Andrewmarkmusic: decoding the headlines
and official narratives in short, terse pithy aphorisms!
Hi, truthseekers. First off I’d say it was a decent interview. I like that Jeff doesn’t constantly interrupt his guests.
Here is the link to the video: https://youtu.be/GWdj7-XSxzo
Hmmm...Everything is a lie! Really? Is it a lie that objects fall to the ground when dropped? That the sun appears mainly yellow and the sky blue? That automobiles exist? Dillahunty gives a reasonable warning about the dangers of hubris and I agree with him.
I don’t think the state is necessarily and defacto parasitic and evil although I’m quite sympathetic in that regard. I think the state most often gets hijacked by monied elites and they converge and conspire to steer the state mechanisms to their desire, whim, and agenda–and yes, this is what happened in communist countries, too. I’d agree that the scale of the nation-state today is immense and the co-opting of it by monied powers is an intractable problem. I don’t have much hope in political solutions to the human condition as the scum always rises to the top of the pond. Which leads of to why that is?
Gnosticism! Which of course is what the interview was about. I share the concern as a Gnostic about the cozying up among the monied elites and spiritual non-duality which is the fave flavor of spirituality among the neoliberal capitalist class/caste. It’s an untenable position; at least to the degree that it’s asserted as metaphysical fact when the truth is that it’s one spiritual philosophy among tens of thousands and ALL OF THEM ARE UNPROVABLE. I have no problem with anyone believing that philosophy, but please get honest in your framing.
Dualism is every bit as possible especially if this is some kind of matrix, prison, or energy farm for controlling entities. If the architect of this matrix is a demiurge then it’s consistent and logical that there exists something beyond this flawed architect and that it is separate from the demiurge and exists independently from it. This isn’t really a new religious idea–it shouldn’t be that controversial from the perspective of religious philosophy. How the atheists feel about it is another matter altogether, but we’ll kindly fuckin’ ignore them in this post! We’re talking God and Gnosticism here, dammit!
So how do we get to the truth of any particular matter here? Honesty! It’s really the only mechanism we have which goes to the first point I made. Getting accurate about assertions helps; being open about what humans can and can’t know helps, too. Sorry, anti-theists, your claims are over-reach although it’s true theists can’t meet the burden of proof for whatever reason (yes, that may mean God doesn’t exist). I’d share the atheist critique of the problems associated with religion especially in regard to the societal question of how humans should run society–NOT BY THEOCRACY!
Secular Humanism, if understood correctly should be the overarching superstructure of civilization and people should be able to believe whatever they want about life, God, and metaphysics as long as their actions don’t break the best laws that humans can enact via the faculties of reason and logic. Sadly, we are nowhere near that possibility today as we live under corporate oligarchy which has purchased the courts and political representatives and they are implementing a type of neo-fascism. The demiurge predicted it would do this in antiquity, btw…
That leaves us with SPIRITUAL ANARCHISM! It’s best practiced via following the intent of The Golden Rule which is not to coerce and exploit others unnecessarily for personal gain and profit. This is Voluntarianism but that also needs to be parsed out and I’m too damn tired to do that tonight.
I would say that in a society premised solely on money as currency there is only one way to do that: a guaranteed minimum income juxtaposed to a new education model tied into a positive view of humans and not the cynical misanthropic view we have now. It’s not the only way but it would cover the most span on this issue. Going back to a non-monetary life with and off the land is another way, but that idea has to be premised on actually having access to affordable land. Not easy under present late-capitalist systems. Education on how to live like that would be needed, too. 
                                    Thanks for the interview! I enjoyed it…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *