05/28/2012: The Role of Religion as Existential Security

Unfortunate, ain’t it?

In Nietzsche’s, The Gay Sciencewe are met with this famous trope:

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?

Nietzsche’s pronouncement seemed prophetic at the time when belief in European rationalism was at its zenith, but belief in God has isstill very much here with us.  However the fact remains that Religion, despite being the “opiate of the people” as Marx put it, still serves a crucial function: as a protector and a firewall against uncertainty and existential insecurity.

Not surprisingly, studies have found that atheism is more likely to appear within the industrial and post-industrial countries. In impoverished, less educated countries, belief in God predominates.

Religion of course not only provides relief from existential stress by supplying existential security, it also moderates human behavior within the socio-economic insecurity of the times. Religion thus helps keep failed states somewhat stable. It might seem obvious that there are no atheists in foxholes, or in the impoverished cities of India or in sub-Sahara Africa while there are plenty of atheists in post-industrial  countries that feature high education along with strong social safety nets (Yes, Virginia, Socialism indeed breeds atheists!). One country seems to invalidate this formula. The United States is the wealthiest of all industrial nations and yet the most religious – due to extensive income disparity.

This all but guarantees that religious fundamentalism is still going to be around for a very long time (especially in the impoverished Muslim and Asian countries where existential security is nonexistent. And here is where the behavioral moderation properties of religion come into play and will grant a longer life to belief in God. Atheists make a terrible mistake in their belief that the application of applied reason and positivism alone will change the world for the better without any kind of action plan. The stealth religion that is atheism is useless as a force of reason unless those proponents can put their logical prowess into practice and help produce existential security for all. But atheists don’t seem to be interested in doing anything for all of us. The Equal Money system is such a proposal that will give all more security through social and economic programs that will ultimately give everyone that existential security only those privileged few now enjoy. We need all people to buy into economic equality and security or else we will have to endure the consequence of allowing  the grizzled, intolerant specter of religious fundamentalism to destroy what’s left of the world for centuries to come. Such a fate is only as inevitable as our avoidance to the necessity of change.

Notes:

[1] Pippa Norris, Ronald Inglehart, Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide (Cambridge Studies in Social Theory, Religion and Politics), Cambridge University Press, 2004. The authors claim that their research shows that the world’s industrial nations are more secular while the third world remains religious due to economic insecurity. The birth rate in these impoverished countries have grown to numbers where there are far more people who hold religious views than ever before, while the birth rate among secular nations are dropping.  Implication: unless economic equality is installed to remove existential uncertainty, religious fundamentalism may never leave us, threatening to collapse civilization into the Dark Ages 2.0.

2011/12/25 – 2011 Post-Mortems. FLASH!

2011 is almost gone. Do you know where your Light-body is?

Welcome, back. It’s been a while since I’ve made a post here, but I’ve been working on several writing projects and just completed one of them, so that’s good news.

My goal at the beginning of last year was to boost the readership of the blog, and I am happy to report  Mission: Accomplished. Views nearly quadrupled over the previous year, and I attribute that to several reasons, the main one being that I actually posted more blogs than I ever have before.

In looking back at the events of 2011, it seems that the old adage of, “the more things change, the more they stay the same.” The “Arab Spring,” which began almost a year ago when a young Tunisian fruit merchant set himself on fire in protest against the crushing economic climate he was forced to participate within, we wonder how much has changed. Ironically, according to this Al Jazeera, the young man’s family had to leave Sidi Bouzid out of fear.

In Egypt, President-for-life Hosni Mubarak was toppled from power after the military repeatedly fired on its own citizens. With Mubarak gone, guess what the military is up to these days? Firing on its own citizens.

In Libya, the story is far from over. Although Qadhafi has been toppled from power and killed, his prescient comments made in 2008 to his fellow Middle Eastern leaders seem to carry more weight as time goes on.

Syria of course, has resisted the uprisings by brutally repressing its citizens. In reports that can only be termed as “surprising,” former pals Syria’s Assad and Hamas (the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement in Israel) are not on speaking terms.

Osama bin Laden was allegedly assassinated by American Navy Seals. We don’t know for sure because the man’s body was thrown into the ocean. Allegedly.

The EU had been rocked by one financial tsunami after another. Japan was rocked by an actual tsunami and had one of its nuclear reactors melt down.

Steve Jobs, the leader of Apple died. His reported last words: “Oh, wow.“

Excuse me, but didn’t you used to be Occupy Wall Street?

Okay, we’ll be back soon with even more great blogs.

2011/09/17 – Ivan Rauscher Channels his Inner Hitler

Ivan Rauscher at play

“Ivan Rauscher,” a regular contributor to the Desteni Cult blog recently made  a lazy comparison that should reveal to anyone with even a modicum of discernment the deliberate smear campaign underway against Desteni. The only question that remains a mystery for these faux-logical contortions is, “why?”

We see and understand that any group that offers a different point-of-view from the mainstream will be called a “cult,” even groups such as Greenpeace and Zeitgeist will be called “cults” even when there is no metaphysical underpinning within their platform. But in Ivan Rauscher’s fevered imagination, he is clearly trying to link Desteni within  Nazi and Neo-Nazi philosophy in oder to smear, not to produce any kind of objective perspective involving Desteni. Watch Ivan as he does his thing:

To say that Adolf Hitler is an example of ‘self-forgiveness’ verges on support for Nazism.

This strange comparison , if it means anything, can only mean that the demonic has more power and fear over man’s common sense. A figure like Hitler is apparently far too evil to ever experience remorse or a desire for forgiveness. Such a notion of the forgiveness of Hitler is metaphysical But this description would only hold if Rauscher was serious about self-forgiveness and Nazism. In any case, this is a disgusting smear, which  Rauscher hopes that if he and his Anti-Desteni Watchdog Cult repeat often enough, people will believe it. Anyone familiar with Nazism would understand that the political thrust of Nazism was fear, racism, social Darwinism, conspiracy and vengeance, principles which not-so-ironically features a lot within the perspectives of the Desteni Cult Watchdogs. Another feature is an appalling disregard of dignity. Rauscher is quite satisfied to resort to common slander and misinformation against Desteni when he knows  what he’s saying isn’t true. I must assume that he understands what he is doing, because the alternative is that he’s lost touch with reality and needs to seek professional help.

I will go further and give Rauscher a pass and assume that he is “serious” when he says self-forgiveness of Hitler “verges on support for Nazism.” But how does the principle of self-forgiveness, a subject  that Rauscher clearly doesn’t a damn about, which focuses on self-acceptance, self-responsibility and correcting self to become clean in one’s dealings with others and within self, have to do with the political ideology of Nazism? We’ve briefly laid out Nazi principles earlier and I don’t see any connection between supporting  that specific, early 20th Century European movement based on the above factors of racism, fear and vengeance and with self-correction via self-honesty.

 If a member of ‘desteni’ made such a statement in a place of work where, as in the UK,  there are laws in support of Equal Opportunities, they would lose their job.

Well, I guess you must be sorry to live in the UK, Ivan, because in America, we are (for the moment) allowed to speak about any subject we like. But then again, censoring speech of others is apparently something neoliberals like Ivan have no problem imposing on others. This is counterintuitive, for freedom of speech is a liberal principle, and as we know, Hitler’s Germany limited speech in a big way. Another indication that the Anti-Desteni Watchdog Cult is more authoritarian than they understand themselves to be. They are the true “Nazis.”

