Friday, July 19, 2019

Leftism is the Solution to the Pathologies it Engenders

On purely logical and dispassionate grounds, the existence of thought is a cruel hoax in the absence of God. Put conversely, to engage in thought is to implicitly posit God.

Except to say the hoax can't be cruel, since there is no one responsible for this impractical joke. Rather, it's just an unnecessary, superfluous, and annoying activity that interferes with the real action of existence, which is to say food and sex, and the power to obtain them.

It is therefore ironic that the people who most insist that thought has no ultimate significance are the most certain of the ultimate truth of their own insignificant thought. For the restavus, we have only faith, not certitude, (o) not (ø).

The world seems so obviously defective, why should it make sense? In other words, perhaps all the disorder in and around us results from the fact that the disorder is built into the cake. We look for truth, for meaning, for order, but in vain, since there is none to be had. Our search for meaning is an itch that cannot be scratched; or worse, it is like phantom limb pain, so it is an itch with no source.

That's certainly one way of looking at it, and we actually respect the person who looks at it this way, so long as he truly lives by it -- Nietzsche, for example.

One of Nietzsche's finer qualities was that he at least had the good sense to merely go insane instead of trying to impose his insanity on the rest of us, as do the many existentialists who have followed in his wake.

If you want to go nuts, hey, go nuts! But what gives you the right to impose your insanity on the collective? What, are you nuts? What if we don't wish to be rescued by a bunch of statist nuts?

Aphorisms:

Social problems are the delightful refuge of those fleeing from their own problems.

As such, In order to enslave the people the politician needs to convince them that all their problems are “social.”

And The more severe the problems, the greater the number of incompetents that a democracy calls forth to solve them.

Therefore, Social salvation is near when each one admits that he can only save himself.

This gets to the nub of Voegelin's argument in Science, Politics, & Gnosticism. In it he has a chapter called The Murder of God. It's peculiar that something that doesn't exist needs to be murdered at all, but that's just one more irony lost on the left. Shoot first, ask questions never.

In order to solve a murder, you need to discern what? Motive, means, and opportunity. What could be the motive for this deicide? Hatred? Yes, but of what? Can't be God, can it?

Voegelin writes that the aim of political gnosticism "is to destroy the order of being, which is experienced as defective and unjust, and through man's creative power to replace it with a perfect and just order." The left simultaneously denies existential problems and pretends they are susceptible to political solutions.

Now, if there is no God, then there is no intrinsic order, not to mention any basis for justice. Therefore, injustice and disorder are precisely what we should expect to see, and we have no right to expect otherwise. There's no crying in Darwinism. Deal with it.

Conversely, for the believer, order is necessary, disorder contingent. In fact, disorder has its own necessity -- "relative necessity," as it were -- because it is not the Order, precisely, but a deviation from it. Everyone and everything necessarily falls short of its ideal, since we are creature, not Creator.

Therefore, for us, the existence of disorder is a banality, not a crisis per se. Indeed, most of us learn by the age of seven or eight that "life's not fair," and move on. Others become Democrats.

The task of man is indeed to "repair the world" (ticoon Olam), but this is because there is an ideal, precisely. It is not for us to reinvent the world order, because that's not repair, it's destruction. We are to be jehovial witnesses to this ideal, not witless juvenile idealists.

But for the gnostic, "the givenness of the order of being must be obliterated." The order of being is "essentially under man's control," and "taking control of being requires that the transcendent origin of being be obliterated: it requires the decapitation of being -- the murder of God."

That's a pretty bold statement. Are we seriously charging the left with deicide? Not necessarily. It could be abortion, i.e., killing him in the womb of speculative thought, for the gnostic insists that "man should stop creating gods because this sets absurd limits to his will and action; and he should realize that the gods he has already created have in fact been created by him" (Voegelin).

Beneath the destructiveness there is envy. Envy is built into man -- at least post-lapsarian man -- but if unacknowledged and forced underground, it can take on literally cosmic proportions. Thus, one of the motives in deicide is envy of the Creator: "If there were gods, how could I endure not being a god!" Therefore, there are no gods, and I am he!

