logicp_writings/collectivist_theology/GnosticParasite.md

Gnostic Parasite

Virus

The ideal metaphor to describe their program/teaching method is a virus. It can infect students, send them into other disciplines and careers, and infect other institutions by bringing the ideaology in like a virus that gets in through different receptor sites.

They compare themselves favourably to HIV, Ebola, SARS and viruses that cause cancer because cancer represents, in their own words, true transformative change. They characterize conservatism as an immune system and explain that in this one case, among all viral diseases, immune system-mediated destruction of the virus is a bad thing - the virus needs to be allowed to run rampant to transform the body.

If you wondered if this is a death cult (they think they can bring new hermetic life out of death), that's pretty certain proof. Cancer is transformative (that word again - the goal of these secret religions is to transform (man, society, the world, nature) into the gnostics' vision. What they believe they've seen in glimpse of the divine intellect. The nous/mind of God. The Utopia that they picture there. It will be sustainable and inclusive).

Transform the world into what Marx said -> nature completing itself through Man. And Man completing nature as it completes God.

If we say that it works like a virus, it's the same to say that it works like a parasite - roughly the same thing with different terms of biological sophistication. They don't feed themselves on their own account - they do so by getting their life from something else. It's not a symbiotic relationship - it's wholly to the benefit of the parasite and to the cost of the host.

How

They do this by copycatting - simulacrity instead of Christianity, for example.

"We do the same thing that you do, but we do it deeper and morally better. The thing you understand is something that you only kind of understand."

Fauci

He is the science - you don't have a clear/deep understanding of the science like he does. Whatever he says is true.

You don't understand how glaciers work because you didn't take into account feminist art which yields equity through glaciology and a greater representation of different ways of knowing, which ultimately is assumed to bring about a better understanding of glaciology, or at least a world that has been socially transformed to one where disparate perspectives are less of an issue, and thus any kind of information should be more easily observed/discovered/attained/understood.

The Game

The game is what we've heard from everybody. Dialectical inversion is what we like to call it - it's all politics by different means. At the end of the day, it's warring tribes and politics being done by a means and then calling it "Knowledge". If it benefits the historically oppressed, then it is better knowledge.

They use terms like "ways of knowing". Science does ways of knowing and we have other ways of knowing. Hegemonic science wants to exclude other ways of knowing because they want to keep themselves in positions as scientists, write papers, get grants, be justified to write more papers and receive more grants, etc. Everything is political so your politics don't matter. Nothing is neutral. There is no neutrality. There is no neutral position. Everybody is biased.

It does this by co-opting the terminology and creeping in while inventing new big-word sounding words like "trans-disciplinary" -> scientifical. It steals words like "love your neighbour". It steals words and transforms what they mean -> diversity, inclusion, social emotional learning. This is how it works as a parasite. You don't feel a tick crawling up your leg. You rarely feel the mosquito landing on you. Sometimes you never feel the bite. Sometimes it bites you and you understand what has happened.

With the ideal parasite, you'd never feel and it and you'd never even know it was there. A tick might have to be on you for quite a while before you get lyme disease. They have all kinds of means to hide themselves - if you fifgured out you had a parasite on you, you'd get rid of it. It gets in by seeming undetectable: we're the same as you, but we understand it slightly different.

THe differences in degrees: there are squares saying they're circles of a different size. Once you believe it is a circle, they'll stretc to fill the space you take up.

Weakness

When someone sounds like they have a more satisfying interpretation of something you're already familiar with - like scripture or activism - and you get sucked in. It's not necessarily religion, but it will look like religion. The New Age stuff really sticks out - I'm spiritual but not religious. Makes me feel really good.

Scientific and scientifistic language where science has domiannce to creep in under science. The Science. Scientific Socialism. A system of science. The scientific study of history. Scientism.

In post-modern domains, it looks like manipulations of language - all you have - language games, advertising, marketing, propaganda, blurring of boundaries so its' hard to tell what one thing is and what one thing is not.

It latches onto very valuable traits that faith strengthens and encourages, like charity. Caring about people. You're not caring about them enough unless you care about them in this particular way. Correct way to love thy neighbour - socialism. Jesus was a socialist.

It co-ops the idea of Love and of theological mystery and drags you in. Things that people in religious contexts are seeking or are already satisfied by.

Love is a big concept in Christianity. In Hermetic thought, Love has a different definition. It's a manifestion of the source spirit - the highest good. It gets brought in as a parasite trick under teh phrase "God is Love", but they mean something different by both Love and God.

Love, in the Hermetic tradition, refers to the desire to affect self-completing and gnostic illumination. Reunion, partial or whole, with The One (God).

What was the point of the cross? Atonement?

Atonement

They spell it with two hyphens. At-one-ment. At One Ment. Atonement. At one ment. Atonement means you come back at one with the whole, but when they mean the whole the undifferentiated God in their crackpot religion that they have the only path to return to.

This has spun off to where Love now means the desire to affect self-completing and gnostic illumination partial or whole reunion with the one or with God into a concept called "Critical Love". A critical everything. Critical unhappiness.

It's hard to get a definition for Critical Love. It' svery difficult in general to find concise definitions for anything, but one definition said "It's the beginning of equity". It means "caring about communities, in service". Critical Love means the love that you have for the collective, not in dividual or one to one love for one other person. Not love for yourself, or your spouse, or for your children. Love for the collective above those. At-one-ment.

Individuals loving communities are the ones that actually love individuals. You love the community so that the community can love individuals correctly, on your own behalf. And you end up with a snake eating its own tail, again. Communities that love individuals that love communities that love individuals etc. A circle which assumes its beginning and finds its own end.

Liberal Receptors

What sort of receptors does it tap into for reason and liberalism? Philosophical liberalism? For Faith it hits charity, but for liberalism it hits the other kind of charity: taking an argument at good faith. Having an open mind.

"This person said that gender is performative. Maybe it's correct - let's spend years writing thousands of papers investigating it because it couldn't possibly be wholly wrong - I wouldn't be open minded".

It takes advantage of curiosity to find out more: "This is a hypothesis - let's explore it!"

It takes advantage of freedom: Hundred flowers campaign - let 100 flowers bloom in China - 100 flowers of Free Speech -> everyone speak up! Tell us what you're really thinking ;) ;) Freedom Freedom.

What do they do when they get mad because they lost their censorship stick on Twitter. They started to be abusive to everyone on Twitter and when they were accused of it they said "are you against free speech, now?". This is what Elon Musk calls Free Speech! :) They beat everyone else by abusing and harrassing them and calling it free speech. Don't you care about free speech? Aren't you interested in debate? They hold you to your standard, while they don't hold themselves to the same standard. (Saul Alinsky - Rules for Radicals - hold the enemy to his standard. Voegelin - construct 2nd reality so it looks like it's accomplishing the thing in the 1st reality while evading accountability in 1st reality).

They can peaceably assemble, but when you do it's not peaceable anymore. Demand that you take their ideas seriously - they can't stand being mocked and can't stand satire. They have to throw things off the internet (Babylon Bee)?

They play motte and bailey games with you (Nicholas Shackle). You'll have more diversity (the definition shrinks from "people that are different" to "only racial minorities count as diversity" 100% black is 100% diverse!) The next step is "Larry Elder isn't black because he's the black face of white supremacy. Only black people who speak the proper critical language of blackness count and it shrinks further until it's just their commissars getting in positions. Shifting the definition.

"We just want to teach kids honest history - social emotional skills - just some very nice thing". They thereby force you into their wizard's circle or their frame/terminology. Liberals get sucked into this like fools because they can't possibly understand or use discernment around circumstances of their being played in a game of 3-card monty where the words are the cards / cups on the table used to rip you off.

They demand you treat their ideas charitably while not treating your ideas at all - forget charitable. Everything you ever thought/said/did is interpreted in the worst possible light to the point where they accuse you of being a sex trafficker - something absurd. You must give them every benefit of the doubt, and they'll give each other the benefit of the doubt while giving you none.

They demand you give their idea respect - if you mock their ideas and make fun of them, they'll flip out. The Iron Law of Woke Over-Reaction. To respect their ideas means to let them keep talking and "casting their spell/putting the wizard circle out there" to draw more people in, even if they can't get you.

Substitution

Reality gets substituted for Gnostic Hyper-reality, because reality got "negated".

Harry Potter Analogy

Voldemort attaches to the back of Quirrell's head and parasitizes him Parasite latches on the back of the head and controls what is done, thought and said, causing the system/person/society/etc to be unable to say no to anything. The purpose is to transform the subject.

What to do

Train yourself to pause, and turn on your discernment. It's very frequently thought to be bad to discern, but you must get over it and see if they're doing some sort of Alchemy, or if they mean what they're saying in a mundane or even Christian context.

Otherwise, What are they going to transform? They're going to transform YOU into their image. Because they believe they are "As God", thus they are the only way - they are As God to transform you and the world to re-merge back to the all. Obliterate the real and obliterate the distinctions. In a personal sense, obliterate the self.

Hermetic Religion

In the hermetic religion, the goal is to obliterate your sense of individuality and self-hood to raise yourself to the highest spiritual level (self begotten). At that point, at the very end of that point, you get to merge back into oneness (into the undifferentiated whole).

Hegel

Hegel talks about this - there's a scholar H.S. Harris that commented on this and was quoted in Glen Alexander McGee's book - "In Hegel's view, we have to annihiliate our own selfhood in order to enter the sphere where philosophy herself speaks".

In order to understand what Hegel calls "Philosophy", you have to destroy yourself completely. That makes you a philosopher (or a philosopher King - someone worthy of rule because you have the true wisdom or, as Hegel described it in Science of Logic? "A mysti").

Marx

Marx describes this a bit differently - he goes full blast materialist (how he evaded being classified as a religion). He went Materialist like Feurbach but then said that Feurbach didn't go far enough.

Communism is the positive transcendence of private property.

Private property is human self-estrangement, so what you're transcending is the estrangement of yourself by having private property. What does private property indicate for Marx? -> Individuality.

You're an individual who can own things. You being an individual, separate from your species, is the problem. That's what's caught up in private property. The point of transcending private property is the return to what man really is -> a species being. A being that lives for his entire species. A communalist or a communist.

Communism

The riddle of history solved that knows itself to be the solution.