Francis Berger

Hell May Not Be Empty Yet, But It Will Be Soon

6/2/2020

Hell is empty, and all the devils are here. Ariel's declaration from The Tempest has become a meme all to itself; I have seen it employed countless times online over the past decade-and-a-half to describe a variety of evil circumstances and events. But in this time and place I can't help but feel that these previous applications of the quote did not do it full justice. Yes, evil circumstances certainly existed in the past ten or twenty years, but were they truly evil enough to empty hell of all its devils?

Ariel's statement is primarily one of recognition - a sudden awareness of the existence of men who are essentially evil - but the language he employs is supernatural in scope. In this respect, it mirrors what some people must be experiencing today - a cold, perhaps even reluctant realization of evil in their midst. Like Ariel, I imagine some would even use demonic imagery to describe this evil, but I suspect such language would remain firmly grounded in the metaphorical in the minds of most. In other words, evil men are merely like devils; hell, the imaginary place from which they spawn.

Though metaphoric comprehension denotes a step in the right direction, it offers only a partial understanding of the reality we are currently experiencing. It is hard to know if all the devils are here in this time and place, but one thing is certain - many are. And their numbers are increasing by the day. The pressure they are building and the chaos they are fomenting is undeniable.

If hell is not empty yet, then we must be getting close - awfully close.

2 Comments

What Cuckoos Will Soon Be Up To In My Neck Of The Woods

6/2/2020

0 Comments

In a recent post I described the abundance of common cuckoos around my village this year. True to form, the males' famous cu-coo calls continue to fill the air, but in recent days the calls have started to decrease. Every now and then I hear the not-so-famous three tone cuckoo call - cu-coo-coo - which many regard as an indication of spring giving way to summer. I tried to find a recording of the cuckoo's 'changed tune in June', but to no avail.

In any case, I imagine the female cuckoos have already placed their eggs in the nests of other birds. If they haven't, I suspect they will do so very shortly. Apparently, a female cuckoo will place its egg in the nest of the species that reared the female cuckoo itself. Thus, if a female cuckoo was reared by sparrows, it will inevitable place its egg in a sparrow's nest.

Cuckoos are notorious brood parasites, but the behavior of the cuckoo chick after it hatches is truly something to behold. Immediately after hatching, the cuckoo chick systematically eliminates whatever competition it happens to find. If it hatches early enough, it pushes the other eggs out of the nest (as the short video below shows). If it hatches at the same time as or slightly later than the host hatchlings, it will doggedly eject its step brothers and sisters from the nest until none remain, thereby ensuring that it alone will be the sole beneficiary of its hosts incessant feeding.

The cuckoo chick in the video reminded me of Sisyphus; however, unlike Sisyphus, the cuckoo chick's efforts ultimately proved fruitful, at least for it.

0 Comments

The Story Behind Haydn's Farewell Symphony

5/31/2020

0 Comments

In my recent post addressing the time Franz Joseph Haydn spent at the Esterhazy family's rural retreat in Esterháza, which happens to be a stone's throw from my own home here in western Hungary, Bruce Charlton referred to one of his favorite Haydn symphonies - No. 45 in F-sharp Major, also known more commonly as The Farewell Symphony.

Though I have known about Haydn and his music since I was teenager, I only began listening to his compositions intensively in the past two or three years (after the composer's connection to the area which I now call home solidified in my mind). Despite this, I hadn't encountered the Farewell Symphony at all until Dr. Charlton brought it to my attention. The piece is not only musically wonderful, but it also contains the kind of humorous creative ingenuity Haydn displayed in some of his other works, most notably Symphony 95 - The Surprise Symphony.

Anyway, Haydn and his musicians often accompanied Nicholas, Prince Esterhazy to the fabulous 126 room palace complete with an adjoining opera house the prince had constructed in Eszterháza, a small settlement in rural Hungary approximately 50 kilometers from the Esterházy's main residence in Kismárton (today, Eisentstadt, Austria). The musicians' wives and families were left in Eisenstadt during these stays, which tended to last from approximately May to October.

Nevertheless, in November 1772, Nicholas decided to alter his annual routine and extend his stay at Esterháza for an additional two months. The time extension applied to Haydn and the musicians as well. The musicians, who were all quite homesick at that point and longed to return to their wives and families, beseeched the Kapellmeister to protest on their behalf. Haydn was in sympathy with his musicians plight, but he was reluctant to confront his patron about the matter directly. As a result, he devised a brilliant means through which to bring his musicians plight to Nicholas's attention.

