Evolution theory suggests we are an animal species that evolved from apelike creatures and that chimpanzees are our nearest living relatives. In other words, we are much like the other animals. Indeed, animals can experience joy and suffering like us. A central ethical rule is not to cause unnecessary pain and suffering. So, if ethical considerations apply to our fellow humans, they might as well apply to other animals. Nature does not have ethics, but ethics are part of our nature because we can place ourselves in someone else’s position and feel compassion. Compassion helped us as a species, as did aggression, but in a utopian society, ethics take precedence.
Suffering is something a conscious mind experiences, but consciousness comes in different levels. You can beat a stone, but it does not feel anything. A plant is less aware than an insect if it is aware at all. An insect has less awareness than a fish. And fish are less conscious than mammals. And we may relate more to animals that are more like us. That is why mammals elicit the most sympathy. And so, murdering a cow feels very different from killing an ant.
We care more about people we know than strangers, so we may also care more for our pets than people in faraway countries. The suffering that goes unnoticed does not affect us. Only when we see the misery, for instance, in factory farms and slaughterhouses, do we become aware of it. But once we know, we can react in different ways:
Not caring. You may have more urgent problems than animal welfare.
Accepting. You could argue that meat is a natural part of our diet.
Doing something. You might become a vegan.
Humans have been murdering animals since time immemorial. And our distant forebears drove several animal species to extinction. So, why stop now? Today, humans dominate the planet, and much of the remaining wildlife is under threat. Hence, it may not be a luxury to ask ourselves some questions like should there be animal rights like there are human rights? And if so, what rights should animals have? Animals themselves do not think they have rights. Respecting nature and animal suffering are reasons why we think about animal rights. But those considerations can conflict with each other. So whatever choices we make, they can raise controversy.
Even when we think animals have rights, animals transgress our moral rules, for instance, by murdering each other. After all, predators eat prey, and nature does not care. It is survival of the fittest. Should we stop them from doing that? Some species go extinct because of our actions, while others profit. Rats, cockroaches, and crows do well where humans have disrupted the balance in nature. Should we restore the balance in nature? And, if you own a cat and allow it to go outside, you contribute to a bird massacre. In the Netherlands alone, cats eliminate twenty million birds per year. Should you keep your cat inside or not keep a cat at all? And should we control pests? Probably so because pests threaten us.
And what about eating meat? Meat has been on the human menu since time immemorial. It provides us with some of the nutrients we need. There may soon be artificial meat and replacements with those same nutrients. And so, we might end the suffering of animals in the meat industry. Animals in the meat industry often live under miserable conditions, but in some areas like the European Union, there are regulations regarding the welfare of animals on farms. If animals cannot behave naturally, they experience stress and suffer, for instance, when confined to small spaces.
These European animal-welfare regulations conflict with practical economic considerations. For instance, what to do with a pig that resists stepping into the truck that brings it to the slaughterhouse and gentle prodding does not help? Transport companies and slaughterhouses must make money. Unruly beasts take time and can make the operation unprofitable. Whether animals in the wild always have a better life than those on farms remains to be seen. Wild animals must deal with predators, food shortages, and humans. Still, it is fair to say that ending factory farming promotes animal welfare. And we may need to limit meat consumption to reduce our impact on the planet.
In a caring utopian society, we should not make animals suffer unnecessarily. We can extend that to nature. For instance, if there is not enough food for the deer in a forest, is it not better to shoot the weak and eat their meat than to let them starve? Perhaps, you could introduce wolves, but that might cause even more misery. A deer suffers less from a clean shot from a rifle than a lengthy chase by a pack of wolves. And it gets worse when there are pastures with sheep nearby. Or do sheep lives not matter? Sheep, whether these are black or white, are mostly peaceful creatures who do nothing wrong.
If you prefer the wolves chasing deer, you believe the value of nature takes precedence over the rights of animals and that it justifies animal suffering. But nature itself does not suffer, nor does it care. And humans have profoundly disturbed the ecological balance, so unspoiled nature as it once was, is gone in most places. Letting wildlife coexist with humans can cause problems. For instance, bears are beautiful creatures, but it is better not to let them roam in cities as they are intelligent enough to adapt and may kill people. We can restore the original situation in areas where few people live, stop agricultural and industrial activities, and create large nature reserves. In other areas, we can better manage what remains of nature as a park.
A broken clock is right twice a day. At least that was so before clocks came with digital displays. Even that truth no longer holds. And so, nothing is certain, not even that. In the same fashion, end-time prophets may be correct, for once at least, because there can be only one end, even though that is not certain either. As for the end-time predictions of varying religions, if your religion is full of errors, expect no less from its prophecies. There can be an end time, while the prophecies aren’t much help in picking a date or detailing out the scenario. The Bible doesn’t mention historical events like the discovery of America or the Industrial Revolution, which seem significant to historians but apparently not to the prophets of that time. Or the ancient prophets had no clue, which seems more likely.
Now, if these prophets didn’t know the future, and God likes to joke around, and of both we have evidence, their prophecies may still come true in ways they didn’t anticipate because we live in a world that runs the script of a story. So if the name Bathsheba hints that She was an avatar of God and would return as the Queen of Sheba, then the presidency of Donald Trump may precede the end times, because the noise of trumpets heralds the end times, and the name Trump refers to a trumpeter.
Logic is a strange thing, and humans are emotional creatures that occasionally think. If the end time ever comes, it is now closer than ever, but the longer we have waited, the less likely it might seem that it could be now. In any case, the odds for an apocalypse are higher than ever for the following reasons:
We ruin the Earth and turn it into a wasteland. We are creating an apocalyptic environmental disaster that includes, among others, disruptive climate change.
As long as there are nation-states, there will be no enduring peace, and weapons of mass destruction can kill billions of people and make the planet uninhabitable.
Technology will completely change life as we know it. Eternal life may soon be possible, or artificial intelligence may make humans redundant.
Existing religions and ideologies have failed, but we are religious creatures and need something to believe in. Only the truth can save us now.
The order is breaking down. We are nearing the end of social progress. The gang is our natural way of cooperating, and we may soon revert to barbarism.
We may soon discover that we live inside a virtual reality created by an advanced humanoid civilisation to entertain someone we call God.
If the end is now, it is time to apply some after-the-fact reasoning about how we arrived here. One ingredient in the mix is an obscure Canaanite deity whom the Jews came to revere as their preferred object of adoration and, later, as the Creator of the entire universe. And by a rather peculiar course of events, billions of people came to believe the same. Meanwhile, the Greeks had kicked off a tradition of rational enquiry into reality and moral life, which Europeans later took up. They began to develop science, Enlightenment ideas, capitalism, and social progress. They gradually came to understand that the facts contradicted the Bible and that it was not the absolute truth, not even in moral matters. In hindsight, we can add Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel to the list of greatest prophets of all time, as he envisioned that our quest for knowledge and social progress would ultimately bring us closer to God.
Pop music, the unexpected medium
If the end is near, there may have been signs, and probably not in places people were looking, and not the type of signs they expected. A few Christians found Satanic messages hidden in pop music by playing tracks in reverse. Some of them even believe Satan is in charge of pop music entirely and that this horned fellow has been busy composing the lyrics in his state-of-the-art studio in that hot place called Hell. Few would have guessed that God was the composer and hid secret messages in pop music. That, however, might be the case. Even more surprisingly, you don’t have to play the songs in reverse to hear them. Only that was not for the faithful to guess.
