Superstition, Fascism, and the quote on your homepage

[E Unum Pluribus]

I've been a lurker here for a long time, and I regularly visit this site to get my fix of fascinating and thought-provoking albeit a bit off-beat (in a good way) commentary about all sorts of things.<br><br>I just read your post about fascism and Vendetta, and it brings to mind a comment that I've longed to make. Jeff, you write:<br><br>"Now, with a spoiler advisory, here's where I think the film falters as dangerous art. (At least as good dangerous art.)" ... "But even an antifascist of Woody Guthrie's pedigree found himself similarly wrongfooted on occasion." ... and so on.<br><br>In other words, you make the excellent point that even a staunch and committed opponent of fascism can occasionally make the error of promoting ideas that in fact, upon closer examination, are fascist.<br><br>(I am using the term "fascist" here as a stand-in for other things as well as just political evil. You know what I mean.)<br><br>You make the excellent comment, for example, that "unity" can be a very evil idea... which inspired me to choose the a screen name that parodies the notion of freedom through becoming "one."<br><br>So here is the comment I have longed to make:<br><br>Jeff, I really think you should give some good hard thought to the connection between superstition and mystical thinking and fascism.<br><br>On your front page, you have the following quote:<br><br>"Whenever a feeling of aversion comes into the heart of a good soul, it's not without significance. Consider that intuitive wisdom to be a Divine attribute, not a vain suspicion: the light of the heart has apprehended intuitively from the Universal Tablet." -Rumi<br><br>When George Bush looked into his heart, God told him to strike at Saddam, and so he did. It was not a vain suspicion, but an apprehension from the universal tablet. Thus, tens of thousands have died.<br><br>Get what I'm getting at? I really, really, really despise this quote and the kind of thinking that it represents. It is evil, bigoted, fascist thinking. Don't promote it.<br><br>"Consider that intuitive wisdom..." Has it ever occurred to you that this might be the sort of thought process that is *guiding* the delusional quasi-occultic elites that you write about here? Evil men rarely do evil for evil's sake; they usually are deluded into thinking that in some twisted and bizarre way what they are doing is good. The Thule society occultists of Naziism thought that they were building a bright future-- a rediscovery of their glorious Pagan past. I am sure that their hearts thought they were apprehending something from some pure universal tablet somewhere.<br><br>Assuming for a moment that there is a universal tablet that can be apprehended from: how, exactly, do we *objectively* tell the difference between apprehension from the universal tablet and delusional thinking? How do we know that we are seeing the light as opposed to the "glittering darkness"?<br><br>Here are some methods that do not, as far as I can see, work:<br><br>1) Religious dogmatism. Followers of "Jesus Christ" have been led to support the neocons and their fascist agenda en masse. The followers of Muhammed have similarly been led to support fascists like Ahmadinejad(sp?) and bin Laden in their own lands. There seems to be no infalliable wisdom in religious faith. The faithful have been deceived again and again. Many German Christians supported Hitler because he used quasi-Christian rhetoric. Either there is no God or, if there is, it is not enough to merely follow him and perform the appropriate prayers and rituals.<br><br>2) Vague fluffy bunny of light stuff. You've posted before on the well-disguised fascist ideas that often show up in new age circles.<br><br>3) Pure introspection. This sounds good, but it seems to fail if history be any guide. People are frequently introspective, and yet they are still deceived.<br><br>So how do we know?<br><br>By promoting blind faith in some "universal tablet," you are making the same error as those who promote blind faith in, say, religion or reason. Reason can be mistaken, and religion can be misled. Likewise, faith in some "pure vision" is vulnerable to the glittering of the darkness as well.<br><br>Remember, always remember, that the darkness has a shine of it's own. Liars are good at what they do.<br><br>I think that your heart-- meaning your root intention-- is in the right place. I think that a good theme for this site should be a good, open, no-holds-barred discussion of just how we can tell the difference. I think there are some good rules of thumb: when you are condeming whole groups of people whole-cloth, you are being a bigot. I think the same thing applies to condemnation of "cognitive styles." Not all occultists, materialist/scientific skeptics, religionists, or mystics are evil. Not all are good either. Some seek the truth, and some are liars. Good and evil are found everywhere, in every circle, and clothed in every cognitive style.<br><br>Just a comment I've wanted to make. I'm not saying you should take that quote down, as there may indeed be a glimmer of truth in it. Here's a suggestion:<br><br>Place, alongside this quote, an opposing quote from a skeptic. This sort of Buddhist-style transposition of opposites tends to foster a kind of illumination.<br><br>"What is the sound of one hand clapping?<br><br>"How does an atheist skeptic apprehend from the universal tablet with the eyes of his heart?"<br><br>Keep striving toward freedom, kindness, peace, and liberty.<br> <p></p><i></i>

