Recommendation #10 Fails

Readers and kindred spirits will be delighted to learn that the PGM’s recommendation to begin the scrubbing of all things Christian from our fraternity failed. If I recall correctly, it may have earned fewer votes than last year. If only our governing bodies in all areas of life had such requirements. 

I heard a speaker against use the term “politically correct.” That’s excellent. And I heard a proponent mention slurs both against and from Jews. So it would appear that I was right. This is, at least partly, about teaching lessons to others, whether they want them or not. Call it Social Justice, call it Tikkun Olam, whatever phrase you think fits. I will admit in advance that I may be wrong, but it seems to me that no matter how tolerant you think you may be, brother, there are those who still have lessons to teach you. 

The bigger, more troubling question is whether Freemasonry itself will be a willing vehicle for these “good works.” After all, Progress has to keep progressing. Even when it strays into questionable realms. At the rate we’re going, I foresee the day when our first transgender grandmaster recommends an end to single sex restrooms in all Masonic buildings. 

Kindred Spirits

http://www.masonictruths.com/blog/grand-master-charvonia-s-recommendation-no-10-removal-of-the-ou


Masonictruths.com – if you haven’t visited, you need to. Follow them on FB: https://www.facebook.com/MasonicTruths/

Or Twitter: @MasonicTruths

So nice to find brothers with whom we can dwell together in unity. It’s like the precious ointment and all that. 

Grand Master Wants to Erase Our History for the Feelz 

I like MW Charvonia. He is, as best as I can observe from my few interactions with him, a great guy. It pains me to critique his Recommendation no. 10, but he is attempting to make innovations, which he once admitted was beyond his power. Combined with his Recommendation no. 8, we can be sure to look forward to a plethora of non-Western brothers feeling right at home in our Lodges as soon as they step off the boat. 

I wrote about this once before. Thankfully, it did not pass our super majority threshold. But it got enough votes to rise again. Here are some (edited) remarks I had hoped to give, but I was a day late and a dollar short: 

…. As Masons, we always respect the office, but I also respect the man. But as deplorable as it may seem, I will offer the following: 

I have heard many thoughts on this matter. Here are a few:

  • That this is an innovation in the body of Masonry – a violation of our oaths. 
  • That this is right, because Masonry has no ties to Christianity
  • That this resolution is a whitewashing our history in America in the name of political correctness
  • That this resolution recognizes the inclusiveness of Masonry
  • This resolution will wreak havoc on our ritual, and we will need to revisit many of the stories in our ritual on account of their ethnocentrism. 
  • That we should just begin referring to those two eminent patrons as the two dudes John. 

I don’t know if I’m qualified to say whether any of these perspectives is on the mark, but what I do know for certain is that this recommendation is a solution desperately in search of a problem. Show me the problem. I have attended degrees featuring several different holy books. The _________________ had participants from at least 4 continents. Where is the exclusion? That the words “Holy Bible” are spoken? If it doesn’t fix a problem, we can think of it as a feel-good measure, one that suggests, but does not say that our fraternity is deficient for referring to our founding fathers’ Holy Bible. 

These types of initiative, when we find them in other spheres of life, are often presented in a Narrative of oppressor vs. oppressed. I am pleased to see that this recommendation was not framed this way, but the (((kinship))) is plain to see to anyone willing to see it. 

We can’t even agree on The Moral Law; so much so, that we suspended recognition of other American GLs. I wonder if this is the time or place to even contemplate such a change. 
I will leave the floor with this: MW, you may remember a number of years ago when an atheist made the news after suing the government to remove the words “in God we trust” from our currency…No doubt he too saw his effort as a positive affirmation of America’s inclusiveness. A lesson that we needed to learn. He wanted to impose his values on us. His suit failed. I hope the brethren see to it that this recommendation fails as well.

The Ritual Commitee is in the bag for Charvonia. The Legislative committee is in the bag for Charvonia. R. Stephen Doan is in the bag for Charvonia. John Cooper is in the bag for Charvonia. The Grand Lodge has abandoned you, brother. What have you to say? 

