It may be no bad idea to consider the powers that created us as human beings, and placed us in the ecosystem of this particular planet at this crucial point of its evolution. The human race seems to serve as a vehicle to bring organic life to a cataclysmic end – possibly for the purpose of transforming Earth into a Supernova. Which must mean that the planet has served long and resourcefully as a haven for the thronging millions of souls that have sped to it from other planets, and have sped on to their new destinations after encountering its seasons and elements, and after interacting with fellow beings of a variety of natures. And that must mean that a new Earth has been prepared for future generations. (Just like the Bible says, isn’t it?)
Let us get one thing straight from the start. We arrive on this planet in businesslike fashion. We ‘have a purpose, and our eyes are bright with it’, as John Dewey reminded us in his book on our interpretation of experience. Human beings are ready to communicate, to play, and to explore, even at the moment of their births. They are conditioned, adjusted, and organized for teamwork; they are game and fit. That is not the same thing as being generated from the infinite potentialities of the Universe on a once-off basis, as if the wheel was being gloriously conceived, created, and perfected in its most developed form in a unique surge of creative genius. And it has absolutely nothing to do with having evolved from clay crystals out of the cosmic soup, and having competed with vervet monkeys and chimpanzees for the opportunity to evolve one’s hands into instruments of intelligence (a process that would have commenced largely through masturbation), and all the stuff that would have interested Charles Darwin.
The process of our coming-into-being can be likened only to the condition of a visitor arriving at a uniquely appointed place and time for a highly specific purpose.
As fully equipped agents of a force comprised of beings far more powerful than ourselves, yet having been organically derived from them – extended from them – we bring with us, encoded in our DNA, only the information relevant to the station of the spirit that we have occupied on our previous planet, and that we will require to influence the present one for purposes understood but vaguely by ourselves, that understanding being the business of the agencies which move us between planets and between incarnations, for purposes best appreciated when we arrive at the place to which we refer as Purgatory – where our first question always is: “How did I do?” – and to which the reply is: “You did good! You did what you set out to do. You accomplished your mission.” – and where the second question is: “What’s next?”
Scientists talk of how many pollocks and lemmings are killed off for human consumption, and of how species are renamed for the retail trade because their more environmentally conscientised brethren have swum north to cooler waters: “…bocaccio becomes Pacific red snapper, Patagonian toothfish becomes Chilean, or Australian, sea bass, and dogfish becomes rock salmon…” (The Economist, January 3rd 2009) – while the important thing is to establish criteria by which the relationship between live creatures and the agencies and powers that placed them here at this moment in time may be determined, and to generate an appreciation for the character and motivation driving the transactional management dynamic at the root of the process.
Please do not say that Charles Darwin could not have conceived of representatives moving between planets in discrete incarnations, and of principals awaiting them at half-way stations before re-equipping them and dispatching them on new missions. Darwin had a perfectly good sense for the virtues of colonialism. He just lacked the notion of creating life in a laboratory, and of creating ecosystems and anthropo-dendroid symbioses in the space-time-continuum, as habitats in which to acclimatize creatures to volitional impulses related to communications from very distant regions of the Universe – for purposes better understood by the planners of global supply-chain systems than by the truck-drivers in their employ.
The problem is that so much mileage is made out of how glorious the criminals are who have usurped the prerogatives of God for their own ends – as if that is going to work out just great for them in the end – that not a single thought is possible on the real issues of existence on Earth. So much claptrap on evolution does the rounds that no moment of peace and quiet can be earned in which to reflect and to contemplate the true nature of things. The Jesuit Order has kept all noses to the grindstone for so long that no sense can now be made of all the hysteria over the contrived lifestyles in which everybody is caught up in the present artificial world, which is rapidly degenerating to the status of a cage of the arrested society.
We need to learn why we are deployed by the Powers that Be to destroy the planet on which we live. Because that is where our chances of survival lie, and nowhere else. And should it prove that we do, after all, have access to some measure of free will with which to evade the worst, then we will have derived that knowledge from a real and proper audit of our relations to the power that constituted us in the Here and Now, and will have formed theories on a range of possible purposes for that ontological covenant – we would no longer need to blunder on in a regime by which those who control the conditions of our lives for criminal purposes imagine that they are God, and that therefore they have the right to deal death among us and to mess with the survivors of their shoddy plots – in secret, from the safety of their ivory towers of unchallengeable privilege and their fastnesses of brute power.