[sceneshifter]

good article, e unum pluribus - we do have only our own wits - which means we must go wrong sometimes - but we can go as right as we can by using our own wits, and developing our own wits - that is the game - like a baby learning to walk, having a go - the one thing that is a certain error is lending your body to someone else's wits - that is, obedience - mindless donation of our bodies to the purposes and thinking of another - anyone that interferes with free thought, free discussion, free talking, free sharing of ideas, is using force, is trying to enslave, is fascist - fascism is terrorism - bullying - theft of freedom - our schools are fascist - they use force - there is no mental life with force and fear - where is the celebration of thought in our schools? - where is the presentation of the day's new thoughts? - the commentary on the day's new thoughts? - 60% of hitler's nazis were primary school teachers [thiewelt, male fantasies] - fascists love oppressing, love domineering - but they are cowards - so they gravitate to schools - which is why they shout when they are in charge: because they see their power in their voice, because they know it is not in their hearts or minds - <br><br>and disobedience is just obedience with a minus sign - that is, merely doing the opposite of what you are told is still not thinking, is still not using your wits to maximise your happiness - that is the game - maximise your happiness with limited wits - that is what we are here for - a game - the ultimate video game - so obedience and disobedience are soul suicide - like football, in the game of life you can get hurt - boy, do we get hurt! - but the biggest mistake is not using your own wits - if you are going to obey, and throw yourself and your happiness completely into the pot of someone else's wits - well, that is giving up the game - that is staying on the field without playing the game - that is the spreading of mindlessness, the deliberate reduction of your wits to zero, deliberate selfblinding, utter unsportsmanship<br><br>you are on your own - you are the driver of your life - others can give suggestions, but you have to assess those suggestions - and be wrong or right, and suffer or not suffer - but to suffer and yet not think, not crank up the old brain - how contemptible is that? - to avoid looking at your distresses, and avoid using your wits to the max, what kind of gameplayer is that? - you will reap what other wits have sown - you will not even have the consolation of reaping your own sowing, right and wrong - you will, as it were, hand over the driving of your vehicle to another driver, while you remain in your driver's seat and he remains in his - how well can another drive your life? - he has very little information about you, he has misinformation about you, derived from his own experience and projections - obedience and disobedience are the only unforgivable errors: putting the wits on hold and running your life on formulas, on rules, on laws, on commands not critically examined, not passed under your inspection - walking blinder than you are<br><br>all religious people are committting the unforgivable sin if they obey without deciding themselves the truth value of a command, a rule, a law - do not believe out of respect for the teacher - test everything and hold on to what seems good to you as long as it seems good - so to speak, the first question god will ask, the only question god will ask, is: did you use your own wits or someone else's? - did you play the game, or did you commit mental suicide, lend your body mindlessly uncritically unthinkingly to another's purposes? DID YOU LIVE, DID YOU STRIVE, DID YOU USE all THE WITS YOU HAD? - if you didnt every day ask yourself, is this path the best path for my happiness, what mistakes am i making, what happiness am i ignorantly destroying? you didnt play the lifegame - you killed yourself, you let yourself die, you were a baby that didnt try to walk, you are just body, nothing, a waste of time and space - did you fight pride and the other enemies of using your wits freely and fully? - did you face reality, or hide in the sand, commit denial of reality? were you a human, or a blob?<br><br>look at animals: they never deny reality, they never pretend they are not on their own, they never don't strive to maximise their happiness - they care for themselves, they love themselves, they serve themselves in all humility as best they can<br><br>You are a cause, not an effect, an origin, an original, an originator, an author, an authority, a creator not a creature. Be! <p></p><i></i>

[Animus Rex]

This is an older article that I just came across about complex mythologies created by homeless children in Miami. Very telling indeed, especially in light of some of Jeffs posts about interdimentional interlopers:<br><br>Get this: <br><br>*"Demons found doors to our world," adds eight-year-old Miguel, who sits before Andre with the other children at the Salvation Army shelter. The demons' gateways from Hell include.... Jeep Cherokees with "black windows." The demons are nourished by dark human emotions: jealousy, hate, fear.*<br><br>Maybe not entirely magical thinking, eh? Maybe important survival lessons for extremely vulnernerable children.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.miaminewtimes.com/Issues/1997-06-05/news/feature_print.html">www.miaminewtimes.com/Iss...print.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[Rigorous Intuition]

First of all, thanks for the post and I'm glad you delurked.<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>When George Bush looked into his heart, God told him to strike at Saddam, and so he did. It was not a vain suspicion, but an apprehension from the universal tablet. Thus, tens of thousands have died.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>Actually, I don't think we can say that, just because George Bush <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>says</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> that's what happened. Leaders have claimed divine right since there have been leaders, and it's usually born no relation to their inner life. And this comes back to the key requisite of the poem: "Whenever a feeling of aversion comes into the heart <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>of a good soul</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->." So this isn't really applicable to the "evil men... deluded into thinking...they are doing is good."<br> <p></p><i></i>

[starroute]

I don't disagree with E Unum's cautions -- but I've read enough Rumi to feel confident that the quote means nothing more complicated than, "You can trust your intuition, so long as your heart is pure." What it advises is a lot more closely related to the old truism about children being instinctively able to pick out the phonies than it is to a George Bush thinking he hears the voice of God.<br><br>I expect we've all encountered people who didn't seem sound, offers that seemed too good to be true, situations that seemed vaguely off-key -- but without our being able to put our finger on just why. It's easy to feel embarrassed about those reactions, to worry that others will take them as a sign of foolishness and weakness, and to try to shrug them off. Rumi is saying, "No, don't ignore them. If you're a good person yourself and you feel something is wrong, you're probably right. Heed your intuition and don't be swayed by social pressure."<br><br>Granted, the language -- Divine attributes and Universal Tablets and such -- can ring badly on a modern ear attuned to hints of religio-fascism. But Rumi was addressing a 13th century audience, after all, and he had to phrase things in images they'd respond to, just as someone today might talk about the unconsicous mind or the intuitive right brain trying to get messages through to the rational left brain. It's the meaning that matters, and not the words it's dressed in.<br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[Seventhsonjr]

E Pluribus said:<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Evil men rarely do evil for evil's sake; they usually are deluded into thinking that in some twisted and bizarre way what they are doing is good. The Thule society occultists of Naziism thought that they were building a bright future-- a rediscovery of their glorious Pagan past. I am sure that their hearts thought they were apprehending something from some pure universal tablet somewhere</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->.<br><br>I would have to disagree with this statement except to the extent that evil men do evil deeds because they believe it is good for THEM --- NOT out of some delusion that what they are doing is GOOD.<br><br>The actions of fascists and brutes like the Nazis and the BFEE are NOT motivated by any false inspiration of goodness. Certainly they are not motivated by love, which is the highest good.<br><br>I understand your general point and agree that "divinely inspired" actiosn can be damned and dangerous and evil sometimes without the actor intending them to be evil. But I do NOT think that the analogy to the Nazis or the Thules or Skull and Bones or any of those fascist bastards is apt.<br><br>But I do think it is worthwhile to reiterate a point I make with some of my more esoteric philosopher friends:<br><br>I think it was Swedenborg who said something like: we must beware when we hear the spirits speak to us, as we do not know if these spirits are good or evil.<br><br>I think that this is a pretty apt point and expresses what you mean by your comments.<br><br>But allowing the extreme right to be considered as "misguided" by divine inspiration when they KNOW that their actions are evil (brute force is the principal modus operandi of fascists which is well acknowledged by them) is one of the great misleading myths of modern times.<br><br>i.e. Bush, the Nazis,, fascists etc MEAN well and BELIEVE what they are doing is right.<br><br>Nothing could be further from the truth. They are simply evil worshippers of materialism and mammon, necrophilic power lusters, trying to get all they can before their bones and their souls rot.<br><br>One element of Skull and Bones, for example, is basically that what it is all about is getting what you can before you die by any means necessaruy because all the apirutal stuff is BS to them.<br><br>THAT is where the difference lies between Rumi, who had a profound love for creation and the Creator, and those like the current power mongers on Wall Street and in Washington.<br><br>If anyone can find that Swedenborg quote exactly (I will look) post it: it applies.<br><br>Peace all.<br> <p></p><i></i>

[blanc]

do evil because it is good for them - exactly 7thsonjr<br>that is both their recipe for success and their achilles heel<br>'belief' is what they hang it on when convenient <p></p><i></i>

[rothbardian]

I think Mr. E Unum is on to something. There is an inadvertent elitism that creeps in when someone says: "Because I and my friends are better than other people, we need only depend on our instincts to give us reliable guidance."<br><br>The problem with that approach is that there are 'decent' and 'good' people on both sides of various arguments and issues. I, for example, (assuming for the moment that I am a halfway decent person) have an 'aversion' towards mainstream liberalism with it's Rorschach Inkblot approach to morality. It's waaay to willy nilly for me ("...if you're a good person and you feel good about something then...it IS good.").<br><br>On the other hand, a lot of the very decent liberal/socialists here at this blog, have a strong aversion to a Christian outlook (like mine) on moral issues. How does that work, in reference to this stated principle about feeling or sensing an "aversion"? <br><br>For example, there are a lot of good and decent folk living in the heartland of America. They're kind, neighborly, generous and charitable. They'll give you the shirt off their back. (After all, in terms of voluntary charitable donations, American citizens outgive the closest competitors by about 3 to 1). And yet these same people have a 'good feeling' about their nation's leadership, a bunch of evil (satanic?) psychopaths.<br><br>The moral of the story: When a good person has a good feeling about something, it means absolutely nothing...unless it is backed by good and sound reasoning.<br><br>Somehow or other, there are some huge questions being glossed over when folks like Seventhsonjr and Jeff are in effect saying: "Well, they're 'bad' and we're 'good'."<br><br>Maybe it's not so much that "they" are bad, but rather "they" have been put in a bad position...a position of obscene and unaccountable power...a kind of power that corrupts 99.99% of any individuals who ascend to that kind of power. Maybe the libertarian ideas of the so-called Founding Fathers should be heeded--- to VASTLY reduce these powers, so that if nothing else the ability (that only a centralized government has) to MASS-PRODUCE evil is eliminated.<br><br>E Unum is touching on what is one of my biggest beefs with liberalism/humanism (and a few other 'isms')-- the simplistic idea that there are 'good' people and 'bad' people in the world...and as soon as the 'good' people take over, everything will be (largely) OK. That's tantamount to saying there are two different species of human beings on the planet, and this simply is not the case. <p></p><i></i>