Resolution 16-04: A = A Revisited 

The first link in the chain is forged, or is it merely a reaction to factionalism? 

RESOLUTION NO. 16-04: ALLOWS ADDITIONAL EXCEPTION TO BALLOT SECRECY

The proponents of this Resolution seek to allow an exception to the rule on ballot secrecy when reporting, preparing, investigating
and/or adjudicating charges of alleged unmasonic conduct relating to a ballot.


I have been concerned for a long time about the clear, but indirectly spoken desire of the Grand Lodge to remove our traditional balloting process. I have written about this before. This, my brothers – absent real examples of real and recurring problems – is an attempt by the authors to impose their values on you, or at least to circumscribe your actions. Don’t let my wording fool you. Mason’s circumscribe their own actions; we are not taught to circumscribe others (at least without a very pressing need). Does this rise to the occasion? Perhaps. I am interested to know what problems prompted the resolution.

If this is a result of ONOB and their tribal, identity-based politicking, then I may recommend a yes vote. I know we don’t approve of such politics in the Lodge, but you and I both know, dear brother, that there are those who engage in such politics anyway. Alas, the section of “whereas-es” is filled with justifications that don’t get at those real examples we should like to hear. 

This is a Masonic example of relinquishing freedom for the sake of the illusion of security. You encounter this when you have to submit to the TSA’s porno-scanners and remove your shoes before boarding a plane. Since we can’t ever notice significant details about who might be more likely to wage jihad, we must require all native-born Americans to jump through hoops. If we notice certain foreign groups commit violence against Westerners, maybe don’t let them into Western lands. 

Accordingly, we must never notice who in our fraternity are the most likely to lie and cheat when it comes to the ballot box. No, to do that may be considered racist (which is, or should be, described in the Code as “Super un-Masonic Conduct”). Rather than notice inconvenient facts and (maybe?) take actions to contain the problem, we write burdensome rules, which will never fix the problems they purport to solve. Sounds a lot like the TSA, no? 

However, if there is no problem of the sort I have described, we should reject this resolution. Do not doubt that there are those who would like to remove the ballot box completely. They don’t trust you to vote the best interests of your Lodge. If they find that you have refused entry to someone for reasons beyond criminal law (the Moral Law? What is this, the olden days?), they will expel you. They will call you all the usual names on your way out: xenophobe, homophobe, racist. Don’t you know it’s The Current Year?

America: A Nation or an Idea?

What does it mean to be an American?

Let me begin with a warning to the reader that some additional reading may be in order to fully understand this post. If you have not yet read the collected works of Mencius Moldbug, my only question is…what, you don’t have an extra six months of free time? Seriously though, the man has insight. The insight here regards his remarks on the troubling lineage of Calvinism, Mainstream Protestantism and Progressivism, and his concept of Ultra-Americanism. If you are familiar, proceed. If not, report to Unqualified Reservations for your Red Pill. 

This post occasioned mine. Read it through.

Was it touching? Did it stir your patriotic side? A story of hardship and discrimination, of overcoming great odds. For most Masons, I have no doubt that they were filled with civic pride. Perhaps you thought of the “tired and poor,” or of the words of the Jewish fellow, living in England, who coined the term “melting pot”? Funny how the creations of foreigners can so profoundly influence how we think of ourselves.

But did it stir any other feelings? Was there something slightly disquieting about it? A sort of sleight of hand in the article too? Surely not! We do love an underdog after all.
Clearly the author is a tolerant and compassionate individual, and one who has worked hard. But to call oneself a “better” American, especially when the author is admittedly and objectively not an American? I can scarcely imagine showing up in another country and declaring myself a better ________ than my hosts (maybe parts of Britain, since they’re so cucked – but Brexit. So maybe not). Further, since when is it a rating? It’s my nationality. You are either American or you’re not. But I think I know where this poor USian went wrong. 

We Americans make so much fuss over someone receiving citizenship, but we never distinguish between and American and a citizen. I remember when I first read a question posed by a much greater thinker Than I, that if one has to become “American” (meaning citizen), is it not proof that they are not, in fact, American (nationality)? 