Nor would it be possible to inquire into the nature of things while the international Mafia manipulates the Christian Church into remaining stuck in the bog of a misogynist patriarchy too terrified to contemplate the possibility of a positive role for the female gender in the constitution of the world – forcing the human race to blunder on beneath the tyranny of a regime conceived four thousand years ago by a few old savage Arab prophets railing in the desert against the light-headedness of women who failed to appreciate the significance of the need to unite beneath a monotheistic God for the purpose of galvanizing a desert tribe into a military defence against invasions by the empires of Egypt and Assyria.
I should not hope to get away with being facetious in that respect. Of course we all know old patriarchs whose many fine qualities allow us to love them despite their bigotry. But it is true that criminal elements thrive on the societal discontinuities generated by prejudice and sexism. Criminals know very well on which side their bread is buttered; they would be the last to remain standing, should a war of the sexes materialize in our lifetimes. The Christian Church is like clay in their hands, precisely as Communism and Islam are like clay in their hands. Yet they will instantly seize the opportunities for exploitation opened up by the new order of bigotry that would accompany a matriarchal revolution.
Science has made great progress on the nature of time, an element of which the prophets of the Old Testament had but a primitive appreciation. The experience of time relative to that experienced by other beings is evidently a crucial element in the mission of the human being, which finds itself incarnated on new planets with scant memory of previous experience – in regard to which it is arguable that some sort of agreement of a transactional management nature has been reached between creator and creature, that a contract assignment has been accepted, which nevertheless involves the duty to learn as much as possible of spiritual principles and physical conditions as allotted time and inclination would allow, since both short-term and long-term objectives are involved.
For example, a seven year-old dog is far more susceptible to the violence of his emotions of loyalty than the (perhaps) forty year-old human equivalent who is his master. That may be, in part, because the dog is a visitor to Terra Firma which hails from a planet where time is experienced much more slowly than on Earth, and which was engaged in relationships with other beings characterised by much shorter life-spans than itself, and where the lacks and excesses of its relationships inculcated in it a great appreciation for human qualities. A cat, although it might stand right beside the dog, really inhabits an entirely different world. While the dog feels obliged to kick up a cacophony at the drop of a hat, the cat disdains to respond to vulgar stimuli, and moves with super-sensory sensitivity through an element which gratifies her in relation to the slow, reluctant element from whence she came, where she developed her lissom, gravity-defying agility, to silently thrive among humans on Earth, complementing their qualities with her own.
The problem is that to appreciate the way in which another being experiences time, such as a cat or a dog, and the nature of the process of interaction generated between the observing human and the animal, requires a sensitive appreciation of the character and motivation of the animal itself. And that would be too much to ask of one obdurately resolved on destroying everything in sight for the purpose of getting to feel more important than other beings, whether by way of slaughtering the animal in order to learn how to telemetrically control its biology for purposes of malignant social engineering, or by way of slaughtering it in order to sell its remains to carnivores seeking to stuff their stomachs at a predetermined price paid for in hard currency.
It is likewise arguable that conditions on planets may be modified to alter requirements set for their inhabitants at various periods of time – that God, or the goddess, or the gods, has or have recourse to the spiritual equivalent of an operations room from which to make sweeping changes to conditions of living, thus to fundamentally alter the behaviour of live creatures who arrive with a purpose brightening their eyes. It is even more arguable that such recourse would take the form of a general template for being and becoming in which no ad hoc intervention needs to be made, but which might rather resemble an evolutionary development involving the elements of the physical Universe and the powers of nature in the inexorable march of time.
For example, the female gender might dominate on one planet and the male gender on the next one, in order to facilitate a fundamental insight for the travellers which would modify their behaviour in the manner required for the accomplishment of a millennial upgrading of relations for purposes best known to the creative and governing powers involved. Likewise, a sentient being might incarnate in the male gender in one life and in the female the next. Conditions of life and elements of relationships on one planet might motivate and prepare sentient beings for particular tasks on the next one. It is important to develop a basis on which matters that are separated too far apart in time and space for human appreciation might be viewed by super-beings who experience seconds as humans experience hours, and days as humans experience months. It is equally important to establish a basis by which to appreciate time in the reverse direction, so that the tyrannous direction of causality from past through present to future, of which Stephen Hawking writes in such a well-informed manner in A Brief History of Time, can be suspended, and phenomena can be assessed in terms of an inversion of time, in order to appreciate them at a more fundamental level. For example, how would we experience our lives if we started out old and decrepit, and grew progressively younger and stronger?
