Thursday, May 15, 2014

Monogamy and Monosophy, Counterculture and Counter-Cosmic

Now that I think about it, I guess I've spent my whole (numerically) adult life being part of the so-called counterculture.

That is, just as the left was transitioning from a supposedly freewheeling counterculture to today's dreary, repressive, intolerant, and conformist dictatorship of virtue, I personally transitioned from the ambient bonehead illiberal leftism of my protracted adultolescence to the bohemian classical liberal neo-traditional orthodox hoodooism of our Founders.

Which means that I have never known what it is like to have folks like me in charge. Wait, I take that back. Jerry Brown, who was our governor from 1975 to 1983, is also our current governor. Thus, I suppose he once mirrored my own insanity. I was a moonbat under Moonbeam.

In fact, right now, the biggest issue confronting our failed state is whether Brown will sign a bill mandating that on birth certificates, men can be listed as mothers and women as fathers.

In other words, the question is whether the state can supersede biology and determine for itself who is a mother and who is a father. I don't see why not, since this is simply a corollary of the premise that sex has nothing to do with marriage. To paraphrase Dennis Prager, if sex is irrelevant to marriage, then it is surely irrelevant, period. Everyone is whatever sex they wish to be, which means that our only order is disorder.

It also means that the will has triumphed over reality, or power over truth.

Please note that disorder is not the same as chaos, which would disclose itself as outward or apparent randomness. Rather, this is the imposition of a disordered order, which is something else entirely, for if a woman can be a father, it means that you and I are no longer fathers or mothers (since the new definition vacates the plain meaning of father- and motherhood).

Remember, with rights come responsibilities -- or rather, vice versa, since rights flow from intrinsic cosmic responsibilities. Freedom without responsibility equates to unalloyed nihilism, just as responsibility without freedom equates to the purest tyranny.

But in the upside down and inverted world of the left, parents (or at least those with wombs) have rights with no responsibilities, whereas infants have responsibilities with no rights. What are the infant's responsibilities? Well, first of all, to not be conceived if it should inconvenience the one who has the right to bear it.

Failing this, the child has the duty -- both cosmic and constitutional -- to die for the sake of his mother's sacred right to convenience. Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one's life for the comfort and ease of one's indisposed and/or irresponsible parent.

Likewise, the infant no longer has the right to a mother and father, even if such things existed. But the adult, perversely, has the right to be a mother or father, even if this is clearly an impossibility, any more than my aunt can be a trolley car. You might say that with the left's abiding hostility to language -- or aggravated logophobia -- all things are possible.

The human race is and has always been a race between those who believe in the Absolute and those who want to be the Absolute. At the moment the latter have taken a commanding lead, but I wonder if this hasn't always been the case? If the good guys have ever been ahead, it wasn't for long.

In the Bible, according to Ratzinger, "the cosmos and man are not two clearly separable quantities, with the cosmos forming the fortuitous scene of human existence, which in itself could be parted from the cosmos and allowed to accomplish itself without a world."

Rather, cosmos and man are one (or not two), in that they share an underlying order. This is obvious in the case of science -- e.g., physics, math, and logic -- but it is equally true of ethics, which is grounded in the order of natural law.

Conversely, if our rights are grounded in man, then we have no rights, because what is man in the absence of the Absolute? That's right: nothing. Or, nothing but Obama, i.e., the arbitrary and lawless rule of man.

Thanks to the tenured boobs of multiculturalism, we now have multiple histories -- feminist history, black history, queer history, Chicano history, etc. But even supposing such inanities exist, they can only be understood in light of a universal History. In the absence of an Arc of Salvation -- i.e., cosmic progressivism -- such silly pseudo-histories can have no meaning whatsoever. Which is why the neo-Marxian statism of an Obama is just upside down Christian millennialism.

We say: one mankind, one morality, one truth, one history, and one cosmos because One Cosmos. Or, in an eccentric formulation that occurred to me the other day, monosophy and monogamy -- one wisdom and one woman -- are intimately related, and it might even be that in the absence of monogamy, the cosmos -- discovery of the one transcendent order -- would be impossible.

