Monday, February 03, 2020

The Anti-Word Made Flesh

Toward the end of his piece on The Left's Great Lie and the pervasive threat it poses, Solway muses that

Sometimes I feel that evil is a reified force, not just a figure of speech or metaphor for affliction or a word to describe human malevolence, but an existential power that is discernibly afoot in the world.

Consistent with what we've been saying over the last several posts, this force "is implacably destructive in causing human misery through the operation of the Lie incarnate" (ibid.).

The Lie incarnate. We'll come back to that, because you will have no doubt noticed that lies -- or truth, for that matter -- are impotent unless they are embodied and therefore capable of action.

Let us stipulate that there is an existential power of falsehood afoot in the world. What shall we call it? I think "Satan" is a fine name, but it is so overloaded with preconceptions that I wonder if we need a new term?

They say that Satan's greatest trick was convincing people he doesn't exist. This is to not give him enough credit, for he has made his own name ridiculous, such that if you so much as mention it, you become the object of ridicule.

Indeed, this mechanism resembles an early form of political correctness, which is at bottom a war on noticing. If you do notice Satan, you thereby denounce yourself as a lunatic, or fanatic, or primitive. Neat trick! Through it Satan is able to marginalize anyone who takes him seriously.

This is critical, because Satan can accomplish nothing without human participation. He cannot be embodied unless or until a human being provides the meat and muscle. Though the body, the lie is enacted.

But just as there is a Body of Christ, we might say that there exists a "counter-body" of Lies. Human beings are irreducibly intersubjective, even if they pretend otherwise, so the Lie can't really ever affect just one person. Humans are compelled to communicate and share, which spreads the Lie like a virus; thus, "when the Lie becomes coterminous with the very world in which we have our being,"

in electoral politics, in education, in the entertainment industry, in the media print and digital, in publishing, in the censoring Big Tech platforms, in mass movements sweeping the planet like feminism and “climate change” and Islamic appeasement and identity politics and renewed socialism and Globalism -- and when it lays down the latitude and longitude of our thinking so that there is scarcely any place left to locate our inner coordinates, it forms, as the ancient Gnostics believed, a wholly demonic environment, a false Creation. It is no accident that the devil is called the Father of Lies (ibid.).

Yes, yes, and yes: a false "creation," a demonic environment, and a reality tunnel that we simultaneously project and inhabit (exactly like the structure of dreaming, whereby we are contained in our own container).

Note that we place creation in scare quotes, because Satan cannot create, period. Genuine creation is reserved for God only, so the best Satan can do is mimic it. He can only work with pre-existing materials, and the finest material available is obviously the human being.

People naturally wonder how God could become incarnate in Jesus. By virtue of what principle is this possible? We'll leave that to the side for the moment, but perhaps we can learn something about it by considering its perverse mirror image -- that is, how the Lie becomes flesh and walks around on two legs in our world. Jesus -- the Way, Life, and Truth -- is one with his Father. And Jesus himself calls Satan the father of lies, so this looks like more than a hint; rather, a 54 ounce hickory cluebat upside the head.

But again, "Satan" is so loaded a term. We might symbolize him (-T), in contrast to (T), but this poses the danger of setting up a cosmic dualism and elevating (-T) to equal status with (T). However, (-T) is not the opposite of (T), but a privation of it. (-T) is always a paradoxical "substance of nothing," which might explain why it so desperately needs our material substance in order to not just be something, but more importantly, to do something. Again, only man can do the bidding of (-T).

From the Satanic perspective, everything about the human is material to work with, grist for the dark mill. Thus, it is easy enough for him to hijack the virtues and turn them against the very good to which they are properly ordered. Dávila says it best:

The devil can achieve nothing great without the thoughtless collaboration of the virtues.

Boom. But this presupposes an ability for the Father of Lies to incarnate in human beings. No worries. The Aphorist has that covered:

Many think that the devil died, but he merely walks around today disguised as a man.

The leftist will insist that it is naive to believe in such childish terms as good and evil. Evil doesn't exist. Here is a fine example of how the cosmic heretic is half-correct, in that, as outlined above, evil doesn't properly exist. Rather.

Evil only has the reality of the good that it annuls.

Thus, through embodiment in a human being, we might say that (-T) engenders (-R) -- i.e., the "minus reality" of the demonic environment mentioned above by Solway. (The thought occurs to me: One small misstep for Adam, a giant fall for mankind.)

The final irony -- the irony that cannot surpass its own irony -- is that

Where religion is secularized, Satan becomes the last witness to God (Dávila).

Now, leftism is the most successful political religion of all time. Remember what we said a few posts back: that belief in a materialist metaphysic is not a cause of leftist politics; rather the secular religion of leftism evokes the materialist metaphysic it needs in order to justify and sustain itself.

So, as Satan is the last witness to God, we could equally say that godless leftism is the last witness to the God-fearing republic created by the founders. Adam Schiff is the last witness to George Washington: as the Father of our country figuratively "couldn't tell a lie," the father of impeachment literally can't stop lying. Anti-word made flesh and beamed into your -- ironically -- living room.

27 comments:

julie said...

The leftist will insist that it is naive to believe in such childish terms as good and evil. Evil doesn't exist.

Ironically, they proclaim this out of one side of their mouths, while at the same time our cultural overlords go out of their way to promote all the symbolism of (-T). Performers wearing Baphomet clothes, last night's half-time Asherah ritual, the award show last fall that was all about the awesome sexiness of Hell, etc., ad nauseum, endlessly. Whether they believe in any kind of Satanism, I couldn't say; rather, it is apparent that what they serve and believe and celebrate is aggressively opposed to any kind of traditional Christian norms that reflect decency, goodness, and ultimately Truth.

Gagdad Bob said...

One of the principles by which you can know leftism is wrong is that it is impossible to consistently follow their principles to their conclusion. Just look at the impeachment: they spend 100 years eroding the Constitution and vilifying the founders, only to pretend to venerate them in order to justify their coup.

julie said...

I have a family member - an otherwise very sweet and lovable young lady - who just spent the weekend on Facebook castigating evangelicals for supporting Trump and ignoring his private conversation about what some women will allow, then spent this morning lecturing people that they should lighten up about last night's performance of actual crotch-grabbing, whorish behavior (fun for the whole family!) on national TV, because it was just a couple of women having fun.

If she ever recognizes her cognitive dissonance, the whiplash may well be fatal.

Nicolas said...

The theses of the left are rationalizations that are carefully suspended before reaching the argument that dissolves them.

Anonymous said...

The Super-bowl half time show was heavily weighted towards stylized masturbation, teasing, and simulated copulation. The two female stars had their p*ussies very much on display, covered by some filmy panties and whatnot. Truth to be told they were pretty hot, however Catholics aren't going to approve that show, no way and no how.

Latinas are said to freaks in the bedroom, very passionate. It is a point of pride for them I suppose. Nevertheless, one is left thinking, if this represents America, we are damn horny.

Now let's talk the Devil. We've gone round and round and round about unity, one cosmos, the totality of God as the all, yadda yadda yadda. So God and the Devil perforce must be one and the same. It is hard to think that, but that conclusion is quite inescapable unless you want to run back to paganism and reboot.

God is good, and....ulp. It pains me to say, God is evil. But how else to conclude without tossing unity out the window? We are forced to do mental gymnastics, splitting, gyrations of all sorts, to make this palatable. But it won't work, it just won't work. An the plaint goes up, "Why do bad things happen to good people?" Well the answer is right in front of the nose.

Every Leftist is a child of God, proceeds from God, returns to God. In the meantime this Leftist riles up Bob with his antics. How can he reconcile the holiness of the Leftist?

Bob is nowhere's near touching the truth, and on every play fades back a few steps after the snap, can't find an open receiver, and gets sacked. Every time. Ouch.

The truth? You can't handle the truth.

Today's Paper of Record said...

Trump To Deliver State Of The Union In Scuba Gear To Avoid Drowning In Liberal Tears

Anonymous said...

Regarding "One of the principles by which you can know leftism is wrong is that it is impossible to consistently follow their principles to their conclusion. Just look at the impeachment: they spend 100 years eroding the Constitution and vilifying the founders, only to pretend to venerate them in order to justify their coup."

I fail to see any factual evidence how the impeachment eroded the constitution. The constitution provides for the impeachment process and the process appears to have been followed. Yes there is plenty of noise from on the Internet and Fox that regurgitate this, no evidence of this I can see. From the standpoint of an impeachment, what matters is what the president is proven to have done or not done and whether that is serious enough to warrant impeachment. Whether there were whistle blower issues or someone tried to get dirt (whether Shiff or Nunes) may be issues, but not relevant to the impeachment. Also what Biden did or didn't do - while shady as all hell - whether illegal or not, should be investigated, but is irrelevant to what Trump did.

There certainly is credible evidence that Trump asked a foreign power to get dirt on a political opponent and held aid that was already approved by congress over their heads as leverage. There is also credible evidence that Trump didn't ask that power to investigate Biden - only to announce they were going to investigate. Ukraine is a corrupt country - he was not concerned about anything else but Biden. He also held all evidence that was asked for and blocked witnesses.

So, the question is whether this is enough to warrant an impeachment. Should a president put his personal interests above his country's? I don't see how taking the above to impeachment can be defined as eroding the constitution. It seems to me that what occurred was according to the constitution.

Speaking of constitutional erosion, how about Trump stating that he can do whatever he wants due to Article II or Dershowitz making the scary claim that if a president thought his reelection was in the interest in the country, he could do whatever he wants.

Also the impeachment and being anti-Trump is not a left/right thing (whatever that really is - broad labels like that certainly apply to the fringes such, but many people outside of the fringes are too nuanced for such a broad label). There are plenty of conservatives who think Trump is a danger and are still conservative.






Gagdad Bob said...

Q.E.D. I rest my case.

Anonymous said...

You haven't made a case. You throw out unsubstantiated Fox news drivel intended for the non-thinking Boobus Americanus class (which unfortunately are way too numerous). You have made baseless statements about people that prosecuted for capital crimes like treason and then send links from others that are based on Hannity-like hysteria aren't based on facts to back up their case. You are extremely intelligent, educated, and well-written. I understand how you can be riled up by things that you don't agree with. Baseless accusations of treason and erosion of our constitution by constitutionally mandated processes are way below someone of your caliber.

Alexandria said...

What difference, at this point, does it make? In eleven years we'll all be dead from climate change and white privilege.

Gagdad Bob said...

Anonymous: Sorry for the miscommunication. I'm not saying I made my case. Rather, I'm saying that you made my case.

julie said...

Ah, the joys of self-beclownment. The funniest/ saddest part is Anon will probably never figure it out.

Let the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVW1oZQMB4c</a>reeeing</a> resume...

julie said...

Oops - reeeing, properly formatted

Anonymous said...

Anonymous, so much sadness. But ye should rejoice, for today is a great day.

We know this because the State of the Union is utter perfection.

Kansas City is back in Kansas. Pelosi’s hand is back in her pocket. A long tall and strong wall stands erect at Mexican expanse (not that Buttigieg thinks there's anything wrong with that). And the Ukranians shall never hire a Biden ever again.

What you have never figured out is that nothing matters, there is nothing that anybody can do about it, and we're all going to die anyways. So why even try? A vote for anybody who says they want to do something constructive is a tricksy-false vote.

It's a vote for Satan.

Anonymous said...

I guess I didn't make my case very very well either. Going down to low road and using snarky terms like Boobus Americanus isn't an effective way of trying to espouse your opinion and garner constructive dialog. My bad. What I did prove was that in these divisive times, I am contributing to the vitriol.

I do think that the level of divisiveness and lack of civil discourse - of which I have proven to be a party to - is to a level never seen before in this country and a danger to democracy. Not sure what the solution is and what is going to calm things down.

julie said...

I can think of lots of things that would calm things down:

* Courtesy.

* Manners.

* Not trying to destroy people's lives for the crime of Noticing Reality or existing while white, male and normal.

* Not having a mental breakdown or a screaming fit because someone wears a MAGA hat in public.

* Not advocating that, should you be granted the reigns of power, all the people who disagreed with you should be loaded on trains and sent to re-education camps to do hard labor until they've learned the error of their ways.

* Not threatening to burn down cities if your politician of choice loses.

* Not demanding that innocent people be ever-more constrained and made helpless simply because criminals who ignore the laws, no matter how stringent, continue to do bad things.

Just off the top of my head.

Used to be, most people who lived in this country started from the same set of 10 guidelines, which narrow handily down to two; when a people stick to them, everything is remarkably copacetic.

Few people seem to be taught those rules anymore, much less have the discipline to try and live by them.

Gagdad Bob said...

There is nothing Trump advocates that liberals didn't advocate as recently as the Clinton presidency. So who divided from whom?

Gagdad Bob said...

As a matter of fact, I just checked Clinton's first SOTU:

--I believe tonight one calls on us to focus, to unite and to act, and that is our economy. For more than anything else, our task tonight as Americans is to make our economy thrive again.

--I believe we will find our new direction in the basic old values that brought us here over the last two centuries: a commitment to opportunity, to individual responsibility, to community, to work, to family and to faith.

--the real engine of economic growth in this country is the private sector. And second that each of us must be an engine of growth and change. The truth is that as government creates more opportunity in this new and different time, we must also demand more responsibility in turn.

--Our immediate priority must be to create jobs. Some people say well we’re in a recovery and we don’t have to do that. Well, we all hope we’re in a recovery. But we’re sure not creating new jobs. And there’s no recovery worth its salt that doesn’t put the American people back to work.

--tonight I invite America’s business leaders to join us in this effort so that together we can provide over one million summer jobs in cities and poor rural areas for our young people.

--we will insist on fair trade rules in international markets as a part of a national economic strategy to expand trade, including the successful completion of the latest round of world trade talks and the successful completion of a North American Free Trade Agreement

--Later this year we will offer a plan to end welfare as we know it.

-- I have ordered administrative cuts in budgets of agencies and departments; I have cut the federal bureaucracy – or will over the next four years – by approximately 100,000 positions, for a combined savings of $9 billion.

The main differences are that Clinton wanted socialized medicine and higher taxes, but that's always been true of liberals; and that Trump has delivered on everything promised by Clinton with the exception of deficit reduction.

julie said...

Ironically, while Clinton is and was then a vile human being, he really wasn't a terrible president. He knew that to lead America, you still needed to be an American and identify with the majority of Americans. Of the two of them, I think Hilary is far the worse and the more dangerous. Without her, would he even have tried so hard to socialize medicine? I wonder. Good example of the female being more deadly than the male...

Anonymous said...

And yet strangely, both Clinton and Trump are such liars with so much sense of entitlement that they can barely control their own hands. Or tweets. Yet both are fabulously wealthy.

As noted here, Obama lives in a seaside mansion and gives lucrative speeches for the very Wall Streeters and global warmers he'd hoped us that he would change for us.

Most folks cannot Notice Reality. They're built to be tribal, to work hard doing the right thing for their respective tribes and to blindly allow sociopathic leaders to use tribal impulses for their own benefit. "Leftist" Stalin, and "Rightist" Franco were masters at playing the tribal for their own personal benefit. With millions ruined and destroyed.

Tribalists will study every Prager video and then backfill any 'knowledge gaps' with Prager recommended resources, instead of doing the objective hard work of also viewing counterpoints and rebuttals and then making up their own free minds. The reasons for taking reasoning shortcuts are simple. You can either try to maintain good standing with the tribe for personal reward, or you can use the tribe for personal reward.

Not to mention all the angst that comes from sunk cost fallacy.

Or you can isolate yourself. But you'll risk being labeled a malcontent or misanthrope, a non-team player, to be discarded by all tribes. That's why the decline of religion is such a tragedy. Normal decent folks who just wanted respite from material tribalistic nonsense, could escape to the peace of Christian spirituality.

Crabapple said...

You sound a little butthurt, anon. Maybe you should print out a copy of last night's address, so you can tear it up just like Pelosi did.

Anonymous said...

Which anon? There's at least two here, maybe three.

Use the timestamp. It's as good as any name.

Gagdad Bob said...

Arguing with people who don't share our principles is just a stupid way to kill time, and not even a pleasant way. Conservatives (i.e., classical liberals) and illiberal leftists have radically different assumptions about the world, about human nature, about economics, about the constitution, about human sexuality, about art, about education, and about pretty much everything else. So to argue over the entailments of the deeper structure is truly a waste of time.

I am told that there are plenty of places on the internet where one can get into arguments over surface politics. I advise our anonymous commenters to seek them out.

Anonymous said...

It has always been thus.

There have always been nuts using reasons like "butthurt" to prove their case.

But what if one believes in old school politics, where fiscal conservatives were free to duke it out with tax and spend progressives over actual national problems, in an honest way, resulting in those reasonably plausible solutions which made America great?

Anonymous said...

@julie: you mentioned "Clinton being a vile human being" and it is hard to argue against his lack of moral character. How do you feel about Trump's moral character?

julie said...

"I am told that there are plenty of places on the internet where one can get into arguments over surface politics. I advise our anonymous commenters to seek them out."

Seconded.

Anonymous said...

I get depressed in those places. They speak of Bannon's "American decline managed by the powers that be" far too often.

Not to mention that the only conservative Bannon could find who would keep millennials from stampeding leftward, was that most imperfect of instruments, Trump.

But more to this place... Christianity needs to remain important for many obvious reasons. The best way may be to get out of politics. But is that even possible?

Theme Song

Theme Song