Wednesday 26 April 2017

Q: Why is it that secular people cannot understand the nature of The Left? A: They don't believe in demons

From Zippy Catholic "in fact liberalism is rationally incoherent, all the way down "

I regard this as a vital insight - at least it was for me; the opponents to the Left have wasted far too much time and energy - and have distracted themselves from their proper job - by trying and failing (repeatedly) to encapsulate the Left's essential positive doctrines; which don't exist, but mutate for expediency. 

The way to understand the Left is that it is oppositional.

But this is seldom understood. Why? Because what the Left ultimately opposes is Christianity: real Christianity and not the hollowed shell of the modern mainstream Christian churches (institutions that have as much to do with Christianity as colleges have to do with education, or the European Union legal system has to do with justice). 
And this carries the implication that the true (covert) leaders of the Left necessarily believe-in the reality of Christianity - otherwise they could not oppose it.

Yep - the Leftist leadership believe-in the supernatural reality of Christianity: believe it and reject it. 

This carries the further implication - utterly unacceptable and incomprehensible to secular people - that the Left cannot be understood unless you personally believe in the reality of demons - I mean supernatural, purposive, personified, active opponents of God's plan of salvation.

I'm afraid that it is necessary to believe in demons (immortal evil spirits) to account for the Left's strategic destructiveness extending over many human generations; and the cohesiveness of purpose behind so many persons and institutions - despite the inadeequacy of perceptible systems of coordination and control.

Those for whom demons are ridiculous nonsense - and who cannot ally themselves with God's plans - cannot understand and cannot genuinely oppose the Left.

This does not leave many people in the West who do genuinely oppose the Left - and this is a fact: albeit an regrettable one.


JP said...

I don't know if you have ever read The Devil's Share by Rougemont, but it is short, easy, insightful, enjoyable, and definitely worth a go.

Duggus said...

Thank you, once again. I've thought this in regard to my own church for some time now, but hadn't really considered it as something so fundamental as what you say. In my church, the proclaimed logic behind decisions has been completely contradictory, sometimes justified by going back to something supposedly more ancient but sometimes justified by needing something supposedly more up-to-date. It only makes sense when you realize all decisions consistently move in a direction away from the sacred. Why hadn't I considered all of liberalism that way?

Sean Cory said...

This has been on my mind for some years now. The Left's opponents cannot win because they have no idea of what their enemy is. They fire away and consistently miss the mark because they refuse to see the target. That old saw about the greatest victory the devil ever achieved was convincing men he did not exist is true.

whitestone said...

It's true. the target. The real enemies, are being missed the whole time. While the different factions fight among themselves. Divided and conquered. Oblivious to who the real enemies are

Don said...

Anyone who has watched the news or seen what passes for art or read what they consider normal or entertaining cannot miss the demons unless they are willfully blind.

It's the emperor's new clothes. All are agreeing on what they will and will not consider real. Even believing Christians have a hard time stating outright the obvious. Embarrassed by the teachings of Christ.

If they allow for sodomy, murder, perversions how can they allow themselves to acknowledge the evil forces driving those desires.

Bruce Charlton said...

@Don - The demons are missed because the assumption is that they don't exist - and furthermore than anyone who says they do exist is stupid, dishonest or manipulative. As so often, it is the unexamined, denied - hence incoherent - assumptions of modernity which are the problem.