He composed a symphony that included a distinct message. As the piece draws to a close, the players blow out the candles on their music racks and leave the room one by one until only two remain; when the symphony was first performed, the two remaining players were concertmaster Luigi Tomasini and Haydn himself.

Prince Esterhazy took the hint. After the performance, he strode into the antechamber and informed the musicians that he would return his court to Kismárton the very next morning. This is how the symphony became known as the Farewell Symphony.

Dr. Charlton was kind enough to link an excellent performance of this symphony; a performance I highly recommend (the 'farewell fun starts at 21:20 of the video).

0 Comments

An Injustice I Can Live With

5/31/2020

4 Comments

Apparently it's Children's Day or something. Here's what my wife made my son for breakfast in celebration of the day.

By comparison, here's what my wife made me for Father's Day last year.

A glaring injustice if there ever was one. Oddly enough, it's one I think I can live with.

Note added: I'm perfectly aware that my wife was not obligated to give me anything on Father's Day as I am not her father; nevertheless, I am the father of her pancake-eating little boy. Consequently, I think that deserves something beyond a mere cup of coffee!

4 Comments

The Most Obscene Wood Putty On The Market

5/30/2020

8 Comments

I dedicate this post to Wm Jas Tychonievich who, like me, gets a kick out of this kind of stuff.

Looking for the most effective and durable woody putty money can buy? Fakitt!

Want professional-looking wood finishes that are second-to-none? Fakitt!

Have some holes that need to be filled? Fakitt!

Okay, that last one was a bit extreme, so I think I'll stop there. 'Fa' means wood in Hungarian, and 'kitt' appears to have been taken from 'Kittfort', the manufacturer's name. Thus, in Hungarian, the name is utterly unsuggestive; but in English?

What makes this particular product name so amusing is it is basically a two-for-one in English. Pronounce the 'a' as you would in a word like 'all', and you get one obscene expression; pronounce the 'a' as you would in 'apple', and you get something a little different, but just as colorful.

I've never had so much fun applying wood putty in my life.

8 Comments

Will You Return To Normal Or Seek A New Normal?

5/28/2020

4 Comments

Will things return to normal or will we all have to adjust to a new normal?

A pertinent question if there ever was one, but as far as I'm concerned the question is of secondary importance. What matters more is this - should we desire to return to our normal selves or should we seek to establish new normal selves?

For the sake of argument let's pretend everything returns to the way it was before the birdemic. Does this imply that we should also return to the way we were before the 'crisis'?

And what if things never return to normal? Well, this will likely exclude any chance of slipping comfortably back into our previous 'normal' selves and lives. On the contrary, we will probably be forced into accommodating and adapting to the new normal world in various ways.

So which do you prefer? A return to normal or a new normal?

Either way, we should be inspired to establish new normals for ourselves in this time and place. If our previous normals were on the right track, we should take this opportunity to intensify our efforts. If our previous normals were wayward and misguided, we should seize the moment and strive for more focused and authentic ways of living and being.

As we emerge from the present, we should aim to discard all that is negative in normal - all that is ordinary, conventional, routine, and unexceptional - and embrace all that is positive in normal - all that is sane, healthy, lucid, and right minded. We should then make these 'positive normal' attributes the foundation of our new normals.

Each new normal should be as unique as the individual possessing it, but it should possess a refreshed and deeper understanding of what mortal life in this world is really about and what we should be doing with it.

That's my new normal, and I'll stick to it even if things go back to normal or some new normal begins to take shape around me.

4 Comments

Haydn Was Here

5/27/2020

10 Comments

I often refer to the small village I now call home as unimpressive and nondescript, and I suppose in many ways it is, but whenever I mull about how un-special my little village is, I quickly remember Eszterháza Palace and its famous court composer, Joseph Haydn.

The Esterházy family constructed Eszterháza a mere two-and-a-half kilometers from where my home now stands. A grand structure partially modeled after the Palace of Versailles, Esterháza was home to Haydn for a great portion of his composing life. As kapellmeister for the Esterházy family, Haydn divided his time between the family's palaces in Eszterháza (now known as Fertod in Hungary) and Kismarton (now known as Eisenstadt in Austria). The amount of time Haydn spent at these 'remote' estates - remember this is the eighteenth century and anything ten kilometers from Vienna was considered remote - isolated him from other composers and trends, forcing him, as he put it, "to become an original."