But surely that is wrongthink. America is an idea, after all. I have heard this from so many people, including many libertarians. International libertarians are almost as crazy as international socialists. If you hang around any libertarians, make sure they’re the nationalist variety. 

Nation or State?

One of the greatest benefits of the English language, compared to most languages today, must be its precision. In our Western Civ classes, we hear much of city-states and nation-states. Are these mere redundancies? No. There is a difference between a nation and a state.

But no, we are told that America is an idea. It is a great experiment in self-government. What if that is wrong? 

No my brother; America is a nation. She is the daughter of England, and the only person before whom a President ought to bow, or even incline his head, is to the rightful Sovereign of the Mother Country.

That the American Nation has, over the centuries, let in many who are not and will never be a part of its fabric is inconsequential to its lineage, even if deleterious to its survival. Crossing an ocean, or even an “arbitrary line in the sand” does not make you American. Anyone who says otherwise is lying to you. Being brought to this country, even at a young age, does not make one an American, though with enough government schooling, it will probably make you an Ultra-American.

Our moral duty to allow people in

Whence come this idea? This post languished as a draught for quite some time. During its larval stage, the great Steve Sailer coined the term “Zeroth Ammendment.” I could never have written anything better: 

It’s been evident for some time that the the dominant ideological logic is trending toward making it inevitable that all 7 billion noncitizens on Earth be assumed to have civil rights to move to America.

Call it the Zeroth Amendment.

It is one thing to allow free entry (from civilized nations) and special entry to others from less civilized places for a time, to work and visit. It is quite another to mint new citizens, with full privileges thereof, as a matter of course. Even the most fervent believer in the wisdom of mobs (democrats [small d] or demotists [more accurate]) must acknowledge that your share of governance is diluted when millions more get the vote. And somehow a worldwide brotherhood means much less when the whole world shows up to live in your neighborhood. This is especially true when those neighbors are given to crass identity politics. 
Immigration has been an issue for well over a century. Each great wave has taken its toll. Each wave crashes slightly higher upon the Anglo-American Foundation, gradually wearing away, piece by piece, the original soul and spirit of this great project. Few are those who lament it’s passing. No doubt the Founders would be confused to find this Nordic Son defending their own position against that of their own WASP and Progressive progeny. But hey, man, they owned slaves and shit. Why should we care what the Founders think? Equally troubling to me is the thought that those Founders were links in the chain that Moldbug traces from the Reformation to modern Progressivism. But I suppose, in a few ways at least, they are closer to the Old World that we reactionaries to admire.

This is not a call to deport people, at least not a lot of people. But it is a call to distinguish a resident from a citizen. To cherish that which is your birthright, native son, and to not give it away lightly or haphazardly, as (or for) so much pottage. Especially to those who would castigate you and call you less American, whatever that means. 

5 Reasons Why (Most) Blogs About Freemasonry Suck

Most Masonic blogs leave much to be desired. This isn’t a bold statement; most blogs suck. Some will say that this one does too. That’s fine. A wise woman once said, “…the haters gonna hate hate hate. But why are they so reliably bad? I can think of a few possible reasons. 

  1. Ahead of their time – a lot of our brethren are old. How many brothers in your Lodge have AOL or Roadrunner email addresses? Maybe all of our good writers aren’t good with WordPress. Maybe it will change with time. This is being kind though. I suspect most of the reasons fall under the following category…
  2. They’re Boring – there’s no getting around this one. What to write about? “My Masonic Journey.” Please. If you put it out there for everyone to read, it should be more than just a diary of how you felt after your degree or being installed as Jr. Steward for the first time. Talk to me about the Craft. How have you applied your lessons? 
  3. Politically correct – file under boring. But also dangerous to the vitality of the Craft. I hope to change all this. No topic is taboo here, and I don’t mind shining lights in those darkened corners where we have allowed, by misguided, benign neglect, insalubrious attitudes and factions to flourish. 
  4. Virtue signaling – that is, an obsession with showing the world how wonderful we are. We’re so tolerant, so righteous. George Washington was a Mason, you know. You want us to throw our brethren in flyover country under the bus? Okay! As long as you don’t call us bigots! Want us to waste spend our money on politically-driven public schools? Sure! We will even talk about how a free public education is the basis for everything we hold dear!       S-M-R-T. It’s amazing Washington has survived. He owned slaves you know. He probably would have discriminated against gays too. 
  1. No RealTalk – rarely will you find a Masonic blog that has anything worth saying (until this one). Just the facts; nothing more. A Masonic aggregator. It’s like they set out to be the Masonic version of Drudge, without the catchy headlines. Then some drive-by commenter throws out something unMasonic sounding, and the the hands get to wringing! Friday night fun! Gawd – ask your wife to service you. 

