Fragment 54

Recent events are a good reminder that we are in an Occult war. The Occult war is when a government or powerful alliance of interests try to make everyone think alike. This is the overriding reason I wrote this "Fragment" if the L.H.P. wants to compete in the arena of ideas, it must have ideas, and policy alternatives to the decadent R.H.P. narrative. For the R.H.P. everyone must have the same narrative. A Christian heresy has gained wide support both inside and outside of the churches. It has even gained support from the globalists. The globalists are the enemy in the present Occult war. The heresy has several names: the most common being "wokism", the heresy started out as "modernism" and then morphed into "Liberation theology". "Wokism" is the current name, but that could change, since its proponents like to use duplicitous language. It must be said that "Wokism" is even more radical than "Liberation theology". Liberation theology cannot embrace transgenderism. The reason is because the central metaphor of Liberation theology is the union of "Bridegroom and Bride' united in love. This is why Pope Francis cannot embrace Wokism. To better understand the heresy of Wokism from an occult-religious perspective. I shall examine Wokism from the perspective of the Theosophy movement that started with J. Bohme, (not to be confused with Blavtsky's latter theosophical movement) that continued on with Johann Gichtel, John Portage, Jane Leade, and so on. (for more information on this movement and how it developed in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries I recommend the book "Wisdom's Children" by Arthur Versluis) There have been many names for the social space we live in. Chardin called it the "noosphere", Hegel called "substance", the German Idealists called it "intersubjectivity", and the Theosophers called it "the Astral". (I am using the term "Theosophers" to distinguish the seventeenth and eighteenth movement from Blavatsky's more recent "theosophists") The Astral is the social space of both the individual and the collective. It is the intellectual and emotional envelope that circles the globe. The theosophers did not think this would lead to any Utopia like Chardin and the modern proponents of Wokism. An example would be Chardin's Omega point. As I said, this social space is not purely intellectual, but loaded with emotions. The German Idealists claim that if we could all reason together Utopia would arrive is a fallacy. Social media is the best example of its failure. The Astral according to Gitchtel is this envelope of thoughts and emotions that surround us. Gichtel wanted to purify the Astral to make it pellucid. The way to do this was to not get involved in worldly matters. This not only means giving up vices, it also means giving up loyalties to sports teams, churches, or nations. One's thoughts should be centered around God. The Theosophers evolved a system to do this. It involved prayer. fasting, and meditating on images. This is the basis of much of philosophy and religion. It is not the philosophy of Wokism or Liberation theology. For Wokism and Liberation theology the unforgivable sin is individualism. Any deviation from collectivism is sin.The globalists in Gichtel words " they want to darken the Astral until there is no independent thought and no genuine spirituality. Utopia is their goal. I will have more to say about Utopia later. Remember both Wokism and Liberation Theology are duplicitous in their use of language. Let us begin by examining the recent protests against Israel and the jews. I shall begin with a word to History professors. I have heard that the majority of professors joining the protests were History professors. If one is a History professor and is part of a mob of barbaric jew haters chanting genocidal and absurd slogans; one is a failure as a historian. And one should probably be sued for educational malpractice by the students. A historian who engages in such practices is too stupid to teach. A historian should rise above the raw emotions of the present, maintain their objectivity. What the historian should be doing is these modern protests movements to movements in the past. The obvious examples are Hitler's Germany in the 1930s, and when St, Cyril provoked his followers to destroy ancient the Pagan culture. by tearing down statues and the murder of Hypathia. A historian that has lost an objective view is no longer a historian. Let us look at some of the ethical issues involved in the protests from a L.H.P. perspective. I have watched interviews of the protesting students. There seems to be two groups to this movement. The first are the muslim jew haters. Jew hatred is part of the D.N.A. of Islam. The second group is privileged kids that do not even understand what they are protesting. They are protesting to feel morally superior; this is the woke students. What I have heard from the woke students is that they are protesting to be part of a woke movement: virtue signaling. A movement that has nothing to do with them. This is typical R.H.P. activity. To sacrifice yourself for some vague greater good. When these students are asked about whether they are concerned with how the protests might sabotage their academic career. or future careers? Like having a criminal record for the rest of their lives.They reply that it is worth it. Until they get arrested, and have to pay a real price for their activities, then they cry not to be expelled or deported. What do the students get from the protests? Do they get material wealth or advantages in later life? No, they only get to feel morally superior. When someone sacrifices their own good to feel morally superior, they are buying Snake Oil. The students do not realize they are under the control of an Egregore that cares nothing about them. And is using them for its own agenda. The future well being of the protestors is of no concern to the Egregore. The Egregore does not care if they get physically hurt or killed in the protests, it is using them for its agenda. All this to virtue signal. Thus I propose a new moral maxim: What is in it for me? In simple terms if one is following an Egregore that may get one killed, maimed, or destroy one's future for feeling good about one's self. One has bought Snake Oil. The future promise of the Snake Oil is Utopia. It is laughable to watch the chattering class admire the student protests, even though they condemn the jew-hatred and the violence. This is the R.H.P. at its worst. The chattering class should be condemning the stupidity of the students for falling under a delusion. Both the jew-haters and the progressive students are being used by an Egregore to fulfil its agenda, and not the students. I am going to take a diversion here. I have been studying the Chinese Qing dynasty. Even if one tries to keep one's studies on one period of history it naturally expands to cover the past,and the present. I can tell you that the Chinese have already won the competition for global dominance. Without listening to the "experts" in the chattering class. I do not need to know the economic or military theories of the so-called experts. The most valuable resource a nation has is its young people. Chinese students and recent university grads are motivated, self disciplined, and very smart. Unlike the U.S. students are content to wallow in narcissism, and sanctimony that they have learned from their elders. The U.S. government is quickly losing the Mandate of Heaven as the Chinese say. The Mandate of Heaven has little to do with religion, instead it means legitimacy. For a nation to have legitimacy it must be able to make things work, and have the people trust its institutions. The ruling class in the U.S. are content to live in a pretend world, here everything is great. This is much like the end of the Qing dynasty, even after the wake up call of the First Sino-Japanese war there were still some that could not break the dream. that China was the only civilization and the rest were at various levels of barbarism. As I said before, the sleep is deep, and the dream is strong. I shall now move to our next topic, which is about capital punishment. It centers around an argument the so-called super-geniuses on the left use to make about capital punishment. We know they were super-geniuses because they told us all the time. (as a side I never had strong feelings about capital punishment. I thought capital punishment would never go away because of human nature) This argument has not been used in decades. The argument runs; that we are too civilized of a nation to have capital punishment. The super-geniuses then would point to Sweden. Of course this was before mass immigration changed Sweden. Before immigration Sweden had a very low crime rate. With murders in the low one digits if at all, no forcible rape for years. A county as peaceful as Sweden does not need capital punishment. Of course the left never points to Sweden anymore. If they really wanted to emulate a peaceful society they should be pointing to Hungary today. But it is never about practical matters; for the left everything is about ideology. Let us now look at the argument, which its proponents never did. The argument is that the harshness of the laws should correspond to the degree of civilization that a society has achieved. I was converted by the argument. If a nation has the crime rate of pre immigration Sweden, it should not have harsh laws and capital punishment. By this standard the U.S. should be having public hangings now. As society becomes more barbaric the harshness of the laws should be adjusted. The degree of civilization should be determined by the amount of violence in society. This should provide the ever elusive definition of cruel and unusual punishment. The laws should follow a sliding scale of the amount of violence in society. Of course, the super-geniuses on the left never thought out the implications of the argument they were using. They just wanted to point to Sweden and western European nations as a model for policy. Of course mass migration ruined their argument. We have one last topic for this "Fragment".Which is social evolution. I want to connect this with Occult philosophy. Most political ideas start as religious ideas. Theology and law are related subjects. One's metaphysics or theology affects one's politics and ideas about legal philosophy. What we are observing with wokism is a Christian heresy. Pope Pius XII said that "modernism is the synthesis of the synthesis of all heresies". Pope Pius X claimed that modernism was a cesspool of heresy. Modernism gave birth to Liberation theology. Wokism is just a more radical strain of Liberation theology. (if you do not believe me read "A Theology of Liberation" Gustavo Guterrez) Both Liberation theology and wokism are based on the fantasy of Utopia. There is no scientific