Since 2020 there are two complementary aspects to global evil: its goals, and its totalitarianism

Since the international totalitarian coup of early 2020 and the establishment of secular materialist leftism as the official ideology; we can perceive two complementary ways in which the covert world government pursues evil. 

(Just to recapitulate - my understanding is that evil is opposition to Good; and Good is God's will and divine creation. So evil is always negative and oppositional in nature. Evil is not an alternative form of the same kind of thing as Good; evil seeks the destruction of Good.) 

The first, and perhaps most obvious, is that the global establishment is aiming at evil ends, its goals are evil. 

This involves value-inversion; that is, the values positively endorsed by international and powerful national governments, the mass media, and all major social institutions (law, religions, health services, education, arts, police, military etc) all favour significant inversions of virtue and vice, beauty and repulsiveness, truth and lies. 

Values are swapped-around - so the core positive values (which are actually negative oppositions) of the global establishment are actually evils - antiracism, birdemic-healthism, anti-climate-change, anti-normal-functional sex and sexuality etc. 

The second evil is totalitarianism itself. This is the attempt to make the ruling ideology so pervasive and such a monopoly, that the masses become unable to do, think or believe anything that is officially proscribed. 

Totalitarianism is intrinsically, necessarily, always evil - from a Christian perspective. 

One cannot have 'totalitarianism in a Good cause' because that is a contradiction in terms.  

And there cannot be a "Christian totalitarianism" - that is an oxymoron. 

The reason is that Christianity requires each individual acknowledging his own ultimate responsibility for his own spiritual fate. 

Free will/ agency is absolutely required in order to choose to follow Jesus Christ. 

Anything which seeks to prevent the recognition or operation of individual agency is therefore evil. 

In sum - the global establishment is evil because they are totalitarian in aspiration, and substantially in attainment - and totalitarianism is innately and always evil. 

And the global establishment is also evil because that apparatus of totalitarianism is directed towards evil (value-inverted) ends. 

Therefore, if there was any doubt before 2020 that these are the most evil, most sinful, times in the known history of this world - there is now no doubt. 

This is our situation. 

But God never leaves a single of his children bereft of the means for salvation. We can (in principle) all be saved, resurrected, follow Jesus Christ - if we wish it. 

Even when our situation is severely suboptimal; all that we need will provided before the end - before the decision needs to be made. 

Salvation if we wish it...

That is the big 'if' - it seems that here-and-now very few want what Jesus offers...  

However, if Christians are to attain salvation in such a context, we need to know what we are up-against. Otherwise we will be seduced by totalitarianism, and follow the universal and pervasive 'authoritative guidance' into inverting evaluations, rejecting Heaven, and choosing (what will turn-out to be) Hell.  

Why is totalitarianism evil? (or, more exactly, for whom is it evil?)

Totalitarianism is the attempt to control thinking.

The usual excuse is that this is the best or most effective way of controlling behaviour; but in the end that is just an excuse - and the real and strategic motivation is to control thinking because that is what is wanted.

Totalitarianism has nothing necessarily to do with violence (as Aldous Huxley perceived in his Brave New World of 1932 - and to equate totalitarianism with violence was an error by Orwell). For totalitarianism 'whatever works' is the guide.

Thus we now, in the West, live in a highly totalitarian society, in which most people's thoughts are controlled most of the time - by a combination of indoctrination during childhood and youth, the unified-linked bureaucracy of the government and the workplace, the mass media and its addictiveness, and a legal system which explicitly includes thought crimes (what else are 'hate crimes'?).

There is a combination of filling people's minds with approved thoughts, and excluding disapproved thoughts (by direct exclusion, and by simply driving them out with stimuli, noise, and the prevention of detached solitude).

There is very little concern about this state of affairs - and indeed it seems that many or most people positively approve of totalitarianism so long as it is 'in a good cause' - thus our current secular Left totalitarianism is okay because people agree with its goals; and indeed most people apparently want ever-more totalitarianism so that their goals may become realised.

So why is it bad to control peoples thoughts, if the cause is good behaviour?

Well, totalitarianism isn't bad for atheists and secular people generally, which is why our society is as it is; since the aim is merely 'good behaviour' in pursuit of goals like comfort, peace, prosperity and amusement.  

In practice (and ignoring empty words), all non-religious people approve of totalitarianism.

Also totalitarianism isn't bad for most religious people in most religions - which is why there have been many religious totalitarian societies that regard thought-control as a legitimate means to religious ends. (They were usually limited by their technology, and the degree of support; but the totalitarian aim of thought-control was explicit.)

Totalitarianism is only really 'a bad thing', an evil, for those Christians who view motivation as primary; who regard freedom or agency as central to salvation and theosis - such that only a truly free, creative, and divine decision of our truest and deepest selves is valued by God; and our actual behaviour is secondary, and indeed (since behaviour may be coerced) almost orthogonal to the divine purpose.   

Any system of any kind (whether political, in the workplace, the church or the family), of any aim, that tries to control thought, or to prevent agency - any system which tries wholly to occupy the mind - is therefore evil to this kind of Christian.

This kind of Christian - the kind that regards agency as non-negotiable and central to the faith - would regard any and all types of totalitarianism as evil; no matter how kind, how non-violent, how materially successful; and no matter how happy was the resulting society. After all; Huxley's Brave New World was almost certainly happier than any society of recent centuries.

If happiness is the number one priority; then totalitarianism is the likely means to that end and will sooner-or-later be embraced - and then (as now) the only genuine dispute relates to who is in charge of the totalitarian system.

And that question, in a nutshell, constitutes the entirety of modern mainstream politics.

It is inevitable that churches become part of a totalitarian society - therefore obedience to a church here-and-now = damnation

If you consider the nature of the kind of totalitarian society we inhabit in The West, it can be seen that it is inevitable that churches - including Christian churches - will be parts of The System. 

This to the same extent that these churches exist in the public realm as legal/ economic/ financial/ employing/ educational etc.) entities. 

(The nature of a totalitarian society is that all significant social institutions are necessarily part of the system of surveillance and control - which means, part of the totalitarian strategy.)

Thus, in a totalitarian society, insofar as they are significant social systems; churches will be part of The System - that is, part of the totalitarian system. 

And, totalitarian = evil* 

Therefore (under totalitarianism, in The West here-and-now) churches are evil institutions: evil in overall-effect and by their overall-aim. 

 

The consequence is that (as a strong generalization):

Obedience to churches = obedience to evil.

...Which means a positive choice to reject the salvation of Jesus Christ, and instead to choose damnation. 

This is explainable on the basis that the totalitarianism is manifested materialism, and operates by "brainwashing" people (by multiple means) to regard the external and the material as primary - indeed as the Only Real; and to subordinate, ignore or deny the inner intuitive and the spiritual. 

Churches are readily encompassed into totalitarianism; insofar as they actually function on the basis of quasi-objective laws, rules, regulations, dogmas, written documents with fixed conceptual interpretations, on the one side; and requirements for particular publicly observable behaviours (speech, writing, actions...), on the other. 

Therefore; under totalitarianism, any church that operates on the basis of public obedience to publicly observable and regulate-able behaviours is doing the work of evil: doing evil in terms of training its members to regard "the external" and "the material" as primary and mandatory. 

(What is deadly is the doctrine that salvation depends on the principle of obedience to a church which is so pernicious, rather than the specific content of that obedience.) 

So; (here and now) any church is evil in requiring obedience to itself (which is a social institution) as necessary to avoid damnation - when in reality this obedience is itself, precisely, damnation. 

It can be seen that under totalitarianism; the churches (which are part-of The System) engage in the same institutionally-imposed value-inversion that characterize totalitarian evil. 

+++

*Totalitarianism is evil because it is a manifestation of that kind of "materialist", anti-life, anti-human evil I have termed Ahrimanic; therefore evil both by its demonic-aim, and also intrinsically - by its nature. 

+++++++

NOTE ADDED: I realize that real Christians who are (here and now) members of churches do not obey them (except selectively, and on the basis of intuition and spiritual guidance - which is precisely Not to obey, in a traditional sense). 

However, too many of these people are currently dishonest or self-blinded as to the foundational Christian necessity of their own and personal discernment; which is itself a weakness and/or a sin - doubly-so when they pretend to church obedience as necessary to salvation. 

It is therefore important that such people understand what they are actually-already doing, and why; and are explicit and honest about what they are doing (at least in their own minds, if not publicly).

