Reason meets anti-reason through reason
This comment from “The Other Chuck” was so good I decided to highlight it [emphasis mine]:
[Postmodernism is] the destruction of human reason, using reason, and the destruction of everything flowing from reason. If this sounds like nihilism, yes, but there is a purpose. That purpose is the acceptance of chaos as the only reality, an ever changing reality that allows for the whim of the moment to rule…In this kind of ever changing world there are no absolutes except the absolute of chaos. Politically the target is the Enlightenment, but that is not the main purpose IMO.
I highlighted that first sentence because I see at as the heart of the matter.
I’m not at all sure that I agree with Other Chuck’s later conclusion, however, which is that the main purpose is chaos rather than politics per se. I think both are very very important, but that the chaos—which the postmodernists do find very satisfying—is a route to political power. The two go hand in hand.
Destroying ideas via postmodernism is fun, and it also makes the destroyer powerful in the world of ideas which is, after all, the main world in which a philosopher operates. But it also is fun to see the despised traditionalists be dethroned, and to see the admired leftists take their places.
The Enlightenment emphasized both reason and individualism. It struck at those who had held power through superstition, manipulation, subjugation, and the subordination of the individual to the group. It’s no exaggeration to say that the Enlightenment is the foundation of the bulk of the Western cultural, societal, and scientific achievements of the last few centuries, and because some of the cultural elites in the west have decided those achievements are bad ones (even though they themselves are the beneficiaries of them) they would dearly love to tear them down.
The enemy of the Enlightenment has always been different forms of Romanticism. But the post-modernists are not really among the Romantics. That’s why, as The Other Chuck writes, the postmodernists use reason to perform the task of undermining the Enlightenment and its devotion to reason.
I do not have the sense that the post-modernists use reason to demolish reason. Though they do use a radical skepticism to argue against reason, empirical evidence and truth in general. Post-modernism resembles an old school of philosophy that even Socrates and Plato had to deal with. But I doubt that it is a fair characterization to describe the chicanery and intellectual slight of hand practiced by people like Derrida as being reason in any real sense.
The goal is to be able to present “the only solutions” to chaos. There is a part of the underrated movie V For Vendetta that speaks to this issue in which John Hurt’s character implores his underlings to remind the people why they need him and his government.
Bryan:
Well, you and I may not think it’s reasonable reason. It is sophistry. But it uses the tools of reason and has a logic, as opposed to an emotional appeal.
Neo wrote, “I’m not at all sure that I agree with Other Chuck’s later conclusion, however, which is that the main purpose is chaos rather than politics per se.”
I agree with you. As I learn more and more, I find tension in everything and the chaos and purpose are clearly needed for the ends justifying the means. The followers of the world are duped. They are running down the path of intersectionality and find joy in using the term to most men’s faces as they are unaware of the term.
The eradication of all that was clear science in one fell sweep without reason is the oddest part to me. What fills the void? Do scientists sit and think this is just a fad or phase?
Whatever they think, as one who worked at a California state government department that supposedly dealt with science, I was aghast at how little these people actually knew. CO2 was a pollutant? And excuse me, that person was allowed to speak about every other social justice topic known to man to target funds toward “environmental justice”. As a computer person I just sat and marveled in silence. Who was I to speak.
In this video there is a 50 minute discussion on responsibility, post modernism, blue vs. red and Jordan Peterson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQCTeGKHsVc
The conversation runs a little deep but even I realized at the end…. the team they showed was ALL white. Who are we playing off of? There was a study done that showed that if only white high school students voted in the last election, all states except California would’ve voted for Trump. That says a lot about California. When I and every other white person in California notices we have to do something but what is the something then a seed of an idea turns people into viewing nothing but color all the time.
Reason produces the idea of individual responsibility.
Chaos produces the idea that we need equality of outcomes.
Elite Socialists’ end goal is absolute order, Chaos in society was deliberately stirred up by the socialists as a fear mongering tactic to gain support from people who want peace and stability to hand them the absolute power to create an absolute harmonic society by taking away freedom the people.
Elites doesn’t like freedom, they hate free market because a free market can’t be theorized. There is no -ism to explain how a free market works except letting people do whatever in their best interests, letting the chips fall where they may and things would work itself out in the end. It hurts their feelings that all these ideologies they created with their brilliant minds does not work as well as simply as letting everyone complete freedom to do whatever they want to. But intellectuals can’t accept that, the uncontrollable gives them anxiety because they are control freaks, and their narcissistic nature prevent them letting people run their lives because liberals believe they are the better beings, they should be running everyone’s lives and world would be the utopia if the world can just forfeit their stupid freedom and let the elites rule. Liberals are agents of lucifer as they can’t accept that God gave freedom to men to govern their destinies, for better or worse, Lucifer thinks he can run the world better if all men just follow his rule, Pride was Lucifer’s downfall and will continue be liberals’ downfall.
atheists love to use the “if god is prefect why does he allow evil to exist” argument to disprove God. My answer would be if God only allows Good to exist then he would be a dictator. free will means an absolute freedom to control our destiny, even the will to choose hell over heaven, how mighty God is that he loves us so much, that he cares so much about our liberty that even the choice to cast ourselves into hell was given to us.
The ultimate lesson in the Christianity mythology is “The lord of darkness was the champion of light once” Why did he fall? Why did robespierre fall? Why did Lenin fall? why did Mao fall? why did Obama fall?
What are our founding fathers worth worshiping, why is our constitution the greatest piece of political document ever existed and we should protect it with our lives, our blood? Because George Washington is the only public figure in the history of mankind who was presented a chance to become an absolute ruler but was able to dispel the temptation and chose not to, and created the constitution with the sole purpose of constraining the government power, it is unheard of, it is ridiculous how against human natural the action was. George Washington is the only person in the history that absolute power corrupts absolutely doesn’t apply to.
Postmodernism is essentially nihilistic and amoral. It seeks to create chaos as a means toward accomplishment of its purpose, which is power.
So of course its adherents view postmodernism as a path to political power. However, postmodernists come in two flavors; utopian idealists like Trotsky and ruthless pragmatists like Stalin. The idealists view political power as necessary to the accomplishment of their utopian visions. The pragmatists view political status as necessary to their personal power. Since the pragmatist is an amoral realist and the utopian idealist rejects reality, the pragmatists will always rise to dominance over the idealists.
As for postmodernists using reason to attack reason itself… Reason employs logic to uncover the real, i.e. truth. Logics’ great flaw is its inability to examine its initial premise(s). Which is why “certain truths are self-evident” resting as they do upon either consensual opinion or the assertion of a divine edict. Postmodernism’s initial premise is that reality is subjective with objective reality an illusion. Accept that easily disproven premise and postmodernism’s logic is unassailable.
Dave,
Neither Lenin nor Mao fell, they held absolute power until their death. And Obama moved the country more to the left than any other President.
Our founders are worthy of great admiration but not of worship. Nor was Washington offered absolute rulership.
Nor was he the first to walk away from absolute power, Washington almost certainly emulated the Roman Cinncinatus who, granted absolute power as dictator during a times of war, did it… twice. First in 458BC and again in 439BC.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Lucius-Quinctius-Cincinnatus
Neo:
Thank you for the compliment of highlighting that observation, and agreeing with it. When you say the following, you’ve hit on the, let’s call it co-reason, at the heart of postmodernism:
Destroying ideas via postmodernism is fun, and it also makes the destroyer powerful in the world of ideas which is, after all, the main world in which a philosopher operates. But it also is fun to see the despised traditionalists be dethroned, and to see the admired leftists take their places.
I have yet to read Hick’s book, but it’s on order.
Michel Foucault has been at least as influential as Jacques Derrida, and Foucault definitely uses reason (sophistry if you will) to attack and attempt to demolish Western Civilization. Whereas Derrida’s books are extremely difficult to get through, Foucault’s are erudite but not impossible, and both “Discipline and Punish” and “Madness and Civilization” are showoffy texts without being absurd.
Foucault also, when he became “hot” in the 1980s, had the great advantage of his appearance (shaved bald and severe, wearing glasses) along with the fact that everyone knew he was gay.