Poolman’s romanticisation of himself as the redeemer of the Nazi leader is a crude  attempt to rehabilitate the historical figure of Adolf Hitler in the minds of  impressionable people.

It is nothing of the kind. To take the most reviled being of the 20th century and declare that even someone like that can apply self-forgiveness and be forgiven is actually a test of one’s own humanity. Simply put, anybody in Hitler’s shoes would have done the same thing. There were economic and cultural forces in the world that produced a Hitler, and nobody stepped in and helped him out before he became a monster. This is why we link self-forgiveness with self-responsibility and self-honesty. Nobody is innocent and everyone is responsible for what the world has become. There is a Hitler at the core of every single being in this world. Hitler wasn’t more “evil” than a “normal” human being. He just expressed it more fully than anyone would. It is beyond belief that Rauscher would stoop to inveigling that Desteni supports Nazism because we believe everyone has the capacity to forgive oneself and become self-responsible and clear within themselves. Rauscher’s agenda is to attack Desteni. We don’t know why. Maybe he needs something to feel superior to, like Hitler. Maybe he just wants to destroy something that he disagrees with. Like Hitler. Maybe he thinks the only way to bring his desired result to fruition is to spread and repeat lies eternally so people will believe what he believes.  Like Hitler. Seems to me that Rauscher is the one who supports Nazism, since he uses so many Nazi propaganda techniques to demonize Desteni.

Poolman’s fan club have claimed that ‘what Hitler did for the German people was full  employment and no crime’, when full employment and ‘no crime’ were brought about  in Germany by the Nazis waging all-out war against other nations and legalising the  terrorising, torturing and killing of Jews and other minorities.

Hitler rebuilt the Germany economy before he went too far and began to wage war against Europe, and he did it without using the Western banking system or their money. Hitler did kick the Jews out work to reach full employment in prewar Germany (by 1938). It wasn’t right to do, but as I’ve said earlier – Nazism was racist. Desteni does not support any policy that is racist and unequal. What Desteni supports is that any person, no matter how evil or vicious they may have become in life – we support the idea that even the worst among us can  be forgiven. And I fail to see how such a position can be twisted into “support of Nazism.”

But in Poolman’s ‘desteni’, Hitler’s economic policies are meant to show how an ‘equal  money system’ might work, and ‘equality’ involves seeing Hitler as a model of ‘self- forgiveness’. It means denouncing friends and family as ‘demonic’ and damning  outsiders as psychopaths who are ‘unworthy of life’ — as if such notions could be of any  use to anyone.

What if science backs up our assertion that Family is the cause of war? “Social scientists have claimed that the American family “is also in a continuous state of war. Conflict between husband, wife and children is a constant source of unhappiness. Behavioral symptoms of these conflicts are rape, violence, murder, physical and verbal abuse. Emotional symptoms of these internal conflicts include frustration, jealousy, arrogance, anger and hate.”  We were all subjected to the conflict in our families and of the conflict that scrambles our inner self. Breaking away from the family construct is necessary because of the psychic pull and influences damage and  distort one’s view of self. It isn’t done out of hate or malice. This is another charge against Desteni being made by a hater with no direct experience to self-forgiveness or self-honesty. Everything his head in just lies. Such charges betrsay a psycopathic personality, Wikipedia describes “psychopathic” tendencies.

A psychopath “is a mental disorder characterized primarily by a lack of empathy and remorse, shallow emotions, egocentricity, and deceptiveness.”

Doesn’t that sound an awful like the Anti-Desteni Watcher cult?

These psychopathic  symptoms begun in the family  are later played out in wars all over the world. The manifestation of War begins within the family unit, where all members are potential Hitlers all thrying to get their way.

They all revolve around the ridiculous idea that dead movie and rock stars, occultists,  dictators, reptilians, mythical beings and various inanimate objects have told Mr.  Poolman — via some waitress he picked up in a café — that they have ‘forgiven’  themselves in the afterlife or in ‘the dimensions’ — as if that were an unquestionable  revelation of ‘equality’.

See Rauscher mangle and confusing the entire Desteni message in a typically ill-researched and sloppy  manner that he tries to pass off as “truth.”Rauscher also can never verify his suspicion that the portal is a fact. This is something that he knows he can’t prove, so what he has  to is resort to opinion, lies and smears. Not very clever and very easy to see through.

Mr. Poolman tries to hijack liberal concepts of equality to try to make his financial  scams, bigotry and tawdry fantasies about famous historical or fictional characters  seem relevant and appealing. But he is unconvincing.

Liberalism has long ago betrayed the principle of Equality and disfigured it to such an extent that people fear the very word. Equality is a threat and a joke, so all Desteni is doing is to revive the meaning of the word and remove the layers of deception, fear and ignorance from the damn word that has infected its meaning. Not that you or your fellow cult-members would be able to understand anything Desteni says.

‘Equality’, the ‘equal money system’, the so-called ‘lifestyle concept’ of the Desteni I  Process MLM scam and requests for donations at desteni.co.za are all so many tacky  marketing devices to raise funds to maintain the ‘lifestyle’ of the people who live on,  and sell holidays at the Desteni farm in South Africa.

And this is another meme that the Anti-Desteni Watchdog Cult is fond of exploiting. Desteni  is apparently too weird to be able to exist in any form, and anyone who supports Desteni financially is a weak-willed duped that must be saved by clear thinking anti-cultists. This kind of reasoning is clearly fascist. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism ) Isn’t it odd that what the haters rail about Desteni is in fact how they operate?

Just as Poolman has never met Hitler or anyone else in ‘the afterlife’, heaven or in  ‘demon dimensions’, he, Sunette Spies and all their buddies and deluded, obedient  sycophants have nothing whatever to do with equality.

Big words that sound impressive but signify only a opinioned, anti-intellectual feebleness. The problem is simple for Rauscher – he has no evidence what is “fake.” He only has ideas about Desteni. He has no authority to pass judgment on what Desteni is about because he clearly is nothing but a bandwagon jumper on the Anti-Desteni Propaganda Express. Why does Rauscher believe he can make a name for himself by attacking something he has no clear understanding of? He proves that one does not have to understand something to have an idea about something, because in Rauscher’s world, only his perspective and experiences matter. This is, of course, a reflection of Rauscher’s intellectual fascism. Yes, Ivan Rascher is a small-minded and deceptive Hitler, or at least a Mussolini.

And here is the winner. The decrepid mind-poison central to the tenets of Anti-Destonianism. It is a catechism that must be murmured in solemn tones:

Desteni’ is a fraudulent organisation. It only exists to promote Bernard Poolman’s  xenophobic, misanthropic world view. Its members misrepresent, abuse and pervert  principles of equality in support of their own enslavement under his totalitarian fantasy  of an ‘Equal Life Party’. In spite of their empty claims that they are a ‘threat to the  system’, they are a threat only to themselves and the naïve, idealistic New Ager  conspiracy theorists they try to prey on, groom and recruit.