[blanc]

don't know if rothbardian you are attributing to me the concept that you argue against, namely that there are good and bad people - 2 sorts. I didn't say that, did anyone else? <br><br>there are people who choose bad actions, usually as a route to more power. <br><br>this kind of discussion usually ends up with people arguing about definitions of good and bad, a pretty diversion for a dull moment, but no use.<br><br>there is a place for instinctive knowledge, and a place for intellectual reasoning. I took the rubric on the RI page to mean that in a world where the input of information goes through a filter controlled by persons who don't necessarily have your best interests at heart its smart to be alert to all the messages from all your faculties ie both rigor and intuition. to which I'd add the caveat 'don't nail your colours to the mast too soon' <p></p><i></i>

[rothbardian]

blanc-- <br><br>Actually I hadn't quite understood your short comments. I was just echoing a little bit of what E Unum was saying. And yes, that is the overall message I have been getting from many folks here...a kind of "we're good/they're bad" over-simplification. No, I wasn't really trying to argue about definitions of good or bad at this point (although I would disagree with you that such a thing is a waste of time). I'd just refer you back to what I have said. <p></p><i></i>

[NewKid]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>There is an inadvertent elitism that creeps in when someone says: "Because I and my friends are better than other people, we need only depend on our instincts to give us reliable guidance."<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Don't have much to add other than to say this notion is incredibly prevalent among what you would call the ruling classes in Washington and New York. It's unimaginable to these people that anybody other than them should be ruling the country or the world. They have a huge problem with what you might charitably call "entitlement issues" and honestly believe that they should be in charge. The amount of reverse engineering their minds do to substantiate this is truly amazing. <p></p><i></i>

[AlicetheCurious]

In a healthy person, intuition and reason do not oppose, but complement each other. Emotions, intuition, however you want to call them, are no more than signals. They call your attention to certain things that otherwise you would not stop to consider or analyse. Consciously, we can only process an infinesimal fraction of the stimuli we're constantly bombarded with, so, much of it is ignored or processed automatically. Intuition and emotions are merely calling you to take a closer look. To go back on manual, so to speak.<br><br>If your car is emitting an alarm signal, you can either disable it, or direct your attention to the possible cause. In the first case, you are behaving irresponsibly and risking the possibility that your car could be irreversibly damaged (at the very least). In the second case, just because the alarm is ringing, doesn't mean it's time to trash your car, or even to assume that there is a problem with it -- the alarm itself could be malfunctioning.<br><br>But you can't know that until you gather enough data to rationally explain why the alarm was triggered.<br><br>So, intuition-information-logic comprise a three-step process that is necessary for intelligent decision-making, the way taste, chewing and swallowing are all part of the process of eating. <br><br>Sorry for the stupid metaphors, but I hope you get my drift. <p></p><i></i>

[havanagilla]

reason can be shared by a large number of people with very different intuitions, beliefs and values. therefore, I agree to some point with the first poster. mystical insights, when too many people start sharing them (or actually agree on a mystical intuition of one leader), have a tendency to deteriorate to...fascism ? well, to something bad. Plus, as long as we are human, we are prone to make mistakes. <br><br>---<br>Alice, I was going to address your comments on the blog about holocaust denial as distinct from misuse of holocaust drama. But then I felt this is becoming a bit uncomfortable for me, to be "the token Jew (Israeli?)" maybe some other time. <p></p><i></i>

[AlicetheCurious]

havanagilla, why are you uncomfortable? I thought the whole point of this forum and the pseudonyms was to enable us to exchange views and information without dragging in all sorts of distracting baggage. I can't speak for anybody else, but I certainly don't think of you as a token anything. There are only two things that impact my reaction to you: 1) the views you express here, and 2) your pseudonym...my only issue with your pseudonym is that every time I read it, the "Havanagilla" song starts playing through my head. Really. It's very catchy, but it's hard to get out again, and a pain if you're trying to concentrate. <p></p><i></i>

[chiggerbit]

I doubt that anyone thinks of you as a "token Jew", hava. For me, you are like a little window into Israel. If another Israeli posted here, that would be two windows, each with a different view. Without your insight, we have no window at all except what the propagandists provide. <p></p><i></i>