Eszterháza Palace (photo by Civertan Grafikai Stúdió)

Sometimes I wonder if Haydn ever happened to pass through my small, nondescript village, which must have been much smaller and much more nondescript in his day. I imagine he must have. As I mentioned above, the palace is very close by. But even if he didn't, I imagine Haydn must have experienced many of the same sights, sounds, and scenery I experience today - the calling of the cuckoos, the red flecks of poppies, the strong spring breezes, the sight of the Alps on the western horizon. I imagine some of these things must have inspired his music in much the same way they inspire me. Of course, Haydn's inspiration led to masterpieces, whereas mine leads to non-masterpieces and feelings of contentment and wellbeing.

The statue of Haydn at Eszterháza, which my son affectionately refers to as "Hot Dog Haydn" because the sheet music in the hand resembles a hot dog.

Thinking of Haydn has reminded me that I have not visited Eszterháza Palace since December or January. I believe I will take my son this week, and we'll walk through the garden the same way we did after we first moved here, with a sense of awe and wonder. My little village may appear unimpressive and nondescript, but it sits in the middle of a region that is anything but. After all, Haydn was here. And in many ways, he still is.

I'll sign off this post by leaving a link to one of my favorite Haydn pieces - Trumpet Concerto in E-flat major. If you happen to give it a listen now, try to visualize the composer walking the garden at Eszterháza, and you'll have the chance to spend a little time in the area I call home.

10 Comments

It May Not Be The End Times, But It Is Certainly The Anti-Times

5/26/2020

9 Comments

My imagination is far too weak to properly comprehend eschatology. I know one thing for sure, none of the end-of-the-world predictions I have encountered in my life ever panned out - at least not in the manner in which the prophets described them.

Interpretation is the crux of the problem. What is meant by 'end'? What about 'times'? Will it truly involve some sort of rapture? People floating up to empyrean, glorified by the light of the Lord as angels rain fire on the damned?

Somehow I doubt it.

But I would be hard-pressed to deny that something is undoubtedly ending . . . now. The world I have known - this half-rotten, corrupted old sphere that was still somehow capable of birthing genuine moments of reprieve, insight, and joy, seems to have tilted and capsized. Yes, genuine moments of reprieve, insight, and joy remain, but the atmosphere around these gentle pockets of illumination has darkened considerably. I don't expect the world to end, but for all intents and purposes, the world has ended.

It may not be the End Times, but the Anti-Times are now in full effect. Anyone with eyes has seen the mounting opposition against Goodness over the past few decades - the sustained, thinly-veiled secret war against Truth, Beauty, and Virtue. Well, the veil has slipped; the war is not a secret anymore. Those with eyes can see this; those without? What's that saying about the blind and the blind?

The front has expanded now. The destruction of Divine Will and Creation remains the primary objective, but the dark forces seem intent on destroying the virtual world they have erected to hide Reality as well. They want to bring it all down - in one fell swoop. All the idols they deified - society, economy, politics, freedom, equality, humanity - are being pulled down, one-by-one.

For decades they worked to remake society, to make it kinder, gentler, and more accepting. They raged against social constructs, against oppression, against marginalization. They fought for an open world that would include everyone and everything but the Divine and those who live by the Divine; a society that would inevitably emancipate everyone - even the oppressors.

That society is now anti-society.

For decades they argued for open borders, the free movement of goods, the mobility of labor - all for the gradual but imminent enrichment of the world. Tens of millions have been shut out of work these past few months. Debts continue to increase. The infrastructure continues to crumble. People are going hungry. Yet stock markets around the world are once again close to all-time-highs.

That economy is now anti-economy.

And politics is now anti-politics. Nations are anti-nations. Laws are anti-laws. Culture is anti-culture. Religion is anti-religion. Truth is anti-truth. Beauty is anti-beauty. Virtue is anti-virtue. Goodness is anti-goodness.

Why? Because humanity is now anti-humanity. Humanity is not aware it has become anti-humanity. Humanity is unaware of nearly all antis. The bulk of them see nothing but pros.

Anti-humanity silently longs for its anti-savior. And when the anti-savior appears, the End Times will finally arrive.

After that, it will make absolutely no difference at all if the world actually ends . . . or not.

9 Comments

The Gardeners - Károly Ferenczy

5/25/2020

0 Comments

Károly Ferenczy (1862-1917) remains one of the best known Hungarian painters from the late nineteenth/early twentieth-century (at least in Hungary). He started painting in the naturalistic style, but eventually experimented with impressionism and post-impression and is often hailed as the father of the latter two styles in Hungary.