I don’t think many are aware of what a hardcore S&M masochist he was, which to me has all kinds of ramifications and lends overtones to such things as his infatuation with Ayatollah Khomeini — the alltime “Master,” in effect the leather-daddy of his dreams.
Michel Foucault said that you can never really say you understand the “map of your body” until it’s been subjected to erotic torture. Maybe so. In any case, it seems that Foucault subliminally infected the white male intelligentsia of Western Civilization with a masochism and longing for oblivion which remains in effect to this day.
Im a conservative. Im also an atheist. I thought the Enlightenment was the best thing to happen to humanity. One would think that for those who value logic, reason, empiricism and the scientific method, many of us would naturally be atheists. You cant seriously expect rational people to expect “God works in mysterious ways” to be a valid answer for anything you cannot give a rational, reasonable answer to and expect that to be satisfying.
I guess I will always be stuck in the middle of the pre-modernist “God is truth” and the post modernist “Many gods, many truths” argument, wishing more people like me were in charge.
Postmodernists don’t use reason to eliminate reason. They stab reason in the back with a crippling, soul-less reductionism.
.
From a Western perspective, “reasonable” men and women are people who make space for meaningful dialog, and that space is created by them to preserve mutual respect and dignity for all concerned. For them, a respectful give and take creates a whole that is greater than the sum of the parts — and the give and take begins with a substantial trust that participants will similarly foster respect and dignity.
.
Postmodernism has released a corrupting flood of memes that reduce Western values to concepts subject to infinite interpretations. Postmodernists tend to exploit goodwill without fostering it; they value hypocrisy when it serves their pursuit of power, and as they gather power they BETRAY reason, dialog and dignity because in their world, there is no virtuous course — only a victorious one. They see the rest of us as self-immolating fools.
A question for Post Modernists: Is it true that there is no such thing as truth?
Doug Purdie:
Postmodernist reply would be: Depends on who is talking. Because if you subject yourself to their discourse they have power over you.
“Power” is the key word, always. This is why the students have no interest in debate. If they allow the patriarchy to speak, there’s a danger that someone might listen, and become confused.
I blame the Clintons.
Cornhead:
That’s reasonable 🙂 .
I had always said that the Black Death “killed” God, and replaced Him with Man, and that the World War (starting before WWI, and going on), killed Man, but I want sure sure what Man was replaced with.
Now the seedlings of what came to replace existed before. Before the Black Death, God and Church formed the center of life, in a sense. Things were done to celebrate the glory of God. God was truly exalted. But the devastation of the plague years shook that particular manifestation of faith in God. Man came to replace God.
Man was appreciated for the talent and knowledge he possessed. Whereas before, everything was seen as a gift from God, now things were understood to come from the talents of Man. And though the beginnings of the Renaissance started before the plague, the fact that the devastation of the Black Death knocked God out as the Center of the Universe enables the flood gates of the Renaissance to open wide.
But then came the World Wars. Maybe it started with the Anglo-Boer War, maybe earlier. But the twentieth century saw vast devastation: millions dead from war and genocide. And while the philosophy that wanted to knock Man off the pedestal, out of the place where he had replaced God, existed before the devastation of the the wars, it was World War I and World War II that dealt the last blow. Man was knocked off his pedestal.
I have wondered what Man was replaced with. I know think that postmodernism had supplied the answer: nothing. They is nothing. Nothing to celebrate, nothing to value as a gift, nothing to at the center of our existence.
Crap.
I want God or Man back!!!
As Peterson implies in Neo’s previously linked video, broad expanses of college campuses have become a postmodernist hell world. We underestimate the extent to which the entirety of our long accumulated knowledge base is under nihilistic assault with the intent to completely destroy it through false claims that all of it was constructed to serve the aims of a racist patriarchy. From the perspective of a freedom-loving democratic enlightenment, the postmodernists who have infested and hijacked academia are the worst things that have ever existed.
See also lectures on this topic by Stephen Hicks. For example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnMAbZJsxJ8
Isn’t it interesting to what extent ideas really do have influence and this has consequences in the real world?