evidence that humanity is progressing towards Utopia. Utopia is a religious idea. The idea of Utopia has caused the death of more people than any other religion, except for Islam. Both Islam and wokism are based on the idea of a coming Utopia. There is no Utopia, no Utopia in the future or the past. To add to modern demonology. Utopia is the siren that wrecks countries and people. It is like the Sirens of classical Greece whose song led to the doom of sailors. Utopia destroys both individuals and nations that follow her song. I seem to be writing about political ideas but I am actually writing about religious ideas. Utopia is a matter of faith not science.And it must be attacked vigorously since this is the promise and draw of wokism and LIberation Theology. I have a few more remarks before I explain the theory of Utopia. One may wonder what evolution has to do with Occultism? Let me quote Crowley remarks on the reading list. (from "Magic: Theory and practice): "The general object of this course, besides that already stated, is to assume a sound education in occult matters, so when spiritual illumination comes it may find a well-built temple. Where the mind is strongly biased towards a special theory , the result of and illumination is often to influence that portion of the mind which is thus overdeveloped with the result that the aspirant, instead of becoming an Adept Becomes a bigot and fanatic." Crowley recommends reading Herbert Spencer and Thomas Huxley. I wonder how many in the Crowley groups have read Spencer, and, or Huxley. How does this tie in with Utopia? The "experts" that are preaching Utopia are practicing pseudoscience. Believing in Bigfoot Lake Monsters or Atlantis is the same as believing in Utopia. I shall use crypto-zoology as an example. The crypto-zoologist starts out assuming Bigfoot exists, and then starts looking for evidence to confirm their theory. This is not how science works (theology works this way), instead science starts out with evidence and then comes up with theories to account for the evidence. Also scientists are supposed to be able to abandon theories when they do not work. What makes pseudo-science appear to be science looks like reverse engineering. The trouble is of course, in reverse engineering one already has the object or entity to be studied. P.S. I will be revisiting some of the material in this "Fragment" in future "Fragments". So bone up on Spencer and evolution

Fragment 53

In this "Fragment" I am going to continue with my philosophy of reading, and get to the book reviews. I am going to look at reading from another perspective than I did in the last "Fragment". I want to begin with an old memory of mine that stuck with me for decades. I was watching "Nightline" with Ted Koppel. The topic for the show was celibacy in the Catholic Church. The two guests were Father Andrew Greeely, and John Cardinal Krol. When I was young I was a big fan of "rapier wit" (this is actually a misnomer, Rapiers are long heavy swords, but Rapier wit sounds better than Colichemarde wit.), and the art of conversation. I remember people saying that the art of conversation was a dying art. Of course now, the art of conversation is dead and has been dead so long that on one even remembers the art. Back to Greeley and Krol. The first question was about the reason for celibacy. Greeley was first up. Greeley told Koppel that part of his job as a Priest was to be fascinating as representing the invisible world. I loved this answer, it delivered up a chance for Krol to display Rapier wit. The problem was Krol did not have any Rapier wit. When it was Krol's time to respond to whether it was part of his job to be fascinating. He answered "not at all". What Krol should have said was "Being a Cardinal I am way more fascinating than Father Greeley. I was disappointed. I thought of the comeback instantly. The weird thing is this memory stayed with me for decades. I realized there was more to this memory than a lost opportunity to deliver a clever ripost. Decades later I realized Greeley was right. It was part of his job to be fascinating. Before leaving Greeley, I want to say he deserves better than to be forgotten. Greeley was a college professor of sociology, and wrote many books. Some of these books were best selling novels that did not make him popular with the Church hierarchy. Father Greely claimed he never had an unpublished thought. Greeley was fascinating. This memory came back to me while I was reading the books I am reviewing in this "Fragment", and like a kaleidoscope gave me various ideas, and views.Once I realized that Greeley was right. I thought about two of my favorite modern spiritual leaders. I thought about Gurdjieff and Crowley because we do not have much of an account of ancient spiritual leaders' conversations. Both Gurdjieff and Crowley were great conversationalists.they could talk to different classes of people with ease; both could either dominate the conversation or withdraw and let people make fools of themselves. They were interesting men, they were fascinating. And both like Fr. Greeley realized it was part of the job to be fascinating. This led me to think more about the concept of being an interesting person. Interesting people are great conversationalists, and great communicators. So what is it that makes one interesting? The answer is simple: interesting people have read memorable books,and had memorable experiences. This answer surely fits for Gurdjieff,and Crowley. The next realization was our current society does not produce interesting people. The reasons are obvious. Playing video games does not give memorable experiences, and modern popular fiction does not produce memorable books. At this point I should connect this with occultism, but I am not. Instead, I shall give a hint. It has to do with building the magical mind.I am going to explore this topic in future "Fragments". This review is going to be my meditations on some popular fiction, both authors and their creations. This should become pellucid as we continue. Let me also add that when I started reading the following books I had none of this in mind. I just wanted to talk to people about books. The trouble with most modern fiction is one forgets it right after finishing the story. So I did not get the stimulating conversations I was hoping for. My criteria for the following books is that they have to be bestsellers. (I was thinking if I read bestsellers there would be a lot of people to talk to about the books. I was wrong.) I shall start with the worst first. The venerable Steven King. King has many bestsellers and is seen as an icon of modern horror fiction. I am not a big fan of King, I find him almost unreadable. I have only read one of his books from cover to cover. (The Stand) The rest I gave up on long before I reached the middle of the books. I have heard people say: that King's style is to mix the horrific with the banal. I find too much of the banal and not enough of the horrific to keep me interested. I do like some of the movies, but not the books. to get to particulars: I find his characters boring and have trouble identifying with them. I find the stories too long, and full of banal incidents. His handling of disabled characters is a disgrace. Does he do any research? Next let me move to James Pattterson who is probably the best example of what I am talking about. I have finished all the Patterson books I have started, found them well paced and no problem to read. The trouble is when I finish the book it is instantly forgotten. As I said he is the perfect author for our times; disposable fiction. He writes disposable literature that is meant to be disposable, like a razor. After reading it is forgotten like throwing out a used razor. This is why Patterson is more of a media empire than a serious author. LIke junk food his books are enjoyed and forgotten. I have read a lot of pulp fiction and I can remember Sax Rohme and Ian Flemming that I read decades ago. I have also asked people who are fans of Patterson if they can remember his novels and things about them after reading them? The answer is always "no". It seems Patterson's books are read for a bit of euphoria and then be forgotten. I noticed this after I read one of his novels, and then came across the title again in a few days, and realized I could not remember any of the book. Let me say this about Patterson's novels, they are paced well and keep your interest while you are reading them, but there is nothing challenging about them, or memorable. Patterson's books remind me of "Romance Novels". I remember when I briefly worked in a used bookstore. There were older ladies that would come looking for "Romance Novels" weekly; they read one or two of them a day. And remembered nothing about them. Since they are all the same, being memorable would be a flaw. They are not memorable books. Let us now move to Lisa Scottline. She has had many bestselling books. I find her unreadable, but this may be a flaw in me. I found it impossible to identify with her main characters. Her main characters alway seem to be female attorneys entering middle age. Something I cannot seem to get any interest in. Which might say more about me than Scottline. The flaw in all the above books is they are not memorable. One does not become interesting reading these books. But is not seen as a flaw by fans of the above authors. I have tried to have conversations about the above books, but that is not the purpose of these books. Another problem with the above books: is that fans of these books do not read much else, so there is no comparing them to other books or events. I want to look at three characters from three popular series of books. The three characters that I have chosen are Jack Reacher (Lee Child), Jeremy Logan (Linclon Child), and Aloysius Pendergast (Doug Preston & Lincoln Child). I shall refer to Lincoln Child as "Child" and Lee Child as "Lee Child''. There are several reasons I picked the above characters.The first reason is I could actually read the above books with interest. And one of the series features a psychic detective (Child) and another another series where there are strange almost occult situations. Except they are mostly built around pseudoscience. I tried to write some psychic detective stories that feature my character of Gwen Chu. I have stopped writing the stories because the character of Gwen Chu seemed to talk with me but stopped. It seems she became independent of me and now belongs to the world. The inspiration for the stories was Rohmer's psychic detective Maurice Klaw. I am not the only occultist who has tried to write in this genre. Anyone remember Crowley's detective "Simon Iff"? Let me make my first evaluation of the three series: I would not buy any of these books, but I will reserve them at the library. I shall start with the worst first going to the best. So let us begin with the Jeremy Logan books. (Child) There are only six books in this series. I have read four of them. Jeremy Logan is an art history professor. He also calls moonlights as an enigmatologist. He investigates unusual mysteries for people at a very high price. Logan is called into consult on problems that defy ordinary explanations. Sometimes there are occult elements, but most of the time the problem is caused by science which, most of the science in the books is pseudoscience. I guess that's why the books are called techno-thrillers. A good example of this is Child's novel "Full Wolf Moon". It is about a werewolf, but the werewolf is not cursed, instead he was created by pseudoscience. Jeremy Logan is not that interesting of a character. Even though he is the most realistic of the lead characters I am examining. He has mastered some eastern meditation techniques and seems to be an empath. And of course, he is exceptionally smart. We know he has a dead wife he talks to, but we never really get to know what motivates Logan. He is an opaque character. The books follow a formula. Logan is called in by some incredibly rich private institution to solve an unusual problem. He also has champagne taste; he loves the finer things in life. I did enjoy the books, but had no trouble putting it down when I had something else to do. Do not think I am going to read any others in the series. Next up is Alysius Pendergast. Pendergast is the character created by Preston and child as the hero of the very popular Pendergast series of novels. The first novel in the series (Relic) was made into a movie. The movie illustrates some of the problems with the character. The producers of the movie cut Pendergast out of the script. It does seem in the first novel that Pendergast is a superfluous character. The rest of the novels are centered around Pendergast. Pendergast is supposed to be an F.B.I. agent. Although he seems to freelance and is given wide jurisdiction by the agency. Pendergast is also supposed to be exceptionally smart and an expert in combat, both armed and unarmed. Pendergast is also exceptionally rich. Like Logan; he likes the finer things in life. Which he indulges in constantly; gourmet food, super expensive clothes, and so on. Which seems a contradiction to his exceptional physical abilities. I have never heard of an athlete that trains of faug gras, and the finest wines. We never see him working out or at the pistol range. Instead, we see him in his leisure time reading Latin literature, and listening to classical music. These do not seem like the pastimes of a supersoldier. He is also an opaque character. He is extremely secretive. And continues this in all the novels, even though it seems to constantly get him and his associates in a lot of trouble. He never learns. When one is reading the novels one wonders why the characters never check in with one another. Not even a cell phone message to say where they are or what they are doing. This is a common occurrence in the novels. The characters go off to investigate some dangerous place and never leave an email or a voice message with their associates. One wonders why Pendergast, who is supposed to be a super genius, never learns this. Pendergast is another billionaire crimefighter. He often uses his money to bribe people or buy some expensive piece of equipment. As for the evaluation of the books. I have read most of the books in the series, even though Pendergast is not a great character. LIke the Logan novels we never find out what it is that motivates Pendergast to fight crime. Again they are techno-thrillers. Most of the science in the novels is pseudoscience. There is a sort of "Dark Shadows" vibe to the novels that has kept my interest in them.Pendergast's family are all super geniuses. And most of them are evil and insane. I have read most of the novels in the series. The cast of characters has kept me reading. The novels are paced well. Although I never had trouble putting them down when I had something else to do. The stories are entertaining. I will probably read all the novels, but again they are disposable literature. The last character we are going to examine is Jack Reacher. Reacher is the brainchild of Lee Child. Reacher is the best character of the three. He is a wandering vigilante. His ancestors would be Mack Bolan of the "Executioner" series, the movie "Death Wish", and so on. Reacher travels around the country getting involved in defending people against organized crime. I do not mean the mob, but corrupt law enforcement and business. The novels are formulaic. Reacher wanders into a town and some incident, usually violent, gets him involved. Reacher is a vagabond, he only owns the clothes he is wearing, clothes that he throws away when they get dirty. He is supposed to be ex-military: a military policeman. Of course he is an expert in hand to hand combat. The latter novels get more violent, and less romance. This was the only series that I had trouble putting down. I read about half the novels. I shall probably read more, but I would not buy them. Lee Child created a memorable character even though the stories are all the same. -P.S.- I am working on some more "Fragments" that shall involve the Jesuits. If anyone wants to get a head start I recommend reading Malachai Martin's book "The Jesuits". Maybe there is a real Illuminati pulling strings behind the scenes?