This is peripheral to this great article, but it should be recognized that at least in my young time during the 60s in the US that much of the groundwork for the counter-culture was laid by the repressive, stodgy, anti-intellectual, and conformist atmosphere choking us from the 50s. Too bad these brainiacs added their toxic ideology to the reaction., and they did, as the article aptly illustrates.
David Hoffman on Youtube has a number of outtakes from his film "Making Sense of the 60's" Some of them are comical, some thought provoking. Anyway, I like these little videos because they show how this cultural wave affected people 'on the ground'. Here's one of them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNUDSTtLUSg
I think it's important to realize that the 60's are usually portrayed through an American lens, as if this was the only place where radical social change was occurring. Don't forget, much of that era took place against the background of the Vietnam war and the Civil Rights movement, which created all sorts of social tensions that didn't exist in the UK, Europe or even the USSR where similar transitions were taking place.
Speaking as someone who was there, I'd have to say that the 60's were a very personal experience for most who were caught up in it, which is to say it can't really be described with any accuracy without taking that into account.
Personally speaking, I thought the 80's were a far more interesting period, but again, that is a personal observation possibly accounted for by the fact that I'd become more skeptical and a bit more grounded than in 1969 when I first entered the fray.
The so called 60's generation was divided between those before Vietnam and those after Vietnam, not as monolithic as often portrayed and then too there was a cultural and a political faction.
Absolutely, and then there were those that were sort of in between. I put Morrison as a partial Beat because of his poetry but even later there are artists like Patti Smith. I don't think the Beats were subjected to the same level of hijacking and subversion as the Hippies.
They were smaller in number and blended in more with the general population would be my guess. Unless you went to a beat cafe, then they dressed for the occasion. The New Wave partially retrieved that image I think. In my case, my first exposure was to the beat poets, especially Ginsberg. Also, we shouldn't overlook that the beat generation was probably where the first interaction between blacks and whites on level ground occurred, especially in the jazz realm.
I go over how this occurred in the 19th century here: The Shaping of a World Religion: From Jesuits, Freemasons & Anthropologists to MK Ultra & the Counter-Culture Movement PART III https://cynthiachung.substack.com/p/the-shaping-of-a-world-religion-from-6bd (However, this focuses on the American situation, in the near future I plan to write an overview that would also incorporate Europe as well, but hopefully this offers some clarity for now.)
“There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown.”
Perhaps in Russia or China which are countries which have suffered the most under their communist/freemason dictatorships.
The dystopian future you have envisioned will not come to be, and surly not in countries which have experienced freedom.
True is that the new age “soma” is now digital and to be more specific, is being administrated via S.M.A.R.T. “Cell” phones to which people have become compleatly addicted too, but true is also that people are not sheep as some like to make them believe to be.
True is also that when a man is pushed to a corner or to the edge of precipice, he will eventually do all in its power to get out of that corner, or to avoid to fall.
Anyhow, all of the famous so called thinkers by you mentioned, except for Jung, were all brain and soul less sociopaths and brainwashed freemasons, just like the actuators of this patentdemic we are witnessing.
The very fact that all of those sociopaths have no understanding about life out of their glass bubbles, is the reason why they have no chance to succeed.
People are waking up to the facts, and facts are the destroyers of deception and of the deceivers.
People are rising allover the world and no media blackout will be able to contain their inevitably coming to be “fury”.
The winds of change are starting to blow and the coming storm will sett us free.
Read my writings if you are not afraid to learn the untold truth of our history “I advise you to start with my “Holy diet””.
If you choose to do so, please don't mind my pore english and occasional typos, english is not my first, second or third language, but you should be able to understand what I wrote.
Moreover, since you are interested in the occult, I advise you to read also my “bocksaga.substack.com”
Anyhow please, keep some positivity cause we all need it.
Hi Sol, I am not sure if I understood you correctly, but I am not writing about my dystopian vision but rather bringing light to something that has already been envisioned and has already caused a lot of damage. I do not think it will be successful in the long run, and yes, I am very much positive, however, that does not mean we turn a blind eye to the present destructive currents we find ourselves swept up in.
The quote “There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown” is from Aldous Huxley, not myself. Not sure if that was clear for you since you referred to it as my own dystopic vision, which it most certainly is not.
Dear Cynthia, I know what has happened and what is still happening is truly horrible, but you can be also sure that this horror is not going to less for much longer.
People are aware of is going on and everyday more and more people are waking up to the facts.
What I will like to suggest a great writer like you, is to never forget that your readers need clarity and hope.
There is a light at the end of the tunnel, we and our readers need to reach it.
I agree with you Sol. Again, I do not think the Great Reset agenda will succeed and I do think my writing is clear that I do not think it will be successful so, I am not clear what you are drawing from me that makes you think I have given up on all hope or clarity?
To give clarity requires we know a little about the ugly side of history that has caused all this destruction. To know your history is to be empowered my friend not disempowered.
My last post goes through why I am positive that the current destructive trend will not succeed and why I think this is the case. The post before that was also philosophically very optimistic in the approach to the nature of the universe and our relationship to this. And the post before this also reinforces this. So, I really don't think your view is justified that I am just trying to drag everyone down into a pit of hopelessness.
Crowley was an anarchist only in the sense that he thought the current global order was vulgar and wanted a return to aristocracy. He praises figures like Charlemagne, King Chow 周武王, and even some unmentionable contemporaries for their stricture and the opportunities that order can create for art and esoteric revival. He fits into the "traditionalist" school more than the liberal, and that by a mile, and reserves the "anarch" type of Junger for visionaries who, even according to Hegel, should be afforded some latitude by society.
1) I remember reading this other article of yours https://cynthiachung.substack.com/p/understanding-the-tri-fold-nature. How does all this stuff about counter-culture and world religion tie into it? Is this covered in The Shaping of a World Religion: From Jesuits, Freemasons & Anthropologists to MK Ultra & the Counter-Culture Movement PART III?
2) Forgive my naivité and simplemindedness, but would this then mean that Jung was an abhorrent character with perverse megalomaniac intentions? I'm asking this because I've been hearing (often in so called "truther" circles) about the brilliance of his ideas for so long that I'm not sure what to make of this. Same would go for Steiner.
Visions of a dystopian future along the lines of Huxley or Orwell don't alarm me nearly as much as the consequences of the inevitable collapse that will result from their implementation. We've already had an example of this: the Soviet Union.
The problem is easy to understand. Modern industrial society requires an educated cadre of scientists, engineers and technicians in order to function properly. For that, you need intelligent people who are capable of independent thought, however that precondition can't be met in a system based on rigid political orthodoxy which discourages any sort of thinking "outside the box."
Now imagine the pall that cast over K's colleagues when they learned of his fate. Not a good incentive for creative thinking. Safer to just tow the party line. Unfortunately, the party line doesn't prepare you for a nuclear emergency such as occurred at Chernobyl, which likely would never have happened if: 1. the people in charge were actually qualified to run the thing, and 2. the people who recognized the inherent danger in the design weren't afraid to speak up.
Now multiply that by the number of reactors currently in world service, which is about 400 with another 300 on the way. Not all are as dangerous as the Soviet RBMK design, but some definitely are. That's just one example. Now apply that to everything from mining to energy, to the electrical grid, to building and maintaining the equipment needed for industrial production, then add in transportation and distribution of everything needed for that to continue. That's without even considering the improvements needed to account for obsolescence, plus mitigating the unintended consequences of poor design and a lack of properly trained workers.
Sure it can persist for a time - 74 years in the case of the USSR - but eventually it will fail at a critical point, after which all bets are off. It's a miracle actually that the USSR survived the collapse without much bloodshed, but can the same result be expected in America, which already suffers from the education deficit brought about by the replacement of (relatively) free markets by the rigid ideology currently in place? What you end up with is something like the 1985 parody of 1984 - 'Brazil' where nothing works properly anymore.
The only thing they left out of that film is the finale, where things break down past the point where people's daily needs can be met, after which it's every man for himself. Basically 'The Walking Dead' minus the zombies, although there'll no doubt be a few of those as well.
Most people have no idea how fragile industrial society really is. It's not a complete stand alone system that just needs occasional tinkering - it never was. It's a work in progress that requires constant attention and most critically, creative thinking, which you'll never achieve in a totalitarian state, regardless of what name it goes by.
