I’d advise children not to read this. Just to expand a little on an utterance in my last post that it is the person who is the living reality whilst the state is simply “an intellectual abstraction, a kind of agreement of the collective imagination for our mutual benefit.” It has no independent life apart from people behaving as though it were real, and this can be compared to Santa Claus who functions as an apparent reality by the collective efforts of people to act on this idea’s behalf. Were people, particularly parents, to stop the performance, giving presents in his name, etc, then the non-reality of Santa would very quickly be left with nothing to sustain the idea of itself.
Similarly with the behemoth of the State, and regarding the achieving of American Independence where if you read particularly someone like Thomas Jefferson it is clear the idea of the less government the better - that just as Jesus described the Sabbath as made for man and not vice versa, the state is made for man and not the other way round. Jesus is responding to a tyrannical inversion by a ruling elite of man’s relation to things that should serve him - like a day off work! Instead of this being a freedom for man, the religious orthodoxy, within the relevant passages anyway, twist this release from labour into a pathway of oppressive coercion where it is wrong to even cure someone because this is a supposed violation of the Sabbath and its obligatory freedom from labour! Freedom and a release from burden is replaced by bullying and psychological intimidation to police this ‘freedom’.
The American idea in its original form is very conscious of and a safeguard against the tendency of the rulers of the state to accumulatively develop the state apparatus into a tyrannical despot. By contrast, with leftist ideologies, principally Marxist, the balance of power is in the opposite direction where once again it is man who is most certainly subservient to the state, and rather than the ideal of within reason the less external governing of man the better, the more state control the better. The state owns everything, man nothing. And this relates to the nonsense one often sees that Marxist countries have been much less wonderful than desired only because they have failed to be Marxist enough or true to the ideal. The ideal is one-party absolute state control over the individual.
One thought that just struck me in the writing of this is how the word ‘reactionary’ would be used as very much one of accusation by proponents of leftist ideologies towards contrary viewpoints, and with themselves presumably as being ‘revolutionary’. But actually at a deeper ideological level if one compares to Jeffersonian democracy the aspiration of liberty of the individual from state tyranny, the natural over the unnatural, it is actually the leftists who are at the core reactionary as they are seeking to maintain the dynamic of supremacy and despotism of the state over the individual. The identity of the rulers may have been shuffled around a little but it is the same psychological essence as the absolute monarchy with man beneath the state, and now actually much more helplessly beneath. Here there is most certainly no place for dissent from within. It’s a mentally contrived structure where there are no internal contradictions permitted, a firmly set and controlled mathematical equation as it were where man must obey or be eliminated as an impermissible violation of this perfect system. So when we see the liberal left being vehemently anti-free speech if it is contrary to themselves and their mores, this is utterly consistent with the totalitarian nature of their desired system. All this of course all ties very much in with The Great Reset and its seriously unhinged and diabolical narrative of absolute state control at almost unimaginable levels, and towards which realisation there are very great efforts being made.
No comments:
Post a Comment