It seems to have been little noticed that for several decades, the West's idea of 'conquest' has been morally to corrupt nations - for the obvious reason that those paid to notice and inform the masses, are themselves among the most corrupt.
If you follow-up the consequences of any Western intervention - whether an invasion/ occupation; engineered and paid-for 'regime change'; or 'subversion as usual' by means of subsidizing NGOs, 'charities' and funding destablizing leftist groups...
You can see a pattern of Western intervention invariably increasing moral corruption (bribery, theft, sexual immorality, social breakdown with violence); including the destruction of any genuine religion by convergence and suppression (especially Christianity, but also any traditionalist religion with a distinct world-view and morality).
Thus, the actual and achieved pattern of Western intervention abroad is Sorathic (i.e. doing evil by inducing chaos) rather than Ahrimanic (i.e. evil imposed by systems of totalitarian bureaucratic surveillance and control) - and has been for a good while.
A clear example is the current conflict involving the Fire Nation - where it seems that (as usual) the main Western 'plan' has been first grossly to corrupt the top-level leadership-class of a nation (by standard techniques of bribery and blackmail); then deliberately - but 'deniably', by proxy - to provoke a war; and now to encourage the maximum of destruction to population and infrastructure.
By such means has the Western Establishment has pursued the most advanced forms of Sorathic evil abroad - but what about 'at home'?
Meanwhile, for the past couple of decades and peaking in 2020 with the global coup; the dominant strategy 'at home' in the West has been Ahrimanic. That is, to use a single, linked, increasingly international bureaucracy-mass media, to create a society of omni-surveillance and total control. Agenda 2030 and the Great Reset are some statements of this plan.
However, there have also been strongly Sorathic aspects in home policy; especially the implementation of mass immigration to the West - including the encouragement of illegal, violent and criminal migrants.
This inevitably creates social and economic breakdown and chaos; and the chaos has been deliberately concealed by suspending the surveillaince-control Ahrimanic state when it comes to 'multicultural' sub-groups - such as 'no-go zones' of cities, and police policies of 'non-intervention'.
The actual governance of Western nations (e.g. in relation to the personal behaviour of politicians, and the conduct of elections) has also become extremely, now all-but openly, corrupt - hence chaotic.
Chaos has more recently been fuelled by birdemic-testing-quarantine and the peck, the imposed cult of antiracism and race-sex preferences, and the truly colossal global economic destruction caused by financial and economic 'sanctions'.
At some point, the forces of chaos become, of their nature, irreversible. Evil feeds upon itself - inevitably, by its nature (when unrepented); and the Sorathic is a more advanced form of evil than the Ahrimanic.
The triumph of leftism (and it is, indeed, triumphant - worldwide, at the highest levels) therefore turns-out to be the triumph of corruption and chaos.
That is what leftism is at root, and what it always tended to become over time - because the nature of leftism is oppositional and negative; hence incoherent; and incoherence is another word for chaos.
In other words; leftism is the ideology of evil, but evil has different forms; and there is always conflict among evil-serving persons and entities.
Yet, over time, evil innately 'progresses' from Ahrimanic to Sorathic; from (partly) constructive and planned, towards very-fully-destructive and chaotic.
For a while, the most destructive evils of mainstream Western Establishment leftism were mainly exported abroad; where societies were destroyed serially.
But now, the same chaotic evil is getting a grip 'at home' - overwhelming the bureaucrats, transhumanists, and mind-programmers - and the current triumphs of the left are more about spreading destruction than about increasing control.
The bad news is that it is much easier to corrupt Men than to encourage morality, to destroy than to create.
The 'good' news is that the left is - at an increasing rate - destroying its own capacity to inflict chaos.
Yet evil does not destroy itself as it advances, and Good can only arise from Good-aiming Persons - and Good means of-God.
However, this analysis suggests that there may be coming more spiritual scope for Good, for Christian awakening and conversion, as The System destroys itself... Even though the physical/ material prospects seem extremely bleak.
6 comments:
Looks to me like ahrimanic confusion has functioned as a cover for sorathic suicidality from about 1750 with the suicidality getting continuously more severe since then. Late Rome, Greece, West would be characterised by this process with the West being the most severe. There are also parallels to the Early Modern witches and the sort of appalling self-harming things they would say/do. The mouse utopia mutational meltdown situation (starting about 1750) might be understood as a process in which sorathically inclined souls begin to incarnate and proliferate exponentially.
This would sort of fit Steiner's scheme of luciferic -> ahrimanic -> sorathic if ahrimanic and sorathic are understood as coming together necessarily. ahrimanic would actually be a sort of excuse/justification/something like that for sorathic suicidality.
Example: http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-dark-chocolate-scam.html
People will give all sorts of reasons for liking dark chocolate. It's better for you, it's more natural, it's good with this or that. But they really just want it *because* it's undesirable, *because* they don't like it.
Another example is the current situation in the east. People will have a lot to say when it comes to opposing the particular nation they oppose, but they really just oppose it because it represents (rightly or wrongly) things that are not just Good but even desirable. Their race, Christianity, and whatever else.
So Christianity itself would be opposed not just because it's Good but because it's desirable in a basic, instinctively felt way. People would (with sorathic motivation) invoke the Crusades, Inquisition, what have you as an ahrimanic cover for their agenda to oppose something they actually feel positively about deep down (Christianity), in the manner of witches.
@ben "So Christianity itself would be opposed not just because it's Good but because it's desirable in a basic, instinctively felt way."
It's surprisingly easy to get people to think this way - I certainly did for much of my life. Our culture pre-immunizes us to reject anything that provides meaning, purpose and a positive reason for life by the snobbish slur that it Must Be childish, idiotic, weak-minded, wishful thinking - therefore necessarily false.
(And, of course, on the other side; any attitude that is stoical, tough-minded and self-denying would interfere with the distracting pleasures and sexual daydreams that all that keeps us going.)
@ben - I should emphasize that my usage of Luciferic, Ahrimanic and Sorathic is derived from, bit significantly different from, Steiner's.
I particularly strongly reject Steiner's idea that Lucifer and Ahriman are 'not-really-evil' but something like extremes of conservatism and a 'premature' futurism; of which Christ is the 'happy medium' (and I also reject the stuff about Lucifer being incarnated in China 3000 years before Christ, and Ahriman will be incarnated 2000 years after Christ in The West (?USA) - and all this was pre-ordained. Steiner also asserts that all of cosmic and human history and future was laid out from the beginning and unfolds more-or-less predictably over millennia.)
makes sense
As a peculiar aside, I recently read how the Dali Lama was noting that mass immigration was harming native inhabitants and that migrants should be sent home. I suspect he wont be invited to anymore ngo galas and events.
It remains interesting that John Gray objected to many of the projects of the neo liberals (aka the several Steinerian ideas) and pointed out their danger--albeit without a spiritual component.
Dark, dark times.....
@ben OK listen up BUD, you couldn't be more wrong if you were head of the official global fact checking organisation. Dark chocolate is the best chocolate (90% is the sweet spot), and that's the truth even if you're so addicted to refined sugar that the only thing you think of when someone says "chocolate" is something that's *mostly sugar*, ie mostly not cocoa. Good dark chocolate is smooth, rich, and bitter in a good way--in fact in a way that's similar to how people who call dark chocolate likers liars should be responded to.
Post a Comment