I remember back in the 70’s reading about Weimar and Elagabalus and Nero, and thinking, “How could anyone have been so nuts as to believe any of that obviously perverse and stupid stuff, let alone act on it?” Yet we seem to fall into such fantasies pretty regularly, especially in times of general prosperity and calm. Any number of other such wild and absurd episodes could be adduced: the French and Soviet Revolutions, the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, ancient Persian Mazdakism, the Marquis de Sade and his circle (he must have had a pretty extensive circle, who bought his stuff, or we could never have heard of him, no?), Bloomsbury, the Frankfurt School, transhumanism, on and on.
Also, less violently but more radically and pervasively, Freemasonry and the occult – theosophy, New Age, and so forth.
I.e., Gnostic Pelagian utopianism, in all its instantiations.
And, now, right now, today, abortion, porneia, divorce, wokeism, globohomo, transsexuality, and – especially, and at their root, and at their most energetic and fulsome – anti-Christianity; which is to say, when abstract doctrinal push comes down at bottom to pragmatic bloody shove, infanticide and the genital mutilation of children.
That’s where it always ends, no? These Gnostic transvaluations of value always terminate upon the mutilation and death, or just the prevention, of children; i.e., of humanity.
Oh, and also the decapitation or immolation of nuns. And monks, and priests. Them, too. There’s no way after all to dispose of humanity altogether that does not entail and indeed prerequire the elimination of true religion (not just the Christian religion, NB; Islam too is on the kill list, with Hinduism and all the rest). If you want to kill man, you have to kill his hope. So, religion has to go.
OK, understood. But then, God is not mocked. He’s *God,* after all, right? Mocking him is *logically impossible.* By the definition of “God,” he wins, must always win, has already won, and all this muck and mire of late is just a mopping up operation that’s a little messier than most such.
Alright then. What can we expect? What is likely to happen as the enormities of the latest Gnostic excrudescence begin at last – as all merely creaturely endeavors must – to wane?
What happened after Weimar? What happened after Elagabalus? What happened after Belshazzar?
There was a Reaction. It was Not Nice. But it rooted out the rot.
Mene, mene, tekel upharsin.
The Orthosphere 
It is strange to see the mainstreaming of madness, and yet here we are. There really seems to be no absurdity or vileness that the dupes won’t entertain. The demons really take pleasure in humiliating their tools.
It’s so insane that I have — many, many times — wondered whether the radical left is right, after all, in thinking that there is some secret Nazi cabal driving world affairs. Could the entire BLM drama and its aftermath have been any more grotesque in its depiction of sub-Saharan Africans? The countless videos of blacks behaving bestially — and encouraged to do so by all respectable opinion. I told my friends that no Grand Wizard could have devised a cleverer plan to inculcate race hatred and contempt in the white West’s heart. And the same story plays out with the Jewish question — and feminism — and sexual deviants . . . over and over. Current events — or at least how they’re portrayed by the mainstream (supposedly liberal) media appear to vindicate the narrow-minded bigot in pretty much every way. It’s really extraordinary . . . it’s as if the Nazis were not the reaction to Weimar but the evil genius behind Weimar — in order to prepare the populace to accept them.
Do I believe that is what’s going on? No, but I find it all uncanny.
Yesterday, I thought of another example. A few months ago, I attended a county fair in rural Ohio a few hours north of Cincinnati — God’s country. After my friends departed from the fair in the evening, I decided to spend an hour or so with the folks at the Democratic booth — to see what they thought of recent happenings. As usual, it was time well spent as I indulged my inner anthropologist. The people were friendly, even after I replied that, no, I wasn’t a Democrat, nor was I a Republican, but most likely they would consider me a fascist. We had a good talk, and when we turned to the Covid madness, the principal lady mentioned a few times that she “trusted the science.” I had encountered that saying before, and I had a bit of fun juxtaposing her statement with her subsequent ignorant pronouncements about the issue, but I didn’t really think about the phrase until yesterday. It was in the air, after all — an unpleasant odor, but a common one, like the nasty skunk weed smell so prevalent among the trashy poor in these latter days America.
Yesterday, though, while I was mulching leaves, the comic idiocy of the phrase suddenly struck me. Science isn’t about trust! Quite the opposite! When a university or government institution makes some discovery, it publicizes the claim, and then other labs attempt to replicate the experiment . . . because science isn’t about trust at all. Scientific culture follows very much a hermeneutic of suspicion. In fact, I think that the very phrase “trust the science” may have made a good spoof line in Mad Libs or a comedy sketch a generation ago. But I’ve become so inured by the general stupidity, contradiction, and dishonesty of our public life, I didn’t even see how crazy, how foolish, how mockingly funny it is! We should expect such a phrase to come from an acerbic satirist — Mencken or Wolfe — who enjoyed mocking the ersatz piety of the left.
It thus fits the pattern, right up there with six State-level funerals for a recently departed, overdosed ne’er-do-well who received actual — and repeated — genuflections by America’s nobility as he rested in a gold coffin.
Such is the stuff of farce!