As for retreating into an idyllic pagan past that never existed except in people's imagination, good luck with that once desperate city dwellers find you. You better have a plan for that eventuality, and there goes the carefree atmosphere once you realize that survival requires harsh measures, including towards your own people who've lost touch with reality. That kind of thing works well enough when it has the external support of an industrial society, but even the Amish depend on that for some of their needs, and they've had over 200 years to work things out.
One of the most ridiculous concepts to emerge from the so-called social sciences is this idea of a 'post-industrial' society. It's pure BS conjured up by people with no experience at running an actual manufacturing economy. There's nothing 'post-industrial' about the present world when you take China into account. All that's happened is the pieces have been moved around on the board, facilitated by another massive intellectual fraud known as fractional reserve banking and international finance.
I better leave it at that before I have a stroke because this stuff just makes me apoplectic.
Cynthia, what is your definition of anarchist, or anarchism? What are their beliefs?
I think this explanation would go a long way toward giving better context to this discussion. We are given this term many times in this article, but we are never told what it means. We are left to give the term form in our own imaginations, which might be subject to all kinds of biases.
Who, or what, is an anarchist, for the purposes of this discussion?
Thank you Antonio for your question. I am not sure if you had the time to read the entire four-part series to which this paper is included in. The players that I focus on in this series, which I hope I have successfully demonstrated, use anarchism as a tool that is ultimately used against the people. In this series the theme is clear, they equate the destruction of western civilisation as a necessity in order to build their utopia. This branch of anarchism thus equates destruction with rebirth and not coincidentally falls within the same sphere of the fascist ideology, in fact, there was a clear attempt to unite the two. You can read a paper I wrote on this https://cynthiachung.substack.com/p/the-machiavellians-osscia-james-burnhams. That is, there was a conscious effort to radicalize communism, socialism, anarchism to be united with fascism. It is not just religion that can be radicalized, any ideology can be targeted for this as well. I have no issue with the general meaning of anarchism which is a political theory advocating the abolition of hierarchical government and the organization of society on a voluntary, cooperative basis WITHOUT RECOURSE TO FORCE OR COMPULSION. However, in order for this to occur, one also needs to recognize that the people must be worthy, qualified, of such an ideal, such a lofty responsibility. The French Revolution failed because the people had thought the solution to their freedom lay in destruction, to equal out the playing field. What was the result? Bloody mayhem. The Jacobin Terror and it was truly a terror with a never ending line-up to the guillotine for months while the people were thrown into greater poverty and tyranny. As a result of the Jacobin Terror the people again craved order and structure. Who was to bestow this so-called order onto the French people? Napoleon. That is, it was not the "elites" or "bourgeoisie" or "oligarchs" who ruined the French Revolution and made it the failure it was, it was the French people themselves who had descended into a bloodlust. As Schiller would write of this revolution, “How could it be that such a pregnant moment, such a moment full of opportunity, failed?…This great moment had found a little people.” This does not mean that anarchism as I defined earlier as the abolition of hierarchical government is not possible, nor something that we should not strive for. I think it is a good thing to strive for. However, the solution does not lay in destruction of present civilization but in the ennobling of individuals such that we do not need laws to keep people from committing crimes, such that people love wisdom and not just short-sighted happiness and comfort. This is what Schiller, who was a revolutionary, was calling for. That no anarchistic revolution would succeed in creating the ideal which is a people fit to rule themselves if they had not yet qualified themselves to the task. If you are interested you can read more about Schiller's work in this here https://cynthiachung.substack.com/p/an-introduction-to-friedrich-schiller-6e6.
Hi Cynthia- This seems a good place to mention that if you look at Rudolf Steiner's work in earnest you would see that he has a lot in common with Schiller. I notice his name is getting lumped into these articles because of his short affiliations with some of these groups and people. Upon a close inspection of his own words I think you will find that he did not want to obliterate the past or the intellect. He very much wanted to ennoble people and culture. It seems to me he parted ways with groups when he did not approve of their direction. He saw cultural trends as "streams" which could run clear and bring health but which could be made "dirty" through unhealthy influences... thus having a poisonous effect at which time one should leave the stream. He was very open to exploring different streams and so had a lot of associations. This could be the sign of someone being intellectually curious rather than some sort of nefarious insider. He spoke explicitly about "secret brotherhoods" and often criticized Annie Besant. It is true he speaks favorably about pagan rites of the past... saying they were part of our maturing. But he also says that we must forge new ways of connecting with the divine because we do not have the same needs as the people of the past. He certainly did not advocate drug use. His book on "How to Reach Higher Worlds" spends the first chapters urging the adept to increase his sense of wonder and appreciation for reality. He implores the seeker to increase her sense of moral responsibility. He goes on to say that if one does not do this first peril will follow. While he was not opposed to developing technologies he also urged that we should strive to increase our moral understandings at pace with technological developments. He often repeats that in not striving for wisdom the race would be doomed to technological slavery. His words are nuanced, yet clear. I am not an Anthroposophist, and have only been reading Steiner for about a year- so I don't want to claim expertise here. But it has been bothering me that I keep seeing him lumped in with Crowley and the like (not just here). I think if you did an honest assessment of his work, you'd see he has more in common with Schiller than Crowley. Start with the Karma of Untruthfullness then maybe do a search on the Steiner archive website for "secret brotherhoods". He always champions the intellect and reason as prizes the human race has won with much striving. His main message involves strengthening our heart, which unites our animal nature (lower) with our divine nature (head) through following the example of Christ. This is not similar to Crowley or Otto Gross at all. He does have lots of "kooky" ideas which I am not readily swallowing, but he seems sincere and more positive than negative in my opinion.
Thanks for your good work! It is very valuable and I always enjoy it.
"However favorable may have been the conditions for mystic phenomena, it should be clearly understood that Jesus of Nazareth never resorted to such methods for communion with the Paradise Father. Jesus had no subconscious delusions or superconscious illusions." The Urantia Book, Paper 100, Section 5.
Thank you for this very informative essay Cynthia. Regarding “sex magic” I advise you to do some research on the connections between the OTO and the gnostic church. I also advise you to do some research on the oldest and once most secretive mythology/history on the planet. (Bock saga).
Symbology is essential to show the links and mentions of the secret societies
From the Bock saga you will learn the true meaning of sex magic.
You will also learn the true meaning of the Ouroboros or snake biting its own tail, and the reason why is now and as always been the ultimate symbol to describe fertility and eternity.
Feel free to ask me more about it ;)
Look forward to the next part of this and more of your great essays.
Since you have done such a great job exposing the Progressive movement and how long it has been in motion, at some point will you suggest a counter that those who are feeling overrun can employ or will you simply advise that this is the way of mankind/civilization that must be played out and endured?
Hi Martin, yes Part 4 is coming but it probably won't be published for a few weeks. I am most certainly not suggesting we adapt to this current that I am exposing in this series. The first step is always to be aware of where the roots that dominate much of popular thinking in the west come from. Many still regard the counter-culture movement as a good thing, thus it is important they understand, that even though well-meaning people were caught up in all of this, that the movement has always had a sinister intention from its very inception. In terms of a solution, this is pretty much the raison d'etre for the non-profit organisation I started with my husband, called the Rising Tide Foundation, which you can view here https://risingtidefoundation.net/ . It is meant to be primarily educational and focuses on the solutions to the problems we see today and the need for a dialogue between the east and west which includes our understanding of the history and culture that comes with this. We do weekly classes, with a focus on the need to rebuild a healthy culture, which contrary to this idea of COUNTER-culture, requires that we take the best from the past, a classical cultural background, rather than attempting to build everything anew from broken scraps after we have smashed everything to pieces, which is inherently an anarchistic view that has done much damage worldwide during the 20th century and on. The solution to this problem is thus first recognition that it is a problem and second I would say in terms of a more immediate solution, is the need to educate ourselves about the best of our culture in the past and that of other countries in the east. Much of the problem today stems from the fact that westerners do not know history, they do not know their own history and they do not know the history of other cultures. I know this is the kind of answer that many in the west do not like hearing but that is precisely the problem. We are in a situation today that is full of injustice, but