Amen. Shades of “Sandman,” Sean Munger, Thom Darc, Robert Lester and Laura Corsetmacher.  A distillation of the Anti-Desteni Cult Watcher meme, repeated in orgiastic excess that would  make Goebbels blush. Carry on, fuckers. You cannot destroy that which you don’t understand.

The point is this: if Hitler cannot be forgiven, them nobody can be forgiven, and the commandment of Jesus to forgive another is lost forever, Because as Ivan Rauscher has sufficiently revealed, everyone has a Hitler within.

2011/09/16 – A Reply to Sean Munger (AKA “MUERTOS!”)

 Sean Munger AKA “Muertos!” Why?

I haven’t really had the time to check on what the League of International Desteni Haters Cult has been up to lately, what with all the You Tube banning of Desteni and the accompanied internet attacks against us. But now that things have calmed down, it has been brought to my attention that the white racist Desteni  Hater Cult (why are almost all of them white males?) might not be aware that Desteni doesn’t die — we MULTIPLY. Desteni is STILL ON THE INTERNET. Must bug the hell out of the racist Desteni Hater Cult that they couldn’t complete their mission.

Why do I call them “white racists?” Because that’s how they’ve chosen to portray themselves. Look at the “comments” they leave on their insipid message boards. And one of the principal white Desteni haters is of course, the doughty meta-conspiracy theorist, “Muertos!” Of all the white Desteni haters on the formerly-called “Conspiracy Science (recently renamed to the somewhat less goofy “Skeptic Forum”), perhaps none was as gleefully gloating as Sean Munger, who also has the most threads started on the “Skeptic Forum” about Desteni.  Weirdly obsessive, isn’t it?

The month of August has not been kind to the conspiracy theorist cult known as Desteni. Indeed, while it’s probably too early to declare the impending extinction of this bizarre group, they are undoubtedly reeling from a series of recent disasters, one of which may well strike at the cult’s ability to reach new members.

And then again, it may NOT, Sean. After the You Tube banning of Desteni, we experienced another surge in subscriptions to the Desteni I Process and let me tell you, it was very gratifying to witness that some people can see right through the elaborate paranoid fever dreams you and your ilk take so much satisfaction in creating.

This move by YouTube is very possibly a stake in the heart for the cult, as YouTube is their main recruiting portal.

Hahahaha, wrong again, Sean. There are still many Desteni channels – dozens and far too many for you to wish for their demise. The Bernard Poolman and Desteni channels (not all of them, though) were targeted by an affiliation of racist white haters who couldn’t care less about the “poor, hapless dupes” that were “too mentally unstable” to think for themselves. This affiliation was cobbled together to form an “anti-Desteni movement” out of sheer hateful ignorance, jealousy and cultural brainwashing. This group was merely a ”sleeper-cell” of system-zombies that like the good robotic anti-bodies they are, attack the “cult” who has the nerve to state things as they are. The “MLM-cult” smear was something that Desteni could not overcome, so there has been a change in tactics, although the details aren’t for public consumption yet. The You Tube banning was the best thing that could happen to Desteni, because now we see what is allowed to be said and what isn’t. Desteni is shown that YouTube and Google are instrumental in curtailing “free speech,” not that Destonians believe in such a quaint notion, it’s just that speaking about Equality has consequences, but it is too late: millions have watched Desteni videos and won’t forget them. They have been marked in way that aren’t understood, but has all to do with the almost-dead seed of honor and human dignity that will find a way to break out of this ever-tightening noose around the throat of humanity. And there’s nothing white racist sleeper-cell zombies can do about it. There is a shit storm coming their way with their names on it. Remember these words when it finally falls upon you, and understand it was the consequence you created for yourselves.

While Desteni uses Facebook to a lesser extent to spread its message, its main strategy has always been to reel in the gullible via YouTube videos spouting their bizarre philosophy and promoting conspiracy theories. Indeed the use of YouTube to appeal to a conspiracy theorist demographic is no accident. Conspiracy theorists are uniquely attracted to YouTube, for reasons I explained in another blog on the SkepticProject site. [...] Furthermore, Desteni has always marketed itself using a uniquely visual interface. Blogs and even Facebook posts just don’t have the same visceral appeal.

Sean Munger, the only conspiracy theorist in this conversation is yOu. I mean, it would take someone with a racial-superiority mindset to be opposed to equality just because of the deep-seated desire to be ‘superior” to someone else. Yes, I am sure the subject of Equality is a “bizarre philosophy” to someone who hates Equality. How else would they see it?

The cult’s indignation at this move was palpable. In an “official statement,” the Desteni cult, mere hours after the channel closures, was already crafting its take on this event: it is (naturally) claiming this is censorship and an attempt to prevent Desteni’s pure message of equality from getting out. The statement read in part:

“We can only assume the real reason for this. One thing is certain – Desteni is hitting the nerve of some people and it’s hitting hard. It also shows the nature of the system we live in. I mean what we deal with in our material – self-forgiveness, self-perfection, establishing and Equal Money System for all. Points that everyone can benefit from, points that are best for all. Many people have been supported by this material and shared their results publicly. Yet, this is not recognized and even fought against. Shame.”

Desteni immediately launched a counter-strike, commanding its members to spam YouTube with a form email protesting the closure. Not surprisingly, the form email blames the whole thing on Desteni’s external enemies–the “haters” with whom the higher-ups in the cult seem bizarrely obsessed:

“Hereby we declare, as the individuals that have received the support and assistance from the material provided by these channels, our discontent and discomformity with the decision that youtube has taken based on the false-flagging done by people that have been opposing our stance in relation to world equality.”

We have seen evidence online that a concerted effort was made to remove Desteni from YouTube, and since you are one of the Desteni-obsessed haters who exhibit that smugly superior attitude that people who don’t share your personal perspective, must be in a “cult.” You sound a lot like Rick Ross. Are you a “cult-watcher,” Sean Munger? No, you’re worse than that. You’re a ‘conspiracy-cult-watcher.’ Yet you belong to a similar cult that Rick Ross and Thom Darc and Rob Lester belong to. A cult that protects the status quo. Or maybe the world looks alright to you. All your conspiracy-cult-watching as done fuck all to improve the state of this world. And yet you and your white, racist conspiracy-cult-watching pals probably surf the internet for porn while keeping one hand on the keyboard scouring the internet for ‘equality cults.’ No, you don’t look for equality cults. I was kidding. Equality is like fucking kryptonite to zombie sleeper-cells. And you think Destonians are “indignant?” Wait until this world gets ahold of you. You’ll know what “indignant really means, although, it will probably be too late for you.

Although there is some precedent for reversing YouTube channel closure decisions, it has now been 11 days since the closure and the hundreds of emails sent by dutiful Destonians seem to have come to nothing. None of the channels have been reinstated.

Fuck YouTube.

Desteni spokesperson Darryl Thomas, who I suspect (but do not know for sure) is #3 in the cult hierarchy after leader Bernard Poolman and New Age whack job Sunette Spies, took to his blog with an even more defiant statement denouncing the closure, as well as reinforcing the cult’s narrative that it’s all the fault of “haters.” For the record, Darryl once told me he “enjoys being in [my] head.” I wonder if I and other Desteni critics were not in his head as he fired off this seething invective:

“It is so unfortunate that these misled fools will one day realize after it is too late, that they stood on the wrong side of history. They have unwittingly – in their misguided zeal to stand against equality for all – unleashed demons that will return to devour them in madness and direct them to a fitting end. And the beautiful thing is they brought it on themselves. How fitting.