God is a DJ This is my church
Faithless, God is a DJ
Clearly, God likes to joke around. The song ‘Strange Phenomena’ by Kate Bush suggests that a coincidence with the radio could be a sign of God’s arrival,
A day of coincidence with the radio … G arrives, funny, had a feeling he was on his way. … We raise our hats to the hand a-moulding us Sure ’nuff, he has the answer
Kate Bush, Strange Phenomena
G might be God, as the song alludes to the hand that moulds us and someone who has all the answers. Does a day of coincidence on the radio herald the arrival of God? For me, it did. Coincidences on the radio prompted me to search for these messages. Like literary criticism, this is not science but speculation. So, can I guess God’s intentions? The following incident suggests so. At secondary school, I did particularly poorly at explaining literature. It is about guessing the motives of book authors. My scores were consistently poor, the poorest in the class. I considered guessing other people’s motives and decoding hidden messages in texts a waste of time. There are so many ways in which you can interpret words. The authors themselves often marvelled at what the literary experts deduced about their intentions from their books.
With the final exams approaching, I began to fret and asked my teacher for additional practice exams. It didn’t help. The grades remained as poor as before. Before the final exam, I prayed and asked God that the grade wouldn’t be too bad. My result was the best of everyone’s, but it was also equalled only by a girl with a striking hairdo, a bit alternative, who dressed in an outspoken way and flaunted her interest in art and literature. That was not only a surprise to me. A classmate wondered how I had managed to pull this one off. I was too ashamed to tell. I didn’t need a higher grade while children were starving. It was a peculiar incident. At the time, there was no reason to think God was behind this, nor did it seem a harbinger of things to come.
Hotel California
Let’s do a text analysis on the famous song Hotel California by the Eagles. What is its meaning? On the Internet, you can find some answers. It could be about the lost Paradise caused by American decadence and burnout, too much money, corruption, drugs and arrogance, and too little humility. Her mind being Tiffany-twisted and owning the expensive car reflects that. The wine being unavailable since 1969 refers to the fact that in 1969, it was no longer legal to drink alcohol while you were in a drug rehab programme. Before that, you couldn’t do drugs, but you were allowed to drink alcohol. The hotel, thus, was a rehab. I see another message, not intended by the songwriters and unseen by the critics.
When She stood in the doorway, the mission bell sounded. He might be meeting God because of the mission bell. And then, he enters Paradise, thinking this might be heaven or hell. God is a spoiled woman who owns the place and is used to getting Her way. Her mind, thus, is Tiffany-twisted. She owns an expensive car. Most people think Paradise is perfect, but it doesn’t agree with human nature. There is a darkness to it. They can’t kill the beast. And you can’t escape. You can check out when you like, but you can’t leave. You can argue against this by pointing to the master’s chambers. If there is a master, she isn’t God. Indeed, seeing meaning is not science, and interpretations are dubious. I knew that already as a teenager, so I won’t argue. With that in mind, we can proceed.
From Almelo via Enschede to Eurovision
Ilse DeLange’s fourth studio album, The Great Escape, contains the most messages. If there had been a meter for hidden messages, it would show an elevated reading when you play this album. If you read between the lines, this album comes with a message from God, Eve reincarnated, to Her husband, Adam reincarnated, to prepare himself. The album contains lyrics with parts that convey such a message. Noteworthy coincidences surround DeLange. DeLange was born on 13 May 1977 in Almelo, a town in the Dutch region of Twente. Almelo was also the hometown of Herman Finkers, a comedian who wrote ‘Kroamschudd’n in Mariaparochie’, a short animated picture about the possibility of Christ coming from Twente.
On 13 May 2000, the 23rd birthday of Ilse Delange, a fireworks plant in Enschede in Twente blew up, killing 23 people. That was exactly 11 years after I moved to Enschede to live on the University of Twente campus. I lived in dormitory 401 for five months, until 13 October 1989, a time lapse that precisely matches the events surrounding the Fatima Miracle of the Sun, which occurred 72 years later. This is the most spectacular religious miracle ever confirmed to have actually happened. And in that dormitory, lived that most peculiar Lady. The recurrence of 23 is also odd. The accident was on the day of the Eurovision Song Contest. Once the seriousness of the situation became manifest, the Dutch broadcast of the Eurovision Song Contest ended.
My wife had dreamt about a large fire the night before the fireworks accident. On the day itself, she visited a friend who had just given birth. Some of her other friends were also present. One of them came from Enschede. Just after my wife told this friend from Enschede about her dream, this friend received a text message asking whether she was all right. It was only then that they learned about the fireworks accident. Fourteen years later, Ilse Delange sang in the 2014 Eurovision Song Contest herself with Waylon as The Common Linnets. They came in second place after Conchita Wurst, a transgender Jesus look-alike. That is noteworthy, not only because it links DeLange to Jesus but also because early Christians performed a sex change on God in their scriptures.
Jesus and Conchita Wurst at a Meet & Greet during the Eurovision Song Contest 2014. Albin Olsson (2014). CC BY-SA 3.0. Wikimedia Commons.
The Finnish rock band Turisas dedicated a song named The Great Escape to the Norwegian king Harald Sigurdsson, who played a role in a coincidence scheme related to D-Day. His daughter died in Norway on the same day he perished on the battlefield in England, a noteworthy coincidence. The Great Escape was also the name of the fourth album made by the English rock band Blur, released on 11 September 1994, a remarkable date considering the coincidences surrounding the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks. The total length of Blur’s album is 56 minutes and 56 seconds. Compressing these numbers results in 11:11 as 5 + 6 = 11. And 56 + 56 = 112, which is also the European emergency telephone number. The lead song of DeLange’s album, The Great Escape, lasts 4:01 minutes. I moved to Enschede to live in room 112 of dormitory 401.
The Great Escape
Ilse DeLange’s album ‘The Great Escape’ contains a message from God, the eternal Eve, asking Her prospective husband, the temporary Adam, to prepare for his task as saviour. That was not DeLange’s intention. Unwittingly, she became the channel for this particular communication. As Finkers already noted, a lot was going on in Almelo, such as traffic lights switching colours. Mediums make misses alongside accurate guesses. The messages blend into the lyrics like the accurate guesses of mediums mixed up with misses. The book ‘The Virtual Universe’ explains how mediums can be precise at times while making many misses. It is not a gift but scripted. It works the same way as meaningful coincidences. So, how can we interpret those songs?
In the first song, ‘Reach For the Light,’ God says She remembers and that everything he knew is lost. That makes sense if he is supposed to be Adam and doesn’t remember,
I know my name, but who’s the same when everything you knew is lost I’m filled with hope that echoes loud inside a forgotten mind
Ilse DeLange, Reach for the Light
In the second song, ‘The Lonely One’, God claims She used Her powers to make his life disagreeable. Only God can order the sun not to shine and the sky to fall on him. What She says about Herself would even make Louis XIV, the Sun King, blush,
I told the sun not to shine and stay away … I am the only princess, I am indestructible … Asked the sky to fall down on you
Ilse DeLange, The Lonely One
He probably thought his life was not great. The song ‘The Great Escape’ gives the album its name and is the centrepiece. The song says it’s autumn, and some force pulls him into the shadow world. For him, it was scary to be taken in this fashion. But it is a holy land in disguise. She says she comes from heaven,
In this holy land A desert made of quicksand … Some force pulls you in The shadow world … I was falling, falling, falling from heaven
Ilse DeLange, The Great Escape
In the next song, Carry Hope, She instructs him to prepare himself. She says the power is in his hands, and he has to make this land his own. She adds that faith calls out his name. In all his vanity, even Louis XIV, the Sun King, would not have said that when he lets go of hope, there is no one left you can follow. There is nothing but the power to believe in Her,
The power is in your hands, the dust will fall to sand Gotta make this land your own … Faith calls out your name When I let go of hope, there’s no one left to follow There’s nothing but the power to believe in me
Ilse DeLange, Carry Hope
It can hardly be more clear than that. The song Was It Love suggests She doesn’t care for religious people. They are locked inside their belief,
And they’re locked inside belief But they’re not inside of me
Ilse DeLange, Was It Love
You have to cherry-pick lyrics and the lines to get the message, so the critics might point at that. The coincidences relating to DeLange suggest that there is more to these messages than just an accidental slip of the songwriter’s mind. And DeLange comes from the Dutch region of Twente. I lived in Twente, met the Lady there, and She was born there as well. That makes it more remarkable. And then you have Finkers’ animation picture ‘Kroamschudd’n in Mariaparochie’ about the possibility of Christ coming from Twente. That is a bit too much to ignore.
