main

Unity and Human Types

2008-03-22T19:07:00+00:00

I would like post a few words today about the notion of the undifferentiated unity of man and the absence of human “types” in the creational order (that is, the sinless state) -a notion which the relevant texts, I feel, do not support. We know that there are orders and hierarchies in heaven (or at least differentiation of function in the Lords “court"). But heaven is not our final destination (are we agreed?), but rather the “regeneration”. Be that as it may, it is not an insupportable contention that orders, hierarchies, and mediatorial functions are not simply the skins of sin that must be shed, but rather God-ordained offices and functions that do not cease when sin is swept away, but rather are “regenerated”, born anew. I think this view is not only scripturally supportable, it avoids certain exegetical difficulties with respect to the origin of human difference and social custom (culture). There is nothing in the earth that is not a degenerate form of the creational potentia. And nothing exists beyond the compass of the creational potentia. There was not a second creation in which the fall is somehow realized in new forms springing from new potentials. Diversity in itself, therefore, metaphysically, cannot be a phenomenon of the fall, but only the degeneration of diversity, its misuse. Thus it is not difference or diversity itself that can be called a “product” of sin, but rather the manner in which it is evidenced in human behavior (historical) is affected by sin. It is true that human potentials are not what they were. But we have good reason to think that difference is simply “wired in” to the way humans are made, and that separation and time will always result in difference -which is not itself evil, but is rather a degenerate form that must be sanctified by the continuing operation of the Holy Spirit in the elect. The elimination or marginalization of difference is therefore not approaching more closely the aboriginal condition of man, but rather moving farther from it as it is relegating to the status of an error one of the fundamental potentia of humanness. The a-cultural, atomistic, immediate, egalitarian view of the sinless state (whether heavenly, paradisic, or of the final regenerated habitation of man) is a set of inherited Theological assumptions that must be thoroughly challenged if Kinism is to claim a total reliance on scripture and necessary inference, and is to be fully equipped to answer the questions of great philosophical and Theological subtlety that will arise in due course. We must avoid the presumption (I think based on deeply rooted egalitarian thinking) that man’s relation to his fellow man, and to God are inherently immediate (being without mediation) and simple (being without regulatory or functional strictures of any sort). These mediations and functional strictures do not create diversity, but rather regulate it -that potential for diversity that is inherent in man and shows every symptom of being extraordinarily opportunistic. Difference shows itself eagerly and rapidly, just as in the animal kingdom. That difference can be properly estimated as a value related to our created condition, rather than valued in its increasing absence from man. We do not know precisely in what ways regenerate variety will differ from the unregenerate variety, but I think it has something to do with being a “good neighbor”, that is in right relation to the law with respect to one’s neighbor (both actively and passively). I don’t think it entails a program to destroy his identity through hatred of diversity. Now here, in this valuing of diversity as a creation mandate (fruitfulness and multiplication), we see where we are often misjudged by our opponents. This occurs in our promotion of the positive virtues (5th commandment, et. al) of valuing one’s own tribe and ones elders (in their unique manifestation, in their identity) -valuing them not merely as archetypes of “man”, but valuing them and honoring them qua themselves, as unique creations, as flesh and blood. In other words, we value them in their “identity”, not in their approximation to a type. But that approximation has its own creational value, as a manifestation of the potential of the created kind. This is the essence of cultural continuity, rooted in the Law. Our opponents hate individuality (ultimately). Thus they hate their elders as real living men. This is sin, since the 5th commandment is CLEARLY inter-generational. Real living men bear the marks of their familial belonging within themselves as a framework of resemblance into which their individuality is fitted. It mirrors the unity-in-diversity of the Godhead, and its economy is the type of which the human social economy is analogue. I stated in a previous article that it is my conviction that sin creates nothing. I do not think that it is a trivial point, Theologically or philosophically. Nor is it my invention. Sin is able to corrupt what is, not engender what was not. We have laid out a very strong case for the “inherent” nature of the potential for difference. Diversity of individuals and diversity of types are of the same creational order, being the valences of communities, which are necessarily based on the various forms of likeness. What remains is to marshal the relevant scripture. I have no doubt that a thorough review of the text will not diminish our case, but rather make it MORE compelling. There is more to be said regarding the typology of the creational order, but it must be left for another time.

A Brief Etymology of Tolerance

2008-03-22T18:54:00+00:00

Isn’t it interesting how the definition of “tolerance” has been transformed from one with an external, demonstrable proof to an internal subjective process of divination as to the presence of that ethereal substance known as “hate”? Tolerance is no longer thus: “You have not imprisoned, deported, or executed me therefore you have been tolerant.” The contemporary (and hopefully temporary) definition is this: “I sense you are not fully on board with our diversity program.” A “scientist” drawing on generous grants from The Bureau, has even devised an analytical process which uses NMRI scans to reveal changes in the brain due what else but...Ta da! Homophobia. Or is it Metrophobia? I always get these neologisms mixed up. That’s fear of haute couture for all you rubes. And of course, only a filthy, self-hating “christohet” would be capable of such barbarity. After all, science has proven that such men are really latent metrosexuals to begin with. They just need a bit of reprogramming, a charge account at Banana Republic, just a bit of SHOCK THERAPY combined with psychotropic drugs, “gay” porno, and fois gras to make them see the light at the end of the velvet goldmine! I’ll see if I can dig up the link. Funny thing, the Scimitar of homo Tolerance swings in one direction, toward what they derisively refer to as “christohets”. You see, tolerance is now the inner suppression of any form of moral opprobrium toward their “lifestyle”. And since paedophilia is a mainstay of their lifestyle, well disapproval of paedophilia must go. Since AIDS executions are a mainstay of their lifestyle, then AIDS “victims” must receive an exemption from the usual methods of dealing with terrorists wielding an invisible weapon more potent than nerve gas. Think I’m exaggerating? Look at the massive depopulation taking place in sub-Saharan Africa from AIDS. Other than via transfusion or similar tragedies, there are no AIDS “victims” unless we are counting self-victimization of perversion. This is what the health community will not say, nor will the evangelicals. But I’ll say it. I’ve got news for the evangelical Judeoxtians. Jesus was intolerant.

Law, Elites, and The Mob

2008-03-22T18:27:00+00:00

The inner logic and will of ideological states (some have called them “proposition nations” -a ludicrous oxymoron) must inexorably move toward the marginalization and final eradication of subversive ideologies, dissident voices. In our present malaise, these dissident voices are those of the white Christian plurality, which is beginning to “kick against the pricks”. Democracy is fundamentally a system of leveling imposed from without by cryptocratic elites who have seized the machinery of culture, and the hopeful parchments of constitutionalists are resistless of the mob-will, when constitutionalism itself can be endlessly “re-imagined” to reflect nothing more than boilerplate tales of contemporary “social norms” and the endless variations of the “experience of the people” as it is projected onto the screen of law.

This mob-will that is inculcated in the “demos”, the holy and inviolate “People”, whose voice is the will of god, ought it to be made law even if its slogans fall from the lips of every creature under the sun? Isn’t argumentum ad populum a logical fallacy? Therefore on what logical ground does legal positivism rest? Succinctly, a “living constitution” is no constitution at all, and all the tides of ink cannot stave off the slightest breath of “the people” but rather promptly collapse, where there is no will and no power to ward the “people” against infantilism as manifested in “law” -wherein every masturbatory desire must be instantly gratified. Is theocracy a different form of elitism? Hardly. Elites act for themselves (ultimately), and in the interests of the diseased moralism by which they exercise mass-hypnosis. Biblical Law (if properly administered) is not a respecter of persons, and thus permits no elites, in the modern sense of one who is above the law. But only that law which is regarded as objective has the force of objective law. Thus if a people are wicked, so will their laws be, as they are removed from their shrine and cast into the mud of the thoroughfare.

