What should we Do, Now? Some considerations:

The Will versus Will-Power

*
William Arkle's Geography of Consciousness (1974) is so densely written that it is extremely difficult to understand - so it was only yesterday that I grasped the meaning of Chapter Sixteen The Will - and recognised that (without mentioning the term) it provided an explanation for a phenomenon which so interests me: Synchronicity.

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=synchronicity

*

My previous understanding was very general and external - that synchronicity was an indirect form of evidence for the reality of a personal God since it implied that 'the universe' was being 'arranged' such that I experienced certain events of special significance.

*

Arkle's explanation is related to a contrast between The Will versus Will Power.

Will Power is taken in its usual secular and common sense definition, and interpreted as the use of normal psychological disciplines to attain a particular goal.

Will power is a matter of 'getting what we want or believe we need'; it is a matter of strategically using our mind, understanding, predictive ability, force and manipulations to attain an objective.

Will Power may or may not achieve what it sets out to achieve - but it is essentially an attempt to impose ourselves upon the world; and therefore extremely prone to be evil in motivation and effect.

*

The Will is something altogether different in its nature and operation. It is our true, higher, individual Self; that contains an element of, and is in communication with, God.

Therefore The Will is a source of the power strength, and purpose of God as this specifically applies to our (real) selves.

The Will is therefore necessarily good, and (being divine) this good is harmonised with the good of all other things.

We have no conscious power to influence The Will by a strategic decision - any more than we could change God's will; we can only recognise The Will, and choose either to accept or to reject it.

*

Mostly we choose to ignore or reject The Will, and instead attempt to impose our false selves upon the world by Will Power.

And mostly this is un-successful - and this failure is both necessary and fortunate as the results of success would be disastrous to ourselves and to others (including the whole environment).

When (as is usual) the Will Power goes against The Will; The Will 'sabotages' our plans, by all kinds of means including psychological sabotage, but not confined to that - since The Will is divine it has power to influence other things in the environment - leading to what may be termed 'bad luck' but is actually a necessary failure to get what we want, because what we want is opposed to what God wants, and therefore creation is 'weighted against us'.

*

But a person who knows, accepts and lives by The Will (in however brief and incomplete a fashion) finds the opposite - he finds that not only his own mind (mental powers) but also 'things in general' cooperate in ways that are good.

This includes genuine synchronicity - which is a consequence of harmony between ourselves and our environment working towards the good, caused by The Will spontaneously (over time) reproducing in our surroundings 'a drama which represents the significance of our being': i.e. synchronicity, or 'meaningful coincidence' (as we interpret it).

*

By this account synchronicity is mostly an operation of God-within-us, rather than a situation created by God's power external to us. It is evidence of a truly vast and intrinsically good power - a divine power of subtle harmonisation that we may recognise (or reject); but which it is impossible for us to control, exploit or 'use' to achieve our personal desires.

This also explains divine providence, that sense of God's Will working in the world (but only with our chosen cooperation) can make situations that seem like a near-incredible 'good fortune' by a sequence of apparent 'luck'.

*

This may be the explanation for Great Men (in religion, theology, politics, arts, sciences etc.) who are (who 'happen to be') in the right place at the right time, and whose (small) decisions and acts are amplified (by invisible processes) to have vast consequences.

Arkle's example is Winston Churchill; whose personal qualities in the role of Prime Minister during the Battle of Britain were a consequence of extraordinary sequences of 'luck' - with world historical consequences.

"If you are a Churchill, you make a few small noises into a microphone, and you set forces in motion in people's natures which make all the difference..."

The lesson is that if we want real power in life, like Churchill, or the Greats in other domains of life; then this can be had only by renouncing Will Power, and embracing The Will.

*

We tend to suppose that the 'main problem' of life is 'amplifying our voices' - using force, cunning, chance to make the world take notice of what we think is important; but this is the false self at work deploying Will Power.

When the true self, The Will, is at work comes a recognition that our proper main problem, something that only we can do, is to recognise and nurture our true self, our highest consciousness which contains and harmonises with the divine.

And insofar as this achieved (and whether we know this is happening or not, and whether we are personally credited with it or not) the goodness of a true self in higher consciousness will quite easily and quite naturally be 'amplified' and propagated by innumerable instances of 'luck', sequences of meaningful coincidences: synchronicities.

Repost from 2014: http://williamarkle.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/william-arkle.html

Synchronicity and providence: The Will versus Will Power - ideas of William Arkle

*
William Arkle's Geography of Consciousness (1974) is so densely written that it is extremely difficult to understand - so it was only yesterday that I grasped the meaning of Chapter Sixteen The Will - and recognised that (without mentioning the term) it provided an explanation for a phenomenon which so interests me: Synchronicity.

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=synchronicity

*

My previous understanding was very general and external - that synchronicity was an indirect form of evidence for the reality of a personal God since it implied that 'the universe' was being 'arranged' such that I experienced certain events of special significance.

*

Arkle's explanation is related to a contrast between The Will versus Will Power.

Will Power is taken in its usual secular and common sense definition, and interpreted as the use of normal psychological disciplines to attain a particular goal.

Will power is a matter of 'getting what we want or believe we need'; it is a matter of strategically using our mind, understanding, predictive ability, force and manipulations to attain an objective.

Will Power may or may not achieve what it sets out to achieve - but it is essentially an attempt to impose ourselves upon the world; and therefore extremely prone to be evil in motivation and effect.

*

The Will is something altogether different in its nature and operation. It is our true, higher, individual Self; that contains an element of, and is in communication with, God.

Therefore The Will is a source of the power strength, and purpose of God as this specifically applies to our (real) selves.

The Will is therefore necessarily good, and (being divine) this good is harmonised with the good of all other things.

We have no conscious power to influence The Will by a strategic decision - any more than we could change God's will; we can only recognise The Will, and choose either to accept or to reject it.

*

Mostly we choose to ignore or reject The Will, and instead attempt to impose our false selves upon the world by Will Power.

And mostly this is un-successful - and this failure is both necessary and fortunate as the results of success would be disastrous to ourselves and to others (including the whole environment).

When (as is usual) the Will Power goes against The Will; The Will 'sabotages' our plans, by all kinds of means including psychological sabotage, but not confined to that - since The Will is divine it has power to influence other things in the environment - leading to what may be termed 'bad luck' but is actually a necessary failure to get what we want, because what we want is opposed to what God wants, and therefore creation is 'weighted against us'.

*

But a person who knows, accepts and lives by The Will (in however brief and incomplete a fashion) finds the opposite - he finds that not only his own mind (mental powers) but also 'things in general' cooperate in ways that are good.

This includes genuine synchronicity - which is a consequence of harmony between ourselves and our environment working towards the good, caused by The Will spontaneously (over time) reproducing in our surroundings 'a drama which represents the significance of our being': i.e. synchronicity, or 'meaningful coincidence' (as we interpret it).

*

By this account synchronicity is mostly an operation of God-within-us, rather than a situation created by God's power external to us. It is evidence of a truly vast and intrinsically good power - a divine power of subtle harmonisation that we may recognise (or reject); but which it is impossible for us to control, exploit or 'use' to achieve our personal desires.

This also explains divine providence, that sense of God's Will working in the world (but only with our chosen cooperation) can make situations that seem like a near-incredible 'good fortune' by a sequence of apparent 'luck'.

*

This may be the explanation for Great Men (in religion, theology, politics, arts, sciences etc.) who are (who 'happen to be') in the right place at the right time, and whose (small) decisions and acts are amplified (by invisible processes) to have vast consequences.

Arkle's example is Winston Churchill; whose personal qualities in the role of Prime Minister during the Battle of Britain were a consequence of extraordinary sequences of 'luck' - with world historical consequences.

"If you are a Churchill, you make a few small noises into a microphone, and you set forces in motion in people's natures which make all the difference..."

The lesson is that if we want real power in life, like Churchill, or the Greats in other domains of life; then this can be had only by renouncing Will Power, and embracing The Will.

*

We tend to suppose that the 'main problem' of life is 'amplifying our voices' - using force, cunning, chance to make the world take notice of what we think is important; but this is the false self at work deploying Will Power.

When the true self, The Will, is at work comes a recognition that our proper main problem, something that only we can do, is to recognise and nurture our true self, our highest consciousness which contains and harmonises with the divine.

And insofar as this achieved (and whether we know this is happening or not, and whether we are personally credited with it or not) the goodness of a true self in higher consciousness will quite easily and quite naturally be 'amplified' and propagated by innumerable instances of 'luck', sequences of meaningful coincidences: synchronicities.
*

Beware of developing and following your conscious 'will power', except when you have chosen to align it with divine creation

The development of human consciousness means that strategies that once were (overall) directed towards Good, have now become net-harmful. Will power is one of them. 

