Two posts from yesterday, which I am repudiating. The new atheists would be shocked. A brimstone sermon to scare the sinful plus politicians with threats of hell is not my genre, but once in a while…hope it scared you…
However, dabbling in fascist magic is not taken lightly in the higher realms of the angelic worlds…
The barrenness of Christianity as a source of ‘political science’ or democratic fundamentalsAs per previous post, ‘hell’ is real, but it isn’t the one in Christianity/Islam.
We should note that such language implies the need for ‘spiritual government’, but what is that? That wasn’t implied either. Neither religious nor secular cultures are proving able to maintain honest government.
Here, in any case, the stance of conservative religious Christians needs equal challenge: they speak in such haughty tones, but the record is poor indeed: the Christian tradition doesn’t show any periods of ‘good government’ in the modern sense. Monarchy, deliberate class formations, and then nothing. Through the entire period from 0 AD to 1500’s when a new process gets underway. It does work through the Reformation churches briefly, but then the whole process ditches Christianity. The Reformation begins the ferment that leads to revolution, and we see an actual proto-communist reformation church with Thomas Munzer and there is a lot of ‘Christian’ revolutionary thinking in the English Civil War. But in our model this is under the rubric of the macro period and isn’t really ‘christian’ in the legacy sense. Christianity is starting to abolish itself in another elusive revolution. In any case there is no classic record from the period of the Roman empire genesis of any real contribution of Christians to modern democratic politics. So the diatribes of Bible Belt preachers are hopelessly misled.
But the left should be wary of going to an opposite extreme: the marxist canon got unlucky and navigated into scientism, and we see the allergic prejudice of Marx himself to Ethics and even philosophical subjectivity as ‘idealism’. That wasn’t the right approach either. Here Kant tried to rescue science from scientism, but his labors seem in vain, especially after the clever ‘demon’ Nietzsche produced a ‘how to be a demon’ kit for secular retards, the famous ‘last men’, so-called. But Nietzsche better represents the type.
In any case, the modern conservative Christians show absolutely no awareness of the problems of Machiavellian government and eagerly endorse all its worst aspects…
The myths of ‘hell’ arise in the action of angelic powers to create prisons for sin, but the reality is unknown, and not mythological. Tyrants, also, at all scales create dungeons, and truly scropholous political devils just might end up in a million dungeon wrought in angelic wrath.
Hell is very real, and too many politicians are headed there
One of the dangers of proposing neo-communism, taken straight as a form of political definition, or defineability, is the mutated legacy of modern government as a whole, and the rapid ‘coup d’etat’ created by the covert agencies, next to the obscurities of occult/esoteric operations in that connection. The nice guys propose, the psychopaths, posing as wiser than nice guys, dispose.
Here the myth of Machiavelli, and the worse charade of ‘Nietzsche for Real dummies’ reign as reigning wisdom. It is a load of crap. The rare hopes of man, to insert a figure like Kant, preposterously, denouncing political lies, at the climax of the revolutionary democratic era, are the object of derisive contempt in the criminal big shots who run the shows, and who must think they are auditioning for the role of Overman. Nice going, guys, but don’t forget you are being watched and that there is a ‘hell’.
Here, to be specific, it is hard to verify what the covert agencies of the various governments cited really are. We are a long way from the early modern creation of modern republics/democracies and we have seen the rapid dissolution of american democracy in the wake of the fifties creation of the CIA (going back to the OSS, and…?). The horrifying connections to the JFK assassination, and then (no doubt jumping over a host of further horrors) the 9/11 supercaper (with no doubt Mossad/CIA connections) show us that we live in a mysterious captured government that seems to be a parody of fascist/esoteric mindcontrol ‘superbuddhist bad guy’ spiritual diarrhea. What are the facts? With 9/11 and JFK we actually begin to have some facts, and they are pretty horrifying, although we have no direct connection with, say, the CIA, a term that refers to a curious fog of multiple layers, with the real conspiracies located quite ‘elsewhere’.
It helps to study the ‘macro’ effect in WHEE: we see that democracies, never founded by the Machiavelli’s, emerge in protected periods with macro-determination, and barely there. The degeneration is outside of this, as is Machiavelli, who is discussing history/medieval/Roman degenerate governments.
The point of Kant, and the larger framework behind him, is that honest men who aren’t criminals or liars come to run governments in the foundation of a new politics of free men.
That system barely appeared with the American breakthrough democracy (whose corruptions of ‘local’ imperialism began very early), guffah, but at least that experiment has symbolic significance as an historical ‘nice try’ posed on the brink of the modern ‘divide’.
The point is that the newly official world of covert controlled government isn’t a bit official. The record of world history is that Athenian democracy lasted a century or so, despite macro induction, ditto it appears for the modern American, and once you lose it you can’t get it back, etc…
In fact, democracy reseeded itself dozens of times in the modern period, so the situation is not like the desperate and sad case of of Athens, after which no further such attempts appeared again for millennia. That’s why it is misleading to say that Machivelli tells us what government is really like. It is what gorilla politics is like, with apologies to gorillas.
I can’t make out all the details of this essay without some research/study, but we have discussed the Tradition and book issue over at The Gurdjieff Con, along with the issue of Crowley, and the charges of fascist occult buddhism and its connections to nazism (not exactly full documentation) exposed with hints by the figure Rajneesh, and we can be ‘sure’ as cynics,but not certain, that the realm of sufism is ditto ditto, compounded by the terrifying suspicion the great legacy of sufi soul creation has been hijacked by an Islamic/sufi mafia.
Spiritual religions, we must learn, didn’t help here.
The connection of spirituality to esotericism and its link with political mafias and covert agencies leaves us with a social existence in hell, and nothing we can do about it. Yet.
We can propose a neo-communist revolution in good faith as ‘real democracy’, propose to debrief all covert agencies, destroying them completely and replacing them with whatever constitutes honest need. That means closing down the CIA, and sowing salt in that geographical and starting over with something that isn’t social cancer. If that is hopeless, then we should simply rightly despair.
The evidence suggests that bolshevism was ‘covert agency’ ready from the start and that it made the problem worse, granting the provocations of the reactionary whites.
What a real effort to create a neo-communism will do in this situation is not clear. But it can’t be a blank check for the false tactics of the bolsheviks…
This essay is of great interest, but needs study on my part…
Perhaps its author could tell us if he knows of the ‘sufi mafia’ and the corruptions of the ‘soul game’, if any, else my paranoia, and suspicions. I am the first to speak of this side of sufism in public, that I know of, perhaps I will be the last.