Bob, why would you say such a strange thing? Well, for starters, in order for there to be a cosmos, there must be human beings. Animals know nothing of any extra-terrestrial, transnatural cosmic order. So, what are the conditions necessary to discover this deep unity?

It seems to me that this cannot be an exterior, outward, or simple monism. This is a lower oneness for which we have no use. If reality were this simple, it would be too simple to account for us.

Rather, this reality must be -- how to say it? -- the simultaneous discovery and co-creation of a dynamic and living unity woven from the diverse -- at once complementary and/or polar -- threads of multiplicity. How is this possible?

Let us suppose that male and female are the (or an) instantiation of one-as-two. This is -- or was -- the assumption of our western his & heritage, i.e., male-and-female He created them. In short, the "unit" of mankind appears as two-knit, or as two becoming one flesh via the living third. To notice that homosexual (or any other form of) non-marriage cannot achieve such higher unity is to be cognizant of the vast realm of Beyond Obvious.

There is much more to say about this, but I'm backed up in my work, and besides, Tucker says it well enough.

(And RS, if you're out there slacking off at work again, don't worry, your book will soon be on the way. I'm just a little behind in my correspondence and everything else.)

15 Comments:

Blogger Magister said...

To notice that homosexual (or any other form of) non-marriage cannot achieve such higher unity is to be cognizant of Beyond Obvious.

They'll become procreative by means of artificial procedure, which will lead them to insist that there is no significant difference between unnatural and natural procreation.

Naturally, they'll ignore the inconvenient truth that the exception proves the rule. Instead, they'll insist that any exception proves there's no rule whatsoever. Many people believe this.

5/15/2014 10:53:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

Or, in an eccentric formulation that occurred to me the other day, monosophy and monogamy -- one wisdom and one woman -- are intimately related, and it might even be that in the absence of monogamy, the cosmos -- discovery of the one transcendent order -- would be impossible.

Oddly enough, I'm reminded of a line from Goodfellas, though of course I can't find it online. Anyway, I think it's when Henry's been shacking up with his mistress, and it's causing problems for almost everyone he hangs around with. One of the men gives him a talking to, and says something like,

"What are you doing here? We are not animale! Go home to your wife."

Even such base humans as those recognize the importance of monogamy - the Law - even as they choose to live outside of it. As they do in almost every area of their lives. They put on a show of virtue, without which their vice would be meaningless. The Left, on the other hands, craves the meaninglessness. They would rather be animals.

5/15/2014 11:12:00 AM  
Blogger Paul Griffin said...

(Bear with me, I tend to process these things in allegory to good books)

They would rather be animals.

An animal cannot suffer guilt. To follow up on my comment of the other day, one way to try to escape your guilt is to claim that you are incapable of it. Likewise shame. But as Bob likes to point out, when we reject the things that make us human, we do not become animals, we become monsters.

I found Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment to be an excellent illustration of this, including the collateral destruction of innocents that is inevitable with the onset of nihilism and the worship of the ubermensch.

disorder is not the same as chaos, which would disclose itself as outward or apparent randomness. Rather, this is the imposition of a disordered order, which is something else entirely

In The Inferno, the devils are organized like a mockery of a military unit: they salute each other with vulgar gestures and farts, do not really obey orders unless beaten, and quarrel incessantly.

I'll have to mull this little tidbit over some more today. I had never really thought to distinguish disorder and chaos, but there is certainly something deliberate and diabolical in disorder. Perhaps "unordered" would be a better term than chaos for drawing the distinction?

5/15/2014 11:50:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

Re. being animals, you are correct, of course. Humans that manage to act "like animals" are actually monsters, sinking far below mere animality. But I've noticed that they usually manage to fool themselves, believing that they're just doing like they do on the Discovery Channel, and that somehow their bad behavior is justified. It's only natural!

5/15/2014 11:58:00 AM  
Blogger mushroom said...

