Category: Articles in English

Odihnă

Zgomot. Mult zgomot. Culori stridente captive în orizontul strîmt al prejudecăților cenușii și plictisitoare, ambiguități ieftine îmbrăcate în slogane pretențioase. Vorbe aruncate, scrâșniri din dinți, tăceri vinovate, pumni ridicați și priviri îndreptate umilit spre țărână, aroganțe îmbrăcate cu sloganuri smerite, degete acuzatoare ce caută mereu victime convenabile, mereu incapabile, imorale, insuficient de inteligente și sofisticate…


Pași dinspre balamucul cetății goale și atot-suficiente către muntele care oferă spațiu să ne golim de noi, de greutățile și războaiele noastre, de poverile acumulate în înimă, de aroganța răspunsului mereu bine pregătit pentru ceilalți. Un spațiu în care zgomotele se disipează în liniște, un spațiu în care oferim loc și Altcuiva. Pași către un Everest al odihnii, unul în care poți găsi liniște pentru suflet, poți privi pe celălalt în ochi, poți reda demnitate cuvintelor. Un munte unde simți că poți fi altfel, mai bun, fără a te hrăni din deficitul celuilalt. Un munte al odihnei unde te poți pierde ca să te redai lui Dumnezeu, ție și, într-un final, celorlați.
Poate că fiecare are Everestul lui, înspăimântător și seducător, unul de la care nu poți/ nu trebuie să te întorci la fel.


Sau poate că iarmarocul zgomotelor cetății ne ține iremediabil prizoneri…

A test for all hyper-modern self-righteous “heroes”

The monopoly of ethical virtues implies the risk of the monopoly of hypocrisy!

In a post-Christian world, our new Pharisees, while claiming to be a/anti-religious, are condemned to mimic the most terrible religious behavioral patterns ( Later I will discuss in a series of articles about how a lot of social justice activists are fulfilling religious patterns of the old Pharisees).

Now I will summarize the test God gave in the Old Testament to those who presented themselves as being emphatic and emotionally driven justice warriors.

Micah 6:8 sets up a foundation for a well rounded

1. ethical decision-making and

2. spiritual growth.

“He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you?”

The precondition of acting for justice is to recognize we are mortal, limited, self-centered, fallible and stubborn.

1. To act justly

• requires outward actions of doing justice (a knowledge that determines/moves you to act)

the danger is to over-emphasize your righteousness and to promote even a corrupted vision of justice (revenge, etc.).

2. To love mercy

• requires inward actions. Mercy is the best “checks and balance” mechanism of an ill intended judicial mind

the danger is to show off  to others what is in inside, to engage in a Pharisaic/ self-righteous/hypocritical competition of self promotion, claiming the superior moral ground (arrogance).

3. To walk humbly with your God.

• requires an upward action. If mercy will test and balance our desire to do justice, then humility will test, and eventually, correct our misplaced desire to play with our moral and spiritual accomplishments.

• there is no danger in walking humbly with God when we act justly and love mercy! Look at the entire social justice exhibition of literature/vocabulary/concepts – in an obese and brazen inflation of radicalism (“radical love/inclusion/justice/etc.), you will never find anything about “radical repentance/humbleness/”!

Guess how our vociferous social justice heroes of our era do score at this test? Guess where they successfully fail?

To love love

We accept the love we think we deserve. (Stephen Chbosky)

Our culture mischaracterized love in a way that it’s hardly recognized through its infinite false copies.

We replaced the Ancient and Medieval ideal type of the saint with its modern corresponding ideal type of philosopher and scientist and now we have the all glamorous postmodern versions of love lover/activist.

To love love is the total dementia of a language that lost its contact with reality. Love is now that domesticated virtue that by a simple invocation gives us the social acceptance to justify any vice.

1. We expect from love, but we do not respond first to it, recognizing its price and imperatives!

2. We demand other’s love, but we are not showing it when there is none!

3. We think that love is a magical mantra that will change things around, but we do not persevere and assume its cost when there are no signs of it.

4. We focus so much on quantifying love (numbers as substitute for quality and/or honesty and modesty), but we are not ready for that anthropological realism that not everyone will embrace love.

5. Our love for love is vocal, selfish and obsessed with its self glorification.

6. We impose our love to othersthrough censorship, exclusion, name-calling, scapegoating – a violent love in the name of love!

Love is just our life lived for another life, not because of our mortality, but despite of it.

Love knows its limits – even God wasted his infinite love for some humans who continuously choose to defy and reject His love! That’s why true, genuine love, is something not from this world. While we, finite and hypocritical, are tempted to impose our love in a totalitarian way, God’s love is infinite and still does not suffocate and limit other’s freedom!

We have to be taught and then asked to show this kind of love. This world is formidable deaf to love’s call while covering its weaknesses with slogans made out of love letters. While we, carnal humans, tend to think of love as a perfect ideal, for a spiritual God love is a painful choice of limiting itself!That’s why to love God and others is a command, not a romantic idealism!

Jesus Christ – abstract painting by Amal Augustine

Christ’s love is the only tested paradigm of what true love is. He’s embracing, but not forcing, waiting but keeping you accountable, sacrificial, but demanding.

Consider a simple test: if you really value love, not just signaling your moral superiority, take a look at how you treat those who have the opposite values and ideas. Accusing them of hate when disagree with them shows how insignificant and impotent your love is. You give love a bad name!

Love is still waiting to be understood, embraced and lived in our everyday acts, gestures, thoughts, words, silent moments… Love does not expect to be loved, but understood as something sacrificial and demanding… Because love is a Person, not an ideal to fight, suppress and silence others!

How to take control over a society

“The most intolerant wins! The dictatorship of the small minority”(Nassim Nicolas Talib, Skin in the Game)

What V. I. Lenin, A. Hitler, S. Alinsky and M. Kirk have in common? The unwritten part of Karl Popper’s “The Open Society and Its Enemies”!

Reading the history of Fascists, Nazis and Communists, we can see some common strategies militant minorities used to impose their sectarian ideology as a state philosophy:

1. finding a cause that appeals to emotions

(fighting against oppression is the most appealing moral cause that automatically makes you an innocent and justify any action, it’s forbiden to talk about your own weaknesses, de-converts, etc.),

2. whitewashing their own narrative

(appealing to their innocence, suffering terrible injustices, erasing any privilege or social status that does not fit the narrative of oppresion)

while demonizing opponents’ worldview and actions

(a vengeful victim is the perfect soil for the creation of a new oppressor),

3. weaponizing their progressive position

(they are gnostic dualists – only the few ones can comprehend the complex dimensions of reality/justice; that’s why is important to emphasize their sectarian purity – neutrality/middle ground/shared wickened human condition are just another forms of oppression),

4. victimization

(they are the opressed ones, we do not share with anyone else our privilege to suffer the most terrific opression, ethic judgement is based on emotional categories such hate because there is no other philosophical foundation),

5. scapegoating

(there are only two possible options: to be on the progress side or to be reactionary, whatever is wrong now is because the majority is ignorant, reactionary, not educated enough),

6. the push/replication/control factor

(almost every sect has political ambitions to replicate, multiply and take control over the society as a the only way to impose a better society),

7. institutional sabotage to demand an institutional reinvigoration/revolution

(re-write history, glorify your fight for progress, diminish opponents’ virtues, blame, acuse, attack, etc.)

8. speech/vocabulary control

(controling the narrative means controlling people’s minds, the necessity of submission through compelled speech!),

9. institutional censorship,

(the long march through institutions is a nevessary step to the glorious goal of building a new society)

10. ideological control of science

(purify all remnants of “unscientific”/ “nonconforming”/”oppressive” science – ideological imperatives are what drive scientific advancement)

11. educational brainwashing

(school is seen not as a place of diversity but as a clone factory, controlling education means controlling families and the future of that society).

Is this what happened only with fascists, nazis or communists in the past?

The Russian Revolution as the first #Resist

100 years ago the first #Resist was experimented in Russia: fighting injustice, corruption and authoritarianism to bring to power an even more violent injustice, corruption and authoritarianism.

This new documentary (“The Russian Revolution, 2017, directed by Cal Seville), now on Netflix, explains the Russian Revolution through the lens of an personal war, one between two families: Lenin’s Ulyanovs and the Tzar’s Romanov (started on March 13, 1881 with the assasination of Alexader II and Lenin’s oldest brother – “Sasha” interest in opposing tzarist regime and joining a political revolutionary sect), a battle that will feature crimes, executions, and a feroucious desire of power. The entire course of history would be derailed and humanity will get prepared for Stalin, the supreme dictator who made the socialist brand /#Revolution (#Resist nowadays) to be oxymoronic, the maincore of socialist hypocrisy and mysticism.

(Donald Rayfield, author of “Stalin and His Hangmen”) Lenin understood it wasn’t your numbers that mattered, it wasn’t your popular support that mattered, you just paralyzed the country by occupying the key points, and then you take over.

(Victor Sebestyen, author of “Lenin. The Dictator”) Revolutions don’t happen from the dispossessed and the starving, it happen from the middle class, and it’s always been true.

(Rayfield) “The people’s will” was more of a mystic than an ideological association. The idea if we bring down the very top, they’ll be so terrified that the system will disintegrate and they’ll be a sort of peasant uprising out of which a new order will arise, but they had begun to read Marx. The trouble with reading Marx, of course, is Marx predicted the last place there’d be a revolution would be Russia.

(Sebestyen) On the biggest influences on Lenin, before he read Marx, was a novel by a guy called Nikolay Chernyshevsky called “What Is to be Done?” It’s a pretty lousy novel, but the hero is a selfless, devoted revolutionary who gives himself up to the cause and walks 20 miles a day, does 150 press-ups, abstain from alcohol. And he modeled himself on this character quite deliberately.

#Resist, but be careful what you wish for!

%d bloggers like this: