Showing posts sorted by relevance for query resistance is futile. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query resistance is futile. Sort by date Show all posts

Sunday, 1 December 2019

No institutional escape from Wokeness. With organisation versus The System - Resistance is Futile!

Above: The Borg - from Star Trek

Above: Early adopters of the next-generation of 'smart' technology

The Borg are the deadliest threat to the universe in Star Trek — The Next Generation. Part man, part machine, with each member participating in the group consciousness; the Borg act with a single ant-like will, and when one is defeated another steps forward to take its place.

In fact, the Borg are totalitarian bureaucrats; especially those with transhumanist aspirations for omni-surveillance and micro-control. And both Borg and Bureaucrat share the same mantra (in various versions): statement — resistance is futile.

At the level of institutions, this is correct - resistance is indeed futile.

Why? Because, all human institutions, corporations, organisations, functional or formal systems... are indeed mini abstract 'systems' that are linked to 'The System' (The Borg) by laws, rules, regulations, practices, use of money, taxes, banking and accounting, use of mass media, use of electricity and other utilities... linked, therefore, to that totalitarian bureaucracy which spans the world and has penetrated deep into all of our lives.


If, for example, a church (any church) tries to resist the Borg, and to remain unassimilated, it is identified as a threat and destroyed via one or more of the systemic links with the uni-System; via media firestorm or endemic vilification; political condemnation; punitive tax auditing or accounts auditing; prosecutions by employment law, hate crime law, be found to violate 'terms of service' from media and utilities and providers of internal services ...

That is, the church will - one way or another - have costs inflicted incrementally, open-endedly, and without limit; until it is destroyed as A-system distinct-from The System. Once identified, its separate organisation will be destroyed or else assimilated: that is the choice for modern institutions.

In political terms the choice is convergence, which is absorption; or death as an institution that is effective in The World.


As long as The System - the single atheist, leftist, totalitarian bureaucracy - continues there is no escape for systems.  

In a world of Woke institutions, only the 'Woke' will continue to survive...

But the Woke institutions 'survive' only by assimilation into the leftist, converged, Woke World that is The Single System: that totalitarian, increasingly transhumanist, bureaucracy which is controlled by the demonic Establishment.


So there will be (there already is.. all-but) nothing-but the individual and the non-institutional personal and loving relationships around that individual (principally the family); and on the other hand: The System.

All the institutions, churches, professions, corporations and all of 'civil society' that once bridged the gap between individual and totality, will have been destroyed or absorbed.

Man as a divine child of God, will be confronted by demonic collective that is The Borg: the Ahrimanic Satan, the coordinated world of purposive evil. Any person who affiliates to any ostensible institution will, in fact - as bottom-line, be affiliated to The Borg.


And these are the End Times, when the Christian Churches are being (or have already been) assimilated to the System of Evil because they are systems; and only individual persons that are motivated by love of God and fellow Men will be outwith the world of system/s.

And by love I mean real love, not operational, measurable, public-discourse altruism; because all the abstract altruists - those who aspire to loss of ego, consciousness and an end to thinking; those who regard the group as higher than persons - will have long-since surrendered their 'selves' to the merged uni-mind of the Borg.

Note: This is a deeper understanding of the current observation 'Go woke, go broke' - that when an organisation converges onto mainstream politically-correct Leftism - it will 'go broke'.  This is true, but irrelevant to the management, who will simply move on to another institution, with enhanced credentials from their Go Woke activism. If a broke organisation is useful to The System, it will simply be absorbed bureaucratically; and (while The System lasts) sustained with monopolistic privileges, subsidies, destruction of rivals (by taxation, law-fare or whatever). For example, mass higher education is long-since Woke and Broke; but sustained (and expanded) by subsidies of multiple kinds: tuition grants and debt-trapping loans, 'research' grants, grants funding manadatory bureaucratic compliance, requirements for paper credentials enforced by the state, multi-pronged attacks on non-Woke alternative providers (e.g. for-profit colleges) etc. Go Broke and Go Woke are therefore, in practice, synergistic - so long as that Wokeness is subservient to The System.   

Friday, 27 January 2023

Why the dystopia-mania?

Netflix have introduced a new category into their streaming services which is Dystopian Futures

In other words; one of The System's core propaganda sources is encouraging its audience to consume movies and TV programs which focus on future hellish societies; just as (since the summer of 2020) they introduced the category "Black Stories" as an approved category. 

This invites consideration; because on the surface it would seem to be counter-productive for The System to warn the masses about the nasty things The System intends to do with the masses... Yet, here we have it. 


The answer is quite simple, as indeed are all such matters of large scale System policy - because, if strategies were not simple, then they would be rendered ineffectual by the complex and varied multi-society implementation process. Only simple policies can be relied upon to have their desired effect across many nations and across extended timescales.  

The reason why Netflix is pushing dystopian narratives is related to their overall service to the core demonic agenda, which is the damnation of Men.

Overall (and on average) modern dystopias - under modern conditions - promote the agenda of evil; which is the agenda of The System. 


The damnation is Men is not an easy thing to achieve, because Men must choose it: that is, each Man must (as an unique individual) choose to reject the offer or eternal resurrected life in Heaven that is made possible by Jesus Christ. 

That is: a Man must be induced not-to-want Heavenly resurrected and everlasting life; but instead to prefer death and hell. 

In other words; Men must be made to want evil (not Good); and to desire evil entails that Men understand evil and its implications; understand the planned evil sufficiently to consent to evil, sufficiently to say yes to evil


Furthermore, Men be be induced Not-to-repent; because it is never too late (in mortal life) for any Man to repent and instead follow Jesus Christ. 

Damnation is never secure so long as Men retain an accurate sense of what is Good, and what is sin

Only when the evilness of sin is denied and its opposite asserted, is damnation secure. 

This means that - at some level - there needs to be a value-inversion whereby real Good is understood to be evil; and actual evil is understood to be Good.   

This is the spiritual function of Dystopian Futures - and indeed the reason for the mania for dystopian depictions in the mass media and arts, especially since about the millennium: to induce Men to consent to the evil which is planned for them, and to choose it in preference to Heaven.


There are many (unlimited in number and variety, although with some common themes) ways in which modern (especially post-2000) dystopian fictions can promote exactly the dystopias they 'warn' against. 

Maybe simply through depicting dystopia as inevitable - hence inducing the 'resistance is futile' mindset; which is just one step away from embracing the evil plans while trying, personally, to make the best of it. 

Depictions of 'apocalyptic' collapse likewise often promote an attitude of ruthlessly selfish personal-survivalism - indifferent to any spiritual or divine goals (which are implicitly depicted as unreal delusions when times get hard). 

For example; physical survival is assumed (but without stating it) to be the ultimate Good; therefore a 'whatever it takes' ethic becomes ultimate. 

Or; evil is promoted by opposing the depicted dystopias with leftist/ atheist/ materialist/ hedonic System ideologies. This means that both support-of dystopia and 'opposition'-to dystopia both share the same ideology, and both sides in the conflict are merely different aspects of the same (evil) System. 

For instance; Nazi-like 'racist' fictional dystopias are opposed (in-world) by 'antiracist' freedom-fighters - when in real-life antiracism is a core tool of the totalitarian System. 

Or when 'environmentally destructive/ indifferent' tyrannical and cruel rulers, are opposed by some 'eco-warrior types' aiming to save-the-planet - when in real life the environmental movement is utterly in-thrall to (indeed a creature of) the globalist agenda. 

And there are (many) fictions about  Artificial Intelligences. If these are 'evil' (i.e. cruel, selfish etc) this implies that there are also potentially 'Good' AIs (kind, altruistic etc). Fictions of 'Good' AIs, and 'nice'/ or beautiful robots - may have these depicted as better than (most) Men. 

In the end, the message is that AI is a real thing, and AIs are persons and might replace (in essentials) Men - and often the AI future is said to be inevitable anyway (again "resistance is futile"). 

Yet another strand of the propaganda is that futures are some combination of random materialism, scientific determinism, and the Man-made; such that divine creation is excluded completely from the range of possibilities. 

In dystopia Men inhabit a meaningless and purposeless world - because only the divine creation of a Good God has purpose and meaning; consequently those who are depicted as opposing dystopia in these worlds, implicitly accept the same nihilistic assumptions concerning reality, that are inevitable when creation is excluded from possibility. 


In other words; the 'dystopian' worlds portrayed are ones in which all depicted options, on all 'sides' in the dramatic conflict, are all servants of the demonic agenda - in one or another of its aspects. 