[As it so happens, I'm currently reading a book that asks Who is the Devil?, and it hews remarkably close to the present post. You could summarize it by saying that he is 1: envy, 2: rebellion, 3: lies, and 4: murder -- not just of such and such a man, but of man as such.]

In the Marxist version, man is a product of nature, which is a process through which man is gradually revealed to himself. Thus, the final apocalypse of man leads to the murder of God, for this bang ain't big enough for the both of us. God and socialist man cannot coexist (for the same reason God and Satan ultimately cannot coexist).

Now, to kill God is to kill man. Except man survives the operation. But in what form? There is the trembling little man, murder weapon in hand, blood dripping from the blade. Now what?

"The madman does not go backward, he goes forward.... [I]f the deed is too great for man, then man must rise up above himself to the greatness of the deed." Reminds me of another aphorism: With the generosity of his program does the liberal console himself for the magnitude of the catastrophes it produces. Thus, leftism functions very much like alcoholism, as it is the perpetual solution to the unavoidable problems it causes.

But in reality, "the nature of a thing cannot be changed; whoever tries to 'alter' its nature destroys the thing. Man cannot transform himself into a superman; the attempt to create a superman is an attempt to murder man. Historically, the murder of God is not followed by the superman, but the murder of man: the deicide of the gnostic theoreticians is followed by the homicide of the revolutionary practitioners" (ibid).

Yes, leftism is a gnostic cult that denies God so as to diminish and control man. And The cult of Humanity is celebrated with human sacrifices (Dávila).

16 comments:

julie said...

In order to enslave the people the politician needs to convince them that all their problems are “social.”

And The more severe the problems, the greater the number of incompetents that a democracy calls forth to solve them.

And this is why we can't have simply male and female - as if there aren't challenges enough just in that one and simply true distinction - but rather, there must be umpty-seven different varieties of problematic, which you will recognize, comrade, unless you want to be hounded by crybullies.

But for the gnostic, "the givenness of the order of being must be obliterated." The order of being is "essentially under man's control," and "taking control of being requires that the transcendent origin of being be obliterated: it requires the decapitation of being -- the murder of God."

Mankind seems to be on a quest to continually re-enact the conflict between Cain and Abel. Cain couldn't murder God outright, so he did the next best thing and slaughtered his bother, instead.

Anonymous said...

The topic and tone of this hit-piece bring to mind the fire-and-brimstone preaching of 17th century New England Puritans, mixed with 20th century philosophy and psychology. Chock full of jargon and intricate concepts. It is clear you are intelligent and well-educated, love God, and wish others would too.

But this is a grim and joyless exercise.

I understand your point. The principles of surrender, control of the ego, consecration, purity, and bahkti should be actively worked for the best outcome in life, and what commonly happens is the opposite. The whole mass is in flux. The ignorant and self-righteous leftist.....haven't we all been that at one time or another? Did we stay there? Where's the hope? And preaching should done in a loving manner. I think you would agree.

Gagdad Bob said...

No, this blog has always been a grim and joyless exercise in puritanical preachifyin', and I aims to keep it that way.

Would you like to hear the story of right hand left hand?

Anonymous said...

Anon @7/20/2019 05:08:00 PM,

I'd love to hear the story of how Bob came into this line of thinking.

IMPO, usually it's some traumatic event, or, the groups values brings one along. To go full "Dillahunty", to embark on an in-depth study in one direction, then deduce an epiphany in the completely opposite direction, seems rare.

Petey said...

Not rare at all: it has always been understood that a little philosophy inclines one to atheism, whereas depth of philosophical understanding leads to the horizon of the human subject and to the threshold of God.

Which is why, in the words of the Aphorist, "Proofs for the existence of God abound for those who do not need them."

Or you could say that if God doesn't exist, only He knows it; conversely, if God does exist, only man can not know it. And he can not know it because of his God given freedom, a vertical and horizontal freedom that is inexplicable in the absence of God.

Anonymous said...

Hello Anon 7/20/19 at 12:28 PM.

I missed the boat on your astute observation that Dr. Godwin had an "epiphany in the completely opposite direction," which Petey comfirmed. I parsed that Godwin's starting point was his love for God, then he offered evidence to support love of God as right and just, and then he segued into a denunciation of atheists. This type of thinking would properly be called a meditation (chain of thought on one subject). I did not note any surprises. I feel I'm not getting something here. A little help?