This is because (to a nearly complete degree) modern Man's will power is cut-off from the creative purposes of God; and cut-off also from his former immersion in the unconscious mind of other-Men. 

In the past, an individual Man's will arose from a context of other Men and from at least some degree of spontaneous sharing of divine purpose - for example, from some degree of 'automatic' harmony with the natural world. 

But nowadays a Man's free will lacks these former (unconscious, spontaneous, automatic) elements of coherence and direction. 

Therefore any strengthening of will power, of focused concentration upon an inner purpose, will - unless deliberately directed into harmony with divine creation - be directed against God and fellow Men. And nowadays this maldirection does not tend to be corrected 'automatically' by unconscious inner feedback impulses. 

In effect; there is only one Good direction for will to be harmonious with God; and an 'infinite' number of bad/ wrong/ evil directions - in pursuit of which will power is dissonant, disruptive - and ultimately destructive of creative harmony.  

Thus we moderns are more free in our will and thinking than ever before; consequently for us to will in harmony with divine creation is a conscious choice; whereas to will in conformity to divine creation used to be, to some extent - albeit an extent dwindling through recorded history - natural and spontaneous.

Yet nowadays we are confronted with a vast array of options and alternatives among which we must and do choose. 

Given this range of choice; most Men choose to conform by (what they regard as) expediency: i.e. they make their choices for their own best advantage... And, in practice, this usually means they will choose whatever is most powerfully imposed upon them. 

In the modern world; this means that Men typically choose whatever is imposed by saturation (by marination) in the outputs of mass media, state and corporate bureaucracies; and by propaganda from all these plus from (what used to be called) churches, law, science, schools and colleges etc. 

And since 2020; it has been obvious that all these are 'converged' onto a single global program: so (in those matters of core importance to the 'world government', the passive individual experiences a unified external will.

What is the nature and direction of this external pressure that is imposed? It is demonic, purposively-evil; it is a will unified in opposition to God, divine creation and The Good. 

Thus passivity is evil; and the scope of such evil is unbounded - including even nonsensical incoherence and the gross inversion of Good - since modern Man's will power can now 'make' whatever 'reality' it chooses. 

 

But this is not inevitable - it is always a choice. 

In effect, it is often a choice made by the cut-off will power to deny choice. 

It is simply choosing passively to yield to external pressure.  

Yet, all the time, the divine harmony and purpose of God's creation is still there - (as it were); in the background; waiting to be noticed and waiting to be chosen: waiting to have will power directed at it. 

Any Man is free make this choice, but it must be a conscious choice.

 

How can a Man know where this choice lies? 

By the possibility of directly knowing God-within each Man, through directing our attention to our real-divine Self; and by directing our will power to make such choices. 

And from 'externally'; through knowing in our hearts the personal presence of the Holy Ghost; which is the spirit of the ascended Jesus Christ... 

This through love-of, and faith-in, that same Jesus Christ - by making the choice to follow the Good Shepherd to eternal resurrected life.  

Cosmic significance and "will power"

There is a recurrent spiritual problem in relation to what might be termed will-power. A vast amount of spirituality has been, and is, about study, training, practice, knowledge, technique... all manner of relatively arduous things that need to be acquired as a matter of habit. 

In sum: the spiritual path is seen as one that requires will-power... with the proviso that in some traditions the will-power is supposed to come from the divine; and this divine-will merely be "channelled" by an individual human being. 

(This may be paradoxical in practice; as a self-less, ego-less person is somehow supposed to overcome other temptations and idleness; and instead strive continuously at years of arduous spiritual exercises - which are themselves dedicated to expunging his personal will!) 

 

It seems natural and inevitable - and is indeed true! - that our spiritual cosmic significance will have effects on material this-worldly affairs. In other words, insofar as we have spiritual experience, and attain spiritual learning; this will benefit "the world". 

But! This effect of the spiritual on the material, the effect of the cosmic on the earthly, does not happen in accordance with our personal will!

A Big Mistake (it seems to me) - and one that recurs often - is that spiritual people explicitly strive to change the world in accordance with their spiritual insights. What specifically they do varies greatly; but the general point is that the individual spiritual person tries to change the world in accordance with a pre-decided goal. 

Attainment of this goal then becomes an index against-which spiritual power is calibrated.

Another way into this matter is via "power". Most people want power in some sense, for some reason; but it is pretty foolish to supposes that it would be a good idea if a person's spiritual power was equated with his ability to achieve (pre-decided, explicit) worldly plans. 

On the flip-side, it is equally absurd to adopt a view that spiritual power can lead to absolutely anything in this world, including catastrophic outcomes for those we most love and value. 

Yet the question of what counts as spiritually-catastrophic, rather than materially-catastrophic, is a necessary one to consider. After all; the powers of spiritual evil dominate this world, especially in The West; and these demons may engineer materially bad outcomes for spiritually good-motivated actions; just as they often engineer worldly success, status, wealth and influence for those who serve demonic interests. 

My conclusion is rather one of understanding than of advice. 

We (and especially men) inhabit and intellectual environment that grossly overvalues a caricatured Nietzschian version of will-power; we tend to hero-worship and wish to emulate examples of people who set ambitious (worldly) goals, and go on to achieve then - by sustained and long-term endeavour against temptation and difficulties.   

But a closer examination of these persons will reveal that almost all or then are pervasively corrupted, and spiritually malign - such that it seems their efforts have in fact been in an opposite direction to good.  

Spiritually good persons are rare indeed, but they seem quite different; and much more concerned with learning and experiencing and developing creatively; than with imposing their will upon other people and the world. 

The power of concentrating the mind isn't the answer (because it's mundane will power, in disguise)

I have often noticed that there is an almost-opposite stream of therapeutic self-help to the oneness spirituality - and that is to propose that we need to improve our powers of mental concentration. 

This suggestion goes back to Nietzsche, and includes George Bernard Shaw and Colin Wilson - and also several strands of the Golden Dawn tradition of ritual, or ceremonial, magic*. All these (and many other self-help gurus) advocate training oneself (or undergoing systems of training) in 'habits' of mental control and concentration; as a kind of amplification of will power. 

This is a significant half-truth; because there is certainly a sense in which our inability to control our thinking is a real plague of mind. If we cannot focus, or concentrate, our thoughts - then we can't follow a line of reasoning, cannot analyze and critique, cannot resist the ubiquitous distractions of mundane life (especially now that the mass-social media is so prevalent). 

Also; people who have high powers of concentration - whether spontaneous or trained - may be impressive in their capacity for work, and also relatively socially dominant: they may be able to manipulate other people more effectively than would otherwise be the case, in a kind of "hypnotic" fashion. 

Concentration really can, therefore, be a kind of power - power over the natural world, and over social situation, and it is easily understandable that some people (at least in some moods) would desire this power. 

Yet such power amounts to self-assertion. It is a means to the end of imposing one's will on the rest of the world. 

In other words; concentration operates at the level of the everyday, mundane self - which self is ultimately passive, externally-controlled, un-free. 

What concentration bypasses is the Primal Self; and if you agree that this mortal life is "about" the learning and development of our Primal Self - then it can be seen that a focus upon focus, concentrating on concentration, is missing the point - and indeed amounts to a deliberate exclusion from purpose of the real meaning of life. 

In other words: because a focus on concentration is a means, not an end; then, to the extent that mental concentration is made a purpose in life - in making concentration our aim we are not discovering (leave alone following) the divinely-intended destiny of our spiritual life. 

Thus, to focus on enhancement of the will-power of concentration, is rather like making improved efficiency the goal of life while neglecting what the efficiency is aimed-at; instead of discovering what ought to be the purpose of life. 

Overall it is surely better to be inefficiently aimed at the right purposes of life, then to focus efficiently on achieving goals that have been passively absorbed from external sources. 

At root, a person with tremendously focused will power is not even serving his own interests - because the mundane self is not Primal nor essential, but merely contingent. In practice; will power operates as merely an effective servant of the powers that dominate this mortal world and life. 

The lure of successful self-assertion, of imposing oneself upon other people and upon Life; in practice turns people into mental slaves for this-world's demonic rulers. 

*An example of the power of trained "magical" concentration in the Golden Dawn tradition can be seen with the Inkling Charles Williams; of whom many accounts have been written of his hypnotic, charismatic effect. None more vivid than that of Lois Lang-Sims; who was an initially-complicit "victim" of Williams at his most "vampiric". Charles Williams demonstrates that a training in focused attention is a tool that can be effectively deployed - for good and Christian purposes; for the "Left Hand" path of selfish personal benefit - or for both purposes, at different times. Williams was aware of the temptations of such self-willed power, as is evident from several of his novels; yet despite such knowledge was not able effectively to resist the temptations to abuse such power - even in the last years of his life.   