I have touched upon Ferenczy's work before here and here, and for reasons I can't fully explain, I keep returning to his work again and again. Thus far, I have found the bulk of his work immensely satisfying, regardless of the style he utilized or the subject matter he chose to paint.

The Gardeners (1891) is one of my 'new' favorites from Ferenczy. Note how the muted, almost monotone colors against which the earth-tone clothing worn by the two figures, presumably a father and son, rise in contrast. The gardeners' clothing then serves to complement the leaves and soil in the potted plants to the right of the composition.

The boy's facial expression as he stares straight at the viewer is purposefully ambiguous. Though the boy grips the watering can and cradles the plant pot in what appears to be a determined fashion, his face hints at something resembling resignation.

0 Comments

The Creation of Anti-Society Requires Anti-Social Engineering

5/23/2020

7 Comments

By social engineering, I am not referring to the information security context of the term - though that certainly plays a part - but rather to the political science definition that refers to the utilization of central planning to initiate social change and manage the future development and behavior of society.

A quick check of social engineering on Wikipedia reveals the following:

Social engineering is a discipline in social science that refers to efforts to influence particular attitudes and social behaviors on a large scale, whether by governments, media or private groups in order to produce desired characteristics in a target population. Social engineering can also be understood philosophically as a deterministic phenomenon where the intentions and goals of the architects of the new social construct are realized.

The Soviet Union and Nazi Germany are two obvious examples of large-scale social engineering projects in the twentieth century. In both cases, authoritarian central governments sought to reshape the characteristics of their respective target populations by modifying or abandoning previous social and cultural frameworks and replacing these with social and cultural frameworks subjugated to encompassing political/economic ideologies.

The Soviet Union and Nazi Germany can be considered 'all in' social engineering efforts aimed at transforming all aspects of their respective societies, primarily by influencing human behavior at the individual level through a comprehensive series of incentives and disincentives that basically left individuals with no viable means by which to 'opt out' of the new social constructs being erected around them.

Nevertheless, the Soviets and Nazis were true social engineers. Though their societal endeavors fundamentally addressed individuals, the overarching goals of these endeavors were firmly positioned at the collective, or more appropriately, at the communal level. As the word communist denotes, the Soviets desired to build a new sense of community in which individuals were willing to actively and enthusiastically sacrifice personal liberties for the greater collective good - a greater collective good that promised a more just and equitable society through the emancipation from political/social oppression and financial/economic exploitation. Nazi social engineering also required individuals to relinquish their individuality to the collective, but unlike the Soviets, the Nazis promise of an improved social framework was one in which 'echte' Germans could utilize nationalism to regain their pride and escape from the clutches of international profiteering and unfair war treaties that left their nation devastating and bleeding after the First World War.

In other words, through social engineering, the Soviets and the Nazis veritably attempted to establish new social constructs. Though both demolished certain aspects of their societies, neither sought to purposively demolish their societies altogether. On the contrary, though they ravaged many traditional and organic social frameworks, both the Soviets and the Nazis used some of these traditional/organic frameworks to craft their new respective social constructs.

Though the Soviets and the Nazis actively marginalized, atomized, and/or liquidated some segments of their populations to create their new social constructs, neither aimed to destroy the concept of society altogether. Twentieth-century communist and fascist approaches to social engineering were driven by the innate ambition to build 'better and improved' societies. They viewed individuals as cogs in a machine, and the primary motivation was to recalibrate the cogs to build an improved machine. In medical terms, the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany strove to eradicate cancerous individuals from society in an effort to nurture 'healthy' cells that would effectively work together to build an improved body. Neither intended to kill the body outright.

The Soviet and Nazi examples are both instances of blatant social engineering, but it would be wrong to assume social engineering projects are limited to authoritarian governments hellbent on constructing new societies. In fact, one could argue that in the past sixty or seventy years most of the world has been subjected the most comprehensive social engineering effort ever initiated through the vehicle of new or progressive leftism.

As in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, the primary 'perceived' intention of contemporary leftism has been the creation of a fairer, more just, and more equitable social framework at the international or global level. In this sense, our current form of leftism is more akin to the Soviets than it is to the Nazis, who made nationhood and ethnicity the foundation of their social engineering project. Like the Soviets, contemporary leftism is cosmopolitan, transnational, and universal in its scope; unlike the Soviets, contemporary leftism has succeeded at imposing its vision upon the most of the world.