But whichever perspective one adopts, it seems that some sort of relationship, some sort of appreciation for the nature of the divine being functioning as the prime cause behind the behaviour of organisms and the conceits of the human mind, is required for the proper understanding of the conditions of life as a guide to right thinking and action.
Those who have usurped control of conditions of living for criminal purposes have already gathered a great body of experience that could move them to contemplate the purposes behind the means deployed by any creating, directing, sentient being, or its emanation, that would incarnate the great variety of life forms inhabiting Earth’s comprehensive and sensitive ecosystems, with its deep hierarchy of spiritual stations and physical imperatives – and with its vast array of magnificently attuned sensibilities interpreting visual, audible, tactile, olfactory, and taste impulses for uses known only to the developers of those sensibilities – arguing a strong case for communication with other planets ranged over vast distances and time zones.
The problem is that the innate barbarism of the criminals in control of the amenities of life continues to drive them to indulge in inane activities that satisfy their need to think of themselves as more significant than their fellows, over whom they lord it like so many cattle-herds applying thongs to the hindquarters of their livestocks.
It seems that the savagery of primitive matriarchy during pre-historic times, with its tyranny of motherhood, its male sacrifice, and its cannibalism, gave impetus to the savagery of patriarchy after the barbarian invasions of western Europe and the Mediterranean during the late third millennium BC, with its martial, strategic stampedes by vast herds of wild cattle of ancient settlements, and its conquest through the spear, bludgeon and torch. The art of witchcraft seems to have comprised little more than an interminable regime of murder throughout the larger part of the ages preceding the most recent four thousand years. Such civilizations as flourished over the past, say, fifty thousand years in the regions subsequently invaded by the pastoralist hordes, seem to have at last achieved that perfect symbiosis between the two genders which now represents the crucial factor that could save the human race and all life on Earth from imminent extinction. The prospect of achieving the requisite relationship between the genders is evidently the key to right thinking and action during life on Earth at present.
The ultimate reason why the editors of The Economist fail to present the current state of affairs in eco-devastation in a morally intelligent, and therefore economically sustainable, manner, is that men still have no cause to believe that women would be interested in any regime other than one characterized by interminable murder. Hence the heavy oppression characterising patriarchy: the effects of matriarchy, were it to be achieved by means of a sudden, universal revolution, would certainly be infinitely more bloody and nasty even than the present regime. Far from constituting any improvement on it, it would result in genocidal famines and wars, attended by a barbarous bickering between vested interests and role-players in a landscape of cataclysmic societal upheavals. The quality of life would swiftly plunge to the level at which those who absolutely have to continuously murder and betray in order to exist at all must have their beings, regardless of the primitive conditions attendant upon that primordial state.
The only way to regain civilization is to examine its true elements, and to determine how they could be constituted, established, and sustained. But before that can happen, there must be the will to require civilization rather than barbarism, which is at present driven by the profit motive, and by media dissimulation calculated to blame the victims in order to perpetuate the oppressive, insane regime. Sanity is the one indispensable condition for survival of life on Earth.
That does not mean that sanity is easily achieved and sustained as a general condition. On the contrary, the purpose of the Powers that Be could well be to grace Earth with the distinction of becoming the Universe’s most recent Supernova. Why else would it have disturbed a near-perfect state of affairs that took ages to materialize – with cataclysmic invasions by cattle-herding nomads? The point is to determine what the creators of these realms require, not the creatures. And in order to reach that point we need to stop imagining that we are the creators simply on grounds of our ability to deceive – and thus to destroy – everything in sight.
Life – all life, not only life in a state of nature – is ‘red in tooth and claw’. And under highly artificial conditions life is as ‘nasty, brutish, and short’ as under any other conditions. Those facts are a function neither of a cruel, perverse deity nor a barbarous atheistic scientism. They are the function of the duress under which Creation was accomplished, from a force antagonized to life: Death – which, having found Life seeking to flourish in its despite, required that life and death alternate in perpetuity, with the result that the cycle of birth and death, which is reflected also in the divergent yet complementary natures of the genders, came to constitute the most fundamental element of existence.