But right now, the biggest issue confronting our failed state is whether Brown will sign a bill mandating that on birth certificates, men can be listed as mothers and women as fathers.

How stupid do you have to be for that to make any kind of sense? And how educated do you have to be to get that stupid.

Women are Sophia/Wisdom/Tao in type. All those warnings against adultery and "foolish" women in Proverbs is in contrast to sticking with Wisdom and the Virtuous Wife.

5/15/2014 12:02:00 PM  
Blogger neal said...

Animals know nothing? All of Creation broadcasts the truth, humans forgot how to listen. Even the stones cry out the Truth, they would rather be doing other things than wasting their destiny on the world of Man.

Humans are like art ciritics. They would rather have some damned opinion than be the thing itself, serving the Artist.

Animals are dust and wind. They fell, because humans are the same. They do not blame, just wait. Angels, too.

It is a hell of a thing to be stuck together.

5/15/2014 02:26:00 PM  
Blogger Paul Griffin said...

How stupid do you have to be for that to make any kind of sense?

It seems we are watching the arc of Nietzsche's madness being reproduced on the cultural level. We have killed God and are discovering that there is Nothing to fill that void. As more and more things are added to the "doesn't matter" list, as nihilism is taken more and more seriously, more and more people have nothing with which to fill that void and come unglued. And so their children (the ones that survived) go out and rabbit punch people in the park for fun...

I have to remind myself frequently where my Hope lies.

5/15/2014 02:27:00 PM  
Blogger JP said...

"Let us suppose that male and female are the (or an) instantiation of one-as-two. This is -- or was -- the assumption of our western his & heritage, i.e., male-and-female He created them. In short, the "unit" of mankind appears as two-knit, or as two becoming one flesh via the living third. To notice that homosexual (or any other form of) non-marriage cannot achieve such higher unity is to be cognizant of the vast realm of Beyond Obvious."

Isn't one of the two still the man and the other one the woman in the relationship?

5/15/2014 02:34:00 PM  
Blogger JP said...

"But in the upside down and inverted world of the left, parents (or at least those with wombs) have rights with no responsibilities, whereas infants have responsibilities with no rights. What are the infant's responsibilities? Well, first of all, to not be conceived if it should inconvenience the one who has the right to bear it."

I've read stories of negotiation.

Granted, the result is one of delay.

In any event, I have no actual reports (first person or direct from a source) to offer. Only rumors.

5/15/2014 02:36:00 PM  
Blogger julie said...

JP, Isn't one of the two still the man and the other one the woman in the relationship?

Only by proxy, and never adequately. Putting on a dress and some lipstick, or even taking hormones and having surgery, can never make a man a woman. Much less a mother. Nor do short hair, hormones and a strap-on make a man, much less a father.

This isn't to say that men never "mother" and women never "father," just that it's never the same, and not adequate. Even the best mothers I know who have raised kids without their fathers (for a variety of reasons, including gay relationships) will readily admit that their kids need a father. Sometimes, this realization comes far too late. The consequences are serious.

I don't think I know any men raising kids without their mother, but I'm sure any honest men in such a situation would know the same.

5/15/2014 02:56:00 PM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

The human race is and has always been a race between those who believe in the Absolute and those who want to be the Absolute. At the moment the latter have taken a commanding lead, but I wonder if this hasn't always been the case? If the good guys have ever been ahead, it wasn't for long."

Good point. The fight for liberty never ends. Time to overthrow the "gods" again.

5/16/2014 01:07:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Excuse me? (second story from the top).

5/16/2014 07:09:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

This won't do at all. Advocating telling a kid that he throws like a girl is not at all the same as cutting off his head and selling his sister into slavery. No matter how hysterical the limp-wristed kid's dad becomes.

Also, studies show that converts to the Order of the Raccoon are too full of slack to go raping and pillaging.

5/16/2014 07:16:00 AM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Irt the Lucianne link:
Oh hell no!

5/16/2014 08:36:00 AM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

I dream of the day when raccoons are not judged by the markings on their fur but by the content of their character!

5/16/2014 08:41:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home