What to do about it?

This, the Last Redoubt of what I like to think of as traditional Freemasonry in California, will

  • Always cast a critical and reactionary eye upon our betters in the Grand Lodge cabal. 
  • Work to sound the alarm on ONOB, for more and more Lodges are falling to them. 
  • Call out Masons who cower before the shrieking mobs of SJWs, who will never be appeased. Remember brother: you’re too old, straight and white for the New World being built here in California. 
  • Offer our advice on moving the pendulum back, not in a folksy- racist way. I live in a city too; I’m not a hick. But we will no longer swallow the poison pill that teaches (and is not Monitorial) that to be a good and tolerant Mason, you must accept invasion of your country and the subversion of your Nation. America is not its  government, and the State is not the Nation. 
  • Never accept that meeting on the level means never favoring one culture over another. We will not remove Shakespeare from the classroom of life to make way for savagery. 
  • Connect the dots between Masonry and its lingering allegiance to Progressivism, which, despite Steve Doan’s belief that it has been a tool for good, has been the source of even greater evil. 

So we will press on, at least until the last Lodged is fully converged to the message of Social Justice. Then I might find something better to do. Know when to hold ’em; know when to fold ’em. 

Grand Master of California Bows to SJWs

So the Grand Master did this 6 weeks ago. We’re a little late.

Always eager to demonstrate how right-thinking and Progressive we are, GM M. David Perry, likely with much input from the executive committee, has wrung a self-righteous hand at our brethren in Tennessee and Georgia.

As a result of the suspension of recognition of The Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the State of Georgia and the Grand Lodge of Tennessee F. & A. M., a Georgia or Tennessee Mason may not attend a tiled meeting of a California Lodge, and a California Mason may not attend a tiled meeting of a lodge under the jurisdiction of one of these two Grand Lodges.

What do you think our Persian brothers would do with a homosexual applicant to a lodge chartered by the Grand Lodge of Iran in exile?

How about African Masons?

Do you think that these Masons, raised by non-Westrons, should reflect our liberal, Western values? And if they instead cling to values held by American Masons as recently as 20 years ago, will we disown them?

The Grand Lodge of California must not apologize for anything done by our brothers outside of California. But it must bow to the alter of political correctness. It is a converged institution. What is that? Why, dear brother, have you not read SJWs Always Lie?

The Saints de-Canonized 

Past Grand Master Nagel, who is a true leader of men, if not always a popular one (one cannot often be both), used to say something about it being a great time to be a Mason.  He is right, but perhaps not in the way he intended. These are certainly interesting times.

Your Grand Lodge is currently trying to figure out how to square openness and inclusivity with the numerous Biblical references. This will reach its zenith at Annual Communication.  This arose after our GM exercised his privilege to recommend a change in the law. No doubt he has the highest ideals of equality and inclusiveness when he recommended that we excise any mention of the Holy Bible from our ceremonies and instead adopt the term Holy Writings. One wonders how the lecture of the third degree will sound afterward. Much shorter perhaps.

But this is a troublesome task, for there are so many references to strike. One of the greatest examples: we are reliably informed that some of the saints, who are described as being patrons of our Craft, are included in our teachings by virtue of their eminent patronage, rather than for the deeds which lead to their original canonization.