And to all the Haters, do not gloat so loudly. DesteniProductions is not dependent on YouTube for our continuance – Desteni has its own websites and forums, and so, still lives. And even though equality-speech is apparently strictly verboten on YouTube, Desteni finds this entire affair little more than a nuisance. The Desteni Material will soon be released as book and DVDs and the thousands of texts and videos will still be available on the Desteni website for anyone who wants to watch them.

I know it will sound strange to some people who believe that Desteni is defeated by this treacherous activity by YouTube, but we haven’t gone anywhere and in time, this alleged “setback” will turn out to be the best thing that ever happened to the Desteni Group.”

YOU “suspect (but do not know for sure) ” that I am “Number 3?” Is this more of your “research” or more opinionated twaddle that you are better known for? Besides, for all you know (or suspect), I could be “Number 1″ in Desteni?  I use Bernard to throw cult-watchers like you. But, who is the conspiracy nut here? Careful…

The closure of the cult’s YouTube channels was evidently enough to bring cult leader Bernard Poolman out of hiding on his South Africa ranch. Two days ago Poolman uploaded a video that is remarkably shrill even for him, urging followers to flag as inappropriate any video on YouTube that they don’t like for any reason–regardless of copyright or privacy status. The video is here, but as the video itself violates YouTube’s terms of service I doubt it will be up for very long; I’ll therefore link you to another blog that ran a story on the video. Essentially, Poolman is, in evident desperation, commanding his followers to create such havoc on YouTube through the flagging process that the video website giant will be brought to its knees. Somehow I don’t think this is likely.

“Desperation?” If you knew Bernard Poolman (and we both know you don’t), you’d understand why he doesn’t experience “desperation,” and why the You Tube banning was the best thing that could happen to Desteni. Again, “Fuck YouTube.” There are plenty of Desteni channels and blogs on the internet.We’re STILL HERE, Munger. You and your white racist friends on the Skeptic Forum (lol) can waste your time being against us if you want to, but as long as there’s an internet, we’ll be here.

The second blow to the cult fell just this morning. As you can see from Darryl’s defiant statement, the cult clearly did have plans to relocate to another web video service, though of course being denied access to the vast numbers of YouTube users must be galling. Desteni attempted to move over to Vimeo. Today, however, Vimeo suspended Desteni Productions’s account. Why? Because promotion of multi-level marketing schemes is not permitted on Vimeo.

Fuck Vimeo, too. Nobody watches anything on that lame-ass site, anyway.

In short, it seems that efforts to promote awareness of the fraudulent and destructive nature of the Desteni cult are finally bearing fruit. While we have no idea what’s next, I wonder if Facebook may be the next social network outfit to ban them. Facebook’s terms of service, like Vimeo’s, expressly forbid the promotion of MLM schemes, and Desteni watchdog bloggers are already spreading the word that Desteni violates Facebook’s guidelines.

Ahh, God bless the White Religious and Racist Desteni Watchdog Cult. And yet, nearly 2500 Facebook users have chosen to identify themselves as being proponents of the Equal Money System. And as of today, Desteni members are all STILL ON FACEBOOK. “Oh my GOD! It’s the END OF CIVILIZATION! DESTENI MUST BE STOPPED!!!” We can’t be stopped. Deal.

It’s not inconceivable that in the near future Desteni may be reduced down to its own website and a much less-centralized structure of communication. Individual Desteni users are still as thick as fleas on YouTube, but the authoritarian coordination of their message seems to have already suffered a serious disruption. Their bizarre “Anti-Hate Response” ritual, for instance, has ground to a halt. [Scroll to the bottom of that blog for the update that discusses that issue]. Without central coordination from YouTube, marshaling the Destonians in the future is going to be a much tougher slog than before.

I know that is what you would like to believe, Munger. but the past events has shown us that Desteni is all the more conspicuous in its absence. Tell a lie long enough, and people will believe it’s true, and that is all the Desteni Watchdog Cult has been able to do, although they did their job well. Goebbels should be so proud. The orchestrated and deliberate misinformation campaign, smears, slanders and out-and-out lies was only made because certain fools thought that Desteni was an “easy mark.” Yeah, that foolish miscalculation will be your downfall. Already the consequences are drawing closer to you. You brought it on yourself with your deliberate deception.

It almost goes without saying that this has nothing to do with Desteni’s message of “equality,” as much as Destonians would like to make it about that. Instead, it’s about the fact that Desteni is a fraud and has been using social networking tools to make money, possibly illegally but certainly spuriously, through a remarkably transparent pyramid scheme. It is certainly not against YouTube or Facebook’s terms of service to use their services to promote belief in conspiracy theories. And it’s ludicrous to believe that the owners of these services give a whit about messages of “equality.” They just don’t want to get tagged with advancing fraud and illegal activities, and rightly so.

“Almost goes without saying that this has nothing to do with Desteni’s message of “equality?” Yes, Sean Munger, it does have everything to do with the message of equality. And we have all seen your true relationship with the “facts.” You are delusional if you believe you know squat about Desteni. If it is a “fraud,” then why don’t you fucking PROVE IT? Or is it that since trumpeted your deliberate twisting and misinformation of Desteni so much that you’ve finally believe your lies are “true?” You just don’t get it – making false statements about a subject that you are ignorant of doesn’t make it “true,” no matter how much you want to believe it. Your grasp on reality is becoming confused. I suggest you seek out professional help to deal with your obvious mental issues before you become a danger to your community.

2011/08/12 – Bernard Poolman Censored by YouTube for Talking Equality!

A few days ago, the YouTube channels DesteniProductions, DesteniProdDemons, BernardPoolman and others were deleted by the ‘YouTube Team” for various “violations” of the “Community Guidelines” And while DesteniProductions were controversial enough to have been penalized four times in four years, the BernardPoolman account was penalized twice, and was deleted by YouTube the same day. I have not heard of accounts being deleted for having two violations if the Community Standards. The other Channels that were created by Desteni, DesteniProDemons, DesteniExposed and DesteniMoney had ZERO strikes and were deleted by YouTube as well. The “explanation” given in a form email from YouTube is woefully ensconced in ass-covering, boilerplate legalese that is the leading example of corporate assholery.

“We are unable to provide specific detail regarding your account suspension
or your video’s removal.”

“Unable?” Or is it that the reason is a bit more plain than you’d like to admit, YouTube. What the “YouTube Team” has accomplished is muzzling the speech of a group that had attracted millions of views on YouTube by fighting the only good fight that matters: installing universal equality for all people. As careful readers of this blog have long since realized, no topic is more dismissed, sneered or opposed than the subject of economic and social equality. Gone are the YouTube comments that revealed the absolute evil in people’s minds. Most were stoopid “insults” made by simpletons too stupid to understand what was being shared. Others were more sinister and menacing and death threats made against were not uncommon – usually this was committed by militant “lightweenys” and “loveburgers” and conspiracy theorists who were too stupid and lost to see what they stood for was nothing but imaginary bullshit that has enslaved them forever. But some, thankfully, recognized what equality was terribly important and why its absence in the world is the tragedy of humanity. And if anyone dares to speak for those who cannot, because they’ve been locked out of the system, then woe to them. They will be called a “cult,” and that they are guilty of ‘harvesting weak minds” and evil beings who imagine that they are acting in the name of God will plot and try to stop you from speaking or worse. It is so unfortunate that these misled fools will one day realize after it is too late, that they stood on the wrong side of history. They have unwittingly – in their misguided zeal to stand against equality for all – unleashed demons that will return to devour them in madness and direct them to a fitting end. And the beautiful thing is they brought it on themselves. How fitting.

And to all the Haters, do not gloat so loudly. DesteniProductions is not dependent on YouTube for our continuance – Desteni has its own websites and forums, and so, still lives. And even though equality-speech is apparently strictly verboten on YouTube, Desteni finds this entire affair little more than a nuisance. The Desteni Material will soon be released as book and DVDs and the thousands of texts and videos will still be available on the Desteni website for anyone who wants to watch them.

I know it will sound strange to some people who believe that Desteni is defeated by this treacherous activity by YouTube, but we haven’t gone anywhere and in time, this alleged “setback” will turn out to be the best thing that ever happened to the Desteni Group.

Watch this space. And Haters… step off.

2011/08/08 – Free Market Theology: Response to ‘Tadpole256′

"Listen to me, you left-wingers!"

This is a blog response to “tadpole256″ who left the following comment on the DesteniProductions video, “A Good Capitalist is a Dead Capitalist” on August 5, 2011.

 @DarrylWThomas There is a FreeMarket in Hong Kong… The U.S. had a very free market until the industrial revolution, which ostensibly was a direct result of the Free Market. Read some history books, don’t listen to the brain-dead lefty propaganda.

Well, since “free market” is an idea based on liberalism, I am wondering what kind of history books tapole256 reads. Ones that no doubt reflect his opinions he already has, of course. But without going any further, what is it “tadpole256″ means when he mentions, “free markets?”

Free Markets is a quaint term that describes an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses and free from government regulation. Government should never, ever be involved in commerce.

To this point I must refer “tadpole356″ to recent history all the way back to 2008 when In the US government used at least $700 billion of taxpayers’ money to buy up toxic assets. That was an intervention that your typical neoliberal had no problem with, strangely enough. Now why didn’t the invisible hand of the marketplace swoop in and rescue these poor neoliberal hacks from their pathological greed? Why didn’t the neoliberal investor take responsibility for what happened and accept the consequences? Because what these neoliberals say about the myth of free market capitalism is nothing more than a political perspective pretending to be an objective economic one. When it comes to the economic reality of their bank accounts, the neoliberal will take any “intervention” the government can muster.

Tadpole256 also erroneously claims that their were “very free markets”  in America BEFORE the Industrial Revolution, but this doesn’t match what professional historians of the subject say. Capitalism has to have three ingredients in order be properly called “capitalism.” Land, money and labor. There was no effective labor force other than importing human beings from Africa as slaves that existed before the Industrial Revolution, and hence, no “free market.” The slave-trade was the culmination of Mercantilism[1] before it mutated into Capitalism (by way of the Industrial Revolution – and it was this principle Crime Against Humanity that the fortune of America was built).

Another reason free market capitalism is a myth is because the richest countries became rich through – wait for it –  economic political policies. You know – “protectionism.” America and the United Kingdom were the biggest protectionist countries in the world during their rising economic trajectories. It is a sick joke that the IMF and World Bank frown on poorer countries trying to use the same methods to gain wealth. People like “Tadploe256″ shouldn’t be listened to because they confuse their beloved political ideology with reality.

So why does this myth of free market capitalism prevail and why do so many neoliberals still believe in such fairy tales? Because free market mythology is standard brainwashing fare you get in Econ 101 at every college in the world and that makes people who are hot for capitalism’s dreams all warm and fuzzy inside. But they are blind and will eventually have to pay the piper for their unconscionably greedy ways.

[1] Mercantilism is the economic theory that trade generates wealth and is stimulated by the accumulation of profitable balances, which a government should encourage by means of protectionism. American economic reality has always been mercantilist in principle, and  it was protectionism that enabled certain countries, like America and the UK, to become the richest in the world. Conversely, we can see what “deregulation” as done: it has accomplished creating burst bubbles, bailouts and trillions of dollars of debt that America will never be able to pay back. America has already lost its AAA credit standing due to the cynical greed of the investor, and things will only get worse. It gives me a warm feeling when I hear things like the richest man in the world recently lost 6 billion dollars in the wake of last week’s US budget debacle. Neoliberals everywhere are in for a great big surprise.

2011/07/24 – Amy Winehouse’s Death Predicted By Desteni in 2007

In a DesteniProductions video uploaded  on to Google Videos on September, 23 2007, there was this prediction about the troubled late pop star Amy Winehouse. Of course, nobody who knew of the woman’s struggle with her inner demons could have been surprised by the trajectory she followed to her death, but that does not remove the wonder of this eerily prescient video.

For more information, see the Desteni Universe website:

http://desteni.co.za/n/destonian-forum-goes-exclusive-portal-re-opens?search_id=newposts&sid=7c44154b95c30494ca2d81a03161713b

 

 

2011/06/30 – Reply to Thom Darc: Choose Life over Suffering

  In response to my post, “Thom Darc’s Sadistic Christian Theology Prefers a World of Suffering,” Darc has posted on his LiveJournal Blog that my characterization of his position was mistaken. In his latest blog he writes:

 Darryl, I never said I prefer suffering just for the sake of suffering. Therefore, I’m going to us the words of C.S. Lewis in his The Problem of Pain to respond to you:

Before we get to that, Thom, let’s give correspondence some context. In your statements that I took, I accurately quote you saying, “… I don’t wish to live in a world of non-suffering. I prefer a world that has suffering and pleasure and hatred and love and peace and war, life and death.” 

Further down this post you will read that Thom Darc prefers a world of suffering over the quaint and terrifying notion that suffering leads to “spiritual growth” and gives “meaning” to life. This Pain = Meaning” is an ancient  trope. If we ask Thom what his definition of the meaning of life, he must say that it is spiritual evolution through physical and mental suffering. I wonder then if the names of Satan or the Devil should be placed in Heaven’s Hall of Fame for the indispensable service they provide for the Suffering Department. But alas, God, as the Creator of Heaven and Hell, must take responsibility for this fuckup of this world, at least in some part.

That part may ultimately Man’s responsibility, anyway, given that Man Created God in the first place.  We will touch on that later, but for now, it is important for you to know that Thom Darc does accept suffering as a necessity. I wonder if that means he’s also willing to inflict suffering on others, since, according to Thom’s perspective, suffering is to everybody’s benefit. Once an abuser, always an abuser. Thom has stated many times that he is against Equality and indeed, this places him in the camp of the abusers. He should have chosen life instead. But to each their own.