As we may perceive all around us in everyday life: nobody can be argued or compelled to take personal responsibility for their own choices, nor can they be argued or compelled into becoming conscious of that which they prefer to maintain unconscious. And there is a significant chance that having "bad faith" pointed-out will merely lead to an escalation of the self-distraction and displacement-activity of attacking the messenger.   

It would therefore be much better if the kind of self-identified "obedient" church-first Christians I am talking about would reach a true recognition, each from- and for-himself. 

Proxy evil is worse that doing it oneself - more on the Sorathic takeover

The Western powers standard procedure for doing evil dirty-work is via proxies. 

In international politics, this means via bribing/ blackmailing national leaders - or 'opposition' leaders, bribing/ blackmailing 'terrorist' and 'protest' groups... 

Bribing/ blackmailing other-people to do whatever evil we want done. 

In within-nation politics it means buying/ blackmailing proxies such as Corporations, Trades Unions, NGOs, charities, think tanks, 'opposition' parties, mass media controllers - and indeed the leadership of any and every significant institution - from lawyers and doctors, teachers and researchers, priests and pastors, police and military. 

Such indirect action via proxies is slower, less reliable, uncertain in outcome - but highly effective when the work is primarily destructive - and the most 'advanced' form of evil (what I term 'Sorathic' evil) is, indeed, very 'purely' destructive in its motivation.  

As Sorathic evil increasingly takes-over dominance from the previously hegemonic Ahrimanic evil (i.e. an evil aiming primarily at control, rather than directly at destruction; the evil of bureaucratic totalitarianism); we can see more and more acts of purposive destruction; performed by increasingly numerous, remote and distanced proxies.

The effects are unpredictable - but that does not matter to the Sorathic spirit, since increasing destruction is easy to accomplish, and can be attained by many routes and methods.  

Whoever is behind the evil acts, whoever was motivated to do them and made the decision - is, in practice, nearly always separated from the 'implementation' by several removes.  

More often than not - this person or group is unknown, and unknowable - they 'get away with it'; and the official blame (if any) always lands elsewhere: usually on the proxy minion/ hit man who did the dirty-work; sometimes on the proxy boss who was bribed/ blackmailed to arrange the 'hit'. 

Thus those with greatest power are distanced from the action, and from the consequences of their decisions; and are always able publicly to deny and avoid responsibility for them - and even to deny that they have any significant power. 

Such is the way that the world operates. It is totalitarian, but a very different totalitarianism from that of a century ago; where the Dictators were famous/ notorious - known to all; and operated via a personal cult. 

Dictators often made a point of claiming power and responsibility even beyond that they really possessed. 

Such a leader presented himself as embodying the nation and its spirit - and this justified his (claimed) absolute power. 

Matters are very different now: Evil has evolved - is now impersonal, indeed anonymous; covert and diffuse, and works by contrived confusion and self-contradiction (PSYOPS).

Modern evil is proxy evil - and proxy evil is even-worse than direct evil; in the sense that proxy evil is always deliberated, contrived, planned... whereas direct evil may be impulsive and due to a temporary failure to resist strong temptation. 

In sum: the motivation of proxy evil is always actively-evil and evidence of a strategic commitment to evil-purpose; whereas the motivation of direct evil may be negative, passive; due to weakness rather than a person confirmed in evil purpose. 

By analogy; a murderer (or saboteur...) is often less culpable than someone who arranges an assassination or a 'hit' (or act of destruction, intended to cause suffering and death...) via several proxies - even, or especially, because the instigator of a cleverly-contrived proxy killing (or act of sabotage...) may escape scot free, unnoticed, and unpunished by Law. 

Evil has evolved... And yet the essence of matters are still the same! 

The purpose of evil in this world remains as it always was: to oppose God and divine creation, to seek the damnation of Men. 

We do not need to know the specific human sources of evil in order to recognize and oppose evil - which is just as well, because we almost-never shall. 

The key is that we personally, as individuals, need to be able and willing to recognize and oppose evil for ourselves - not, therefore, relying-upon any external source (purporting to provide us with knowledge and evaluation) in order to identify and interpret the reality or source of evil. 

We should not be striving to out-source our moral discernment - not even to the (increasingly corrupt and evil-allied) Christian churches; just as we cannot out-source our personal salvation. 

We should also refrain from futile attempts to pin-down 'responsibility' for evil acts in a world which has been elaborately structured to conceal responsibility. 

What can be observed now is the Sorathic spirit of pure destructive evil using the (already existing) vast and elaborate Ahrimanic System of bureaucratic-totalitarian surveillance and control... simply to destroy! 

Simply to smash, kill, maim, immiserate - on the biggest scale possible! 

By war, famine, plague, poison, sabotage; and any other means that presents itself. 

And spiritually - which is most important - Sorathic evil seeks to generate ever more fear, resentment, and despair. 

It is probably impossible to prevent massive physical destruction - with the world structured as it is, and when most Men have rejected God. 

But we personally can work to prevent spiritual destruction - in ourselves; and can seek universal and eternal spiritual creation by our own attainment of Primary Thinking (no matter how partially or briefly this is attained). 

And this, of itself, opposes Sorathic evil, because it breaks the link between imposed physical destruction and the outcome of spiritual damnation. 

Insofar as we can overcome in ourselves the intended fear, resentment or despair - by the Christian virtues of Faith, Hope and Love: then we have (at that moment) won the spiritual battle of this world in our-selves, and to an extent among those whom we love. 

And such victories are permanent in their consequences.  

The dividing of sheep from goats - an essential part of God's work

Why is the Western world getting worse; why is materialistic-Leftism triumphant; why are we being incrementally crushed by the imposition of totalitarian bureaucracy? What meaning can such experiences have for us, in terms of God's plan of creation?
 

My assumption is that God's motive for creation is love, and that a major aim is to enable people to choose to join with God in the 'project' of loving creation. So, the hope is that some people will choose to learn from their experiences to make the choice of Heaven.

Since Heaven is a place of love, only those who can love can dwell there - or indeed would want to dwell there. An analogy is a loving family; because that is the ultimate basis of Heaven - God's family. For those who love the loving family, it is the best possible situation - but for those incapable of love or who reject love, the family is an abhorrent situation: oppressive and boring.   

Another assumption is that Men are free agents, and God does not know who has capacity for love or who will make the ultimate choice that love is primary. Therefore such matters can only be decided by experience. In other words, who wants and who does not want love is something that emerges as creation proceeds - creation is a situation of testing and development, during which each person's attitude to love becomes apparent.

More exactly, each person is brought to a point of decision, from which is determined whether he is a sheep - who chooses Heaven, or a goat - who rejects Heaven. Of course, such a decision can be and is often deferred, but the point of decision is at least when Heaven is chosen permanently.

It seems that resurrection into Heaven - made possible through Jesus Christ - is an eternal commitment, and the possibility that this commitment to love is eternal is a vital aspect of Heaven.

So there is a sense in which the ongoing processes of God's creation are a means to the end of self-sorting ('assortative partitioning') into sheep and goats: more exactly a means to self-sorting of sheep into Heaven eternally; and goats into some-other-destiny (not Heaven, maybe not eternal).


Let me provide an analogy based upon my thirty-something years of working in universities. The situation of universities became more evil over this time, mainly due to the progressive introduction of bureaucracy which was also the imposition of leftist-materialist (ultimately anti-Christian; thus anti Truth, Beauty and Virtue) ideology.

In this context of step-wise increase in evil, people reacted variously. Some people disagreed-with and reacted-against bureaucracy; other people saw its evil went along with it for selfish and short term reasons (e.g. careerism); others simply did not regard creeping totalitarianism (towards omni-surveillance and micro-control) as being bad or evil... They liked totalitarianism, materialism, the inversion of morality and truth... they wanted more of it.

People who perceived the evil and repented it correspond to the sheep. These are the people who comprehend and share God's values, and who want to dwell in a situation where such values prevail, which includes being a situation among others that have made an eternal commitment to God's values. Heaven is a place where Men participate with God in the work of loving creation.

The goats, in this analogy, are those who respond to experience of creeping totalitarianism with approval. They are either not capable of love or else have chosen to reject the primacy of love and put some other values in its place - for example leftist political values or the sexual revolution; and these values trend inevitably towards inversion of Christian-values.

Those who see the evil of bureaucracy but go along with it for the time being, for careerist reasons; correspond with those who are not yet sorted into sheep or goats. They have not yet decided. Their decision is being deferred.