it is also a consequence of the decisions western people have made. That is, the western people are victims of their government, yes this is true, but they also have not done anything to really address it in a serious manner, since the days of protesting Vietnam which was snuffed out by a wave of assassinations including JFK, since then there has been an absolute failure to address a government system that has become a monstrosity and how this has also affected other countries' well being across the globe. People were comfortable enough and so there was not a lot of push back for decades! Thus, the western people need to take some responsibility for where they find themselves today, it is not just pure victimization. By constantly turning a blind eye to the crimes committed, such as the very evident Iraq war being based on a lie, it is no surprise that such a monstrous injustice would come home to roost. But most western people only complain when it comes home to roost, that is not right. And if a society is encouraged to be overly individualized (the me generation) and cares mainly for their immediate welfare, this society will be doomed for they do not have the moral fiber to bring about something that can last for generations since they do not think of the welfare of the future, only the welfare of the now which will cause only further and further compromise with such a monstrosity, whereas welfare for the future is to be willing to suffer and even die for a better future. Thus, the solution is for people to understand how their culture was targeted for destruction, since this is the heart and soul of a people, they must come to understand what were the better parts of their culture that they need to return to and build upon, and they must correct the ignorance they have of other cultures in the world which actually have a lot of wisdom to offer. The solution is that we must learn to see clearly who are our true friends and who are our true foes. This is not something I can prescribe or dictate for you, but as I said, we offer a curriculum of a sort on our Rising Tide Foundation website (with articles and lectures and readings of classics) that aim to help facilitate such a process. However, to go from blindness to knowledge takes effort on the individual's part, it is not something that can simply be given. This is was a proper educational process is supposed to do, but as I am sure you are aware, this has been destroyed here in the west, people are taught to simply memorise and have the answer their teacher wants to hear. Thus in the end, the solution in part lies in your decision to want to acquire wisdom, and if you desire such a thing, it will require much of your time and effort to set yourself upon that life long path.
“Thus, the solution is for people to understand how their culture was targeted for destruction...”
Well said. It really was targeted for destruction. And I think it continues to be targeted in various way and sometimes targeted at various subgroups/cultures.
While there was a wave of creativity in the 60’s and early 70’s, in art and science, rooted in the space created by blowing up tradition, in conjunction with space created by economic prosperity, I think the engineered counter culture “movement” ultimately led to a massive existential crisis, which I believe is what you are saying in some sense (?). To quote Nietzsche : sometimes when you stare into the abyss, it stares back at you.
Once culture and tradition were smashed, it left in its wake a sea of paranoid freaks, susceptible to suggestibility, as you have alluded in other context.
This all reminds me of Adam Curtis “Fuck you buddy” and game theory. I think Sargant was highlighted in that doc as well.
yes, you can email me using this address cynthiachung.substack.com, it should work. otherwise, you can register for free and when you receive a welcome email you can reply to that and contact me.
This is peripheral to this great article, but it should be recognized that at least in my young time during the 60s in the US that much of the groundwork for the counter-culture was laid by the repressive, stodgy, anti-intellectual, and conformist atmosphere choking us from the 50s. Too bad these brainiacs added their toxic ideology to the reaction., and they did, as the article aptly illustrates.
David Hoffman on Youtube has a number of outtakes from his film "Making Sense of the 60's" Some of them are comical, some thought provoking. Anyway, I like these little videos because they show how this cultural wave affected people 'on the ground'. Here's one of them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNUDSTtLUSg
I think it's important to realize that the 60's are usually portrayed through an American lens, as if this was the only place where radical social change was occurring. Don't forget, much of that era took place against the background of the Vietnam war and the Civil Rights movement, which created all sorts of social tensions that didn't exist in the UK, Europe or even the USSR where similar transitions were taking place.
Speaking as someone who was there, I'd have to say that the 60's were a very personal experience for most who were caught up in it, which is to say it can't really be described with any accuracy without taking that into account.
Personally speaking, I thought the 80's were a far more interesting period, but again, that is a personal observation possibly accounted for by the fact that I'd become more skeptical and a bit more grounded than in 1969 when I first entered the fray.
The so called 60's generation was divided between those before Vietnam and those after Vietnam, not as monolithic as often portrayed and then too there was a cultural and a political faction.
Agreed. It's also worth mentioning that the 60's were preceded by the 'Beat Generation' which doesn't get as much attention as it deserves.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beat_Generation
<addendum>
Mustn't forget the spiritualists either, like Blavatsky, Crowley et al. This thing goes back a long way actually.
Speaking of which, what do you call a clairvoyant midget that escapes from prison?
A: a small medium at large.