Power and corruption - Is the evil of power an amplification, a temptation, or the fundamental nature of things?

In ancient times, it seems that power was regarded as A Good Thing - the only problem was getting it! The assumption was that gaining power simply enabled good people to do good things. 

Power was wanted for Us, and Our power was good. The evil of power was when They had it, and exercised it on Us. 

When someone with power did evil, then the ancient assumption was that power simply revealed their real nature - which had previously been thwarted of expression. 

Power for the ancients was thus an amplifier. 

It was as if goodness and evil were innate qualities; "a good man" given more power would, by his nature, do more good; and vice versa. 

The best society was therefore one such as King Arthur's Camelot; in which there was a good and powerful ruler. 

The era of power-as-amplifier also includes the assumption that the goodness of the ruler's power would permeate the people (as if the people would inevitably absorb the goodness of power, like a sponge). So, a good and powerful ruler, would lead to a better people. 

The idea that power corrupts, was a product of the modern era; and became socially dominant especially in the middle 20th century. 

We see it in literature such as the depiction of the Emperors and their courts in Robert Graves's I Claudius and Claudius the God - when many basically-decent individuals such as Augustus, Tiberius and Claudius himself, become corrupted by their power. (And those who are not corrupted get eliminated.) 

The corrupting effect of power was supposed to work such that a normal, or even good, person who got enough power, would strongly tend to be corrupted by it. So that a powerful monarch, or in the 20th century a secular dictator, might start out doing overall good; but would tend to become worse, get more selfish and paranoid, and do increasing harm...

The more power someone had, and the longer he wielded that power - the more corrupted he would become. 

Thus, in contrast with the ancients; the "power corrupts" idea was that power would itself tend make individuals evils: power was understood as a temptation. 

The more power, the longer the power was wielded: the greater the temptation.

From the late twentieth century the idea began to emerge that power was intrinsically corrupt: power just is corruption. 

While it is true that power amplifies innate evil, and also corrupts; in this most recent era there is more to power. It is not just a question of power bringing-out evil, plus tempting people to evil; on top of (and underpinning) these: power always is evil in its fundamental nature. 

This analysis asserts that power cannot be good, that power always is evil - because of what power is. 

Such an idea can be seen emerging in the depiction of the One Ring in The Lord of the Rings - where the temptation of power is, in practice, unstoppable in its corruption- such that even the most good and pure of people (Elrond, Galadriel, Gandalf, Aragorn) know they they would be unable to resist it.  

Here we may see hints of the current concept that the very nature and operation of power is evil (yet not quite fully in place, because the legitimate monarchical power of Aragorn is regarded as unproblematically good). 

Yet now, the situation is that power is regarded as coercion; as operating by compulsion of one by another; or of the masses by the minority rulers; or of people by the totalitarian System or "machine". 

A literary exponent of this vision of fundamentally evil power is Philip K Dick; with the depictions of future (and present day) dystopias as the Black Iron Prison; in which the whole structure of societal power is regarded as evil incarnate, set against each individual - who is a victim of power regardless of his position within The System. 

The operations of power are therefore such as to spread evil; in that power compels. Power propagandizes, coaxes, and forces behaviour - power deploys punishment for failure to obey; and power allocates rewards for compliance.  

In other words: power is all about bribes and sanctions and the like - these are not means to an end; but propaganda, bribes and sanctions, and brute force are what power is. 

The corruption spreads; because power is about getting others to behave in accordance with fear and greed, and the lust for power. 

This development in the understanding of power is, I believe, a consequence of the changing nature of human consciousness - the development by which human behaviour began as spontaneously and unconsciously immersed in the group-mind; and then (via transitional stages) became a alienated modern situation, in which each human experiences himself as cut-off from other people, from reality - even from his inmost self.

Whereas ancient power was diffused among the group mind - so that it was intrinsically shared-between the members; now power is experienced as external compulsion of one upon others.

Power makes everybody worse - the powerful, and those upon whom power is exercised! 

This is why the making of structures of power - power to shape, destroy and compel the world (as its people) - has been so much the focus of demonic strategy through most of the modern era. 

This has many and deep consequences; such that whereas the ancients could do good by power; we moderns cannot - power only does evil in the modern world, and can only do evil because of its nature. 

This applies to all humans with power - all are evil; and to all institutions with power, including Christian churches. 

Insofar as a Christian church is powerful, it is evil - it can only be evil. Whatever Christian churches do to increase their power is based on the false argument that power will enable them to do more good... The reality is that more-power simply makes churches more-evil. 

Because power is evil by its nature in the context of modern consciousness; institutional activity to "do good" that was normal in the past, is impossible in the present. 

Even when the intent to do good with power is genuine; insofar as power is attained, evil will in fact be done. 

This corruption of power is not just a temptation that might (in theory) be eschewed; the corruption of power is unavoidable, because it is in the fundamental nature of power. 

**

Note: What of the future? Well, it seems clear to me that, when power is known as innately evil; Christians need to lose their past keenness on getting and wielding power via - whether personally, or via institutions. The antidote to a world of power, is a world of love - and that is Heaven; and the mortal realities of Heavenly love that we may experience on earth. But even our idea of Heaven needs to be purged of past infatuations with power. We should also distinguish between the zero-sum games of power, which is all about arranging what is already created; and our potential for adding (eternally) to the sum and varieties of divine creation - through our own divine freedom, in harmony with ongoing creation. Of course, in our mortal lives in this mixed world, permeated by entropy and evil; we cannot eschew power, and necessarily participate in it - but we can and should recognize and repent the necessity. 

Further Note: Lest I be misunderstood - the situation is Not symmetrical. Although power is evil, power-less-ness does not mean good-ness. To be wholly good, power must not be operative. To put matters positively - goodness works by love, not power. Power is the destruction of loving relationship. 

However; in this mortal earthly life, love and power are always mixed in actual Men and their actual relationships, in a manner analogous to the inevitable mixture of good and evil in the hearts of each Man. Only after we have been remade and transformed by resurrection can Men (and other Beings) become wholly-loving. So, the situation in this earthly mortal life is that we cannot Be goos and loving (except partially and intermittently) but we can , and should, to affiliate to the side of love, just as we can/should affiliate to the side of God. It is not a matter of total reform and purification (which is impossible in this world) - what matter is a matter of taking sides; and, when it comes to values and matter of taking the right side.   

Acknowledgement: My awareness of the changing understanding of power originated from Tom Shippey's discussion of the One Ring in his magisterial The Road to Middle Earth, and some further discussion in the essays Roots and Branches.  

Power corrupts. Worship of power corrupts also

The insight that "power corrupts" (with or without the addendum "and absolute power corrupts absolutely") was an insight that emerged only from the end of the nineteenth century - as Tom Shippey notes in his analysis of the subject in JRR Tolkien: author of the century. 

In ancient and medieval times, power was not regarded as corrupting, but instead was thought to reveal the nature of its wielder. Power did not of itself corrupt a good Man. 

Yet by the middle 20th century the idea that power of itself actually makes all people worse (even when they started out good) was a truism - evidenced all around us, and around the world.  

My understanding of this phenomenon of corrupting power; would include that it was related to the emerged of the characteristic modern consciousness; a consciousness that is alienated - cut-off from God, the world of spirits and the group-mind of Men. 

Modern Men are existentially detached from The World in ways that were not possible in the remote past. 

In ancient times, a power-wielder was innately embedded in a social and spiritual world, such that to a significant degree he could not help but express the values and will of this broader world and its perspective. In other words; ancient Man was not a detached being, therefore responsibility for his power was always somewhat dispersed, and power was (spontaneously, unconsciously) wielded in a "groupish" way.  

(Exceptions are usually due to pathology, to some form of insanity.) 

Only in more modern times, and gradually, has power been able to interact untrammelled with the self-centred and selfish nature of a power-wielder. The corruption of power operates as a kind of feedback loop, within the alienated self. 

A further development has been the way in which power became embedded in bureaucracy, in The System - so that it is seldom very clear to what extent a leader actually has power. 

People typically are only given power when they are regarded as being the kind of person who will "do what they are told"; and those who do not obey, are rapidly got-rid-of So that many apparently powerful people feel themselves to be, and indeed seem to be, almost helpless in the face of constraints of a systemic nature. 

If, as many people say, the US President is "the most powerful person in the world"; then the world has recently seen a situation in which the US President was known and acknowledged to be mentally incapable of wielding power; and yet things carried on much the same. 

This suggests that when an individual is said by official sources to be wielding power and making decisions; then it is probable that this is untrue: it is an expedient illusion propagated to the public; perhaps in order to conceal who, or what, it is that is really making the decisions and deciding the strategy. 

This may be done for various reasons, including evasion of responsibility, or making effective resistance to power more difficult. 

But another reason for pretending some person has power, is that an image of the powerful individual tends to induce a worship of power in many people. 

George Orwell was very sensitive, perhaps over sensitive, to this. Writing in the 1930s and 40s - he saw this worship of power as a common attribute of the intelligentsia - of academics, functionaries, authors, artists, commentaries, journalists etc. 

Orwell's usual target was the radical left, including its literary lions such as GB Shaw or WH Auden. Such might, for example, delight in imagining details of the retribution to be wrought "when the revolution comes". Including the supposition of an attitude of calm, unyielding, masterful objectivity with which "necessary measures" are inflicted. 

But he saw analogous worship among figures of the right, including (for instance) Nietzsche, political theorist James Burnham, and the Roman Catholic converts such as Hilaire Belloc - who Orwell believed admired their Church mainly because of its potential or actual power. 

Among intellectuals, power worship is evident in the brutal relish (even sadism) with which such persons describe, or fantasize about, the forcible exercise of power - the overmastering imposition of will. 

There is, indeed, an almost-sexual gratification evident in this kind of vicarious triumphalism - a quality of self-stimulation in the writing, which (when noticed) becomes often embarrassing, and disgusting. 

The power worship that Orwell described almost a century ago is, of course, still endemic among intellectuals across the board of political and religious affiliation; and in much greater volume due to the expansion of the mass and social media. 

Power worshipping fantasy is easy to find, and hard to avoid among intellectuals; apparently because it soon becomes habit-forming, addictive, seemingly a compulsion; and few are immune to it. 

Although there is plenty of the naked and raw power worship of the "crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women" type; this impulse may be somewhat concealed by euphemism and pseudo-therapeutic affectation. As when the cruel exercise of power is enjoyed, but self-excused by the pretence it is done "for their own good", or "the greater good". 

Power is an unavoidable reality of this world; as Tolkien recognized. We cannot opt-out of the subject.  

As usual with sins, the sin of power worship occurs at the level of motivation - and I mean real motivation, not manufactured rationalizations. 

We must judge motivations; yet motivations must be inferred - they cannot be proven from "evidence, or by "logic". 

The dominance of power worship in oneself, or another person, is therefore a matter that each must discern and judge for himself, as honestly as he is capable of doing. 

And few of us are spontaneously true witnesses to our own motivations - it takes an effort. 

"Will power" characterized the spirituality of the religious elite during the era of Medieval consciousness

Religions, as we know them, emerged in the era of Medieval consciousness  - which was a millennia-long transition between the immersive passive un-consciousness of Original Participation and the current alienated Modern consciousness. 

There were (perhaps) two main forms of religion - one for the masses, the other for elite religious specialists. 

The Medieval mass consciousness was based on obedience to the religious institutions; and spiritual participation was made possible by intermediary phenomena; such as symbol, ritual, scripture, song - or social dynamics. 

The Medieval elite consciousness was based upon control of the whole person by "will power"; that is by human will aligned with divine will. 

The basic idea of Medieval era elite consciousness; was that a human being might discover the divine will; and then organized his life around the process of getting his own will into accord with the divine - and the totality of his behaviour into accord with his own divine-aligned will. 

So, the religious life was about prolonged discipline and training (e.g. varieties of initiation); aiming towards conscious goals. 

If successfully, the will was directed at the divine, and mastered all aspects of behaviour; to produce a transformed person (the higher type being described in various terms - holy, enlightened, an adept etc).  

Since the religious elites led the masses - and the obedience of the masses was directed at the religious elites - it was vital that there was sufficient alignment between elite and divine will. 

Usually - in most places, most of the time - there was not sufficient human-divine alignment. 

But sometimes and in some places there was; so it remained a valid ideal; especially in a world where individual consciousness was not much developed in most people. 

This idea of subordinating the whole of life to an elite will (purportedly aligned with the divine will) was "a good thing" insofar as the human will really was aligned with the divine will. 

And also insofar as the Medieval mode of consciousness infused this process of deployment of human will with "the spirit"... 

Because otherwise the whole thing was merely legalism - with all the ambiguities and imprecision intrinsic to the interpretation of language

It is this second aspect of the spirit infusing the human will, that has changed so much in the modern era - such that now the religious elites seldom even claim seriously to to be highly-aligned with divine will. 

Indeed, elite religious authority is usually based upon the same modes as the secular - that is to say institutional legitimacy, laws, rules, guidance understood as normal language (and in practice interpreted in the secular ways that such language is interpreted - e.g. legalistically, by historical and linguistic analysis, quasi-scientifically etc).  

What the modern era is left-with; is therefore the forms of Medieval consciousness, but minus the spontaneous spiritual infusion that used to accompany these forms. 

This, I think, is a reason why the Medieval forms are so badly-disenchanted; and exhibit such a dry, monochrome, dull, "school dinners" atmosphere...

Lacking spiritual infusion, their motivate only feebly, sometimes imperceptibly feebly; and consequently the elite religious specialists become assimilated into mainstream elite social mores: which are currently those of bureaucratic totalitarianism; hence evil; hence anti-Christian. 

(This can explain why the church leaders are the primary conduit for this-worldly and socio-politically-expedient corruption in the major Christian churches.)

And this, in turn, is why so many of the religious elite have turned away from them to immerse in the psychological gratifications - e.g. political spectacle-excitement, media entertainment, self-gratifying pseudo-moralism, therapies and palliatives - of mainstream secular culture. 

"Successful" churches are nowadays enterprises; providing meeting places and organizing holidays, staging events, serving as cafes and theatres, hosting social and health services - and so forth. 

This, then, is our situation. The aim, I presume; if our Christian life is to be strongly-enough motivated to transcend the pervasive pressure of secular society - is for each of us is to seek "enchantment" - i.e. infusion by divine spirit. 

...That same spiritual infusion that Mankind enjoyed in the past - but accepting that this is not possible either by passive immersion or by mediating phenomena. In sum: We need to seek the spirit actively and consciously - or else it will not happen. 

And we need to seek to integrate our-selves not by will power - which is now alienated from the divine. Nor by integration with the unconscious - from which we are detached, and which is anyway not Christian. 

But instead by seeking re-connection with our own partially-divine, eternal, original selves that are currently cut-off and alienated -- both by modern culture; and cut-off also by the forms of Medieval religion without the spirit. 

Because it is our eternal self that is in direct contact with the divine; and which therefore knows when it is aligned with God - and when it is (usually) more or less in a state of disharmony with creation - i.e. sin.  

For us; will power, and the disciplined seeking of conscious goals that characterized elite religious life in the Medieval era of consciousness; needs to be secondary to seeking divine-motivation, and divine-guidance and correction, by this inner-directed seeking consciously to establish direct-contact with our eternal selves.  

This is something new and unprecedented; and therefore difficult - but not so difficult as it may seem. The first step is to recognize what is wanted; then to recognize when it happens...

And the third step is not to expect too much! 

What is needed is sufficient Christian motivation to be able to navigate a Christian life in a hostile world - the ability to discern and the commitment to choose the divine and reject the demonic. 

We do not need, and shall not achieve, permanent and pervasive personal transformation for-the-better! 

We will neither become holy nor enlightened persons (unless we already are these things). 

But what is attainable; is a steady and robust desire to follow Jesus to resurrected eternal life in Heaven.  

The drama of your life is trying to tell you something

The basic and original situation in created reality was (and is) one of harmony and power - it is our destiny (the gift of God - if we choose to accept it) to become participants in this harmony and power.

Against this; false, superficial 'personality' and its 'will power' strive to attain worldly, selfish, short-termist and materialistic goals...

These cherished worldly goals that we consciously strive-for (status, fame, wealth, influence, sex, indolence, pleasures, distractions...) are continually being-sabotaged-by the divine tendency in multiple ways that we perceive as 'bad luck', illness, failure, misery, boredom, demotivation...

Our worldly-goals - even if we do get them - always turn-out to be infrequent, transient, unsatisfying.

Nobody pursuing worldly goals ever gets his hands on real power - primary power - the power of creation: including never getting the power to attain genuine, lasting, pervasive gratification, fulfilment, meaning and purpose - of being at home in reality.

(Satan, an unincarnated spirit, has no such power; but is a tormented soul who can only work by corruption of existent creation - to destroy that which is, and is good.)

This is a safety feature - since we (as we are) would certainly abuse real, primary power if we could grasp it - we would destroy the  divine harmony between free agent beings; so creation was set-up so that is impossible - power comes only with Love: the two are attained together or not at all.

In sum: we cannot access primary power except by working from our true (divine) selves with motivation of Love; but if,or when, or insofar as this pre-requisite is attained then we may indeed work with the primary power of ultimate creation.

Real power exists for us in proportion to how aligned we are with divine purpose and its harmony. The true nature of our Will is not in 'forcing' reality to conform to our worldly appetites but in knowing and (voluntarily, with Love) aligning ourselves with the divine harmony and hopes.

This is what lies behind such phenomena as synchronicity (the alignment of multiple complex strands of reality, over time, to create positive situations for our potential personal benefit); also by what seems like luck, patterns, cycles, and stories as they apply to our lives.

This mortal life is for our education - we are to be educated by experiences; and the main thing we are intended to be educated in is the qualities of Life - which we know imperfectly as both positive and negative phenomena such as love, fear, hope, despair, affection, hatred and so forth - all these must, eventually, be understood; and to understand them requires experience. 

But how do we understand?

There is an inner and outer communication. The main inner communication is by imagination. We can consider imagination to be a full, inner grasping of reality: to know something we must imaginatively-inhabit it. Imagination (properly understaood) is indeed the primary and ultimate experience of knowing.

But sometimes a purely inner stimulus does not suffice, and we need to have the lesson impressed upon us by the physical outer world; sometimes we need to know something as an objective experience (perceptible to others as well as to ourselves). These lessons from the physical world are slow to emerge, and simple in their nature - but these 'harsh lessons' (as they feel to us) may be compelling in a way that, in practice, is necessary to improve the possibility of our learning from them.

(Of course we can always resist learning! No matter how many lessons, or how harsh the lessons may be - people can, and do, choose not to learn them. Nonetheless, God does not give-up on us; but gives us chance after chance to learn what is vital to our eternal progression - so long as we allow him.)

Thus, primary divine power works to reproduce in our surroundings a real life picture of our situation - of the situation of our mortal life on earth. The drama of each of our lives is a way we can perceive and learn what we most need. 

Our real-true-divine Will is therefore always spontaneously working-away - often against our superficial, selfish, worldly will - to enact in our environment the drama of our own being, and its requirements; typically in a slow, simple, heavy-handed and linear fashion. 

On the other hand, we can in principle learn these necessary lessons much more rapidly, simultaneously, and less painfully if we can learn-to-learn-from imagination - in the spiritual realm.

(The above is a paraphrase of an argument in the chapter The Will in William Arkle's book A Geography of Consciousness, 1974 - esepcially page 212.)

 

Working to develop our gifts and powers may do harm, tends to do harm, in the absence of good motivations

*
This is William Arkle writing in the persona of God, who is writing a letter to us to explain himself:

You are in a situation where your own private world which you live in will be what you make it. If you allow it to be dominated by the wishes of your physical nature, you will feel alien to it even if you are carried along by it. If you feel like a stranger to yourself it will make you unhappy, and you will doubt your own true identity, and you will lose faith in all the higher values in life.

 You may disguise the situation to the people around you but inside yourself you will feel lost and helpless and degraded.

My work is to increase your sense of reality to yourself, and make it feel of great value to you, without it spilling over into pride and selfishness. The balance between the over-subdued nature and the over-inflated nature is not easy to keep, and is a necessary balance to be achieved before other values can be built in.

The balance between the over-subdued nature and the over-inflated nature is not easy to keep, and is a necessary balance to be achieved before other values can be built in. The foundation lessons to be taught are thus integrity and responsibility, combined with affection and sympathy, but added to an ability to feel a balanced importance in the scheme of things. 

It is not an easy thing to believe you have great value and ability, and at the same time maintain a temperament which does not try to show off and impress people, and perhaps even dominate them. 

Every new gift I give you with trepidation because I know you are more likely to misuse it before you learn to handle it correctly, so, to me, a gift can appear like an ordeal and a temptation, and I am worried when I see some of you working to achieve special powers which may well be your downfall so far as the graceful balance of your temperament is concerned. 

On the other hand, I am glad when I see you developing gifts as a result of loving aspiration and wise discrimination, for such gifts I know will surely benefit you and all those associated with you.

http://www.billarkle.co.uk/prose/letterfromafather3.html

*

In our culture there is a tendency to assume that gifts and abilities ought to be developed - people should make the most of themselves -- in general, the idea is that power and capability (in persons or in our groups or nations) are 'a good thing'.

But from a divine perspective there is a big problem - and it is a problem that we can see with many geniuses - especially the most recent twentieth century geniuses.

*

Gifts are potential abilities to affect the world - Gifts are Power.

Is power a good thing? It depends on what you do with it: But we would agree that giving power to an evil person, or even just an irresponsible person, is a bad thing.

Bad, that is, from a divine perspective, even when the specific person with power got what they wanted. And bad from the perspective of that individual's 'graceful balance of temperament'.

(Think of Gollum and the Ring of Power - Gollum 'wanted' to possess the Ring, but it was bad for Gollum's balance of temperament, and bad from a divine perceptive that he should have it.)

*

I think this used to be much better understood than it is nowadays: That before someone has power, they need already to have learned the foundation lessons of integrity, responsibility, affection, sympathy, balance...

It applies to individuals, and it applies to nations and cultures. Yet not only are the foundation lessons neglected, they are not even attempted!

The situation is perilous enough when dealing with natural (divine) gifts - but the worst possible situation is when people, nations, cultures are systematically and successfully working to achieve special powers without any recognition that powers are intrinsically likely to be corrupted. And this applies to powers of all types - including medicine and healing, including art and literature, including housing and clothing... But obviously so in terms of science, technology, and bureaucratic organization.

Insofar as we fail to perceive the probability of hazards, we have chosen to misuse power - while blinding ourselves even to the possibility of misuse.

*

The situation is really very simple: it is a matter of motivation. From the divine perspective; gifts and powers in the hands of the badly motivated are a horror - and only in the hands of the well-motivated are they a good.

Since everybody claims to be well-motivated (even Gollum) - but nearly everybody is this requires discernment on the basis that people tend to be self-deluded and dishonest about their bad motivations - and what people say about their motivations needs to be compared with their actions; and their ability to maintain good motivations in the face of temptations needs to be evaluated: power does intrinsically tend to corrupt, and corrupted power is far worse than no power.

The divine perspective would therefore seem to be: Better no geniuses than corrupted genius; Better no breakthrough innovations than those which would be used with bad motivations; Better cultural decline and extinction than an unstoppable evil empire.

*

In other words, from where we are, and as we are, and what we want to be - gifts and powers, energy and determination will all do more harm than good - much more harm than good; and we cannot use the excuse that we have evil enemies and it is 'us or them' because - from a divine perspective, we may both be bad, but we may be worse because of our superior gifts and powers...

*

Therefore - the situation is that on the one hand, we in The West we have cultural decline (decline in power, achievement, capability, efficiency, courage and will) because we have rejected Christianity - because we no longer place religion above all other considerations; and on the other hand we should not even allow ourselves to hope that Western cultural decline is reversed until after there has been a Christian revival, a Great Awakening.

And if religious revival does not happen (as seems all-too-probable) then it is better that we do not reverse Western cultural decline.

Because - motivated as we now are - with our policy, propaganda and multiple laws and regulations systematically enforcing explicit moral inversion (a situation of depravity previously unknown in human history) - we are already and are still much-too-powerful

So enhancement of Western power, achievement, capability, efficiency, courage and will in the absence of prior religious revival would (from a divine perspective) likely be regarded as one of the worst possible outcomes.

*

Seeking power entails opening ourselves to manipulation by power

It is seldom explained explicitly; but experience of life teaches that those who seek power are thereby made more vulnerable to power. 

In general terms: those who seek to manipulate the world thereby open-themselves to manipulation by the world. And this applies whether the power sought is physical-material, or spiritual.

There are many routes and reasons by which this happens; but the general principle seems solid. It is a Faustian-type bargain; as if reality tells us:

"Yes, you can impose your will on the world, to some extent; but the price you must pay for this privilege is that your will itself becomes subject to elements within the world". 

Why this should be a kind-of law is perhaps abstractly explicable in terms of engagement: insofar as we engage with the world (for whatever purpose), we are Just Are engaged-with the world! And influence flows both ways, whether we like it or not. 