Past Dystopias were indeed sometimes genuine warnings against that which they depicted; but the vast expansion and promotion of the dystopia agenda during the past few decades is undoubtedly driven by evil motivations, and is intended to work in support of the evil System-agenda: to pave its way, reduce resistance, increase acceptance...

In a nutshell; 'dystopian futures' are depicted with the overall intent of - by one means or another - generating consent for a totalitarian and materialist society; and, further, inducing mind-sets, attitudes and responses to the unfolding global dystopia that support its development.

Modern dystopias encourage a wide-range of Jesus-rejecting, anti-God, spirit-disbelieving, leftist ideologies that feed-back-into The System, and indirectly but materially and spiritually support it; because in dystopia, all possible futures derive from exactly the same basic and fundamental assumptions upon-which dystopia has been built.     


Monday, 8 November 2021

Pre-emptive compliance versus "It will only happen when it has happened"

In my time working in the UK universities and National Health Service - these functions were brought under managerial control, and integrated into The System which (since early 2020) is now global. 

The almost complete surrender of power by academics and doctors happened almost entirely without coercion. Why? 

Essentially, deeply, due to the lack of motivation and courage from living as godless-expedient hedonists (i.e. regarding mortal life as wholly about 'utility'), on the basic of incoherent (increasingly inverted) Leftist values. 

Lacking any positive transcendent values (truth, beauty, virtue, coherence...); modern people, especially Westerners, are easier to control than any group I have heard of throughout history. 


But how did this control operate proximately? The answer could be termed pre-emptive compliance

The management (whether national or local) would announce what was going to happen - some new scheme to strip autonomy from academics and subordinate teaching, research, scholarship under administrative control; or some new, extra, unpaid and harmful bureaucratic tasks...

And always the mass reaction was 1. to assume that this was inevitable and that 'resistance is futile'; and 2. therefore to comply instantly and with feigned enthusiasm. 

There was essentially zero mass resistance, yet those individuals who did refuse to comply were - for many years - left alone; showing that mass resistance would likely have been effective. 


In other words - the mass of people responded pre-emptively to threats: threats were made, and people obeyed... Obeyed even before threats were implemented, obeyed even when threats were not implemented! 

Scaled-up this has been the story of The West over the past several generations. Coercion to enforce totalitarian tyranny was very seldom needed or used, because compliance was automatic and instant - despite that there has been very widespread cynicism concerning the motivations of the bureaucracy and politicians whose instructions were being so slavishly obeyed. 

This is a measure of our spiritual malaise - the West has quietly, obediently and pre-emptively complied with each step of a now System which covers all nations and regions, and claims authority over all aspects of human existence including family, church, and a Man's private thoughts - i.e. a global totalitarianism. 

And there has been extremely little need for coercion, because the world has complied automatically and instantly; which is evidence of an extreme level of human demotivation due to gross insufficiency of any inner and positive convictions that might provide a basis for, even conceptualized a need for, resistance.


That is the point. We are not seeing merely a global 'failure' of resistance; but a global failure to recognize any need for resistance: that is, a failure to have any reason for resistance of a totalitarianism which is evil both intrinsically (in that universal control is of-itself evil) and also evil explicitly, in its agenda.  

Our spiritual malaise is therefore much, much worse than most people seem to realize. People talk as if what was lacking is means to resist evil (they usually mean some kind of organization); but the much deeper problem is a lack even of the basic desire to resist evil. 

And this stems from a false basic understanding of the nature of reality - false metaphysical assumptions about the world - consequence of generations of apostasy from Christianity combined with a pervasive 'materialism' that by-now permeates traditional Christianity.


If, on the other hand; you are personally motivated Not to comply - because you have strong positive motivations with which compliance interferes and/or because you regard totalitarianism as evil by nature and/or intent - then you do not need a plan for non-compliance. 

One simply does not comply - and wait to see what (if anything) happens. Sometimes nothing happens.

If there are threats (and there will be) they are ignored. Often they lead to nothing. So one waits to see if the threats really are going to be implemented - sometimes they are not.

If the threats are implemented - which is relatively rare, because resource-consuming; one may still refuse to comply.

Or one may delay complaince: comply as late as possible (to make Them make extra effort - sometimes they will not)

One may continue to disobey except when specifically told to obey - that is: refuse to self-police... make Them do it (so They must expend effort); behaviour is adjusted reactively, not pre-emptively.


Evil plans and threats are cheap hence innumerable - an accurate response is that each will only happen when it has happened.

And even then evil will only continue happening either due to continued effort and resource expenditure from those who want it to happen - or else because of the chosen surrender to evil of pre-emptive compliance and self-policing. 

In sum - resistance to evil has many levels and degrees - most are 'passive' (a matter of non-compliance); most are about delaying in hope of unforeseen providential assistance, not all require heroism and some at least are possible even to the most timid. 

Enough delay, from enough people, for the right motivations; will provide God with everything He needs to make a cohesive, positive, alternative, better future. 


God helps those who help themselves is both true, and exclusive: God helps only those who help themselves. 

If individual people do not make choices, for good and against evil - then God cannot pursue good ends in this mortal world. But when some people do know and choose the side of God; then by the invisible working of providence (possible to The Creator) then an unknowably great deal can be achieved by combining and sequencing these individual acts. 

Any individual who is motivated to do good or resist evil, will find sufficient discernment and some courage. And then each such act can be woven-with other such acts, by God, into a divine plan of scope far beyond the wit of Man. 


But what all require is motivation - and motivation is based on an understanding of reality that identifies and distinguishes between good and evil, and the capacity to discern this for oneself (not relying on 'authority' to inform you) - it requires a perspective that we are each responsible for our own choices, and that individual choice is of genuine significance, and makes-a-difference.  

In other words, resistance needs a transcendental perspective - one that is larger than this mortal life; and it also needs a personal perspective - that regards an individual's as able to make choices and those choices as having cosmic significance. 

I don't know of anything other than Christianity - and even then only some kinds of Christianity - that can (even in principle) lead to such a combination of personal and transcendental motivations; and therefore sustain even the desire to resist totalitarian evil.   

Sunday, 10 May 2020

Can there be heroes in a bureaucratic totalitarian world where Resistance is Futile?

Not in the traditional sense, there can't

There cannot be a hero leading a fellowship of fighters for freedom and The Good; because there is nothing specific for them to fight, or beat; no wicked Emperor (or Vizier), no all-powerful dictator (just replaceable suits, puppets and drones), not even The Party nor a Ministry of Magic...

Instead a nebulous, all pervasive, globally-interlinked, bureaucratic-abstract System; to-which all are linked, with-which all are complicit, and from-which nothing stands altogether apart. 


Indeed, with things as they are; the idea of a hero defeating evil on behalf of a silent oppressed majority of the good masses, is unrealistic. The modern materialist masses overwhelming desire their own oppression - mostly tacitly and implicitly, but often-enough explicitly and aggressively.

So, even if the fellowship somehow did defeat the many-headed system - and succeeded in 'Scouring The Shire'; the would-be heroes could not expect the gratitude of the populace; but quite likely the opposite. 


So if group rebellion and mass resistance just isn't going to happen - because unwanted - what should Christians actually do?

Some principles are that whatever is done, we must do alone, or with (at most) a handful of like-minded folk (who we would need already to know). Our advantage is that we do not need to wait on persuading others, or developing consensus: we can get on with it immediately!


What is 'it' that we should do? Well, for our-selves 'it' must be to develop personal understanding: knowledge of what is happening in a spiritual sense.

As for evangelism, this understanding and knowing is also what must be encouraged.

It would be unwise, as well as futile, to encourage action in a situation when so many people are so wrongly, as well as feebly, motivated. Right motivation must precede that strong motivation necessary for effective action.


And if this 'plan' sounds just as futile, or even more futile, than trying to organise resistance; then we need to bear in mind that God works through-us - and anything of value that we personally do, can (and will) be amplified and directed by divine providence - to whatever degree is best.

Always bearing in mind that effectiveness will be calibrated by the divine against the eternal condition of post-mortal Heavenly life; and will not be aimed-at optimising our immediate comfort and pleasure in this mortal world.

Thus hope is sustained by faith.

Monday, 31 October 2022

Destruction is easy! - Explaining the (inverted) triumph of atheist-materialist-leftism

However differently things used to be, the world is now simplified - Good and evil are increasingly without overlap, separating, diverging. 

There are those who affiliate with God and divine creation - and there is the opposite side: the mainstream, common, majority of atheist-materialist-leftist ideology that rules The West (and which apparently includes most self-identified religious people, including most Christians). 

All the leadership class and most of the populations are therefore leftists; which means that their motivations have no genuine positive agenda, but operate via oppositions.


(e.g. As of 2022, leftists - i.e. the entirety of the mainstream of Western public discourse and a majority of the population - oppose 'climate change', or are anti-racist, or keen to protect and promote sexual 'minorities', or eager to transform the world to 'prevent' the birdemic, hate the Fire Nation etc - typically they are all of these. All major policy strategies of the mainstream are primarily oppositional, negative in motivation - and adopting even one of them, is to join the leftist alliance.)


Opposition is easy because it is destructive in nature, therefore leftism is easy: therefore the lefter has triumphed over the less-left, and the trend is ever-leftward. 

Any kind or degree of subversion, destruction or inversion - of whatever is created, divine, of Good - is therefore a triumph of leftism.

Of course, this 'triumph' is itself a value-inversion. To re-label destruction as triumph is to invert the true nature of accomplishment. 

The global triumph of leftism is only real, because value-inversion has become mainstream and dominant.


Creation is difficult in this mortal life, which is dominated by entropy; even sustaining good motivations and effective functionality requires ability, energy, effort...

To make something new, useful, beautiful, happy, complex... these are difficult

But anybody - even the laziest and most talentless fool - can destroy what has been made; destroy to a greater or lesser extent, or even completely!

It takes talent and hard work to design a functional machine - but any fool can throw a spanner in its works, sprinkle sand into its gears, or smash it with a hammer... There is just one way to make it work; but innumerable ways to break it. 


The leftist West is now self-weakening rapidly. It can accomplish less and less of the positive, and that only at greater and greater cost (due to massively reduced efficiency and the diminished status of functionality). 

Indeed the West is not even trying to create, grow capability, produce that which is necessary...

Instead; the West's diminishing resources are being increasingly channeled into the infliction of destruction


Even as the Western powers are consumed by their own evil; and as their capacity to create good - and even to sustain functionality - declines with increasing rapidity; they can easily destroy - internally and externally, at home and abroad...

Destruction is so easy that the powers of evil can attack simultaneously on multiple fronts. 

...As I write, leftist-motivated Western powers are seeding and nurturing chaos across the globe and in many nations; destabilizing, pouring fuel onto conflagrations; breaking complex systems of design, production, and maintenance; snapping webs of trade, transport, distribution; threatening, lying, blackmailing and bribing; encouraging hatred, resentment and despair. 


What can stop them? 

Well, the first thing is that there is no cohesive desire to stop leftist destruction. We would have to want to stop leftism, and do something else instead. 

The West is leftist here-and-now, and getting more-so. The mass majority are invested in one or several left-agenda items, therefore resistance is neutralized and cooperation widespread.

In the short-term it is nearly-always pleasanter or more expedient to join the left-agenda, than to oppose it; even when its long-term lethality has been recognized. Selling-out has become the single major career path for those with talent and the capacity for hard-work.

  

It is a snare and delusion to suppose that those who oppose the leftist-agenda can succeed in stopping and reversing it. It is too easy to destroy, too hard to sustain and build. 

Anyway, two wrongs don't make a right: double-opposition is futile. 

The problem is not what we shouldn't, but what we should do


So, first (before anything else) we must want to stop leftism because we want something-else more - want that something-else as the highest priority in our own life. 

Since this world makes destruction easy, and this mortal life is dominated by short-termism and expediency; the only conceivably effective answer is when people live with their hopes fixed beyond this mortal life and world; and with faith that to dwell eternally in such Goodness is personally achievable. 

Work it out...


Sunday, 5 December 2010

Political correctness defined - its tendency revealed

*

My out-pourings on the topic of political correctness have now, more or less, stopped; and I am starting to pull things together.

*

Karl Popper commented (in his autobiography Unended Quest) that definitions are of limited value; and can indeed serve to close off enquiry.

Definitions come after enquiry, and serve merely as a convenient summary.

*

My understanding of the nature of PC has developed as my ideas have clarified. I would now consider PC to be an evolutionary development of socialism/ communism - it is what the New Left of the sixties became.

In particular, PC is post-communist in its anti-utopianism - and its principled anti-humanism.

*

In its early ideal form communism was intended to liberate human individuals - after humans had been remade/ or had their false programming removed, then the state apparatus was supposed to wither away.

Of course, when this showed no signs of happening then communism became hypocritical, careerist and corrupt - but PC has arrived at the corruption, careerism and cynicism of late communism.

Yet there is much more to PC than this: PC is underpinned with an extraordinary anti-human kind of idealism, a state-ism, in which humans are regarded as the root of all evil and the abstract state embodies virtue (through its abstract processes, its procedures, laws, regulations, bureaucracies etc.)

So ultimately the idealistic PC intellectual is something like the idealistic communist commissar who was working to make his own job unnecessary; the idealistic PC bureaucrat is acting to make human judgment and power not merely unnecessary but impossible: all important human decisions are to be transferred to abstract system.

Individual agency is replaced by the state.


*

Thus PC is, in its aspiration, the only wholly and permanently totalitarian ideology to have gained any currency and traction in the history of the world.

That is why political correctness is evil; and why PC must be denied and opposed by each individual human person, without regard to the possibilities or probabilities of effective resistance.

Even if resistance seems doomed certainly to fail in this world, PC must be resisted.

Because resistance to PC is not 'futile' - quite the opposite - life has meaning and purpose in the act of resistance.

It is embracing of PC anti-human abstraction and the annihilation of human agency which is 'futile': indeed, its futility is guaranteed.

(Hence the tidal self-loathing unto despair, avolia and socio-personal suicide of the PC elites.)

*

PC is not, therefore, merely a political matter: it is existential, it is ultimate.  

*

Wednesday, 24 September 2014

No resistance to anything anymore - This is not adaptive: this is pathology

*
It strikes me that one problem is that the West is sick.

I don't mean 'sick' as a metaphor but really diseased, suffering from diseases - perhaps especially Britain which is the most advanced modern society because it was the first. Here there is no resistance to anything anymore. But other places are little better and on the same road.

*

This is the only adequate explanation for how little resistance there is to lies, nonsense, and the crude inversion of good and evil. People have always spouted lying, meaningless evil rubbish; but in the past they weren't believed, they were not cooperated with, they were resisted and fought

Here in the UK, the majority of young beautiful women choose to vandalize themselves with tattoos; half the population are drunk or drugged half the time (and most of the rest wish they were); the population is almost sterile, by choice, and are being replaced by random others - centuries of culture is being dismantled before our eyes, and the destruction is celebrated.

Multiple millions of people do no work or insignificant amounts of work - ever. The people who are productive and do something useful are despised and harassed and demoralized by armies of politicians, manager, administrators and regulators who are professional saboteurs - actively and unceasingly trying to stop them doing anything useful. The highest aspiration is retirement (not working but getting plenty of money to do what you want) and travel (high status serial distraction with the hope of cheap drunkenness and sexual adventures).

*

We have been hit by major disasters: the London race riots locked down the city for days but the cause was concealed and nothing was done; Sir Jimmy Savile - the most praised celebrity of all time - was revealed as a sexual abuser of epic proportions whose depradations were widely known but nothing was done; slavery and trafficking slaves has been reintroduced to the nation which first abolished it and nothing is done; organized systematic rape gangs were known about for more than a decade but nothing was done.

There is nothing, nowadays, big enough or bad enough to galvanize the British to deal with it - or even to remember it.

*

Why? Why have people given-up - en masse?

In the past people were often in scary, dangerous, fatal situations - much worse than now - but they didn't give up. Modern people give up in the face of microscopic pressures; they don't even have enough energy and motivation and integrity to complain! Anything and everything is met with mumbling, grumbling acceptance.

*

Part of it is that the UK is nominally Christian but there are hardly any Christians, and hardly any of the self-identified Christians are real, and hardly any of them are solid.

But even among real and solid Christians there is very little/ no resistance. There are too few in any one place, with too little interaction between them; they cannot support each other enough to make a real difference.

Nobody among the British will just say NO, and stick by it.

*

Yes there is 24/7 propaganda for mostly bad things. yes there is soft power - vilifying, shaming, fines, sackings. But why are we so vulnerable to this stuff? People in teh past faced prison, torture, executions without yielding. Why does almost-everybody consent to the system and the vile, destructive fashions?

Why do we despair and do nothing about it.

