Peace and Safety

I’ve written before that Gnosticism is a parasite, and exists to feed on and subvert either the Christian or the Pagan worldview. For a deep analysis of this phenomenon, here’s a powerful post over at Thermidor: The Spirit of a Spiritless Situation: On the Right’s Failure to Organize

This piece reminds me of Flannery O’Connor. In her fiction there’s a recurring character type, the mad prophet, and at least part of what she was driving at with these characters is that to be a Christian and live without contradictions or compromise, you will by necessity be considered insane by the world at large. It would be absolutely unavoidable, and the post at Thermidor says something similar in examining the failures of conservatives (and the Right in general). We fail because we refuse to live out our beliefs without compromise or contradictions, because if we did so our world would radically change. Not many have to courage to face this, especially if the change is quick and final.

The condemnation of the conservative who really just wants to be let alone, to live in peace, hits very close to home. It’s me as much as anyone, and saying it’s just my nature doesn’t make it right. Scripture never says I get to live in peace. Just the opposite, in fact. How drastically would my life change if I truly embraced just that truth? What would I lose? What am I willing to lose? What would I gain?

Peace and Safety  is a powerful tranquilizer.



See Your Local Pharmacist

The Anti-Gnostic is apparently semi-retired, but every once in a while he comes back and shows he can still punch with the best of ’em. This posted today, and it’s a fine shiv of modren Gnosticism.

Gnosticism, the lying, parasitical old heretic, is clever enough to change his clothes to suit the times. Fashions change, after all. Classic Gnosticism told us that spiritual knowledge is all we really needed, and we believed him for a while, but now the spiritual has been banned from the public square and the political has taken it’s place, so he tells us that political knowledge is all we really need. Political knowledge = ideas, abstract notions of what makes the perfect governmental system. Remember, it’s the SYSTEM that’s broken, not you. It’s always been the SYSTEM. Fix the SYSTEM, and you’ll be free.

It’s easy to see the Left falling for this, but it’s also easy to forget that the Right has fallen for it too. Conservatives, with their Proposition Nation and their Civic Nationalism. Hey, this country was founded on ideas, and these ideas are what unites us and makes us Americans. Race and place have nothing to do with it. See, I’m not racist!

You’re infected. But there’s a cure, and it comes in a little red pill. See your local pharmacist.

Back to AG, his summation is too good not to reprint:

In sum, if you want to defend your principles you have to defend the people who thought them up and lived them in their geographic redoubt because after all, if you change the people, you change the place. If you want a conservative country, you have to grow conservatives: encourage marriage and childbearing over careers and libertine behavior, reduce the cost of housing, eliminate credentialism. Starve the universities, fire the bureaucrats, seal the border, give Christianity primacy in the public square and dare anybody to do anything about it. This is thankless and perhaps hopeless and even dangerous work for conservative politicians and public figures at this point.

Don’t Go Back to Egypt

The Alt-Right needs to find ways to appeal to Mainstream Conservatives, to Moderate Republicans. 

We hear this a lot, and not just from old geezers. We hear it from younger conservatives, too. We hear it from Christians. What it reveals is sympathy for the Alt-Right, but also fear of its more dangerous elements. It also expresses the idea that broad consensus is power, and necessary. This idea is logical, rational, and reasonable. And wrong. Very, very wrong.

We need to go the opposite direction, and while we shouldn’t act like idiots, this opposite direction we’re heading in is the right course. The way of consensus is safety. It’s Egypt.

Sure, Egypt sucks, but at least we have food there, and jobs…

The Alt-Right is the nation willing to head into the desert, facing risk, looking for reward. The Alt-Right is Christopher Columbus, Magellan, Cortes, DeSoto. They’re the ones traveling into uncharted territories, mapping what they find, discovering things. What they’re discovering looks like a new continent, but it’s really the Old Country that’s been abandoned and forgotten. We Christians should have been able to tell them that, if we hadn’t forgotten it ourselves.


Not too long ago, I was struggling hard about prayer. I still struggle with it, but not as much. Sometimes, it’s just hard to pray. What can I talk about with God? He already knows everything, including everything about me. I really got to the point that I no longer knew what to say. Yet, the Church and Scripture commands us to pray, which means God wants us to. Why? I just didn’t see what God got out of it.