“By the goodness of God we mean nowadays almost exclusively His lovingness; and in this we may be right. And by Love, in this context, most of us mean kindness – the desire to see others than the self happy; not happy in this way or in that, but just happy. What would really satisfy us would be a God who said of anything we happened to like doing, “What does it matter so long as they are contented?” We want, in fact, not so much a Father in Heaven as a grandfather in heaven – a senile benevolence who, as they say, “liked to see young people enjoying themselves” and whose plan for the universe was simply that it might be truly said at the end of each day, “a good time was had by all”. [pg. 20] 

Lewis refers to God’s “lovingness.” I would like to see some evidence of that in a world where countless millions (probably billions) of children have been left to suffer in this history of mankind. Realize that Lewis wrote this screed within the privileged comfort of his life as an Oxford don. It is largely speculative reflections of an Anglican trying to address the problem of suffering through theodicy – the vindication of the “lovingness” of God in a world of suffering. When Lewis says, “What would really satisfy us would be a God who said of anything we happened to like doing, “What does it matter so long as they are contented?,” understand, such a perspective could only come from a being already living a satisfied life. This view has nothing to do with the tragic human suffering experienced in the world – Lewis is speaking to fellow First World citizens sitting in their overstuffed leather chairs in the study. Not to a child laborer in India. I dare say the thought never, ever crossed Lewis’ mind. I’m sure children in this world living lives of suffering, pain, hunger and disease would appreciate such a universe that Lewis mocks as “a good time had by all.” The fact is this, according to the Christian belief structure of Lewis, God did not want his creation to be happy. God wanted His creatures to suffer. Refer to the book of Genesis and you will quickly find God cursing His creatures to eternal suffering. So much for God’s “lovingness.” Lewis’ speculations read like quaint, if discredited and irrelevant, parlor room fluff.

I should very much like to live in a universe which was governed on such lines. But since it is abundantly clear that I don’t, and since I have reason to believe, nevertheless; that God is Love, I conclude that my conception of love needs correction. [pg. 21]

Yes. If a world of suffering descended from God’s Lovingness, I reckon a reappraisal of “love” is warranted.

If God is Love, He is, by definition, something more than mere kindness. And it appears, from all the records, that though He has often rebuked us and condemned us, He has never regarded us with contempt. He has paid us the intolerable compliment of loving us, in the deepest, most tragic, most memorable sense. [pg. 21]

This assumption that God is Love has no foundation to support it, save for being a sentimental statement expressed within living a comfortable life. I’m sure if I was living a financially and academically satisfying life like Lewis did, I would carry similar sentiments. But I have to disagree with Lewis and point out that God actually did regard His human beings with contempt when He cursed them to live lives of pain and suffering. God cursed the ground (the Earth?) and condemned Adam to painful toil “all the days of your life.” (Gen 2:17) It is not surprising to state that half of humanity still lives under God’s curse. If such suffering is God’s “intolerable compliment of loving us,” I would hate to see what God’s active hate would look like. But I guess what we have will do until that cosmic hate gets here.

We are, not metaphorically but in very truth, a Divine work of art, something that God is making, and therefore something with which He will not be satisfied until it has a certain character. Here again we come up against what I have called the “intolerable compliment”. Over a sketch made idly to amuse a child, an artist may not take much trouble: he may be content to let it go even though it is not exactly as he meant it to be. But over the great picture of his life – the work which he loves, though in a different fashion, as intensely as a man loves a woman or a mother a child – he will take endless trouble – and would, doubtless, thereby give endless trouble to the picture if it were sentient. [pg. 22]

Lewis at the zenith of his speculative Yahweh ass-kissing apologetic powers, here. How about depicting  God as an amused child doodling a scribble of his Divine Work of Art, and then after “endless trouble” to try and “get it right.” But we have no evidence that God even exists, let alone He has some Cosmic and Divine Plan that is silently working in the background. What Lewis is doing here amounts to self-deception and the deception of others who will believe in his speculative mythologizing as “true.” Lewis is just giving an opinion based on his belief structure. He is not telling the “truth.”

When Christianity says that God loves man, it means that God loves man: not that He has some “disinterested”, because really indifferent, concern for our welfare, but that, in awful and surprising truth, we are the objects of His love. You asked for a loving God: you have one. The great spirit you so lightly invoked, the “lord of terrible aspect”, is present: not a senile benevolence that drowsily wishes you to be happy in your own way, not the cold philanthropy of a conscientious magistrate, nor the care of a host who feels responsible for the comfort of his guests, but the consuming fire Himself, the Love that made the worlds, persistent as the artist’s love for his work and despotic as a man’s love for a dog, provident and venerable as a father’s love for a child, jealous, inexorable, exacting as love between the sexes. [pg. 24-25]

“When Christianity says God loves man, it means God loves man” but that Christians don’t have to. Actually, Jesus Christ says Love your fellow man, but when have Christians as a group ever done that? The countless denominations that divide them has to suggest that Christians can’t even agree among themselves. How in the hell are they going to be the paragons of virtue proclaiming God loves man yet cursed the Earth we all live upon because God does not forgive? A Christian cannot have it both ways. If it says in the Bible that mankind lives under the Curse of Original Sin and under the curse of the Earth itself, then it can only proclaim a Gospel of Maltheism, a theology that states that God is essentially evil and derives pleasure or benefit in seeing humanity suffer. If such a thing existed, it would exactly as things look in this world right now. In the New Testament, Satan is said to have power over the Earth, which is a curious thing to say because it means in effect that this world is a God-free zone. When Jesus cried on the cross that God had forsaken him, Jesus was with humanity for a brief moment, he understood for one terrifying moment what human beings go through every day – living in a world where no one answers your cry. When we suffer, we suffer alone and God does not hear or intervenes.We are hung on a cross, suspended between earth and sky, forsaken and hated by those who believe our suffering is just. But Lewis did not see that when he wrote this book. He did not suffer until much later in life (explained here).

Christians cannot proclaim a “God of Love,” unless that “Love” is a sinister malevolent curse. Save me from God’s “love” for it is a curse that destroys and obliterates. 

The problem of reconciling human suffering with the existence of a God who loves, is only insoluble so long as we attach a trivial meaning to the word “love”, and look on things as if man were the centre of them. Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake. “Thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.” We were made not primarily that we may love God (though we were made for that too) but that God may love us, that we may become objects in which the Divine love may rest “well pleased”. To ask that God’s love should be content with us as we are is to ask that God should cease to be God [pg. 25]

When Lewis says, “God does not exist for the sake of man,” he is mistaken. “God,” in fact, is the creation of Man, There is no evidence at all that God created man, but there is ample evidence that man created God, for God always exists first within the minds of men that is later transferred to books written by man. It’s been like that all over the world – even in cultures without formal alphabets or writing. God was created by man to explain suffering. The idea of a “God” only makes sense if the idea is placed within the relationship of man’s suffering. God has been called “Love” because it is thought or believed that love is the only thing that can take the suffering away. Actually, the only thing that can take suffering away is forgiveness. That’s why man continues to suffer. There was a flaw in the Design of God. God was not created to forgive.

All arguments in justification of suffering provoke bitter resentment against the author. You would like to know how I behave when I am experiencing pain, not writing books about it. You need not guess, for I will tell you; I am a great coward. But what is that to the purpose? When I think of pain – of anxiety that gnaws like fire and loneliness that spreads out like a desert, and the heartbreaking routine of monotonous misery, or again of dull aches that blacken our whole landscape or sudden nauseating pains that knock a man’s heart out at one blow, of pains that seem already intolerable and then are suddenly increased, of infuriating scorpion-stinging pains that startle into maniacal movement a man who seemed half dead with his previous tortures – it “quite o’ercrows my spirit”. If I knew any way of escape I would crawl through sewers to find it. But what is the good of telling you about my feelings? You know them already: they are the same as yours. I am not arguing that pain is not painful. Pain hurts. That is what the word means. I am only trying to show that the old Christian doctrine of being made “perfect through suffering” is not incredible. To prove it palatable is beyond my design. [pg. 59]

I read this passage twice. It failed to invoke anything but an incredulous gasp that someone could be so intelligent and so clueless at the same time and not even realize it. People are not made “perfect” through suffering. They are destroyed and obliterated by suffering. It’s obvious, isn’t it? I would dare state that a drug addict, for example, does not become perfect through the destruction of her body. Even if an addict placed Jesus and God at the center of their life, they will not be made “perfect.” They will only become perfect Christian robots, if the programming is effective. Children who are sent to fight wars or sold into slavery are not made “perfect” through suffering, even if somehow Jesus would enter their lives. They have already been destroyed for life, if they are “lucky to live. That one child should suffer in existence is intolerable when there is Divine Lovingness of an omnipotence that never shows up. What God has done to the littlest of us, He has done to all of us.God has been an unworthy servant for man for too long. It is time to get rid of the fucker once and for all. 

(Thom Darc) Therefore Darryl, I see suffering as a necessary ingredient for spiritual development and growth. Like C.S. Lewis I have no wish to see a world where abuse continues without any reason and for nothing more than the delight of suffering. However, what is Desteni’s prescription Darryl? You wish to remove the systems which perpetuate abuse. However, you and the rest of Desteni constantly practice abuse against yourselves and people outside of Desteni. Your solution is the Equal Money System with the Desteni Process. It is a proposition which is hallow and offers nothing except wishful fantasy based upon jealousy. If Desteni were to implement its vision on a grande scale and if it were to work as desired, what would be the outcome except a world where everything has no meaning? Like I said before, a world where I simply shovel food in mouth but can’t live is something I’m simply not interested in.

Yes, Thom. We know you see suffering as necessary for spiritual growth.Too bad it is just an opinion that does not take into consideration all the points. It doesn’t take into consideration that you may be wrong. Or that you’ve been brainwashed by flowery words or naked fear into believing a lie, or that there is no such thing as “spiritual development.” Perhaps you think you’ve evolved spiritually, but in what demonstrable ways? Has it grown more love of your fellow-man. Has it made you more humble or patient? Has it made you a better person? Has it expanded your life in ways you never considered or realized? 

I have to question that you have evolved spiritually. It would mean, if it were true, that you defined yourself as a specific point that may not be what is best for you. If you believe that only suffering can give your life meaning, then you condemn yourself and others into living that. Suffering has no “meaning.” Suffering is a consequence. It is a consequence of man’s inhumanity to man. That’s all. There’s not Divine Reason or explanation needed to discover what suffering is. To apply a “meaning” to something means you’ve formed a mental construct about something. And it seems you are backing a God where suffering has meaning. This means you do not love a God that loves humanity, you love a God that hates humanity. You love a God that let Jesus die without changing one goddamn thing in this world. It is not that the removal of suffering, which is something God is either unwilling or unable to do, that is the cause of meaninglessness, Thom. It is your divination of suffering is what is meaningless. An unfounded opinion that is meaningless and unnecessary. Better get onboard the Train of Life before you get left behind.

2011/06/29 – C.S. Lewis and the Cosmic Sadist

"Suppose the truth is God always vivisects?" C.S. Lewis

The Problem of Evil is one of the most rational and obvious objections to religious belief systems one can have. It also happens to be the best argument against the existence of God. And yet, defenders of the faith have used this deadly theological weakness as a cornerstone of faith. The weakness (of course) is the question of how a “good God” could allow suffering and evil into the world? This question is specifically dealt with, if unsatisfactory, in the Old Testament book of Job, where Job wants an answer to why God singled him out for undeserved suffering. Does God show to Job that the cause of his suffering was originally a bar bet with Satan? No, God dissembles and puts on a great show of force demonstration how great He is while claiming that questions are not allowed and one should just simply have faith – which completely evades the question of why innocence suffers. Jesus is the Christian attempt to exploit suffering as a necessary act that grants reconciliation with God and entrance into Heaven. The writer(s) who wrote under the name of “Paul” also appealed to the suffering of Christ, the obedient slave of God, unto his death, providing the West with the template of acceptance of suffering as a consequence of God’s infinite wisdom.[1]

But there is that nagging problem that the religionists can’t satisfactory shake off. When the Bible asserts that God’s creation was “very good” (Gen. 1:31), it sure as hell doesn’t seem that way. We all live under the “curse of God,” according to the Garden of Eden myth, presumably for eternity, given by an insanely enraged God who didn’t know how to forgive. Not only is the first human couple cursed “above all animals,” but God also curses the earth to give up nothing without pain and toil. Such are the ways of the ancient tribal god of the Hebrews. Yahweh has cursed His creation to suffer and then demands His creation to be “obedient.”

There is something tragically unfair about this mythic scenario. If nobody else but God created everything, what about that ol’ talking serpent that just happened to be “more crafty” than any other being God created? God does not take responsibility for that and just pulls rank and orders everyone out of Paradise and into a cursed world. But Yahweh, His ministers always have told us, is “Love” or “All-Loving” perfect and omnipotent. Doesn’t make a lot of sense. The theologians find themselves painted into an uncomfortable corner.

Enter “Theodicy” – from the Greek theos (God) and dike (righteous) – a term invented by the Christian rationalist and philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz (1646-1716) – which attempts to justify or defend God’s relation with the problem of evil by answering the following question, commonly built upon these assumptions:

God is all good and all powerful (and, therefore, all knowing).

The universe/creation was made by God and/or exists in a contingent relationship to God.

Evil exists in the world. Why?

Witness how religions use the greatest argument against itself to its advantage. They simply claim that all suffering as an essential “learning tool.” Suffering is not a consequence, but a “necessity,” and here religion and spirituality justify the existence of abuse without having any reason to end it at all. How awesome is that? They believe ‘God’ or ‘Source’ placed it there for ‘learning lessons’ needed for ‘spiritual evolution’ and for establishing ‘faith.’ And yet, they do not see it as the point that should open their eyes to the obvious lie. If “God” and his buddies all implore us to stand against evil, why did God place it here in the first place?  It’s like a parent setting the next-door neighbor’s house on fire and then telling his family that it’s their duty to save the occupants inside or just let them burn inside the blazing structure. Would that be a sinister act by a mad man, or the actions of an all-perfect, loving adult? Apologists for the faith have resorted to all kinds of logical fallacies in twisting obvious malevolence that causes suffering in the world as “lessons learned the hard way,” or as “trials” sent by an invisible, wholly transcendent “God” to mold a being’s mind into a “faithful,” believing slave.

The modern Christian apologist for the faith C.S. Lewis was very crafty himself at presenting questionable premises to build rational structures upon. In his seminal work, The Problem of Pain, Lewis explains that suffering exists because of the free wills involved, and if God removed or excluded suffering, He would have “excluded life itself.”

Really? Without suffering life would be “excluded?” How did Lewis come to such a stretch? Lewis could only present such a ludicrous assertion within the confines of the accepted premise that God is “good” (faith). It is not logical to state that free wills who cause evil is the only condition that Life could exist within. As an apologist, Lewis was forced to work within the framework of his faith, and that’s why he had no choice but to contort himself into convoluted, pretzel-logic positions. Like this one:

‘The world is a dance in which good, descending from God, is disturbed by evil arising from the creatures, and the resulting conflict is resolved by God’s own assumption of the suffering nature which evil produces. The doctrine of the Fall asserts that the evil which thus makes the fuel or raw material of the second and more complex kind of good is not God’s contribution but man’s.”

When did C.S. Lewis become privy to “God’s own assumption?” Did God tell these things to Lewis, or did he just dream them up on his own? It’s an interesting flowchart, however, as Lewis constructs a curious diagram of the “good” cascading down from Heaven only to have it “disturbed” by evil “creatures.” It wasn’t Man that took Lewis’ wife. Hadn’t Lewis prayed to God to make her well, and didn’t she enter a remission?  And wasn’t after that promising rebound, didn’t his wife die shortly afterwards, anyway. In Lewis’ book, A Grief Observed, Lewis at one point in his bereavement rightly considers God as a “Cosmic Sadist.” This embarrassment of Lewis’ a brief loss of faith is usually glossed over by Lewis’ followers as a novel convention of someone struggling and not the way Lewis actually felt. I don’t buy that. Lewis’ grief over his wife was notoriously deep, and such questions would naturally arise. Lewis is more honest in dealing with his brief embrace of Gnostic Maltheism in this excerpt:

“No, my real fear is not materialism. If it were true, we–or what we mistake for ‘we’–could get out from under the harrow. An overdose of sleeping pills would do it. I am more afraid that we are really rats in a trap. Or, worse still, rats in a laboratory. Someone said, I believe, ‘God always geometrizes.’ Supposing the truth were ‘God always vivisects’?” [2]

Indeed. What if God is not “All-Loving,” but rather a sinister Cosmic Sadist who derives pleasure from the suffering of His creatures? Would anyone know the difference?

Returning to Lewis’ appeal to the Fall and the Adam and Eve myth quoted above as some sort of corroborating evidence of God’s benevolence is not such a good idea, because it forces Lewis into supporting his Christian speculations with more speculations, with the foundational premise and starting point based on acceptance the what is said in the bible is “true.” Lewis’ optimistic view of the goodness of God is neither defensible or all-encompassing, for an alternative explanation of the world as “a dance” of good and evil could simply be that Evil is far stronger than the good, which would suit a Cosmic Sadist just fine.

Another Christian champion who tried to gild the theodical lilly was Paul Tillich, and he claimed that the only acceptable answers to the question of suffering was… wait for it… prayer and faith. If your loved one gets abducted by a cult, pray about it and have faith. This seemingly nonsensical, magical-thinking approach has been a New Age staple ever since, with Eckhart Tolle and others peddling (for a price) the same damn nonsense to the gullible. Amazingly, Tillich speculated that petitioning the Lord with prayer influences God to intervene into the world and place the petitioner into a participatory role in making the world into a better place. Tillich takes the position that existence is grounded into the “being” of God. This is all well and good if vain speculating of religious beliefs is what you’re into.

Karl Barth, another modern theologian had an even more terse perspective as to the problem of evil, and like Yahweh in the Book of Job, he claimed that was anyone posed such a question was in danger of judgment! Rejecting theodicy, Barth no doubt had seen the inadequacy of his liberal Christian faith dealing with the problem of evil, and preferred to be up front about. Suffering and evil were the cards humanity had drawn. Deal. Besides, Barth explained that God was “wholly other” (echoing Marcion) and could not be comprehended by limited, earthbound creatures, it was useless for theologians to speculate. [3 ] However, “prayer and faith” doesn’t seem to be effective against evil, either. Barth didn’t realize he was committing the same offense with his own Christian speculations about prayer and faith.

Where does that leave us? This ‘necessity of suffering’ is how religion and spirituality justify the existence of abuse without having any reason to end it for all, since they believe ‘God’ or ‘Source’ placed it there for ‘learning lessons’ needed for ‘spiritual evolution.’ What these religionists fail to grasp is that evil does not need “God” to define itself. However, religion does need “God” to explain itself, which is why Religion have constructed as many doctrines and tenets and explanations as there are voices to explain them. They all fail, because the speculative nature of the explanation, which produces a “explanation gap” about the thing being explained. Speculating about the nature of reality is something that is never going to be absolutely true or free from error. By definition, a speculation can only be a conjecture about a subject without firm evidence. Same as Faith. We are seemingly forever cursed with having to deal with people will assert their speculation as “truth” when all they are doing is jumping through mental hoops. The problem of Evil should be enough to dissuade anyone from belief in an all-good, omnipotent and benevolent “God.” But it is to our detriment that it’s not. Suffering is instead seen as a fulfillment unto death; the ultimate fulfillment of a Christian life – a suffering that is promised to be justified after you die. But you have to die first. How does that justify faith?

***

[1] Phil. .12; 2 Cor. 22.7; 12.21

[2] A Grief Observed By C.S. Lewis, HarperOne. 2001

[3] Karl Barth: theologian of Christian witness By Joseph L. Mangina, Westminister John Knox Press. 2004

2011/05/17 – Why doesn’t the US stop the killing in Bahrain?

One reason is that Bahrain is home to the American naval Fifth Fleet. That’s a strategic port of call in the Middle East. Iran considers Bahrain a breakaway island, and has been accused of inflaming the demonstrations in a bid to destabilize the island. Thus Bahrain and the US gets to thumb their noses and go, “Nanny nanny booboo,” to Iran. Geopolitics is always so great. The problem is that the US can only stand by and hope things break its way. As with Tunisia, Egypt, Lebanon, Libya and Yemen, a political shift away from American hegemony would be a huge pain for the White House.

The brutal crackdown of the pro-democracy movement has been in place ever since Bahrain’s  King Al Khalifa declared a State of Emergency mid-March in response to the country’s pro-democracy protests. Arrests and torture have reduced the once large-scale demonstrations into scattered skirmishes. When you read from the AP and other sources schoolgirls are being tortured and that three people who edited an opposition newspaper will stand trial for “unethical” coverage of Shiite unrest against the Sunni elites, the prospect for a good ending for this story isn’t very likely. Oh yes, the Sunni-Shiite conflict is in full effect in Bahrain. Don’t hold your breath, because there is not going to be any White House condemnation over the crackdowns of revolutionary movements going on in yet another Muslim country. The US has already revealed where it stands between the people and the ruling class.

As of Monday, May 16, Al Jazeera has claimed that since no international press is allowed on the island, there no news of how the crackdown is progressing. But don’t single out America for its lack of response or criticism. No other nation is saying much of anything either.

And so it goes.

(Article first published as Why Doesn’t the U.S. Stop the Killing in Bahrain? on Technorati.)