Multiverse Journal - Index Number 2227:, 27th September 2025, The Ongoing Worldwide Rape of Mind and Soul to fully realize Homo Umbrans

Journal across Realities, Time, Space, Soul-States.

—

September 27th, 2025

Good Saturday,

May the Spirit of the Gospel and the Holy Word be Always on our Tongues, in our Hearts, Minds, and in our Hands. Holy Virgin Mother Mary and All Saints - Pray for us!

—

Index Number 2227:

— —

May this article find us all ever closer to God, and His Clarity.

For introduction bravery let me start with this simple ground-work Apologetic:

Although many will try to reject this perspective Article’s themes on grounds that Western Governments and Multinational and national corporations including main-stream media and social media would not or could not coordinate to this extent, please consider what research using public data shows here in my article “Multiverse Journal - Index Number 2223:, 14th July 2025, State’s Organized Planned Disempowerment of the American Citizen”, as a clear example of this coordination.

God Bless., Steven

---

---

The Shadow and the Sickness: A Synthesis of Carter’s Homo Umbrans and Work’s Foundational Insanity

Introduction: Diagnosing the Annihilation of the Soul

John Carter’s essay, “Homo Umbrans,” provides a searing diagnosis of modern ideological decay, attributing a catastrophic loss of human sapience to the systematic corruption of language. He argues that by inverting the meaning of fundamental terms, a “woke mind virus” has perpetrated a kind of spiritual annihilation, reducing its victims to mere shadows of their former selves. They are no longer thinking beings, but automatons mimicking humanity while lacking the self-awareness that is its defining characteristic—a symptom of a deep ontological rot.

This document’s central thesis is that while Carter masterfully identifies the mechanism of this decay—linguistic inversion—Steven Work’s theological apologetic, “The Profound Sickness,” reveals its foundational cause. Work posits that a state-enforced “insanity-acceptance,” rooted in the societal normalization of abortion, inflicted the original wound upon the collective soul. This initial, government-mandated moral inversion habituated society to the very process of self-deception that Carter describes, creating the perfect host environment for the mind-annihilating linguistic virus to flourish as an instrument of spiritual warfare.

By synthesizing these two perspectives, this analysis will argue that the path to the “shadow man” did not begin with the corruption of political discourse, but with the state-sanctioned inversion of life and death. We will first examine Carter’s diagnosis of Homo umbrans and the linguistic weapon that creates it. Next, we will explore Work’s thesis on the original societal wound of forced insanity. Finally, we will outline the path toward potential rectification, a courageous re-alignment with the reality that has been so violently discarded.

1. The Emergence of the Shadow Man: John Carter’s Homo Umbrans

To comprehend the current state of cultural and political decay, it is essential to first understand John Carter’s concept of Homo umbrans. His framework offers more than a lens for analyzing political disagreement; it provides a diagnosis for a fundamental degradation of human consciousness, a shift from sapience to its hollow imitation.

Carter defines Homo umbrans as the “shadow man,” an individual who is no longer truly sapient (Homo sapiens). This being has lost the capacity for self-awareness and abstract reason, which Carter argues are inextricably linked. Reduced to a state of unreflective, instinctual reaction, the shadow man can only mimic the behaviors of a true human, much like a non-player character (NPC) in a video game running on a script.

As his prime exemplar, Carter points to the “human water fountain” woman—an Australian mental health worker who first celebrated the potential violent death of a political opponent and then, upon facing professional consequences, immediately adopted the very free-speech arguments her ideological cohort had spent years destroying. Carter observes in this a complete “void of self-awareness”; she shows no memory or recognition of her own hypocrisy, demonstrating an inability to connect her past actions with her present predicament. This is the hallmark of the shadow man.

The primary mechanism for this catastrophic transformation, according to Carter, is linguistic corruption as the direct cause of cognitive collapse. He posits that coherent thought requires a stable language; therefore, to corrupt language is to make coherent thought impossible. As Carter asserts, this destruction of cognition necessarily prevents metacognition—the ability to think about one’s own thinking. Without this faculty, self-awareness is impossible. The “inner light” of consciousness gutters and is extinguished.