Slippery slope
Lyrics by other performing artists contain messages from God. The song ‘Hotel California’ by the Eagles did get its fair share of literary criticism, as did ‘Gimme the Prize’ by Queen, and ‘God Is a DJ’ by Faithless. To access these messages, you must filter out the noise, thus selectively choosing the parts that fit, which is a very unscientific approach. Literary criticism is about seeing meaning. You can’t prove meaning as it is subjective, so seeing it is an art. And not seeing meaning is the art of being a moron. The song ‘Joga’ by Björk mentions accidents, coincidences and connecting the dots. The coincidences make sense only with one person. So God made these things happen to show him Her love,
All these accidents that happen Follow the dot, coincidence Makes sense only with you … This state of emergency How beautiful to be … All that no one sees, you see What’s inside of me
Björk, Joga
She adds how beautiful it is to be in an emergency. The emergency services telephone numbers are 112 and 911. When God demonstrates Her love for you by murdering people in accidents and terrorist attacks, that can be intimidating. And you might get the impression that you, like Jesus, have no choice but to go along with God’s plans.
Now the word goes around in certain circles that the song ‘Stairway to Heaven’ by Led Zeppelin contains hidden satanic messages that you can hear by playing the song in reverse, which is something normal people wouldn’t do. There was something there, and the artists said it was a coincidence.1 However, straightforwardly playing that same music, which normal people do, reveals something even more interesting. It mentions a lady we all know. That lady could be God. After all, the song is named ‘Stairway to Heaven’ rather than ‘Highway to Hell,’
With a word she can get what she came for Ooh, ooh, and she’s buying a stairway to Heaven … There walks a lady we all know Who shines white light and wants to show How everything still turns to gold The tune will come to you at last When all are one, and one is all … And she’s buying a stairway to Heaven
Led Zeppelin, Stairway to Heaven
It is therefore not a coincidence that the same album, Led Zeppelin IV, which features Stairway To Heaven, also includes the song ‘Going to California.’ It mentions a queen who is a woman who was never born, thus Eve,
Seems that the wrath of the Gods Got a punch on the nose and it started to flow … To find a queen without a king; They say she plays guitar and cries and sings. La la la la Ride a white mare in the footsteps of dawn Trying to find a woman who’s never, never, never been born.
Led Zeppelin, Going to California
The song The Infant King from the album Adieu Sweet Bahnhof by The Nits is about a boy king on his way to meet his Bride. The world is falling apart. The border is closed. People are packing. Gold can help you if you want to leave. That could be the End Times. But the infant king is on his way,
I tip-toe tip-toe through the sleeping train An infant king who meets his bride … Two eyes two ears nose uncertain smile A child reflected thousandfold Someone said the other day The border’s closed there’s no way in or out … My mood is changing every mile Someone said the other day The world is cracking up it’s plain to see … Two eyes two ears nose uncertain smile The infant king is on his way
The Nits, The Infant King
On that same album is the song ‘Woman Cactus’, describing a psychotic love affair of an indecent nature. His senses don’t make sense at all. She haunts him as the bar sign repeatedly prints Her name on the wall,
This is not comme il faut It’s no respectable affair … My heart, my head, my brain My senses don’t make sense at all The bar sign prints your name Over and over on the wall … I know it hurts to touch a woman With those needles and pins
The Nits, Woman Cactus
There is more, but it is a slippery slope. The farther you go, the more you slip-slide away. For the argument, the presented selection suffices.
Latest revision: 9 May 2026
Featured image: Watchmen cosplay at Comic-Con 2009. Taken on July 24, 2009. Ewen Roberts. CC BY 2.0. Wikimedia Commons.
1. The 10 Wildest Led Zeppelin Legends, Fact-Checked. Rolling Stone (2012). [link]
The purpose of our brains is to keep us alive so our genes can copy themselves, not to make us happy. Anxiety keeps us from doing stupid things. And happiness can make us complacent, and that could be fatal. There is a struggle for survival. So what is the point of new ideas, technological development and social struggle? Why do we have agriculture, industry, cities, writing, money, empires, science, property, human rights and democracy? If these things don’t make us happier, what is the point of pursuing them? The historian Yuval Harari asks this question in his book Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind.1 Things often don’t happen to make us happier.
Our forefathers switched from hunting and gathering to crop planting and animal herding because agriculture feeds more people. It was a success for human genes, as there were more copies of them, and also for the genes of domesticated animals and plants. But it made the lives of humans and animals more miserable. By growing crops or herding animals, people had more food. But more children survived, so they had more mouths to feed and remained as hungry as before. Meanwhile, returning to hunter-gathering had become impossible as it would mean starvation. Compared to hunter-gatherers, farmers worked harder, their diet was less varied, and they had more violent conflicts.1
The competition between businesses and states drives the change. States are the most effective war machines. And writing made it possible to have states. Investors expect to profit from technological advances, or governments see a use for them, for instance, to win a war. And so, scientists fetch budgets for their research and get busy. We have smartphones because investors profit from making them. Your smartphone does not exist to make you feel better but to make you addicted. Many people now think their lives are meaningless without their smartphones.
Social reforms like equal rights for women intend to increase fairness, thereby making people happier. But it doesn’t always work out as planned. If there is a norm, for example, the man being the head of the family, many women might be content with the arrangement. Men might have accepted that women had been in charge if that was the norm. A norm gives clarity, and change brings discomfort. Feminism liberated women, and overall, it probably made women happier, but not always, and the process of changing these norms raised tensions. So what makes us happy? That is not easy to answer. It depends on our characters and circumstances. Several issues influence our happiness:
our needs
chemical processes in the body
money
our expectations
our desires
having a sense of purpose
social trust
Maslov’s hierarchy of human needs
Hierarchy of human needs
Abraham Maslow thought of a hierarchy of human needs. He claimed that basic needs such as food and shelter are paramount. Once you have them, you desire security. Maslow believed that if you have food and security, you crave love and attention. And if you have all that, you want to be respected and have a sense of purpose in your life. These needs exist but not in such a neat hierarchical order.
Chemical processes in the body
Some people are always cheery despite adversity and misery. Others are always bitter and fret, even when they prosper and have nothing to worry about. That has to do with body chemistry. If cheerfulness comes from chemistry, we can be happier by taking pills. Pharmaceutics can end depression but might also give a false sense of happiness. And do pills make you better, or do you become addicted to them? The difference between prescription drugs and harmful substances like cocaine is not always clear. Nevertheless, more and more people use pills to feel better.
Money
If you are poor, some extra money will make you happier. Poor people worry about making ends meet. And that is why poor people often feel miserable. It becomes less clear once you can buy the things you need and have no financial worries. More money can make you happier, for instance, if you spend it on the right things. What is right is a personal matter. So if you can afford it, you should buy that garden gnome you always craved.
The more you have, the less extra makes you happier. Your first automobile can make you happy. You can go where you want when you want. A second car makes less of a difference. You and your husband can go to different places on the same evening, but that rarely happens. A third and a fourth car probably have no use unless you are a car collector and have a garage where you can spend your days gazing at your automobiles.
Expectations
Suppose I promised you ice cream. If you expected a small cone, but I gave you a medium-sized one, the outcome exceeded your expectations. It can make you happy. But if you anticipated a large cone and got the same medium-sized cone, the result failed to meet your expectations, and that can make you unhappy.
If you anticipated less than what you get, that could make you happy, but if you expected more, it could make you unhappy. We adapt to new situations. After a while, our happiness or sadness is gone. Having low expectations can be a path to happiness. If you expect the day to be miserable, and that does not materialise, it can make you happy.
Similarly, if you are better off than your peers, it can give you satisfaction. Alternatively, being worse off can be displeasing. Your happiness depends on the people to whom you compare yourself. The attention given to celebrities, their riches, and their beautiful husbands and wives can give you the unpleasant feeling that your life is subpar.
That can make you go to the gym or the plastic surgeon, buy things you cannot afford and turn down potential spouses who are not rich or do not look so great. The advertising industry uses this to make us buy more stuff. People in more equal societies are often happier. And we might be happier without the Internet and television.
Rock cut seated Buddha statue, Andhra Pradesh, India
Craving
Gautama Buddha also weighed in on the issue. He lived 2,500 years ago and founded Buddhism. Mr Buddha taught that people crave temporary feelings and things, which causes permanent dissatisfaction. As soon as you have achieved a desired goal, such as love, or acquired a desired object, for example, a car, you will crave something else.
That ties us up in this world so our souls will reincarnate and keep suffering from craving, or so Mr Buddha said. When we stop doing that and disengage ourselves from this world, we disappear into nothingness, a state of eternal peace. So, according to Mr Buddha, happiness is about letting things go. And that became a religion.
Having a sense of purpose
Believing your life has a purpose can make you feel better. If you believe in God, you may think you play a role in God’s cosmic scheme, while atheists may believe their lives have no purpose. The psychologist Daniel Kahneman arrived at a similar conclusion. He interviewed women about their daily activities, which gave them pleasure. He also asked these women what made them happy.
Caring for their children was among the activities that gave them the least pleasure. But when he asked these women what made them the happiest, they answered that their children gave them the most joy. The children gave meaning to their lives. Maybe these women deluded themselves. Similarly, if you think your job is significant, that may give purpose to your life, but that can also be a delusion.1
Social trust
Societies can contribute to our happiness when there is social trust, which means you can trust other people and organisations. There is no social trust when your neighbours steal from you, or you fear that they do, criminal gangs roam the streets, corporations dump their toxic waste, the government spies on you, or you need to carry a knife or a gun to protect yourself. Wouldn’t life be better if you don’t need to worry about criminals, the government, or corporations, and you can go where you please without feeling unsafe?
When people do the right thing spontaneously, there is less need to check on them. And so, moral values matter. Without values, liberty is the road to hell, and Paradise is a dictatorship. Doing the right thing comes from a sense of connectedness. If I do wrong, it adds to the wrongs done, and this world becomes a worse place to live in, even though I may not notice it. That requires empathy and taking responsibility for our actions. That defines what good and evil are in Paradise.
Latest update 14 April 2024
Featured image: Smiley. Public Domain.
Other images: Maslov’s pyramid chart of the hierarchy of needs. Androidmarsexpress (2020). CC BY-SA 4.0. Wikimedia Commons. Rock cut seated Buddha statue, Andhra Pradesh, India CC BY-SA 3.0. Adityamadhav83. Wikimedia Commons.
1. Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. Yuval Noah Harari (2014). Harvil Secker.
Christians tell us that God is love. There is something about this love that the Church Fathers found so troubling that they didn’t want us to know. Jesus’ deeds might make more sense once you know what it is. Love is a central theme in Christianity. And so this religion is known as the Religion of Love. According to the Gospel, Jesus said we should love God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength (Mark 12:30-31). Paul wrote the First Epistle to the Corinthians around 54 AD. It is one of the earliest written sources of Christianity. It contains a remarkable poem (1 Corinthians 13),
If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonour others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.2
Paul informed us that love is more important than faith and good works. That is quite informative, as God is love (1 John 4:8, 16). The Christian story became that God loved the world so much that He gave His one and only son so that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life (John 3:16). The author of the Gospel of John shares his views on God’s love in the First Epistle of John (1 John 4:7-10),
Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.
God loving us and sending His one and only son into the world to die as a sacrifice for our sins seems peculiar, outrageous even, unless you are a Christian. Christians claim that Adam sinned, so we are all cursed, but then came Jesus, who saved us by his crucifixion. Jews and Muslims don’t believe that God has a son, nor do they think that Adam’s transgression justifies this sacrifice. When God ordered Abraham to offer his son, and Abraham was about to comply, God called it off. So why did Jesus do it? The odds are that it has to do with love. Ephesians gives a possible clue (Ephesians 5:25),
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.
Christians believe Jesus married the Church. Only the Church didn’t exist when Jesus lived. The verse suggests that Jesus died out of love, as in a marriage. It asks husbands to love their wives just like Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her. That was as close to the truth as the church fathers dared to venture. Jesus was married and gave himself up for his Bride. And men should do the same for their wives. This vantage also sheds new light on Jesus’ views on marriage as a bond forged by God (Matthew 19:3-9),
Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, ‘Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?‘
‘Haven’t you read,’ he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.’
‘Why then,’ they asked, ‘did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?’
Jesus replied, ‘Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.’
Here, Jesus departed from Moses’ law, referring to the beginning, thus Eden. Jesus’ disciples argued it would be hard for men to love their wives this way. Jesus replied that not all men can do this. Concerning marriage, Jesus promoted a high standard that was untenable for many men. It would be better to live in celibacy than not to live up to it. In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus compares the kingdom of heaven to a king who prepares a wedding banquet for his son (Matthew 22:2-14). The wedding symbolises the kingdom of God. It may seem odd to compare the kingdom of God to a wedding, unless it is one.
The Pharisees indulged themselves in some additional testing of Jesus when they caught a woman in the act of adultery (John 8:1-11). They asked Jesus, ‘Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?’ They were using this question as a trap, as stoning should be the verdict according to Numbers 5, perhaps because they expected Jesus to rule in favour of the woman. Jesus’ answer was, ‘Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.’ But according to Rabbinic literature, the man being free from sin was a precondition for the trial of the woman, as Hosea 4:14 reads,
I will not punish your daughters when they turn to prostitution, nor your daughters-in-law when they commit adultery, because the men themselves consort with harlots and sacrifice with shrine prostitutes.
Jesus’ answer was the correct interpretation of the law, as recorded in Rabbinic literature, so it wasn’t merely a clever rebuttal. By knowing the law better than they did, Jesus made the Pharisees appear foolish. The witnesses weren’t free from sin, and as for the husband, we learn nothing.
Surviving records of Jesus’ words and teachings suggest Jesus believed women to be equal to men. The equality of the sexes is at odds with the patriarchal society of Jesus’ time. Paul probably also saw women as equals, but his views concerning marriage are remarkable. In his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul says (1 Corinthians 7:1-2, 3-4, 10-11),
Now for the matters you wrote about: ‘It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.’ But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.
The husband should fulfil his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife.
To the married, I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife.
To Paul, celibacy was preferable to marriage, but only for the strong, who can resist their urges. Marriage is to keep the weak, who can’t control their desires, on the right path, so that Satan will not tempt them (1 Corinthians 7:5). That is a rather specific interpretation of Jesus’ saying that only men who are capable of loving a woman should marry, and that if one cannot love a woman, it is better to remain unmarried (Matthew 19:3-11). After explaining that, Jesus went on to discuss eunuchs, noting that some choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 19:12). That may have inspired Paul’s views on celibacy.
The Didache, an early Christian text dating back to the first century, implies the equality of the sexes. It helped to make Christianity monogamous, as opposed to Judaism at the time, and later Islam. As many early Christians were Jewish and had heard about Jesus and the miracles he did, but didn’t know about his marriage to God and believed God was an invisible being in the sky, Paul faced a theological problem.