Absolutely, and then there were those that were sort of in between. I put Morrison as a partial Beat because of his poetry but even later there are artists like Patti Smith. I don't think the Beats were subjected to the same level of hijacking and subversion as the Hippies.
They were smaller in number and blended in more with the general population would be my guess. Unless you went to a beat cafe, then they dressed for the occasion. The New Wave partially retrieved that image I think. In my case, my first exposure was to the beat poets, especially Ginsberg. Also, we shouldn't overlook that the beat generation was probably where the first interaction between blacks and whites on level ground occurred, especially in the jazz realm.
So how did this movement metastasize into Masonic lodges in cities and towns across America?
I go over how this occurred in the 19th century here: The Shaping of a World Religion: From Jesuits, Freemasons & Anthropologists to MK Ultra & the Counter-Culture Movement PART III https://cynthiachung.substack.com/p/the-shaping-of-a-world-religion-from-6bd (However, this focuses on the American situation, in the near future I plan to write an overview that would also incorporate Europe as well, but hopefully this offers some clarity for now.)
It didn't. The two are quite independent.
“There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown.”
Perhaps in Russia or China which are countries which have suffered the most under their communist/freemason dictatorships.
The dystopian future you have envisioned will not come to be, and surly not in countries which have experienced freedom.
True is that the new age “soma” is now digital and to be more specific, is being administrated via S.M.A.R.T. “Cell” phones to which people have become compleatly addicted too, but true is also that people are not sheep as some like to make them believe to be.
True is also that when a man is pushed to a corner or to the edge of precipice, he will eventually do all in its power to get out of that corner, or to avoid to fall.
Anyhow, all of the famous so called thinkers by you mentioned, except for Jung, were all brain and soul less sociopaths and brainwashed freemasons, just like the actuators of this patentdemic we are witnessing.
The very fact that all of those sociopaths have no understanding about life out of their glass bubbles, is the reason why they have no chance to succeed.
People are waking up to the facts, and facts are the destroyers of deception and of the deceivers.
People are rising allover the world and no media blackout will be able to contain their inevitably coming to be “fury”.
The winds of change are starting to blow and the coming storm will sett us free.
Read my writings if you are not afraid to learn the untold truth of our history “I advise you to start with my “Holy diet””.
If you choose to do so, please don't mind my pore english and occasional typos, english is not my first, second or third language, but you should be able to understand what I wrote.
Moreover, since you are interested in the occult, I advise you to read also my “bocksaga.substack.com”
Anyhow please, keep some positivity cause we all need it.
Thanks for your article.
Sol
Hi Sol, I am not sure if I understood you correctly, but I am not writing about my dystopian vision but rather bringing light to something that has already been envisioned and has already caused a lot of damage. I do not think it will be successful in the long run, and yes, I am very much positive, however, that does not mean we turn a blind eye to the present destructive currents we find ourselves swept up in.
The quote “There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown” is from Aldous Huxley, not myself. Not sure if that was clear for you since you referred to it as my own dystopic vision, which it most certainly is not.
Yes, now It is clear.
Thank you.
Dear Cynthia, I know what has happened and what is still happening is truly horrible, but you can be also sure that this horror is not going to less for much longer.
People are aware of is going on and everyday more and more people are waking up to the facts.
What I will like to suggest a great writer like you, is to never forget that your readers need clarity and hope.
There is a light at the end of the tunnel, we and our readers need to reach it.
Sol
I agree with you Sol. Again, I do not think the Great Reset agenda will succeed and I do think my writing is clear that I do not think it will be successful so, I am not clear what you are drawing from me that makes you think I have given up on all hope or clarity?
To give clarity requires we know a little about the ugly side of history that has caused all this destruction. To know your history is to be empowered my friend not disempowered.
My last post goes through why I am positive that the current destructive trend will not succeed and why I think this is the case. The post before that was also philosophically very optimistic in the approach to the nature of the universe and our relationship to this. And the post before this also reinforces this. So, I really don't think your view is justified that I am just trying to drag everyone down into a pit of hopelessness.
And I am here to give you power.
You are a great writer and human being.
Yes indeed, knowledge is power, and so I am glad to share mine as you are with sharing yours.
I hope to give you even more courage and good feelings, as I know the weight of knowledge is some times hard to bare.
