Gnostics, Cathars, and ?Liberals?

[arendt]

Jeez, maybe I'll have to change my handle to "Jefferson" :-).

arendt

--------------------------------

Gnostics, Cathars, and ?Liberals?
by arendt


..."Fear prophets, Adso, and those prepared to die for the truth,
...for as a rule they make many others die with them, often
...before them, at times instead of them."
...
...-- Brother William in The Name of the Rose by Umberto Ecco


1. Amnesia

Unfortunately, there is no political equivalent of vaccines for childhood
diseases. Instead, each new generation of democracy-loving Americans
falls prey to common varieties of authoritarian certainty and its
concomitant intolerance. Each generations' parents can only stand at the
bedside, offer comfort and support, and hope the youngsters can survive
the illness - thereby gaining immunity.

Once again, beginning around 1990, a Fundamentalist Holy War has been
declared on American democracy - on the free and public education
that underpins a politically aware population, on the separation of Church
and State, even on the historical fact that the founders of the country were
Deists.

In the name of "American" values, Fundamentalists attacks those things about
our democracy and its Constitution which make America unique in the world.
They would replace our democracy with yet another squalid, ayatollah-ridden
theocracy.

Each new generation must face the "offer you can't refuse" nature of
Fundamentalism. If you join them, they will change from persecuting you
to ordering you around in the name of God; but if you resist them, they
feel free to resort to any tactic. Genghis Khan offered besieged cities the
same deal. Jesus would be appalled at what is done in his name.

Yet, America should be uniquely resistant to this kind of bad deal. This is
the country of "Live Free or Die", and "Don't Tread on Me". Beyond slogans,
America was founded by Enlightenment Deists, descended from militant
Protestants. The whole point of Protestantism was rebellion against an
overbearing "universal" (Roman) church, marked by demands for personal
access to spiritual communion unmediated by church hierarchy and for
an end to corruption.

After 120 years of "no quarter" religious warfare culminating in the bloodbath
of the 30 Years War, everyone in Europe finally agreed that tolerance and
private spiritual communion had much to recommend it. And, finally,
everyone knew who the Catholic Church was:

..."The Papacy is no other than the ghost of the deceased Roman empire, sitting
...crowned upon the grave thereof"
...
...-- Leviathan, Part 4, Chapter 47 Thomas Hobbes


America's founders, especially Jefferson, were at great pains to exclude
religion from power in the state. Jefferson knew who democracy's enemies
were:

..."In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty.
...He is always in alliance with the despot... they have perverted the purest
...religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to
...all mankind, and therefore the safer engine for their purpose."

-- Thomas Jefferson to Horatio Spafford, 1814


These lessons are all in the history books, yet Fundamentalists call
ever more loudly for a return to this primitive and brutal system of
tyranny. How can American Fundamentalists (and that includes Jewish
fundies and Catholics like Opus Dei) denounce Moslem theocracy but agitate
for their own? How can they advocate second-class citizenship for
non-Fundamentalists when religious discrimination is what America was
founded to escape from?

The answer is ignorance plus religious delusion, with a political program
that uses the one to reinforce the other. Most important to the enthrone-
ment of ignorance is the Fundamentalist trope that "thinking is the snare
of the devil", that faith must trump reason. This is the basic disconnect
of "patriotic" Fundamentalists: they refuse to see that willful ignorance
(i.e., blind faith) is incompatible with democracy.

..."If a nation expects to be both ignorant and free, it expects what never
...was and never will be."
...
...-- Thomas Jefferson

It is sad that a whole generation seems to be unaware of just how
dangerous religious fundamentalism has been throughout Western
history. I am appalled that, while lunatic religious websites, radio shows,
and publications are a glut on the market, the voices of Constitutional
democracy, the Bill of Rights, and the history of religious mania are
barely heard. Its like America has a case of amnesia.

What follows are some historical facts for people who found the standard
high school and college history courses, understandably, boring and
irrelevant. (If you went to Catholic school, some of this stuff might even
be news to you.) Yes, history may have been about "dead white men",
but those guys killed a whole lot of other white (and colored) folk before
they went. So, if you don't want to go the same way, it behooves you to
study history.


2. Squabbling Schemers

Since the groundbreaking work of German Biblical scholars in the 1850s,
we have assembled a validated body of documents about the early history
of the Christian (catholic) church. With the mid-20th century discovery of
the first century Qumran scrolls and Nag Hammadi Gospels, we finally
have access to the other side of the theological debate that raged between
Christ's death in 33 AD and the conversion of the Roman Emperor
Constantine around 320 AD.

And, guess what? The Gnostics who lost that debate despised the Catholic
bishops as much as the Protestants; they called the bishops "waterless
canals". They claimed that the bishops had perverted Jesus' teachings for
worldly power. This charge has been known for a long time

..."But a short time elapsed after the death of the great reformer of the
...Jewish religion, before his principles were departed from by those who
...professed to be his special servants, and perverted into an engine for
...enslaving mankind, and aggrandizing their oppressors in Church and State."
...
...-- Thomas Jefferson to S. Kercheval, 1810

but now, the evidence is there to back it up. These documents show that
early Christianity was as eclectic as the Democratic Party. The bishops called
this eclecticism "heresy", and named the specific (and hair-splitting) varieties:
Manicheanism, Arianism, Montanism, and so on.

Early Christianity was also progressive. It included women in positions of
power (even treated Mary Magdalen as an apostle the equal of Peter); it
allowed meditation and other body-oriented practices akin to yoga; and it
hated hierarchies. These are practices that were mentioned and carried out
by Jesus himself.

But, in the end, the touchy-feely Gnostic Christians were out-shouted and out-
maneuvered by the ideologues. And, these were the same kind of extremist
ideologues we have today. The church "father" Augustine led a wild, younger
life and espoused one of the heresies until switching into the bishop's camp.
(Sort of a David Horowitz or neocon of his time.)

Constantine wanted internal unity and loyal subjects. Contrary to propaganda,
he worshipped Sol Invictus all his life, and was baptized on his death bed. He
called the Council of Nicea to knock some Christian heads together, not for
any specific theological reasons. He wanted order. The bishops wanted
legitimacy and power to deal with the Gnostics. The deal was done, and the
Roman Army enforced the bishops' definition of who was a heretic.

Now, students, if you didn't catch that, let me break it down. State religion
means using the Army to enforce it. Also note, the list of bad guys for
hierarchical, macho religions has not changed in millenia: feminists, new age
types, homosexuals, freethinkers.


3. Religion is Politics in your head and in your bed

Once you have an army behind you, you soon have a secret police that
eliminates any high-profile dissenters. With military and ideological
dominance, society becomes a laboratory for experimenting with theology
in service of political power. It follows that holding the wrong political
position can get you dead very quickly. This threat fuels the seemingly inane
theological debates ("not worth an iota"), which mutate into elaborate,
deniable cover stories for political positions.

But in the end, theology is a form of government that goes beyond
fixing the potholes and collecting the taxes (called "tithes", "pences", etc.).
It wants to dictate how people think and behave at the most personal level. Here are some examples:

1. Closet Sexuality for the Clergy

...Until about 1100 AD, Roman clergy could marry. Greek Orthodox clergy still
...can. Priestly celibacy was a political victory by anchorite monks and other
...ideological fruitcakes over the everyday humble dignity of wedlock. The
...clergy were deemed holy and above the married people. The resulting
...homosocial isolation caused clergy who already had been driven to
...monasticism by sexual temptation to take their sexuality into the closet.
...The problem remains with us today, in the Catholic pederasty scandals
...around the world, in the adulteries of Jimmy Swaggert and other preachers.

2. Other-worldly-ness

...Medieval Christianity couldn't deliver earthly goods. Life was dirty and
...short. The church even declared that sex was only for procreation, not
...pleasure. So, all they had to offer was the next world, the afterlife; or
...the Second Coming. The propaganda campaign was that dying early
...meant you got out of this awful world sooner and got your reward in
...heaven. Nice racket. Remember, the Catholic Church invented the
...word "propaganda".

3. Ignorance

...Medieval Catholicism and modern Fundamentalisms all see thinking
...and reasoning as the devil's work. When you have a doubt, praying
...is religiously correct; thinking is not. Convenient if your monasteries
...are the only centers of learning to be had. Inconvenient for democracy.

4. Persecution - like the Inquisition

...The slave makes a poor master. The ideologues in power are the same
...stiff-necked people who were martyred by Romans. Power has not made
...them less truculent. They will enforce religious purity by torture if
...need be. And, if such purity happens to result in political aggrandizement,
...well, that must be God's will.

The ultimate cynical combination of points 2 and 4 was the infamous
statement of Simon de Montfort during the Albigensian Crusade to "Kill
them all. God will know his own."

So much for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And many
Fundamentalists will tell you so openly, calling the Enlightenment
heresy. These four points ought to begin to make you, dear pupil,
understand the stakes in the theocracy vs democracy choice. To
drive home the point of how theocracies treat religious dissenters,
the Albigensian Crusade is the clearest historical reference.


4. The Cathars: Tolerant, pious, productive, non-violent, and D-E-A-D

Most Americans will be unable to identify the Cathars, and their awareness
of the Inquisition is probably via Monty Python. But, the so-called
Albigensian Crusade of the 13th century showed ideological (or Legalistic,
to use Bruce Bawer's terminology) Christianity at its most theocratic and
horrific. The very idea that one bunch of Christians is given license
to collectively punish another bunch of Christians, by looting and murder,
blasphemes the name of Jesus.

The Cathars lived in Languedoc, a part of Southwestern France that had
never really been brought under Papal authority since the fall of Rome.
Instead, it lived on the shifting border between Islam in Spain and
Catholicism in Italy and what-would-become Northern France. It is
an anachronism to think of Languedoc as a rebellious province.
Rather, it was an independent state with as much legitimacy as any
early medieval kingdom founded by invading barbarians.

The Cathar population was descended from one of the innumerable
early heretical Christian groupings, but as mentioned above, a group
that had avoided Rome's grasp. Their theology was inclusive, with a
strong feminist streak. But, they were Manicheans who believed that the
world was sinful, and the prince of this world was a devil as powerful
as God.

But because only the few, non-hierarchical clergy obeyed the most
strict rules of Catharism, the population at large was merely pious,
hard-working, and tolerant. The Cathar domain had a large Jewish
community due to Mediterranean trade that had flourished since the
early Roman Empire. They also traded both merchandise and ideas
with the advanced Islamic civilizations. As a result of trade they were
wealthy, educated, and cultured.

When they encountered priests and representatives of the Roman
church, they found them ignorant, corrupt, vulgar, and obnoxious.
The Roman Church was wrestling with its perennial problem of wordly
goods and, as usual, losing. (Contemporaneously, Francis of Assisi
was barely able to found his monastic order to help the poor, because
that order was thought to be an open admission of the failure to minister
to the needy.)

The Cathars were an even more open affront to the Church. In a
direct comparison, the people of Languedoc chose Catharism. The
Catholic Church could not compete spiritually.

So, the Church fabricated a causus belli. A Catholic was murdered in
Languedoc. His murder was blamed on the Cathars, even though that was
not true. The Pope proclaimed a Crusade, and the crude Northern
French Catholic barons, who had long coveted the rich land of Languedoc,
descended en masse on a peaceful people.

Along with their armies, the Church brought the Inquisition. The
Inquisition invented the "thought crime" and the whole secret police
apparatus of ratting out others to save your own skin. This was Legalistic
Christianity at its most muscular.

The entire culture of Languedoc was liquidated, along with much of the
population. Their history and cities were snuffed out. It is no wonder most
Americans have never heard of them. Nevertheless, Americans should take
the trouble to educate themselves on this matter.


5. Is there a pattern to Legalistic Christian behavior?

Let's see: legalistic bishops use someone else's army to rub out
their spiritual competitors. Item one: the Gnostics. Item two: the
Cathars. Being "touchy-feely" is a bad idea when religious ideologues
are in the vicinity.

Later, Protestants decided the Catholics were corrupt. Again, the Legalistic
response was to call out the army. Only this time, the Protestants were
strong enough to beat the Catholics. You can hardly call John
Calvin "touchy feely".

Where do we see the Legalistic pattern in the world today? That was a
rhetorical question, of course.

American Fundamentalism is hot-house Legalistic Christianity, fueled by huge
donations from super-rich political reactionaries that have conveniently
arranged for Legalistic Christian radio and TV stations to broadcast a sort of
God-plus-Mammon capitalist Chrstianity that is on the verge of
overthrowing the U.S. Constitution and instigating a theocracy.

As throughout history, a corrupt Church and the bazaar can get along
quite well, unlike Jesus and the moneychangers. And, who will be persecuted
for incorrect thinking in the coming hellish hi-tech reincarnation of the Dark
Ages? Why, the liberals, of course. Isn't that a surprise?


6. Liberals, cluephone calling!

After twenty years of stand-offishness, a deal has been worked out
between cosmopolitan capitalists and backwoods evangelists. They
intend to bury the hatchet - in the urban, liberal middle class.

Here is the deal. The Capitalists get to loot the U.S. treasury, the U.S.
middle class, and all the extractable raw materials on U.S territory.
They get to take the money and run to whatever guarded community
they choose. Look around you, grasshopper, its happening right now.

The Fundamentalists get to inherit the third world basket-case that will be the
remains of the U.S. after this grand ripoff. Fundamentalism will thrive in its
natural soil - poverty and ignorance. Corporations will have the rights of
feudal lords. Fundamentalists will blame the fall of America on those wishy-
washy liberals, and the Capitalists will give them all the propagandists they
need to convince the new Legalistic Christian American peasantry that
"thinking too much", "tolerating diversity", and "letting women and gays vote"
were the reasons for the downfall of America.

Any liberal relying on the good sense of the American people to reject this
ought to look at the recent hijacking of the Southern Baptist Convention(SBC)
by Legalistic ideologues. The "stealth" tactics that fundamentalist GOPers use
to get elected (up to and including "compassionate conservative" G.W.Bush)
were developed first to take over the SBC. (Say anything to get elected,
then govern as you please.) Good sense and fair play won't get you far
against a knife in the back. Today, the SBC says "women should submit
to their husbands".

Legalism is all about twisting and violating the existing rules to gain
leadership, and then changing the rules to eliminate your enemies.
Legalistic tactics strongly resemble the CIA playbook of "use the part
of the government you control to take over the part that you don't".
So, it should be no surprise that Korean CIA-trained Rev Moon is the
sugar-daddy for Jerry Falwell and a host of fundamentalist followers;
and no surprise that ex-CIA head G.H.W. Bush received $500,000 for
a curiously under-reported speech in South America praising Rev. Moon.

We are one staged "terrorist" incident away from martial law, if General
Tommy Franks (whose loyalty to his oath to defend the Constitution is
suspect) is to be believed. What the Confederacy and Hitler couldn't do,
a few rag-tag terrorists can. Sure! Where is the Kool Aid, Rev. Jones?

Under the illegitimate G.W. Bush, the U.S. is already experiencing
the hallmarks of Legalistic religious rule - massive corruption, the
willful destruction of rational, objective science, direct Federal grants
to religious groups, and the establishment of an inquisition.

The first clear signal of the Bush science policy was the refusal to sign the
Climate Change Treaty. Then, after 911, outright lies were told about the air
quality in NYC. Throughout the government, fundamentalist kooks and
corporate apparatchiks are being appointed to scientific oversight positions,
and fundamentalist Congressman are black-listing religiously-incorrect
science.

The inquisition has been created by the Patriot Act, which allows massive
suspension of civil rights, down to habeus corpus, as long as the magic
words "suspicion of terrorism" are spoken. As John Kerry said, "Hold
until cleared" is just a nice way of saying "Guilty until proven innocent."

But, wait, you may say. Fundamentalists don't have a Pope; they
aren't hierarchical. The analogy is flawed.