Patriarchy returning
Paul resolved that issue by aligning Christianity with the Jewish scriptures. He wrote that the head of every man is Christ and the head of the woman is man (1 Corinthians 11:3) and that a man is the image and glory of God, as man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man (1 Corinthians 11:7-9). Paul must have known better, but it was the biblical account from Genesis. As a religious Jew, he considered these scriptures infallible, so the facts are secondary, which may seem strange, but that’s how many religious people reason. Most early Christians were Jews who didn’t know the specifics about the relationship between God and Jesus, so they wouldn’t have believed the truth anyway. Worse still, it would be blasphemous to them. And so, Paul did God’s work by making the new religion more palatable to them.
Paul makes up for it by adding that the head of Christ is God. He goes on to say that a woman ought to have authority over her own head, and that woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman, and that woman came from man, but also man is born of woman (1 Corinthians 11:10-12). In his view, men and women were equal. It is a juggling with words, as Paul is beating around the bush.
Over time, Christianity became increasingly patriarchal. Scholarly analysis of the letters of the early church fathers underlines this. Scholars think 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 is a later addition.1 It claims that the man is the head of the family. The same applies to 1 Corinthians 14:34-35. It orders women to be silent in the churches. A reason for suspecting that the latter passage is an addition is that several manuscripts have it at the end of the chapter instead of its usual location. Scholars view it as a sign that a scribe copied a note into the body of the text.2 A previous scribe likely added that note.
If you ask yourself how scribes could justify falsifying their scriptures, here lies an answer. It happened in small steps that appeared reasonable. You might not consider adding a note a falsification. As Paul wrote, the head of the woman is the man. You can interpret this as the man being the head of the family, as traditional Jews did. Once the comment is there, it becomes part of the text’s context as a clarification. Once it is part of the context and has become an instruction to read the passage that way, it might not seem falsifying to include it in the text. In this way, a few generations can make an astounding difference. And so, the First Epistle to Timothy reads (1 Timothy 2:11-15),
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
Paul never wrote this letter, despite the letter claiming otherwise. An unidentified Christian scribe likely penned it down more than fifty years after Paul’s death. Scholars uncover falsifications by comparing the wording of this epistle with that of Paul’s genuine letters. The passage above suggests women spoke publicly and felt they had authority over men. Otherwise, the author would not have written it. These modifications suggest an equality of the sexes, a prominent position for women in the early Christian movement, and the gradual re-establishment of male supremacy.
Sacrifice for love
As Jesus sacrificed himself for love, devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus is a noteworthy peculiarity, as is some of the accompanying imagery. Within the Roman Catholic tradition, the Sacred Heart is a symbol of God’s boundless and passionate love for humankind. Nothing of the sort existed during the first ten centuries of Christianity. The Crusades revived religious life and inspired monks and nuns to revere Jesus’ wounds, including his heart, as sacred. The Franciscan monk Bonaventure wrote in 1274, ‘Who is there who would not love this wounded heart? Who would not love in return Him, who loves so much?’ Over time, Jesus’ heart came to the centre stage of these devotions.
Women mystics played a crucial role in that development. Among them were Lutgardis of Aywières (1182–1246), Mechtilde of Hackeborn (1241–1298), and Gertrude of Helfta (1256–1302). The devotion to the Sacred Heart in its present form began with Margaret Mary Alacoque (1647–1690), a nun of the Order of the Visitation of Holy Mary, who claimed to have received revelations about the Sacred Heart from Jesus Christ between 1673 and 1675 in the Burgundian French village of Paray-le-Monial. Later, Mary of the Divine Heart (1863–1899), a religious sister of the Congregation of Our Lady of Charity of the Good Shepherd, reported receiving locutions and visions of Jesus Christ.
So, did Jesus sacrifice himself for God’s love, and did God not care about Jesus? And if so, why would God care about us? If that thought had occurred to the Church Fathers, they would have found it disturbing. If someone else were to find himself in the position Jesus once was, he might not be instantly enthusiastic about the proposition. But no one can go against the will of God. And you can fall in love with someone who has taken you hostage. It is a natural reaction known as Stockholm Syndrome. Having no choice makes things easier. You must try to save humankind if there is a slight chance of success. He knows he has to play his role in the script. And he can succeed, like Chief Inspector Clouseau, if that is the plot of the story. And if the absurd has hunted you down and cornered you, and you see no escape, you can better embrace it.
And is it so terrible to die for love? Everyone dies, usually for less agreeable reasons like a fatal encounter with a deadly disease, some random accident, old age or a war fought for the ego of a leader, or even worse, his stupidity. In hindsight, Jesus’ sacrifice was exceptionally functional. It created Christianity, a religion that claims we are unworthy of God’s grace and need to accept a saviour and follow him. It is an idea that can save us because we can’t fix our problems ourselves. We are religious creatures who need a fairy tale to believe in. And as Paul explained in his poem, you can speak every language, know all the secrets, and give your money to those in need, but it is pointless if you don’t have love. If it is a delusion, you can enjoy it for as long as it lasts. And if you must go down in infamy and die, you can better do it laughing. So, always look on the bright side of life,
Life’s a piece of shit When you look at it Life’s a laugh and death’s a joke, it’s true You’ll see it’s all a show Keep ’em laughin’ as you go Just remember that the last laugh is on you And
Always look on the bright side of life Always look on the right side of life
Monty Python, Always Look on the Bright Side of Life
Latest revision: 12 February 2026
Featured image: A cross in a heart formed with candles. Photos taken in Camp Tejas, Giddings, Texas, USA. Wingchi Poon. CC BY 3.0. Wikimedia Commons.
1. Forgery and Counter forgery: The Use of Literary Deceit in Early Christian Polemics. Bart D. Ehrman (2013). 2. The Oxford Bible Commentary. John Barton; John Muddiman, eds. (2001). New York: Oxford University Press. p. 1130. ISBN 978-0-19-875500-5.
Will Jesus return? What will he do if he does? Will Jesus make things right? Will there be a showdown between the forces of good and evil? Will evil people burn in hell forever? And what about Buddhists and atheists? They don’t believe in God. And Hindus? They have many gods. Or Jews, Christians and Muslims? Who are the good people, and who are the wicked anyway? The Italian mafia bosses were devout Catholics. The usurers of Goldman Sachs claimed that they were doing God’s work. The Muslims blowing themselves up to murder unbelievers also did. Palestinians murder Jews and Jews murder Palestinians, all in the name of God. US President George Bush claimed that God had ordered him to invade Iraq. So, what might happen if a messiah were to come? Few people have given the matter the attention it deserves, either because they think it will never happen or because they think the Bible addresses the issue sufficiently.
Jesus believed himself to be Adam, who lives forever, because God made him believe it. His appearance to some of his followers after his death led them to believe it was true, giving them faith, so we now have Christianity and Islam. Yet, he was human, and only the Son of God figuratively. And so, Jesus will likely not return, and we may have to cope with a stand-in who might not, as the faithful hope, magically turn things all right and, as Santa Claus, dole out presents like eternal life, bliss, and special places in heaven. What were these people thinking? So, what can we expect? There has been a sort of dress rehearsal to get us in the mood and foreshadow what might be coming. Adolf Hitler was a most messianic figure, perhaps the most messianic figure ever, even surpassing Jesus. We may have to follow the messiah like the Germans followed Adolf Hitler.
So, was Hitler the opposite of Christ, the anti-Christ, or was he like Christ, as many of his followers expect him to be? Will there be a final reckoning in which billions of people die or face eternal torture in hell? The latter is worse than being gassed in a concentration camp, as there is no end to the suffering. For those who think it is an inappropriate remark, life in Gaza in 2025 has become as horrible as in a concentration camp. And Jews did that, and Palestinian terrorism prompted them to do it. Many Jews hope for a final solution to their Palestinian problem, just as many Palestinians hope for a final solution to their Jewish problem. Both groups have their reasons, but so did Adolf Hitler. So, have we learned our lessons? And what are these lessons in the first place?
