He's pretending to invade Ukraine by calling whatever he's doing a humanitarian thing or an anti-Nazi thing. It isn't really being called an invasion, though, is it? (Why no, and for reasons.) But it does sort of look like putting soldiers in Ukraine like something is going to happen isn't exactly unaggressive, is it?
Why yes, it does look like he's directing his military to infiltrate another sovereign nation to kind of enforce his bidding! There's good reason to think this is more like a shake-down than an actual invasion where he actually wants to re-annex all of Ukraine, but seriously. There probably is no good strategy for arming or supporting Ukraine, in any event. And in some ways, I don't even feel up for it--probably because the Nazi thing? Is a little bit true. Or a little bit a lot. I don't know. It's not that Putin is so very much anti-Nazi himself, but really, he's invading a neighbor and calling them the Nazis. Very much the pan calling the pot "cookware"-no? After all his anti-gay bullshit and the machismo--yeah. Other countries are the problem, Vlad. Whevs.
Anyhow, I'm not down with neo-Nazis of any country, and all things considered, I don't feel like arming Ukrainian neo-Nazis all that much. I say we have great valid reasons to sit this out.
From a spiritual point of view, I do not care for nationalism or any ideology that fosters hate. My view is that the search for meaning that animates people is a highly individualistic dealing of one's life with their circumstances, and the warping of thousands or millions of persons to any fell purpose is basically sacrificing those folks on a dubious altar. Which is why I find warmongerer columnists or opportunistic warmonger politicians to be, essentially speaking, the lowest form of life. Yes, there's such a thing as lives that ain't positive. But cheerleading for destruction is making some black magic with words. It isn't worth anyone's finger to confront demons that exist on paper to satisfy a word-wizard. Talk is cheap. Blood is dear.
3 comments:
Hi Vixen, I don't like ideologies either, which is why I'm basically in disagreement with political parties. My view is that a lot of the intellectual ferment in the US can be laid at the feet of political parties trying to build models to scrounge up votes.
At its best the United States is a set of ideas. The Freemasons who set up our country (who would, incidentally, be lodge brothers) had some very unique hermetic ideas that they used as a foundation for many of our points of view.
As you have probably gathered by now, I have done a considerable amount of research in the area of comparative religion, and I've only found the Creator of the Declaration of Independence in one place. As you know, the Declaration talks of a Creator that endows us with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It does not reference Jesus bin Joseph or Yahweh. Of course it doesn't reference Allah or any other common views of God.
This is very consistent with the way the Great Architect of the universe is seen in Freemasonry. There is only one ontological view that I know of consistent with the Declaration, and that is the Qaballah.
In the QBL it is said that it is impossible for the human mind or vocabulary to say anything specific about the author of the universe beyond Ain Soph. Nothing beyond this point can be defined. You know, define means to put a line around, and the universe in all four of the worlds is simply too big and too eternal for the limitations of the human mind to have any capacity to comprehend or make statements about it.
However, they do say you can say one thing about it, and that is that it is a Bestower, an Endower. Because from the Qaballistic point of view virtually everything we know originates from this source. There is literally nothing that exists that is not bestowed and endowed from this Creator.
This would have been well within the understanding of the lodge brothers who set up this incredible new experiment called the United States of America.
Regrettably, political parties and other agents of the Qlipoth have drawn films of propaganda between the ideas that represent our mission statement and the way we think about it today.
Incidentally, in an earlier post you mentioned the name of a certain Enochian demon. My I suggest that you heed the admonition, "Speak of the devil, and you shall hear the rustle of his wings."
As a matter of fact, there is a major player in the demonic world creating entropy and chaos. I will not mention 'his' name, but will tell you it is the archdemon of Chesed.
This can best be expressed by a joke.
One time a small imp stationed on earth ran down to the counter-initiator of Chesed (for simplicity, we will call him Satan), and in a panic he said, "Master, someone on earth has discovered a piece of the truth!" Satan continued with his manicure while his servants brought him another martini.
The imp, beseeching, said to Satan, "Master, I don't think you hear me! Someone on earth has discovered a piece of the truth!"
His Satanic master looked at him nonchalantly, stretched and yawned, and said, "OK, so today they have discovered a piece of the truth. Let them enjoy it. Tomorrow I will go help them organize it." (If you know your Qaballah, you will see the hand of the counter-Chesed here.)
And this, it is said, is how the devil got into the details.
Incidentally, since the Qaballah represents one of the important features in the way I view the universe, I have to say that Geburah and language involved in Geburah are necessary parts of this universe when used appropriately and justifiably. It strikes me that ISIS, who just beheaded another American journalist, is deserving of both words and actions.
I think I can manage to refrain from name-dropping demons, since I mostly don't talk magick-shop. One thing I've recalled from history is that the Constitutional Convention labored to put into exact words the world they wanted to create, which is very in the spirit of Tikkun. This is why when I perceive that the Founders' intent is being called on and twisted (certain "originalists" and pseudo-historians in the "constitutional-conservative" line)it bothers me. Playing around with what they meant is a concern because they labored to say what they meant.
Regarding ISIS, although I am skeptical of the wisdom of force in foreign policy and, you know--a tree-hugger, there really is only one good strategy once the decision to rout them is made--do it, and with all might. Old Testament style. Leave not a brick. Don't settle for a long war, actually rout root and branch. They aren't a people or a civilization or anything but a criminal enterprise of bad doctrinal choice. There is no settling for a decade of snuffing "number two's". The way to go is not even leaving remnants to form active cells.
Now, on the current playing field, that isn't nice. But I think it would be dumb to draw it out (like Iraq or Afghanistan) and make several martyrs and whatnot. They recruit westerners based on what they allege they can do. They use propaganda. The best counter-propaganda is they ain't shit and they are done. So we need to get them done.
Hi Vixen, you know, you raise an interesting point about the founding of America by Freemasons being an example of Tikkun. I had not quite looked at it that way, but I think it shows insight on your part.
Tikkun HaOlam means a fixing of the world. That is, liberating the world from the shards of qlippoth that surround everything and keep the light from automatically re-unifying (a yihudin).
What most people do not realize is that there is a Tikkun HaNefesh, which means a fixing of the soul. That is, our bodies and minds are surrounded by pathologies or shards of qlippothic energy that keep us from being able to be normal and in unification with the divine.
One of the things unfortunately missing is that you really have to have been successful for some distance with Tikkun HaNefesh before you can engage Tikkun HaOlam. In other words, the do-gooders are really so blinded by their own foibles that they do not have a capacity to understand what is right for the world or how to fix it.
You see this in both political parties.
We went to see the movie America by Dinesh D'Souza. As a conservative, I was in agreement with most of it. However, ultimately the presentation was about how money can be distributed to give everyone greater opportunities to reach financial success. The left constantly harps on trying to accomplish the same purpose through a different method of distribution, and on both sides this is regarded as a goal (unachievable, of course).
As laudable as this goal is with both theories, it has utterly nothing to do with the purpose of life as seen by the Qaballah or the Vedas or any of the great wisdom traditions that have been quite clear.
The goal of this life is the fixing of the soul. Of removing all the complexes and misperceptions and fixations and compulsions and malevolence to reach a normal state of consciousness. The wisdom traditions are entirely clear that this is the purpose. Now if this can be done and at the same time give everyone a raise in pay, so be it.
There is a purpose for life on this planet. The purpose has been known since before recorded history, and is agreed upon by virtually everyone whose seership has allowed them to have cognition in respect to the purpose of life. And it is not that everybody gets a Cadillac. Sure, that stuff is worth messing around with as long as the real purpose of life is in the forefront. As an old avatar once said, "Healer, heal thyself."
Naturally, no conservative could agree with your views on originalists relative to the Constitution. If one party says a ruler has 8 inches, and the other party says a ruler has 14 inches, in all you simply have a lie that is unreliable and that switches around with the caprice of politics. At the very least the people have a right to understand what the rules are. And one simply cannot trust politicians of whatever stripe always to act in the best interests of people.
Post a Comment