Thursday, July 25, 2019

If You're Going to Strike at God, It Helps to Kill Man First

Picking up where we left off with the previous post -- in fact, let's continue downstream from its last sentence: "Indeed, this seething [politico-psychic] frustration is probably a permanent feature of deicide, as the murderers vainly attempt to force transcendence to be immanence, which is of course impossible."

Naturally, attempts at the impossible will result in frustration, and frustration is one of the causes of anger. Statements like that are why I have a PhD in psychology and you don't.

Come to think of it, another source of anger is "comparison," especially in a free country in which we are supposed to be equal. Ironically, there is less anger in highly stratified societies than there is in free ones, because in the latter you have no excuse for your failure.

Consider the race riots that only began in the mid-60s, precisely when the impediments to achievement were falling like dominoes. And the anger is only more institutionalized today, when economic prospects are better than ever for the disciplined and talented, irrespective of race. And why on earth would feminists be angry? (Hint: it has nothing to do with the world outside their heads.) Just because you fail to achieve, it doesn't mean you didn't have the potential to have done so with more prudent decisions.

Now, if one wants to make sure that God's not only merely dead, but really most sincerely dead, one must somehow go after and eradicate the psycho-pneumatic matrix out of which contact with, and experience of, God emerges. One must sow the divine ground with salt, so to speak, such that nothing grows and (equally important) nothing grows (i.e., the literal expansion of nihilism which we've seen over the last six decades or so).

For Marx and his contemporary heirheads, God can be nothing more than a fanciful human projection. Therefore, our proper task is to withdraw the projections and thereby reclaim the psychic substance we've dribbled away via this psychic process. In short, the best way to kill a god is to become one.

Ironically, both religion and anti-religion posit a new kind of man, a novel cosmic development. For example, in Ephesians, Paul advises us to take off the old man and put on the new.

Indeed, remaining in the old man's shoes is identified with mental futility, while shedding the old coot is both a cause and consequence of vertical renewal via our participation in the divine grace.

Just so, the (hello,) NewMan of the left isn't just devoid of religious delusions, but "has taken God back into his being. The 'non-man,' who has illusions, becomes fully human by absorbing the 'superman.'"

Hence the breathtaking arrogance of the left, which they truly cannot help. After all, when one is the center of the universe, it's a little difficult to hide one's light under a bushel.

An essay by Doctor Zero, The [lower case r] republican virtue of humility [deceased link] touches on this theme. You might say that the new man of the left barters away his abstract freedom in exchange for something a little more concrete -- power, cash, privilege, or other valuable prizes.

Doing so is "only natural," whereas placing ultimate value in something as nebulous as "negative liberty" (i.e., our sacred rights conferred by the Creator) is only supernatural. Thus, under our Constitution you can't choose to be a slave, but you can get around this by choosing to have masters. At the moment, some two dozen Democrats are competing to be your master (or mistress). Each wants to limit your constitutional rights in order to expand your unconstitutional ones, such as free college, free healthcare, and punishing or rewarding groups based upon a hierarchy of racial grievance.

Back to Voegelin. He writes (quoting Bottomore) that "The struggle against religion is therefore a struggle against that world of which religion is the spiritual aroma." (Note that we don't so much project into God as he does into us.)

This is why leftist culture is every bit as iconoclastic as the Taliban thugs who blew up those magnificent Buddhist statutes. The left does the same thing with language in particular. As I've said before, the first victim of the left is always the poor dictionary -- that is, the plain meaning of things -- but the dictionary is only an emanation of the logos, so we're back to deicide.

The left is a lexicographical tactic more than an ideological strategy.

And The progressive travels around among literary works as the Puritan did among cathedrals: with hammer in hand.

Again, fascism involves the violent rejection of transcendence; although I suppose we should qualify that, since Islamofascism -- or most any other kind of "religious fascism" -- involves a violent rejection of immanence.

In any event, for the liberal fascist, "once the world beyond truth has disappeared," it is necessary "to establish the truth of this world" (Bottomore, in Voegelin). Never mind that truth is always transcendent. That's none of your business. As the barbarians of the Jihad Squad might say, just grab your hammer and get with the pogrom!

For once the center of power has shifted from God to man, from transcendent to immanent, "it seeks not to refute but to annihilate" (ibid.).

