09.29.07
Gurdjieff was against abolition
Michael Medved Defends Slavery
Posted by Jillian at 1:00 PM on September 28, 2007.
Jillian: Way to go, Medved, have you considered pimping this argument out to David Duke? I bet he’d love it.
G.I. Gurdjieff, et al,… sufi hyenas
post on ‘sufi hyenas’.
Perhaps this post was misleading! I was not proposing another consipiracy theory, but simply expressing pure paranoia. We can’t easily figure this one out.
Read the rest of this entry »
09.28.07
Sillykitty, I’m worried
SK has pestered me to reveal the secrets of occult mindcontrol, and I have protested my ignorance of such a category.
Anyway, SK, read this opening paragraph from Krugman today.
Sometimes it seems that the only way to make sense of the Bush administration is to imagine that it’s a vast experiment concocted by mad political scientists who want to see what happens if a nation systematically ignores everything we’ve learned over the past few centuries about how to make a modern government work.
I agree that it is very hard to grasp George Bush. And there is something very fishy about all this. The sheer speed with which great damage has been wrought on American democracy is almost unnerving. Krugman unwittingly (maybe not accurately, his statement is merely en passant, of course) puts his finger on the strangeness of Bush and his destructive, self-destructive, crypto-fascist style.
Sillykitty, from what you and I know about sufi hyenas, we have to ask, why would a figure in politics be exempt?
Don’t look at what he says and does, look at the net result over six years!
Weimar Germany was a democracy too.
Very worried, Sillykitty.
Sillykitty terrorized by sufi hyena
Sillykitty comments.
Welcome back, SK.
Readers may not recall our threads on ‘sufi hyaenas’ (sic, spelled thus) and ‘sillykitty’ and ‘mindcontrol’ and ‘Rajneesh’ here. Use these quotes as search items.
He has been avoiding me, and this blog, for reasons unknown (I am hard to like, I guess), no problem with that.
I mention this to comment on something in the Times today, Krugman’s OpEd, in the next post.
09.27.07
Involution, evolution, history, and self-evolution
An interesting discussion (crossposted Teilhard/chaosmos@yahoogroups.com): in the list vicinity of this link,Re: [teilhard] Re: Value of neo-Darwinism?
I am asked about ‘involution vs evolution’, a ticklish question that I have long avoided, but which was inevitable.
09.24.07
Gurdjieff and the plunder/rape of Samkhya
Continuing from yesterday,
Spiritual psychologies and Christianity,
More on Spiritual Psychologies
If we examine the spiritual impoverishment of current scientism, or the New Atheists, we see wistfully at what might have been: an intelligent Samkhya, beyond religion, available to social man as his birthright.
The question of Samkhya is very complicated, and my references to it are provisional at best. But the point is clear enough. Dawkins et al. ought to take note, and consider how they play into the hands of religious traditionalists.