Harry,
Do you assert there to be “inalienable rights”? If so, upon what basis do you claim them to exist, other than the current cultural consensus?
If you concur that as an atheist, the current cultural consensus is the sole basis for ‘rights’ and that a later consensus may amend, disregard and even rescind ‘rights’, then rights are really privileges that the State permits.
I suspect that you’d find that living in a society in which only rescindable priviledges exist… to be an unpleasant experience. You might want to reconsider what you’re wishing for, in that the Left is doing their level best to create it as they’re atheists too.
Isn’t it interesting to what extent ideas really do have influence and this has consequences in the real world?
So true, Miklos…
I wasn’t aware of the twisted details of Foucault’s personal life, only his twisted thinking. It explains a lot.
Harry Says:
March 6th, 2018 at 6:20 pm
Im a conservative. Im also an atheist. I thought the Enlightenment was the best thing to happen to humanity.
* * *
You might be interested in this excerpt from Jordan Peterson’s videos (he seems to be the ubiquitous “go to” person these days).
If you’ve listened to anything by him, you know he is a passionate proponent of Enlightenment principles, a rabid opponent of the post-modernists, and a respecter of the development of religious morality and the myths (or history — YMMV) that support it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-n9jAKvejRs
Jordan Peterson – Why Am No Longer An Atheist
The video is a collection of clips from his lectures and talks on the subject of transcendent morality, as instantiated in myths and Jewish scriptures.
In the first half, Peterson discusses primarily the “eden myth” in the Biblical story. I think he nails this definition: “Evil is the production of suffering for its own sake.”
At the end of the final clip, he asserts that “you can’t even look at the world without a value system.”
(the first half predates the last half, judging from his appearance, so you might want to go to the mid-mark and reverse the sequence; be warned that there are intermediate ads just like a TV show, but not cut in as well)
(as a commenter there noted, “that doesn’t mean he’s become a Christian,” but many of his ideas are contained in or related to Christian doctrines, without his associating them with the divinity of Christ)
The Enlightenment is overrated. The Goddess of Reason was no defense against the descent into the Terror. Happened pretty fast after the Enlightenment politicos got in charge, too. Funny how that works.
The catalyst for our modern freedoms was the Reformation.
Didn’t any of you people go to Sunday School?
The individual’s Freedom of Conscience and liberation from interlocutors between man and that which is Holy became the basis of Western Civilization’s world view in the modern (post Renaissance) era. Individual political agency was an inevitable follow on effect, with Protestant countries driving the leading edge of political freedoms.
Don’t ask me why elites were so determined to lead us into a post-Christian era but here we are. So now we have SJW’s telling us driving cars is evil and the disaffected shooting up schools instead of turning the other cheek. Frightening times ahead.
“…the destruction of human reason, using reason, and the destruction of everything flowing from reason.”
Yes.
But it’s just(!) a variation on the Orwellian theme, stemming, it seems to me, from the overriding view that Perversity is essentially Morality.
And that this cult of the Perverse is at war with the enemies of the perverse: solid social foundations, family life, a culture that admires life and living things, ethics, personality, responsibility, upward (as well as downward) mobility, freedom of choice, true justice….
So that Orwell’s maxims, already encompassing the basic “Lies are Truth” and “The Truth is a Lie” may be expanded to include:
Perversity is morality.
Destruction is constructive.
Nihilism is productive.
Responsibility is irresponsible.
Violence and thuggery are social justice.
Etc.
The list is practically inexhaustible.
And so, the question is, how to stand up to the onslaught.
Wretchard, several good years ago, wrote about the power of saying “No”. But I’m afraid it will take a lot more than that to change directions, especially since the MSM is, to a large extent, responsible for the mainstreaming of perversity.
Who will be the heroes in this kulturkampf (for it is nothing less than this)? For his efforts, Jordan Peterson is right up there, together with blogs such as this, that are islands of sanity (and encouragement) in a sea of perversity….
“…personality, responsibility…”
Should be “…personal responsibility…”
AesopFan,
I think someone is stalking Jordan Peterson.
The same ‘someone’ stalked C.S. Lewis.