Europeans have learned in two devastating world wars that nationalism and tribalism are the paths to destruction. It is still in their collective memory. Other continents don’t share that experience, and memories don’t last forever. Nationalists point to the troubles migration and mixing people from different cultures cause, but nationalism leads to warfare and will prove to be fatal in today’s world. Yet, letting different tribes live together under the umbrella of multiculturalism causes similar problems. Normally, we would be doomed in one way or another unless there were a one-world government that dealt with the troublemakers. Most people wouldn’t accept a one-world government. We cooperate through the myths we share. That seems to be the point of a messiah. Humans are a failed and destructive species. Without an inspiring fairy tale and a leader who unites us, we are doomed.
Adolf the Messiah or the Anti-Christ
At first glance, Jesus Christ and Adolf Hitler are opposites. Jesus personifies goodness, while Hitler is the epitome of evil. Today, with the rise of fascism, more people view Hitler more favourably, and some outright admire him. Christ stood at the cradle of Christianity, the Religion of Love. Jesus taught that love would overcome hatred. He said, ‘If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.’ And, ‘Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.’ Hitler represents Nazism, the ideology of hatred that brought us unprecedented cruelty and revealed the depth of human depravity. As the world is barrelling towards an apocalypse, it is the right time to take a distance and be honest.
Closer inspection reveals a few intriguing parallels between Hitler and Christ. Adolf Hitler’s followers considered him their saviour, and they worshipped him like one. Christians believe that Jesus will descend from heaven and that there will be a rapture at his return (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17). Hitler was the first leader to fly around in an aeroplane. He came down from the sky to meet the cheering crowds. Rapture means ecstasy, enthusiasm and admiration. Few people in history caused as much rapture as Hitler. A Nazi slogan was, ‘One people, one empire, one leader.’ Christians and Muslims expect that to happen when Jesus returns. And so, Hitler might foreshadow the Second Coming.
In several ways, Hitler resembled a messiah. He told the Germans they were the chosen people for their superior race. Jews believe they are the chosen people because of a supposed special relationship between God and the Jewish people. Like Moses, Hitler promised to end the unjust oppression, in this case, caused by the Treaty of Versailles. He claimed that his Third Reich would last a thousand years, whereas the Bible says that Christ’s reign would last a thousand years (Revelation 20:1-6). And Hitler inspired the same blind following and loyalty to the death that many Christians expect the Second Coming of Christ would do. Somewhat unsurprisingly, a British intelligence report found that Hitler had a messiah complex.1
The Nazi ideology has biblical parallels. In traditional agricultural societies, land remained within the family. The Jews were no exception. The Bible says the bond between people and land is not to be broken, and land is not to be sold (Leviticus 25:23). The Nazi ideology of Blood and Soil focuses on ethnicity and homeland and stresses the importance of the land people live on and celebrates rural living. The Nazis made the ownership of selected lands hereditary. Those lands could not be mortgaged or sold. The Nazis sought to return to their Eden, without Jews and other undesirables. The Holocaust became the culmination of centuries of anti-Semitism fed by prejudices in popular culture.
The Nazis objected to degenerate art, which supposedly was perverse, thus, Communist or Jewish. Ironically, a Jew, Max Nordau, was the one who coined the term degenerate art for modern art, which he believed was the work of feeble minds corrupted by modern life who had lost their self-control. That was by far not the only idea that the Nazis borrowed from the Jews. It is the irony of history.
Nazism and Judaism both have fairy tales about superior people, the nation’s greatness, messianic leadership, and a promised land. Like the Nazis, the Jews have been keen on not allowing mixed marriages, not to keep their tribe racially pure, but to keep it free from foreign influences. In the past, Jews saw non-Jews as inferior, and many still do. Whether Jesus compared Gentiles to dogs, we can’t be sure of, but there is little doubt that these words reflected a widespread sentiment among Jews. It is a natural human conduct to perceive our own group as superior and other groups as inferior, and the Jews are no exception. They have only been the best at cultivating their superiority complex by producing an elaborate collection of fairy tales about their supposed special relationship with the owner of the universe, and dragging half the world’s population into it. That makes Nazism the Frankenstein’s monster that Judaism has spawned.
View of the Auschwitz concentration camp
Political views
Hitler could have been a painter had the Vienna Art School not declined his application, and we would have had a few additional acceptable wall decorations instead of World War II and the Holocaust. Hitler wouldn’t have sought revenge if Germany had not lost World War I. Had he not lived in an impoverished multicultural neighbourhood in Vienna, he might not have thought that mixing ethnic groups was a bad idea. And had there been no widespread anti-Semitism already, he wouldn’t have hated the Jews that much. Adolf Hitler was skilled at delivering speeches, often angry rants that energised his followers. During the Great Depression, he gained popularity and grabbed power in Germany. He started a war that killed fifty million people. Ten million people died in the Holocaust, including six million Jews. Few people had imagined the Nazi regime could be that depraved.
Like many Germans, Hitler considered the Peace Treaty of Versailles unjust. The treaty stipulated that Germany accept responsibility for causing World War I and pay massive reparations. The British economist Keynes warned in 1919 about the harsh peace terms imposed upon Germany. They were the product of vindictive sentiments among the allies. It could lead to another major war, Keynes warned. Hitler also opposed usury and international finance after attending a lecture by Gottfried Feder, titled ‘The Abolition of Interest Servitude.’ It was the reason Hitler joined the National Socialist Party. Hitler’s views were similar to those expressed in the Bible and the Quran. Today, unchecked trade and finance drive the creative destruction that is to terminate humankind.
Adolf Hitler coined the term ‘Big Lie’ and wrote that the masses will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one, because they would never believe others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Hitler claimed that the Jews had used this technique to blame Germany’s loss in World War I on German general Erich Ludendorff, who was a prominent nationalist political leader in the Weimar Republic. Nazi propaganda repeatedly claimed that Jews held outsized and secret power in Britain, Russia, and the United States, and that the Jews had begun a war of extermination against Germany, so Germany had a right to annihilate the Jews in self-defence. Historians see it as a big lie. The factual evidence was absent, so it was paranoia, but as others, including Marx, had already observed, Jews had enormous economic clout via international finance. The reparations Germany paid and the war debts of the Allies created an unsustainable debt loop that eventually collapsed, but there was no secret Jewish scheme behind that.
Hitler feared that the Jews would take over Germany. He believed it would happen through two seemingly opposite yet connected forces: international finance capitalism and Marxist communism. In the early 1930s, not only did the fascists have violent paramilitary groups engaged in subversive acts and street violence, but also the communists. Communism and finance operate on the international level, and both are forces working against national independence, and featured a significant Jewish presence. That doesn’t mean that the Jews operated behind them to futher Jewish interests, which is a form of paranoia.
Yet, it could eventually work out that way. In the United States, about half the wealthy US elites are Jewish, while Jews are only 2% of the US population. The elites bribe US politicians to do their bidding, and many are Jews. To get elected, American politicians from both sides must unconditionally support Israel. If not, they face the wrath of the Israel Lobby, which will terminate their career. That is also because Israel depends on American support. Otherwise, it might not have played out that way. Today, many Americans are impoverished while the wealthy, often Jewish elites, party, with the Epstein Files giving some insights into the particulars.
Yet, there have also been pogroms, in which populations attacked and murdered Jews and looted their possessions. The Night of Broken Glass is the most famous. It was a nationwide pogrom in Germany organised by the Nazis with looting and destruction of Jewish property. It points to the broader issue of people from different cultures living together and causing harm to one another because different cultures have different strengths and weaknesses. Both groups have a relative advantage, which can harm the other. The Jews have money, on which they may charge interest and exploit the other group, while the others have the numbers, which they may use to plunder.