How to explain this? Demons find it amusing to mock their supplicants, sure, but is that it — just infernal trolling? It’s all very queer.
Yeah, I don’t get why they are going so hard and so far so publicly, so in your face. I suppose it must be either that they think they have won already, so why not, or else that they know they are going to lose, and are trying to set a high water mark for later reference.
If we English the Latin motto of the Royal Society, it means “Take No One’s Word For It.” Skepticism is essential to the epistemology of science. Obviously, much science is beyond the depth of any ordinary layman, but Covid skeptics are clearly acting in the spirit of science and “trust-the-science” believers are not.
The common denominator is often is this love of an equalitarian paradise.
Their paradise unlike real paradise brooks no hierarchy. They aren’t merely immanetizing the eschaton. But their paradise even in its ideal form is evil.
Their hatred of hierarchy reduces at bottom to hatred of concrete reality, which is hierarchical it its essence; for, hierarchy is the only way to get wholes that are composed of subsidiary parts, or by the same token parts that partake of wholes. It is on account of their hatred of reality per se also that they hate the body, and materiality. For that same reason they hate decisions: they want to have their cake and eat it, but reality doesn’t work that way. So they fuss. And because it is true that they can’t have their cake and eat it too, they hate truth. Hating truth, they hate reason, ratio, and so both beauty and goodness. Thus what they aim for, their paradise, is the opposite of good, true, rational, intelligible, and beautiful. It is evil. They like that.
Egalitarianism truly is the doctrine of demons.
The Fallen are subject to envy; so they hate what is higher than they, and seek its destruction. The innocent are not subject to envy. Thus one of the traditional attempts at an explanation of Lucifer’s non serviam – that he was envious of man as glorified in Christ Jesus – has never made sense to me. He could not have felt envy unless he had already Fallen.
It boils down to selfishness, that is, evil. “Me, me, me!” They want to do whatever they want without drawbacks. They call this “freedom”, when it should be called “power” or “selfishness”.
They hate everything that puts limits on that. Truth, reason, reality, hierarchy, decisions, etc. In fact, they don’t hate hierarchy. They hate and resent not to be the king, the boss, the rich guy, etc. They don’t want to work to improve their station in life. They want things given to them with no effort.
This is why they love equality, which means “Other people have to give me their stuff, but my stuff is mine”. When they claim for equality, they don’t realize that they live better than 70% of world population, and that they are them who should give things”. They scream “Equality!” and think “the rich guys have to give me something”.
One of my sisters is left-wing. I told her once: “You want equality and have two houses: one for daily living and another one in the beach, for the holidays. You should give the house in the beach to a family that does not have a house. For example, to immigrants”. Crickets. They only want equality when it suits them.
Yes. When they say they just want equity for everyone, what that means is they want your equity for themselves and their ilk. Of course, even if they got all your equity, they would be still deeply angry and unsatisfied; for, they would see that, even penniless, you are still happier and healthier than they.
“even if they got all your equity, they would be still deeply angry and unsatisfied; for, they would see that, even penniless, you are still happier and healthier than they.”
Yes, their resentment knows no bounds. They resent not being God.
The rule that “God will not be mocked” is evidently homeostatic, since God is mocked. But the action of mockery at some point provokes a reaction of “wrath,” and this “wrath” returns the moral system to the equilibrium state of non-mockery. These corrections are very terrible. They may afford the non-mockers some schadenfreude, but the Bible suggests that even non-mockers share in the general judgement.
Oh, for sure. Millions of non-mockers died in WWII. Push a system far away from equilibrium, and the equilibrating snap back will take it far out in the opposite direction. Homeostatic snaps back are like earthquakes. Not tidy; violent. But they get the job done.
God only ever *appears* to be mocked. The mockers think they are mocking God. But Providence is inexorable, and overwhelming. The mockery of the mockers redounds. It is not God whom the mockers end up mocking, then, but themselves. So we see the mockers of today making parodic fools of themselves.
sorath scandalizes to lucifer. sorath also weakens a population such that it can be invaded by external luciferic groups. Evil feeds on evil.
weimar -> nazis
french revolution -> napoleon
westernization (sorathicization) in the middle east -> isis, iran revolution of 1979, taliban
It doesn’t root out the rot so much as replace it with a different sort.
Yes. That was what I had in mind in saying that the Reaction from the present extreme decadence is not going to be nice. It is not likely to be a reversion to the mean, but rather a sharp turn toward the opposite extreme, which is going to be just as vicious as what it replaces, albeit in a different way. But, one thing it will definitely do is kill off the most extreme perversions – ostensibly, at least. The greengrocer’s placard du jour will be of a different sort altogether than the BLM Tranny placards that are today de rigueur. But it will almost certainly be just as whacked.
After the volatility and chaos first of the French Revolution and then of the Napoleonic Wars, and then another bout of (much more circumscribed) leftist reaction across Europe in 1848, things settled down again into the Belle Epoque.
Albert Pike did say that WWIII would be about erasing all religions.
Did he now? I did not know that. So, Freemasonry has been a plot against religion per se, and not just against the Catholic Church. Interesting.