Dr. Godwin's childhood remains a mystery, he will only publish his formative experiences from late adolescence on. I suspect he had a dire family conflict in childhood, ages 6-10. I cannot speculate any further than that. The good Dr's prose veers from good cheer and light-hearted punning, to dreary, pessimistic and even apocalyptic visions. We are all wounded, this is alright by me. He can write what he sees fit on his blog.

Dr. Godwin, you relayed an intention to remain puritanical, in jest I hope. Prithee tell what is the story of right hand left hand?

Petey said...

Ah, little troll, yer' starin' at Bob's fingers!

Anonymous said...

For those not into arm wrestling with themselves, I offer this bit of observational logic.

When I was a kid everybody was a Christian and democratic capitalism was settled science. Atheists and socialists were ignored regardless of any argument.

Today Christians live in a crony capitalism where Rule of Law is owned by the few and life is becoming increasingly difficult for average American children.

Most Christians sensing this, who actually care, seem to be trying to resolve the problem by targeting “the socialists”. Yeah, lets get rid of a corrupt police force by targeting street corner crazies. Of course most people wouldn’t fall for that. So lets expand the definition of “street corner crazies” to include anybody who doesn’t look and act exactly like us.

We cronies aren’t selling out Christians, our nation, our democratic capitalism. Not us. It’s everybody else who doesn’t look and act like us.

Unfortunately, the more Christians fall for this the more compelling the atheist and socialist arguments are becoming, to the children.

Anonymous said...

Anon @7/21/2019 04:13:00 PM

Just asking is all.

Dillahunty also tried going deep, with disastrous results. For those who don’t know (as he tells it) he was an aspiring minister who resolved to read the Bible cover to cover to help resolve any “little philosophy” arguments being used against him.

He was a little stymied by the part in Exodus where God speaks of the treatment of daughters being sold into slavery, but he continued on. By the end of the Old Testament he was beginning to perceive God as full psychopathic nuts. This seems the direct opposite of Bobs direction.

Today, Dillahunty’s argument is simple. God physically showed up a lot back in olden times, relieving folks of the need for blind faith. But today he never shows up. And the same is true for every other God that man has ever written about. So where’s the proof?

Today it seems that one must either do blind faith, or do the hard work of achieving a “depth of philosophical understanding” merit badge. Myself, I used to just be happy doing Pascals wager, to let mammon do its own thing. But then mammon intervened in the worst way, and won, apparently with Jesus' blessing.

Gagdad Bob said...

Dillahunty didn't "go deep." Rather, the opposite, in presuming to read the Bible unaided, without thousands of years of enlightened exegesis and commentary by rabbis, sages, patristic fathers, theologians, and metaphysicians. What an arrogant and childish fool.

julie said...

Anon @ 10:18,

Today Christians live in a crony capitalism where Rule of Law is owned by the few and life is becoming increasingly difficult for average American children.

Yes, and this is why we have Trump. Whether or not he and those good people working with him can prevail against the enemy remains to be seen; even if he does, though, the problem of humans and what to do with them will always be an issue. There will always be those who subvert what is right for their own ends; bad actors will always try to take on the role of shepherd, not out of the goodness of their hearts but out of a desire to pillage the flock. It was ever thus, and the better things seem to be the more likely the sheep won't notice. Indeed, things have been so pleasant here that the sheep have been asleep to the danger of evil for a good long time, to the point they often can't say for sure whether really Evil evil is actually a thing.

Of course it is.

Then, when they discover that all that Biblical talk of spiritual battles, powers and principalities, angels and devils is all true, well, they feel betrayed. They didn't want to know that part, it doesn't comport with the comfortable and safe life they've always known. There's no Santa and no Easter Bunny, and no Satan either. One wonders what they really think about Christ. Devils are just a metaphor, but the earth is actually flat and only 6000 years old. They take the wrong things literally, then when reality hits, instead of adjusting their perspective they get mad at God because they didn't believe people could really be so bad. News flash, they can.

The best saving grace is and always shall be to know the True Master, and listen to His voice. Pray for our leaders, the white hats doing battle in ways we'd probably really rather not know, and pray that true justice may yet happen in our lifetime; but know that even if it doesn't herebelow, it will surely happen in eternity. Cold comfort at the moment, but true even so.

Pray for your friends, pray for your enemies. Pray that His Kingdom will come, and His will be done. Until that day, we are stuck right where we are with the people we have and the world as it is. You can't fix everyone, and unless you have some Authority you can't fix much of anything in this world. Most of us can't even fix ourselves. But you can pray, and be kind, and love the people given to you, and so doing bring a little of that heaven down to earth today. Be good with your eyes open, knowing that there is rarely a reward, and you may even be punished for it.

I know the bitterness. Don't let it rule you.

Anonymous said...

Hello Petey:

Thank you for the link to the right hand left hand story. I enjoyed it.

I differ from Dr. Godwin, Anon, and Julie, in seeing things are quite alright as they are. The struggles between love and hate are the raison de etre for the world. It is the main course on the dinner menu, as it were. Take that away, and the restaurant must close its doors for good.

The Earth is functioning exactly as intended and things are well curated and under solid management and control from God, Jesus, Krishna, The Great Spirit, O, and others who are all one and the same.

And was God more interactive in antiquity, making belief easy? Hardly. He is more accessible now than ever. Physical miracles are popping up all over, and these can be seen with careful observation. A skilled observer can see up to 3-4 very evident miracles in one lifetime.

So....yep. Perhaps I'm loony tunes.

Anonymous said...

Julie,

I don’t think this is business as usual with the usual amounts of angels and demons. What we’re seeing in real time is sociopathy being given (and taking) carte blanche to do it’s thing, again. Just like in the old USSR, though it could be argued, the evil part of anacyclosis happens much slower after democracy. IMO, the worst part is that this go round evangelicals will be the scapegoats.

Trump the miracle is on record saying that “lock her up” and “drain the swamp” were political theater for votes. He’s sticking to “build the wall”, probably because it has practical value for the elites who know what’s coming (personally, I wanted all three of those chants). The wall is cover for the current automation of jobs and for climate change. Our primary effect from a warming earth isn’t Al Gore’s swimming polar bears, but large populations moving north as outdoor working conditions become intolerable.

Strategically, conservative evangelicals should’ve embraced climate change as proof of an impending End of Times, of mans sinful nature. Or, some may have honestly asked: “Do you really want to give up your modern lifestyle?” Nope. Every one that I know ridiculed it as a hoax whenever it snowed, loudly and proudly. If only they’d spoken of Gods grace with that kind of moxie. If the worst happens, score a loss for Christians and a win for secular science. Not good. That’s my point.

Anonymous said...

Anon, those capers in the soup are actually rat turds.

Anonymous said...

Climate change is unique in being both a hoax and real at the same time.

Are humans changing the climate? Yes, 9 billion large mammals have an impact on climate. Our fecal output alone changes the climate,without going in to all of the stuff we burn. Our livestock help in this project. This is absolutely a no-brainer. CO2 and Methane.

Volcanoes change climate too, you might say. So what? You want to be like a volcano? Do we just love it when a large eruption occurs? Come on.

Exactly how much climate change, what kind, and where it occurs we can't suss, and that's the "hoax" element to climate change. Pretending to know but not knowing....and will it be bad?

Put your conservative hat on. Since when is change ever good to a conservative?

but seriously folks...how big do you think this planet is? If the species were my child I'd tell it to clean its room or it would be grounded. A real no-brainer.

Anonymous said...

And furthermore, conservative evangelical Christians are supposed to make up 20% of total North American population mix. Numbers are currently under par at about 18%, so there is room for moderate growth in that demographic.

Despite mostly failing to embrace climate change controversy, the CEC's are a balancing group and good for the collective moral fiber and also control a modest chunk of the wealth, so we must have.

Evangelizing, anyone?

Conversely, the rabid communist element is not supposed to exceed 3% and is at 4%, needs slight trimming. These folks do not generate significant revenue but are used as an antidote for corporate abuses. In theory they can agitate if the corporations get rapacious. They are currently on standby but that ol' trigger point is never far away.

On our Marx, get set, go. Wait, not now.

Theme Song

Theme Song