*

What this increasingly looks like is a sick society of sick people. An old society, a society of millions on invalidity benefit, tens of millions dependent on drugs - whether they need them or not, of chronic diseases - mental and physical. 

I am not making a Nietzschian point here, I am not yearning for a nation of vigorous blond beasts; I am not despising or hating the sickness of old sick people (after all, I am one of them!). (Modern society is already filled to overflowing with resentment and hatred - it is just that the resentment is feeble, futile, evanescent - hence deniable.)

I am simply stating that there are strong indications that the population of the oldest industrialized society in the world is maladaptive; as individuals and at a group level.

Why? Well all the above is consistent with widespread, near universal, genetic damage; mutation accumulation due fact such as the child mortality rate has fallen from about half to about one percent, and that for six to eight generations the people with the least mutations have had the least children, and those with heavy mutations loads have had the most - also that for several decades the average fertility is well below two children per woman for all classes, and the population of British is shrinking. This is a recipe for eventual mutational meltdown, but on the way to that increasing pathology is inevitable.

So we in Britain, we in the West and East Asia, are a sick society of sick people; and there is nothing that we can realistically do to prevent it; not least because it is caused by what was probably the greatest boon of the industrial revolution - the near abolition of child mortality - which throughout human history has been a major cause of human misery. 

However, it makes a vast difference; it makes all the difference in this world (and the next) how we respond to the facts.

We do not need to be - we ought not to be - what we are now; which is a society of death wishers, a society of time-servers, a passive society of unmotivated hedonists. That we have just given up is because we have as a nation and as a society turned away from God, forgotten God, hate God - and this puts us into a position of weakness unprecedented in human history.

We know in our bones that we are dying, personally and socially - because genetically. We know too that disaster looms. But it is unacceptable to respond by simply trying to get through the intervening time with as as much fun and as little unpleasantness as possible. This attitude doesn't work, it makes everything worse; and it is evil because it not only acquiesces in the destruction of all good things (marriage, family, beauty, honesty etc.) but actively (albeit feebly) promotes evil (sexual hedonism, the marring of beauty and imposition of ugliness, hype and lies and fake denial).

In such circumstances it is not hard to imagine a suicide cult taking hold - even a cult of humane murder on a massive scale; spun as being the only reliable way to avoid future suffering for yourself and those you care about. Because modern secular people regard death as a full stop, an oblivion, and they like the sound of that better than a world of suffering, fear, starvation, disease and violence (which is the world they are working hard to enable).

Therefore, if it is not to become a cult of death, a culture that is dying needs to look beyond death. There is no alternative. Only by looking beyond death can we put a life of disease and decline into a meaningful and purposeful context.

We can only live well in a sick society in the time that remains us (indiviually and collectively) when our mortal lives are seen in context; and context means as not-the-whole thing but a part and a preparation for the whole thing.

No matter how bad things become, and the quantitative scale of a modern collapse would dwarf anything humans have experienced so far, from the individual perspective there can be no suffering or loss that Men of the past have not already experienced - and which some of them have transcended by their faith in God.

*

Where does it begin?

It can only begin with individuals, individual choice, by opening-ourselves to God. We are not going to be rescued; we are not going to have God forced-upon-us and the future mapped-out and ourselves carried-passively-along. 

It all begins with a change of fundamental attitude. Anybody can do it. You don't need to be young, healthy, high status. You can be old, sick and despised.

No matter how sick you are, you can open you mind, you can say yes. You can repent the evils of our time and in yourself. You can recognize the side of Good and join it.

It makes all the difference: the difference between living the cult of death, and living in expectation of eternal life.


*


A note on the concept of 'adaptive'.

The idea here is that modern men have lost some of the most basic and significant adaptive behaviours due to mutant accumulation, due to substantial relaxation of natural selection against mutations. In biology, adaptation is (roughly) that a stimulus leads to behaviour which is (on average) beneficial to survival and reproductive success. Thus, pathology/ disease is pretty-much behaviour that is not adaptive - behaviour that does not contribute to survival or reproductive success.

Adaptations are not natural nor are they spontaneous, but they evolved. Therefore random damage will nearly-always destroy adaptations. What is left when adaptations have been destroyed (partly or wholly) is not another form of adaptation, but is disease - it is (biologically speaking) no good for anything - just as cancer (which is precisely a loss of adaptation) is good for nothing (not even for the cancer itself, in the long run).

Mass maladaptation, mass disease, is possible because of the society of growth in peace, prosperity and plenty. But mass and increasing maladaptation is incompatible with a society of growth in peace, prosperity and plenty; because p,p&p are an achievement, unusual in the history of the world (not the default!) - and because mutation accumulation (maladaptation) cannot even sustain p,p&p but will instead destroy it.

For a while, society has been living off the inertia from the major achievements of the past - but the achievements dried up, and have been first parasitized then actively destroyed.

I am suggesting that in the vast majority of modern humans in Britain - and other developed countries - with respect to many, many of their attitudes and actions, people en masse violate adaptive, evolved behavioural rules which could have been taken for granted at any previous point in history; and this is evidence of multi-system disease; and the situation is getting worse. And that understanding the basic cause of this implies matters will continue getting worse until the basic current form of society (modern society, based on growth I productivity of necessaries) will come to an end.
*

Thursday, 22 May 2025

Evidence depends on theory, theory depends on assumptions


If this is how it all began - then purpose, meaning and personal significance are merely trivial "optional extras"


Evidence depends on theory, theory depends on assumptions.

So; he who controls our fundamental assumptions concerning the nature of reality - controls everything that ultimately matters.

(Just a reformulation of an old thought.)


We live in a world of public discourse that pretends to be determined by evidence; but evidence is not determinative - and cannot be.  

Because what counts as evidence, and what an item of evidence means, is dependent on theory. 

And all theories depend on assumptions concerning the nature of reality. 


So that our assumptions concerning the nature of reality - i.e. metaphysics - determine all knowledge. 

And this is why totalitarian, materialist, atheism rules the world of public discourse, why all "evidence" seems to support it, and why there seems to be no evidence to support the spirit and the divine. 

It is why all "serious" theories acknowledged in public discourse lead in circles back to themselves; why "there is no alternative" and "resistance is futile".

It is why all discussion of purpose, meaning and personal significance seem arbitrary and feeble - and why hedonism, nihilism and despair are the pervasive moods of modernity...


Purpose, meaning, and the significance of the individual person are all excluded from the accepted and propagated picture of the nature of reality in this life and universe. 

For us; the ultimate assumptions of real-reality are of abstract impersonal particles, forces, processes, fields, energies, randomness... operating unknown and mechanically, algorithmically, in a world without consciousness, or life.   

These assumptions are built-into our public life, our pubic institutions; and from such ultimate metaphysical assumptions, any purpose, meaning, personal significance is arbitrary.  


Even for the self-identified religious; the purposeless, meaningless universe - indifferent to life and Men; is the real picture - much realer than that of God. 

Indeed God is regarded as having primarily created such a dead and futile world, without values: only later inserting some living beings, and finally humans. 

So, according to the mainstream and institutional reality; the purposeless, meaningless, impersonal world came first, and existed without our consciousness; by this we know which is most fundamental, which is most important - and is is not us.     


Thus the assumptions of our underlying metaphysical picture combine to rule-out the primacy and seriousness of  purpose, meaning, personal significance, and values in the universe and in our societies and individual lives. 

These are not regarded as fundamental, but merely "optional extras" - even for the religious. 

Public debate and discussions about evidence or theories relating to God, creation, good and evil etc. are all rendered necessarily trivial. 

Our motivations are poisoned at source. 


Those who controls our fundamental assumptions - control everything that ultimately matters.

This is one reason why the "alternative" internet makes no substantive difference; why those political animals who regard themselves as opposed to mainstream leftism make no difference; why even the most serious types of institutional religion make no difference.

Dig down; and they share the same deep assumptions as the globalist totalitarians - such that dissent is merely superficial, and ultimately irrelevant.


Monday, 26 April 2021

Living in the End Times - recognizing the reality, understanding the implications

I have been solidly convinced that these are the End Times for about a decade; but since the global coup of early last year - and with its continued invisibility - this is an everyday reality.

My understanding of the End Times is that it references the time when evil dominates the world, and when further decline becomes inevitable. The self-correcting possibilities of negative feedback (e.g. the 'pendulum swings' of history) has failed; and positive feedback (whereby each adverse change creates further adverse changes) has set-in. 


The evils of the world have become irreversible mainly because they are invisible to the mass of people and the totality of the Establishment. The incrementally-increasing value inversion of recent decades in The West has reached such a degree and compass that a world of evil rampant is regarded as a beneficial development. 

The System built on Big Lies and elaborated from a web of dishonesty and propaganda-manipulation, has a totalizing quality such that all worldly considerations are encompassed. Every apparent this-worldly (i.e. social-political-psychological) 'dissent' or 'escape' turns-out to be a loop-back into The System. 

All apparent 'conflict' (between capital and province, political parties, media, nations...) turns-out to be stage-managed; with both sides operating as part of The System. 


For a Christian who recognizes the reality that The System is a machine for evil; there is no way of engaging with those inside The System. 

The modern world is materialist (denying the reality of God and the spirit); and The System identifies, interprets and explains all material things. Those who accept the material assumptions, cannot get outside of The System - not even in imagination; they cannot escape - even in principle. 

In these End Times there is only the material, and The System is the material; and therefore The System includes all minds, all thinking - as well as all action. 

So, any thinking outside The System is simply incomprehensible: stupid, insane and/ or evil.  

And this is how a material system ends-up by controlling the spirit: how a material-system can become (in effect) a spiritual-process leading to damnation.   


Nearly all self-identified Christians are inside The System - and their 'Christianity' operates in The System - because all institutions, organizations, corporations are (they Just Are) parts of The System because they must be in order to function. 

All actually-existing churches are System Churches; because they are a part of the economy, receive subsidies and pay taxes, have legal identities, are employers, deploy Public Relations and interact with the media, are part of the education system... Nearly-all churches sustain one, several or all of the current strategic socio-political agendas (e.g. birdemic, climate, antiracism, sexual revolution).

Thus All actual churches are components of The System. 

Therefore all 'Christians' who are 'spiritually' led-by churches are in The System; are part of System-evil; hence on the opposite side than God the creator and Jesus Christ.  


And this situation is (by now) irreversible - because invisible, because denied (even as a possibility). 

Millions upon million of ex-Christians have-been, are-being, led into The System by their churches; each endorsed by the dogma that resistance is futile, because there is no alternative because we must be part-of a System (church) and Now there is Only One System

This is what happens in the End Times. The principle of value inversion means that what was Good becomes evil; the churches - which were once sole-agents of Christianity, have become agents of Antichrist. 


Unless, that is... we live from a spiritual source outside of The System (including The Churches). 

The System is, in fact, a tiny and self-circumscribed part of the real world. Outside The System there is God and creation, spiritual beings, living and conscious nature; and there is each Man in his divine self.

...Man's divine self in the direct, intuitive knowing of heart-thinking.

Yet all of these are individually-known; all requires conscious knowledge of reality; all require free agency and acting by-choice; deliberately, explicitly, from the-self. 


To live this way, rooted outside The System and in the divine, is very simple. It is within the capacity of anybody who wants to do it...

But of course, hardly anybody wants to do it - and indeed most Christians regard it as evil, and Anti-Christian, to do it...


This is the nature of the End Times; and what makes them the End. 

Lies are asserted as mandatory Truth; that which is obvious is invisible; that which is Good becomes regarded as evil - and evil is the only existent 'good'. 

That which must be done to affirm God and Jesus Christ becomes regarded as self-evidently (without need for proof or refutation) crazy, dumb, nonsensical. Thus what must be done becomes regarded as precisely that which cannot and should-not be done. 


The answer to the End Time lies in our own hands, requires nobody else's permission, cannot be stopped by any power, and may be commenced immediately...

But because these are indeed the End Times: what is necessary and do-able is exactly that which will not be done. 


Monday, 2 November 2020

No Hiding Place (or, learn from what The Enemy *does*)


Christians have often commented with dismay on the way that the Totalitarian Left actively seeks-out dissidents. Nobody is left to themselves to 'get on with life'. 

As of 2020 when the Global bureaucracy has taken-over; there is No Hiding Place - to quote the title of an old TV programme which used to chill me as a young child.

 

It seems natural, and necessary, to find a 'hiding place'; somewhere un-known to The Enemy where we may shelter and escape his attention and demands. Why? (those not Of The Left complain) can't They just leave us alone, to live the way that we want?

To mainstream materialistic thinking, this situation looks-like one of a vast System deployed against a series of helpless individuals, each of whom will inevitably be crushed. And that is certainly how things are portrayed, and how their personal situation is described, to those individual dissenters who find themselves the focus of The System. 

(I know. I have been there, twice: it tends to feel like Me against The World.)

 

Yet, if that captured the essence of the situation, The System would not bother about individual dissent. After all; focusing The System on detecting and eliminating each and every incidence of dissent inflicts vast costs and inefficiencies, and cripples actual System capability. Why bother?

Why indeed - if Leftism really was materialist... But it is Not. 

Sure enough, Leftism says it is (and acts like it is) a materialistic philosophy at its lower levels (among the un-thinking, un-conscious minions and propagandists); but the demonic powers at the top of The System are driven by spiritual aims: they are fighting a spiritual war. 

(Albeit Leftism is engaged in a spiritual war of a distinctively anti-spiritual kind; in other words Leftism seeks to eliminate the spiritual from Life; to track down and eliminate all people who are genuinely spiritual in their thinking.) 

And this should be obvious from how modern, world-dominating Leftism actually behaves. Leftism is (after all) about the thought police; Leftism is about propaganda, persuasion, public relations; it is about 'winning hearts and minds' via the censored and controlled (yet attention-grabbing and addictive) mass/social media, a corrupted arts establishment; (fake) news, (pseudo) science. Leftist crusades are quasi moral - abolition, pacifism, socialism, enviromentalism, healthism, antiracism, sexual liberation...

Leftism wants zero dissidence; requires every last person (in every 'hidey-hole' on the planet) to be On Message, With the Program: actively and internally supportive of this-week's moral imperatives.

(This was the clear message and lesson of Orwell's 1984: every single person must love Big Brother: every-single-person, Must, Love... Big Brother.)  

 

And by this demand; Leftism reveals its weakness to those with spiritual-eyes to see: that any single individual person who dissents in thought (no matter how apparently obscure) is a significant threat to The Agenda at the level which matters most: i.e. the spiritual level.     

The individual has never been so objectively empowered as here-and-now

The Global Establishment demands that you, specifically (no matter who you are), decide to be On Their Side. 

When the demonic powers view our planet; any dissidence, any one Godly Christian, stands-out of this world like a blazing beacon.

(This, ultimately, is why there is "no hiding place".)

 

Of course it is vital to The Enemy to persuade Christians that Resistance Is Futile... 

Meanwhile, by everything they actually do; Leftism makes clear that any resistance, by any person, anywhere is In Fact a colossal threat to The System - at its primary and spiritual level. 

 

Note: This general phenomenon was brought home to me some twenty years ago when I refused to put my signature to a bureaucratic performance-surveillance document in the university system. 

I did the perfomance review, but would not sign-up to targets: I would not formally agree to performance measures. I refused because signing was legal agreement, and weakened my employment protection - by modifying my contract in favour of the employer and with zero advantage to myself. Obviously, I wouldn't sign... 

(And equally obviously, 'everybody else' did sign.)

In order to persuade me to sign, I was alternately told that my signature was a trivial formality that meant nothing - so I might as well sign; and also that it was essential that I sign Or Else. 

In other words, that my formal agreement to institutional goals and practices was completely insignificant; yet also that it was vital I formally-supported institutional goals and practices. 

Writing my name at the bottom of my form meant nothing whatsoever, and at the same time my failure to sign was of major concern to the organisation. 

This is just an analogy for the spiritual reality. But, in the end, each of us must decide which is the truth about our situation: are we insignificant specks of dust (one among billions), or are we personally a significant threat - whose thinking might, potentially, materially damage the plans of the Global Elite?

One or the other.

Thursday, 3 September 2015

SJWs are just the tip of an iceberg of pervasive secular Leftism: the Culture War is merely the surface of Unseen Warfare

No matter how well expressed, the secular polemics against political correctness and its leadership of the Social Justice Warriors (SJWs) always seem to underestimate the depth, pervasiveness and severity of the problem of secular Leftism; implying that 'if only' enough people would 'fight back'; then the sorry business of political correctness could be destroyed and a more sensible, reasonable kind of politics re-established. 

True enough; but everything hinges on that 'if only'. People do not, and will not 'fight back' against political correctness because they are not motivated to do so. It is motivation which is the underlying problem. Political correctness SJWs could never have risen and survived and thriven if there was motivated resistance.  