“Don’t ask me why elites were so determined to lead us into a post-Christian era but here we are.”
I believe it was two horrific world wars, together with what was perceived, mistakenly or not, as the Christian “official” contribution to those wars—or if not “contribution”, then the Christian response to them.
(To be sure, the Christian response was not at all monolithic….)
All this along with the social upheavals of the 19th and early 20th Centuries, and the perceived role of established religion in those areas…
Together with the establishment of heaven on earth (or at least that’s what the communists promised)….and so, it became a question of “following other gods.” (“Gods” that, for a while at least, seemed to be quite convincing—as long as one didn’t look too, too closely….)
And so, here we are….
“…George Washington…”
Very true.
But I think that Cincinnatus is the precedent.
And I believe that the image of Cincinnatus played a huge role in the life of GW—and was an influence on his decisions—as well as in the lives of the other founding fathers.
(To be sure, the image of Julius Caesar would similarly have served as a warning to all those steeped in Classical history….)
Barry,
Enlighten me, what was the ‘official Christian contribution’ to WWI? WWII?
The Christian response to the defeated Axis powers in WWII was right out of the playbook.
‘Love your enemy’.
Related:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/27891/watch-sjw-protesters-besiege-jordan-peterson-talk-james-barrett
Molly,
Yes, having a state religion can be very problematic, generally simply because, that particular state religion will generally be identified as supporting the policies of the state.
Or be expected to support those policies.
(One—extreme, perhaps—example might be the Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa.)
On the other hand, it is certainly true that in some cases, the state religion—or, more precisely, some members of it—will contest, and even try to subvert, state policies.
During WWI, the UK (and Allied) churches—naturally—prayed for victory (of the UK and its allies); while the German (and Austrian) churches prayed for victory of the German and Entente forces.
Perfectly natural, of course…. (And yet, one may, at the same time, discern a conflict between the patriotism of the respective churches and the universalist message of Christianity…)
Nor should one forget the famous Christmas truce during WWI (with Brits and Germans together singing carols, etc.), but that was early on in the war and I believe it was a one-time occurrence as the war dragged on and became more brutal.
WWII was somewhat more complicated, with some Churches (and clergy) being complicit with the Fascist policies (e.g., the well-known photograph of Catholic priests giving the Nazi salute) while other churches (and clergy and members) acting to subvert those policies and actively trying to save victims of those policies.
One could argue that the churches, under fascism had no choice, and/or had to protect themselves and their practitioners first and foremost from very real and deadly Fascist threats.
And one could argue that Nazism was essentially a Teutonic pagan and anti-Christian ideology.
My point is that post-war Christianity—in Western Europe, at least—took a beating because of the association of traditionally Christian countries (of various denominations) with the bloodbaths of the 20th centuries.
And this would include attitudes to colonialism—with its religious component—which once again, could be defended or excoriated (or both) for religious reasons.
Is it fair? Maybe not, necessarily—or at least not in all cases (since Christianity—no religion, in fact—is monolithic). But I don’t think that one can deny that the bloody century did cause many people in Christian Europe (or at least, W. Europe) to question at least certain aspects of their Christian religion (and their culture).
The question now is, with the rise of Islam in Europe (and its resurgence, generally), will Christianity—as a religion and a culture—undergo a renaissance in Europe, at least in some form.
Molly says,
And
Because:
“The individual’s Freedom of Conscience and liberation from interlocutors between man and that which is Holy became the basis of … Individual political agency …[as] … an inevitable follow on effect”
The West has been a “post Christian” place since after the Roman Emperors after Constantine at least.
It’s quite delusional of Westerners to think any true remnant of Christianity was passed to them from the Vatican or the Protestant branch off split from the Vatican theology. It’s not pleasant to hear either, but it is the truth.
I suspect the whole point of destroying traditional ideas of religion by the post modernists is to create the anti thesis to the new thesis (One World Totalitarian State Religious control). Only in a secular State gone dystopian mad, will people be yearning for the return of Religious States. The “Christian denominations” have ran out of their usefulness as democratic control methods. Time for a new Babylon to rise. Just look at the US capitol and what is on top. Look at your US dollar bill.
Nicely stated.
I don’t personally know whether it was Foucault or some other emotionally needy, solidarity and penetration craving pervert, but someone certainly elevated masochism to the status of the hidden god of the progressive movement.
Bryan Says:
March 6th, 2018 at 2:58 pm
I do not have the sense that the post-modernists use reason to demolish reason.
Time ran out for the edit, oh well. I didn’t set 5 min.
The Jesuits were known far better for their Sun Tzu art of war guerilla counter reformation tactics of using knowledge to fight the Protestant knowledge of the bible. Reason vs reason. It’s why Catholic institutions of “learning” are quite well known for adapting well to cosmology and scientific knowledge.
It is also why the more people who get higher degrees of education, the more likely they are to turn atheist or agnostic. The knowledge kills the faith that Protestants used to divide the power of the Vatican up and split it off from State religion into just “whatever religion”.
It was once widely discussed and known in Protestant circles that due to Luther’s Theses concerning Papal indulgences, Popery, Papism, and the Vatican were literally tools of the Anti Christ. Meaning the opponent of their Messiah, not the Vicar of their Messiah.
This has been forgotten in favor of re unification between Protestant and Vatican lines. The Jesuit Counter Reformation has been working for 5 plus centuries. Their army has done a rather good job, even though many people thought the Jesuits had been banned and eliminated from power before. That was probably a ruse.
Liberation Theology is Jesuit employed. It was deployed centuries before Marxism was available. Marxism props up Liberation’s Theology of killing all tyrants and overthrowing all powers. Which is useful for Jesuits to employ in Protestant countries. The current P of Rome is a Jesuit, I have heard. Liberation Theology is the “religion” of many of you self proclaimed Christians. I find that interesting, given that Jesus of Nazareth did nothing to rebel against Caesar, even though his fellow Jews clamored for a Zealot led Holy War.
I’m moderately well read in this area, and yet I am not exactly certain what “method” they [the primary thinkers not their imps and disciples] are using other than a kind of descriptive phenomenology … which on one view is or launches off of, a kind of reductionism, albeit not the science or physics based style we are most familiar with.
One of the famous Anglo-American observations/jokes about modern “French philosophy” is that one encounters no “arguments” there. But rather that it often enough reads like a series of grandiose declarations spun out of the author’s favorite anthropological assumption.
There are a number of Derrida’s interviews on YouTube, and insofar as they go, I think that they are interesting enough, and as the material of a “theory” make for a somewhat engrossing intellectual exercise, or thought problem. But …
What fills the void? Do scientists sit and think this is just a fad or phase?
Do you really want to know?
I can think of a likely candidate for limited disclosure of all the things the Deep State has been hiding from us. I don’t use the word lie, because that has become a rather ambiguous word ever since WMD+Bush II. The language has degraded and Americans have become easier to mind control as a result.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFYaT-U82JY
Anyone ever figure out what exactly is sitting on the US capitol yet? Anyone ever figure out what happened to Rumsfeld’s 3 trillion lost by the Pentagon: coincidentally as the investigation just so happened to go up in smoke when the investigators tried and died on 9/11?
You think your District of Columbia is telling any of you Americans the truth?
I, at least, have stopped believing that possibility soon after 2007. Not because of President Hussein or Demoncrats. One may as well call it the Holy Spirit, since what else can we call non human entities. Socrates called it his muse or his daemon. Daemon is probably where the word “demon” was derived from Greek Christian lines. A demon is used to mean an evil spirit. A daemon was just any kind of spirit, similar to the concept of the elohim being entities that belong to the spiritual dimension (realm/heaven).
If a Divine Artifact, like the Ark of whatever, is found and proven to be powerful beyond human limits, and the organization behind it is the Deep State or a one world religious system like the Vatican known for harboring evil… how are people going to react given that they no longer have any faith in secular science or society? I can easily predict that, and so can the brightest strategists of the human race that work for the DS.
Dave Says:
March 6th, 2018 at 3:47 pm
Elite Socialists’ end goal is absolute order, Chaos in society was deliberately stirred up by the socialists as a fear mongering tactic to gain support from people who want peace and stability to hand them the absolute power to create an absolute harmonic society by taking away freedom the people.
