Firstly,
here is a short film I made in association with some of the members of DDU (please copy and paste the link to your browser):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXJ0odPqZl4
"The God of the Bible is not to be confused with Cupid! The God of the Bible hates and loves...Both the Old and New Testament provide us with the evidence that God hates the wicked and loves the righteous. Do not be deceived, the Lord Jesus is not coming back to form a "hug" line...He is not coming back to sit down and have dinner at the house of the sinner. When He returns it will be a great and terrible day for all those who have not surrendered to His Lorship."
I made this film using early New Wave editing techniques, as well as a keen sense of insanity, inanity, and the implications of southern faith.
This short SuperPAC advertisement for Conservatism is already making waves through out the Bible Belt.
Filmed in 2003 - you can really get a sense of the post-9/11 sensibility for the proper treatment of grief and tragedy that pervaded those with heart and a sense of emotional resonance.
I myself, unfortunately, did not share such a 'repentant' sort of worldview at that time, something I hold much regret about and am, more than likely, still repaying the debt for to this day...
Did Jesus Christ remove the judgement and wrath of God at the Cross?
The answer is, of course, a solemn 'no', regarding both 9/11 as regarding our treatment of the Muslim world in the Middle East after the invasion of Iraq - as well as regarding our own sense of 'humility' regarding our own sin.
If you watch this video I've composed - you will hear the Story of Jason Boston.
Jason Boston was ASSASSINATED by a marxist collectivist conspiracy to kill christians, not to mention more than likely his initial indictment was the result of collectivist manipulation of human beings through devious devices uncanny to our everyday awareness and worldviews - with the end strategy of ripping apart a god fearing family.
Died in a prison fire?
I highly doubt there is nothing whatsoever suspect about that.
As a matter of fact, in the small town in which I live - similarly suspicious things have happened on numerous occasions... and are most likely part of a Marxist strategy to, I say this with all due respect, 'destroy the foundations of western tradition in an attempt at a 2012 coup de etat by foreigners, academics, and unions.'
It may have already been disrupted - it may have already been stopped...
But I pray to god we can restore to prominence the type of sentiment expressed by Jason Boston and his family - as opposed to merely letting it 'die out' with the rest of our history.
Is there any difference between 'new south' ideology and 'collectivism'?
Yes, probably - but it is only a shift in level and subject... they are existentially, essentially, empirically, and endlessly intertwined to the point where you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between, say, 'populism' and 'individualism' - and let me tell you, there is a world of difference between them as well their having an inherently incongruous nature.
I am probably wrong about my allegations, and I hope I am...
But if I'm right... some people need to remember what the punishment for treason is, and has been historically.
I'll end with a sole thought -
"If I'd have told some of our founding fathers that in the future treason would be acceptable and patriotism and nationalism would be outlawed, they'd be even more surprised than discovering that in the future there are technologies that allow for the transmission of data through the airwaves. If I'd have told them that the press became an instrument for suppression of the people of America and 'true' worship of Christ would be more or less banned and criminalized - they would probably rethink some of the more humanistic tendencies of their vision regarding how to combat against the possibility of despotism. If I'd have mentioned to Adam Smith that our country no longer adhered to Capitalism, yet whose public officials didn't even have the tenacity to admit publicly such a 'change', he probably would have had a more 'compassionate' view of the french revolution, and a far more harsh position in regards to the role of the Market."
DDU FOUNDER AND MEMBER - Brendan O'Connell
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Friday, January 27, 2012
DDU _Ultra I MEDIA - "'2012' AMERICA IS DESTROYING '2083' AMERICA"
The amount of confusion in the U.S. is palpable, not just in terms of the old papyrus press, but pretty much by way of the National conscious, subconscious, consciousness - as well as conscience.
We are lost.
We need hope.
I ask you, dearly beloved reader, not to find it here: Please, do not read - unless you want the raw facts regarding the struggle for redemption on the world stage as a means of War (the ultimate act of love), as a means of Love (the ultimate act of war), and as a means of the well touted sentiment of WW3 buckleyan meandering... by way of instantly insane inanity being confronted with perfectly sane massive violence.
I would like to preface this ambling post-amble by saying that, even though I recognize the triteness of such a proclamation, "NO ACT OF VIOLENCE UNLESS SANCTIONED BY THE STATE LOCAL OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS EVER WARRANTED":
but, I am writing a discourse on "2083 - A european declaration of independence", so here goes -
....
Realistically, it is the 'End Times'. I, as founder of DDU (Domestic Democracy United) take this statement very seriously.
One of the most radical southern style 'end times' proponents said, contradicting the supposedly inherently violent gravity of such a claim, that quote "the end times started right after jesus was crucified and continues to this very day". To the alarmists and fearful Christians out there, this particularly radical mouthpiece for conservative protestantism said something to the effect of "the mark of the beast has not yet come", meaning no trumpets have been sounded... etc.
But that being said, if you are, say, a peak oil guy or girl (of whom I am very distrusting but would find ideological congruence with regarding this topic [apparently]), you should note that - yes, we are in fact near the 'end' of oil supplies.
The fact that this 'end' could go on for at very least 25 to 50 years is of little significance as far as this debate is concerned - and the need and possibility for alternative fuels and energy is, in my opinion, a moot point.
The realistic, yet confused, fact is, that, at least 50 percent will disagree and at least 50% will agree with this article to varying points of validity regarding the facticity of this particular diatribe... but only about 2 percent will admit it openly... a sad state of affairs in what used to be a free world based on globalism, democracy, and the judeo-christian tradition.
"who should be hurting?"
I.e. - who should get judgement in these end times?
Well, that's something I'll leave you all to decide for yourself.
But I'll wager one guess as our last round of troops are sent off to fight for democracy in the middle east...
who should be hurting?
"THE MUSLIMS"
I'll venture one last pre-post amble before I get started on interpreting 2083:
"I've read almost exactly half of the Koran, and -even though we are told to be understanding regarding cultural differences- 'ALLAH' is the definition of 'Satan'. We do not all worship the same thing with different names... that is multi-cultpropaganda telling us to 'give up hope' over and over again in the draw of some kind of pathetic negotiation for when the shit really does hit the fan - disreputable 'bowing', and the like, that our new overlords will be 'understanding' ('verstehen'). I've read the Koran, trust me. 'Allah' is 'Satan'."
-DDU Founder and Member, Brendan O'Connell
2083, A discussion of 'an' Endgame:
Hi, My name is Brendan O'Connell (a.k.a. John Oswald, Clip & Carbine, etc.), and I would like to welcome you to a fascinating but controversial discussion regarding racial interests, nationalistic interests, philosophical interests, and the growing 'apocalyptic' sense in our age where '2012' (the year) is synonymous with the 'end of the world'.
Many moderates, on either side of the spectrum, recognize the validity of the politics of 'self-interest'. We are not always as dedicated to our 'philanthropic sentiment', 'compassionate caring', and 'christ-like love' as we often admit to ourselves.
Well, I'm going to propose that christ's consideration that 'blessed' are those who show mercy gives to Christendom the stance of one who would be in a position to contribute mercy to one who was 'under the sword', as well as a hope that one would acknowledge the reality of letting judeo-christian blood reproduce into the future generally.
Sounds a bit weird, but when you consider the historical struggle for dominance as 'our' way of coming to be in this world, perhaps you can appreciate this sentiment.
The irony is, at this point, people of judeo-christian descent are in the minority - not only in the 'world', but generally within their given 'country' as well (this applies particularly to europe and the middle east).
Add to that, the fact that many 'of' judeo-christian descent (and this is an honorable 'of' indeed), either refuse to take part in it explicitly, deny it completely and accept more acceptable 'eastern' frames of reference, or fight 'against' it actively- and you've got an uphill battle for many who would like to see country, race, religion, or 'world' continue on in a suitable fashion... Not to mention 'survive' the 'end year' of 2012.
Now I may well be 'wrong'...
but assuming this 'will' be a problem at 'some point', let's consider the position of being capable of providing mercy in the future.
...because, as an end result of massive scale indoctrination, immigration, and subversion of traditional judeo-christian values - we may not always be in such a privileged position.
I mentioned before 2083, which brings to mind many things - including 'murder', 'manipulation', and 'sociopathy'.
But let's get aside that and just look at the date:
today is Jan 27th 2012 -
the date of the title of brevik's narrative is '2083'.
What could 'change' between now and then?
I'm a defender of democracy.
I'm a defender of liberty, freedom, and Truth - and consider them almost to be synonymous.
I'm a 'crazy person' officially.
...and I don't expect you to care, and I don't particularly care myself - but that IS the moral position I've chosen, and will continue to dedicate myself to for the rest of my life...
But what I want to ask you is, how difficult would it be to sort of... y'know - 'let democracy go'. Let 'morality' go. Let 'civilization' go - and just become another vicious un-christian nation?
I'd wager, through a very sophisticated mechanism of self-examination, not very difficult.
Matt Stone, I believe, once said the difference between libs and repubs is that libs believe 'society' constrains us - and repubs believe that 'society' or 'culture' is basically the only 'wall' keeping massive raping and pillaging from becoming common currency (a thin wall at that), and is quote 'a good thing', rather than a 'bad' thing.
Well, I haven't read ALL of 2083 - just the very convincing intro - but I know enough to understand that this particular 'end game' thesis says that these 'walls' of society could break down completely under certain circumstances - and due to the fact that the judeo-christian morality, lifestyle, and tradition has been so eroded- could cause a 'cleansing' of the quote 'white race'.
Don't believe me?
Ask yourself this...
Why is it that so commonly college curriculum teaches the 'injustice' of the judeo-christian tradition?
Why is it that the tea party was so massively vilified?
Why is it that, in England, someone can be arrested and punished for expressing 'anti-homosexual' sentiment (not to mention any kind of racial 'discrimination')?
I'll wager that certain academics early on in the last century had a certain biblical validity in their 'cold war' sentiment. You can counter bet, but I've been told that the certainty of 'our' narrative (and by the way, 'narrative' is a notion defended by Robert Solomon as a way of making our emotional strategies comprehensible at all) has increased from 98.6 percent likelyhood to 98.7 percent likely hood - so, even though MY hand may not be valid in this particular instance and will probably loose to an anti-gambling rigged deck - the Heritage Foundation (which, apparently, many conservos on Capitol Hill H-A-T_E) has a certain kind of accuracy [not that Rush's narrative and mine agree, but merely correspond].
{And every good christian knows, gambling is SIN. You can't spell 'casino' without 'sin', and I recognize the way in which by even conducting the following narrative - I AM SINNING.} But.... I repent.
DO YOU?
So the end result is 'dictatorship/fascism', according to brevik.
We, the cultural conservatives and anti-fascists of America must therefore do everything possible to defend democracy and freedom and prevent a fascist dictatorship by seizing power any way we can - i.e. tea party tactics.
We must enforce a harsh but 'just' Democracy, any way we can - i.e. tea party tactics.
The Marxists, both academically and in the marxist controlled media, have for more than 50 years disregarded the 'will' of the majority of Americans. The time for 'dialogue' is over. The time for resistance is over. The time for reasonable assessment of 'priority' is 'in vogue'.
The most basic 'Rights', as defined by our history, must be defended tooth and nail against deliberate attacks by an institutionalized 'genocide' of whites, african americans, and anyone sympathetic to Christianity 'properly defined'...
We call upon you, fellow americans, europeans, asians, and internationalists to 'stop complaining' and join the resistance to the Marxist/Multiculturalist elites, who are leading us to the slaughterhouse by selling us into slavery.
We, the patriotic Americans, will continue to revolt against "the Nazis of our time", the cultural Marxists who hate the idea of a higher power, who hate the idea of GOD, and who hate the idea that JESUS died for our sins to offer the whole world salvation (I repent for typing the Lord's name).
We 'tolerate' them, we offer them 'respect', but they just 'assault' and 'assault' and 'assault' our heritage.
Yes, in a way, we have already lost the democratical struggle to defend America and Europe from deliberate cultural annihilation... but as more people realize this, we will see an increasing number of Europeans joining the ranks of American Post-Patriot Nationalists to overcome the multi-culti self-nihilism of Marxism.
Many brothers and sisters, rulers and subjects, have died for this cause through out history - but by different names and circumstances.
Will we reject our history in favor of 'heaven on earth'?
Will we reject our history in favor of 'diversity of opinion'?
Will we reject our history in favor of 'domination by foreign occupiers'?
Probably, as we are a fearful race at this point.
Heidegger, Martin Heidegger, made an interesting point in a passage I read earlier today which said "Fear is Forgetting".
Well, we have been made to be fearful people who can't remember what our Tradition was really all about. Our tradition, as Americans, is The DOI, and the Constitution.
once I made the comment that: ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION IS THIS:
"one glance at the actual papyrus with properly christian faith".
I still consider this to be true.
I have a very clear message for you:
We know who you are, where you live, etc. If not today, then tomorrow, you will be confronted with the truth of Faith and Scripture... and when you are - will you just deny the validity of your own ancestors on the basis of multi-cult indoctrination?
Because, that is where the initial 'recoil' to any mention of Jesus comes from, jftr.
It also must be remembered that the element of surprise is crucial.
REPENT SINNER!
If you are a Tea Party Patriot, an Evangelical, or a Nationalist - and you are not on Facebook- you need to shape up and adapt. Get on facebook now and network with fellow lovers of dignity and freedom. Send this to a friend, or patriot, etc.
Never the less:
TO ALL patriotic FACEBOOK activists:
-Take america back!
-English Defence League!
-Ban Islam!!
-Stop Islamisation, wake up Europe
-Stop Islamisation of Europe
-Stop Islamization of America
-Contre L'islamisation de l'Europe/Against Islamisation of Europe
-I Support Isreal in the War Against Terrorism
-Take America Back
Use your imagination -
]Thanks,
Domestic Democracy United Founder and Member,
Brendan O'Connell
2083: a declaration of independence
by Anders Brevik (only read if you disagree... if you agree slightly, DO NOT DOWNLOAD)
http://www.mediafire.com/?57p6l85u94va1g8
DDU DISCLAIMER:
This does not reflect on DDU members, DDU is not affiliated with the republican party, and DDU explicitly finds Mr. Breviks 'calls to revolution' to be narcissistic and dangerous in the same way marxism can be narcissistic and dangerous.
Ultra_MEDIA DDU
We are lost.
We need hope.
I ask you, dearly beloved reader, not to find it here: Please, do not read - unless you want the raw facts regarding the struggle for redemption on the world stage as a means of War (the ultimate act of love), as a means of Love (the ultimate act of war), and as a means of the well touted sentiment of WW3 buckleyan meandering... by way of instantly insane inanity being confronted with perfectly sane massive violence.
I would like to preface this ambling post-amble by saying that, even though I recognize the triteness of such a proclamation, "NO ACT OF VIOLENCE UNLESS SANCTIONED BY THE STATE LOCAL OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS EVER WARRANTED":
but, I am writing a discourse on "2083 - A european declaration of independence", so here goes -
....
Realistically, it is the 'End Times'. I, as founder of DDU (Domestic Democracy United) take this statement very seriously.
One of the most radical southern style 'end times' proponents said, contradicting the supposedly inherently violent gravity of such a claim, that quote "the end times started right after jesus was crucified and continues to this very day". To the alarmists and fearful Christians out there, this particularly radical mouthpiece for conservative protestantism said something to the effect of "the mark of the beast has not yet come", meaning no trumpets have been sounded... etc.
But that being said, if you are, say, a peak oil guy or girl (of whom I am very distrusting but would find ideological congruence with regarding this topic [apparently]), you should note that - yes, we are in fact near the 'end' of oil supplies.
The fact that this 'end' could go on for at very least 25 to 50 years is of little significance as far as this debate is concerned - and the need and possibility for alternative fuels and energy is, in my opinion, a moot point.
The realistic, yet confused, fact is, that, at least 50 percent will disagree and at least 50% will agree with this article to varying points of validity regarding the facticity of this particular diatribe... but only about 2 percent will admit it openly... a sad state of affairs in what used to be a free world based on globalism, democracy, and the judeo-christian tradition.
"who should be hurting?"
I.e. - who should get judgement in these end times?
Well, that's something I'll leave you all to decide for yourself.
But I'll wager one guess as our last round of troops are sent off to fight for democracy in the middle east...
who should be hurting?
"THE MUSLIMS"
I'll venture one last pre-post amble before I get started on interpreting 2083:
"I've read almost exactly half of the Koran, and -even though we are told to be understanding regarding cultural differences- 'ALLAH' is the definition of 'Satan'. We do not all worship the same thing with different names... that is multi-cultpropaganda telling us to 'give up hope' over and over again in the draw of some kind of pathetic negotiation for when the shit really does hit the fan - disreputable 'bowing', and the like, that our new overlords will be 'understanding' ('verstehen'). I've read the Koran, trust me. 'Allah' is 'Satan'."
-DDU Founder and Member, Brendan O'Connell
2083, A discussion of 'an' Endgame:
Hi, My name is Brendan O'Connell (a.k.a. John Oswald, Clip & Carbine, etc.), and I would like to welcome you to a fascinating but controversial discussion regarding racial interests, nationalistic interests, philosophical interests, and the growing 'apocalyptic' sense in our age where '2012' (the year) is synonymous with the 'end of the world'.
Many moderates, on either side of the spectrum, recognize the validity of the politics of 'self-interest'. We are not always as dedicated to our 'philanthropic sentiment', 'compassionate caring', and 'christ-like love' as we often admit to ourselves.
Well, I'm going to propose that christ's consideration that 'blessed' are those who show mercy gives to Christendom the stance of one who would be in a position to contribute mercy to one who was 'under the sword', as well as a hope that one would acknowledge the reality of letting judeo-christian blood reproduce into the future generally.
Sounds a bit weird, but when you consider the historical struggle for dominance as 'our' way of coming to be in this world, perhaps you can appreciate this sentiment.
The irony is, at this point, people of judeo-christian descent are in the minority - not only in the 'world', but generally within their given 'country' as well (this applies particularly to europe and the middle east).
Add to that, the fact that many 'of' judeo-christian descent (and this is an honorable 'of' indeed), either refuse to take part in it explicitly, deny it completely and accept more acceptable 'eastern' frames of reference, or fight 'against' it actively- and you've got an uphill battle for many who would like to see country, race, religion, or 'world' continue on in a suitable fashion... Not to mention 'survive' the 'end year' of 2012.
Now I may well be 'wrong'...
but assuming this 'will' be a problem at 'some point', let's consider the position of being capable of providing mercy in the future.
...because, as an end result of massive scale indoctrination, immigration, and subversion of traditional judeo-christian values - we may not always be in such a privileged position.
I mentioned before 2083, which brings to mind many things - including 'murder', 'manipulation', and 'sociopathy'.
But let's get aside that and just look at the date:
today is Jan 27th 2012 -
the date of the title of brevik's narrative is '2083'.
What could 'change' between now and then?
I'm a defender of democracy.
I'm a defender of liberty, freedom, and Truth - and consider them almost to be synonymous.
I'm a 'crazy person' officially.
...and I don't expect you to care, and I don't particularly care myself - but that IS the moral position I've chosen, and will continue to dedicate myself to for the rest of my life...
But what I want to ask you is, how difficult would it be to sort of... y'know - 'let democracy go'. Let 'morality' go. Let 'civilization' go - and just become another vicious un-christian nation?
I'd wager, through a very sophisticated mechanism of self-examination, not very difficult.
Matt Stone, I believe, once said the difference between libs and repubs is that libs believe 'society' constrains us - and repubs believe that 'society' or 'culture' is basically the only 'wall' keeping massive raping and pillaging from becoming common currency (a thin wall at that), and is quote 'a good thing', rather than a 'bad' thing.
Well, I haven't read ALL of 2083 - just the very convincing intro - but I know enough to understand that this particular 'end game' thesis says that these 'walls' of society could break down completely under certain circumstances - and due to the fact that the judeo-christian morality, lifestyle, and tradition has been so eroded- could cause a 'cleansing' of the quote 'white race'.
Don't believe me?
Ask yourself this...
Why is it that so commonly college curriculum teaches the 'injustice' of the judeo-christian tradition?
Why is it that the tea party was so massively vilified?
Why is it that, in England, someone can be arrested and punished for expressing 'anti-homosexual' sentiment (not to mention any kind of racial 'discrimination')?