There has always existed a class of scofflaws we now term elites, and it is the rule of law that must be wielded against them. Elites and megalomaniacs come in all varieties, and are not the unique province of Spanish Inquisitions and Torquemadas. Moralism, or the involuntary “improvement” of man through the law, is an equal opportunity error. We’ve seen 150 years of secular-religious alliance in moralism as the public rhetors (sophists and true-believers alike) have enthralled us with tales of our collective racial guilt. Perhaps we are fully ready for the minimalist, objective Law of God over the whims of technocrats and social engineers. But what do we know of that majority voice? We know what we are told. And we are told that half of our citizens (chattels of the state and of the egalitarian priesthood in our “churches") see no harm in the dismemberment of helpless infants, see no harm in the binding of the strong man (whites) that his house may be plundered by savages (whom incidentally will chop up the Bosendorfer for kindling and hang their soiled smocks from his crystal chandeliers). Who are YOU to say otherwise? The “people” have spoken.

The False Unity of “The Church”

2008-03-22T18:07:00+00:00

In the regeneration to come, men are to be as angels -indeed even sitting in judgment of them. But what if our dread, our stern angels in the conflict above (snatched from a teeming panel of Bruegel’s) were to throw down their swords of division? Ought the demons be invited to high tea, or more relevantly, to a conference on “cultural reclamation” (whose chevrons would derive from the number of unrepentant sodomites in attendance)? Did not the Lord say He came to bring division? Division of what sort, one must ask, for the modern ecumenical church brooks no division, save argument over the gradations into which its children will be excluded from the real meat of Gospel. Is unity to be sought above truth? Apparently. Thus there can be no false gospel in the fashionable modes, and the discordant Gospel of presumption is broken on the wheel of sentiment. Perhaps sentimentality is the chief sin of the West, wherein our Christ-God is reduced to a plot device in the merry comedy of ecumenicity: a deus ex machina to advance the trite machinery of salvation -salvation from something that cannot exist in the mind of unity, and that is heterodoxy -save the only error that signifies: identity.

Materialism and The Demise Of The West

2008-03-17T02:53:00+00:00

If the life of the Western man is to be more than a lengthy series of empty exercises as we await death, then we must resolve to undertake a pilgrimage, as in Bunyan’s tale of travail and overcoming. It is an inward journey, followed by an outward one, but a journey of years and not of miles. For any serious work to begin, there must be a stock-taking of aims, of resources, and of cost. This is the meaning of Christ’s words when he admonishes his disciples, “For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it?” He is speaking of the cost of discipleship, certainly, but also of the “cost” of faith, or those sacrifices that are a necessary but insufficient condition of the gift of faith. No serious work, that is work with an aim, is done without cost, and much of the misery and neurosis of the modern milieu is the protracted outworking of the systematic denial of this metaphysical truth. In the acquisition of truth, there is always real cost. This is the tower the price of which a man must reckon before the work is undertaken. It is the sole end of life, and there is no other. All the regular and normal forms of offices and institutions exist to support this end and are only shown to be legitimate to this extent. But why speak of work? Is not this age a golden era of blessing? Can anyone deny the wonders that man has wrought and think of work to be done? But there are those who do not view the present age as one of unalloyed blessing.
There are men and women, perhaps a not insignificant number of them, who look upon the present stage and shudder -who do not look upon the Western industrial ‘miracle’ with favor, for off in the darkened wings of the stage that has been prepared for their enjoyment, they see the trompe l’oeil backdrops and painted props, and the cast milling about, and think, ‘I am at a theater, and what I am witnessing is not life.’ We will call these doubters ‘aspiring humans.’ They are believers in a life beyond the gay theater of ‘prosperity’, proselytes of former things, before the curtain was raised on the present comedy. We spoke above of work and of cost because to these doubters, there is a work of reclamation that the West requires, if it is to regain its full humanity –the humanity it relinquished to materialism during the ages subsequent to late antiquity. The claim of the superiority of the West may only go so far as the empty boast of material dominion. Certainly the vainglory of believing that it has merited the commitment of God’s oracles to its keeping cannot be maintained by serious men. It is enough to love the West without indulging the self-delusion that is the primary obstacle to her redemption. Often in discourse we hear the West referred to as “Christendom”. In some instances the term is employed in a nostalgic manner, while in others it is used as a designation of a living and viable cultural-ethnic entity. This latter is a mistaken usage; though the reasons it is made use of are often praiseworthy, in the main they amount to no more than a hopeful sentimentality. To speak of “Christendom” is to speak not of a place but of an era, and one that lamentably belongs to the ancient past. One of the developments we will examine most assiduously is the manner in which the demise of Christendom was brought about, and the means by which we were transported unawares into this “happy age”.
One of the many false claims of Western superiority is the claim of material plenty. While we will not go so far as other critics in the underscoring of this error of estimation, it is to be said that this unquestioned material superiority is not the only factor in the relative estimation of civilizations. The West’s material domination has come at a great cost, and that cost is its genuine humanity. The international clamor for the blessings of America are, from a certain perspective, not the signs of a beacon of hope, but rather the unmistakable evidence of the decay of spiritual values worldwide, the pervasive influence of American values, and the triumph of an unthinking materialism. Anticipating the likely objection, even by sober minds not sufficiently detached from the pervasive suggestions of those who have an intense interest in maintaining the current state of affairs, we do not claim that the West is a civilization without merits. Certain strident critics of America and the West in general have taken this course of thinking to extreme conclusions, because they, as leftists and Marxists, begin from false, that is, materialist, premises. If materialism is the gnawing in the West’s vitals, Marxism is not, and can never be its physician. But the victory over Marxism gained in recent decades is not a victory over materialism, and indeed, it is an irony of history –and a sign of the success of the industry of persuasion- that the supposed antagonists of the cold war were, in reality, armed camps of the same sovereign order, rival factions and not genuine enemies. The fact of the left’s dogged attachment to Marxism, in its various formulations, is proof of its moral and intellectual bankruptcy as it attempts to critique the materialism of the so-called right. What is to be noted here is that the false dichotomy that is maintained between the modern right and left is a species of the mental control exercised by powerful interests toward the preservation of the current order of things.
Certainly the West possesses merits that can and ought to be claimed for it, but such merits as it has lie in the vestiges of a former order, and in the character of a people altogether too credulous, too quick to believe fairy tales. It will certainly be objected by men who call themselves “patriots” that the West is the birthplace of certain liberal and “progressive” conceptions, such as the “freedom” we hear well spoken of in academic and other forms of discourse. But this freedom, to the regulated and traditional mind, appears as mere anarchy and license –the menace of a body liberated from mind and from true conscience, a monstrosity overcome by inner forces it has neither the will nor the inclination to rule, as in Mary Shelley’s prescient fable of the consequences of man’s, and particularly Western man’s, hubris. The liberty to wreck the immemorial and human order of life, and to imperil millennia of spiritual development, the fruits of a society devoted to holy living, and this for the achievement of the infra-human ends of industry, must be looked upon with disgust by the normal man. One of the freedoms the West has enjoyed is the freedom of political and economic domination. Its will to empire is an historical truism that is beyond dispute. From the brute empires of Britain and Russia, to the de facto, if not de jure, empire of the United States, the tale is quite repetitive. In this it is not alone, as the East has also possessed this character sporadically, from dynastic China to the Mongol conquests to Imperial Japan. But what distinguishes Western Empire is its sheer scale as well as its economic/material totality. There is a will to dominion in the Western man that is alternately both a blessing and a curse. To be sure, economic and material benefits are not always to be lightly dismissed. Nevertheless, the typical ends to which such efforts are directed -those of extreme levels of comfort or of idleness, the mental and spiritual domination of masses of men by diabolic force and regimentation, among other similar ends- must cause question to arise as to its value. The benefits of the suffering and misery of millions being relieved through medicine and sanitation is noteworthy. But was industrialization and regimentation of life the only means by which these ends could and can be achieved? We must ask ourselves what is given in exchange for these benefits, and more principally, the manner in which they are brought about. This is a question that is crying out for an answer as the West seethes and lurches toward ends that are genuinely horrifying to any not under the powerful spell of mass suggestion.