Dave is more or less correct, although I wouldn’t attribute that to socialism.
Socialism, like China’s capitalism, are merely tools, not the end results. Socialists are puppets of the DS. They will be useful idiots until they are no longer useful: they will still be idiots however.
The Leftist alliance in many ways was designed as a one use weapon and then later discarded. The Soviets lost control of this Weapon of Mass Deception and due to the Cold War, probably no longer bothered with funding it. Now we have a rogue Cold War era Weapon of Mass Deception, WMD, inside the uS, that we call “US citizens” or “US voters”…
I call them Demoncrats: rule by and for demons. That is exactly, and precisely, what they are.
When everything becomes Kaos and people have lost faith in their institutions like churches, voting, democracy, Western society, gender constructs, gender roles, taxation without representation, national healthcare, freedom of belief, freedom of worship, freedom to be armed and thus to live, the Deep State and One World State Religion swoops in promising this.
Novus ordo seclorum
Obey or else.
Slavery 3.0 or even 3.5
I would rather die having spoken in my manner, than speak in your manner and live. For neither in war nor yet in law ought any man use every way of escaping death. For often in battle there is no doubt that if a man will throw away his arms, and fall on his knees before his pursuers, he may escape death, if a man is willing to say or do anything. The difficulty, my friends, is not in avoiding death, but in avoiding unrighteousness; for that runs deeper than death.-Socrates before the athenian death assembly
And all of those of you who refuse to kneel down to the new Babylon, will end up leaving without your heads: sentenced to Death by the Powers That Be.
This era of time is the time where the End of All Things shall begin. You either know it or you do not, it doesn’t matter. Either people knew Civil War 2 was inevitable in 2007 US, or they did not. Nothing from this world’s “knowledge” would ever change that difference.
Our founders are worthy of great admiration but not of worship.
Indeed, yet I see many Americans unashamedly kneel down and bow before the altar at the District of Columbia. If the State and feds decree it, then it must be Law, and if it must be Law, then it must be Righteous and Must be Obeyed, Or Else you will be declared a traitor and destroyed.
So say we all right…
The Constitution, military power, worldly pleasures, or economic power has now become their idols and gods. People forget that it was the people of Sodom/Gomorrah and the people/Nimrod at Babel, that was the problem. No people, no problem.
Is it fair? Maybe not, necessarily–or at least not in all cases (since Christianity–no religion, in fact–is monolithic). But I don’t think that one can deny that the bloody century did cause many people in Christian Europe (or at least, W. Europe) to question at least certain aspects of their Christian religion (and their culture).
Your point is fair and I detect little to no hostility towards labels such as Christians. Ulterior motives are the bane of humanity after all.
Did you ever hear about the story that one particular faith in post WW2, decided that charitable works would begin the healing between the Germans and their enemies? As Germany was suffering from a famine and food production/transportation was disrupted, potatoe farming plots were funded in the less war torn districts of the faithful. After these farms would bear fruit, the extra produce would be sent to starving Germany to feed the same group under the same faith.
Yet what did the former enemies of Germany think? They could not stand knowing that the potatoes they were growing would go to those Germans, even if they were of the same faith.
That is how much humanity’s little “war of righteousness” did to the souls of petty small humans.
Only through the inspiration of the Holy Ghost and through charitable works, was this healed. Action, not a bunch of words on a dead Constitution. Not through a State Religion run by humans harboring evil intent, evil hearts, and blood stained evil hands. Not through Western philosophy, theology, and science.
You might be interested in this excerpt from Jordan Peterson’s videos (he seems to be the ubiquitous “go to” person these days).
Got to love that cult of personality, eh Aesop…
Humans, no matter what, need a leader. No matter how often I chide them, they won’t become enlightened on their own merits or even through the aid of the Holy Spirit. Human free will blocks that often times.
It is unavoidable for a large organization to need top down hierarchies. While organizations, grassroots, that have bottom up hierarchies often have the left hand fighting the right hand. The situation where a top down organization also has bottom up hierarchies… seems much like an idealistic conception.