I am glad to have found you here and look forward to read your future works.
Humanity will succeed.
Thank you for existing and sharing :)
Sol.
Crowley was an anarchist only in the sense that he thought the current global order was vulgar and wanted a return to aristocracy. He praises figures like Charlemagne, King Chow 周武王, and even some unmentionable contemporaries for their stricture and the opportunities that order can create for art and esoteric revival. He fits into the "traditionalist" school more than the liberal, and that by a mile, and reserves the "anarch" type of Junger for visionaries who, even according to Hegel, should be afforded some latitude by society.
Hi Cynthia, great article. A couple of questions.
1) I remember reading this other article of yours https://cynthiachung.substack.com/p/understanding-the-tri-fold-nature. How does all this stuff about counter-culture and world religion tie into it? Is this covered in The Shaping of a World Religion: From Jesuits, Freemasons & Anthropologists to MK Ultra & the Counter-Culture Movement PART III?
2) Forgive my naivité and simplemindedness, but would this then mean that Jung was an abhorrent character with perverse megalomaniac intentions? I'm asking this because I've been hearing (often in so called "truther" circles) about the brilliance of his ideas for so long that I'm not sure what to make of this. Same would go for Steiner.
Visions of a dystopian future along the lines of Huxley or Orwell don't alarm me nearly as much as the consequences of the inevitable collapse that will result from their implementation. We've already had an example of this: the Soviet Union.
The problem is easy to understand. Modern industrial society requires an educated cadre of scientists, engineers and technicians in order to function properly. For that, you need intelligent people who are capable of independent thought, however that precondition can't be met in a system based on rigid political orthodoxy which discourages any sort of thinking "outside the box."
Here's an example of what I mean:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Kondratiev
Now imagine the pall that cast over K's colleagues when they learned of his fate. Not a good incentive for creative thinking. Safer to just tow the party line. Unfortunately, the party line doesn't prepare you for a nuclear emergency such as occurred at Chernobyl, which likely would never have happened if: 1. the people in charge were actually qualified to run the thing, and 2. the people who recognized the inherent danger in the design weren't afraid to speak up.
Now multiply that by the number of reactors currently in world service, which is about 400 with another 300 on the way. Not all are as dangerous as the Soviet RBMK design, but some definitely are. That's just one example. Now apply that to everything from mining to energy, to the electrical grid, to building and maintaining the equipment needed for industrial production, then add in transportation and distribution of everything needed for that to continue. That's without even considering the improvements needed to account for obsolescence, plus mitigating the unintended consequences of poor design and a lack of properly trained workers.
Sure it can persist for a time - 74 years in the case of the USSR - but eventually it will fail at a critical point, after which all bets are off. It's a miracle actually that the USSR survived the collapse without much bloodshed, but can the same result be expected in America, which already suffers from the education deficit brought about by the replacement of (relatively) free markets by the rigid ideology currently in place? What you end up with is something like the 1985 parody of 1984 - 'Brazil' where nothing works properly anymore.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil_(1985_film)
The only thing they left out of that film is the finale, where things break down past the point where people's daily needs can be met, after which it's every man for himself. Basically 'The Walking Dead' minus the zombies, although there'll no doubt be a few of those as well.
Most people have no idea how fragile industrial society really is. It's not a complete stand alone system that just needs occasional tinkering - it never was. It's a work in progress that requires constant attention and most critically, creative thinking, which you'll never achieve in a totalitarian state, regardless of what name it goes by.
As for retreating into an idyllic pagan past that never existed except in people's imagination, good luck with that once desperate city dwellers find you. You better have a plan for that eventuality, and there goes the carefree atmosphere once you realize that survival requires harsh measures, including towards your own people who've lost touch with reality. That kind of thing works well enough when it has the external support of an industrial society, but even the Amish depend on that for some of their needs, and they've had over 200 years to work things out.
One of the most ridiculous concepts to emerge from the so-called social sciences is this idea of a 'post-industrial' society. It's pure BS conjured up by people with no experience at running an actual manufacturing economy. There's nothing 'post-industrial' about the present world when you take China into account. All that's happened is the pieces have been moved around on the board, facilitated by another massive intellectual fraud known as fractional reserve banking and international finance.
I better leave it at that before I have a stroke because this stuff just makes me apoplectic.