I'll wager that certain academics early on in the last century had a certain biblical validity in their 'cold war' sentiment. You can counter bet, but I've been told that the certainty of 'our' narrative (and by the way, 'narrative' is a notion defended by Robert Solomon as a way of making our emotional strategies comprehensible at all) has increased from 98.6 percent likelyhood to 98.7 percent likely hood - so, even though MY hand may not be valid in this particular instance and will probably loose to an anti-gambling rigged deck - the Heritage Foundation (which, apparently, many conservos on Capitol Hill H-A-T_E) has a certain kind of accuracy [not that Rush's narrative and mine agree, but merely correspond].
{And every good christian knows, gambling is SIN. You can't spell 'casino' without 'sin', and I recognize the way in which by even conducting the following narrative - I AM SINNING.} But.... I repent.
DO YOU?
So the end result is 'dictatorship/fascism', according to brevik.
We, the cultural conservatives and anti-fascists of America must therefore do everything possible to defend democracy and freedom and prevent a fascist dictatorship by seizing power any way we can - i.e. tea party tactics.
We must enforce a harsh but 'just' Democracy, any way we can - i.e. tea party tactics.
The Marxists, both academically and in the marxist controlled media, have for more than 50 years disregarded the 'will' of the majority of Americans. The time for 'dialogue' is over. The time for resistance is over. The time for reasonable assessment of 'priority' is 'in vogue'.
The most basic 'Rights', as defined by our history, must be defended tooth and nail against deliberate attacks by an institutionalized 'genocide' of whites, african americans, and anyone sympathetic to Christianity 'properly defined'...
We call upon you, fellow americans, europeans, asians, and internationalists to 'stop complaining' and join the resistance to the Marxist/Multiculturalist elites, who are leading us to the slaughterhouse by selling us into slavery.
We, the patriotic Americans, will continue to revolt against "the Nazis of our time", the cultural Marxists who hate the idea of a higher power, who hate the idea of GOD, and who hate the idea that JESUS died for our sins to offer the whole world salvation (I repent for typing the Lord's name).
We 'tolerate' them, we offer them 'respect', but they just 'assault' and 'assault' and 'assault' our heritage.
Yes, in a way, we have already lost the democratical struggle to defend America and Europe from deliberate cultural annihilation... but as more people realize this, we will see an increasing number of Europeans joining the ranks of American Post-Patriot Nationalists to overcome the multi-culti self-nihilism of Marxism.
Many brothers and sisters, rulers and subjects, have died for this cause through out history - but by different names and circumstances.
Will we reject our history in favor of 'heaven on earth'?
Will we reject our history in favor of 'diversity of opinion'?
Will we reject our history in favor of 'domination by foreign occupiers'?
Probably, as we are a fearful race at this point.
Heidegger, Martin Heidegger, made an interesting point in a passage I read earlier today which said "Fear is Forgetting".
Well, we have been made to be fearful people who can't remember what our Tradition was really all about. Our tradition, as Americans, is The DOI, and the Constitution.
once I made the comment that: ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION IS THIS:
"one glance at the actual papyrus with properly christian faith".
I still consider this to be true.
I have a very clear message for you:
We know who you are, where you live, etc. If not today, then tomorrow, you will be confronted with the truth of Faith and Scripture... and when you are - will you just deny the validity of your own ancestors on the basis of multi-cult indoctrination?
Because, that is where the initial 'recoil' to any mention of Jesus comes from, jftr.
It also must be remembered that the element of surprise is crucial.
REPENT SINNER!
If you are a Tea Party Patriot, an Evangelical, or a Nationalist - and you are not on Facebook- you need to shape up and adapt. Get on facebook now and network with fellow lovers of dignity and freedom. Send this to a friend, or patriot, etc.
Never the less:
TO ALL patriotic FACEBOOK activists:
-Take america back!
-English Defence League!
-Ban Islam!!
-Stop Islamisation, wake up Europe
-Stop Islamisation of Europe
-Stop Islamization of America
-Contre L'islamisation de l'Europe/Against Islamisation of Europe
-I Support Isreal in the War Against Terrorism
-Take America Back
Use your imagination -
]Thanks,
Domestic Democracy United Founder and Member,
Brendan O'Connell
2083: a declaration of independence
by Anders Brevik (only read if you disagree... if you agree slightly, DO NOT DOWNLOAD)
http://www.mediafire.com/?57p6l85u94va1g8
DDU DISCLAIMER:
This does not reflect on DDU members, DDU is not affiliated with the republican party, and DDU explicitly finds Mr. Breviks 'calls to revolution' to be narcissistic and dangerous in the same way marxism can be narcissistic and dangerous.
Ultra_MEDIA DDU
Sunday, January 22, 2012
DONATE TO AHA and Domestic Democracy United SuperPAC
Just do it!
We'd love for you to donate to the American Heart Association -
www.heart.org
Do you know what love is?
Love is many things, but with Christ all things are possible -
and love is a beautiful thing...
GIVE NOW TO AHA - and if you are reading this by my direct mail TEA PARTY campaign, happy monday etc. neighbor! Love it if you'd contribute!
Don't mind the blog, just showing my technical proficiency for 'integrated' applications of technology, lulz -
We'd love for you to donate to the American Heart Association -
www.heart.org
Do you know what love is?
Love is many things, but with Christ all things are possible -
and love is a beautiful thing...
GIVE NOW TO AHA - and if you are reading this by my direct mail TEA PARTY campaign, happy monday etc. neighbor! Love it if you'd contribute!
Don't mind the blog, just showing my technical proficiency for 'integrated' applications of technology, lulz -
Saturday, January 21, 2012
ULTRA_MEDIA - DDU, and Emotional Resonance
Ultra Media DDU manifesto:
I've been doing a lot of posting about politics, but something I want to talk about here is more important than what's going on in washington d.c., which - as I can attest, isn't the most friendly of towns.
It's funny, I met an 'old friend' who happened to be a chicano-american ex girlfriend of mine, who now happens to work as a vocation under a new york liberal politician - and I met her for coffee...
Her view of emotional resonance seemed to me to be either lacking in authenticity, derisively dismissive, or altogether a promenade of posturings and posings all too characteristic, unfortunately, of the elite liberal establishment hack job 'infadatista'.
But saying that, I'm already getting contemptuous and angry- so let's address this anger...
I put out a mix recently that said something to the effect of 'you've got to get angry, you've got to say - 'I'm a human being god damnit, my life has meaning!' right at the start - advertised it as a guy fawkes day special edition, and didn't give any more thought to it.
But let's start with that basic emotion... anger.
When we feel angry, do we see red?
When someone slights us, is our almost immediate aversive reaction to their 'slight' justified? Does it matter whether or not anger is a 'hardwired' instinct in a Jamesian Behaviorist sense? Is any talk about 'anger' as such even allowed at all, as 'anger' is a negative emotion and we shouldn't talk about it - I could even laughingly continue, because it robs it of it's 'beauty'?