The correct response, students, is "not yet". Hierarchy is in the genes
of fundamentalists. They don't feel safe unless someone is telling
them what to do, how to think. And, there are plenty of rich sociopaths
willing to pander to this need.

One need look no farther than the secretive Council for National Policy,
before whom G.W. Bush gave a speech whose contents remain undisclosed.
The CNP is a clearinghouse for the behind-the-scenes planners and
funders of the Fundamentalist takeover. Sort of like the murderous,
ultra-Catholic Guise family in Reformation-era France, these people are
scheming away to eliminate the secular/non-fundamentalist opposition
by any means fair or foul; and it would appear they have placed their
pretender, G.W. Bush, on the throne. The CNP also resembles the
Council of Nicea, where a lot of log-rolling goes on in a heavily political
environment to solidify a "religiously inerrant" dogma.

Look at the national GOP, a party with thought control more rigorous
than any mainstream political party in American history. Tom Delay
is a perfect example of the kind of blind faith and violence approach
to governing that Fundamentalists will take.

If they weren't so dangerous, the Fundamentalists would be laughable.
They are out to eliminate the government; but the rural States where
the fundies live are net receivers of Federal dollars, while the urban
states they so despise are net givers.


7. They hate us for our freedom

I am not a touchy-feeely liberal. I am a hard-headed liberal. Fundamentalists
are dangerous and devious. The knife is already an inch into our backs, and
Tom Daschle is making nice with these people.

If liberals don't want to end up like Gnostics and Cathars, they better
defend themselves like the decent liberal Protestants who were their
forebearers. For surely their opponents are as determined as the Catholic
Inquisitors that their cause is just and violence is permitted. Failure to
grasp the seriousness of this kind of threat is how Jews wound up in
boxcars - because they simply couldn't believe that mindless genocide could
happen in a "civilized" country.

Liberals today, like Cathars before them, find Fundamentalists "ignorant,
corrupt, vulgar, and obnoxious". My advice to them is not to turn up their
noses too far, as they are likely to be cut off. Fundamentalists are human
sharks with minimal brains, very sharp teeth, and a nose for blood. They are
primitive, brutal, and above all, dangerous.

In closing, I offer the following pop psychological insight:

When G.W. Bush said "they hate us for our freedom", he was unconsciously
expressing his own views about liberal America. The motivation which he
assigned to questionably-identified Moslem Fundamentalists made sense to
him and to his followers because it is a motivation that American
Fundamentalists also have.

American fundamentalists hate American liberals for their freedom. They
hate our urbanity, our education, our rationality, our tolerance, our respect
for women, gays, and people of color as equals. Fundamentalism thrives in
rural areas, and just as barbarism from the hinterlands eventually submerged
the Roman Empire, it now threatens to do the same to the American Republic.

The urban middle class should remember the words of our founders:

..."Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God."
...
...-- Thomas Jefferson

[opihimoimoi]

1. Well well done. The Pubs are using Ignorance to their advantage

The Sheep are poor in the knowledge of History. They know not the Cathars and could care less.

They fail to see the relationship and its deeper meaning and how it links to us in our present morass.

Come, we kick this for many to see, read.

[arendt]

2. You read fast!

I wish I could keep these things shorter. Thanks for slogging through.

What do you think of the pop psychology at the end? Ring true?
Rallying cry for liberals?

arendt

[ulysses]

3. very nice

I very much like your take on the corporatist/fundie alliance, but is it that formalized? I have no reason to believe that it isn't, I just haven't heard anything in particular to that end. I'd be interested to know more if you have any info on that.

Great piece. Thanks, arendt.

[arendt]

6. Ever heard the word "comprador"?

In third-world countries, the local bully boys for the foreign
power constitute the "comprador" class. They are the plantation
supervisors for the foreign absentee landlords.

The average U.S. citizen has never experienced being a
plantation slave, although it is coming back soon.

In South America, after Pope John Fascist I got rid of those
heretical (there's that word again) Liberation Theologists,
the priests down there have gone right back to kissing The
Man's ass.

So, its no new deal for the corporations to enlist the local
clergy to sell corporate legitimacy to slaves. What took awhile
was for the U.S. fundies to get comfortable with the fact that
they were really selling out their congregations.

But, now we have a new generation of totally cynical, corporate-
engineered preachers; preachers who got trained at Pat
Robertson U, or Bob Jones U, or wherever. They can see
what kind of preaching gets you a TV contract and lots of
money.

So, no, I don't think its formal. I think that, like the media, the
corporations just dangled a lot of money in front of the preachers,
and some of the most unscrupulous preachers took the cash.
Just like in the whore media and the whore Congress. Of course,
whoring while preaching takes chutzpah.

Thanks for the question. It helped me think things through.

Want to start a website: Preacher Whores Online? We could
list all the outrageous BS that is spouted in the name of God.

Peace (after we kick some fundie butt)

arendt

on edit: typos, grammar

[ulysses]

8. damn.

Excellent analysis.

Interesting site idea. I have a plate full of things I keep ignoring (;-) ) but I'm intrigued, and I know a little about running a site. Let me think about it.

[dpibel]

24. Ahmanson, for starters

The Ahmanson fortune is big on supporting the Chalcedon Institute, a place that'll curl your hair (Christian reconstructionists). I think the Hunt brothers are in that same crew.

Just for extra funzies: Both fortunes are tied to touch screen voting devices.

[starroute]

41. Philosophical connections between corporatists and fundies

I don't know how "formalized" the corporatist/fundie alliance may be, but the philosophical affinities go very deep.

All right-wingers seem to believe that people are naturally sinful and corrupt, although they may react in different ways to that belief. Fundies go in for prayer and brainwashing for their followers and dreams of destruction and hellfire for those whose actions match their definitions of "sin." Old-line fascist types are strongest on military and police power to keep people from getting out of line. The corporatists are more inclined to accept the sinfulness of the world and use their belief in innate corruption as an excuse for being both corrupt in themselves and a cause of corruption in others.

However, as different as they are in certain ways, all rightists are on the far side of a philosophical divide from liberals and leftists, whose basic article of faith is that people are naturally good and caring, will do the right thing if given half a chance, and can be allowed to act upon their normal inclinations without fear of untoward consequences.

Another connection between fundies and corporatists lies in the similarity of predestination to social Darwinism. Both belief-systems single out a particular favored group to be saved/survive while everyone else is damned/goes extinct. Both systems also discourage the winners from having compassion for the losers, on the grounds that it doesn't help the losers and might only drag the winners down.

It's no coincidence that the Unitarian-Universalists came out of a late-18th century reaction against predestination and embraced the notion that the same divine spark is in all of us and that religion only works if everybody gets to be saved. In that sense, liberals might be called social universalists -- they believe "that all men are created equal" and that government only works if its goal is to endorse and empower everybody.

[IrateCitizen]

54. One small correction regarding UU's

From the UUA website (http://www.uua.org/aboutuu/history.html):

Unitarian Universalism has a deep and diverse history, dating back to sixteenth century Transylvania (our Unitarian side) and to eighteenth century America (our Universalist roots in this country).As Mark Harris writes in his pamphlet, "Unitarian Universalist Origins: Our Historic Faith," people who expressed a belief "in free human will and the loving benevolence of God, eventually became Unitarian. During the first four decades of the nineteenth century, hundreds of congregational churches fought over ideas about sin and salvation, and especially over the doctrine of the Trinity. In 1819, Unitarian minister William Ellery Channing delivered a sermon called 'Unitarian Christianity' and helped to give the Unitarians a strong platform. Six years later the American Unitarian Association was organized in Boston, Massachusetts."

Of our Universalist history, Harris writes, "From its beginnings, Universalism challenged its members to reach out and embrace people whom society often marginalized. The Gloucester church included a freed slave among its charter members, and the Universalists became the first denomination to ordain women to the ministry, beginning in 1863 with Olympia Brown. Universalism was a more evangelical faith than Unitarianism. After officially organizing in 1793, the Universalists spread their faith across the eastern United States and Canada," promoting the belief that all people are the children of God, rather than a chosen few.

The links on these pages will tell you more of the story of Unitarian Universalism; introduce you to some of the most famous Unitarian Universalists -- both those of days past and present; and provide you with sites where you can learn much more about this rich faith which embodies many strands of Judeo-Christian teachings and the influences of the world's great religious traditions.

And from a linked article:

By the middle of the twentieth century it became clear that Unitarians and Universalists could have a stronger liberal religious voice if they merged their efforts, and they did so in 1961, forming the Unitarian Universalist Association. Many Unitarian Universalists became active in the civil rights movement. James Reeb, a Unitarian Universalist minister, was murdered in Selma, Alabama, after he and twenty percent of the denomination’s ministers responded to Martin Luther King, Jr.'s call to march for justice.

[arendt]

4. Front page moves fast at 5 PM - kick n/t

n/t

[SpiralHawk]

5. Bravo, Arendt -- Unfortunately, I agree too much with your

piercing analysis, though I doubt I could have expressed it with such force and eloquence. Tis starkly true what you write. Time for all Americans to snap out of it.

And yet, even if the majority do not awaken from thier dangerous slumbler, the Hell on Earth that the neocons and fundamentalists are creating shall not stand for long. It, too, shall pass. And far sooner than they might ever imagine.

Spirit is alive. Spirit is afoot.

[arendt]

7. Try once to wake, then move on. Its triage time.

I agree that spirit is alive, or I wouldn't be writing this stuff.

But, we have to gain followers fast. So, if someone rejects your
alarm clock ringing, move on. We are better off finding willing
followers than knocking sense into deluded opponents.

Time is of the essence.

arendt

[IrateCitizen]

9. Not sure I can do this justice with just one read through...

... but here goes, anyway.

First off, you never fail to disappoint, arendt. There is a lot of historical context to absorb here -- much of it that I am admittedly unfamiliar with.

I see things in much the same manner, except that I see the corporatists as the real holders of power -- even after they have fled to the gated communities of their choice -- and the fundamentalists as their brownshirts, carrying out their murderous dictates with zealous glee. A good example of this is Molly Ivins' description of Dubya's relationship with the religious right in "Shrub". She describes it as "dating a girl with whom you don't want to be seen in public." The book also contains a few other anecdotes about the role of the RR in Texas politics -- and how they are essentially beaten back by the country club Republicans should they step out of line, telling us who really still holds the power.

But that doesn't diminish the danger that you warn against, because it is very real. No matter who is really calling the shots, it is the liberals and progressives -- thinking people -- that they are allied against. For the moneyed class, it is an alliance of convenience -- they certainly don't expect to be held to the dictates of the fundamentalists. For the fundies, it is their unadulterated fear of anything foreign to them, anything that they cannot easily understand (that means gays, feminists, other cultures, etc.). And that fear can manifest itself as hatred pretty damned fast, as I have seen exhibited by fundies I have come across in the military!

The question before us is, what do we do to counter it before it's too late? Just being a "hardheaded liberal" is not enough. We need real organization as well, because they're the ones who embrace social hierarchy as being the natural order -- and we recoil from it in disgust. Without the organization -- especially speaking out from the pulpit and membership of more moderate and liberal religious institutions (both in the house of worship AND in the street!) -- I don't see how the hierarchy and structure needed will take shape.

What are your thoughts on this, or are you just providing detailed historical analysis today? ;-)

[arendt]

10. Tough Question. Here's a off-the-top-of-my-head-response.

Self-interest is an organizing principle that has worked for
business for a long time. Its about time it worked for citizens.

Its a fine line between preaching self-interest and inciting
fear, but that fine-ness can give us cover in case of overzealousness.

You say to a middle class person:

Why is there no money for our states, but plenty of money for Haliburton?
Why are we running up huge debts while giving tax breaks to the super
rich who send our jobs overseas?
Why do we get a bum's rush, corporate pork Medicare bill under the
GOP, when the same issue was resisted by them for decades?
Why did my state (MA) spend more money on prisons than on higher
education this year?
Why is the government giving money directly to churches so they
can run faith-biased programs?

Oooh - faith-BIASED - I like it.

Those are four basic issues: government finance, health care, education,
retirement security.

Maybe you find a few more, but the idea is to speak to middle class people
about what kind of future they and their children will have.

And, hammer the shit out of these liars about the needless war in Iraq.

arendt

[IrateCitizen]

13. You're coming up with ideas of things to hammer them on...

which is nothing new. Most of us are quite aware of this stuff -- and try to get people to understand at every opportunity.

The question is one of ORGANIZATION. It's like this: how much effect will ten thousand people have spreading the word, person by person; while at the same time the fundies and moneyed class are brainwashing more than we can get to open their eyes? We can't do anything without a real ORGANIZATION.

I've offered an opening with the example of moderate to liberal churches getting on the front lines. There is already a loose hierarchy present within them -- even within sects like my Unitarian Universalists! Plus, they provide an EXCELLENT counterweight to the fundies, much better than atheists or agnostics or humanists, with regards to the general populace.

But whereto from there? Based on the amount of hostility I see many of the agnostics here express toward ANY people of faith, I don't see it as a rift that is going away anytime soon. And in that case, how do we get the ACLUers, the environmentalists, the socialists, the anarcho-socialists, the communitarian communists, etc. to all put down their bickering and join forces? How would such a movement take shape?

[arendt]

17. Yeah, I go to UU too, and its a hard sell

UU is for peace and justice; but it is a very select group that can
be so selfless and well-motivated. They are too tolerant of fundie
churches for my taste.

We used to have the Democratic Party as an organization. Even if
Dean wins the nomination, the DLC will splinter off and it will be
1968 redux.

Perhaps we should check out what George Soros is up to. I know that a lot
of DUers have all kinds of conspiracy theories about him; but he
spent Billions with a B trying to set up democratic institutions in the
ex-Soviet bloc, and he had direct experience of the Nazis. Still, he
can't fund everything.

Organization requires easily explainable programs and well-recognized
people, if you want a mass following. Who would you nominate as
figurehead leader of this organization? What program will get people
to join your organization.

I personally think that the internet has demonstrated itself capable
of providing all the technology needed to organize on a national
level. We just need to plug shoe leather and good writing into the
net. So far, Dean is best at that.

BTW, I'm off to my Dean meetup in about 30 minutes. Perfect example
of ORGANIZATION. The location and the group keeps changing, but
the ORGANIZATION holds it together.

arendt

[opihimoimoi]

11. KICK

:kick:

Re Pop psychology

They hate us for our freedom""

Its a simple statement by a simple person who happens to be Prez

Designed for the simple mind

easy to absorb, really nothing of substance as it is almost meaningless.

They don hate us for our freedom

they hate us for our ARROGANCE

which allows excesses, stupidity, and ... greed.

The Pub Mind is easily swayed by the Pub Propaganda/ churches/ and psyOps.

[arendt]

22. You missed the point

I agree that he's dumb. I agree why the Arabs hate us.

I'm saying it was an unconscious slip. The statement went down
so easily because so many people in the US do despise liberal
New Yorkers.

Sensible people thought it was a joke, but it may have been an
unintended coded communication from W's subconscious (a
hideous concept, to be sure) to the freeper subconscious.

I'm suggesting that the dittoheads bought it because they couldn't
very well piss on NYC while claiming to be patriotic, yet they
had often expressed anti-NYC sentiments themselves.

It just seemed like good Daily Show material. You know, some
liberal New Yorker gets mugged by a bunch of anti-abortion
protestors and he says "they hate us for our freedom".

There, I have beaten it to death.

arendt

[opihimoimoi]

23. We are in agreement. Part of my answer discribed the sheepesque pubs

and the other part, the terrorists Bush directed his THUFOF statement thingy.
My bad, shoulda made myself more clear.

and its not dead, it still lives, lol

[arendt]

37. THUFOF! - first time I heard that. LOL. n/t

n/t

[arendt]

14. Well, somebody better telephone the country club repubs, cause...

their boy is busting up the joint.

See my post on Dubya and the CNP.

I think that the CC repubs are stupid. They've been outsmarted
by all the smart little boys they hire to do the dirty work for them.

I think that the fundies hijacked the GOP like they hijacked the
SBC. Only the CC repubs are too rich to feel the hurt yet, and
the smart boys want to keep it that way until they've got both
the middle class and the CC repubs in chains.

What exactly have CC repubs done to rein in the damage these
nutcases are doing to the U.S. economy? Or don't the CC repubs
care where they get their money anymore? Are they all just clipping
bond coupons and cashing out Wal Mart stock?

No offense, but I see no restraint from the moderate right at all.

arendt

on edit: typo

[IrateCitizen]

19. No offense taken...

The "moderate right" is nonexistant today. The "moderate right" is typified by people like Maine Sens. Snowe and Collins, along with the likes of Kevin Phillips. What we have now on the right are the fundies and the moneyed class. The moneyed class isn't reining in the fundies because the fundies are doing just what they want.

You brought up the example of Tom DeLay. He's a wacko fundie, but every time he opens his mouth it's espousing something that makes the life of the poor harder and the plight of corporations (and the rich) much easier. Their interests overlap.

You won't see the wing-clipping in public, because most of the leaders of the fundies are at least smart enough to know where their power flows from. They're bullies and toadies -- and if there's one thing you can count on them to be, it's predictable. They'll bully all those lower than them, and suck up to all those above them. The rare example of someone stepping out of line will be dealt with.

Remember, if there's one thing these people crave, it's a clear HIERARCHY in which everyone knows their place. That means following as much as dominating, it's a double-edged sword.

[arendt]

21. Won't argue with your analysis. Getting back to organization

Historically, the counter to entrenched hierarchy was distributed
resistance. Drawing on Kevin Phillips' "The Cousins' Wars", the
Parliamentary Party and the Massachusetts Patriots both formed
local organizations that inter-communicated and swarmed.

The internet lets us do the same. Our leaders should be people
who distinguish themselves in organizing us via the internet.
People like "moveon" who have now been funded by Soros.
People like THE ORGANIZERS of Democratic Underground.
Perhaps people like Will Pitt, but you have to draw a line between
organizing and self-promotion. The internet has its own "groupie"
problem.

In any case, my suggestion is that organization will look less
like 1950s style labor union hierarchies, and more like much
older Committees of Correspondence.

Comments

arendt

[IrateCitizen]

45. OK, I think we're in agreement here...

The key, of course, will be to keep all of the cats herded together, even if they aren't necessarily directly listening to one another. ;-)

[arendt]

12. Here's a link for Dubya and the CNP

At this page

http://www.tylwythteg.com/enemies/Bush/bush9.html

you can find their take about what got said at this speech.
The text has never been released.

> GEORGE DUBYA's SECRET PLATFORM

<snop>

"He stated that he is in favor of denying (special) civil rights to Americans.  He believes Gays should have less rights than other citizens.  He also feels that if the truth be known, women need fewer rights.  He believes women have no business in politics.  He thinks that there also should not be a right to ridicule candidates on the Internet." (In fact our analysis of his public and private remarks show that George is in favor of altering the first amendment and making homosexuality a federal crime.)

*

"When said that if he is elected president, he will make sure that there is Christian prayers in schools.  If he has his way, all prayers will be Christian." (and no one will be allowed to pray in any other language but English, and to any other god but the Christian God.)

*

He said he will work to put a stop to lawsuits against the gun industry, the tobacco industry and HMOs.  He feels that there is too much litigation in America and the lawyers are getting too rich."

*

He said he will work hard to overturn Roe v. Wade, and will keep the FDA from approving abortion pills.  He will appoint only anti-choice Supreme Court Justices and judges to the federal bench."

</snip>

This site has possibilities.

arendt

[SpiralHawk]

15. You have described a "Pluto-theocracy" or Theo-plutocracy

or whatever: Theocrats and Plutocrats in the
Ultimate Unholy Alliance.


"The most potent weapon of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed." --Steven Biko

[DoYouEverWonder]

16. Wow,

you got it. Thanks for putting it all together so eloquently.

IMHO, the problem with humanity started 1000's of years ago when people started to believe that god was something that was outside of themselves. The sooner people wake up and realize that god is in them and therefore they are god, the better off we will all be. As soon as you make god something that lives outside of yourself, then other people will be able to take advantage of you and will be happy to try to control your life. That's how all these TV evangalists get away with their crap. They convince people that you have to go through them to get to god and it's usually for a hefty fee.

I hope you go for it with the website idea.

Peace be with you,
DYEW

[arendt]

18. Spoken like a true Gnostic. n/t

n/t

[DoYouEverWonder]

20. I'll take that has a compliment

Thank you.

I suppose it takes one, to know one. (pun intended)

[Khephra]

34. There's a few of us Gnostics still creaking around

Heresy, like history, is determined by the winners.

[arendt]

36. Cool! Maybe we should start Gnostics Underground n/t

n/t

[NashVegas]

46. The Most Radical Concept in History

"god created man in his own image," or "man created god in his own image," whichever way you look at it, the implication is that we are all capable of the divine.

[IrateCitizen]

47. Not only that, but that the divine dwells in all of us

The challenge lies in reaching this "divine spark" that exists within each person's conscience. Personally, I think that Quakers have some good ideas on this, with their emphasis on "sitting in stillness" to achieve "leadings of the spirit". There's something telling in following this philosophy and almost invariably ending up at a pacifist outlook, rejecting war and militarism as having any sort of legitimacy.

[DoYouEverWonder]

52. Not exactly

Since god is in everyone and everything, there is no image to create something in. It is not a question of one creating the other, this is the first step in perpetuating the fallacy that god is an entity unto itself.

However, it is true that we are all capable of the divine but on the other hand, we are all just as capable of evil too. It's that old yin and yang thing. Darkness vs light. Seems you can't have one without the other and for us humans it's an age old battle between the two.

[eric_schafer]

25. nice post

work in Hypatia of Alexandria and you'll have people ripping up the stadium seats :)

what evidence do you have that people will respond to a message like this? much less take the next step and organize on the basis of it? mind you, i'm not being critical of what you're advocating. but don't you find that people would rather just try to eke out an "existence" instead of having to think about the big picture stuff?

[arendt]

51. No evidence at all. I just can't help writing what's on my mind...

and DU lets me post it. I love DU.

> don't you find that people would rather just try to eke out an "existence"
> instead of having to think about the big picture stuff?

Has it ever not been so? The beauty of DU is that I post, and those
who are interested respond. I find better discussions of such esoterica
online than I have ever found in person. Its one of the best things
about the Internet.

Thanks for your response. I'll have to look up Hypatia of Alexandria,
I thought ?she? was a major intellect who got killed by the Christian
mob.

arendt

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

26. When liberals conceded Protestant Churches to the right-wing

we lost America. The Protestant Churches are some of the (few) long standing American institutions that are not governmental or capitalist. When liberal regain them, the Democratic party will be the majority party again.

Notice that we did NOT lose the Black Protestant Churches, and notice that many of our favorite Democratic African American leaders like King and Jackson were ministers from Protestant Churches.

[roguevalley]

27. I love posts like this. thank you. Now read Jesus the Heretic by

douglas Lockhart (element) about how gnosticism was
subverted and made this all possible.

Thanks for the lovely post.

[Aries]

28. Kick---and a plug for the Freedom from Religion Foundation

Organized religion is the source of several of our problems, including (but not limited to):

1) irrational deference to authority, based on belief in one "God", from Whom all authority flows.

2) mediation between the individual and the uni/multi/omniverse by the professional "priest" class.

3) denial of "evil" tendencies within oneself and projection onto those who believe differently.

I don't care if people practice this at home, just keep it out of the public arena, and stop these insane "faith-based" government projects!

And, BTW, join the Freedom from Religion Foundation

"...The Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc., is an educational group working for the separation of state and church. Its purposes, as stated in its bylaws, are to promote the constitutional principle of separation of state and church, and to educate the public on matters relating to nontheism.

