizens would submit to a series of genetic and intelligence-based tests which would determine whether or not they are fit to remain alive. In ancient Greece, and even within the Germanic tribes of northern Europe, it was common practice to inspect children at birth and to discard the defective ones. Thanks to the pathetic Judeo-Christian system of values, we are encouraged to accept all forms of weakness and frailty within our ranks. Allowing defective individuals to live not only subjects them to unnecessary misery, but it also enables them to corrupt the gene pool with their inferior DNA. As for intelligence testing, all people of below-average intelligence would be eliminated. We have long seen the effects of allowing mediocrity to flourish. Ideally, if someone possessed above-average intelligence, but poor genetics, they would be sterilized but allowed to live. Of course, there should be a broad range of examinations that one would have to pass before being deemed worthy of survival. I would not recommend even wasting the time to assess the condition of most criminals, as it would be easier to just flush them.

- Of course, the rest of the world would provide greater difficulty. Areas such as the middle east, Africa, Latin America and southeast Asia possess the world's lowest IQs and highest growing populations. The average IQ in most African nations, for example, is below 70. That officially deems them mentally retarded. How much money and other resources has been pumped into that continent to help preserve useless lives that are never going to amount to anything anyway? Why send food to the jungles when people on your own streets are starving? So they can have the energy to wage their pointless wars and kill your peace officers in the process? Even an imbecile should be able to see the opportunity to kill two birds with one stone, here.

- Africa would best be dealt with by means of a weapon that could eliminate human life while leaving animals, nature and even the existing structures unharmed. Once they are gone, there will be an entire continent full of useful resources and one billion less mouths to feed.

- India, the Middle East, Latin America and southeast Asia are a little more tricky, as they are considered of average intelligence, but on the low end of the spectrum. They also represent a large part of the growing population. With the sheer number of humans in the world, there is no reason to settle for average, or those bordering on retardation. Through proper testing, it would be possible to depopulate these areas at an astounding rate.

- In the case of east Asia, the average IQ is on the higher end of the spectrum, so it is likely that less people will need to be cleansed in relation to intelligence. However, the DNA testing should clear out a decent number. In a population so huge, there must be plentiful amounts of genetic problems waiting to be discovered. Even if that is not the case, they will be able to spread out and not be so densely packed together once the surrounding areas are cleansed.

- It should be noted that this is not a call to exterminate whole races from the face of the earth. Sub-Saharan Africa would hardly be considered worth the time to administer the test, based on the data that we already possess. However, in all other regions, testing should be conducted and the strongest, most intelligent and most beautiful of each race should be preserved in order to allow the to follow a higher path, in the generations that follow.

- More than likely, much of this would have to come as a result of war. However, if the advanced nations can use reason and logic to realize that there is no other way, and to effectively implement this within their own lands, the rest of the world will fall in line by common sense or by force.

- Following the Great Cleansing, the real work could begin. From then on, the population could be planned and managed through effective eugenics and human civilization could be re-ordered in a more beneficial manner.

- People may object to the ancient practices of discarding useless children, but much of this could be avoided with science. After proving themselves to be financially capable of providing for a child, the potential parents would then undergo a series of tests to ensure the quality of their genetic material. After conception, the fetus would be monitored much as it is today. The difference would be that an abortion would be mandatory if any defects were discovered. After birth, the child would be thoroughly inspected and regularly tested until a certain age, to ensure that they are developing properly. That would inspire a bit more hard work than the hope of a gold star, surely.

Hunters are quick to justify their “sport” by talking about how they are doing their part to control the population of various wild animals, which helps them to avoid becoming too numerous and suffering famine and other problems related to overpopulation. Sadly, people are too selfish and short-sighted to apply the same logic to themselves. History can provide an example of the benefits of a smaller population. Much like in the aftermath of the Black Death, the quality of life for those left behind would be much better. Not only would animals and nature itself benefit greatly, but with only the best still alive, the human race could go on to become even stronger, more intelligent, more beautiful and capable of much more than we could have ever achieved while hindered by the dead weight of nearly seven billion pieces of gene trash. When utilized to its full potential, humanity can accomplish some pretty remarkable things. However, this is nearly impossible with the way things stand. With dwindling resources and growing populations, we are on a path toward war, famine, pestilence and death.

