Monday, 28 June 2021

Freedom for what?

In a sense it is pleasing to see pictures of vast 'freedom' 'demonstrations' in London, apparently against the birdemic and peck agenda and the totalitarian response - because they show some degree of immunity and resistance to the official/media propaganda and programming. 

In another sense I know it will go nowhere - except to be infiltrated and turned to the advantage of the Global Establishment.  

The resistance is correct; and perhaps it may delay the agenda of evil; but, because the resistance coheres only on the basis of 'freedom', this is merely 'hedonic' in motivation (ie. pleasure seeking, suffering-avoiding). 

The hedonic can easily be manipulated by totalitarian forces that control the international bureaucracies; so will ultimately feed the totalitarian demonic powers. 

Much as the 1960s hedonic rebellion led directly - including many of the same actual people!- to the 1980s bureaucratic takeover which has continued; thus the negative demand for 'freedom' (despite being justified) will only lead to more totalitarianism; by a well-trodden (albeit roundabout) path of subversion, cooption and deception. 

This is why I am not interested in movements against any-thing, or for 'freedom' or any other negative secular abstraction...

I am only excited by evidence of individual people finding their way to Christianity; and developing a personally discerning belief in the reality of the world of the spirit and resurrected life in Heaven. 

Anything else - everything else - just goes to hell by a less-direct, more-scenic, route. 


William Wildblood said...

I'm glad you wrote a post about this because I was thinking of saying exactly the same thing and you have saved me the trouble! I live just outside London but I have not gone on any of these protests precisely because they are, as you say, "'hedonic' in motivation (ie. pleasure seeking, suffering-avoiding)."

Anonymous said...

In how far are they 'properly hedonic' - so to say, 'natural-law hedonic' - in motivation: seeking licit pleasure and avoiding unjustly imposed or facilitated suffering? And, beyond that, 'orthodox Christian hedonic': pursuing - or at least facilitating (rather than determinedly hostile to) - freedom of worship, of evangelization, of preaching, of practical temporal charity - including where medicine and education are involved, of public expression and participation?

David Llewellyn Dodds

Bruce Charlton said...

@ William - Well that saves you doing it!

@DDL - As I said, the cause is good, in itself - but in a Godless society such a movement will not do good. Either it will be ineffectual (as so far) or it will be infiltrated, coopted, subjected to false flag and agent provocateur tactics - and in general used as an excuse for more repression.

Until we address the spiritual root of the malaise, we will remain trapped in the death spiral by being drawn onto the wrong side.

Jake said...

Very true essay.
Also, being motivated by freedom in the negative sense: freedom to do one what wishes, freedom from coercion, is easily crushed: all you need to do is threaten something that counteracts the hedonic or pain level of the lost freedom or coercion that the protestors are protesting against. It's mathematical, almost. Easily counter-acted by a simple algorithm.

Being motivated by God and the divine provides a much much harder to counteract force.

ben said...

It's hard to know what motivates these marchers, but if it is hedonism are these marches not just another form of evil? Running from Ahriman into the arms of Lucifer.

"seeking licit pleasure"

This is still wrong because the primary motivation is pleasure. I've noticed that modern people tend to imagine that all behavior is a matter of pleasure-seeking/suffering-avoidance. This seems to be one of those unexamined metaphysical assumptions that people see evidence for because they already have the assumption. Have assumption -> interpret experience within assumption's framework -> thereby see experience as validating assumption.

Seems to me like people used to be much more motivated by righteousness, not pleasure/suffering. For example, you take communion because it is right, not because you derive pleasure from it (this isn't to say it isn't also pleasurable).

Gary Bleasdale said...

The raw truth is that mass movements such as protests, voting, and the like, don't matter anymore when thinking about things "getting better". They belong to a prior era and are today and forever utterly obsolete.

They don't matter for spiritual reasons (which you have touched upon in this blog many times) and, in consequence, they don't matter at the level of practical tactics, because centralising anything today will make you the easiest possible target, straight in the sight of very able and capable "disruptors".

If things are to "get better" it will *have* to be through decentralized action, which by definition can't be coordinated by a single human entity or oligopoly.

What I mean is this: at bottom, all you can really do (which is A LOT and MORE THAN ENOUGH!) is strive to speak and live the truth, find out what it means to be truly Active, and strive to be as Active as possible according to the specific task that God has given you.

This may or may not involve large numbers of people - it'll depend upon who you are.

But it certainly means that if your hope of moving away from the "abolition of man" is dependent upon getting the support of the masses and becoming a visible movement, you will be sorely dissapointed.

It *has* to start with the individual and his relationship with God - it has to start with a sincere desire to become Active and Aware at the level of YOUR OWN CONSCIOUSNESS. And in a way, it has to end there as well.

And I strongly suspect that once this type of thinking becomes more naturalized (and it will, because there are still many men who profoundly detest the notion of being abolished and will sooner or later find out that the old ways are obsolete), we will see a waning in "protests" (because they will be correctly perceived as being on the wrong side). And this will, in that context, be a good sign.