We are tying ourselves in knots, and I fear that once so tied, those bonds will be hard to break. When the GL goes around spouting revised history, it is similar to the way in which we are told that a man is really a woman, Y chromosomes notwithstanding. Black is white, war is peace, slavery is freedom. But you know the Truth; it is a divine attribute they say. Do you believe that there are certain universal truths? Steer clear of these liars. Eventually Solomon himself will be found to be too ethnocentric for our Lodges. After all, he is mentioned in only three(?) holy works. That doesn’t sound inclusive at all.

And when our beautiful ritual is rewritten for the sake of political correctness, will there be anything special remaining?

Suicide by Virtue-Signaling

If this is not your first visit to MR, you are doubtless already aware that we are here to express concerns about the unfortunate and reflexive tendency of modern Masons to bend to common leftist narratives, mostly revolving around abstractions such as tolerance and equality. 
Regrettably, equality does not exist, unless we are equal before the law. But everyone equally capable? Rubbish. Tolerance does exist, but we do not think it means what you think it means.
The Founders of my country were quite explicit that they established their government to secure the blessings of liberty for themselves and their posterity, not for the poor and wretched the world over. That was a Gallic trick, from which we have yet to fully recover. But the good news is we are finally beginning to recover, and Masonic Reaction is here to spread the news to our brethren of the new, Alternative Right. The Neoreactionary Right. The purpose is not to exclude, but to appreciate the subtleties that differentiate the classical understanding of tolerance within an English, Christian nation, and the modern, Progressive notion that being tolerant denies the existence of a common stock, a shared language, and shared traditions or that the preceding exist only inasmuch as they are enforced through racism and oppression.  

We are here to remind our brothers that this land is more than an idea; it is a nation, forged and tempered from the nations of Europe, but in the English mold. While we have allowed others to join us in the past, we owe no debt payable by allowing further immigration, which would further divide us. It is enough to note that immigration in the last 50 years has given us 50 million foreigners. The next time someone says to you we must allow more foreigners to live here, ask them why? Do we owe someone? Do they have a right to live here? 

Allowing such large scale immigration is not particularly American.

Allowing it is not particularly Masonic. 

It is suicide. Germany is experiencing this now. Watch as the Saxon begins to hate. 

Being tolerant is not the same thing as allowing vast hordes into your neighborhood, city, county or state. 

My duty to my country guides my thinking here. I am a steward of this nation. It is not mine to give away. Nor is it American to do so. It is my duty to preserve the blessings of liberty for myself, my countrymen, and our posterity. Not for Russians, Mexicans or Syrians. How do we square this patriotic duty with our Masonic teachings?

If I meet a Syrian man in Lodge, I greet him as a friend and brother. I do not, however, work to settle thousands (or even hundreds) of refugees from Syria in America, my home country. Neither do I passively watch as these things are done. This is an important distinction. We can simultaneously be accepting of a brother, while politely declining his extended family and friends residency in our nation. But how? Isn’t America a “nation of immigrants”? Sure it is.

Even if true, does that mean that we must always, at all times, continue to bring in more and more people? In a word, no. How to keep them out though?

Let’s discuss property rights for a moment. This concept is well established in our law. Any person may morally and legally bar anyone from entering his home, at any time and for any reason. This is an individual right. Similarly, a group of individuals who own adjacent properties or homes may do the same, restricting entry to any and all. Admittedly, this sort of explicit covenant agreement is less recognized today. But the theory holds up; a group of individual landowners come together and decide that only certain persons are welcome on that land. 

The people in power, whether Democrat or Republican (except Trump) disagree. If you disagree with them, or their agenda of Third World Uber Alles, you are a hater, a bigot, and they will destroy you if they can. 

Why then cannot a larger group of people decide the same for their town, state or (distinct from state) nation? Where is the line drawn? Most Americans are solid on the concept of private property, but where do we draw the line between an individual’s right to his property and the community’s rights to the same? Do Americans have a collective right (ownership, in other words) to these United States? Your answer to that question is very important, and it likely informs your worldview. 

Examine this belief. Where does it come from? Whether you admit it or not, you would not want to live in a neighborhood full of Somalis or Syrians. Ponder this, my brother. Where does it lead you?