What happened and continues to happen is that the situation continues to get worse; universities become more bureaucratic and totalitarian and evil. Their original-residual Christian values become more destroyed, subverted and inverted. And one consequence is that the unsorted are put under increasing pressure, as evil impinges upon them more and more obviously and potently.

Under this increasing evil - individuals will either repent and rebel; or else it will become revealed that they approve of bureaucratic totalitarianism: they will be self-assorted into sheep and goats.

Those sheep with loving natures will, sooner or later, come to the point of rejecting The System. Those goats who lack the capacity for love, or actively reject the primacy of love, will actively, consciously, choose to join with the strategic evil of The System... they will live to succeed in the ever-less-loving, ever-more-materialistic inverted-world of totalitarian bureaucracy. 


The above example is, therefore, a microcosm of what is going-on in God's creation. It is also an explanation of why - in some times and places - it is valuable that 'things' get worse. The most-good sheep are able to learn from 'mild' experience that they want to choose love. They don't benefit from harshening (more evil) conditions.

But there are other sheep with more mixed motivations, less naturally good, who require the kind of increasing evil, increasing pressure, increasing clarity of creeping-totalitarianism - for them to awaken, repent and rebel - and choose Heaven.

This is, therefore, a possible explanation of the meaning why 'things are coming to a point' in the modern West.

The successful totalitarian global coup of 2020 has been breaking-up since - but world politics is still totalitarian

In 2020 those with the ability to perceive and learn, realized that we inhabited a totalitarian world: which means an evil world. 

In other words, our world is rooted in atheist, materialist, leftist assumptions; where all significant social institutions are interlinked and bureaucratically-subordinate to this ideology. 

This is why so many people have "politics" as their fundamental value; and why so many people behave as if everything is (at root) "politics". 

By "politics" they means the System of totalitarianism - "everything is politics" means that, bottom-line, everything in the public realm - discourse and behaviours, communications and actions - is part of this totalitarian system.

Since 2020, this unified world government has broken-up into two or more increasingly hostile factions; but the components are still totalitarian in their nature. 

This does not mean that all the totalitarian units are as bad as each other - they aren't, some (e.g. ours) are purposively worse than others. Some have hope of becoming better, more socially-Christian to be exact - while still ultimately totalitarian. Other factions are actively hostile to Christianity and its legacy. 

But all factions are bad in the way that totalitarianism is bad - which is a modern way (post 19th century): totalitarianism is only possible in a post-religious society, with highly developed and pervasive bureaucracy and mass media.  

What this means for religion is that all churches are part of the totalitarian system, therefore - insofar as churches are this-worldly institutions - churches are net atheist, materialist, leftist - and overall part-of-the-problem of institutional evil.

This implies that church-led "Christianity" will, overall and by net-effect, be totalitarian hence anti-Christian.

And so will church-rooted Christian people.    

Against this, and because of the nature of evil and its progression, there is an accelerating trend for the ubiquitous totalitarian societies strategically to self-destruct. 

The most evil parts of totalitarianism are those that are most pervasively and strategically orientated towards destruction in many forms - such as destroying nature ("the environment"), functionality (within and between social systems - i.e. destroying science, law, education, etc), agriculture, the health and lives of masses of people - and so on and so forth, right across the board. 

Destruction is not an explicit goal, however (except, presumably, at the power level above global totalitarianism); but instead totalitarian sub-groups are manipulated into mutual and internal destruction by their ideologies of opposition/ negation and value-inversion. 

The totalitarians are therefore induced by their ideological assumptions into incoherent sub-strategies, that accomplish the opposite of stated goals, and lead always to accelerated destruction. 

So, we find ourselves in a world where politics is everything, hence everything is politics; yet/ consequently politics is all evil - and political discourse is a clash between totalitarianisms.

It is extremely tempting to be drawn into politics, precisely because it is all-pervasive in functional discourse. This ubiquity makes it seem that politics (debate, analysis, choice, action etc) is fundamental and necessary.  

From inside The System anyone who refuses to share the assumption that "politics is primary and everything" is seen as shirking ultimate responsibility. 

Therefore we find, on the one hand, an expressed cynicism at politics; on the other hand - in practice - politics matters more to most people than anything else... 

Politics usually forms the basis of a person's world-view; and typically shapes all their other convictions and choices - including religious... 

Under totalitarianism, religion becomes primarily and mandatorily political - both in the mainstream and in dissenting groups.

Thus, subjectively; my life, my self, seem inescapably captured by The System - and the only way out seems to be political: a politics to end all politics, perhaps? 

My point is that we default to "political" discourse and convictions - under totalitarianism politics seems more important than anything, and more important than ever. 

But there is No Hope in this.

Spiritually, we must break out from the loop, which means we first need to disengage sufficiently to understand the nature of our situation: this understanding of our situation is the first and necessary step; and it is spiritually valuable in itself. 

What happens after understanding, is mainly a choice of affiliation; and when all the options in this world are evil-by-nature; then a Christian affiliation must be outwith this world.   

To me, this seems the only Good way to escape-from and subordinate the totalitarianism of "politics is everything". 

Good only comes from good motivations - not from the negation of evil

Good only comes from good motivations - not from the negation of evil.

This ought to be obvious, but human beings are confused by the scale and abstraction of modern civilization and life; so they mistakenly come to believe that the defeat or destruction of their "enemies" is evidence of increasing good in the world. 

It is grasping at straws - when it is not an indirect preparation for self-advertisement.

I see a lot of this at present. Al lot of commentators "crowing" over the travails of the most leftist corporations, the most zealously totalitarian nations etc. Predictions that this presages a turn of the wheel of fortune, that from the self-burned ashes of The West shall (inevitably, it seems) arise the beautiful phoenix of a Christian society... 

As the self-hating self-destructiveness of modern totalitarian leftism begins to erode social functionality in ever-more-obvious ways, with the incompetence, decline and collapse of signature evil-tending institutions; it is tempting to suppose this change represents a pendulum swing back towards good. 

It doesn't - at least, not in The West, and not on any socially significant scale. 

What is happening (almost always) is that the organized, bureaucratic evil of globalist/ leftist totalitarianism; is being eaten-away from within by the short-term selfishness and/or spiteful destructiveness of its component parts. 

Yet from a Christian perspective, the infighting of evil is almost irrelevant; because no matter how many evil institutions and persons degrade and impoverish each other; unless there are sufficiently good-motivated institutions and persons that will occupy the vacated social spaces - then matters are no further forward - and indeed whatever evil emerges triumphant will be energized and strengthened.  

Our problem is far deeper than "merely" being-dominated by an evil leadership class, evil government, evil corporations, evil education, an evil mass media etc.  

Our profoundest problem is lack of good. 

Most of those who crow most loudly over the demise of some disfavoured grouping or person, are manifestly core-motivated by one or other evil drive: money, sex, status, power - or a cynical sneering sadistic spitefulness/ Schadenfreude. 

Such people do want want as primary that which Jesus Christ offered - resurrected eternal Heavenly life - even when they have constructed a pseudo-Christian System as their public-consumption objective. 

Yet such people are not necessarily "evil" - overall and in net-effect; they may simply be the normal, average kind of person with mixed motivations; but who have allowed their "base" motivations to take first-place and determine their core allegiance*. Our civilizational problem is that even such-people are statistically among the best of us - and they are Not Good Enough! Nothing like good enough. Only those mixed persons (no matter how mixed) whose primary motivation and core allegiance is to God and Jesus Christ will suffice for what is needed here-and-now - and such persons are (to all appearances) exceedingly rare. 

In sum: beware the false triumphalism that celebrates evil persons and institutions coming to an evil end for evil reasons. 

Mix it how we will; a stew of evils can yield only soul poison - unless we discern, reject and repent the whole nasty brew. 

*A sign of false allegiance (a Litmus Test, if you like) is trying to emulate (to "learn from") the effectiveness of heroes and exemplars of evil. ("Oh, why can't we be more like [fill in the name of some evil success story]?") In sum: Advocating adopting the methods of evil, on the basis that these tactics have a strong track-record of changing the world, that they work.  

This is a Litmus Test of evil allegiance because such people have failed to learn that doing evil and doing good are not symmetrical. Evil is much, much easier than good; because destruction is easier than creation. 

It requires hard, prolonged and skilled labour to make a functional machine or a beautiful artwork; but any idiot can vandalize them in a moment.

Defence against evil: negating the spiritual power of the Big Lie

The Big Lie (e.g. the birdemic, antiracism, CO2 global warming)  is usually analysed in terms of its practical benefits - i.e. that lying is instrumental, that dishonesty assists the attainment of certain goals. But the Big Lie is primarily and ultimately spiritual - regardless of whether or not it is strategically helpful*. 

It has become vital consciously to know the Big Lies as lies... And because the lies are conscious; so muct the knowledge of their falsehood be conscious.

(Instinctive resistance to lies, based on unconscious urges, is spiritually insufficient.) 

 

A lie is a sin and a Big Lie is a fundamental sin by which a person (a civilization) may be overthrown and self-damned. Satan was called the father of Lies for this reason. The Big Lie is a temptation.  

If we focus only on the practical (e.g. sociopolitical or psychological) effects of the Big Lies, we will neglect or forget the spiritual dimension - which is primary. 

And if we are (in practice) unable to resist the material roll-out of the Lies, then we will be tempted to give-up on resistance altogether - to go-along-with the lie spiritually as well as practically - and that may well lead onto spiritual acquiescence to the lie. 

 

But the reality is that Thoughts Have Power: spiritual power first, and thence practical power. 

Thoughts indeed have ultimate power: Conscious knowledge of a Big Lie is a power against Satan, demons and supernatural purposive evil; and consequently power against what they plan to do.  

(Totalitarianism aims to be total for exactly this reason. There must be No Dissent - because each dissenter wields a spiritual weapon.)

 

There is a limitation of evil, to do with its needing the consent of those whom evil intends to corrupt. 

(This limitation has to do with the primacy of God and creation; and that evil is negative, hence secondary: Evil is opposition to already-existent Good.)   

This limitation is symbolised in mythical terms by such phenomena as the assertion that a vampire must be invited to cross the threshold of a house; or that the super-villain must 'monologue' his plans to the superhero, before he can execute them... People need to be told what evil intends, before evil can do it. 

The reality behind such myths is, of course, spiritual not verbal. The reality is that when evil is known as such and rejected, then it is ineffectual - it has no power to fulfil its wishes. 

Victims must therefore (spiritually) agree to the evil done to them: victims of evil must become complicit with their spiritual corruption.

(Although, of course, victims may physically be corrupted despite spiritual resistance - since mortal life is about learning directed towards Heavenly eternal life - and experiences of this life happen for this reason. Yet even the physical and this-worldly practical evil is - to some extent, for reasons perhaps not known - repelled or thwarted by spiritual refusal; since the physical is secondary.) 

In resisting the Big Lie we are often up-against established habit, and habit may lead us unthinkingly (un-consciously) to go-along-with the practical implementation of evil. Nonetheless, direct divine intervention will (sooner or later) alert us to the reality; and then each person will be brought to the point at which he must agree consciously to evil - or reject it. 

(Consciously to 'delay' making that decision is In Fact to agree to evil, here and now, and to advance its corruption in oneself. Repentance has infinite power, but is binary. There is no neutrality about evil.)

And it is never too late to repent, therefore never too late to resist evil. 

Better late than never is a true saying - when better has an ultimate and spiritual sense; and 'better' is true however the practicalities of this-world evil implementation work-out. 

Any individual person that consciously knows evil - who knows the reality behind a Big Lie - is thereby weilding a real spiritual effect upon the power of evil: a power to resist evil - including a power against the practical implementation of evil strategy.

Which is why many, many bad things that might have happened - that were planned to happen - in fact have not happened!

*Note added: This is why the mass media always lie, even when They don't need to; in the major, headline news stories.

Understanding the surveillance monomania as a natural expression of Ahrimanic evil

There is a dominant monomania of surveillance: that everything everybody does, all the time, should be monitored and recorded.

I suggest that this is probably the dominant and overwhelming underlying motivation in the world over the past decades and continuing. There is a constant pressure to increase the scope and precision of surveillance - and a constant casting-around for more or less plausible excuses to do this.

There is both external surveillance - monitoring of behaviour by objective observation (especially by electronic media and 'artificial intelligence' algorithms); and there are the systems of self-surveillance ('quality assurance' as it is sometimes called) whereby individuals fill-in auditable 'forms' and other records about themselves - and these are then externally stored and perhaps checked for internal consistency.

The story of most jobs over the past decades has been one of ever-increased surveillance. And what is interesting is that far more data is collected than used.

To some extent, this is explicable in that the data is there if needed - for example, to sack an individual. But there appears to be a far deeper, and morally inflected, motivation to ever-more and more-thorough surveillance.


This is because surveillance is a part of the primary modern ideology of materialism; indeed surveillance is the expression of that world view. Surveillance is both the natural expression of materialism, and itself propaganda-for and enforcement-of materialism.

The surveillance society is the materialist society - the society from which spiritual and divine matters are excluded by unexamined and habitual assumption (which is the most effective of all exclusions).

A world in which most people participate in surveillance most of the time (often from both sides, as surveyors and as surveyed - monitors and monitored) - is a world of materialism; since the material = that which can be surveyed.

It is a world in which only that which can be surveyed counts as real and important.


The characteristic modern evil is 'Ahrimanic' - that is materialist - and this evil is seldom detected by modern men, because they live in bureaucratic systems that are the instantiation of this type of evil. And, as time goes by, all bureaucracies become linked to make a single entity: The System.

And this System has grown to occupy almost the whole of public discourse, and all the various social institutions (politics, civil service, law, military, education, media etc). The System links functions, and it links nations.

Indeed, ever less of the world is outwith The System. Now, pretty much only the individual's inner thinking (but only if he is exercising his agency, and thinking from his real and divine self) is outwith the System; and (to an important extent) the family. Therefore, The System substantially defines reality - in precisely analogous fashion to The Matrix or other virtual reality fictions.

This materialist evil of The System is vast, everywhere, and unavoidable - therefore, for most people (who suppose evil to be exemplified by violent and murderous individuals) evil goes undetected, and is indeed denied.


Evil is denied, because when God and the spiritual realm are denied, and when reality is seen as a consequence of accidents rather than a purposive creation, and men are seen as a type of animal rather than en route to becoming (small g) gods etc... then materialism is not seen as evil.

Materialism is seen as the hard-nosed, realistic truth about things, not as evil. If there is no God, not divine meaning nor purpose, then life just-is material (and the rest is stupidity, illusion and delusion).

So for Modern man there is nothing wrong with a materialist world! There is nothing wrong with a world of omni-surveillance, there is nothing necessarily wrong, therefore, with a totalitarian society.


(This helps explain why the recent global totalitarian takeover has gone largely unnoticed; and when noticed is not regarded as intrinsically bad. In the UK (perhaps the most materialist nation in the world); it seems that a very large majority of the population, as well as nearly-all of the Establishment - favour the open-ended continuation of the current totalitarian lock-down-social-distancing strategy. Omni-surveillance and micro-control are not seen as an intrinsic evil, but as an expedient benefit.) 


It is helpful to recognise that, from the perspective of Ahrimanic evil and the imperatives of materialism; all surveillance is functional - regardless of whether any 'use' is made of the data.


Here is an example from my experience. Sixteen years ago, a new form of surveillance was itroduced in UK universities which is often called the Diary Exercise. For several weeks per year, academic faculty keep a detailed journal of their hourly activities; and a new sub-bureaucracy was installed at each institution and centrally to administer the scheme. Probably, many tens of thousands of man-hours per year (and many millions of pounds) are expended on this scheme.

Apparently, no use has been made of this data (which is, anyway, objectively worthless) - at least I never heard of any such. So let's assume what is probably true: that sixteen years worth of data has simply been collected, stored but never made use of.

Has the Diary Exercise then been a mere waste of time and resources? No! Because it means that for several weeks a year, academics are compelled to reflect upon and present their work in detail, in such a form and fashion as will satisfy management - that is, year-on-year, academics are being trained in materialist thinking, and made to practise it in relation to their own lives.

By the Diary Exercise (plus, of course, many and increasing numbers of other similar schemes) academics have been trained to regard their work as primarily materialist; primarily that which can be monitored - and gradually that conceptualisation has come to be the academics self-conception of their proper work.

Materialism of living has become the habitual and unexamined way of thinking - it has become a basic assumption concerning the nature of academic work: that is, real work is what can be objectively and defensibly described to a managerial system, on an hourly basis.