The social engineering projects contemporary leftism has implemented over the past seventy years have been far more pervasive and ubiquitous than anything the Soviets and the Nazis ever managed to achieve. Unlike the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, contemporary leftism lacks a clear, identifiable center or core. Social engineering doctrines cannot be traced back specific locations like Moscow or Berlin, but instead seep from largely untraceable and unidentifiable sources and only become evident once they have permeated governments, media, business, and other private and public organizations.

Like its authoritarian, twentieth-century predecessors, contemporary leftism is inherently anti-religious in its aims - that is, it seeks to discard the transcendental in favor of the temporal; however, unlike the Soviets and Nazis, our current form of leftist-inspired social engineering, which began shortly after the conclusion of the Second World War, aims not to create a better and improved society, but seeks instead to destroy human society altogether.

Put another way, what we are experiencing now is the culmination of approximately seventy years of purposive anti-social engineering, the end goal of which is the utter marginalization and atomization of every individual on earth. Progressive leftism believes all evil in the world find its origins in 'social constructs'; as a result, progress can only be made through 'deconstructing' social constructs. Modifying or altering social constructs is insufficient. What is needed instead is a thorough dismantling of all social frameworks that define human life on earth. Those who subscribe to this radical vision believe the dismantled social frameworks will then be replaced by new social constructs, but this is where true believers have been misled.

Progressive leftism is a destructive rather than a creative force. Contrary to popular belief, it does not intend to reconstruct the social constructs it deconstructs. On the contrary, social deconstruction is its only real objective. The ultimate goal of progressive leftism is to remove the machine altogether, leaving only a world of atomized, isolated, deterministic cogs.

According to progressive leftism, the greatest evil in the world is society itself. As a result, the ideal society of progressive leftism is actually an anti-society - a sacrilegious abstract conception of purity in which no individual can ever fully and functionally participate for the simple reason that mere participation would render the abstraction impure.

Seen from another angle, contemporary leftism regards society as a massive tumor. Individuals are nothing more than malignant cancer cells comprising the tumor. Shrinking the tumor entails separating and isolating the individual cells and then neutralizing them. The end goal is the destruction of the tumor, which ultimately leads to the destruction of all cells.

Unlike cancer cells, individual human beings are indivisible; that is, they cannot grow, prosper, learn, or reproduce on their own. The growth, prosperity, and reproduction of individual human beings requires the establishment of relationships with other individual human beings. In this sense, man truly is a social creature. The Soviets and Nazis understood this and used it to their advantage.

Our contemporary form of leftism knows this as well and is also using it to their advantage, but the advantage of the anti-social construct objectives contemporary leftism aims for only makes sense beyond the limits of temporal considerations.

Relationships are the essence of Divine Will and Creation. This holds especially true for this world, which is primarily a place for learning. The bulk of this learning rests upon two necessities - freedom and relationships with other Beings. Contemporary leftism is on the brink of eliminating both for the bulk of humanity, and it has done so primarily through the success of its anti-social engineering campaign.

Establishing and maintaining free will and relationships are the only effective means of counteracting anti-social engineering. The former must happen primarily at the levels of thinking and believing; the latter must continue to be nurtured and maintained at the personal and local levels.

I can see no other viable way forward at this time.

Note added: The most significant belief and relationship that must be maintained in this era of anti-social engineering is our belief and relationship with the Divine.

7 Comments

Cuckoos Everywhere

5/21/2020

7 Comments

Take a good look at me now because I would never let you get this close to me in real life.

No, this post isn't about all the insane people in the world - it's about Cuculus canorus; the common cuckoo.

Having grown up in North America, my only experience with the common cuckoo was via cuckoo clocks, but here in Hungary the common cuckoo is . . . well, quite common. Since moving to Hungary five years ago, I have used the cuckoo to keep track of the transition from spring to summer. I usually hear the first cuckoo in early April. In May, practically all you hear in my area is cuckoo calls. Then in June, the easily recognizable double note cu-coo song changes. By the end of June, I stop hearing the cuckoo altogether. Appropriately enough, my experience of hearing cuckoo birds matches the old nursery rhyme to a 't'.

Cuckoo, cuckoo, what do you do?
In April I open my bill;
In May I sing all day;
In June I change my tune;
In July away I fly
In August away I must.

True to form, the cuckoos around my house have been singing all day, but this year it appears there are many more of them. The air is saturated with unrelenting, incessant cu-coos from sun up all the way to sun down. I've never experienced anything like it. It's as if a massive cuckoo clock factory suddenly set up shop near my house.