Inspired by scientific discoveries about natural selection, the Nazis became preoccupied with the fitness of the race. They euthanised those whom they believed were unfit, such as the disabled. Had we still lived in nature, many disabled people wouldn’t have survived, as the communities they lived in would have abandoned them, lacking the means to keep them alive or didn’t want to care for them. Civilisation allows the inept to survive. If you can do a trick, you can get your cheque. You may even get away without contributing. Human bands had lazy people, but social controls and the struggle for survival kept the issue in check. In advanced civilisations with enormous surpluses, large swaths of the population receive money for non-essential activities in the bullshit economy. The Nazis believed that if the feeble survived and procreated, that would weaken the race.
To the Nazis, other races were inferior. Some were good enough as slaves, while others had to disappear. Apart from the Jews, the Nazis exterminated the Roma. Today, 70% of the Roma living in Eastern Europe have criminal records, and the majority of them rely on welfare. They still suffer from mob violence and exclusion.2 These figures make it understandable why people dislike them. The Jews as a group are problematic because, if you let things run their course, they may gain an outsized share of wealth and influence via trade, usury and political corruption. And that is the primary reason why anti-Semitism is once again rearing its ugly head. Cultures, so norms, values and myths, hold groups together, so you can’t reason with groups as you can with individuals. And it is not only the Roma and the Jews. We all do harm to others through our values and conduct, and the myths we believe. Capitalism and myths of national greatness are the most destructive. And so, Hitler ruined Germany more than the Jews ever could.
Why do they hate us?’ It was a question few Americans asked after the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks. And then the Americans did precisely what many Muslims hated them for: bombing and occupying a Muslim country, and even one that had nothing to do with the attacks. Muslims never ask themselves why others hate them. In many places where Muslims live together with others, there is trouble. If we are to live in one world community, it is a question everyone should ask. Why do others hate us? Pride is the gravest sin of all. The prejudices others hold about your group often have a basis in reality. How others view you tells you more about yourself than how you see yourself. It is natural to be proud of your traditions and culture, but that is also why humanity fails.
If we are to survive, we must all be honest about ourselves, our traditions, and the consequences of our conduct. We must stop harming others. In hindsight, the Nazi racial superiority ideology was a guise to address cultural issues plaguing German society. Mixing people from different cultures causes trouble. Yet, none of today’s cultures meets the requirements for our future, so we must all change. The message hidden in God marrying Hitler is that God doesn’t care about a few billion deaths because we are less than worms to Her. That sober assessment should discipline us. If God sends a messiah, we will have to obey like the Germans obeyed Hitler, as he has to implement a final solution for humanity so that humanity might survive. He has to do it regardless of the consequences for individuals. According to the Bible, Jesus said he would separate the sheep from the goats. And so, you either fit in, or you don’t, and that, as Jesus said, the punishment for those who don’t will be harsh, and it could be concentration camps.
Harsh questions
The Nazis didn’t shy away from harsh questions, or at least the ones that could be a pretext for mass murder. The world is finite. The Nazis obsessed over limited resources or living space, and thought that the Germans needed more of it, so that Germany should start wars to conquer territory. The issue of limited resources is far more pressing today, and the alternative to warfare is sharing. Sadly, we aren’t inclined to do so, except perhaps at gunpoint. Revolutions, whether the American Revolution or the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, were not only about ideals but above all about people desiring more for themselves. More stuff is what motivates people. And that comes at the expense of something, such as other people or nature. An economic crisis brought Hitler to power, and an economic miracle made him popular with the Germans.
As for limited resources, you run into questions like, is it okay to spend €100,000 per year to keep one person alive, while that money could have saved a hundred others? Those who take more than is sustainable or have many children condemn others to death. By avoiding these questions or failing to take adequate action, the problems will only get out of hand, so that in the end the suffering will be greater. And so, those living luxurious lifestyles and those having many children are not better than the Nazis. Malthus may have had it wrong for 200 years, but that doesn’t mean he will not be right in the end. Likewise, end-time predictors were wrong for 2,000 years, but that doesn’t mean the end time will not arrive. The world doesn’t need children. On the contrary, the fewer humans, the better. Humans are the most destructive species that has ever roamed this planet.
That brings us to eugenics, or the improvement of the human race via selective breeding. Why would we bring misfits into the world if we can avoid it? If you suffer from a severe hereditary disease, why should you have children? If you are mentally incapable of raising children because you are a retard, a criminal, an alcoholic or a drug addict, should you be allowed to have children? Excessive consumers of resources and planetary destroyers who transfer their lifestyles to their offspring. Should we allow billionaires to breed? Whether greed stems from a genetic defect or is a value instilled through upbringing, we can’t have more useless eaters living off capital that ruins the planet. The prevailing liberal view is that it is a human right to have children. And then liberals leave it up to science to fix the problems this view causes. But to own a gun or to drive a car, you need a license and prove you are sane. So, why don’t we have to qualify to have children?
Drug abuse
Adolf Hitler was a hypochondriac suffering from mood swings, Parkinson’s disease, flatulence, skin problems and a gradual decline. His physician, a quack named Dr Theodor Morell, gave him unorthodox medications, such as cocaine, speed, glucose, testosterone, estradiol, and corticosteroids. In addition, Der Führer received a preparation made from a gun cleaner, rat poison and atropine to treat his farting.
Der Führer miraculously survived all these treatments, but they contributed to his erratic conduct and illnesses. He also ingested an extract of bulls’ semen and numerous vitamins and tonics. He took potions, pills and injections to improve his sexual performance to deal with the sexual appetite of his demanding mistress, Eva Braun. As they say, behind every strong man is a strong woman, and sometimes an even stronger one.
Eva Braun
Eva Braun was the mistress and later wife of Adolf Hitler. Most historians consider Her an insignificant figure who didn’t participate in political decisions. But opinions differ. A letter demonstrates that Braun knew of the concentration camps and the gas chambers. Some Nazi officials close to Hitler have said that Braun was at the centre of Hitler’s life for most of his twelve years in power. She was committed to Hitler, won his affection, gave him moral support, and enjoyed a healthy sex life with him. Braun’s friends have said that She giggled over a photograph of Neville Chamberlain sitting on a sofa in Hitler’s Munich apartment and said, ‘If only he knew what goings-on that sofa has seen.
Hitler’s letters indicate that he was fond of Her, and worried when She participated in sports or was late returning for tea. Hitler’s secretary, Traudl Junge, stated that during the war, Hitler telephoned Braun every day. After learning about a failed plot to kill Hitler in 1944, Braun wrote to him, ‘From our first meeting, I swore to follow you anywhere even unto death. I live only for your love.’ And that was how it ended. Over twenty plots to kill Hitler failed, making Hitler believe a supernatural force protected him. When the end of the Third Empire neared, Braun became merrier. In the end, She married Hitler and committed suicide together with him. It was the romantic ending She desired.
Hitler’s letters indicate that he was fond of Her, and worried when She participated in sports or was late returning for tea. Hitler’s secretary, Traudl Junge, stated that during the war, Hitler telephoned Braun every day. After learning about a failed plot to kill Hitler in 1944, Braun wrote to him, ‘From our first meeting, I swore to follow you anywhere even unto death. I live only for your love.’ And that was how it ended. Over twenty plots to kill Hitler failed, making Hitler believe a supernatural force protected him. When the end of the Third Empire neared, Braun became merrier. In the end, She married Hitler and committed suicide together with him. It was the romantic ending She desired.
Was Eva Braun God and the mastermind behind Hitler’s rise and demise? Hitler, having been the most messianic figure in modern times, and God’s inclination to marry messiahs would make it a most plausible inference. Coincidences can serve as a clue. Braun is the German word for brown. Adolf Hitler was born in Braunau am Inn, and brown is the colour associated with the Nazis. Nazis were nicknamed brown shirts. And Eva is German for Eve. Eva had a passion for nude sunbathing to brown Her skin. She loved being photographed naked. She had no shame like Eve in the Garden of Eden.
For God, the story didn’t end with the Third Reich’s demise. She may have become Marilyn Monroe by assuming the identity of Norma Jeane Mortenson. I contemplated that possibility when watching a Netflix documentary about Monroe’s life. Immediately after my thought, the word goddess appeared on the screen in massive lettering. That hint was as plain as it could get. Monroe had an affair with US President John F. Kennedy. He later dumped Monroe. Soon afterwards, Kennedy met the Grim Reaper in an epic scene dubbed the Kennedy assassination.
Messing with Monroe seemed to have been Kennedy’s most fatal mistake. People still speculate about a plot behind the assassination, so here is the answer that renders the speculation trivial. A set of coincidences surrounds the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert. They are part of an intricate scheme involving the premature deaths of Presidents, including James A. Garfield. Furthermore, the Kennedy family suffered a series of accidents and early deaths called the Kennedy Curse. The book ‘The Virtual Universe’ delves deeper into the matter.
The prophecy of the Holocaust
Rumour has it that Nostradamus predicted the coming of Adolf Hitler, as the word ‘Hister’ appears in his ravings. Hister is Latin for the Danube River. These names are alike, and that is the supposed proof. Hitler’s birthplace was on a tributary of the Danube, a peculiar coincidence. More ominous are the prophetic references to six million Jews in danger of being exterminated or a coming Holocaust of Jews appearing in Jewish magazines before World War II. That is not as remarkable as it might seem. The figure emerged because six million Jews lived in the Russian Empire before World War I. Jews in Russia suffered from a hostile government and pogroms. Pogroms are riots incited to expel or kill Jews.
The Russian Empire collapsed due to its dramatic losses during World War I. After a revolution and a civil war, the Soviet Union emerged. Still, the six million figure continued to circulate in Jewish publications, which is odd as that number had lost its relevance since the former Russian Empire had been split up into different nation-states. Yet, it became the number of Jews murdered in the Holocaust.5 And so, these prophetic statements are eerie, like the reference to the end date of World War I on the licence plate of Franz Ferdinand’s car. The most notable ones are listed below:
In 1911, at the tenth Zionist Congress in Basel, Switzerland, Max Nordau, co-founder of the World Zionist Organisation, together with Theodore Herzl, prophesied the annihilation of six million Jews.
Shortly after World War I in 1919, Zionists feared that a Holocaust of six million Jews was imminent in Europe.
According to the New York Times, in 1936, Zionists were lobbying for a Jewish state in Palestine to save the Jews from a European Holocaust. It was three years before World War II and five years before the extermination camps came into existence.
In 1939, The Jewish Criterion predicted the coming world war would annihilate six million Jews in East and Central Europe.
In 1940, the Jewish leader Nahum Goldmann predicted that if the Nazis achieved victory, six million Jews would be doomed to destruction.
That ugly face in the mirror
Fascists, and nazis in particular, are often disagreeable people because they obsess with the struggle for survival, and the struggle for survival is particularly disagreeable and raises ugly questions that civilised people wish to avoid. And there once was a time when life in the West was more civilised, and people had difficulty imagining why Adolf Hitler came to power. The 1981 film ‘The Wave’ is from that era. It is about a schoolteacher, Ben Ross, who, in 1967, showed his class a film about the Holocaust. One of his pupils asked him how the Germans could have rallied behind Adolf Hitler and committed these atrocities. Ross couldn’t answer the question and decided to start an experiment.
Ross began by offering advice on posture and classroom rules to improve efficiency. The pupils took it up with enthusiasm. The next day, he introduced The Wave, a youth movement with a secret salute. Robert, an unpopular student, was assigned to monitor the other students, a task that filled him with pride. Nationalist pride stands at the centre of fascism. We all want to be part of something great. Robert reported unorthodox behaviour to Ross and the other Wave members. Two hundred students joined. Wave members intimidated and bullied other students. The school newspaper published a negative review about The Wave, prompting Wave members to plan an attack on the editor.
The following day, Ross said the Wave was a nationwide youth movement in schools and that its leader would give a televised speech. The eager Wave students assembled in the auditorium with television monitors on display. To their horror, the monitors displayed a film of Adolf Hitler at a Nazi rally. Ross told them that this was their leader. The experiment showed that most of us are fit to become Nazis or would not resist a fascist takeover. Another experiment showed that humans are capable of extreme cruelty if they believe it is for a good cause. Most of us aren’t heroes, so if we think we are at risk by doing good, we may, at best, passively resist by not cooperating. Most people wouldn’t endanger themselves by hiding Jews, but they also wouldn’t rat out people who were hiding them. Yet, only one rat sufficed, so most Jews ended up in the concentration camps.
We remember the Nazis for their cruelty, but they were also gangsters. Hermann Göring looted art and other precious items, a recurring pattern in authoritarian regimes. Fascist leaders are often gangsters who lie more brazenly than other politicians, engage in crimes, violent uprisings and coups to overthrow the government, while brazenly claiming that the opposition, the so-called far-left extremists, are doing these things, to go after their opponents with trumped-up charges in political processes. Donald Trump is an excellent example with his big lie about election fraud, lawsuits against his political opponents, and gangster raids on several countries. As the liberal world order is falling apart, the rise of fascist gangster regimes is rather unsurprising.
Fascism greatly appeals to human nature. Our natural state is living in gangs. These gangs cooperate and compete with other gangs. Human groups are violent and commit murders. In pre-state societies, about 25% of the adult males had a violent death. States eventually succeeded in bringing down the murder rate by over 99%. So, fascism is a natural response to a perceived collapse in order. And without fascism, humans remain violent. Since World War II, about 10 million people have died in wars. Many of these wars were related to the power struggle between the West and the Soviet Bloc.
The way forward
We may have good intentions, but the outcome of all that humans do is a total disaster. We have created a system that amplifies our destructive inclinations, so we are heading toward an apocalyptic event, sometimes called the End Times. That system is worse than Adolf Hitler. If our survival is at stake, we should do whatever it takes, but somehow we fail to unite and let it happen. To Hitler, the fight was about the survival of the German people. Hitler was a messianic figure, and the Germans rallied behind him. That God married him makes clear that we are nothing in Her eyes. The coming struggle will be about the survival of humankind, and we need a messianic figure to unite us and make the right decisions.
In the real world, that didn’t happen, and post-humans have replaced humans. We live in a simulation run by these post-humans. What they precisely are remains unclear. The post-humans don’t need to be enhanced biological creatures, but could be artificial intelligence. Current developments suggest that humans will soon be no match for artificial intelligence. We also don’t know how humanity ended or whether humans are kept alive in reservations. This simulation runs a script, so we all play our roles, including the messiah. That means that he can’t save you. He can only provide guidance. You need to accept it to save yourself. Whether we succeed or not depends on God, as She wrote the script. In any case, if it is about survival, we must do whatever it takes. Yet, God is in control.
Refrain from anger and turn from wrath. Do not fret—it leads only to evil. For those who are evil will be destroyed, but those who hope in the Lord will inherit the land.
A little while, and the wicked will be no more. Though you look for them, they will not be found. But the meek will inherit the land and enjoy peace and prosperity.
Psalm 37:8-11
Latest revision: 6 June 2026
Featured image: Eva Braun and Adolf Hitler
1. WWII Adolf Hitler’s profile suggests a messiah complex. BBC (2012). [link] 2. Harvard International Review. Minority Report: Roma and Eastern Europe (2019). 4. Nazi loyalist and Adolf Hitler’s devoted aide: the true story of Eva Braun. The Guardian (2010). [link] 5. The Six Million Jews. [link]
The Plan For The Future 