Incorporated in 1978 in Wisconsin, the Foundation is a national membership association of freethinkers: atheists, agnostics and skeptics of any pedigree. The Foundation is a non-profit, tax-exempt organization under Internal Revenue Code 501(c)(3). All dues and contributions are deductible for income tax purposes...."

[sweetheart]

29. hi there sweet hannah...

Your words wise have ever so subtle a smell, to me, a propagandist bitch at heart, i smell something....

Firstly a confession. I spent 15 years in the close company of a self professed enlightened man, Dr. Frederick Lenz, "Rama". In my experience, he was brilliant, lighting up lives of thousands of people and himself luminous light in every meeting. I have seen many miracles and occult powers that most folks don't "believe" in, and accept them as fact, given that the soul on earth is powerful enough to render them. Given that, the most powerful human being i know of on the planet is www.adida.org The man is a very very powerful person, and will debunk your intellectualism if you have the balls to ever get in front of him.... or rather, intellectualism is only a weapon given your intent... and ones intent is the issue, whether that is rational or not. A lover simply loves without thought... and is that wrong, or undermining... by your accusation, yes,... and yet ignorance in that case is a much different machination.

Given my confession, i can hardly concur that a religious visionary is a fundamentalist. I agree with your conclusions outright, yet would fight to my last breath to preserve the right of nutty religious folks to preserve their faith. I am the (kshaktria caste) as was gautama siddhartha and krishna (warrior). The enlightened people who started the world's religions may have been more of the warrior spirit than history remembers... and i have no problem with an enlightened soul usurping military power to a benign dictatorship... aaah... so i'm one of those fundamentalists you rail against... and that is the smell i detect.

Root to all this fancy revisionism is that life is "intent", not rational. Intent may never be spoken outloud, only reverse engineered from the software running.... sorta like reading the manual and discovering the software is not coded to the specification. The intent of evil people, throughtout history is to usurp justice and the natural law of humankind.

The usurpers will repeatedly attempt this coup against civility every century as the world descends in to this dark age of massive overpopulation and ignorance... and it is the job of the guardians of justice to defend justice.

My point is that, as a defender of justice, it has nothing to do with thoughts, or ideas. It has to do with your own willingness to surrender to the inner truth, even if it means defeat. The christians who were ate by lions really did gain heaven... and 72 virgins really may be awaiting a noble warrior who defended justice for all humankind. Intellectuals scoff at the idea, but yet i would not for a second give them credence, as their intent is driven by fear of death, not knowledge of life.

As a warrior, defending the democratic house of USA from the rats who inhabit the congress and executive gnawing on everything and rotting the very timbers of the house upon which we rely.... it is more pragmatic.

Tactially (short term)
1. get people registered to vote.

Strategicaly (long term)
1. form liberalism think tanks
2. form liberalism lobbies
3. form liberal newspapers

The occult (read hidden, secret) fact is that america is already post-empire and declining and the story is all too readable in hapsburg or any other empire collapse you wish to draw on from egypt to assyria... rather the question is in what represents the Rising power... china. Given that by 2050, usa will be number 2 to china, what then... number 2 in all ways, militarily, and china will support independence for hawaii sailing its fleet between california and the islands... supporting cecession of alaska.... as is the new maxim in our age of assertive divisive foreign involvement.... divide FOREVER.

The problem is not the evil men in the GOP. It is the devils in your own heart. I agree with both the intellectualist and the fundamentalist... repent AND seek liberalism... There is a baby in that fundamentalist bathwater.... you must find it.

love always,

-sweetheart

[opihimoimoi]

30. I really wonder if China will become #1 in the nx 45 years or so.

She has a set of probs only a Mother could luv.

Over Population.

Water shortages.

Energy shortages.

Resources are in short supply.

Inadequate food. Top soil depletion.

Poor Highway system. Taking up land formly used for farming.

Inadequate Parking for her cars. Chewing up more farm land.

Leadership problems...due to poor poli system.

Is the labor prostitute of the West.

and, no game plan for the Far Future.

[sweetheart]

32. yes china's problems

are as bad as america's problems indeed... just she has
4 times the population, and the way economic slavery works in our modern world.. that is 4 times the output... even if the american population doubles... then 2 times.

You presume america will stay as it is today, and i see that we are on the crest of a wave that will leave the people high and dry.... that to imagine the pinnacle of the post WW2 hegemony as the "norm" for the usa is absurd.... and the reality is what we REALLY produce and consume in the relative world.

I have no ideological argument to make... maybe india... maybe the EU.... but the USA has lost it... and the spirit of human intelligence resides in all nations far beyond the micturations of american media ethnocentricity.

Indeed, only a mother could love the human race. :-)

[opihimoimoi]

40. It has occured to many on this Planet, that we are seeing the last days

of a jaded, opulent Society. I speak of the Western Nations mostly. We are close to depleting our energy reserves and the mere hint of the spigot closing will most likely trigger panic.

Should the Panic run amok there will be no #1 Nation, only a bunch of poor ones, ours included.

Our one hope is a Global Truce of sorts to join forces in fighting off Famine. Food and Water will be the most important concerns. All over the Planet.

Famine Prevention 101, 277, 374, and 978 is not being offered at our Institutions. Our Gov'ts are not addressing this seriously.

The Sustainable Planet 101 has not creeped into our National conciousness and thus we exacerbate our problems with continuing waste and fool hardy activities. It is the ONLY OPTION and we still have the time to pull it off... But Bush and Co defer opting for the status quo

Our children are gonna be pissed off at this generation. We have the opportunity and we are fumbling the ball big time.

[IrateCitizen]

44. You hit the proverbial nail on the head, opi

One of the books that opened my eyes to this reality was The Sacred Balance by David Suzuki. Western civilization has conditioned us to believe that the environment is somehow something separate from ourselves -- and therefore, little more than a resource to be exploited and controlled. However, the true reality is that we are wholly dependent on the environment for our very survival. We depend on its air, water and soil -- not to mention countless other organisms that share the planet with us -- for our very lives.

Furthermore, the planet is a complex ecosystem in which everything is dependent on everything else. Think of it as an intricate spider's web. If you break some strands here and there, the web will still stand. But tear enough strands, and sooner or later, a large part of it will collapse. Keep on tearing them, and the whole thing will fall in on itself.

Right now, we are precipitating the largest mass extinction of species that the planet has seen since the end of the age of the dinosaurs (cited from the book Affluenza by DeGraff, et.al.) and at the same time acting as if everything is fine. We have destroyed over half of the original forests on the earth, with some of the most valuable ecosystems (South American and Indonesian rainforests, for example) disappearing at incredibly rapid rates. We are currently consuming 33% more resources than the earth can replenish on a yearly basis (chief among these being arable soil and clean water supplies), and if every nation on earth adopted the same "standard of living" as the US, the figure would jump to five times as much.

Many prominent international groups of scientists estimate that we have, at most, two generations to fix things before we begin to suffer MAJOR environmental catastrophe. That's two generations MAX -- it may be less than that. Those major environmental catastrophes will mean the end of civilization as we know it, there's no other way of realistically looking at it.

Scared yet? If not, you should be -- because we are currently doing NOTHING to adequately address these issues, instead trying to squeeze a few last drops of blood out of the turnip before it crumbles in our hands.

[sweetheart]

57. killing the planet

I totally agree with you opi... (aside what does it mean in hawaiian?) Hawaii itself has experienced some disastrous introductions of species that have destroyed other species in the name of "game keeping"... i learned that from a bio-researcher on a scuba dive showing me the introduced fish species.

I grew up in Los Angeles which i think is the city most representative of future america... they've built on effin' every square inch of land and are expanding even today that soon it will be sandiego-abarbara-riverside-LA.. one giant toxic concrete hole... where only the uber-wealthy can afford the space and nature to live normal human lives... and the rest just get toxic. Though it is my home town, i hate the toxic sarcasm, insincerity and hateful tone that has become the LA signature.