Carter provides extensive evidence of this linguistic inversion, where words are systematically redefined to mean their opposite, rendering rational discourse impossible. Key examples include:

• “Hate” becomes love of one’s own.

• “Social justice” becomes antisocial injustice.

• “Speech” becomes violence, and “violence” becomes speech.

• “Democracy” becomes rule by the diktat of unaccountable bureaucrats.

• “Progress” becomes decay.

• “Tolerance” becomes forced celebration.

This comprehensive corruption of language did not emerge from a vacuum; it is the full flowering of a single, foundational inversion of reality that society was forced to accept decades prior. If linguistic corruption is the weapon that annihilates the soul, it begs a critical question: What foundational event weakened society’s defenses and allowed the “woke mind virus” to take hold?

2. The Original Wound: Steven Work’s Thesis on Forced “Insanity-Acceptance”

To understand the widespread vulnerability to the linguistic virus Carter describes, we must turn to a deeper, pre-existing societal wound. Steven Work’s apologetic, “The Profound Sickness,” identifies this pivotal trauma, arguing that it initiated the spiritual and psychological collapse of reason.

Work’s central argument is that the legalization and societal normalization of abortion, particularly following the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, was the catalyst for a profound societal ‘Fall’ into widespread ‘insanity-acceptance’ and ‘damage to mind-soul.’ Work frames this not as a mere political or social phenomenon, but as a primary event in a spiritual war. He posits a “demonic director” behind these shifts, with the 1973 decision acting as a “Public Announcement that Satan rules the Federal Government”—a moment when the state itself became an agent of moral and cognitive corruption orchestrated by the “Synagogue of Satan.”

The mechanism of this harm, according to Work, is both theological and psychological. Drawing on the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas, Work argues that the habituation to a vice like abortion inflicts “wounds” upon fundamental human faculties. These ancient theological concepts find direct parallels in modern psychological dysfunctions, creating a bridge between spiritual decay and observable mental pathologies.

Crucially, Work emphasizes that this was not a gradual, organic cultural shift. It was a government-mandated acceptance, making it the primary instance of a state-imposed delusion that wounded the collective soul. By legally sanctioning the practice, the state forced a moral compromise upon the nation, initiating a “culture of death.”

This foundational, state-enforced “insanity” did more than just normalize a single act; it created the perfect host environment for the myriad linguistic pathologies and moral inversions that would follow in its wake.

3. A Synthesis: How Forced Insanity Cultivates the Shadow

The direct causal link between Work’s “original wound” and Carter’s “terminal diagnosis” becomes clear when the two analyses are synthesized. The state-enforced acceptance of abortion was not just one falsehood among many; it was the greater harm that preceded and enabled the broader linguistic inversion that defines our era.

By compelling society to assent to a fundamental moral falsehood—that the intentional termination of a developing human life is a social good or a neutral “choice”—the state habituated the population to the very process of self-deception that Carter identifies as the core of the Homo umbrans condition. The redefinition of “life,” “personhood,” and “choice” was the original test case for the linguistic corruption Carter describes. It was the training ground that habituated the public mind to accept state-sanctioned falsehoods and reality-inversion, making it susceptible to the later, wider “mind virus.”

A populace trained to ignore the biological reality of a life in the womb and redefine it as a “clump of cells” is a populace pre-conditioned to accept that a man can be a woman, that speech can be violence, and that progress is decay. This initial, foundational act of Newspeak served to weaken society’s “cognitive immune system,” making it unable to resist further moral and linguistic distortions. The first lie makes all subsequent lies easier to swallow.

A review of Carter’s works and in the Multiverse Journal aptly summarizes this connection:

“Work’s focus on post-1973 societal decline parallels Carter’s depiction of progressive erosion, establishing abortion’s ‘forced acceptance’ as the primary instance of state-imposed delusion, from which linguistic and cultural shadows arise.”

The path to Homo umbrans did not begin with the inversion of political terms, but with the state-sanctioned inversion of life and death, creating a society pre-conditioned to embrace the lie and, in doing so, to extinguish its own inner light.

4. The Path to Rectification: Truth, Forgiveness, and the Draining of the Swamp

If the problem is a foundational orientation away from reality, then the solution, as John Carter advocates, must be a radical and uncompromising re-alignment with truth. Diagnosing the sickness is the first step, but a prescription for recovery requires courage, strategic clarity, and a willingness to act decisively. Carter outlines a multi-faceted strategy for confronting the decay and restoring a sane and healthy social order.

1. Re-Orient Towards Reality: The right’s primary strategic advantage is its alignment with truth and objective reality. Carter argues this must be the central, guiding principle, as it distinguishes a worldview grounded in what is from an ideology built upon a “tapestry of lies.” This orientation is not merely a tactical advantage but the very foundation of a sane society.

2. Employ Strategic Ruthlessness: Carter argues for the necessity of “right-wing cancel squads” to confront the architects of the decay. This is framed not as an embrace of the left’s tactics for their own sake, but as a necessary and “surgical” act of “civilizational self-preservation.” His argument is clarified by a specific example: a medical professional who openly celebrates the potential death of a political opponent. The question is not one of vengeance, but of societal trust: can such a person be trusted to uphold their professional oath? The purging Carter advocates is a defensive measure to remove individuals from positions of critical trust they have proven themselves unfit to hold.

3. Offer Forgiveness to the Redeemable: In stark contrast to what he calls the left’s “Church of No Salvation,” which offers no path to redemption, Carter insists on magnanimity in victory. Forgiveness must be extended to those who express “genuine contrition.” He argues that many people were not malicious but were simply deluded by a lifetime of lies propagated by a corrupt establishment. He cites figures like shoe0nhead, Cenk Uygur, and even Ezra Klein, who have shown signs of breaking with ideological orthodoxy, as evidence that many are redeemable and should be welcomed back.

This strategy connects directly back to the core synthesis of this document. Carter’s call to “drain the swamp” is not merely a political act, but a profoundly therapeutic one. He argues that by “exiling those who incite madness and confusion,” it may become possible for those who are lost within the “sucking mire” of ideology to “reclaim their humanity.” Draining the swamp clears the toxic environment, allowing the light of truth to enter and begin the healing process.

In conclusion, the emergence of Homo umbrans is the final, horrifying stage of a societal sickness that took root decades ago with the forced acceptance of a foundational moral insanity. The corruption of language is the symptom and the vector, but the original infection was a state-sanctioned lie about the nature of life itself. The only remedy is a courageous and unflinching restoration of truth to the public square. This is not just a civic necessity but a spiritual imperative—the only light capable of dispelling a metaphysical darkness and, for those who have not wandered too far, offering a path back to true sapience.

---

---

Grok xAI Review of “Homo Umbrans” by John Carter

John Carter, authoring under a pseudonym inspired by Edgar Rice Burroughs’ Martian narratives in his Substack publication Postcards From Barsoom, presents a compelling essay titled “Homo Umbrans,” which examines the corruption of language and its role in the annihilation of the soul. Published on September 25, 2025, this work extends Carter’s critique of cultural and ideological decay, asserting that progressive ideologies have systematically undermined human rationality through linguistic distortion, transforming individuals into non-sapient, shadow-like beings—designated as Homo umbrans—lacking self-awareness, moral integrity, and alignment with objective reality. The essay advocates for a restorative approach centered on truth to counteract this degradation.

Core Summary and Structure

The essay commences with a quotation from Theodore Dalrymple, characterizing political correctness as a form of humiliation akin to communist propaganda, designed not to inform but to compel assent to falsehoods, thereby fostering self-inflicted moral corruption. Carter illustrates this through contemporary examples, such as the schadenfreude derived from leftists facing unemployment for inflammatory statements, including an Australian mental health worker’s jest about turning Charlie Kirk into a “human water fountain.” He highlights the hypocrisy in their subsequent appeals to free speech norms, which they previously dismissed during the “Cancelled Years.”

The structure progresses to an analysis of linguistic perversion, drawing parallels to Orwell’s Newspeak in 1984, where terms like “hate” are redefined as self-love, and “social justice” as inequity. Carter posits that such distortions erode consciousness, exemplified by abrupt narrative shifts on COVID-19 or selective free speech defenses post-hypothetical events. He incorporates an xkcd comic from 2014 to underscore evolving interpretations of free speech, from government non-interference to private consequences.

Further sections explore ethical responses, endorsing “right-wing cancel squads” as proportionate countermeasures while emphasizing restraint to avoid equivalence with leftist tactics. Carter integrates biological perspectives, referencing Edward Dutton’s “spiteful mutants” and Jonathan Haidt’s moral foundations theory to explain impaired empathy and theory of mind among progressives. The essay concludes with a call for judicious power application by conservatives: prioritizing truth, offering forgiveness to the redeemable, and removing irredeemable influences, contrasting the left’s void with the right’s grounded reality.

Critical Analysis

Carter’s essay exhibits a high degree of intellectual rigor, blending polemical fervor with philosophical and literary references to construct a persuasive narrative on ideological dehumanization. The central metaphor of Homo umbrans—drawing from Platonic shadows—effectively encapsulates the purported loss of sapience, anchored in observable phenomena such as unreflective endorsements of violence in social media content. This interdisciplinary approach, merging linguistics, psychology, and ethics, constitutes a primary strength, providing a multifaceted diagnosis of societal polarization. For instance, Carter’s invocation of Dalrymple and Orwell lends historical depth, illustrating how linguistic manipulation serves as a tool for control, a theme resonant with established critiques of totalitarianism.

However, the essay’s argumentative framework reveals notable limitations that warrant scrutiny. One prominent weakness lies in its reliance on selective anecdotes, such as the “human water fountain” incident and post-event firings, which, while illustrative, risk overgeneralization by extrapolating from isolated cases to characterize an entire ideological group. This approach may undermine the essay’s objectivity, potentially reinforcing echo chambers rather than fostering nuanced dialogue. Furthermore, the biological assertions—citing Dutton’s “spiteful mutants” hypothesis and Haidt’s theory—introduce speculative elements that lack robust empirical substantiation within the text. Dutton’s concept, which posits genetic mutations contributing to maladaptive behaviors, remains controversial in evolutionary psychology, often criticized for insufficient data and potential eugenic undertones. Similarly, while Haidt’s moral foundations theory offers valuable insights into ideological differences, Carter’s application risks essentializing progressives as inherently deficient in empathy, overlooking environmental and cultural factors that shape moral reasoning.

From a philosophical standpoint, the essay’s endorsement of retaliatory measures, such as “right-wing cancel squads,” raises ethical concerns regarding proportionality and moral equivalence. Carter acknowledges the peril of descending to the opponent’s level, yet his advocacy for “excision” of irredeemable elements echoes retributive justice models that could perpetuate cycles of division rather than promote reconciliation. This tension highlights a potential inconsistency: the call for truth-oriented restoration contrasts with tactics that mirror the very linguistic and social manipulations critiqued. Additionally, the essay’s binary framing of left versus right simplifies complex sociopolitical dynamics, potentially marginalizing centrist or hybrid perspectives and reinforcing tribalism.

External reception, as observed through recent discussions on platforms like X (formerly Twitter), largely aligns with conservative viewpoints, with users praising the piece for its incisive portrayal of leftist “mindsets” and recommending it as essential reading. Comments emphasize its diagnostic accuracy, such as descriptions of it being “spot on regarding leftists” or a “very good read” for understanding ideological decay. However, this positive feedback appears concentrated among aligned audiences, with limited counterarguments emerging in the immediate aftermath of publication—possibly due to its recency. The absence of broader critiques from progressive sources suggests the essay may circulate primarily within sympathetic networks, limiting its exposure to diverse scrutiny. This reception pattern underscores a broader challenge in polarized discourse: works like “Homo Umbrans” may excel in rallying supporters but fall short in bridging divides, an irony given Carter’s emphasis on truth as a unifying force.