It remains to be seen whether Americans, in this decayed world ruled by the DS, or JordanP, can break out of the dead lock.
Lee Says:
March 6th, 2018 at 8:29 pm
I had always said that the Black Death “killed” God, and replaced Him with Man, and that the World War (starting before WWI, and going on), killed Man, but I want sure sure what Man was replaced with.
I rather think the Black Death killed feudalism, which also killed the Vatican’s absolute control over reading of the bible and various heresies and groups opposed to the Vatican theology. Given the population loss, serfs became much more valuable. This decreased the control of the feudal State. Which also decreased the control of the Vatican through the States.
The Vatican’s power was partially replaced by Man’s ingenuity, in the form of the Protestant wars. This was more in the case of a civil war, where the Protestants claimed that the so called “Vicar of Christ” known as the P of Rome, was in fact the Anti Christ, not the Vicar of Christ, but the opponent of their Christ. Kind of hard to “fudge” that kind of stuff with theology.
The Counter Reformation by the Jesuits did something interesting to the Protestants.
I’m not too much worried about post modernists. They are an expendable weapon, a dead end path. I am more worried about the future grand strategies of the one world religious state and the Deep State, of course. But then again, Americans are often times short sighted. Can people afford to be so short sighted against their internal domestic enemies now that the entire country has been stripped of divine protections?
David Hume (Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, Part I):
“You propose then, Philo, said Cleanthes, to erect religious faith on philosophical scepticism; and you think that, if certainty or evidence be expelled from every other subject of inquiry, it will all retire to these theological doctrines, and there acquire a superior force and authority. Whether your scepticism be as absolute and sincere as you pretend, we shall learn by and by, when the company breaks up; we shall then see whether you go out at the door or the window, and whether you really doubt if your body has gravity or can be injured by its fall, according to popular opinion derived from our fallacious senses and more fallacious experience. And this consideration, Demea, may, I think, fairly serve to abate our ill-will to this humorous sect of the sceptics. If they be thoroughly in earnest, they will not long trouble the world with their doubts, cavils, and disputes; if they be only in jest, they are, perhaps, bad railers, but can never be very dangerous, either to the state, to philosophy, or to religion.”
Mr. Hume, it seems, underestimated somewhat the dangers yet to be discovered, dangers present in another set of subjects, namely, in the gullibility of his fellow common men, the presumptively ruling sovereigns of our republican democracies.
Ymar Sakar says above: “Got to love that cult of personality” — in reference to Jordan Petrerson being referred to as “the ‘go-tp’ man these days.”
Well, if humans are pack animals, like wolves for instance, such do tend to wait for and seek a leader of the pack. Armies seem to need a general; platoons function best with a trusted officer. (I believe the Soviet Red Army, early on, tried voting in small units on what to do next, and it didn’t go too well against the more organized — at that point — Whites.)
Sheep, left to their own devices in a field, spend their time milling around, easy to stampede. Cattle likewise.
Unmotivated humans can be quite sheeplike, lacking a shepherd (with a dog).
Sometimes people are all sharing much the same thought, or thoughts, but don’t realize this until it’s pointed out.
So long as you have a chain of command hierarchy top down, the Deep State can hijack/corrupt/eliminate your leaders and thus your organization dies.
Notice what the IRS was told to do to the Tea Party. That didn’t even kill your leaders, just isolated/froze them with legal loops to prevent them from being funded.
Instead of facing the might of the TP in politics using tactics or strategy, they cut your food supply and then waited until the enemy was too weak to do much against Hussein Obola in 2012.
you think humans came up with that grand strategy? I prefer to think Lucifer has an advisory role with his Demoncrats. Most of you humans aren’t as intelligent as parrots and crows are. Makes people easier to con. Evidence is the power of the Leftist alliance.
If I had the power but allowed the Left to do what they did in the US since 1930, I’d be a retarded fool too…
Humans are sheep in that they are livestock in the eyes of the Deep State and Leftist zombies. You are their prey, not their masters. The police when they say you are “sheep”, they don’t mean citizens they need to protect..