Therefore provision has to be made for the management of the blood and gore comprising the prerequisites for existence – the combine harvester of human life must be optimally regulated – just as excrement must be managed and toxic waste must be managed if life is to continue efficaciously. But to arbitrarily impose a game upon the operations of life and to target those tardy to learn of its lethal implications, is grossly unfair, since not all people approve of efforts to reduce life to the status of a game. And they have a point: neither death, nor excrement, nor toxic waste will be easily negated as proof of the absolute reality underlying existence. While it is not known what the Supreme has in store for us, it might be an excellent idea to behave ourselves in a manner as close to absolute decency as possible, in case the Supreme should be amenable to the suggestion, and would reciprocate. And since the concept of decency is extremely important in all matters of supreme concern to humans, they would be wise indeed to think along those lines, for that attitude might reveal the cause behind events more clearly than could any other. The fact of harsh necessity by no means diminishes the need for moral uprightness – it is the driving force behind it.
The right way in which killing is to be managed, and above all the right reason for doing it must be divined before life on Earth will again make sense to the overwhelming majority of Earthly creatures. Those are matters of the greatest possible importance.
It may be protested that competitive pressures between nations for sustained economic advantage over each other are at present so great that no amount of reasoning could save the day. That is perhaps correct. Some sort of artificial hierarchy that violently distorts reality and that misrepresents human nature will be enforced, even under the best case scenario offered by environmental analysts – unless of course unforeseen events will alter trends presently favouring that outcome. Still, unless the general tendency be rooted in doing whatever it takes to stop the destruction of the ecology, all generation of significant additional capital production may come to an end. Sustainability absolutely has to be achieved.
The problem is that criminal elements will perceive in that necessity an opportunity to be exploited in gaining unfair advantage over a large victim base, and will transform it into a secret war aided and abetted by media violence. However, even those in possession of the most advanced scientific powers are far from certain to prevail over all others indefinitely. Many like them have attempted to do so in the past, but none have succeeded for longer than a brief spell.
The last lesson learned by the barbarian before he becomes civilized is that the covenant of organic life is greater than any individual or any sub-group of the whole.
The king bull of a great herd of wild cattle tolerates no debate. All individuals seeking to alter the status quo must either meet his cruel horns or back off before his sovereign sway. His position at the top of the hierarchy – gained by right of superior weight and strength – has earned him seigniorial rights over all the cows, and the right to gore all males seeking to intrude upon his harem or his sovereignty. That is as it should be, and life on Earth would be confronted by extraordinary dangers if that ancient arrangement should suddenly and unexpectedly change. But human beings are not cattle. When they try to become cattle – as would happen if they ran for a number of generations with great herds of wild cattle over vast distances, and began to take their example from the bull – then the results are at least as disastrous as it would be if the king bull were no longer to rule in absolute tyranny over his herd.
At the opposite extreme of the spectrum in the battle of the sexes is the example of the female praying mantis, which devours the male that had impregnated her, in order to supply her brood with fodder. Should humans live like praying mantises, life would be tolerable only for some, and horrific for the others.
The key to unlocking the secret of human governance seems to lie in finding the optimal relationship between the genders, and in rooting the universal religion in a mythology of human life on Earth which is based squarely on a dynamic that allocates equal significance to both genders. As death has to be accepted as an unavoidable necessity without which life cannot be possible, so the search for the character and motivation of the powers that have constituted life on Earth and that continue to direct its course must be looked for in that miraculous resolution of antagonisms between the genders without which life cannot be possible.
Human beings have a duty to develop and refine their religion: to centre their efforts upon that optimal mechanism for the regulation of life constituted by organized religion – for failure to do so would threaten the survival of the species in deepest consequence. But before that can happen, the interconnectedness of all things must be appreciated anew. For example, economics is a young science; it needs to learn the relative values of many things before it will fulfil its promise as a fundamental order of governance. But if the best way forward must be found, religion and economics can as little be thought of as mutually exclusive as can science and love. That means that the media must be deployed to get efficient information to the public in that crucial matter. But the media are controlled by the constituency which uniquely profits from socio-economic decay: criminals.
Interesting developments in religious thinking have recently emerged. One element involves the view of human beings as ‘co-creators’ of reality. That rhymes with the notion that live creatures are reflections of the Supreme. The crux of the matter will turn upon whether or not the criminal element, and thus barbarism, can be purged from the endeavour to keep religion abreast of secular developments.