Of course, I am not annoyed or irritated by this at all; I just find it odd. I estimate the amount of cuckoo song to be at least three or four times greater than in previous years, which means one of two things: the cuckoos are getting noisier; or there a lot more of them around.

I lean toward the second conjecture myself. The area surrounding my village - a rural mix of fields, pastures, woodlands, and rivers - provides the perfect habitat for cuckoos, especially the rivers where many great reed warblers nest along the riverbanks. Its recognizable song aside, the cuckoo is also famed for being a master brood parasite, and it has a penchant for laying its eggs in reed warbler nests and then letting the reed warbler raise the cuckoo hatchling, provided the warbler doesn't get wise to the scam and jettison the cuckoo egg before it hatches.

Oddly enough, there seems to be many more reed warblers this year as well, which doesn't add up in my mind. Whatever the case, I'll take the apparent overall increase in the bird population in my area as a good thing and leave it at that.

One last point, though I have heard cuckoos constantly every spring over the past five years, I have only rarely managed to catch a glimpse of one. Whenever I do, it tends to be rather far away. The closest I have ever come to a cuckoo is about fifty meters. The second I get a step closer, it takes off and alights on another, distant tree.

Parasitical; master mimicker; practically invisible; a joyful, yet almost mocking double note call; it's hardly surprising Shakespeare, among others used the cuckoo as a sign of bad luck and infidelity. As far as I'm concerned, the cuckoo symbolizes only the positive, which is why I prefer William Wordsworth's take on this most peculiar bird:

To the Cuckoo

O blithe New-comer! I have heard,
I hear thee and rejoice.
O Cuckoo! shall I call thee Bird,
Or but a wandering Voice?

While I am lying on the grass
Thy twofold shout I hear;
From hill to hill it seems to pass,
At once far off, and near.

Though babbling only to the Vale
Of sunshine and of flowers,
Thou bringest unto me a tale
Of visionary hours.

Thrice welcome, darling of the Spring!
Even yet thou art to me
No bird, but an invisible thing,
A voice, a mystery;

The same whom in my school-boy days
I listened to; that Cry
Which made me look a thousand ways
In bush, and tree, and sky.

To seek thee did I often rove
Through woods and on the green;
And thou wert still a hope, a love;
Still longed for, never seen.

And I can listen to thee yet;
Can lie upon the plain
And listen, till I do beget
That golden time again.

O blessèd Bird! the earth we pace
Again appears to be
An unsubstantial, faery place;
That is fit home for Thee!

7 Comments

A Work in Progress Nears Its Completion

5/20/2020

2 Comments

Some readers of this blog probably find my posts about the chicken coop renovation project I started at the end of April mildly annoying. For this I apologize, both retroactively and in advance. Posting about the progress of a backyard hobby project really does seem rather pointless and trivial in the grand scheme of things, especially in light of all that has transpired over the past couple of months. With the exception of those who have some sort of innate interest in construction or renovation, I can't imagine anyone finding my chicken coop posts all that interesting or engaging.

Yet as is the case with most things in life, I view my chicken coop renovation from an analogical perspective; and in my posts on the subject I have also, quite unsubtly, presented my work on this particular building through the lens of analogical reasoning. I will leave it to readers to draw their own specific analogies in connection with this project. With any luck, some of those analogies might deal with renewals of a different sort.

Anyway, the coop was in a sadly dilapidated state when I committed to begin working on it . . .

. . . but over the course of the past few weeks, I have managed to give it a new lease on life. Unfortunately, I could only work on the building in fits and starts, as the weather and my other commitments would allow, which helps explain why it has taken me nearly a month to get to this point. All I have left to do now is build a new door. After that, I can officially call the project completed.

Of course, some sort of fencing or wiring is still needed, and the interior remains unfinished, but I'll focus on all of that if and when I ever commit to obtaining chickens!

2 Comments

Using Hanlon's Razor To Slit Our Own Throats

5/19/2020

10 Comments

As a greater portion of the West slowly emerges from stringent lockdown measures and staggers into a world of confusing and seemingly pointless social restrictions, I find I am still pondering the very same question I began to ponder just days before the lockdown went into effect:

Why do most people fail to recognize the underlying evil motivations fueling the draconian measures that have been imposed upon them during the birdemic?

Many possible explanations exist, but in my mind they all find root in the metaphysical. That is, modern man is largely incapable of recognizing true evil because he has acquired an extremely flawed and limited conception of the fundamental nature of reality. His conception of the relationships between mind and matter, between substance and attribute, and between potentiality and actuality have become blurred and confused. Through the conscious and willing rejection of God and Divine Creation, modern people have essentially lost the plot of reality and have become very much like the captives in Plato's cave allegory - mesmerized into believing the outlines of projected shadows mark the limits of all known reality.

By rejecting God, modern people have also rejected belief in supernatural evil, which is entirely understandable - for it makes no sense to believe in the existence of the devil if belief in God is refuted. Thus, for modern people evil becomes a purely material phenomenon that can only be explained by material factors such as nature, chemistry, psychology, sociology and the like.

At first glance, this range of criteria appears fairly wide-ranging, but it is actually quite restrictive, which might help explain why modern people harbor such narrow and incomplete definitions of evil. Dr. Bruce Charlton has written much about these narrow definitions of evil and argues that moderns ironically appear to recognize Luciferic evil (driven by lower emotions like rage, lust, envy, greed and characterized by murder and violence), but are utterly blind to Ahrimanic evil (cold, calculating, faceless, bureaucratic malevolence characterized by committees, management structures, micro-managing and micro-surveillance).

I fully agree with Dr. Charlton's assessment. If the lockdown has proven anything, it has proven this - most contemporary people truly are blind to cold machinations of bureaucratic evil.

But how did this come to be?

Perhaps a partial explanation can be found in Hanlon's Razor - a philosophical aphorism that posits the following: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." In other words, any interpretation of malevolence might actually be nothing more than a misinterpretation of stupidity and incompetence.

Applying Hanlon's Razor to the unprecedented measures authorities around the world imposed upon their respective populations in response to the birdemic results in the following line of thinking: "Sure, it looks like it might have been done with malevolent intentions, but it is more likely just a case of ignorant and misguided politicians, experts, and policymakers scrambling to make hard decisions based on incomplete and inaccurate data and projection models."

Now, Hanlon's Razor can be a useful tool in discerning mere incompetence - to do the opposite, to assume malice to be the root of all actions and decisions is to veer into the dark realm of paranoia - but the swiftness with which modern people embrace Hanlon's Razor to explain away obvious cases of malicious intent and action leads back to the limited comprehension modern people have of the fundamental nature of reality.

That the line separating good from evil runs through the heart of every man was one of Alexander Solzhenitsyn's most famous observations. Modern people appear enamored by this idea, but for all the wrong reasons. Misinterpreting the wisdom inherent in Solzhenitsyn's insight, contemporary people simply accept the impossibility of pure good and evil. Yes, some people are more good than others; and others are more 'evil'; but no individual person is truly good or evil. Basically, humans are nothing more than fleshy, animated yin-yang symbols; and even the most 'evil' human possesses some attributes of good (racists, bigots, phobes, and the like excepted).

No person is wholly good or evil. That's a fact. A truth. But if it's not anchored in the proper context, this truth can easily be misapplied. Put another way, modern people view Solzhenitsyn's observation as a 'get out of jail free card' - as a means through which to explain away the presence of human evil. Lacking all religious tools to judge, weigh, and assess the presence of human evil, modern people merely shrug and say "I have it in me to do it, too."

Yet once again, the actual definitions of evil here are likely extremely narrow and limited to the Luciferic conceptions of evil mentioned above. Moderns basically equate Luciferic evil in humanity with stupidity and incompetence, where the greatest blunder is not the actual committal of immorality or crime, but the stupidity and incompetence that allowed one to be caught in the act.

But what about Ahrimanic evil?

Modern people often employ Hanlon's Razor when criticizing or lambasting their elected political officials. Malice is rarely addressed, at least through officially-sanctioned channels, and nearly all seemingly malevolent actions and decisions are peremptorily written off as stupidity or incompetence.

But there is more to it than that. Much more. Meandering speculations about Hanlon's Razor aside, I sense modern people do not recognize Ahrimanic evil as evil for the simple reason that most sincerely view bureaucracy as a force for good. Modern people know bureaucracies - organizations, committees, political bodies, corporate boards, etc. - are crammed with flawed, fleshy yin yangs who are often tempted to commit 'bad deeds', but they do not believe that this makes the forms of bureaucracy evil in of themselves (for example, think of those who steadfastly defend abstractions like democracy).

The only notion of heaven most modern Westerners are willing to consider is a temporal one. Contemporary bureaucratic structures, policies, and frameworks are the only means through which this temporal heaven can be established. What does this temporal heaven, this worldly utopia comprise? A greener planet. Universal basic income. Increased international cooperation leading to eventual one-world governance. And so forth. Any threat to this vision of material heaven must be dealt with swiftly and severely, and it must be dealt with swiftly and severely exclusively through bureaucratic means.

Modern people do not recognize Ahrimanic evil as evil because they wholeheartedly believe that Ahriman is a force for good. The rejection of God and Divine Creation leaves no other option. Heaven on earth will not build itself. Such a goal requires an intricate network of plans, committees, management, data, laws, rules, regulations and everything else Ahriman comprises. And any perception of malice in this great project will be attributed to stupidity and incompetence. After all, how could those who strive to build heaven on earth possibly possess 'real' malice or be 'really' evil?

Well, if one rejects all belief in supernatural evil, then those who strive to help build heaven on earth can't really be malicious at all. At worst, they are stupid. Or incompetent. Or both.

But evil? To most modern people, the very notion is incomprehensible.

Note added: Creating heaven on earth also entails guaranteeing certain 'inalienable' human rights, most of which are blatant moral inversions that are in direct opposition to the Divine. Ahriman serves to endorse, legislate, and enforce these inversions, the bulk of which modern people no longer even recognize as such. Modern people also genuinely believe bureaucratic structures sincerely care about the well-being of all individual people. Merely mentioning that this is not the case strikes most modern people as anathema.

10 Comments

Realization

5/18/2020

2 Comments

Once I learned life coaches were not only real but also in demand, the little hope I harbored for our faltering civilization vanished like toilet paper during a panic-driven, lockdown shopping spree.

2 Comments

Resisting the Fire of Temptation

5/17/2020

0 Comments

I have reached the reluctant conclusion that good weather equals bad blogging.

The Ice Saints and Cold Sofia brought some unseasonably cooler temperatures to Hungary earlier this week, but the weather has bounced back in the last couple of days, which means I have spent most of my time outside finishing my chicken coop or going for long walks with the family. As great as the fine spring weather has been for my outdoor activities, it has been anything but conducive to my blogging. Well, life involves trade offs at times, I guess.

In any case, while I was plastering the coop today, an old Bruce Springsteen song inexplicably filtered into my thoughts. I've never really been a huge fan of "The Boss." Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike his music. In fact, I know many of his tunes and would never think of turning the radio dial if he happened to pop up on the airwaves. Yet I have never purchased any of his albums or ever had any particular interest in him or his music beyond the mere pleasure of happenstance.

"I'm on Fire" was the song that came to mind as I was working outside today. The tune is a short, salacious confession of libidinous lust for another man's woman - a real no-no as far as Christian morality goes. Of course, nearly every rock and/or pop song ever written is an affront on Christian morality in some regard. Merely mentioning that Springsteen's lewd little number addresses something sinful seems superfluous, to say the least. As is readily apparent, the lyrics themselves offer nothing redeeming.

Hey little girl, is your daddy home?
Did he go away and leave you all alone? Mhmm
I got a bad desire

Oh oh oh, I'm on fire

Tell me now, baby, is he good to you?
And can he do to you the things that I do? Oh no
I can take you higher

Oh oh oh, I'm on fire

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull
At night I wake up with the sheets soaking wet
And a freight train running through the middle of my head

Only you can cool my desire

Like nearly every rock and pop songwriter that has ever existed, Springsteen forgoes Dante's wind imagery from Inferno and chooses instead to capture the essence of sexual lust and indecent desire through the use of trusty old (and worn) fire imagery. In fact, whenever I hear "I'm on Fire", I can't help but think of the Doors "Light My Fire" with Springsteen's song basically elaborating on the state of lusty desire that consumes a person once they have given into the spark of temptation. Put another way, "I'm on Fire" is just another take on Elvis Presley's "Burning Love", or Johnny Cash's "Ring of Fire", or Jerry Lee Lewis's "Great Balls of Fire" complete with allusions to losing self-control, burning, and the brain being set aflame.

Of course, the other songs mentioned above are merely about the spark of sexual attraction and being consumed by the subsequent passion the spark ignites, presumably for a woman who is both single and available. Springsteen's song, on the other hand, is about a "bad desire" - licentious attraction to a married woman.

Why am I going on about all of this? Well, as I was working in the yard today, I happened to also remember the video for this song. Though the song itself offers nothing redeeming, the video - surprisingly - does. I'm not sure if the video was Springsteen's idea or someone else's, but I feel the decision to pair this brief visual narrative of resisting the temptation of lust the song communicates was not only a good one, but also perhaps a somewhat brave one.

0 Comments

<<Previous

Archives