Well, according to recent opinion polls from wherever non-existent imaginary kind of polling places showing stats and graphs indicate - a lot of people are very angry.
A lot of people have a right to be angry.
A lot of people have more or less righteousness or less or more indignation, both collectively and individually.
But, and I think this is a more salient question than 'why', what are people 'really', that is really with quotes and all the connotations that somehow extend beyond webster, angry 'about'?
Are they angry about their lot in life?
Are they angry about their country?
Are they angry at themselves?
Know one really knows, but the surge of anger, perhaps in many instances, more 'warranted' (SOLOMON) than not, in our country is hot enough to say, boil an egg on.
One can say, "I know that I am angry, and I know why I'm angry, so don't go telling me what to do." and know that one is incorrect.
But contrast that with the man who doesn't even know he is angry, but he "knows" he is VERY angry, and he intends to do something about it.
IS there any way, he could be more in touch with what I'll call 'Emotional Resonance' than his therapist?
I only want to venture it as a point - a fairly mundane populistic point, and one that I'm sure- is easily put down.
But to say that 'anger' is altogether wrong, or that the motives for anger count more than the empirico-ethical basis for his anger, should be tempered with a kind of look in the eye of one's own anger, and perhaps resentment, towards those who have no intention of showing any of our claims even slightest interest.
But maybe we're angry at ourselves, a point ventured by numerous Dimosioans, who have advanced theories including but not limited to 'war with oneself' and 'war with our demons, but censored and medicated'.
I say that in jest, and most of the time as I'm not using reference material, I'll simply 'quote' something out of a kind of rabbit like laziness.
Anger, we all feel it, we all act on it, and it's not always bad.
But of course we're all aware of instances, where anger can go wrong.
Where anger isn't warranted, where anger 'doesn't get it right' -
The instances of these are so disreptuable, it's no surprise that even the most vicious un-repentent murderer on death row feels something like 'remorse'.
But to end on a happy note, I saw a gentelman at the old club jump up and down evangelistically -and boy, didn't that ever not-not-not-not-not-not-not make me mad.
DDU ULTRA_MEDIA "EMOTIONAL RESONANCE"
I've been doing a lot of posting about politics, but something I want to talk about here is more important than what's going on in washington d.c., which - as I can attest, isn't the most friendly of towns.
It's funny, I met an 'old friend' who happened to be a chicano-american ex girlfriend of mine, who now happens to work as a vocation under a new york liberal politician - and I met her for coffee...
Her view of emotional resonance seemed to me to be either lacking in authenticity, derisively dismissive, or altogether a promenade of posturings and posings all too characteristic, unfortunately, of the elite liberal establishment hack job 'infadatista'.
But saying that, I'm already getting contemptuous and angry- so let's address this anger...
I put out a mix recently that said something to the effect of 'you've got to get angry, you've got to say - 'I'm a human being god damnit, my life has meaning!' right at the start - advertised it as a guy fawkes day special edition, and didn't give any more thought to it.
But let's start with that basic emotion... anger.
When we feel angry, do we see red?
When someone slights us, is our almost immediate aversive reaction to their 'slight' justified? Does it matter whether or not anger is a 'hardwired' instinct in a Jamesian Behaviorist sense? Is any talk about 'anger' as such even allowed at all, as 'anger' is a negative emotion and we shouldn't talk about it - I could even laughingly continue, because it robs it of it's 'beauty'?
Well, according to recent opinion polls from wherever non-existent imaginary kind of polling places showing stats and graphs indicate - a lot of people are very angry.
A lot of people have a right to be angry.
A lot of people have more or less righteousness or less or more indignation, both collectively and individually.
But, and I think this is a more salient question than 'why', what are people 'really', that is really with quotes and all the connotations that somehow extend beyond webster, angry 'about'?
Are they angry about their lot in life?
Are they angry about their country?
Are they angry at themselves?
Know one really knows, but the surge of anger, perhaps in many instances, more 'warranted' (SOLOMON) than not, in our country is hot enough to say, boil an egg on.
One can say, "I know that I am angry, and I know why I'm angry, so don't go telling me what to do." and know that one is incorrect.
But contrast that with the man who doesn't even know he is angry, but he "knows" he is VERY angry, and he intends to do something about it.
IS there any way, he could be more in touch with what I'll call 'Emotional Resonance' than his therapist?
I only want to venture it as a point - a fairly mundane populistic point, and one that I'm sure- is easily put down.
But to say that 'anger' is altogether wrong, or that the motives for anger count more than the empirico-ethical basis for his anger, should be tempered with a kind of look in the eye of one's own anger, and perhaps resentment, towards those who have no intention of showing any of our claims even slightest interest.
But maybe we're angry at ourselves, a point ventured by numerous Dimosioans, who have advanced theories including but not limited to 'war with oneself' and 'war with our demons, but censored and medicated'.
I say that in jest, and most of the time as I'm not using reference material, I'll simply 'quote' something out of a kind of rabbit like laziness.
Anger, we all feel it, we all act on it, and it's not always bad.
But of course we're all aware of instances, where anger can go wrong.
Where anger isn't warranted, where anger 'doesn't get it right' -
The instances of these are so disreptuable, it's no surprise that even the most vicious un-repentent murderer on death row feels something like 'remorse'.
But to end on a happy note, I saw a gentelman at the old club jump up and down evangelistically -and boy, didn't that ever not-not-not-not-not-not-not make me mad.
DDU ULTRA_MEDIA "EMOTIONAL RESONANCE"
GINGRICH WINS _
Gingrich wins in South Carolina, and ain't it great?
The, by now, weirdly pervasive anti Newt rhetoric has fallen flat on it's face.
Rupert Murdoch endorses Santorum, as do I - but a win from the man who had to 'shut down a rally in hew hampshire due to security concerns'fxnws nh caucus#? I wouldn't take NEWT too lightly, or too heavily either - though I can attest to one thing - much of the north east gippy ole partay estabbyment takes the SC vote as quite an indicator.
I mentioned in previous blogs recently about 'the historical precedent' of winning Iowa - which is true - more or less all of the most recent G.O.P. people who have gone on to become POTUS have won Iowa.
But south caroline, oh missus caroline, could prove to have it's pulse on the pro-bush crowd, as well as those a bit more educated and classy than the Iowa midwest cowboy crowd - which could be exactly why claims that the SC caucus won't have as much 'impact' as many suspect.
But I never learned from history, as - perhaps just in a buckleyan standing athwart removed sense - I'm going ahead and endorsing the Santorum -
So, Santorum - if anyone, is my official DDU stance.
I'm calling for people to vote Santorum, on the basis of his strong stance on social issues, and previous endorsement of Bachmann - who nodded out to Santorum's tune, but graced him with an unofficial nod of the hat endorsement.
