At least, that's how it was regarded in traditional societies. A Traitor being someone who poses as a friend, but works for the enemy. Far more dangerous, more damaging, than a known enemy...
From a 'natural justice' perspectives it seems unsurprising that it was the last remaining crime to be punishable by execution; and also that to the modern secular Leftist way of 'thinking' treachery isn't a bad thing at all...
It was the upper class communists in Europe, the UK and the USA who made treachery into an 'acceptable' option; by working for the Soviet Union and against their 'host' nations (as parasites, they saw their own people that way).
Nowadays, it has become infra dig, a mark of low-class loser status among the Establishment, even to think about the possibility of treachery. Again, no surprises; considering the entirety of the ruling Establishment are themselves traitors; blood-sucking leeches growing fat from devouring the resources of those whom they purport to lead and guard.
That this is the case in politics is obvious, yet still not fully appreciated - at least in Britain. That the Left have been solid traitors since the middle 1960s, loathing and despising those whom they claim to 'represent', is still denied.
But it applies across the board. Someone who is a traitor and nothing but a traitor, such as Theresa May, is instead the object of sympathy or regarded as a well-meaning incompetent. Something like the Conservative Party is institutionalised treachery; yet people still regard them as superior to the leftists; when the difference is merely between species of Quisling.
The people who represented the medical profession in the 1900s were all traitors; and that the same applies to those who are the leaders of science: the 'great and good' of the peer review cartels. Yet this simple, obvious fact still is not acknowledged.
The leaders of all the mainstream churches are not benign bumbling fools - they are traitors, plotting and scheming how personally to profit from their employment as destroyers of their churches, while rehearsing conciliatory hand-wringing and concerned frowns...
It could not be much more obvious - yet most people don't see (and congratulate themselves on their blindness; as if being a smirking dupe was something to be proud of...).
The mental convolutions through which people will spin in trying to deny common sense and the evidence of experience is remarkable.
Sometimes - indeed, usually - things are as simple as they seem to be. The reason They fail - again, and again, and again - is simply because they are not even trying to succeed.
This basic fact needs to be clear before we can proceed - which is exactly why so much effort is put into obfuscating it.
I understand the world is upside down but keep feeling I'm failing!
ReplyDeleteTreason. Re-framed.
ReplyDeleteTo make it a mark of sophistication to betray one's own was a clever twist. Seen from afar I wonder if there as an odd appreciation for the sheer style of the trickery.
@FX - Point well made. It is a good example of how Pride works - In his own gloating mind, and the community that support him; being a successful traitor elevates the traitor about the masses and the real leaders - demonstrates his superiority, and is therefore self-justifying.
ReplyDeleteFrom the traitor's perspective, he is merely doing boldly and successfully what everybody else wants to do - but is too scared, weak or dumb to do. He regards himself as honest and the rest as hypocrites (or despicable).
The psychology of treachery is well portrayed by Saruman, in Lord of the Rings.
In my perhaps faulty opinion, treachery among people who have few friends is not that big a crime. It is more like the reflex of a sad hunted animal.
ReplyDeleteMoving from animals to humans, the sort of treachery we are talking about is just people with cold hearts doing what people with cold hearts do, and who among us knows what we would be like if we lived in this world and all our friends were not really friends? And that happens every day to many people, to be born into a world like that, where they had no chance to be a fortunate person with lots of friends, and it is not their fault.
if God gave you normal parents and decent health and freedom from mental illness, you almost certainly are not going to commit "great crimes" at the worst you will just be boring, selfish, and unloveable.
Thanks for being patient and trying to understand what I am saying. I have seen, again and again, the look on the face of someone who has been blessed to be surrounded by kindness from their youth.
And I have seen the hunted look of those who never had a friend in this world, and I have seen what they express with their eyes when they see that I --- and I hate to say it, but it is true ----- when they recognize that I was one of those people who , after Judas hung himself (maybe a couple thousand years later, but what does that matter when someone has died) refused to claim I was better than him.
Only God knows what little Judas, in the days before he was born, went through when God the Father walked in Heaven with the human soul that little Judas had before he was the awful creature so abhorred by almost all of us (not me) and with the human soul that Jesus had before he was born in a manger to Mary and Joseph (the picture I am trying to describe is God the Father walking in Heaven with the innocent human souls who would soon be incarnated in Palestine under the evil Roman rule ----- and who we now call, after they lived and died (yes, both of them lived and died as human beings) "judas" and "Jesus" and I was not there but I, in my less rational moments, remember it like it was yesterday, God the Father, not that long ago (less than 2100 years, less than 71 generations) asked pre-born Judas, who did, after all, not that much later, give up all his worldly riches to follow Jesus, if he was willing to be born in the awful sort of home where one would expect the parents of Judas to live, and to let little Jesus be born in the home that was the other choice ----
YOU DO NOT KNOW THAT JUDAS DID NOT TELL GOD THAT YES HE WAS WILLING TO BE BORN TO THE PARENTS OF JUDAS instead of being born to Mary and Joseph ....... and he made that choice willingly
I have known a lot of really bad people in my life and I have gotten into the habit of trying to be as kind as I can to people who have done bad things.
Sure I am all for law and order and for strict laws to protect us from evil doers, including the death penalty which so many people who do not care about the victims do not support ---
but here, we are talking about a guy who followed Jesus for a couple of years.
Did you do that?
Did I do that?
God loves us all, and God remembers what we were before we were sinners.
And now here is why I went through all the trouble of writing this long comment which may or may not be posted and which, even if it is posted, is not likely to be read by hardly anyone who cares what I am talking about ----
we all know how easy it is not to care about other people.
Make fun of me all you want, but I just spent the last half hour describing my best attempt at showing that I care about Judas.
Do that, my friends, for someone who needs you to care so much about them that you would choose what Judas chose, before he was born ----
to be born in an awful home where he would be subjected, as a child, to the evil inclinations of the sort of people who one would expect to be the parents of a Judas -----
and to let his great friend Jesus be born in Bethlehem ,
as the prophets predicted, speaking with the power of the Holy Spirit.
As usual, you hit the nail on the head, Bruce. The infiltration of the churches by the ‘pointy-hatters’ has been a long march and it’s been shown in the various votes by synod v laity but now even the laity is falling away.
ReplyDeleteHi Bruce - I posted a comment here a few hours ago - please do not publish it!
ReplyDeleteIt was more of a first draft of a comment than a comment, and expressed views i do not agree with - because of the short format I was not able to make that clear!
In the much-hyped but astonishingly incompetent film “Avatar,” the human “hero” turns against humanity and fights on the alien side of an aliens-vs-humans war. The human general asks him, “How does it feel to betray your own race?” — and the filmmakers’ obvious intention is to mark the general, by virtue of the fact that he can even formulate such a question, as the lowest of the low.
ReplyDelete@Wm - I suppose what that shows is that loyalty to 'race' is weak, as such. It can be overriden by other loyalties.
ReplyDelete