The term SJW is itself an attempt to make the problem of pervasive Leftism more manageable by implying that there is a sensible majority being bullied into political correctness by a fanatical minority of SJWs. The reality is that the majority are also more-or-less subscribers to Leftism, and are very tolerant of SJWs because they believe them to be well-motivated, to have 'their hearts in the right place'. 

It is like any form of terrorism. The Irish Republican Army (IRA) was powerful for many decades because a large sector of the population in Ireland, (especially Eire, but also Ulster - and among the Irish diaspora especially in the USA) believed their aims were broadly good; therefore they have received considerable funding and even more psychological support - and it did not matter what horrific atrocities they committed. 

People would sincerely deplore mass civilian mutilation and murders, but nonetheless their gut support was enough to keep things going.  

This is the current situation with SJWs. The bulk of the Western population, at least those with any power, believe that politically correct SJWs are basically well-motivated - they approve the aims. That is why SJWs find it so easy to do their work.  

'Normal' Western people are much more afraid of 'Christian fundamentalists' (i.e real Christians) than of SJWs - because they fear (correctly) that Christians would want to destroy the culture of mass media addiction, sexual license, drink and drugs, holidays and consumerism... and in general 'fun'; and for a secular society which sees no overall meaning or purpose to life and sees nothing beyond death - this is intolerable. 

So, I regard the Culture War and merely the surface of an Unseen War between the forces of Good and Evil - and in that Unseen Warfare, the forces of evil are dominant in the West, because (for perhaps the first time in history) the mass of people do not even want Good to triumph; because on-the-whole and overall, they regard Good as evil - evil as Good.

Modern Western people find the topic of their own corruption quite simply incomprehensible, ludicrous, insulting; and deny vehemently, indignantly that there is anything basically wrong with their lifestyles and aims, their philosophy of life. They simply want to regard themselves as basically decent people (and certainly not as bad as some people) who are getting by - they want themselves to be happy and their friends and family to be happy - and 'happy' simply means comfortable, prosperous, high status, not suffering or in pain - and that's it. There is nothing more or different they might or should want because... there is nothing more. 

This is the basis of the Modern Mass Man's sneaking admiration for SJWs, and why SJWs are elected political leaders of almost all Western nations; because these people seem like idealists who seem to have a vision of something more - no matter how unrealistic or incoherent, and no matter the casualties. 

In sum, my feeling is that most people who advocate fighting-back and retaking culture from SJWs, and despite their great work of description and their energizing encouragement, have no idea of the scale and depth of the iceberg of Leftism which SJWs are the merest tip; the fight-backers have no idea that they are up against the mass majority, including almost everyone with any power in Western society. The mass majority of Westerners will not fight back against SJWs because (at some deep level) they want the SJWs to win

This insensibility to the scale of the problem is not least because the majority of well known anti-SJW warriors are themselves Secularists and Semi-Leftists (eg they are conservatives, republicans, libertarians and the like) - and from the point of view of religious traditionalism, they are part of the same problem of pervasive Leftism which they are trying to fight.   

The bottom line is whether society ought to be run on secular lines or on religious lines (and if religious, then which religion). In The West, we live in a deeply secularized society.  While there are much better and much worse forms of secular society. all secular societies have drifted Left, Left and Left - with only rare and very partial backlashes (such as Thatcher in the UK and Reagan in the US) which are barely detectable among the long term trends. 

Secularism = Leftism, more-and-more Leftism - and since Western populations are secular, they are Leftist, and they basically approve of political correctness and the SJW shock troops. 

Leftism can only be rolled-back and defeated by a religion, and until the West experiences a religious revival there will not even be the desire to battle the Left - never mind the motivation to win the Culture War. And The West is so very far from this situation of widespread religious revival that pessimism is the only reasonable form of understanding.


The rhetoric of 'fighting' SJWs and political correctness is therefore futile, misplaced and ineffectual - what is needed is resistance.

But, for resistance to be net-Good, it must be resistance for an ideal, and that ideal must be a Good one: it must be religious. 


Resistance without expectation of victory. 

Without expectation, but with hope - because for Christians there is always hope; because hope is located beyond this world, and even in this world there are unseen forces of great power which can change things for the better.

From an understanding of the human powers, there seems little prospect of winning the Culture Wars in The West; but an understanding that there is an Unseen War behind the Culture War means that the human powers are not the only, nor the most powerful, powers at work. 

Religion may have all-but lost the culture war, but will not be defeated unless it succumbs to despair. 

As Gandalf would, no doubt, say: Do not despair, things are never hopeless; help may come unlooked-for, from unexpected places. 

Wednesday, 29 July 2020

Because we are *already* living in the Black Iron Prison - 'resistance' really is futile

We are already living in the Black Iron Prison; and since earlier this year we know that this jail is global - with nowhere to escape into (only places where the restrictions and rules are currently somewhat less onerous).

Once you have taken this on board, you will realise that this ought to put to an end all this talk of socio-politically 'resisting' the imposition of worldwide totalitarianism. So far as our socio-political status is concerned; we are 'assimilated' into The Borg/ The Matrix/ The System; and Resistance Is Futile

Too late: it's happened.  It has been imposed. (Past tense.)


The revolution has won. Any action to do more than delay the Great Reset - any action to change to a fundamentally different and better direction - would entail a counter-revolution; and seeing the broad support of the BIP it could not be a 'mass' revolution.

The ruling classes are on-board with the programme; and far too many of the masses are clamouring for more oppression, faster, please!

And anyway, a counter-rev to what we had before 2020 would not be worth having - since it was pointing and pushing this way. So it would need to be a new revolution. And to be better; it would need to be a new and Christian revolution.


But it turns-out that the Christian church leadership are in-bed-with the new regime, support the program, and have closed the churches and all-but ceased their activities (gathering, worship, singing, ritual... and - most significantly - sacraments).

There are individual real Christians distributed across and outside-of the pseudo-Christian churches; but when did scattered individuals ever mount a successful revolution? And (more importantly) when was such a revolution ever a change for the better?

So, let's stop pretending that there is any meaningful hope of resistance, revolution or any other socio-political mechanism for fundamental change. The System will have-to unfold according to its own evil, and thus self-loathing and self-destructive, tendencies.


Let us instead do what actually can be done - what our religion insists that we ought to be doing; as individual Christians, working on our selves and with those we love; and any real Christians that happen to be in our vicinity.

We are compelled, for lack of any viable alternative, to stop being political and to put everything into being spiritual. And is that such a bad thing?

Monday, 24 November 2025

Just how important is Free Will (Agency)?

William James Tychonievich has written a blog post about a fictional book that (as part of its story) attempts (albeit from a Jewish rather than Christian perspective - it was written by a Rabbi) to provide an intellectual model that combines the attributed omniscience and omnipotence of God, with human Agency, or Free Will.  

But, as William argues (endorsed by comments from myself and Francis Berger) the model actually, by its assumptions and implications, sacrifices human agency in order to sustain the Omni-God assumption. 

In this respect, and in common with nearly-all Christian theology (including mainstream Roman and Eastern Catholic and Protestant theology); it is evident that the omni-nature of God is primary - and an understanding of human agency and freedom is something that is, in practice, sacrificed to the need to ascribe omni attributes to God. 


This is confirmed when the Rabbi author (Shaul Behr) responds to the post with a couple of comments; finishing with:

Like those who came before me, I am content, as you say, to leave it as an unresolved "mystery of God".

The Rabbi's response is therefore essentially identical with that of most Christian theologians over the past couple of millennia; and I translate it as follows:

We are sure and certain that God is omnipotent and omniscient. We also recognize that Men must be free agents in order that each Man's choices have meaning. But, although we can provide confusing, complex abstract pseudo-explanations of how this might be possible - none of these explanations really make sense. And we cannot provide a clear, simple, coherent account of how free agency is possible with an Omni-God. So we call the situation of Man's freedom in the context of Omni-God "a mystery".


The question I ask is: is this good enough? 

And I answer: No it is not good enough. 

It is, in practice, treating the matter of coherently understanding human agency as trivial - and not something that needs to be understood. 


It is commonly asserted that all Christians (and, apparently, all Jews) must believe in the Omni-God, or else they are not Christians (or Jews) - because Omni-God Just Is God - because supposedly nothing else makes any sense... 

Man's freedom, in stark contrast, becomes something that must be taken on faith, as a form of words; by the asserted necessity for each of us to trust in the validity of theological authority. 

Apparently; Omni-God is mandatory; while by contrast free agency is something that needs to be asserted but does not need to be understood - and, because of Omni-God, freedom cannot be understood. 