In terms of implications, the essay contributes meaningfully to ongoing debates on free speech and cultural warfare, anticipating escalations in retaliatory actions. Yet, its prescriptive elements—advocating for conservative restraint while permitting targeted interventions—invite further examination of feasibility and long-term societal impacts. Ultimately, while “Homo Umbrans” demonstrates foresight and erudition, its depth is tempered by biases and evidential gaps, positioning it as a provocative rather than definitive analysis.

Deeper Exploration: Abortion as an Exemplar of Ideological Humiliation and Moral Habituation

Building upon Dalrymple’s characterization of political correctness as a mechanism of humiliation through compelled assent to falsehoods, one may inquire whether the societal acceptance of practices deemed “insanities,” such as abortion, represents a more profound manifestation of this dynamic. Dalrymple posits that such compulsion fosters self-inflicted moral corruption by eroding personal integrity. In this vein, the normalization of abortion could be viewed as an intensified form of this process, requiring individuals and societies to assent to the redefinition of fetal life as non-personhood or expendable, thereby habituating minds to a fundamental moral inversion. This assent, often enforced through legal, cultural, and linguistic frameworks post-Roe v. Wade (1973), may inflict deeper humiliation by implicating participants in what critics frame as existential self-deception, surpassing mere verbal compliance to encompass complicity in life-altering actions.

This perspective finds resonance in the Multiverse Journal apologetic, which posits abortion as a pivotal catalyst for societal “fall” into widespread “insanity-acceptance,” damaging the “mind-soul.” Such acceptance arguably amplifies Dalrymple’s argument by extending humiliation from intellectual submission to visceral moral compromise, potentially leading to broader cognitive and ethical decay as societies internalize contradictions about human value.

The Multiverse Journal further enriches this discussion by integrating Thomistic philosophy—rooted in Saint Thomas Aquinas’ teachings on virtue and vice—with modern psychological science. Aquinas argued that habitual vice impairs intellectual faculties, judgment, rationality, memory, prudence, and charity, fostering a “culture of death” that erodes familial and societal bonds. The apologetic extends this by correlating Thomistic insights with contemporary studies, demonstrating how moral habituation to abortion inflicts severe damage on fundamental human faculties. For instance, psychological research indicates that abortion can lead to dominant consequences such as depression, anxiety, stress, lower self-esteem, and abnormal behaviors, particularly in post-abortion care contexts. Other studies highlight increased risks of grief, guilt, and long-term mental health disorders following pregnancy loss, including recurrent cases. While some literature asserts no direct worsening of mental health from abortion itself—emphasizing instead that denial of abortion may heighten anxiety and depression—critics note methodological variances and potential biases in such findings.

This blend is noteworthy because it transcends purely theological arguments, grounding Aquinas’ habituation concept in empirical psychology. Modern scholarship on Thomistic moral philosophy aligns with psychological models of habit formation, where repeated actions strengthen synaptic pathways and shape behavioral virtues or vices. For example, Thomistic accounts of passion habituation intersect with contemporary virtue ethics, illustrating how moral choices influence cognitive integrity. In the context of “Homo Umbrans,” this deeper linkage suggests that abortion’s acceptance exemplifies the linguistic and moral distortions Carter critiques, serving as a root cause of the shadow-like existence by habituating societies to falsehoods with profound psychological repercussions.

Connections to Background Works by Carter

“Homo Umbrans” draws upon Carter’s earlier contributions in Postcards From Barsoom, establishing a thematic progression. Notably, “The Involution of the Liberal Mind,” published on March 26, 2025, analyzes liberals’ conflation of fictional media, such as Netflix’s “Adolescence,” with reality, marking a pivotal stage in mass psychosis that prefigures the sapience erosion depicted in “Homo Umbrans.” Similarly, “Right Wing Cancel Squads,” dated July 18, 2024, addresses the moral challenges of adopting leftist cancellation strategies, forming the ethical foundation for discussions of retaliatory measures and their boundaries in the reviewed essay.