Another way to consider this interaction is relevant to the role of churches and religious structures such as priestly hierarchy, ritual, symbolism and sacred scriptures. These structures can generically be considered as intermediary between human and divine: a set of intermediary media. And these media are charged with power by the religious believer, who then seeks to lead the religious life by their intermediary power. 

Thus a religious symbol is effective in achieving its life-changing goals, only when and if it is made powerful; and when we yield to that symbol the ability to affect us. In a Good religion, that symbolic power will (on the whole) be wielded upon-us for our net-Good, and that is why we open ourselves to symbolism. 

But when the religious symbolism is used with evil intent, it has power over those who have (to some significant extent) previously yielded to it that personal power, and implicitly opened-themselves to the power of that symbol. 

(This is the principle behind a Black Mass, or other forms of subversion using distorted but traditional Christian symbols and rituals.) 

 

If we consider this issue very generally; it also applies to secular and physical power. At a material level; anyone (say a monarch or dictator) who intends to impose his will on society, must do so via "human technologies" such as powerful armies, police, spies, and bureaucrats; and by doing so, he becomes the subject of manipulation (individually, and in combination) by these same powerful institutions. 

This is a Big Problem in a world and society of increasingly-evil corruption, where all intermediate institutions, media, symbols, rituals... that whole world of abstractions and things by which we have traditionally related to Reality - gets subverted, destroyed and/or inverted. 

In a corrupting world; those entities by-which we sought power to do Good, to our-selves and to the world, are turned-against us - and with a power that we have previously given to them. And that power strikes home exactly because we have previously (but originally for Good intentions) made ourselves open-to it. 

So; in battling the evil manipulations of The World; we are also turning-against our-selves: turning-against our own former convictions and intentions. 

We are (inevitably) dis-engaging-from The World; and eschewing power - even the attempt to impose power on the world.  

It strikes me that this perspective may help us to understand why so many people are incrementally apostatizing from Christianity - and also why they seldom realize they are doing-so.  

Magic and will-power across the ages (or, How to do White Magic - as of 2021)

I feel it is necessary to clarify the status of magic from a Christian perspective; and specifically from a Romantic Christian perspective that sees human consciousness as having developed (evolved) through human history. 

Necessary, because if we regard magic as (something like) the attainment of human will by supernatural (non-material) means; then magic is real, important; and may be white or black. 

I define white magic as in accordance with God's will; that is, in harmony with ongoing divine creation. 

White magic is done by loving alignment of an individual's will with Good...

Whereas black magic is the attempt to impose one's detached and personal will upon other persons, other beings, or the world generally. 

Black magic can only be done with demonic assistance, and therefore (overall, eventually, inevitably) actually is done in pursuit of evil.

Black magic has not changed very much through history - it has always been possible, and apparently always follows the same 'Faustian' trajectory. Some person or group wants to impose their personal, selfish will upon the world; seeks to do so by supernatural means; and actually does so by means of employing demonic power. 

The black magician believes he can control the demons (despite that they are supernaturally magical, and he is not); by means of some technology or bargain. But the whole thing is actually a demonic snare by which the demon comes to control the black magician - who is therefore either a dupe, servant or slave to the Satanic agenda. 

And the end result is the same - the unrepentant black magician is damned; and apparently suffers more than the usual torments of the damned, for his presumption.

A somewhat conjectural history of white magic (which, nonetheless, I believe is broadly correct) has it that in our pre-historical hunter-gatherer past, God-aligned white magic was simply part of life.  

The individual human's will was neither detached from the human group-will and the group-destiny; and was immersed-in the divine will and having a mostly un-conscious direct knowledge of divine destiny.

Apparently, some individuals had a greater aptitude (what we now term the 'shamans') but the essential activity was universal: everybody did their bit, and contributed magically in some way - spontaneously and mostly unconsciously. 

As human consciousness developed, and humans became more free-agents, as in the Ancient Egyptian empire; this spontaneous knowledge and alignment with the divine was also lost. 

For the Pharaoh and priest-magicians of Egypt, magic required elaborately-selected and -initiated priests; who employed complex systems of ritual, symbol and many other 'technologies' (such as divination) to align their wills with the divine. 

These were overwhelmingly white magicians, who used the supernatural to benefit the society rather than themselves; and who (under the semi-divine Pharaohs) guided the society in harmony with God's destiny - and were able to accomplish (by magic instead of technology) advanced material achievements that still astonish the world. 

The development of consciousness continued, and as well as becoming more free, more of an agent; the individual Man's will became more separate from the divine will and the community will alike. 

As a result, white magic became more difficult, less powerful - and Men (detached from the divine) became more prone to black magic. 

The (all-but) end of the era of strong white magic was at the start of the modern era (Renaissance - 15th and 16th centuries in Europe); with the last of the white magicians (e.g. Paracelsus, John Dee and the Alchemists most of whom had ambivalent reputations or kept their activities secret (like Newton, Hooke and Ashmole). 

This darkening of magic was probably due to contamination of motive by the magician's more-detached personal will. This was the era when the Faust legend of black magic became archetypal; and the negative views of witches (motivated by spite, desiring to harm individuals and society) also became more dominant. 

In the fully modern era, white magic became almost impossible. 

Attempts to revive it in the 19th century, and increasingly through the twentieth century, were only partially successful (skeptical outsiders saw nothing). 

The practitioners found that the power and scope of magic was dwindling almost to nothing; and eventually was almost wholly limited to the psychological realm of the practitioners themselves. 

For example; in the last 19th and early 20th century magical rituals could change the consciousness of participants and sometimes produce quasi-objective 'manifestations'  - but by the late twentieth century this power was greatly reduced, and ritual magic work was all-but merged with imagination (art, narrative, music and drama) as technologies of consciousness. 

So, where from here? The way ahead to a resurgence of white magic was explained (albeit not implemented) by Rudolf Steiner and his 'disciple' Owen Barfield. 

Group magical work is rare, weak - and at present illegal (because groups are illegal for the masses --- although not among the Establishment, who continue to perform their black magic in groups); so nearly all modern white magic must be individual. 

Now that human consciousness is spontaneously and naturally detached from the divine; white magic requires conscious choice. 

White magic now does not attempt to influence by will the appearances of the world, or the behaviours of persons. Furthermore, it happens in thinking rather than (as in the past) by perception. 

This, because the white magician is no longer immersed in the divine - he must meet the divine halfway. 

Indeed, white magic needs to become detached from the individual's will; instead the individual's will needs to be aligned to God by conscious, chosen effort. 

In sum: White magic now should not try to operate at the level of changing God's primary creation - we should not be looking to change our sensorial-perceptions of reality. 

We should not be motivated by a desire to impose our will; nor to attain any particular end-result in this world (such as a change in human behaviour, or society, or weather). 

Instead, white magicians need to attain (and this will, of course, be temporary and usually very partial) alignment of their own conscious thinking with God's ongoing creation.

And if this is attained then white magic will 'Just Happen'.

What we will then be doing is contributing to God's creation; and contributing from our own unique divine Real Self. 

We will therefore be contributing some-thing (some Good) that nobody else could have contributed. 

We will be adding to the total sum of eternal actuality; adding some-little-thing from our own small corner of that actuality. 

Is this worth the effort? It may be. Because sometimes even the littlest contributions turn-out to be vital to the Big Picture.

Political correctness is anarchistic, not socialistic

*

The difference between socialism and anarchism is that for socialists economics is primary while for anarchists power is primary.

By this definition, political correctness is essentially an anarchist ideology, while communism (from which it evolved) was essentially a socialistic ideology.

*

The primary aim of communism is/ was to redistribute money (wealth, income, whatever).

The primary aim of anarchism, and of PC, is to redistribute power.

Political correctness redistributes power in various ways - some of these are indeed economic, since wealth leads to power: economic power is a form of power.

So PC allocates salaries, subsidies, taxes, tax-exemptions, selectively enforces economic rules, and so on.

But PC also redistributes power in other forms: it allocates privileges (legal and administrative) and positions, assigns duties, generates images (positive and negative), regulates propaganda and advertising, gerrymanders voting (ie. shapes constituencies to benefit PC-favoured groups), regulates media depictions in terms of relative and absolute frequency and whether positive and negative. And so on.

*

In practice, PC (because it is an ideology of the ruling elite) in the first place takes power from the middling people and allocates it to bottom people - from the moderately-powerful to the least powerful; subtracts power from PC-disfavoured groups (whites, men, economically-productive people, the native-born, tax and rates-payers etc.) and adds power to favoured groups.

Political correctness perceives this process as being a just re-allocation from selfish, undeserving exploiters to miserable, vulnerable victims.

Since this process is a matter of raising-up the lowest using the money of the middle, it is a matter of being 'generous' using other-people's-money; and is therefore - at the first level of analysis - an extreme form of hypocrisy and moral grand-standing.

And, for the most part, that is precisely what PC is: the appropriation of moral approbation by  elite bureaucrats who coercively extract resources from their enemies and reward their supporters.

*

But at the highest level of politically correct aspiration and devoutness, the elite among the PC sincerely intend to take this process through to completion. They sincerely intend to destroy their own class, as well as the middle class.

Naturally, this intention is kept under wraps; not broadcast to the mass of PC careerists; but it is surely there.

The elite within PC intend to redistribute their own power.

*

In the short term the PC elite need to take all power to themselves, partly in order to begin the process of redistribution of power, but most importantly so that they can convert their personal power into impersonal power.

Those who sincerely want an egalitarian distribution of power cannot simply replace themselves with another class of redistributors, because humans are intrinsically selfish and corruptible.

This would soon lead to a recapitulation of power inequalities, as always happened under communism. The Marxist idea of replacing the bourgeoisie with the proletariat only replaced the personnel in charge of the state, only inverted the power structure - but it did not create an equal distribution of power.

The PC elite therefore intend to disempower themselves, intend to redistribute their power permanently.

This means not installing people or classes into power. Instead the PC elite intend to replace themselves with abstract systems of redistribution.

*

The PC elite intend to replace their own personal and inevitably selfish power with abstract power, in a nutshell to replace people with committees, to replace individual discretion with algorithmic regulations and votes, irreversibly to install redistributive procedural bureaucracy as the permanent form of ruling power.

*

Once procedural bureaucracy is irreversibly installed, thenceforth society will experience a continual redistribution and equalization of power imposed by an all-seeing, all-measuring, all-powerful system.

And the system will not depend on its personnel; indeed the ideal ruling system would be immune to influence by its administering personnel, unaffected by change in personnel, the system would use the personnel - not vice versa.

It would perhaps be something like rule by a computer - or maybe rule by 'The Borg' from Star Trek: the Next Generation: that is to say, rule by a group mind - an entity in which the individual is immersed, and which selfishness is therefore impossible.

From this perspective the ubiquity of voting (as the only method for generating authority) is merely a primitive step on the road to decision by the group mind.

*

So political correctness is the evolutionary child of anarchism, the product of a New Left focus on the distribution of power replacing the Old Left perception of economics as the primary social reality.

And - interestingly enough, ironically enough; PC is of course a totalitarian ideology which aspires to annihilate individual agency.

A totalitarian and anti-human bureaucracy was not-at-all what early anarchists were hoping-for.

Nonetheless, it is what they are getting...

So, anarchism has evolved from extreme libertarian individualism to the dissolution of the individual in the group mind...

*

Those whom the Gods would destroy, they first make mad.

*

By prolonged and intensive effort; we can enhance our powers, but we cannot make ourselves better people

St Paul realized that his being a brilliant orator, high-adept, and genius were ultimately irrelevant to salvation

We are much inclined to believe that people can (and should) improve themselves by prolonged and intensive effort. In short; that strong and sustained will, properly directed, leads to better people. 

Indeed, for most people, now and in the past; this is almost a definition of "religion" - redirecting our will, training and implementing our will.  

And when people are not getting better; the answer is therefore intensification of willed-effort across a longer span of time.

I personally underwent, in accordance with my will, two prolonged and intensive efforts at self-transformation in search of new abilities: first in medicine, secondly as a scientist. 

The years-long and immersive training as a doctor had many effects on me; and I developed many abilities. But there were costs. My personality was somewhat distorted and considerably hardened; and I became prone to be negatively-motivated by the group ethos, especially by a nagging sense of guilt - that lasted several years, even after I ceased to practise as a doctor. 

The years of training as a scientist also developed new aptitudes and habits, especially in the realms of thinking. I became not just able, but also almost compelled, to adopt explicit and few assumptions; stick-to and follow-through clear and transparent lines of reasoning from them; and to exclude all other factors that were not part of the "model". 

This was a deep change, and it made me a pretty good scientist; but was bad for me as a person, overall - at least until it was understood and contained. Because it was a deliberate but also compulsive form of self-blinding.  

In sum; the application of will in a prolonged and intensive training led, in both medicine and science, to functionality and power in a this-worldly sense; but were spiritual dead-ends that impaired me in significant ways as a person. 

I believe that exactly the same applies within the realms of spirituality and religion. 

I mean that when people pursue their religion by prolonged and intense training, by exercise of will (for example in the training and initiation of a priest or monk, or the leading of a rigorous, devout, or holy life) - the result can certainly be enhancements of of the mind in accordance with will; a transformation of personality; an increase of ability, of power...

But the outcome of any sustained and focused exercise of our conscious will, is also a degree of spiritually-negative distortion of our nature.

We may delude ourselves otherwise; but this becomes obvious if we can spiritually evaluate other people, and how observe the ways they are changed by prolonged and intensive effort in accordance with their conscious will-power. 

   

This was an insight of St Paul; who recognized that he himself had been impaired by the effects of his prolonged and intensive (and high-level) initiation into Priesthood. 

Paul realized - indeed he knew, from experience - that Men could not be improved in their spiritual quality by an exercise of will...

That no matter how much we wanted and strove to become better, and now matter how genuine was this desire and effort; we are unable to accomplish this.

For Paul; this was a great insight into the nature of reality, the nature of what Jesus needed to do to help us (help genuinely and qualitatively) - and also a revelation of what Jesus actually did: 

With Jesus there was not (ultimately false) promises of positive personal transformation and enhancement; achievable by following his new prescription of attitude and activities; and rewarded by salvation... 

What Jesus offered was not a new (and better!) sort of life and mind therapy - not even a spiritual therapy; but something altogether different. 

I think Paul saw vividly the limitations of human will and effort; probably because he had himself first accomplished so much by his own will and effort, but then recognized (in a flash) that all this was irrelevant to what Jesus had done for us. 

But this truth is a slippery insight: hard to keep a-hold-of (indeed, Paul often drifted from it), such are the advantages of the kind of worldly enhancements and satisfactions we may achieve from applying our will-power in a sustained and focused way.

In sum: Training and initiation may certainly be useful in this life and world; but such achievements do not and cannot make us better people, or better followers of Jesus - and, indeed, most often our transformation and enhanced aptitude will function as a snare, a distortion, and a distraction.

    

Political correctness and power-seeking egalitarians

*

Since political correctness is (more or less) egalitarian in its aim, it is superficially hard to explain why the PC is so power-seeking: why they seek to subordinate every human decision (public or private) to government regulation. Surely this is to favour one group (the PC elite) above all others?

The answer is simple - albeit unconvincing.

*

The aim is to take all power into the PC elite, who will use this power to make the world safe for PC - by using power to extirpate all trace of resistance to political correctness (all trace of racism, sexism and the various 'phobias') - and then to relinquish this power.

More exactly, to install systems that prevent all forms of prejudice - then when these systems are indestructibly installed - to walk away from power.

So that no individual human being or group of persons will have any more power than another human being or group of persons: all will be subject to the same algorithmic processes of social justice.

*

The unconvincing bit is that there will be nothing and nobody that makes the PC elite walk away from power. There is only the PC elite's trust in their own good intentions, and trust in their own ability to carry-out these good intentions.

Of course, the time to walk away from power will never come if there is any residual trace of non-PC resistance (real, or imagined)...

And since PC is social constructivist (believes neither in God/s nor in human nature) this means that to ensure they will indeed walk away from power, when the time comes, the PC elite must be sure first to brainwash themselves completely and irrevocably...

*

Antichrist phenomena - an Eastern Orthodox perspective from Metropolitan Agafangel

Who will be the Antichrist? - by Metropolitan Agafangel (25th January 2025)

The Antichrist will be accepted first by those who are waiting for him - under one form or another and for one reason or another. There are many such people who are waiting, but they all wait differently... 

The question is where, in what way, does the Antichrist appear before gaining power over the whole world? ...

For atheists, the Antichrist may be a leader capable of bringing order to the whole world. He can begin his activity as the president of any country or, even, a superpower (say, the United States), he can begin with any high position —at least, even with the Secretary General of the Communist Party of China (the general secretaries of the CPSU still dream of world domination, in the USSR, Stalin was an exemplary predecessor of the Antichrist, although he didn't succeed in taking over the whole world, he did get a "sixth of the earth"). 