My point is that materialism is an end, not a means; and as an end, any activity which promotes materialistic thinking is valid from the perspective of materialism.

It becomes clearer why Mainstream modern people are unable to resist materialism - why, indeed, they broadly embrace it. This includes the majority of Christians in the majority of Christian churches.

And it explains why only those Romantic Christians who regard the divine and spiritual as a vital part of every-day (every-hour) can and do regard materialism as evil; and regard the totalitarian imposition of materialism as evil.


For most people (including most Christians) totalitarianism is only evil if or when it engages in violence and murder (at least, that is all the evil they ever talk about).

But for Romantic Christians, the evil of totalitarianism is the evil of materialism - thus totalitarianism is intrinsically evil.

A world of omni-surveillance is evil, and micro-control of behaviour is evil - because these are means to the end of universal and mandatory materialism. They are training us into materialism of thinking and communicating; they are enforcing materialism on all discourse, and as the basis of all activities.

And this is the major and dominant form of evil in the modern world - yet an evil that is invisible and denied by most people, all of the time.


Note added: I certainly experienced surveillance, especially self-surveillance, as an active evil - although (before I was a Christian) I was not able to explain 'why' this was so. Instead I explained my resistance in terms of surveillance being educationally and in terms of academic research, both inefficient and ineffective. But my (albeit slight and indirect - because of my dissent and boycotts) experience of participation in quality assurance exercises felt like I was being crushed under suffocating weight; meaning was drained from my vocation; I felt that my inner motivation and purpose was being replaced by the demand for submission to arbitrary or malign external plans. 

Accelerating incompetence and chaos are caused-by short-termist, selfish, spiteful evil

The UK has descended into political chaos, and this is being blamed on incompetence; which is both true, and misleadingly false; because the already-vast yet still-increasing incompetence of people in charge of Western nations and institutions is merely a side-effect and consequence of the primary reality; which is the evil-intent of the Global Establishment, and the spiritually-blind passivity of the Western masses.  

Chaos in not just a side-effect of evil; it is the deepest motivation; since evil is ultimately opposition to God's creation. 

(Thus the true opposite of chaos is creation - not 'order'.) 

The purest 'Sorathic' evil is sheerly-spitefully-motivated destruction of every-thing created; of-God, functional. 

This merely-spiteful, short-termist, selfish evil is precisely what we are seeing waxing ascendant in the world in general - and the UK in particular.  

Other forms of evil are merely intermediate, mixtures of sin and virtue; such as the type of totalitarian, bureaucratic, survelliance-and-control evil we saw peaking in 2020. Such 'Ahrimanic' evil requires the admixture of at least some virtues such as prudence, co-operation, long-termism and intelligence. 

And it is this kind of long-term, conspiratorial,  strategic, planned evil that is being subverted and destroyed by the break-up into smaller warring factions, conflicting individuals - each tending-towards simply seeking its own here-and-now, personal gratifications - and these gratifications becoming ever-more negative: fuelled by resentment, revenge, fear - and eventually despair. 

This process of the waxing of evil is natural and inevitable; since evil is negative, dynamic, and feeds upon itself. 

The more power evil gains, the more evil it becomes. The residual virtues that enabled the triumph of evil - perhaps courage, or self-control, or hard-work - are no longer 'needed' and more gratification can be gained for each powerful group or individual (here and now!), by pursuing more-and-more selfish and ever more short-termist goals. 

The chaos being observed in the UK are therefore the intra-office conflicts of the ruling class; in which the totalitarians strive to re-assert control, and rebuild their conspiracies - yet the attempt is thwarted again and again by the fact that everybody and everything has become worse. 

For instance; totalitarianism cannot happen without sufficient honesty and obedience within the ruling group. Yet, it is often expedient to be untruthful - and for the evil there is no positive reason to be honest. 

Thus the slippery downslope from manipulation (hype and spin), distortion, deniable dishonesty; to outright lies and value inversions covered by expansile propaganda and censorship. 

Lies and inversions are now built-into The System and the normal, dominant, primary mode of functioning. 

Therefore strategic plans are impossible to implement! - at every level: the plans themselves are incoherent, impossible lies, the methods for implementing them do not work, and every group and individual tasked with doing the work will be pursuing short-termist and selfish goals instead.  

What we are experiencing today is just the tip of an iceberg of latent chaos; the causes of which can neither be perceived by the ruling class nor the masses - both of whom are self-blinded by false metaphysical assumptions (atheist, materialist, leftist etc.) that they will neither acknowledge nor correct. 

Because everybody misunderstands (grossly) what is happening, it cannot be corrected.

And because the traditional, unconscious, automatic, self-correcting social mechanisms have long since been destroyed.

Evil cannot be corrected except by Good; Systemic totalitarian evil can be destroyed by short-termist/ selfish/ spiteful evil - but that only increases the amount of evil.

The future is therefore just: more of the same - a descent into chaos; unless or until people begin to understand, and begin to correct, the evil affiliations in themselves...

Why are so many people (including Christians) so committed to totalitarianism?

Given that it is intrinsically evil; why are so many people so keen on totalitarianism; being actively supportive in practice, if not necessarily in theory? 

I think the answer is related to the unacknowledged reality of changes in human consciousness. 

Changes in human nature have led to mass alienation - with the loss of that largely-unconscious "groupishness" of human consciousness which used to be a spontaneous source of social cohesion and inter-personal consensus. 

Through most of history until recent generations; people did not experiences themselves as wholly-separate individuals. Everybody (even, to an extent, rulers) was part-of "public opinion". 

There was a Group Mind, operating at a spiritual level. 

Because the group and the individual were not wholly separate, group norms did not need to be - and were not - experienced as having been imposed on individuals in a one-way fashion. 

When an individual experiences life as part of a group, he is himself a part of all group aims and decisions - the individual participates in the group as a matter of spiritual reality. 

In other words, in the past (to a significant, although not complete, extent) aims and decisions arose from the Group Mind; in which all individuals participated. 

 

But that spontaneous and unconscious groupishness has now all-but gone.

Individuals no longer participate spiritually in group aims and choices. Leaders do not feel themselves a part of, and in service to, a real "public opinion". 

Aims and decisions typically arise from the most powerful level of the social system - without participation of "the masses" - and these aims and decision are imposed-upon the lower levels. 

Top-down power has replaced the Group mind.   

This loss of participation has generated a visceral (and significantly valid) fear of the consequences of untrammelled individual agency. It has also enabled the one-sided manipulation of the masses by elites - with such phenomena as pervasive dishonesty, top-down propaganda, PSYOPS, and the use of terror, hatred and induced-despair as instruments of social control. 

Social cohesion nowadays must be totalitarian: material, procedural and enforced. The dangerous consequences of individualism are a problem that must be combatted. 

This is done by the integration of all human institutions, of all society (politics, churches, economics, media, law, military, police, education, science, arts etc); all social institutions are mandatorily-united under a single and all-pervasive ideology - with any opt-out regarded as actively hostile. 

The difference between modern totalitarianism and ancient theocracy is that totalitarianism is an ideology, not a religion; atheist not deist nor theist; materialist not spiritual. 

While theocracy explicitly purports to derive authority from transcendental sources (e.g. God or the gods); totalitarianism instead (but implicitly) regards goodness as impersonal, an abstraction - ideological. 

For totalitarianism; implicitly, goodness is a consequence of the system itself - a product of bureaucracy, committees, and procedures such as voting - and, especially, totalitarian goodness arises from those parts of the-one-system that are concerned with strategy, planning, long-term aims. 

So, under totalitarianism; goodness (as understood by mainstream modern people) is to be found near the top of the bureaucratic system, where it inheres abstractly; independently of the actual people involved.

And therefore this ideological faith is invulnerable to the high levels of selfish nastiness and many types of corruption of the actual people involved; invulnerable too to even extreme degrees of failure, counter-productive activity, or atrocities done by the higher bureaucracy.

For example "democracy" - which is a form of bureaucratic procedure - is regarded as good; whoever are the people involved, whatever their character or behaviour, and despite the outcomes. 

Goodness has become wholly abstract - detached from people and actuality.  

Thus for many mainstream totalitarians, goodness flows from top-level bureaucratic institutions downwards; and therefore the highest moral authority of this world inheres in strategic organizations such as the United Nations, the World Health Organization, the European Union, the Supreme Courts, and the various Courts of "Human Rights", or Truth, or Reconciliation; large charities and NGOs, the most wealthy and prestigious universities and "think tanks"... and so forth. 

For Christian totalitarians; their church is simply one of these high-level bureaucracies, organizations that both respond-to and contribute-to the ruling consensus that is enforced upon individuals by the propaganda of mass media, regulations of corporations, and laws of the lands. 

The totalitarian conceptualization is that Men are good only to the extent that they are made good by these top-down and procedural influences; and Men cohere and have common purpose only to the extent that they are part of the vast and interlinked System. 

Christian totalitarians accept the inevitability and indeed basic virtue of this model of human life and society; but desire to place the church (i.e. their church) at the pinnacle of the bureaucratic institutions. 

They envisage a world that is still totalitarian, and the individual is still to be manipulated and controlled; but they imagine a totalitarianism in which their church stands atop the UN, EU, SCOTUS, major mass media, the legal system, universities - so that church-originated ideas, rules, laws etc. will permeate all the major social institutions - and thus human life will cohere and have purpose.  

However... If totalitarianism truly is intrinsically evil (as I believe), then any such vision or hope for society cannot actually be Christian. 

It can only simulate Christianity - can only use Christian terminology to "justify" what are actually totalitarian (hence evil - i.e. on the side that is against God and creation) procedures and goals.  

For many people - insofar as they think about it at all - there is a sense that totalitarianism is inevitable; and therefore the only genuine value-choice is between a secular or a religious totalitarianism. 

The Big Question is whether this is a real choice - or whether, instead, religious/church and atheistic/ ideological totalitarianism are not, in truth, variations on The Same Thing. 

My personal understanding is that totalitarianism is indeed evil in all its forms and variants; so Christianity can only exist outwith The System -- in individuals primarily; and only in such non-institutional groups as cohere from love* primarily.

*By which I mean the kind of inter-personal and mutual love found in the best families, marriages, and friendships - at their best.

Trying to ignore evil in an evil-dominated world...

I keep circling back to the basic insight that negations do not suffice; so that the common strategy of trying to ignore something like geopolitical evil turns-out to be an assimilation to exactly that evil. 

On the one hand, mass media (eg "news") addiction, is a besetting sin of our times and place: the media is intrinsically evil in motivation and net effect. 

If we are to choose salvation and learn spiritually from this mortal life; then we each must know this evil, and must not surrender to it. 

But! 

Cutting-off from the mass media (as well as being literally impossible for most people) is not a virtue - it does not even tend to goodness; because negation does not lead us to positive good. 

And positive goodness is what we must have. 

If we attempt to cut-off our awareness, try to Empty our minds, try Not to have our thoughts occupied with the totalitarian agenda...  all this does not accomplish anything good, because thinking does not stop, minds will not stay empty... 

Unless we acknowledge and discern the presence and activities of purposive evil in our world - such minds will passively be filled by the pervasiveness of evil motivations throughout all the social institutions.

In a world that is - as now - administered and managed by evil-affiliated persons, any form of passivity, negation, attempted-ignoring, or the like; will fail to discern evil, fail to dissociate from evil, fail spiritually to oppose evil by active goodness. 

However differently things were in the past and in other places; for Men in 2025 in our society it is only a conscious and positive spiritual affiliation to the hopes of God and divine creation that suffices to benefit ourselves and the world. 

This, naturally, entails an inner detachment from the ideology and propaganda that pervades (and is the ultimate purpose of) mass media and the Western social institutions - yet it also entails our own active, aware, positive and personal choice to reject the plans and schemes of the servants of evil, whenever they impinge upon us... 

Which impingement is frequent and unavoidable.

The main thing is not, therefore, to try (and fail) to avoid the endless unavoidable impingements, not to enter the infinite and overwhelming vortex of double-negation - hoping to reject evil after evil after evil, without end...

But instead consciously to recognize evil-motives and actions in our orbit of thinking...

And - whenever this happens - recurrently to confirm our desire to align with God's eternal agenda, and confirm our intention to follow Jesus to resurrected eternal Heavenly life. 

**

Note: Back in January when DT replaced the previous puppet-Prez, done with the essential support of CHOAM and its agents; I made a precise prediction of upcoming direct Western military action in the Middle East before April, rationalized by a fake pennant event. This prediction was wrong. My prediction was about three months too early, and I underestimated both the scale of action; and I failed to recognize that the nature of evil in The West would have reached such a point that large scale direct intervention could happen without bothering about false pennants - and indeed without any plausible excuse or attempt to explain its "rationale". Yet here we are. To me, this confirms the acceleration of that decisive shift away from the Ahrimanic evil which is rational pursuit of global totalitarianism (i.e. wars intended to gain relative power and wealth). A decisive shift away from this, and instead into a spitefully-motivated and intentionally destructive evil of the Sorathic kind. (NB: Mutually destructive war - war intended not to "win" but to damage both sides, indeed all sides, i.e. to damage the world, humanity, and divine creation.) So this war is primarily spiritual, and to oppose it requires a spiritual act of conscious recognition and choice. And such discernment is A Must; not something that can be avoided by negations such as trying and pretending not to know, or attempting not to think about such things. Or pretending that what we personally think makes no difference... when in truth what we personally think, makes the only potentially positive difference. 

Archbishop Vigano - correct diagnosis, flawed prescription

Archbishop Vigano (of the Roman Catholic Church) has made a characteristically incisive intervention concerning the nature and reality of the 2020 global totalitarian coup, led by the demonic powers of evil. 

I value Vigano, because I know of nobody in public life who has done a better job of diagnosing the heart of that corruption which has so rapidly accelerated to cover the world; with the compliance of large masses of the populace.

Yet, when it comes to describing what those who agree with his diagnosis ought to do about it; the Archbishop's recommendations are inadequate. 

For a start; he envisages an 'anti-globalist alliance' as the basis for future opposition. 

But this would not be a positively-motivated movement. Instead Vigano proposes a 'double-negative' basis for alliance - i.e. a grouping of those who are Against Evil. 

Such a movement (and there are many already) would certainly be weak because diversely and feebly motivated. At best an anti-evil alliance could only slow the advance of evil; because it offers no a superior alternative basis of life. 

Evil is itself oppositional - oppositional to God/ the good/ divine creation - and ultimately oppositional Christianity with its offer to all Mankind of eternal life in Heaven. A Christian alternative to evil should not itself be oppositional! Christianity has the inestimable advantage of offering positive good - and this ought to be reflected in its aims. 

What is needed, therefore, is an alliance of those who are positively For God, good/ divine creation and salvation. In other words a Christian alliance.  

In the past this would have suggested A Church - or perhaps an alliance of Churches. However, our problem is that the churches are - overall, but decisively - on the side of the powers of evil; they fail to recognize, discern, and reject global totalitarianism - and indeed all major 'Christian' churches embraces more than one of the core strategic instruments of evil. 

This means that before any putative Alliance of Good could get off-the-ground and achieve anything; it would first need to reform and turn-around the major Christian churches. But this is not happening - and instead the churches are getting worse, more evil, by the month. 

Anyone Christian who hoped to join a church and fight totalitarian evil by the means of offering a positive and transcendent alternative; would immediately find himself confronted by an organization that already served exactly that evil he intended to oppose! 

Before opposing global evil, that person would need to embark on a fight against institutional evil; when the institution was embedded in an already evil world; and its evil qualities were being supported by all powers in the global totalitarianism - laws, officialdom, police, the media etc.

Anyone Christian who wanted to fight for good would be faced by inevitable - and probably prolonged - delay; before he could even begin: If he did so via a church! 

(On the other hand, if Christian found a small but uncorrupt church; a church who recognized the coup and opposed global evil - he would instead be faced by the immediate problem of growing that church to such a size that it could exert effective socio-political power.) 

So what does an individual who agrees with Vigano's diagnosis actually do? 

To my mind, any generally proposed solution should be possible for any person, anywhere; and, given the the fact that failure to resist evil leads to more and greater evil - the answer needs to be one which every individual can start to act-upon immediately. 

This rules-out institutional (including church) solutions, since all these regard the individual first trying to persuade other people - and we don't have time for that; nor can we afford to delay beginning our own opposition. 

If we wait until after we have attained a local majority of sufficient size, until after we have achieved sufficient institutional reform; if we put-off our own active opposition until after we can persuade enough 'other people' to join with us in some kind of significant 'movement' - then nothing will happen. 

Most of us are isolated, surrounded, outnumbered - thus nearly-everybody will end-up waiting for some other people to start something that they can then 'join' - so... nothing will happen. 

Once we have ruled-out what we cannot or should-not do; the answer to what we should do becomes obvious:

We should do what we personally can - starting now, not waiting for anybody else; and relying upon divine providence to amplify and organize individual activities into something greater. 

After all; if we are doing the right thing, then God will be on our side; and God is the creator - therefore God can and will use whatever we personally do to advance His agenda. 

We really must do the positively-right things Now - so far as we are able - and trust in God to deal with strategic considerations. 

Such a personally-focused attitude can be made to sound feeble and ineffectual compared with daydreams of a large international anti-evil alliance clashing head-to-head with the demon-controlled corporations and governments...

But the difference is that the one Will happen, starting instantly; insofar as any individual person wants it to happen...

Whereas the other is purely aspirational. 

Mass misdirection: How come - after so many dystopian novels, TV shows and movies - people still can't recognise evil totalitarianism when they are living it?

The thing is: They are clever! Not all-knowing, certainly not all-powerful - and highly fallible; but They are clever. A lot cleverer than most of their pseudo-intellectual critics who will explain-away the biggest, fastest, most universal and comprehensive change in the history of the world as some kind of random coincidence of something or another.


I mean that, just four months ago, the world was qualitatively different; and now almost everybody is living under an extremity of control and restriction that would have been literally incredible, just four months ago. All the talk is that this change will be permanent, in some form.

It happened. And - fundamentally - hardly anybody has noticed; and hardly anybody who has noticed can see the obvious cause; but instead grasps and holds-tight onto the transparently inadequate and incoherent excuse that everything is necessary because of the deadly birdemic plague - and the totalitarian world must continue because of the birdemic plague...


This is all the more surprising since - for the entire last generation - the best-selling, and biggest impact media have been all-about evil totalitarian dystopias; from Harry Potter and the Hunger Games through innumerable other variants of the same idea. And this was building upon the past century of similar products - The Time Machine, 1984, Brave New World etc.

These have been massively disseminated, in multiple media. Now, why would the Global Establishment be so keen on making and sustaining mass media phenomena describing totalitarian dystopias, if that is what they were planning to impose upon us?

The answer, I think, is misdirection.


We have seen many, many evil totalitarian dystopias; but the evil-ness of these societies has always been portrayed as militaristic, violent and murdering. (That is, Luciferic evil.)

This is indeed natural, because in a godless and secular society; directly causing physical suffering seems to be the only kind of evil that people recognise. Thus in these modern dystopias, the baddies are bad because they torment, torture and kill lots of people.

Therefore, when a totalitarian society arises that does not (any more than usual) torment, torture and kill great masses of people - and what is more, was implemented without any uniformed, marching armies and by consent - then it just isn't noticed, and is indeed denied.

Misdirection has worked. 


A godless materialistic society has no belief in any purpose or meaning to life; therefore the idea of evilness as micro-control of behaviour and thought has no reality. It cannot be grasped.

Such a society denies the non-material, the spiritual - indeed it barely acknowledges the autonomous free agency of human beings; who are continually redescribed and modelled in terms of being wholly-determined or statistically-random in their actions. The existence of evil spirits is regarded as being childish, dumb or an insane delusion.

In such a world - and this is mainstream and mandatory in Western discourse - there can be no genuine intent, not even of humans; and everything is explained by the forces acting-upon humans.

One would have supposed that the indescribably vast evidence of humans planning and scheming throughout history and into the present might have had some traction - but no.

The only acceptable view is that stuff just happens, either because it must - or for no reason at all; but at any rate, evil strategies are ruled-out a priori (by assumption) because evil Men are not self-motivated and evil spirits don't exist.


The actually-existing Ahrimanic nature of modern evil is beyond comprehension; hence unrecognised; hence unopposed. The evilness of a society of omni-surveillance and total-control is seen only when this is used to pursue violence; and there is no conception of materialistic reduction being evil in itself.

In sum; when reality is spiritual, but Men are materialistic, then the basic nature and point of life become utterly invisible to consciousness. At an unconscious and inarticulate level; Men retain an awareness of spiritual realities - and it is this that causes the demotivation, fear and despair underlying much of the world today. But unconscious and inarticulate does not suffice.

Therefore, the best and most important thing that we can do is to bring to explicit consciousness these vague feelings and hunches about what has happened and the nature of this current situation. We need to make our-selves aware of that understanding already latent in us.


This is the indispensable first step... But towards what? The answer is: To the salvation of our souls, to life everlasting beyond death.

Those who don't want Heaven can get what they want under totalitarianism - they have no problem with being misdirected.

Those who want Hell or self-annihilation for themselves have no problem with totalitarianism, because it is a demonic mechanism of damnation. They can continue to live under misdirection.

But you may be different. If you want Heaven, if you are a Christian, you need to understand.

Why resist totalitarianism? (What is it?)

Totalitarianism aims to control thinking - by a system of maximum monitoring. 

George Orwell got us mixed-up about this; because of his emphasis on violent coercion and the  assumption that it was the violence which was bad about totalitarianism - and the atheist assumption that the infliction of suffering by violence is the worst possible thing.

The upshot is that when there is no violence - and especially when there is no violent infliction of suffering - modern people cannot perceive totalitarianism: they simply don't notice it, or even deny its presence.

Phrases like 'soft' totalitarianism implicitly suggest that totalitarianism without violence is not really so bad - and nobody fought hard to defend against the triumph of 'soft' totalitarianism, because that didn't sound so bad.

But the badness of totalitarianism is, of course, spiritual - not physical. Totalitarianism is evil because of its effect on our souls - not because of its effect on our bodies.

Totalitarianism aims to control thinking by a system of maximum monitoring - to monitor the people down to a level of detail so fine that the only possible compliance is to think in the approved way.

It is nothing necessarily to do with the infliction of suffering by violence - violence is just one possible means to an end.

Modern Western society is objectively very highly totalitarian - especially in the workplace, compared with fifty years ago - because thought is very highly controlled. Absence, presence, threat of violence has nothing to do with the fact.

But why is totalitarianism bad? - if it isn't violent? Why resist it?

The only reason is if you believe that Life is about something more. The only reason to resist having one's mind controlled is if you believe that there is something very important to do with your mind.

Modern people do not resist totalitarianism because they do not believe they have anything better to do with their lives than to think in the approved way.

Modern people believe that Life is merely about the balance between pleasure and pain (maximising the first, minimising the second) - and altruism merely means wanting the same for other people. If totalitarian thought control can be imposed in a way that does not inflict suffering with violence - modern people are quite happy to accept, indeed embrace, totalitarianism.

Only religious people who believe that Life is about something else than emotions, and something more than mortal existence, have any serious objections to their minds being comfortably colonised and directed by the linked bureaucracies of employers, the state and the mass media; and there are so few Western religious people; and they are so scattered and mutually mistrustful or hostile, that their resistance to totalitarianism has, so far, been apparently ineffectual.

Why resist totalitarianism? If you have something better to do with your life; and therefore if you wish to avoid self-chosen damnation (which is, ultimately, the only kind of damnation).

But if you deny any real, objective, vital purpose of your life, and if you deny the reality of damnation - then you will surely accept, embrace, joyously join-in with the work of totalitarianism.

The benefits of creeping totalitarianism (in My life)

It is a general insight (and one that I have accepted) of Rudolf Steiner, Owen Barfield and William Arkle; that evil in the world can be understood as having an educative purpose. In essence this mortal life is 'for' theosis (becoming more divine); meaning for experiencing and learning aiming at an eternal resurrected life in Heaven.

Evil is tolerated because it may be necessary for this purpose. But such a general explanatory 'model' is Not understanding; understanding can only come from learning the role of evil in our own life (or, perhaps, the life of someone loved by us).

Thus it is a foolish and arrogant error to try and explain what specific role some named evil has-played or is-playing in another-person's life, or in the lives of groups of people who are strangers or known only at secondhand (from hearsay, the mass media or history books; or even from fictions and lies) - families, tribes, races, nations, or mankind as a whole.


What I will do here is simply to explain ways in which the creeping totalitarianism of the modern West has had a positive and educational role in my own life. This can be summarised briefly: the fact that totalitarianism has been increasing throughout my life has prevented me from living-out a worldly life; has prevented me from living a life dedicated to mortal life.

In different words; the ratchet of totalitarianism disrupted every accommodation and adjustment I made with The World, continually preventing me 'settling' into contentment; and thereby it pointed me in the direction of realising that my life was ultimately not 'about' my happiness in this world.


I am, by nature, someone who finds totalitarian bureaucracy extremely unpleasant. I am a natural romantic and individualist. I have no desire to be a leader, but I hate to be a cog in a machine. I am not a 'joiner' and tended to fall-out, or become disaffected, with almost any group; sooner or later (apart from my family).

Yet I began life with an idealism directed at certain institutions such as the profession of medicine (being 'a doctor') and the universities. I loved the arts of literature and music. I was a proud member of my schools, and medical school; and did well at both.

I was also dedicated to the ideals of these institutions: education, science, medicine etc. My dreams were substantially of fulfilment through success in these institutions - envisaged as as these institutions had been during the period of my youth, and earlier as I knew them through reading and the older generation. I craved the special status that comes from recognition by the peer group of those I admired.

But as I moved forward and upward through these institutions, they were always changing - getting worse overall, always in the direction of more bureaucracy, greater surveillance, tighter and more detailed control. They became more hostile to the individual, to the eccentric, to the ideals - and more merely instances of the generic bureaucracy (the Iron Cage of Weber, the Black Iron Prison of Philip K Dick).

As soon as I achieved a position to which I had aspired (and this did happen, several times); that situation would begin to collapse, would begin to be corrupted by the (universal) forces of totalitarian bureaucracy.

No sooner did I plant my feet on some ledge of firm and pleasant ground, than that ground would begin to crumble under my weight. I would very soon feel a need to seek some other niche.  


My early and immediate response to recognising the creeping evil was political. To try and 'change the world'.

My implicit assumption was that there was no other existence than this mortal world, and that the solution to The System of bureaucracy was (must be) a better system. Therefore I thought (as most people do) in terms of a political solution. I would fight the changes - on the confident assumption that something significantly better was possible.

I went through one after another 'possible' political solution, and pursued my political goals as most intellectuals do: through joining a 'party' or pressure group, conversation, writing, lecturing, and a bit of 'organising'.

My covert assumption was that institutions - society itself - could (in principle at least) be improved to the point that the major problems would be eradicated sufficiently for a worthwhile life; and that the positive rewards would be sufficiently great that life (my mortal life in particular) would be justified.

In sum: that a meaningful and purposive life would be attainable.


I can now perceive that this was a foolish, vain aspiration - that the reality, the bottom-line, the existential nature of mortal life (with its intrinsic change, decay, disease, and death understood as annihilation) does not, cannot - therefore will not - suffice.

But so long as there was some (albeit dwindling, as the years went by) worldly, political-social avenue left unexplored; so long as it looked theoretically-possible that the totalitarian bureaucracy might be halted and compelled into reverse - for so long did I fail to understand the nature of life and the perspective of real-reality.

It actually, in practice, I needed the ever-worsening, ever-greater unreality and evil of The System, The Matrix, The Establishment - to exhaust one after another and all of my false and feeble daydreams, wishful thinkings, simplified models and half-insights - before I eventually learned the necessary lessons concerning the true nature of reality and hope.


Therefore, this is an actual example of how the long-term personal effect of something evil - indeed the long-term triumph of purposive evil across the world - actually led to learning something vital; and a thing that a more gratifying, easier, more-successful life in a better world would Not have taught me.

If things had gone 'according to plan' - if I had had the kind and degree of worldly success and gratification that I envisaged for myself as a youth, and if I had found my tastes of such things to be as subjectively and sustainedly-gratifying as I expected - then I would almost certainly have lived my life in a delusory dream, and died without ever noticing that I was engaged in a demonic project of self-centred, hedonistic, short-termist, manipulative and (ultimately) nihilistic evil.


Thus if I had achieved something-like my dreams -and if these dreams had really worked; then I would have wasted my mortal life.

I would have been 'taken' by sudden death directly from a euphoric state of pleasurable self-congratulation and confronted with a Jesus to whom I regarded myself as greatly superior; and whose offer of Heavenly life everlasting would have had little attraction (involving as it does, a loving embrace of the divine project of creation).

I might well have rejected Heaven on the basis that I was existentially satisfied by living conceived as here-and-now self-gratification as the highest ideal; all I would have wanted was that this be continued until... nothingness. 


In sum, without the sustained and adverse environment of creeping totalitarianism to sabotage my tin-pot schemes of immediately pleasurable indulgence; I would very likely have stayed on the broad and pleasant road to Hell - which I had sketched-out in my youth.

And this - it seems to me, is a specific and exact instance of why (and how) we need evil in order to reach good.

Of course this instance does not in any way justify the evil in your life; let alone some other person's life (known or unknown) - nor any great masses of people who might be envisaged. That is for you to discover for yourself - each and individually.

But you can be sure that your actual life is trying to tell you what you most need to know; year-by-year, day-by-day, hour-by-hour trying to break-down your resistance to such knowledge. Even so obtuse a person as myself eventually crumbled under this pressure - but it took a great deal of such pressure, and for a long time, before I did.

For me - this is one reason why my world was adverse; and why there needed to be so much adversity and of that particular type.

Why do modern people actively-want a totalitarian system? (The Ahrimanic evasion)

As the totalitarian society increases in power and scope on a weekly basis, we need to ask whether an underlying reason for totalitarianism is actually that this is precisely what modern people actively want for themselves, as well as others.

If we judge people by what they say, what they do, how they vote, whom they criticize and persecute - it becomes clear that modern people desire a totalitarian system of total surveillance and micro-regulation*. A wholly un-free society in which anti-social behaviour becomes un-thinkable.

And the reason that so many modern people want this, is that modern people want, more than anything else, to evade responsibility.

This is, I believe, an existential life-decision, that goes very deep. By their revealed preferences, we may infer that modern people want to regard themselves as helpless victims, want to be protected, want to be favoured systematically. They want Not to be blamed for anything; they want it never to be 'my fault'. They want always to be able to say 'I couldn't help it'.

And they want it to be the case that any person who does try to assert responsibility or blame, any person who believes in human agency and freedom - be punished, eliminated, silenced, reprogrammed. 

In a world where evasion of responsibility is primary, a totalitarian system promises the perfect excuse of being thought-controlled.

This desire to be able to plead helplessness goes all the way to the top, where individual responsibility is replaced by committees and votes; so that nothing can ever be pinned on anyone. It includes the vast, global, bureaucracy-of-everything - so that every nation, corporation, group and individual can always claim that their decisions and behaviours were compelled, that they were merely following orders.

In sum, modern man is a willing servant of the demonic spirit of Ahriman - this kind of cold, anti-personal, reductionist, pseudo-scientific, systematised evil is dominant. And, ultimately, it is dominant because of the decisions and desires of the millions upon millions of mainstream modern people who collaborate and make careers from The System.

Mainstream typical modern Man (say, the ordinary - female - middle managers in an institution) viscerally reject the reality of their own existential freedom, deny their responsibility for their own beliefs, claim helplessness against the evil-intending propaganda they so eagerly embrace and so diligently implement and defend.

These want a totalitarian system and assert themselves to be powerless innocents. But they cannot in fact evade responsibility for their positive choice of an evil system that claims to eliminate responsibility.

Because thought cannot really be controlled - to 'be' thought-contolled is therefore a decision; and all claims of oneself being thought-controlled and therefore not-responsible are a dishonest excuse. Anyone capable of making that excuse is lying. Humans just are free in their thinking.

Instead, these people actually-are actively-evil - they are in a state of willing evil upon themselves and upon everybody else. They will totalitarianism, and totalitarianism is intrinsically evil.

And this has been their choice, it is what they want.


*It might be asked how I know what most modern people want? My answer would be as above - I am simply assuming that what people want is what they say they want - as confirmed by how they behave - with a high (but not complete) level of consistency, and over several decades. 

Anyone who disagrees and says that modern people really want something different - e.g. want to be free and responsible and others to be likewise, want to live in a world that encourages and sustains human agency... well, such claims go beyond objective appearances, and are asserting deep knowledge of the hearts of Men below the surface and despite contrary actions.

I am simply suggesting that as we descend into evil totalitarianism, people are - broadly speaking - getting exactly what they want; and are therefore personally responsible for what they (and we) get. To put it differently - our problems go very deep indeed, and they are far more wide-spread; much much deeper and more pervasive than most people realise. 

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.