You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Does Steemit Support Oligarchy More Than Anarchism? Does Real Anarchy Lead to World Peace? How WIll Steemit Evolve?
Precisely my thoughts! Friggin' uncanny......Although, as a cause, I've dwindled it down to about 4-6 cosmologies that are still somewhat viable in 2017, at least in my mind....
Ya know, those naughty Gnostic Archons.....
Greetings - maybe I've lost the thread here, but what is the effect that you are pointing at possible causes for here?
Hi, I understood the thread to be talking about archons/rulers; that power structures in existence today created oligopolies. I call the actors involved oligarchic casino owners who have established a trans-national corporate plutocracy. Now, if we analyze this from a modern point of view consciousness assuming a materialist ontology then we'll conclude these actors to be sociopaths and what not.
I'm suggesting it's not the only way to view this phenomenon, but we have to be willing to consider various idealist positions. One of those is that Archons are not human in the materialist sense and are timeless beings who 'own' these dimensions. Perhaps The Merovingian in The Matrix movie is an example of such a being although if what I'm suggesting is possible then they look and act all too human.
Implicit within this line of thought is the idea of an Architect or Demiurge......
Ultimately we are all eternal beings - spirits. So there is no need to artificially separate us into 'bad immortals' and 'good mortals'. There is basically just heartlessness and heart - with the empire builders being primarily the former.
That's fine with me if you want to believe that but it's completely religious in its assertion. I don't necessarily disagree with the sentiment but modernity and rationality would come to a different conclusion: that we are meaningless atoms-- from there we get The Social Darwinism that you discussed in the article.
Because spirit is untestable we have to conclude that we don't know what it is if it exists at all. The Archons I speak of are not bad immortals. They are what they are and morality doesn't enter the equation, and certainly, I wouldn't describe humans as inherently good. I see humanity as inherently flawed, ignorant and arrogant; a rather problematic combination.
There is no religion in my words. Spirit is not untestable, you simply need to be opened to your own higher frequencies of being (light/spirit) - this is one of the aims of correct yoga.
Ah, you see, as much as I can agree with your rather correct assessment of anarchism and its problematic relationship to capitalism I find myself having to part ways with you on matters of metaphysics. No biggie really and certainly nothing new.
But first allow me my quibbles: you are asserting religion no matter how much you deny it. From what I can assess you are asserting one of the many schools of Hindu or Buddhist thought. Perhaps Advaita? This is one of the oldest RELIGIONS on the planet and to assert it isn't a religion is frankly, duplicitous. But one would only need to allow for a small shift in approach for me to be okay with it and perhaps philosophically agree as a 'spiritual hypothesis'.
If one were to say, it's my opinion..... Or, this is my personal belief about spirituality, but I have no way to prove it.... Or, any number of qualifications that made it clear that this metaphysics is a matter of personal experience and preference......As it is, though, you seem to be espousing spiritual dogmatism alongside some accurate assessments of anarchy.....
BTW: I am suggesting in various blogs that universities start setting up 'spiritual' departments so as to verify or falsify innumerable conflicting religious and spiritual claims. To my knowledge, after 500 years of science studying spiritual claims, we have only verified the limited efficacy of meditation and yoga. But again. I'm 100% behind any initiative which wants to study, empirically, spiritual claims in more depth........
Whether a religious group agrees with me or not is irrelevant to whether or not what I am saying contains religion. Neither I, nor my words are aligned with any particular religion and there is no religion on Earth that agrees with what I know to be correct now.
If a religious group says that a day is 24 hours long, I will not claim that you are being religious if you say the same ;)
Sure, but your claim is still religious and should be treated as such.....