Death is coming, one way or another. We can all go down together, or we can cull the undesirable elements and have half a chance of building a better society, bereft of the type of gene trash that led us down the wrong path to begin with.

On Black Metal and Self-Mutilation (Dec. 2010)

Over the course of the last few years, it has been nearly impossible not to notice the very large number of people, within the Black Metal scene, that engage in self-mutilation. People are, in many cases, shredding their flesh and scarring themselves to varying degrees and then displaying this to the world, often making a strong connection between this and Black Metal. It's a rather peculiar development, and one which I think should not persist. This sort of thing is not a useful contribution to the scene, in any way.

To get right to the point, not all people that cut themselves are sub-human emo trash. The thing is that there is a wide variety of reasons for engaging in this practice. For some, it is a coping mechanism. Obviously, they have been psychologically damaged and this is one of the only methods by which they are able to relieve stress of grief. Others use it as a means to punish themselves for something. Again, this goes back to a mental defect. Some people are simply masochistic and they enjoy the pain or even the sight of their own blood. In certain cases, it can actually be a combination of several factors. Whatever the reason, I am of the opinion that it should be a private activity. If you are miserable and the idea of shredding your flesh with a razor or a shard of broken glass seems appealing and you feel that it will take the edge off or help your mood, go for it. Just keep it to yourself. The problem is, there are also a lot of those who do such a thing merely for the attention that they can gain by doing so.

It is a sign of the pathetic culture that we live in, today, that people would rather go out of their way to garner sympathy or concern rather than spend a few moments to come up with something interesting to say. Of course, in the age of the internet, there are many more channels by which to exploit oneself as an attention whore. Surely, there are a lot of reasons behind it. As previously mentioned, some may have no other way to feel that anyone cares for them, other than slicing their wrist and making sure someone can see it so they receive that all-important sympathy. Others may be trying to emulate some of their favourite musicians, by doing this, or attempting to seem “extreme” to those who view their wounds or scars. Naturally, these days, it is very simple to spread this around. It is common to see the typical goth-girl-turned-Black-Metaller who has an online profile that is filled with dozens of photos of her scarred or bleeding flesh. What is the purpose of this? Attention, of course. Perhaps, too many people admired the cover of the Abyssic Hate L.P. or the countless other sheep that got the idea that you are not “grim or cult” unless you have taken a knife to your arms and legs and made little street maps up and down them. It is my belief that the number of truly disturbed people is far less than the legion of imitators. For every person such as Per Yngve Ohlin who was genuinely melancholic, there are a dozen posers like Niklas Kvarforth who wish only to gain as much attention as possible. Based on the incessant need to display their mutilated flesh to any stranger that happens upon their internet profile, it is quite clear that most of these people are demented attention whores.

To reiterate an earlier point, if someone honestly feels that they must tear their flesh open and watch the blood come pouring forth, more power to you. But there is a difference between someone who does such a thing in private and the type of person that does so only so that others will take notice. Anyone who is slicing themselves to pieces and posting the photos online for the world to see is desperately and pathetically begging for any and all possible attention. Whether they desire the “credibility” gained by proving how little they care for their personal well-being or if they are after the sympathy that might come from those who would be concerned for them, it is all disingenuous behaviour that has no place within the Black Metal scene.

Such an attitude does not deserve to be associated with Black Metal. Exposing one's weakness for all to see – strangers, no less – seems to completely contradict what Black Metal was intended to stand for. While it may mean different things to different people, to take it so far from its core beliefs is to bastardize it beyond recognition. And this leads to what we have today, an ever-growing mass of gothic-emo weaklings that have hijacked Black Metal aesthetics and even some musical techniques, in order to cloak their whining, attention-seeking trash as something more extreme and rebellious than it really is. The entire concept of seeking attention for its own sake goes better with some other form of music.

On the Superiority of Primordial Creation (Dec. 2010)

In many creative fields, it is often true that the artist's earliest works are usually the best; the ones most worth remembering and those that really set the standard by which the artist would always be compared. In general, this is also accurate when it comes to music. Regardless of genre (or sub-genre), the early material is usually considered to be the best, or the most pure and meaningful. For bands that quickly disappear after a couple albums, such a matter is not cause for concern. However, those that endure for many years (or decades) must face the irrefutable fact that the quality of their music is quite likely to deteriorate; at least in the eyes of their fans. The changes that a band goes through can be caused by many factors: time constraints and label pressure, other outside influences, changing musical landscape, larger budget / perfectionism, stagnation or development of musicians, age, etc.

While not always true, most Metal bands aren't given recording contracts within a few weeks or months of forming. They go through a lengthy process of finding the right members and deciding upon a creative direction, and then gradually honing their craft. They rehearse as much as possible, with only the dream of making a single album motivating them to push forward. They record demo tapes and put a lot of effort into their first songs. Through rehearsals and playing live, they work on the songs, revising them and getting everything just right, as they go along. At this stage, they are struggling to get noticed by fans and labels, in the hopes of securing a deal and releasing a proper album. And that isn't really for the purpose of attaining fame or glory, but simply to make a record of their own and contribute something. In many cases, the bands haven't thought far beyond making that one album, so they pour all of their energy into it. In general, during this phase of a band's existence, the primary thing is creating. If the band happens to attain even a small level of success, things transform rapidly.

Once the band is signed to a label, inevitably, things become different. How much they change really depends on the size of the label. Within the underground, it is much more negligible. However, for those bands that signed to a larger label, a wide variety of new forces begin acting upon them. They may be told, directly, to alter their sound in one way or another, with the goal of appealing to a broader audience and reaching a higher level of success. This same decision could also come from within, as well. To use well-known examples, just think of Slayer and Metallica. After signing with Rick Rubin, Slayer was advised to get rid of the reverb and trim the songs down, thus over-simplifying them and sacrificing a great deal of atmosphere, in order to gain a larger following. The masses like music that is easily digested and doesn't require much attention or thought. A similar thing happened to Metallica, as Bob Rock was brought in to produce their self-titled album. Rather than following the dictates of their inner creativity and passion, they listened to a big-time producer who was looking for radio hits and did a great job in transforming the band into a stadium Rock act. Credibility was traded for mass acceptance.

One must also consider time. In the early part of their career, a band creates songs at their own pace, with months or even years to get them exactly as they want. After signing a recording contract, they begin pumping albums out each year, or every other year. The strange thing is that, early on, the band has more time to create but less time to record. Once signed to a label, they have a larger budget and more studio time, but not as much time to perfect the songs before they go into the studio. So, what the end up doing is writing a lot of the album as they're recording it, and then experimenting with the new technology that is available to them, since most people are nothing more than overgrown children anyway and prefer to play with things, whenever they get the chance. At any rate, another thing to take into consideration would have to be touring. Sometimes, a record must be rushed in order to take advantage of a touring opportunity. This results in a drop in quality, in a lot of cases.

Look at Testament, for example. The songs that made it to The Legacy had been worked on for several years, and they had ample time to perfect them. This yielded, arguably, the best album of their entire career. However, once they were releasing albums on a yearly basis, they became watered-down and more generic. After a couple of lackluster records, they began to get back on track with Souls of Black, but it still lacked the passion and intensity of the first album. And later on, of course, they tried to follow in Metallica's footsteps, with The Ritual. In the end, they succeeded only in alienating their fan base.

And that brings up another point. Once a band gets even the slightest taste of mainstream success, they throw creativity overboard in an attempt to cash in. This can be in response to similar bands getting big or it can be limited to their own success; i.e. they get radio play for a song and then attempt to repeat themselves. After Metallica's 1991 self-titled monstrosity, many Thrash bands tried to jump on the bandwagon, slowing down and making much more simplistic music. And if they managed to get the slightest bit of notice for those efforts, then it usually spelled doom for any sincerity that the band had left. Dave Mustaine admitted that he altered his songwriting in hopes of creating radio hits. The spirit of Metal had been consumed by his own greed. The problem with Metal bands trying to be pop stars is that it just doesn't work that way, nine times out of ten. Pop music is not art, but rather a corporate imitation of art. Professional songwriters are tapped into popular culture and they know how to exploit the tastes of the masses, writing simplistic, catchy garbage that will be easily digested. Record companies then find someone to perform those songs, often putting together their own groups for just that purpose. However, Metal was never meant to be for everyone. When Metal bands try to sell out, they usually fall flat on their faces, alienating their fans and going unnoticed by the mainstream.

Another factor to consider has to be that of outside influences of a different kind. This can mean a number of things, including bands trying to take elements of more popular / trendy music and incorporating it into their own style, or making changes in order to “keep up” with others within their particular sub-genre.

As an example of the former, one need look no farther than Anthrax and Slayer. In the mid-to-late 90s, each band transformed into something quite unlike what they had started out as. Anthrax added elements of alternative Rock on Sound of White Noise, and then tried their hardest to emulate Pantera in the years that followed. Slayer took influences from the pathetic and trendy Nu-Metal scene, with bouncy groove-laden riffs interspersed with riffs more typical of the band. In both cases, the end result was laughable and disgusting.

To shift focus to an example of the latter form of submitting to outside influences, one can see this with the deterioration of the Death Metal scene in the 1990s. Many bands were trying to outdo one another in terms of being more “sick” and “brutal” than the next guys, playing as fast as possible, with the vocals getting deeper and the musicians including more random time changes, with the end result being that the atmosphere of the originators was forever lost. Not long after, in the realm of Black Metal, a lot of bands jumped on the symphonic bandwagon (as well as industrial or experimental), to keep up with the times. Once something gets popular, it seems everyone has to join in. Losing sight of your own creativity, making decisions based on what others are doing, will usually have a detrimental effect on what you are doing. Occasionally, it can be a beneficial thing, as it can motivate a band to tighten up their sound and not be shown up by others that they end up playing with, resulting in them putting forth the most effort possible and improving themselves. This is most applicable in the band's early stages. But, more often than not, bands end up joining one herd or another.

As the years go by, inevitably, most musicians become better acquainted with their instruments, songwriting and the recording process. Early on, they may have been learning on the job and, in later years, they reach a point where they might look down on their previous accomplishments and view their old albums as flawed and imperfect. There are two different ways that an artist can approach this. On one hand, they may feel that the very style itself is limiting and boring. They would prefer to add new dimensions to their sound, in the name of artistic progression or musical evolution. Whether they wish to show off their new skills or just expand the boundaries of the band's established style, the end result is the same. On the other hand, the band might choose to stick to their roots, but to make an attempt to perfect their sound. Utilizing modern production techniques and more proficient abilities, they maintain the same style, yet they are always in a state of perfecting their sound and attempting to achieve the ultimate expression of their vision. Unfortunately, modern recording techniques will always fall short in terms of atmosphere and character, when compared to a more primitive and old school approach. So even when trying to remain true to who they are, such bands will come off as a pale shadow of their former selves, churning out stale and rehashed music that shows no overall advancement. So, in a sense, musicians are damned either way.

Of course, one can also look at the age of the musicians. Say, for the sake of argument, that they maintain their traditional style and don't go overboard with modern sounds, the fires of creativity fade away with time. The passion and energy gives way to an emptiness that cannot be avoided. Eventually, bands lose their ability to make worthwhile music. For some, it may take ten or twenty years; for others, it may take two or three. Nothing lasts forever, and there is no escaping the fact that a band (or any other type of artist) will, at some point, fail to live up to the accomplishments of the past.

Many would like to write this off as some sort of “elitist attitude”, as if no one really likes the old albums from a band; those that profess to like the demos and first couple of releases must be trying to impress others, as surely they cannot believe what they're saying. People who recognize this must just be trying to go against the grain, in the minds of these people. However, there may be a reason for this erroneous thinking. In a lot of cases, a band doesn't reach a certain level of popularity until their third of fourth album, at which point their audience grows and more casual fans become aware of them. So, naturally, these types will prefer the material that drew them in, as opposed to those fans who were there from the beginning. Still, one must not have to be there at the start of a band's career to realize that the old stuff is, typically, much better. It's not a matter of trying to seem “cool” by shunning the popular albums and embracing the lesser known ones; it's the simple process of recognizing the energy, creativity and passion that exists in the early stages of a band's existence, as evidenced through their demos and early albums, and realizing that this is no longer present as the years pass by.

In the end, there is no right or wrong. It all boils down to personal opinion, and this is mine.