A hotel lady on the big island told me how she always knows when people are from LA as they are hateful... and i think that the psychological result of the destruction of environment. I realized that if i stayed in LA, i would too become a toxic human from the plague of tooo much urban sprawl, and no respect of nature. I remember wishing for a nuclear war, as even though i would die, at least the horror of LA would be erased and it was worth it.

I think the biggest issue by far is population control, and re-engineering economic systems to comprehend "growth" without needing to over exploit... its as if economics presumes that all resources besides cash are infinite... and truly, there should be a futures-market like exchange that trades water, clean air, and unfished ocean... as these resources are scarce.

The american way is to destroy, yet in america i've seen soo many people who are the antithesis of that, yet they are taxed and embedded in to a system that perverts their goodwill. You are right to say it is our generation that has dropped this football... fumble... and unless the political machine can be tamed, the result will be misery for all of humanity. The only other way is to kill the beast before it kills humanity, and my hope is, that if bush can't be terminated, then the dollar plunges to yen parity destroying america's ability to perpetuate the destruction. It is a patriotic wish i have... in the spirit of the american indians and the native peoples who've seen the land raped and killed... we're at the environmental failsafe point... and there is no restart on this game.

[arendt]

35. but would you love me if my name was Hannah Jefferson?

> There is a baby in that fundamentalist bathwater.... you must find it.

Paraphrasing Morris Berman quoting someone:

..What is germane to the development of an individual can lead
..to mass insanity when broadcast over loudspeakers.

To me, the mass of fundamentalists are UN-thinking, UN-relfective
sheep. What is important is to have "interiority", which is exactly
what the unscrupulous leaders of fundamentalism are busy stamping
out.

If your guru has interiority and wants you to have it, he cannot be
my definition of fundamentalist. He may be a mystic or a seer,
but he is not a despot.

Have you read any Ken Wilbur? He describes today's spiritual
movements as (paraphrasing) "a few truly enlightened beings
and a large mob of deeply unenlightened worshippers; simultaneously
ahead and behind in spiritual development".

I judge no individual until I have spoken with him (perhaps to gather
his "intent"). But I judge these movements by their actions. Politicized
fundamentalism is anti-Enlightenment and anti-interiority.

Since I have never heard of your guru, I certainly would never accuse
him of being political.

Your definition of "intent" reminds me of Heidigger's "throwness".
We are in a situation, and it throws us. Our unconscious true self
is forced to respond faster than consciousness can censor it.

Having studied deeply about consciousness, including owning a
set of Gateway CDs from the Monroe Institute and trying pitifully
to meditate, I know that my consciousness is often a mere spectator,
more of the Press Agent for my mind than the controller.

So, please recalibrate your smell sensor. I really am only objecting
to the politicization, de-spiritualization, and exteriority of fundamentalist
organizations.

Peace

arendt

[sweetheart]

43. political enlightenment

Though indeed my guru was apolitical, he was very political... and was deeply opposed to the neocon takeover. It was those same neocons that sicked the FBI on our cult, deeming it subversive, and using the RICO laws to undermine my guru's teaching suggesting that any devotees who were tax-incompetent somehow reflected in any way on the school of meditation my guru held. He held freedom of religion as the most sacred of american qualities, including the separation of church and state.

That said, he did point out that the neocon bad guys were reincarnated from nazi germany... to achieve what they failed to achieve in that former existance. One thing about enlightened charisma is that it melts opposition, and transforms people. Had it been the will that he be political, surely he would have been assassinated as nonspiritual people are intimidated by the intense power round an enlightened soul.

Until his death, i could always say that despite america's flaws, there was solid gold inside the beast... as Rama strongly supported american business and work ethics as wholly healthy tantra.. likening the incarnation to a past life long ago in Japan where there was no "monastary" rather a collective of disciples working in the world.

The very advanced souls i know are all deeply opposed to fundamentalism as it represents the ossification of identity to a little body-mind-self, even if the memory is of enlightened experience... to have memory, one must have engaged the past/future software of the human attention field, and this itself is ego. Intending recollection is more like dreaming, and is well described by carlos castaneda in his book series on occult awakening.

The "I" self that is everpresent before words, language and identity in any given moment... is already free... Yet the mind is trained to "cry for food" from a very young age.. and the expectation that spiritual enlightenment will come from similar crying is amateurish, however advanced self discovery learning becomes in its Ph.D discipline... it is still crying for food... in stopping, meditating, recognizing the awake silence before desire clouds over... stopping takes no time, only the willingness to recognize how "me" has become a fundamentalist.

The fundamentalist is the ego, and it speaks life in the absolutes of words. It creates differences to discriminate and survive, yet these animal impulses that get one survival are in awakening merely chains of ego-self... however effective.

What am i rambling about? I guess i'm saying that if you take on the fundamentalist in your own intellectual-knowing with the same zeal you oppose the bush clan, you'll awaken. There is no other, only you. The fundamentalists reign because you have not put the baby to bed. :-)

Sorry if i sound pointed. its hard to say.. as in language, the self identity is ego. You would really have loved my guru had you met him... he was really funny and profound. Though i have no guru, i would recommend to anyone who really wants to awaken beyond the tyrant of their own superego.. www.gangaji.org She is enlightened, very very subtle, and able to cut any gordian knot of ego you lay in front of her. She's on public access cable in much of the west, and has retreats that are really worth a lifetime.

Putting an unenlightened person in front of enlightenment is the best way to defeat fundamentalism. It creates a chain reaction in consciousness that transforms the world.

My smeller only detects the subtle traces of your attachment to your knowledge, and what a tyrant that is, knowing fundamentalism absolutely as ones own state of mind, and also knowing to want to be free from it, divided in ones own house.

Its a very subtle critique, not of your writing or exceptional inspiration, but of your state of mind reflected in writing... honourable hannah whatever-your-last-name. ;-)

Your enlightenment will defeat the bushies, more than your writing.

namaste,
-sweetheart

[arendt]

50. Guilty as charged

I call myself a "theoretical Buddhist". I have studied enlightenment
to death; plowed through 700 pages of Austen's "Zen and the Brain",
learning more about the thalamus than I ever wanted to know. I
even "flunked" the Gateway Hemi-sync tapes. Can't meditate even
with technological crutches.

I can translate your "ramblings" and agree with them - in theory.

But, I am still a spiritual coward. I have read history, and enlightened
people tend to get murdered. Short of a societal "miracle" of mass
enlightenment, I fail to see the kind of retail "face-to-face" spirituality
you advocate surviving the wholesale orthodox hatred of fundamentalism.

Nevertheless, I will ponder what you have said. One of these trips
to the end of the spiritual diviing board and back, I may get the
courage to take the plunge. No act is wasted. Thanks.

Neocons, FBI, RICO - jeez its a miracle your still alive. No wonder
you are expat.

Peace (in theory)

arendt

edit: add content

[littlejoe]

31. He who quotes other people

rarely has any original to say on their behalf.

[arendt]

33. you are referring to yourself, of course n/t

n/t

[sweetheart]

58. little joe, call ... show us your royal flush

What is your hangup? I've seen you being nasty to people on this board a coupla times now, and i wonder what inspires this rudeness? People here, arendt and pmbryant in particular, are intelligent and good hearted folks, and you are on a rag... what gives?

I'd like to hear what you have to say for yourself in longer than 1 sentence. You only get the priviledge of being rude if you can explain yourself eloquently, so i'm now putting you on the spot... make a contrary argument using logic, english and creativity... or bugger off.

There are enough rude nasties in the world without introducing such things here... maybe you're just young... a product of american schools... i forgive you... but i'm gonna flame your tush if you keep up this behaviour.

[arendt]

38. bedtime kick n/t

n/t

[mmonk]

39. Don't think the Cathars were anything to admire

They would live a life of debauchery. Then on their death bed would asked to be forgiven for their sins, declare their religion, and then have someone smother them to end their life. To them, it wasn't how you lived your life, but what you declared at the end. Though there is some Protestant type thought there, I wouldn't claim them if I were you. Also, Catholics predated medieval times though the church's behavior during that time was its worst (I'm Catholic by the way). Also, I'm not particular religious (too much into science I guess).