Thus, the first period of the appearance of the Antichrist will be his coming to power in some significant and known field—political, social, or religious. Having ascended to one of the peaks of diverse earthly power and, according to legend, having participated in the construction of the Jerusalem temple, the second period of the Antichrist's activity will begin — this outstanding, talented, charming and intelligent man will begin to expand his power and unite in himself the key powers of authority, that is, to seize power over the entire world and in all areas... 

Ideally, the Antichrist will unite in himself the expectations of the coming of "someone great" for all peoples and religions. This is how Satan will be allowed to act...

The Antichrist will come when a type of the Soviet-communist system will be established throughout the earth — defined as democracy, but in reality — dictatorship and total slavery — physical, electronic and spiritual. 

This new order will be led by the finally united secret world government, referred to as the Scriptures as the "gates of hell," which, led by the Antichrist, will fight the Church of Christ (Mt. 16.18) — that is, the last remnant of genuine faith on earth. 

I first learned something of the idea of the Antichrist from Fr Seraphim Rose, at the time when I was strongly engaged with Eastern Orthodoxy. 

While I have moved a long way from the assumptions of Orthodoxy, and I nowadays regard the Antichrist actuality in a "soft and flexible" sense rather than literally; I continue, nonetheless, to be impressed by many of the distinctive insights and emphases - and there seems to be a powerful general truth about their idea of the Antichrist, which has very general applicability. 

One take-home message of this line of thinking for me; is the relative unimportance and potentially lethally-misleading quality of a spiritual evaluation based upon actions; and therefore, by contrast, a renewed belief in the vital importance of basing ultimate and crucial evaluations upon my discernment of underlying intentions, motivations, and spiritual affiliations. 

(Not, therefore, evaluations taken second-hand from external authorities - unless these pass an honest test of intuitive examination.) 

Given Man's innate craving for this-worldly flourishing; we are all-too-eager to seek and find a this-worldly saviour (whether personal, institutional, ideological/ theological - or whatever); and we are all-too-willing selectively to grasp at the straws of particular actions - and not-notice, ignore, or suppress our awareness of those dissonant qualities that reveal an anti-Christian underlying spiritual commitment.

In some Orthodox theology; it has been prophesied, and I fully expect this to be accurate, that it shall in practice prove impossible to convince most people that the various Antichrists (whether persons, institutions, strategies, policies or whatever) - that somewhat-closely simulate some Christian attributes; and actually a guise of demons enlisted in the Satanic anti-Christian project. 

And if all these Antichrists were (more or less) rolled-up into the single figure of a global Antichrist (which I personally do not anticipate will happen) - i.e. Satan wrapped in a cloak stolen from Christ - then the same will apply: the Antichrist would be accepted as some kind of representative of Christ, if not a returned Jesus himself. 

Although the Kingdom of Christ is Not Of This World, but lies beyond death - all too many people (including too many Christians) so much crave an earthly saviour, that they are most of the way to being fooled even before the Antichrists begin their deceptive works.      

 

You, personally, are going to be tested - and soon. Be Ready

In CS Lewis's famous phrase from That Hideous Strength, which has become something of a 'meme' on this blog: Things are coming to a point.

https://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=coming+to+a+point

This means that more and more people are being tested, being asked to make a choice; and if this has not yet happened to you, then it is more likely to happen this year than ever before:

http://meetingthemasters.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/the-test-of-today.html

Almost certainly you are already deeply morally compromised, probably by dishonesty (by having engaged in deniable but deliberate misleading) - we all are compromised - but when things come to a point, you personally will be asked actively and explicitly to give support to something that you know to be wrong.

This (whatever it is) is not trivial (nothing is trivial). If you can get into trouble for not doing it, then it is important.

(You don't get to choose the battle ground. Your choice is simply whether to surrender, as usual, to go-with-the-flow. Or not-to-surrender. To refuse. That is as much as most people are given to 'fight' over. Nothing glamourous - simply saying 'no, I won't'. It is enough - it is everything.)

This moment, this choice and decision, will change you one way or the other - that is the test; that indeed, is exactly why you have been put into the position.

Probably, this is a decision which you will face existentially isolated, and in making the right choice and doing the right thing - if that is what you do - there will probably be little or no visible support from those with power and influence (that is the nature of our modern condition in The West).

The issues, your motives, and your position will be lyingly misrepresented to other people; your character will be slandered; and the lies and slanders will (on the whole) be believed and repeated.

Be Ready.

Think through this situation in advance. Inhabit it imaginatively.

I am not advising you how to 'fight' in the public arena; because that can't be done - also, you are almost certain to make errors. You will also be likely to say or do things that actually help your enemies and worsen your situation (whatever they most want you to do, advise you to do, will almost certainly be bad for your situation - and it may not be possible to find out what would be the best tactical alternative).

Repentance

One thing I would emphasise - which I think has been neglected - is therefore the infinite power of repentance.

1. You are already morally compromised by your decisions and behaviours of the past - consistency suggests that you 'might as well' continue as you have done... But repentance wipes the slate clean and gives you a fresh start.

2. You will make mistakes in understanding your situation - you know something is wrong, something is going on, that you have reached a point of decision; but it is likely that you misunderstand things due to ignorance and inability - your first, second. third etc attempt to formulate your situation is wrong or badly emphasised... It doesn't matter! - in an ultimate sense: simply repent your errors as they emerge, and try again to the best of your ability. 

3. Just as you will misunderstand your situation, so you will make mistakes in action: you will say the wrong thing, do the wrong things, trust the wrong people and doubt those who are on your side. You will be foolish - people will mock you, you will feel ashamed... So be it. Repent your mistakes and foolishness, and bounce back.

I repeat: Christian repentance is a weapon of infinite power that cannot be defeated. No matter if it feels like You against The World - with repentance you cannot lose.

You Cannot Lose.


(Note - If you don't already know what is repentance; then you need to find-out. If you are not already a Christian; then you should make it a priority as of this very moment. It is, after all, the work of an instant to become a Christian; and the status is open to everybody, without exception, at any time or place. Nobody and nothing can stop you. And if you don't understand how that is possible - then you need to find-out.)

Motivation is vital - but what is it?

I've been harping-on about the vital importance of "motivation" since I began daily blogging in 2010 - and repeating that this, our age is characterized by extremely (historically) low levels of motivation. So it's maybe about time I clarified what I mean, and what I do not mean, by "motivation"...

Motivation needs to be distinguished from power; indeed motivation is revealed when power is lacking; when there are stresses and adversity working against it; and over the course of time. when weak motivations inevitably fail.

Motivation is long-term; and continues despite lack of external encouragement or reward - and in the face of active dis-couragement and negative sanctions. 

Be clear that high motivation is not sufficient to good: it depends on what that motivation aims at, and someone might be highly-motivated towards evil. 

However, motivation is necessary to good; because without motivation, people merely conform to external incentives and pressures. 

Therefore motivation underpins long-term courage; and motivation is an aspect of "freedom" or "agency". 

Motivation is inner, ultimately; therefore needs to be distinguished from what people actually do in their lives; because actions are subject to external control. In an extreme case, a slave's actions may be almost wholly controlled (on pain of death), yet that slave can be motivated to good. 

Or, more commonly, a person may be prevented from "actioning" his motivations by many adversities such as inborn deficits or damage, sickness or accident, or a character that is weak-willed. 

Because will-power is not motivation. indeed, most people with exceptionally high levels of will-power - I have known several - use this to pursue socially-valued behaviours. Their will is thus subject to somebody-else's externally-supplied motivation. Such a life-strategy does not need real (i.e. inner) motivation. 

But a highly motivated person might we thwarted by his own deficiencies from achieving anything significant, or observable - and these deficiencies may include lack of "will power".  Such an individual's "aim is true", but his ability to action that aim is feeble.  

 

A highly-motivated person is one who sticks to his inner goal, his destiny (as he has chosen it); even when he is unfitted, or for any reason unable, to achieve that destiny - even when he acknowledges that he has failed.

High motivation is therefore indomitable: it cannot be beaten in this mortal life. 

And when motivation is aligned with God and divine creation, when motivation seeks salvation by following Jesus Christ - then we get the needful Christian combination. 

We get someone who will achieve resurrection to eternal life whatever happens or does not happen in the external world. 

And that is the vital importance of motivation. 

**

Note: The next question is perhaps: How then do I become a highly-motivated, indomitable Christian? That is a task in its own right; and one that involves meeting one's own innate and most-intuitive aims with a long-term and solid apprehension of the Goodness and love of God the Creator. Second-hand information and advice do not suffice. External influences and pressures are more likely to be deceptive than helpful. It is a personal quest. But one who recognizes the absolute need for inner Christian motivation, is guaranteed timely success - exactly because God is the Creator, is good, and loves us each individually.