But of course, catholic conservatism is no 'sinister' thing as I so blithely put it -
as one unnamed southerner said in an horrific terrible movie one time -
No one hates Satan more than the Pope.
lulz
But, in all honesty, the debate between not-romney and romney should be framed on the basis of all of the individual merits of each candidate, not just on the basis of the lamestream media bias -
I'm kidding of course,
It's Catholic vs Mormon all the way down the line -
My one defense of Newt is, he's what the Sun called a 'skinwalker' -
All of their blahs, none of their blahnesses.
Oh, and Domestic Democracy U would like all valid concerns regarding yr own interest in politics to be just real quick expressed in the comment box.
Thanks!
The, by now, weirdly pervasive anti Newt rhetoric has fallen flat on it's face.
Rupert Murdoch endorses Santorum, as do I - but a win from the man who had to 'shut down a rally in hew hampshire due to security concerns'fxnws nh caucus#? I wouldn't take NEWT too lightly, or too heavily either - though I can attest to one thing - much of the north east gippy ole partay estabbyment takes the SC vote as quite an indicator.
I mentioned in previous blogs recently about 'the historical precedent' of winning Iowa - which is true - more or less all of the most recent G.O.P. people who have gone on to become POTUS have won Iowa.
But south caroline, oh missus caroline, could prove to have it's pulse on the pro-bush crowd, as well as those a bit more educated and classy than the Iowa midwest cowboy crowd - which could be exactly why claims that the SC caucus won't have as much 'impact' as many suspect.
But I never learned from history, as - perhaps just in a buckleyan standing athwart removed sense - I'm going ahead and endorsing the Santorum -
So, Santorum - if anyone, is my official DDU stance.
I'm calling for people to vote Santorum, on the basis of his strong stance on social issues, and previous endorsement of Bachmann - who nodded out to Santorum's tune, but graced him with an unofficial nod of the hat endorsement.
But of course, catholic conservatism is no 'sinister' thing as I so blithely put it -
as one unnamed southerner said in an horrific terrible movie one time -
No one hates Satan more than the Pope.
lulz
But, in all honesty, the debate between not-romney and romney should be framed on the basis of all of the individual merits of each candidate, not just on the basis of the lamestream media bias -
I'm kidding of course,
It's Catholic vs Mormon all the way down the line -
My one defense of Newt is, he's what the Sun called a 'skinwalker' -
All of their blahs, none of their blahnesses.
Oh, and Domestic Democracy U would like all valid concerns regarding yr own interest in politics to be just real quick expressed in the comment box.
Thanks!
SOUTH CAROLINA PRIMARY SUPERSPECIAL ddu Superpac manifesto
Series of event's on CBS on eve of iowa caucus:
1.Repub Noms
a.hunstman
b.gingrich
1.c #OUT obama approval numbers
2.New Terrorism
the 'lone terror cell'
3.CIA spy in Iran facing execution.
AD BREAK#
"Prescription Drug 'Recall'"
AD BREAK#
4."Buried"
snow levels in Alaska
5. "White House Snow"
6."Independent Voters"
Questions for applied voter politiq:
Q: "What is the Deciding factor in the POTUS pick?
Q: "Health Insurance? Many can't afford it!!!
Q: Are women outspoken independents?
Q: Who is more aligned with what matters to you? Clinton or Obama?
Q: Do you believe government needs to get out of our way?
Q: Would you say "economics means the most to me"?
Q: Is it always a run around with politicians?
So: conclusion for the DDU superpac on this G.O.P. presidential primary in South Carolina... from north carolina -
1. The deciding factor for ______is ________.
2. There is a high level response to the mention of the Debt Crisis, which is genuinely out of _________ for people.
3.______ believes that the effect of debt on the less fortunate to be of large _____ concern (i.e. _______ interpretation of the New Testament)
That is all -
any contributions to Domestic Democracy United should inquired into by the following e-mail address...
PADDYWALK@GMX.COM -
Thanks you lulz
1.Repub Noms
a.hunstman
b.gingrich
1.c #OUT obama approval numbers
2.New Terrorism
the 'lone terror cell'
3.CIA spy in Iran facing execution.
AD BREAK#
"Prescription Drug 'Recall'"
AD BREAK#
4."Buried"
snow levels in Alaska
5. "White House Snow"
6."Independent Voters"
Questions for applied voter politiq:
Q: "What is the Deciding factor in the POTUS pick?
Q: "Health Insurance? Many can't afford it!!!
Q: Are women outspoken independents?
Q: Who is more aligned with what matters to you? Clinton or Obama?
Q: Do you believe government needs to get out of our way?
Q: Would you say "economics means the most to me"?
Q: Is it always a run around with politicians?
So: conclusion for the DDU superpac on this G.O.P. presidential primary in South Carolina... from north carolina -
1. The deciding factor for ______is ________.
2. There is a high level response to the mention of the Debt Crisis, which is genuinely out of _________ for people.
3.______ believes that the effect of debt on the less fortunate to be of large _____ concern (i.e. _______ interpretation of the New Testament)
That is all -
any contributions to Domestic Democracy United should inquired into by the following e-mail address...
PADDYWALK@GMX.COM -
Thanks you lulz
Rats Occupy 'Occupy DC'
There are unsupported rumors that rats, which the Washington D.C. government has ordered to 'never be exterminated' by pest control techniques cited as 'inhumane', are occupying the Freedom Plaza Occupy location in our Nation's capitol.
Rats, which the policy makers have been taught in their elitist institutions of academia, are 'animals' quote "just like us", D.C. decided, at some point or another in our nations fine history, are to be treated as a problem of diversification of rat populations rather than an actual problem regarding quote 'pest control' - another example of government legislation causing FMD (free market democracy) to be virtually incapable of doing its job.
Instead, the enlightened lunatics who provide us with numerous and concurrent examples of their numbscullery on a constant basis, give us a 'nuanced' position about the rat problem...
We'll export 'em to northern virginia!
That's right, entire 'families' of rats in the d.c. area are to be captured and detained, isolated, and then removed from the initial area of 'residency' to a more suitable location in the suburbs of quote "Northern Virginia".
But what does that do to the rumors of rats being found in the Occupy encampments in D.C.?
I dunno, but clearly these guys in D.C. are 'nuts'.
oh wait, that only works with squirrels.
Well, squirrels, I'm sure according to these pro-epa types, are probably paying dues to have the responsibility to the NLRB to endorse a position of bureaucratic 'compassion' towards squirrels.
THAT'S COMPLETELY BATTY -
Oh wait, that only works for sequidginapedals.
no kidding, bats -
But yeh, I can't think of any good rat puns, so I'll just end this little RUSH digression with this expression of faluire and disappointment.
"Rats!"
Rats, which the policy makers have been taught in their elitist institutions of academia, are 'animals' quote "just like us", D.C. decided, at some point or another in our nations fine history, are to be treated as a problem of diversification of rat populations rather than an actual problem regarding quote 'pest control' - another example of government legislation causing FMD (free market democracy) to be virtually incapable of doing its job.
Instead, the enlightened lunatics who provide us with numerous and concurrent examples of their numbscullery on a constant basis, give us a 'nuanced' position about the rat problem...
We'll export 'em to northern virginia!
That's right, entire 'families' of rats in the d.c. area are to be captured and detained, isolated, and then removed from the initial area of 'residency' to a more suitable location in the suburbs of quote "Northern Virginia".
But what does that do to the rumors of rats being found in the Occupy encampments in D.C.?
I dunno, but clearly these guys in D.C. are 'nuts'.
oh wait, that only works with squirrels.
Well, squirrels, I'm sure according to these pro-epa types, are probably paying dues to have the responsibility to the NLRB to endorse a position of bureaucratic 'compassion' towards squirrels.
THAT'S COMPLETELY BATTY -
Oh wait, that only works for sequidginapedals.
no kidding, bats -
But yeh, I can't think of any good rat puns, so I'll just end this little RUSH digression with this expression of faluire and disappointment.
"Rats!"
Friday, January 20, 2012
THIS JUST IN - Major Brushfires in Reno, Nevada
Apparently I'm getting in the wire that there are over 10,000 people evacuated from their homes in Reno, Nevada - Home of COPS parody Reno 911.
Firefighters are currently fighting overwhelming fires there early this friday morning, and authorities are wondering, "How do we contain the fire?".
I'd just like to make this blog post very quickly, and hope that all of you out there send your prayers to the fine men and women of the Reno FD.
This may or may not be just breaking now, though I suspect - due to the most recent article on this being from an hour ago and sneaking optimism regarding the internet media merely "issuing press releases", that this is salient news for the people of Reno, Nevada, and all of the Southwest.
Some reports say the firefighters are 'working around' what, in certain areas, are massive flames.
As many as 20 homes have been destroyed in the fire so far.
TERROR LEVEL : ORANGE
Firefighters are currently fighting overwhelming fires there early this friday morning, and authorities are wondering, "How do we contain the fire?".
I'd just like to make this blog post very quickly, and hope that all of you out there send your prayers to the fine men and women of the Reno FD.
This may or may not be just breaking now, though I suspect - due to the most recent article on this being from an hour ago and sneaking optimism regarding the internet media merely "issuing press releases", that this is salient news for the people of Reno, Nevada, and all of the Southwest.
Some reports say the firefighters are 'working around' what, in certain areas, are massive flames.
As many as 20 homes have been destroyed in the fire so far.
TERROR LEVEL : ORANGE
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Androcles and Shaws Faithfull Kitten (SUPERSATURDAYEDITION)
"(Pauline Christianity's) enchantment is produced by its spurious association with the personal charm of Jesus, and exists only for untrained minds. In the hands of a logical frenchman like Calvin, pushing it to its utmost conclusions, and devising "institutes" for hardheaded adult Scots and literal Swiss, it becomes the most infernal of fatalisms; and the lives of civilized children are blighted by its logic whilst negro piccaninnies are rejoicing in its legends."
-George BernaRd Shaw "Androcles and the Lion"
The 'Charm of Jesus', obviously derisively intended as is any mention of christianity in Shaw's works (Nietzsche never went so far as to condemn Christ himself, just Christians themselves), that Shaw is referring to is what many people have troubled over when confronted with any kind of Truth to be found in scripture.
"Yes yes, but what does it mean to actually have a man named Jesus Christ?"
Well, it is good intentioned, as if one were to worship such a Messiah, one would logically ask about the man himself... not even to question what parts of the new testament were more or less accurate than others, but to simply ask - "scripture aside, who was Jesus Christ?"
The very question itself, which I found myself both advancing as a query as well as venturing that perhaps I, as in ME the ONE, I had the answer to more than anyone else in classic youthly vigor, is nothing more than the first test of faith for Protestantism.
And this view comes from a very literal interpretation of literacy in conjunction with Christian faith.
One can only know jesus, truly know jesus, through scripture. You can imagine what it may have been ;like to be there when he was on the cross. You can dream of what sort of mood may have been wavering through the crowd when P{ilate brought Him forth for judgement. You can even speculate as to how tremendously historical it must have felt to be one of the early followers of Christ...
...but the ONLY way to know Jesus Christ is through scripture, and any 'imaginings' of the above kind preceeded by a want of knowledge of the authentic, genuine article (as have been done ad infinitum on PBS and elsewhere) and are merely a solid piece of evidence showing a distinct lack of 'faith'.
I'm sure Shaw and his contemporaries thought of the notion of 'Faith' with disdain and cankerous blasphemic anti-christian sentiment, but little did they know that the very idea of faith would become the cornerstone of the 'end of philosophy' as such, in a sense, and the beginning of the 'end of post-structuralism'.
Through much trials and travails of which a southern gentleman such as myself is loathe to mention, I happened across this key verse of scripture from which to understand faith in a philosophical sense -
(paraphrase) Faith is the Temporal Unseen.
Well, certainly this is no discovery of any import until we apply it to the Shaw's view of the relationship between Pauline Christianity and Calvinistic Christianity - with, let's hope, a keen sense of George Bernard's kitten like amusement with religion itself.
Shaw, like a kitten (and probably with much help from academic oxen), paws about his subject - prodding and poking it, crippling it, letting it go and watching with rapt attention it's flutterings and flailings and 'infernal' failings - gnaws on it a bit, and then let drops it on the ground, mush and all, eyes it for a moment, and ambles off to satiate his next loathsome dialectic - only to later come back and drop down his teethed maw down upon the subject with a loud 'Gulp' (which in this case is Christ), internalizing it entirely.
So perhaps one philosophy student, in the good-hearted name of literality, might venture that God is 'Time'.
But of course, those of us with any connection to christian tradition in our hearts know the musings of such a student would be a lackluster Socratization of christianity - one which scholar Hubert Dreyfus pointedly marked as beyond dead - pushing philosophy into post-deconstructionism.
Any understanding of faith is faith in the 'unseen' -
Hence any number of cliche's should spring to ones mind, and we are again assaulted, hopefully, by a culture that has turned christianity on it's head and made it nothing more than a predetermined 'rejoicing of piccaninnies' devoted to Saul but stricken with 'unseen' Calvanism and it's... just... a... mess/////////////////////////////////////
We are a chosen generation, We.
How are we to have any kind of relationship to Christ and God and Ourselves in an age where many god-fearing christians believe going to church to be (and I quote Muller) "Too Dangerous".
The answer I've received is from this simple passage from Hebrews Chapter 13 verse 8:
Jesus is today as he was yesterday and will be tomorrow.
That means that jesus, whether we live in a post-christian nation now as Mike Huckabee dangerously declared upon the New Year or not, is eternal.
The Temporal is Eternal.
The best understanding we have of temporality comes from the beginning of the end of philosophy, in which it was declared that the 'everyday' understanding of time is the correct one.
I would venture a conclusion from this line of logic, and I'd be happy for you to make your own - however, the 'populism' of the 'everyday' understanding of time keeps me from doing so; perhaps I'll just venture a post-deconstructionist account of Christ and how we are to serve him.
Are you ready?
Marx once called Christians, the middle class, workers, and anyone else who wasn't part of the communist party "useful idiots'. This sentiment is widely pervasive today, and shows the broad influence of proto-marxism, especially in industry, academia, and social 'scenes'.
But to worship Christ today, we need to quote "crucify ourselves". We need to be "persecuted for righteousness sake knowing we are sinners". We need to serve Christ so fully, that we are willing to throw ourselves upon our ancestors swords one at a time, until we are not only sanctified by Christs' blood sprinkling our skin - but we are sanctified by christs blood touching our blood.
We need to sacrifice ourselves - christ demands it of us... If we don't, however born again we may be - however sober and religious and chruchgoing we may be- however wise we may be~
It won't matter because Time, in the case of the philosophy student, will simply say - "I know you not" when your chaff settles under an unmarked grave.
Time will say, he did nothing to stand athwart history but wimply held on, desperately clinging to complicity. He did not shout "NO" until he was in bondage. He did not evangelize and make himself a leper amongst those who would claim to be wise. He did not crucify himself, and allow his own blood to actually make direct contact with the blood of christ.
No, all he did was drink a little wine, eat a few wafers, and sit back and watch the world end.
"I know you not" will be the last words you'll hear before plummeting to your fate as a fallen angel.
-George BernaRd Shaw "Androcles and the Lion"
The 'Charm of Jesus', obviously derisively intended as is any mention of christianity in Shaw's works (Nietzsche never went so far as to condemn Christ himself, just Christians themselves), that Shaw is referring to is what many people have troubled over when confronted with any kind of Truth to be found in scripture.
"Yes yes, but what does it mean to actually have a man named Jesus Christ?"
Well, it is good intentioned, as if one were to worship such a Messiah, one would logically ask about the man himself... not even to question what parts of the new testament were more or less accurate than others, but to simply ask - "scripture aside, who was Jesus Christ?"
The very question itself, which I found myself both advancing as a query as well as venturing that perhaps I, as in ME the ONE, I had the answer to more than anyone else in classic youthly vigor, is nothing more than the first test of faith for Protestantism.
And this view comes from a very literal interpretation of literacy in conjunction with Christian faith.
One can only know jesus, truly know jesus, through scripture. You can imagine what it may have been ;like to be there when he was on the cross. You can dream of what sort of mood may have been wavering through the crowd when P{ilate brought Him forth for judgement. You can even speculate as to how tremendously historical it must have felt to be one of the early followers of Christ...
...but the ONLY way to know Jesus Christ is through scripture, and any 'imaginings' of the above kind preceeded by a want of knowledge of the authentic, genuine article (as have been done ad infinitum on PBS and elsewhere) and are merely a solid piece of evidence showing a distinct lack of 'faith'.
I'm sure Shaw and his contemporaries thought of the notion of 'Faith' with disdain and cankerous blasphemic anti-christian sentiment, but little did they know that the very idea of faith would become the cornerstone of the 'end of philosophy' as such, in a sense, and the beginning of the 'end of post-structuralism'.
Through much trials and travails of which a southern gentleman such as myself is loathe to mention, I happened across this key verse of scripture from which to understand faith in a philosophical sense -
(paraphrase) Faith is the Temporal Unseen.
Well, certainly this is no discovery of any import until we apply it to the Shaw's view of the relationship between Pauline Christianity and Calvinistic Christianity - with, let's hope, a keen sense of George Bernard's kitten like amusement with religion itself.
Shaw, like a kitten (and probably with much help from academic oxen), paws about his subject - prodding and poking it, crippling it, letting it go and watching with rapt attention it's flutterings and flailings and 'infernal' failings - gnaws on it a bit, and then let drops it on the ground, mush and all, eyes it for a moment, and ambles off to satiate his next loathsome dialectic - only to later come back and drop down his teethed maw down upon the subject with a loud 'Gulp' (which in this case is Christ), internalizing it entirely.
So perhaps one philosophy student, in the good-hearted name of literality, might venture that God is 'Time'.
But of course, those of us with any connection to christian tradition in our hearts know the musings of such a student would be a lackluster Socratization of christianity - one which scholar Hubert Dreyfus pointedly marked as beyond dead - pushing philosophy into post-deconstructionism.
Any understanding of faith is faith in the 'unseen' -
Hence any number of cliche's should spring to ones mind, and we are again assaulted, hopefully, by a culture that has turned christianity on it's head and made it nothing more than a predetermined 'rejoicing of piccaninnies' devoted to Saul but stricken with 'unseen' Calvanism and it's... just... a... mess/////////////////////////////////////
We are a chosen generation, We.
How are we to have any kind of relationship to Christ and God and Ourselves in an age where many god-fearing christians believe going to church to be (and I quote Muller) "Too Dangerous".
The answer I've received is from this simple passage from Hebrews Chapter 13 verse 8:
Jesus is today as he was yesterday and will be tomorrow.
That means that jesus, whether we live in a post-christian nation now as Mike Huckabee dangerously declared upon the New Year or not, is eternal.
The Temporal is Eternal.
The best understanding we have of temporality comes from the beginning of the end of philosophy, in which it was declared that the 'everyday' understanding of time is the correct one.
I would venture a conclusion from this line of logic, and I'd be happy for you to make your own - however, the 'populism' of the 'everyday' understanding of time keeps me from doing so; perhaps I'll just venture a post-deconstructionist account of Christ and how we are to serve him.
Are you ready?
Marx once called Christians, the middle class, workers, and anyone else who wasn't part of the communist party "useful idiots'. This sentiment is widely pervasive today, and shows the broad influence of proto-marxism, especially in industry, academia, and social 'scenes'.
But to worship Christ today, we need to quote "crucify ourselves". We need to be "persecuted for righteousness sake knowing we are sinners". We need to serve Christ so fully, that we are willing to throw ourselves upon our ancestors swords one at a time, until we are not only sanctified by Christs' blood sprinkling our skin - but we are sanctified by christs blood touching our blood.
We need to sacrifice ourselves - christ demands it of us... If we don't, however born again we may be - however sober and religious and chruchgoing we may be- however wise we may be~
It won't matter because Time, in the case of the philosophy student, will simply say - "I know you not" when your chaff settles under an unmarked grave.
Time will say, he did nothing to stand athwart history but wimply held on, desperately clinging to complicity. He did not shout "NO" until he was in bondage. He did not evangelize and make himself a leper amongst those who would claim to be wise. He did not crucify himself, and allow his own blood to actually make direct contact with the blood of christ.
No, all he did was drink a little wine, eat a few wafers, and sit back and watch the world end.
"I know you not" will be the last words you'll hear before plummeting to your fate as a fallen angel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)