The thought then came into my head one afternoon: There are certain things we know that God can’t do. Sin, for example. Here’s another: if God is omniscient, and knows all, then God can’t learn. He can’t discover anything. Remember how great the feeling was when you learned to ride a bike? Or imagine the joy of discovering something really astounding. God can’t experience the joy of learning anything, or discovering anything. I think He experiences that joy through us. Prayer may be a way to experience that more deeply for Him (yes, I know there are many other reasons we are to pray, but none of them were resonating for me).

This also could point to the purpose of our very existence. Think back to the Genesis story. God created the whole world and everything in it, then He creates Man, and what’s the first thing He says to them? “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

Go! Find out everything there is to discover. Explore. Build. Learn everything.

God didn’t say to be reasonable, rational, logical. He said to explore. Now, He obviously didn’t want us to be idiots, otherwise He wouldn’t have made us logical in the first place, but a lot of errors in life are due to misplaced priorities. When Reason and Logic are placed too highly, there will be problems. It’s my opinion that Discovery is a higher priority.

Adventure trumps Reason.

Back to Genesis. When Eve ate the forbidden fruit, she did so because it would make her wise. I see a connection to the female nature here. Women are naturally inclined towards safety and security, and also consensus.


For the Game aware, we know the 16 Commandments, but the 2 foundational principles are Be Irrationally Confident and State Control. Of the two, it’s my opinion that State Control is the most important. State Control is the Ring to rule them all. You can fake Confidence, but State Control is how you become it. State Control is emotional self-mastery, and the emotions we are trying to master pretty much all boil down to one: Fear.

Fear is the killer. Fear convinces you to play it safe. Be reasonable. Don’t venture out too far. So how do you master Fear? Scripture says that you don’t just get rid of a vice. You have to replace it with something else. It’s not enough to just stop lying. You have to start telling the truth. If a thief stops stealing, he’s just a retired thief. No, he now needs to work an honest job and give to those in need.

That’s how you master Fear. It’s not enough to not be afraid. You have to replace it with something else. Something good. You replace it with Adventure. If that’s too corny of a word, find another, be my guest.

Great men lived like this.

Go and do likewise.



The Devil is in the Details

Outstanding post in Thermidor. Been thinking about the Christians who haunt blogs like Chateau Heartiste. Some of them, like me, are there to learn. Others, to proclaim the Faith. Done with a good heart, I’m all for that. So, this one goes out especially to Earl, and also to King. Good hearts, both.

The Devil is in the Details

What Is Power?

Power is the ability, and also the obligation, to hurt people.

Anyone who has, or has had, any kind of power understands this, either explicitly or intuitively. Having power means you make decisions that affect a group. Some decisions will hurt someone or some people in the group. Hurt their feelings or hurt their wallet, or both. To have power, you have to be ok with this, which is why a lot of people attain some sort of leadership position and end up quitting. They don’t like all the bitching, and the reason they don’t is because they care. Maybe they care too much for others opinions, or maybe they just hate to hurt anyone, but they care.

Some people are ok with the bitching and moaning. They may be able to consistently maintain a higher view, a longer vision for what they’re trying to accomplish that over-rides criticism. IOW, they see the greater good. Others are thick-skinned, some actually like hurting people, some lack empathy, some put blinders on, etc., etc. For a variety of reasons, some just don’t mind hurting people.

Now let’s think about this when it comes to real power. Power over a large group. In a democracy, or a meritocracy, power is not given or conferred. You have to earn it. Which is another way of saying you have to take it. So who’s willing to take it? Who’s ok with hurting large numbers of people? Simple logic dictates that in a democratic meritocracy, the ones who seek the most power are the most sociopathic. People who are just fine with sending young men to their deaths, who’ll destroy anyone in their way, who’ll hide bodies, who’ll lie about their crimes. They do these things, and more, not always because they want to, but because real power demands it.

Who has the advantage in the struggle for real power? The man with higher vision who’s willing to get blood on his hands for the greater good? Or the sociopath who’s not just willing to be cruel, but likes it?

2 guesses, and the first one doesn’t count.

Having a leader means acceding to someone else’s power. In the end, strength is in numbers, so we the masses do have the most power, but we can’t organize, never could. Still there’s always the danger of mass revolt, which means we do have power, when it can be harnessed. So for us, which is the safer bet, conferring power by birthright, or allowing someone to earn (take) it? My bet is on Monarchy.

I’ve read this somewhere: With a Monarchy, you sometimes get a bad king. With a Democracy, you always get a bad king.

Revolution vs. Restoration

A wonderful piece over at Social Matter. Arthur Gordian’s essay is long, but worth your time. His (and, of course, Voegelin’s) depiction of modern Gnosticism is very fine.

So many good quotes. Here are some of my favorites:

“the death of the spirit is the price of progress…”

“It steals the language and symbolism of Christianity but imposes a rationalist interpretation that makes those symbols opaque. Forcing an irrational literalism on the corpus mysticum Christi by transferring that symbol to the democratic voting body of the state strips the original symbol of any meaning it preserved, while creating a delusional second-reality around the character of national citizenship. In other words, to equate the equality of membership in the mystical body of Christ with equality of membership in a secular corporate state is an act of egophantic delusion so deep as to require a Hegel-scale of hubris.”

“The progressive seeks the utter destruction of all civilization in order to remake reality in his own image, and in this way to become like God. The conservative, on the other hand, is content to live in a state of semi-ruined civilization, destroying the aspects he disagrees with while assuming the rest of the structure will not fall down upon his head.”

“The Taliban-like desire to destroy the monuments of the past, in the form of the traditions and faith of Western civilization, can only be considered good in the mind of a disordered individual. There are ultimately two forces in the West that struggle for the souls of Man according to Voegelin: the forces of Revolution and Restoration.”

“One cannot teach human equality without teaching death to the naturally unequal, either in the form of Jacobin and communist murder of the above-average or Nazi murder of the below-average. Any social religion of equality is tantamount to a call for mass murder.”

“Political liberalism isn’t a cultural product of Christianity, but a heretical and competing faith.”

On the Gnostic pleasure in transgression: “Ultimately, the greatest transgression for the Enlightenment philosopher is the transgression of treason, not just to the particular ruler of a particular nation but treason against the whole of Western civilization.”

“Tyranny, contrary to the claims of Ratcliffe, is not a function of power but of immorality.”

“Democracy, built on the foundation of destroying the morals of the people in order to ensure uniformity and docility of the population, can tolerate any vice, but healthy families, moral individuals, and orthodox Christianity may not be permitted under such a regime.”

“As has been mentioned numerous times, the equality of Man exists in a spiritual sense, but has no bearing on the nature of secular government because that equality cannot be linked to a world-immanent notion like government without fundamentally perverting its meaning.”

“The notion of a Universal Humanity, often described in these days as a “global citizen,” is fundamentally gnostic in character and destructive. Universal Humanity only exists in the context of the quest by Man to seek conscious participation in divine reality through the Holy Church.”

“Liberal cosmopolitanism crushes reality beneath its incessant demand that the world should be like heaven, when reality demonstrates otherwise. Common sense demonstrates that human beings are not all equal, and the act of violence which forces them to become equal merely serves to make them equal in their destruction.”

On abortion: “Like all victims of gnostic political violence, murdered children are chosen because they are made to be scapegoats for the imposition of reality over the second reality delusion of gnostic political correctness. When the reality of nature and nature’s God imposes itself on a gnostic woman, she must confront the conflict between reality and dogma, as described above. The dogma of liberal democracy is that she is fully equal to men in every way, entitled to a life of pleasure, and is not subject to responsibilities which she has not voluntarily chosen. Nature disagrees.”

On the failure of the Church to stand against Gnostic tyranny and mass murder (abortion, 60 million plus), or the government that allows/encourages it, or the liberal democratic structure of Western Civilization that fosters only corruption: “No major denomination has ever challenged the legitimacy of the American tyranny on the grounds that complicity with the regime made them party to the deaths of tens of millions.”

Reaction And The Charge Of Gnosticism: A Discussion On Voegelin