- Lightsearcher wrote: Today, democracy means regime change in the sense of government reconstructing our values and identities in order to achieve a culture ofMessage 1 of 5 , Dec 1, 2002View SourceLightsearcher wrote:Today, democracy means regime change in the sense of government
reconstructing our values and identities in order to achieve a
culture of inclusiveness and diversity regardless of the desires of
the majority population.
Thank you, Lightsearcher1, for the URL as well as your previous postings, all of which I gain a great deal from as I also do from Dr. Starman's comments. At one time I considered myself a moderate leaning to the right, but now I find myself more a Libertarian than anything else.
Democracy? I always thought the US is a Republic? No wonder I'm usually in hot water for thinking for myself as much as possible, but I'll continue to avoid "Talking Vacuum Heads."Sheila
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.423 / Virus Database: 238 - Release Date: 11/25/02
- ... I m sort of still waiting to see, what the continued posting of these facts are leading to... What s your conclusions ????? What are you trying to sayMessage 2 of 5 , Dec 2, 2002View Source--- In anthroposophy@y..., "lightsearcher1" <lightsearcher1@y...> wrote:
> from Paul Craig Roberts, November 1, 2002 --I'm sort of still waiting to see, what the continued posting of these
"facts" are leading to... What's your conclusions ????? What are you
trying to say ??? What's your point ??
I agree the world could be up for an acopalyptic development, a clash
of civilisations and hermageddon.... I also pretty much know the
agenda of groups who like to paint the picture this way....
But is this what antroposophy, freedom in spirituality and esoteric
knowledge ask us to ??
To me the horror in a term of "end of western civilisation" is
somewhat diminished by taking a cosmopolitan view... the threat in
"end of western civilisation", doesn't ask me to dig myself into a
defensive position, that there's islamist fundamentalists, 18-19th
century ideologists and God knows what, that dig each their little
trench, doesn't surprise me, and it is important to observe, very
So what to do
a) Pick the best trench and prepare for chaos
b) Hide in a Steinerstudygroup and take a lavenderbath
c) Plug in spiritual science, ethical individualism, seek christ and
take up the Micha-el "sword" - be radical and free to see things as
they really are...
A term I've seen mentioned as a challenge for the 20th-21th century
is to develop a "promethean self" - rather than a) dreaming idealism
(post-apocalyptic dreams) b) raw barbarianism (pre-apocalyptic
To me antroposophy is one of the best "manuals" around for meeting
the challenge as "promethean selves" - Christseekers and MichaelServants
Well and my conclusion to the end of western civilisation, is simply
that civilisation advances seize to be perceived as "christian" and
"western" ... The development of individual human rights, is simply
HUMAN civilisation, not a western, christian monopoly.
- ******Great article, again lightsearcher. Unfortunately it s probably going to get worse before it gets better. What the American experiment was about wasMessage 3 of 5 , Dec 2, 2002View Source******Great article, again lightsearcher. Unfortunately it's probably going to get worse before it gets better. What the American experiment was about was trying to limit government so that it couldn't be used by the inevitable dictators of thought to gain power over free people. But the arrogant desire of some men to rule over all others always tries to find a way around whatever restrictions are placed on it. Whenever the mass of men become like sheep, able to be easily herded, the dictators have their opportunity. This one started when the writings of Marx were brought over by German workers in the 1870s, and has continued ever since. Class warfare and envy has taken a variety of forms, from creating the income tax to "soak the rich" to the present political correctness gone mad.
What I think is necessary to look at is the clash of philosophies. Liberalism is based on dialectical Marxism, a completely materialistic way of looking at the human being. In this philosophy, sometimes called "naturalism", nothing really exists except the material natural world, nothing survives death, consciousness is just electricity in the brain, and there is no higher power within human beings that they can draw upon freely but rather the only hope for salvation lies in using government power to force everyone to do what is "right." These assumptions are not questioned by the the mindless adherents of this philosophy. It is a pagan philosophy, which has great similarities to the Roman Empire's version of stoicism, and so anything Christian has no place whatsoever in it, and so neither, of course, does the freedom that the Christ has brought to every human soul. Things have advanced so fast in the Antichrist's rise in power that, if Rudolf Steiner had come today instead of a century ago, many of the things he started wouldn't be allowed. Ahriman's philosophy is taking over, as we were warned it would, and anyone who is aware of what's really going on can be forgiven for feeling like a German in the 1930s. The only thing that can help is for more people to wake up, but as you can see from peoples' deliberate refusal to awaken to the danger of Islam, for instance,and instead to distort what's really happening to fit their Marxist mindset, some people aren't going to. A world government is coming that will seize and execute any Christian on a far wider scale than was done in the Soviet Union or is still being done in China. People who speak on the basis of their conscience or free thinking must be silenced, in order that no one wakes up. The Ahrimanic deception can only succeed if we remain asleep.
from Paul Craig Roberts, November 1, 2002 --
...the U.S. government has transmogrified from an accountable government into an intrusive therapeutic administrative state with many Orwellian overtones.
Gottfried's new book, "Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt," is a speculative work. It posits the advent of a secular theocracy preoccupied with controlling thought and expression and with modifying social behavior in order to ameliorate injustices inflicted on victims (Third World peoples, women, homosexuals and the disabled) by victimizers (white Christian men).
Gottfried's book is chilling because the author is a learned and well-read scholar who is on top of political, legal and ideological developments in the United States and Europe. The well-documented and referenced analysis Gottfried provides
conveys a comprehensive understanding of the intellectual atmosphere now regnant in the West and why this intellectual outlook is dangerous to liberty. Just as in Oceania in George Orwell's "1984," Western Europe has enacted laws against "crimes of opinion." Gottfried reports that every year many German journalists and
scholars are tried by the government in courts for "inciting the public." This charge is subjective and includes expressing unprogressive and insensitive opinions. Gottfried says that more Germans are languishing in prison for this Orwellian infraction than were in East German prisons before the fall of communism. To propose immigration restrictions is evidence of xenophobia, which is in the process of being criminalized in the European Union. As well, it is prohibited to question details of the Holocaust and to deprecate Islam. Recently, when Austrian politician Jorg Haider rallied Austrians to control immigration, the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia quickly set up in Vienna to report on Haider's "assault on democracy." Austria was boycotted by the European Union until Haider
In the name of protecting racial minorities, the British government has clamped controls on speech and behavior of the native-born population. Political elites in the United Kingdom consider the Magna Carta and the English Bill of Rights less important than compelling Britons to acquiesce to the presence and ways of Third World immigrants. In the United States, environments, behaviors and expressions deemed to be offensive to racial minorities, feminists or homosexuals are
repressed by law or administrative action.
Public officials and schoolteachers have been fired or disciplined for using the word "niggardly" because poorly educated and over-sensitized blacks mistook this fine old English word for a racial slur. A recent court case in Idaho treated a verbal assault against a "protected minority" more seriously than it treated that minority's
physical assault against a white woman.
Gottfried believes that a Protestant sense of guilt is blameworthy in creating public pliancy with government policies that disadvantage whites and diminish liberties in order to make restitution to "oppressed minorities." He describes "the fusion of a victim-centered feminism with the Protestant framework of sin and redemption."
Gottfried believes that the intrusive therapeutic administrative state has already begun the process of breaking down the inherited identities of Germans, British, French and Americans in order to reconstruct society as a multicultural heaven-on-earth where prejudice is forbidden. Mass immigration from the Third World is a useful instrument of change employed by the therapeutic administrative state to
deconstruct the character and history of a majority population.
Throughout the once-confident West, a political situation has been created in which only native-born whites -- victimizers -- can be legally discriminated against.
Gottfried believes that the days are gone when democracy meant self-rule.
Today, democracy means regime change in the sense of government reconstructing our values and identities in order to achieve a culture of inclusiveness and diversity regardless of the desires of the majority population.
- ... materialistic way of ... Well it was rather the other way around, but both are basically materialist - Yes. ... to distort ... is still ... And a smartMessage 4 of 5 , Dec 2, 2002View Source--- In anthroposophy@y..., DRStarman2001@a... wrote:
> Liberalism is based on dialectical Marxism, a completelymaterialistic way of
> looking at the human being.Well it was rather the other way around, but both are basically
materialist - Yes.
> refusal to awaken to the danger of Islam, for instance,and insteadto >distort
> what's really happening to fit their Marxist mindset, some peopleis >still
> going to. A world government is coming that will seize and execute >any
> Christian on a far wider scale than was done in the Soviet Union or
> being done in China.And a smart fellow that Ahriman, some will speak against, who most
will serve... A lot of obviously ugly small Ahriman's (Usama bin
Laden, Saddam Hussein aso) will emerge, and people will gladly turn to
the wolf in sheepsclothes....surrender willingly to the good guy ..
and few will be able to see through this. If I was Ahriman, I'd have
the laugh establishing an apparently Christian World Government,
leading an apparently Free World - to do away with human freedom. Just
to really spit Christ and Freedom in the face