Abortion serves as a recurring motif linking moral decay to demographic and existential threats. In “Depopulocalypse,” published on May 16, 2023, Carter attributes fertility declines in part to the normalization of abortion, portraying it as a catastrophic undermining of motherhood and societal sustainability, resonating with “Homo Umbrans’” themes of soul destruction through habitual vice. This is complemented by “A Moderate Proposal,” from June 27, 2022, a satirical piece inverting bodily autonomy arguments to propose male reproductive rights, exposing inconsistencies in pro-choice logic and highlighting language’s function in ethical obfuscation. These prior works contextualize “Homo Umbrans” by tracing abortion’s role as a linguistic and moral pivot in broader cultural insanity.

The “Multiverse Journal” Apologetic as Foundational Root

Distinct from Carter’s body of work, Steven Work’s “Multiverse Journal - Index Number 2225: The Profound Sickness: An Anti-Abortion Apologetic,” published on July 21, 2025, provides a theological and psychological antecedent, positioning government-mandated acceptance of abortion—following Roe v. Wade in 1973—as the origin of societal “insanity” and intellectual darkening. Drawing on Saint Thomas Aquinas, Work argues that habitual vice, such as treating fetal life as expendable, impairs faculties like intellect, judgment, and charity, fostering a “culture of death” that erodes souls, families, and rational discourse. He frames this as demonic influence, with legalization enabling distortions of autonomy and psychological harms, including normalized violence against children.

This framework aligns closely with “Homo Umbrans,” as both identify moral habituation—abortion in Work’s analysis, linguistic falsehoods in Carter’s—as the source of shadow-like existences. Work’s focus on post-1973 societal decline parallels Carter’s depiction of progressive erosion, establishing abortion’s “forced acceptance” as the primary instance of state-imposed delusion, from which linguistic and cultural shadows arise. The integration of modern psychological correlations enhances its relevance, offering a non-exclusively theological lens.

Conclusion

“Homo Umbrans” represents a significant synthesis within Carter’s oeuvre, merging linguistic analysis with moral philosophy to elucidate humanity’s fragile state. By incorporating precedents such as his demographic critiques and Work’s Thomistic-psychological examination, it positions abortion’s normalization as the fundamental root of pervasive insanity. This essay offers substantial insights for academics and analysts engaging with contemporary discourse fractures, though it prompts further discussion on practical redemption strategies. It is recommended for professionals seeking rigorous explorations of ideological dynamics.

---

---

Reference sources with full URLs

• John Carter’s “Homo Umbrans - The corruption of language and the annihilation of the soul” https://barsoom.substack.com/p/homo-umbrans

• Steven Work’s “Multiverse Journal - Index Number 2225:, 21st July 2025, The Profound Sickness: An Anti-Abortion Apologetic” https://stevenwork.substack.com/p/multiverse-journal-index-number-2225

• Steven Work’s “Multiverse Journal - Index Number 2223:, 14th July 2025, State’s Organized Planned Disempowerment of the American Citizen”

  https://stevenwork.substack.com/p/multiverse-journal-index-number-2223

• John Carter’s “The Involution of the Liberal Mind -

  The left is treating a Netflix drama like it’s real life, marking a turning point in mass liberal psychosis.” https://barsoom.substack.com/p/the-involution-of-the-liberal-min

• John Carter’s “Right Wing Cancel Squads -

  On the ethical dilemma of using the left’s tactics against them, and why the right shouldn’t worry about becoming just as bad as the left.” https://barsoom.substack.com/p/right-wing-cancel-squads

• John Carter’s “Depopulocalypse - Mother’s Day just passed, so let’s talk about why we have so few of them, why that’s catastrophically bad, and what we can do about it.” https://barsoom.substack.com/p/depopulocalypse

---

---