[arendt]

49. If your not particularly religious, where did you pick up...

the smear job you just quoted? Macys?

I never heard these horror stories before; and, besides,
Catholicism is full of death bed conversions, which you
try to palm off on Protestants. As I mentioned in the essay,
its a fact that Constantine was a death bed conversion.
Pot. Ketttle. Black.

If you don't believe in a fairy-tale heaven of golden plates
and golden spoons, then what matters is how you lived
your life. If the Cathars lived "a life of debauchery", it didn't
seem to have hurt them as a society. They were much
richer, better educated, and healthier than the Catholics
of the time.

Maybe you ought to check the source of your story.

arendt

[starroute]

42. Two thousand years of orthodoxy vs. gnosticism

I was playing around with some ideas on these lines maybe 4-5 years ago. I just pulled out the notes for an essay I never wrote and I'm finding them fragmentary but tantalizing.

The basic premise I was trying to set up was that with the rise of civilization, people were encouraged to listen to what authority told them rather than to the higher knowledge they found in their own hearts. With the development of writing, myths ceased to made anew by every storyteller and were set down in a single official version to be copied over and over without deviation. That's what I meant by orthodoxy.

Around 500 BC, there was a renewal of the old, pre-civilized attitudes, largely as a result of shamanistic cultures percolating down from the steppes. That led directly to the mystery cults and then to new, mystical philosophies and religions. That's what I meant by gnosticism.

For the last two thousand years in the West, there has been a great, ongoing contention between the two attitudes. At first, othodoxy held all the reins of power. Wherever gnosticism broke out, it was swatted down as heresy. By the late Middle Ages, the Catholic Church had even abandoned Plato because of his gnostic implications and had embraced Aristotelian scholasticism.

But the Renaissance represented a massive renewal of gnosticism, launched by the hermetic and cabbalistic texts brought to Italy after the fall of Constantinople. And the 18th century Enlightenment, under its rationalist surface, was just as deeply gnostic at heart. (The word "Enlightenment" itself brilliantly expresses both the rational and the gnostic aspects of the movement.) Democracy and modern science were the two most far-reaching products of that gnostic faith in the ability of the individual to know truth and act upon it.

The United States itself was founded on a basis of Enlightenment gnosticism. Its fundamental premises were that truth exists only in the human heart, that there can be no source of authority external to the individual conscience, and that the highest purpose of government is to promote the recognition and communication of truth by enlightened individuals.

Today, those premises are very much as risk in the face of a new onslaught of orthodoxy. But we have something on our side that they don't -- the founding beliefs of this country. If we can be true to those beliefs and not waver, they will provide us with both an inexhaustible source of self-confidence and a clear sense of direction.

[arendt]

48. On target

Have you ever read Morris Berman's "Coming to Our Senses"?

He talks about the body as the reservoir of all "heresy". He
says that interiority keeps being rediscovered (or kept alive
in secret) throughout history. That orthodox religion is always
a fraud that gnostics always blow the whistle on.

He develops a typography of heresy, and tries to show that
how the energy of gnosticism is channeled makes a big difference.
His examples include Cathars (failed - killed by Orthodox),
Enlightenment (succeeded), Nazis (failed - killedd by Englightenment).

Given what you wrote, I think you would find this book interesting.

arendt

[donsu]

53. KICK

nt

[rucky]

55. I think you've got the makings of a great book here

You have a firm grasp on these issues & tie them together well. Hellova read & lots to expand upon - historical and modern.

Please don't let this die in the DU thread factory - flesh it out, stitch it up - and PUBLISH it somewhere.

Thanks!

[arendt]

56. Thanks, but its been done...

My post was a synthesis of a lot of published stuff I already read.
This material is out there, it just doesn't make the top 1000 list.
Its boring and unpopular unless spiced up by, e.g. adding Liberal
to the pile.

If you want to read about Gnosticism, any one of Elaine Pagels'
Books will do: Gnostic Gospels, Beyond Belief.

If you want to read about Cathars, Morris Berman's "Coming
to Our Senses" covers them in academic detail; he also has
a section on early Christian Gnosticism.

But, the problem with the Cathars, and all this "hidden history"
stuff is that it attracts huge numbers of conspiracy buffs.

For example, there are very strong ties between the Cathars
and the Knights Templars. And it is increasingly accepted that
the (dreaded by orthodox religions) Freemasons are an offshoot
of the Templar remnant in Scotland. Once you say "Freemason",
you are in the land of crackpottery and will need a military
grade BS detector. That way lies madness.

But, if you want to go insane, check out "Holy Blood, Holy Grail".
It was the source of a lot of the facts in the number one best
seller "The DaVinci Code". You can give your religious friends
fits by talking up this utterly subversive piece of fiction.

So, I pushed the envelope about as hard as I could. But there
is nothing new here. Your suggestion just points out how
most people are unaware that this literature is already out
there.

Thanks again, and if interested, please check out Pagels,
Berman, etc.

arendt

on edit: typos

[opihimoimoi]

59. Please allow me to interject with THE MURDERED TEMPLARS

The story of how they accumulated their wealth and the envy/jealousy/greed that resulted in their demise.

Sad but so Human.

and also the Cathars, I believe it was the Smithsonian that published a story years ago about this and how the Pope wrecked genocide on them. Led to the Inquisition an all. Gruesome shit as I saw in some Spanish Museums many implements of torture and death.

Till this day, the spot where the last of the Cathars died is called THE FIELD OF FIRE.

It seems, much like Masada, the last of them committed group suicide, but unlike Masada, by throwing themselves into a huge fire. It was their belief it seems, that this was the proper way to die. From my scant flimsy aquaintence with this religion, they were a good people, no churches, no tithes, no abuse. But this led to their weakness of not being organized to defend themselves, thus, extinction.

Re Extinction: We are in their footsteps but yet to realize it.

We are about to SELFEXTINCT,

How? Let me count the ways///////

1. Famine, followed by years of misery, unable to get off this planet due to lack of resources.

2. War, followed by.......

3. Loloness, Unable to choose able and wise Leaders, followed by.....

4. Overpopulation, we are a virus consuming its host cell, Earth. Soon to be followed by ...........

5. and last, by choosing the Weakest Link in our Leadership. We can't even do that right.

[arendt]

60. What is "THE MURDERED TEMPLARS"? A book? n/t

n/t

[opihimoimoi]

64. Yes, it is a book but I cannot recall the author nor the publisher.

sorry,

[Astarho]

61. great article (kick)

BTW the church also forbid priests from marriage because their heirs could inherit the land and the church was losing a lot of money

[Karenina]

62. Excellent!!!

Thanks, Arendt! :toast:
AND :kick:

[Ardee]

63. My goodness ,a rather learned treatise to be sure

I do not wish to cheapen it by mentioning a work of fiction but i just finished reading The Davinci Code by Dan Brown, a NYTimes best seller for weeks now. It deals with precisely this perversion of the teachings of Christ and the diminsishment of the role of Mary Magdelene by the Catholic Church for the purpose of control.

Beginning with the Counsel of Niceaea in the 3rd century as Constantine made catholicism the official religion of Rome the teachings were perverted and much was destroyed so that control of the masses could be equally divided by church and state.

My only problem is that you appear to speak only to the charicature of a liberal , an image fostered by the far right to insult and demean. I believe that most liberals are very aware of the facts you state with such learned eloquence, in fact I believe that the growth of the Green party is a direct result of the frustrations the liberals found with their inability to be heard on this subject and others within the Democratic party.

I believe that is why many on the left are rejecting the anyone but Bush mantra as they (and I ) believe that we need a sea change and not an appearence of change.

[JanMichael]

65. A big kick.

I've always liked your style of analysis. Great piece. I'm afraid though that by the time most people wake up to the danger "A Handmaid's Tale" will be in full swing. Hell my own parents can't buy into the true dangers of the very near future. "It Can't Happen Here"? Yes. It can.

:kick: