Picture a morbidly obese person who can't stop overeating. Now imagine this obese person suddenly finds himself stuck in famine conditions where his access to food has been severely curtailed.
After three or four months of barely eating anything, he inevitably sheds the excess pounds and begins to approach what could be considered his ideal weight. In this individual's case, would it be correct and accurate to say that something good came out of the famine?
Some would argue that a case for something good could be made. The famine conditions severely curtailed the man's compulsion to overeat. This in turn forced him to lose weight. Though the famine itself was bad, some would invariably argue that it led to good results.
But are these results really good? Well, I suppose that depends on the man's attitude to famine and the results it achieved.
If the famine inspired the man to re-evaluate his overeating and his unhealthy weight and make a conscious decision to permanently change his habits and overcome his compulsions, particularly when conditions improve and food becomes accessible again, then yes, the results could be viewed as good because they involve learning and repentance. In other words, the man was able to draw something good out of conditions that were inherently bad.
On the other hand, what if the man merely suffers through the famine only to return to his old ways once the famine ends?
Or worse, vows to change during the famine, but immediately returns to his gluttony when food is plentiful again. Whatever good was forced upon our fat friend disappears. Nothing good was taken out of the bad.
Of course the worst case would be the following: after several months of hunger and agony, deprived of everything he once held sacred and dear, the fat man loses all hope of ever having the opportunity to gorge himself on food again and, thus, falls into despair and kills himself.
Having said all of that, the highest good the morbidly obese man could achieve would involve re-evaluating his overeating and unhealthy weight and taking the necessary steps to curb his hunger and bring down his weight during normal circumstances when food is plentiful. These actions would demonstrate resolve and strength - the fortitude to choose something good despite the presence of ubiquitous temptation. He would also likely suffer less if a famine ever hit.
Whatever the scenario, it would be a mistake to argue that the famine itself was good, even in the case where it ultimately led to repentance, right choices, and good results.
The analogy above hold true in our current circumstances as well. I have spent a great deal of time railing against the evil System. I have described it as anti-beauty, anti-truth, anti-goodness, anti-virtue, anti-spiritual, and anti-God. It is no secret that I would welcome the System's demise. Nevertheless, I do not view the current deliberate sabotaging of the System by the Establishment as something intrinsically good.
The Establishment is collapsing its evil System to generate more, not less, evil. And it is doing this primarily for spiritual reasons. This vital point needs to be understood by those who rub their hands together in glee at the apparent demise of the evil System and the 'goods' emerging from the cracking infrastructure the Establishment has lorded over until now.
The Establishment's purposive and deliberate destruction of its own System is very much like the famine mentioned in the example above. The System's primary motivation here is to inflict material hardship and suffering on everyone. They are convinced this material hardship and suffering will inspire fear, despair, and ultimately, self-chosen spiritual annihilation in the majority of the population. Physical death is of secondary importance and is only useful after an individual has committed themselves to damnation.
Admittedly, the hardship and suffering the Establishment are unleashing may act as a negative motivator for some. It may inspire some individuals to see the errors of their ways and, ultimately, spiritually reject the System.
Those who are on the side of Good are working and will work to make this happen. Like the morbid man mentioned earlier, this is an example of drawing good out of a bad situation, but this is not what the Establishment is aiming for and they play no active role in this process. In fact, they are doing and will do everything within their power to ensure it doesn't happen.
As I mentioned earlier, I believe the System is evil, but I also believe that a good collapse could only be brought about by a shift in consciousness much like the shift in consciousness that eventually resulted in the collapse of communism in Europe in the twentieth century.
In other words, a good collapse of the System would have to begin with a positive rather than a negative motivator.
In circumstances like that, people would freely and consciously choose to abandon the System for something better and would freely and consciously choose to endure any hardship and suffering accompanying this choice. Simply put, they would gladly put up with discomfort for the reality of something better.
That is not what is happening now.
People have not freely and consciously chosen to endure hardship and suffering. The Establishment is forcing it upon them, and it is forcing it upon them for the most pernicious and malevolent of reasons.
The best we can hope for under these circumstances is that people respond to the suffering the Establishment inflicts as a negative motivator - that after a certain period of agony, they might see the light and work to draw good out of circumstances that are intrinsically bad.
It goes without saying that this is good, but that in itself does not make the current deliberate collapse of the System good; much the same way the morbidly obese man's weight loss and changed eating habits do not make the famine he suffered through innately good.
After three or four months of barely eating anything, he inevitably sheds the excess pounds and begins to approach what could be considered his ideal weight. In this individual's case, would it be correct and accurate to say that something good came out of the famine?
Some would argue that a case for something good could be made. The famine conditions severely curtailed the man's compulsion to overeat. This in turn forced him to lose weight. Though the famine itself was bad, some would invariably argue that it led to good results.
But are these results really good? Well, I suppose that depends on the man's attitude to famine and the results it achieved.
If the famine inspired the man to re-evaluate his overeating and his unhealthy weight and make a conscious decision to permanently change his habits and overcome his compulsions, particularly when conditions improve and food becomes accessible again, then yes, the results could be viewed as good because they involve learning and repentance. In other words, the man was able to draw something good out of conditions that were inherently bad.
On the other hand, what if the man merely suffers through the famine only to return to his old ways once the famine ends?
Or worse, vows to change during the famine, but immediately returns to his gluttony when food is plentiful again. Whatever good was forced upon our fat friend disappears. Nothing good was taken out of the bad.
Of course the worst case would be the following: after several months of hunger and agony, deprived of everything he once held sacred and dear, the fat man loses all hope of ever having the opportunity to gorge himself on food again and, thus, falls into despair and kills himself.
Having said all of that, the highest good the morbidly obese man could achieve would involve re-evaluating his overeating and unhealthy weight and taking the necessary steps to curb his hunger and bring down his weight during normal circumstances when food is plentiful. These actions would demonstrate resolve and strength - the fortitude to choose something good despite the presence of ubiquitous temptation. He would also likely suffer less if a famine ever hit.
Whatever the scenario, it would be a mistake to argue that the famine itself was good, even in the case where it ultimately led to repentance, right choices, and good results.
The analogy above hold true in our current circumstances as well. I have spent a great deal of time railing against the evil System. I have described it as anti-beauty, anti-truth, anti-goodness, anti-virtue, anti-spiritual, and anti-God. It is no secret that I would welcome the System's demise. Nevertheless, I do not view the current deliberate sabotaging of the System by the Establishment as something intrinsically good.
The Establishment is collapsing its evil System to generate more, not less, evil. And it is doing this primarily for spiritual reasons. This vital point needs to be understood by those who rub their hands together in glee at the apparent demise of the evil System and the 'goods' emerging from the cracking infrastructure the Establishment has lorded over until now.
The Establishment's purposive and deliberate destruction of its own System is very much like the famine mentioned in the example above. The System's primary motivation here is to inflict material hardship and suffering on everyone. They are convinced this material hardship and suffering will inspire fear, despair, and ultimately, self-chosen spiritual annihilation in the majority of the population. Physical death is of secondary importance and is only useful after an individual has committed themselves to damnation.
Admittedly, the hardship and suffering the Establishment are unleashing may act as a negative motivator for some. It may inspire some individuals to see the errors of their ways and, ultimately, spiritually reject the System.
Those who are on the side of Good are working and will work to make this happen. Like the morbid man mentioned earlier, this is an example of drawing good out of a bad situation, but this is not what the Establishment is aiming for and they play no active role in this process. In fact, they are doing and will do everything within their power to ensure it doesn't happen.
As I mentioned earlier, I believe the System is evil, but I also believe that a good collapse could only be brought about by a shift in consciousness much like the shift in consciousness that eventually resulted in the collapse of communism in Europe in the twentieth century.
In other words, a good collapse of the System would have to begin with a positive rather than a negative motivator.
In circumstances like that, people would freely and consciously choose to abandon the System for something better and would freely and consciously choose to endure any hardship and suffering accompanying this choice. Simply put, they would gladly put up with discomfort for the reality of something better.
That is not what is happening now.
People have not freely and consciously chosen to endure hardship and suffering. The Establishment is forcing it upon them, and it is forcing it upon them for the most pernicious and malevolent of reasons.
The best we can hope for under these circumstances is that people respond to the suffering the Establishment inflicts as a negative motivator - that after a certain period of agony, they might see the light and work to draw good out of circumstances that are intrinsically bad.
It goes without saying that this is good, but that in itself does not make the current deliberate collapse of the System good; much the same way the morbidly obese man's weight loss and changed eating habits do not make the famine he suffered through innately good.
RSS Feed