Unsurprisingly, in practice, traditional Christian theology has always tended to assert God's omni-nature as interpreted by "the church" (whichever church prevailed); while human agency was considered to be a problem.  

Indeed, human agency is blamed for the evils of this world. 

It seems that the only proper role of human freedom - in traditional theology - is to make the right choices from among those presented by God.


Unsurprisingly, since there is only one right answer among choices, and all possible answers are God-given; it has seemed to many Christians that it might be better if humans had simply been pre-programmed to make these right choices

It has thus seemed that the only significant role of human agency is negative: freedom is seen as the freedom to do wrong. 

Which fits with the pointlessness of human life when God is Omni... Since such a God is everything, then human beings can add nothing to creation; which implies that creation of humans was futile - because (from this perspective, at the bottom line) the best a human can do in life, is to follow a pre-determined path of correct choices. 


Apparently; freedom has no positive role. 

Thus, by such accounts; the problem of Omni-God and human freedom has been "solved" by reducing human freedom to an expression of negative resistance to God's reality.

Freedom becomes regarded like a disease; something wrong with Men... Hence the centrality of "original sin". 

However, if the logic is followed - we get the bizarre assertion that this supposedly Omni God, for some "mysterious" reason, created flawed human beings who can only mess-up.       


The things is: our freedom, our agency as human beings, is experiential; something we know innately and directly. 

Whereas the Omni-nature of God is something inferred as a consequence of non-intuitive abstract assumptions; and via logical procedures that many or most people cannot follow, or regard as flawed. 

And that is a problem! 


It is a problem that will not go away: Christians know we are free, and yet we are told that this knowledge of agency is subordinate to the assertion of Omni-God.

Officially - we are told that the ultimate answer is that common sense cannot comprehend this situation - tha tthe situation is necessary and unavoidable - therefore "it is a Mystery".  

And yet this mystery is made to be foundational to being-a-Christian (and also perhaps a Jew)!


Well, in the end, the only responsible way to address this situation is for each of us to plumb the depths of our primary assumptions concerning the ultimate nature of reality - to establish what we really suppose to be known, and sure, and foundational. 

Is it what we have been told, or what we experience?  

Upon this hinges a great deal. 


Tuesday, 21 July 2015

Genetic disruption of optimal sexual development may underlie and facilitate the sexual revolution

*
If the sexual revolution can briefly be defined as the long-term and strategic legalization, toleration, equalization, and now official advocacy and approval of sexuality outwith the context of traditional and permanent marriage - then one extraordinary and neglected aspect is: that it has been able to happen.

In The West, we find ourselves in an extraordinary situation with respect to sexuality - and the single most extraordinary aspect is that a critical mass of people do not find it extraordinary at all!

Plenty of Westerners apparently regard the current situation of moral inversion with bland equanimity - a situation in which the goods and bads, rewards and punishments, official supports and persecutions of sexuality have been turned on their heads... and yet this unprecedented ethos elicits little more than a shrug or a grin from the masses.

It looks very much as if the sexual revolution has been pushing at an open door - and yet, in world historical terms we are in uncharted territory: there never has been a society like ours, now, in which sexual transgression (according to world historical consensus) has been so actively-endorsed at every level from mass media and the arts, to government policy and the workplace.

This is utterly remarkable - yet clearly it is not viscerally regarded as remarkable - it is, more or less, accepted.

*

Why is the extraordinary situation of the sexual revolution accepted so placidly, when it is so extraordinary? Clearly there must be unprecedented factors at work, things that have never before been operative.

I think there are two main plausible candidates: Irreligion and genetic damage.

1. Irrelegion

Irreligion refers to the unprecedented state of incremental mass apostasy from Christianity. We live in a world where religion is not just absent from, but excluded from , the public sphere - and this is something new in human history. Irreligion means that there is no reason - except personal preference, which is labile and malleable - not to do anything.

This means that instinctive feelings of approval or disapproval cannot be ordered; cannot even be rationally discussed - people feel unsure, unconfident; modern people therefore are demotivated, lack the courage of their convictions, and seem unable coherently to oppose anything being imposed from above.

2. Mutation accumulation.

But the lack of resistance to the sexual revolution seems even more profound than this. The impression is not one of a mass of passive people whose instinctive valuations are being violated but lack the clarity and courage to respond; but instead of people whose sexual instincts are absent, weak or disordered - and therefore see no reason not to go along with whatever sexual innovation is being advocated.

The impression is therefore that the mass of people are suffering from a mass of sexual pathologies - such that sexuality is - in multiple ways - weakened, labile, misdirected, futile.

Is this plausible? Yes. There are powerful theoretical grounds for assuming that since the industrial revolution, the extreme reduction in natural selection on humans (mainly, but not entirely, due to reduction of child mortality rates from more-than-half to almost none) must have led to a generation-by-generation accumulation of deleterious genetic mutations - which would be expected to damage social and sexual adaptations before anything else.

http://iqpersonalitygenius.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=mutation+accumulation

*

Why sexuality?

Because the development of adaptive sexuality is an extremely complex and multi-step linear sequence, with many things that can (and do) go wrong at every step - and only if every step in the sequence has gone well, will sexuality be optimally adaptive.

There is genetics; then (controlled by the genes) multiple waves of multiple hormone-induced changes - primarily in the womb during the earliest and most fundamental development, and secondarily at adolescence and the development of fertility; there are calibrations to the early environment ('life history'), critical learning experiences and adaptations to the socio-political system and others... all of which must successfully be negotiated for sexuality to be 'normal'.

This complex sequentiality of development is why sexuality is a function where genetic damage first and most sensitively shows-up.

*

It might be asked how sexual development could possible be so fragile, considering that - until now - the human species has not died out but has indeed grown in numbers!

The answer is that the errors in sexual development were weeded-out generation upon generation - by mortality rates being heaviest, and near total, among the most genetically damaged in the first place; then by sexual selection and assortative mating as a kind of back-stop - whereby the most genetically-healthy would choose each other and reproduce to yield (mostly) viable offspring - and the least genetically-healthy would be left-out; or mate to yield (mostly) non-viable offspring.

The harshnness and rigour of this historical selection process is hard to exaggerate. It used to be near universal, yet in the past 200 years it has been incrementally all-but eliminated from ever-more of the world.

Thereby the failures of normal sexual development would continuously be being-'purged' from the gene pool - and this was necessary because they were continually incident (mostly due to genetics, but also due to the environment).

*

Our current situation is merely the lag phase in which genetic damage is relatively subtle and apparent mainly in sexual and social behaviour; and it will be followed by more and more obvious and severe dysfunctionalities.

The seeming slowness of sexual and social change - operating over a decades timescale - is merely an artefact of the slow generation time of the human species. There have been only about eight generations since the industrial revolution, even in England where it began; and the increasing longevity of humans further buffers apparent change.

*

So it is plausible that the modern lack of concern at the sexual revolution was enabled, was facilitated, and is more-or-less accepted due to the high prevalence of greater-or-lesser types and quantities of disordered sexuality in the population at large.

In sum, it seems probable that almost everybody in the modern West, and indeed most of the rest of the world (the rapidity of change is likely to vary by population and location) is suffering from genetically-disordered sexuality of varying degrees and types; caused by the unique conditions of the post-industrial revolution on ameliorating the harshness of human selection.

And this would explain how it is that the truly extraordinary and unprecedented modern situation with respect to Western sexuality has met with so little response or resistance.
*


Note: these ideas were developed in conversation and collaboration with Michael A Woodley of Menie. 

Sunday, 15 August 2021

What does it mean to consent to evil? The danger of generic-abstract thought experiments

As Christians, we can be sure that God will not put us into a position where we can be 'made evil' against our consent. 

But if we consent to evil and do not repent; then we can make ourselves evil. 

One way in which people consent to evil is by entertaining generic-abstract thought experiments; and by concluding that is such a thing happened, they would capitulate to evil (or even that it would be better or right to capitulate to a specific evil as less than the alternative).  


Lets take a specific example - the birdemic peck. You know the kind of thing...

If somebody really recognized it as an evil, he would not consent to it. But then somebody suggests a thought experiment - 'supposing that' you found yourself in such-and-such a position, and if you did not take the peck then something terrible would happen (maybe threatening your loved ones)... Wouldn't it be okay to consent then? 

Or, if there were some thugs in white coats who credibly threatened to wrestle you to the ground and force the peck into you - then you might as well go along with it. 


My first point is that there an open-ended number of possible scenarios of what 'might' happen - and once you take any one of them seriously, then you open-up the possibility of being confronted by one after another without end - with the expectation or obligation that you examine and explain each. 

But my main point is not to examine any such scenarios; nor to recommend a 'reasonable' course of action for them. But instead as to point-out that this whole way of thinking represents a lack of faith in the goodness and power of God

Not (of course) because God 'would not let such things happen to anyone' in any kind of general way. But because God does not work in a general way


God's providence works on each individual person in the context of his own life and needs. God created and is creating this world moment-by-moment - and with the needs of each individual person in mind - because each is a beloved child of God. Thus he creates situations from-which each individual person is intended to learn. 

Such a God will not create any situation in which any person ought to be evil. 

But - I am not expected to take a God's eye view that encompasses the population of the world - and certainly I am not supposed to consider and pre-decide every abstract-generic possibility of what might possibly happen to anybody.

I am expected to attending to my own life and experiences and to learn from what actually happens to me in real life - especially here and now. That, specifically, I what I am supposed to learn-from. 


My job is to discern evil from good, and to know evil for what it is - not to consent to evil; but if I have consented to evil to recognize and repent the fact. That is, to be clear that what I did was evil, and that I therefore, for that reason, repudiate it.  

This is what a Christian must do to attain salvation and resurrection; because Heaven is a life without evil. For Heaven to be Heaven, all evil (no matter how small-seeming in the abstract-generic scheme of things) needs to be repented and discarded from the resurrected soul. 


We can therefore personally be sure that if we do not consent to the peck because we know it to be evil, then our salvation is secure. We can be confident that that is how our actual life will work out, somehow or another. 

But if we consent because we allowed abstract-generic considerations (e.g. based on thought experiments) to convince us that 'resistance is futile', all paths are evil, or whatever... then by thinking this way we have joined with The Enemy's agenda. 

We have decided, in advance of events, that God will allow our-selves to be put into a situation where evil choices are 'inevitable' - and therefore pre-empted actuality by probabilistic extrapolation: pre-empted divine providence with worldly calculation.  


Friday, 21 April 2023

Temptations in responding to the oppressions of here-and-now evil

One major strategy of purposive-evil - here and now, in The West and globally - is to oppress people with so much actual and prospective evil that people will give-up and yield, go crazy, or try to fight evil with evil

This decades-long strategic plan is one of crushing all that is good by sheer weight of evil discourse, has been made possible by the totalitarian takeover of The System - the web of linked-bureaucracies that control all major institutions including mass media, politics, public administration, law, religion, 'science', education, 'health' etc.  

Spiritually; the strategy is to make us frame the world as (on the one hand) a vast, inexorable, objective, all-embracing organization that orders everything and does everything... And (on the other hand) you or me - standing alone and isolated, friendless and hated, worthless and expendable - stupidly and pathetically thinking-about resisting the inevitable. 


The idea is that we should surrender, fawn, and (in our hearts) beg The System for mercy.  

In return; we shall eagerly believe/ think/ say/ do anything that They currently require of us, and enforce The System on our-selves and each-other... 

And, eventually - after getting ever less-and-less in return for ever more-and-more self-degradation and lying - that we should break, despair, lose hope; and seek permanent oblivion (death-as-annihilation) to escape such a spiritual wasteland and hell. 


A second level of the plan is to channel resistance to evil, such that it is either counter-productive or futile. There are several 'temptations'. 

One temptation is to withdraw from evil, to escape it. While this may be an important, or even, vital temporary tactic; the fact is that evil cannot be escaped in this world - where it is all-pervasive as never before. Further, the attempt to escape may open the mind to evil-inspired fantasies and to dreams.

Furthermore, the desire to escape evil is a double-negative that is not itself good - and is, indeed, prone to being manipulated into evil. 

(To clarify: resistance-to-evil is not itself good. Good can be accomplished only by striving for 'positive' good.)   


The spirit we should instead cultivate is one in which we become aware of our own 'good heart' and rooted in a commitment to love - that is, we may become consciously connected-with, rooted-in, the divine within us which each person has as a consequence of being a son or daughter of God. 

This is quite simple, and experienced as obvious - once we ask the right questions of ourselves and the world; and correctly understand our situation and role. 

Naturally, the powers of evil has many tactics for undermining the confidence of someone who is rooted in a correct understanding of himself and his proper role. His attitudes may be undermined so he loses confidence; or else inflated so that his 'confidence' extends form its true and proper sphere towards prideful and false assertion of self-importance. 


It can be made to sound like an impossible balancing-act to steer between the dangers of inflation and submission - that is, itself, another demonic strategy - to make life seem impossibly difficult, so we may as well 'give-up - Now!'

But - part of having the right attitude is to know that this is a false analogy - we are not steering a course through hazards; but are beings with a divine core self, who are living with the benefit of both inner and outer guidance (intuition and the Holy Ghost).

And who have the inestimable advantage of being able to err and sin and then, as soon as we become aware of the fact, an unbounded capacity to repent and realign with God's creative will.  


To be perfectly accurate; we have nothing to worry about.  

And if we aren't - deep down, and in our hearts - replete with care-free joy and supreme confidence - then we must be living in a state of error. 

The demons can increase the weight of oppression incrementally, piling problems on, and on - but we can never be crushed by it... unless we thus choose. 


We cannot win at this business of life; but it is a colossal error to suppose that we are supposed to win. 

We are supposed to learn-from living, not to win a prize for it. 


The prize (i.e. eternal, resurrected, Heavenly life) comes after this life and by following Jesus, and not as a consequence of any accomplishment during this life. 

But the magnitude and scope of this prize increases in value whenever we live by love; and whenever we think (or otherwise create) in harmony with divine creation. 

Such choices come-to-us, even if unsought - and we can always do/choose the right thing - so we should face life confidently - that is, with confidence in the primacy of the spirit and the indomitable triumph of the divine. 


Wednesday, 21 May 2025

"Soft" totalitarianism in the Third Reich: or, How many Germans did it take to control three million Danes?

During WWII, the Third Reich invaded and occupied Denmark; and for the first few years (c. 1940 into 43) this was a classic example of what people nowadays call "soft" totalitarianism - meaning, totalitarianism imposed without use of violent coercion. 


Denmark had a population of about three million - so how many Germans do you think were needed to control this population?

The answer from military historian Rowland White's recent book (Mosquito: the extraordinary true story of the legendary RAF aircraft...) is... eighty-nine. That is 89. 

Averaging one German to administer more than 30,000 Danes.  


I found this very interesting; given that the Third Reich has (for obvious reasons) become a bye-word for the most purposively-aggressive and physical form of totalitarianism. 

Of course, the handful of Germans were backed by the threat of German military might and the rest of it; yet the numbers tell us that the imposition of totalitarian rule - even during a world war! - can be and was accomplished by "soft" methods...

Presumably some mixture of factors such as effective ideological propaganda, tacit support of the regime, and the calculations of fear and expediency in a situation where "there is no alternative" and "resistance is futile". 


The value of this insight is that most people doubt that we of The West inhabit a totalitarian system of governance, because we do not see the apparatus of violent physical coercion that we have been taught is a necessary feature of such politics. 

Yet, the example of Denmark proves that rigorous and efficient "soft" totalitarian rule is possible, and effective (at least, for a few years) by a tiny number of alien controllers; combined with the cooperation (or "collaboration") of sufficient natives of the national leadership class, and the tacit consent of the bulk of the remainder.

It also seems to prove that totalitarianism works best when it is "soft" - when it deploys soft-ideas rather than hard-violence. 


How many "outsiders" does it take to rule a UK of 60 million? 

Does it just scale up proportionately to... a couple of thousand aliens? Or are the economies of scale and fewer than 2K aliens are needed. Or do the difficulties multiply exponentially and maybe... tens of thousands are needed? 

Either way, it is salutary to realize that a thoroughly totalitarian system need not deploy large numbers of external-rulers, nor physical coercion, to be a very complete and effective mechanism of mass control. 


And, of course, this is exactly what we find, here and now - could we but recognize it.


Note: Rowland White's books tells a story of how this peaceful state of soft totalitarianism was deliberately subverted by British military intelligence by developing a sabotage network, that eventually grew to provoke violent German reprisals, and "hard" totalitarianism - which led to much greater Danish resistance; and the intended transfer of many more German personnel and resources to control Denmark. This effective intervention by another alien power - i.e. the UK - is also a demonstration of how a very few people who want to destabilize a system by guerrilla methods, can do so. The whole narrative seems to me one of elite external powers manipulating the Danish masses for their own ends.