And this is where the real action -- or acting out, rather -- begins, for "Here speaks the will to murder of the gnostic magician.... critique is no longer rational debate. Sentence has been passed; the execution follows" (ibid.).

The political platforms of the left are gradually transformed into scaffolds.

For The cult of Humanity is celebrated with human sacrifices.

The new man of the left, because he has taken what can only abide beyond into himself, "experiences himself as existing outside of institutional bonds and obligations." Like Kamala or Bernie, it's Laws for thee, exceptions for me.

As in the French Revolution, things can get out of hand pretty quickly, as the will to murder lashes out in all directions, and the fickle finger of fatwa falls on whom it will. Every normal person and personal norm gets a turn in the progressive barrel. There's no logic to it except for the underlying will to annihilate. Remember that Satan is 1, a liar, and 2, a murderer, the second always justified and facilitated by the first.

Now, political correctness is fundamentally a War on Noticing, so no one is supposed to be cognizant of any of this, hence the institutional amnesia of the media-academic complex, which restricts consciousness to the momentary in time and the immanent in space, AKA the Narrative.

In the words of Voegelin, "the being of the world and ego is restricted to the knowledge of the immediate or existent." It isn't just "radically anti-philosophical" but "a work of magic."

On the grave of the murdered God the golem is celebrating a ghastly ritual.... The goal has been attained.... This is the closing act of the order of being when gnostic magicians lay hands on it. --Voegelin

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Dr. Godwin, a great post, as usual. I just don't know what to make of you.
The Democrats seem sensible to me. Why is that? I don't detect much of a desire to play God there, or any resolve to kill God.

The 20th century saw the existential movement, the theater of the absurd, and radical communism. Have we not moved on? Are you stuck there somehow?

This is a marvelous time in our country, shot through and permeated with Divine light. The population is loving and hard-working. An effective global governing body is in place, and the world is turning its eyes to the next big thing.

India is going to the moon, as are we. Mars exploration is planned. Space, the final frontier. The time has arrived, and the journey begins. The whole of humanity will bend itself to the task. This is right and just.

God will be fine. He has vetted and signed off on all you see around you. May I even say, all is well? Would you believe that?

Anonymous said...

Since the plan for conservative Christianity is taking far too long, here’s my plan:

We could resuscitate God (of the Jesus kind) by forcing the top 1% to give up all of their wealth to the bottom 50% in the form of cash (the top 5% owns more than 60% of everything). The top 1% would then be forced to live in monasteries, which would certainly increase their odds of getting to heaven more effectively than all their wealth could. They’d thank us later.

The next highest 5% would then be under the gun to take the economic reigns to improve the economy for the citizenry. Or else. Since this is more of the managerial and entrepreneurial class, it’s safe to assume they’d do a far better job then the rent seeking oligarchic class which mostly gets ahead by buying government mandates and offshoring profits.

Much of the bottom 50% would probably go nuts with their new cash (being losers and all, maybe pay off their debts I dunno), but no doubts the consumer economy would skyrocket. Of course the investment economy would crash, but since much of that involves real estate and other resource commodities the cost of living would radically decrease giving that remaining 30% their cut (their primary investment is their home, values theoretically stabilized by increased demand from the lower 50%).

The catch is that the bottom 50% would have to attend church and give a 10% tithe, lest they get taxed with all tax proceeds going towards the building/maintenance of spectacular new cathedrals and other community oriented (of the Jesus kind) facilities. IMHO, a great many more folks and fake Christians would be getting their a’s up to heaven.

One problem I’m having with this plan is that it sounds pretty darned totalitarian communist. As we all know, totalitarian communism always leads to atheism. A bit of a pickle, but our free economy would be allowed to resume after the monasteries had been filled. So are 'Christian theocracy kinds of totalitarian communism turned back into capitalisms' always doomed to fail? Maybe a good time for some corroborating verses from scripture.

Anonymous said...

I’m confused about what’s “left”. Is “left” a full spectrum, or more like an either/or, like you’re either going to heaven or you’re going to hell with no middle place available, kind of thing?

Sanders and Harris are actually, almost polar opposites, a sorta rebel and an establishment more like low energy Jeb. Everybody knows that Uncle Joe Biden is indebted to his credit card corporations. I know that “liberals” aren’t really very left, being free economy status quo except with gays and women managers. The Clintons were more like that. Is it about free sex with interns? But Trump is into the young stuff too. The EPA was Nixon’s deal, yet “the right” really hates that place. Free trade isn’t very left, actually quite libertarian, yet Obama wanted his TPP and Trump put the clamp on that one. WTH? I know lefty Christians. Are they going to hell? Pelosi just lukewarmed up to that fake Republican Mueller in those hearings. Two wet noodles. Is that what “left” is? So is Russia “right”, since they seem to have wanted meddle with the “left”? Is it just a team, like in sports, where players trade jerseys knowing they might be using that other jersey someday? And how right is too right? Or can things not be right enough with ideally, God doing Rule of Law for a 10% tithe?

Anonymous said...

Hello Anonymous of 98:51 PM.

Your economic plan was a bit intricate and cumbersome but its heart was in the right place.

And,about the the mythical "left." As you have noted, this is a vague term. I've advised Dr. Godwin to close the books and get out and meet some Democrats, so as to clear up any misconceptions about who's out there.

Dr. Godwin routinely denounces an atheist demographic I feel certain is not really out there in significant numbers. This would be called "barking up the wrong tree."

The usual policy bumbling inherent to all governments is marked as sinister and communist when it goes to the socialist side of things, however socialist policies can be very effective when used judiciously as they always have been here.

Anonymous said...

My Grand Unified Christian Capito-Commie Plan was intended as more as a thought experiment. I thought that according to The Founders, checks and balances was supposed to be as much a part of The American Way as the liberty part. But The Founders didn't seem to come up with the best instructions for maintaining those checks and balances, which are always under attack by various power centers. Damned sinners. And so now we have the "But The Commies Are Way Worse!" philosophical school of thinking (and shouting) whenever anybody tries to tweak checks and balances for the sake of maintaining our liberal democracy. My plan was an extreme last resort idea for when all the shouting fails and things fall apart anyways.

But then I did fail Prager U. When the economics teacher spoke of trading money for flowers as being win-win equitable for all parties involved, I said to myself: "Wow, that's so obvious. I learned that way back in the first grade trading my lunch money for not getting beat up by the classroom bully. Win-win." They told me that wont happen in the real world because Rule of Law. I replied: "But insulin prices?" And so I got kicked out. Prager U cannot ever fail, only be failed, apparently.

I'm actually trying to save American Christianity. But sometimes there's confusion when I play devils advocate, because the devil is as you know, bad.

Gagdad Bob said...

Speaking of the French Revolution, an essay by Roger Kimball echoing many themes we've touched on in the past:

--It is generally a bootless errand to oppose myth with history. Myth, feeding a deep need, subsumes history.

--the folly of subordinating the imperfect, long-serving structures of civilization to the demands of impatient people infatuated by their own unquenchable sense of virtue.

--“the contrast between benign theories and violent acts” was one of the Revolution’s “strangest characteristics.”

--Robespierre cut to the chase when he spoke of “virtue and its emanation, terror.”

--"absence of curiosity,” Scruton notes, “is a permanent characteristic of the revolutionary consciousness.

--An important reason for this lack of curiosity is the prominent role that abstractions play in the mental and moral metabolism of the totalitarian sensibility.

--Human reality is drained of dignity and becomes material to be shaped and formed according to the schemes of utopian power.

--Absorbed by their ideological battles, the political actors of the establishment seem to have constructed an all-but impenetrable carapace that protects them from the unwanted intrusion of empirical reality.

Anonymous said...

Hello Anon of 07:44 AM

It is good you are trying to save American Christianity. The Catholic Church is running very strong right now. I was wondering if you were aware of that.

Catholics are of course Christians. Perhaps other branches of the Christianity need saving?

Things are by no means falling apart or even close to doing so. The fly in that ointment is the nuclear threat.

Things are good now, we're on a roll. Let's roll.

Anonymous said...

I don't think the establishment is very ideological. A few maybe, but most curious observers believe that the ones we've got today are all on the same team. They play a form of football with each other where the stats don't matter. Nobody clearly quantifies what they do. No touchdowns, no yardage, no NFL combine numbers. Yet fans cheer them on anyways.

Most revolutions yield highly unpredictable results. I'm most interested in how players succeed at doing what they do. Especially that part where prospective 'leadership' observes the direction the mob is headed in and then jumps out in front and shouts "Follow me!" I'm the guy in the back shouting: "But there's a cliff!" But nobody listens. Probably because I sport a fro and bell bottoms. Nobody want's to follow a guy sporting a fro and bell bottoms anymore. Not even Bob Ross.

"Ye shall know them by their fruits" is the best aphorism ever. But they're really good at redefining what a fruit is.

julie said...

An essay by Doctor Zero...

Funny, I remember reading Doc 0 regularly back before he was unmasked; afterward, almost never. Not sure why that is.

Anonymous said...

Anon @7/26/2019 09:37:00 AM

Thanks for setting me straight. I chose not to look at the available stats (which clearly originate from the dark one himself). I pondered Bobs “economic prospects are better than ever for the disciplined and talented” and “just because you fail to achieve, it doesn't mean you didn't have the potential to have done so with more prudent decisions”. So I did some pondering, and guess what?

I just earned $200/hr from home!

My secret? I used the internet, a manual, and some basic auto tools. My story: I noticed that my 4.6 star customer-rated mechanic wanted to charge me $1000 for a $150 gas tank. So I did it myself! He'd also failed on three attempts ($1600) to fix my truck clutch system. So I did the whole "woke" thing, and just did it myself! I think everybody should do their own auto work themselves. Eventually, you too might be able to work out of your own garage and overcharge your own set of customers suckered in by crafty customer play, fake reviews, learned helplessness, and of course, PT Barnum aphorisms.

Anonymous said...

Hello Anon from 7/27/19 at 8:23 AM

Congratulations on saving money by doing things yourself.

Fortunately (unfortunately?) problems encountered in getting goods and services are due to human nature, and not any political system or policy. Cave men were trying to rook each other at the very inception of trade....so, it's caveat emptor as usual.

I try to focus on the incidents where people give splendid goods and services, above and beyond the norm. To be fair, this happens too. The bakers dozen is an example of customary generosity.

So, I say, in the face of all flies in the ointment, human beings are good. Some say evil is innate in people, and I counter that by saying base-line, default human nature tends toward the loving side of things.

Anonymous said...

Human nature varies. Not just by individuals, but also by the times.

One year, horny hatted Norwegians slaughter Scottish monks for the church loot. The next, they're wearing floppy hats and coddling mass murderers. Boy howdy do times change!

As for splendid goods and services, I guess there's Costco. YouTube seems to have opinion videos to suit every possible taste, minus an ad or two. My Korean phone usually works good. But medical, auto, tree, plumbing, college, media, cableTV, insurance... services, I'd rather not deal with. I'm thinking that the depersonalization of corporations might be turning most folks into basically, livestock. But that's probably a philosophical issue for another time.

Any ideas as to why I'm perceiving such in increase in grift and price gouging?

Anonymous said...

Hello Anon of 07/27/19 at 1:00 PM

Now that I think of it, I too am perceiving an in increase in grift and price gouging. There is a distinct uptick in email spam, telephone offers, and other scam approaches.

Legitimate business are also flogging the email pretty hard. Some car mechanics can find no less than $500 worth of repairs your car needs at every oil change. But is it safe to drive as as is? you ask. Mechanic: "I can't give any opinions on that."

Service packages "starting as low as....." Merchandise "*from $15.99...." Get the fish to bite, and then up-sell.

Massage: "$50/hour." What do you think it will end up costing after the tip?

Banks: Sneaky and predatory around their fees at times.

I could go on and on. Social engineering is a thing. Competition for dollars seems fiercer than ever.

But again, caveat emptor. Modern life takes skill, and consuming takes a lot of critical thinking. The unwary will get bitten.

Basically, people want your money, and will do what it takes to get it.

That being said, many of us live well. The sun rises, it sets. Politicians run for office. People vote. People talk and talk and talk and talk about everything.

Dr. Godwin will eventually fire up his laptop and give us another post. Let's roll.

Anonymous said...

People used to mostly agree on what was evil. Not so much today. But you're right, just follow the money. Jesus chased some of their kind out of a temple once, when nobody else would. Maybe we need a post about how it's "meet and right" when Jesus does the chasing. Or what "meet and right" even means, maybe.

Van Harvey said...

" In short, the best way to kill a god is to become one."

Treating effects, as causes, can't help but cause horrific effects.

Theme Song

Theme Song