This was my first reading of yours, but have you posted about the book "Changing Images of Man" in regards to social engineering?
Cynthia, what is your definition of anarchist, or anarchism? What are their beliefs?
I think this explanation would go a long way toward giving better context to this discussion. We are given this term many times in this article, but we are never told what it means. We are left to give the term form in our own imaginations, which might be subject to all kinds of biases.
Who, or what, is an anarchist, for the purposes of this discussion?
Thank you Antonio for your question. I am not sure if you had the time to read the entire four-part series to which this paper is included in. The players that I focus on in this series, which I hope I have successfully demonstrated, use anarchism as a tool that is ultimately used against the people. In this series the theme is clear, they equate the destruction of western civilisation as a necessity in order to build their utopia. This branch of anarchism thus equates destruction with rebirth and not coincidentally falls within the same sphere of the fascist ideology, in fact, there was a clear attempt to unite the two. You can read a paper I wrote on this https://cynthiachung.substack.com/p/the-machiavellians-osscia-james-burnhams. That is, there was a conscious effort to radicalize communism, socialism, anarchism to be united with fascism. It is not just religion that can be radicalized, any ideology can be targeted for this as well. I have no issue with the general meaning of anarchism which is a political theory advocating the abolition of hierarchical government and the organization of society on a voluntary, cooperative basis WITHOUT RECOURSE TO FORCE OR COMPULSION. However, in order for this to occur, one also needs to recognize that the people must be worthy, qualified, of such an ideal, such a lofty responsibility. The French Revolution failed because the people had thought the solution to their freedom lay in destruction, to equal out the playing field. What was the result? Bloody mayhem. The Jacobin Terror and it was truly a terror with a never ending line-up to the guillotine for months while the people were thrown into greater poverty and tyranny. As a result of the Jacobin Terror the people again craved order and structure. Who was to bestow this so-called order onto the French people? Napoleon. That is, it was not the "elites" or "bourgeoisie" or "oligarchs" who ruined the French Revolution and made it the failure it was, it was the French people themselves who had descended into a bloodlust. As Schiller would write of this revolution, “How could it be that such a pregnant moment, such a moment full of opportunity, failed?…This great moment had found a little people.” This does not mean that anarchism as I defined earlier as the abolition of hierarchical government is not possible, nor something that we should not strive for. I think it is a good thing to strive for. However, the solution does not lay in destruction of present civilization but in the ennobling of individuals such that we do not need laws to keep people from committing crimes, such that people love wisdom and not just short-sighted happiness and comfort. This is what Schiller, who was a revolutionary, was calling for. That no anarchistic revolution would succeed in creating the ideal which is a people fit to rule themselves if they had not yet qualified themselves to the task. If you are interested you can read more about Schiller's work in this here https://cynthiachung.substack.com/p/an-introduction-to-friedrich-schiller-6e6.
Hi Cynthia- This seems a good place to mention that if you look at Rudolf Steiner's work in earnest you would see that he has a lot in common with Schiller. I notice his name is getting lumped into these articles because of his short affiliations with some of these groups and people. Upon a close inspection of his own words I think you will find that he did not want to obliterate the past or the intellect. He very much wanted to ennoble people and culture. It seems to me he parted ways with groups when he did not approve of their direction. He saw cultural trends as "streams" which could run clear and bring health but which could be made "dirty" through unhealthy influences... thus having a poisonous effect at which time one should leave the stream. He was very open to exploring different streams and so had a lot of associations. This could be the sign of someone being intellectually curious rather than some sort of nefarious insider. He spoke explicitly about "secret brotherhoods" and often criticized Annie Besant. It is true he speaks favorably about pagan rites of the past... saying they were part of our maturing. But he also says that we must forge new ways of connecting with the divine because we do not have the same needs as the people of the past. He certainly did not advocate drug use. His book on "How to Reach Higher Worlds" spends the first chapters urging the adept to increase his sense of wonder and appreciation for reality. He implores the seeker to increase her sense of moral responsibility. He goes on to say that if one does not do this first peril will follow. While he was not opposed to developing technologies he also urged that we should strive to increase our moral understandings at pace with technological developments. He often repeats that in not striving for wisdom the race would be doomed to technological slavery. His words are nuanced, yet clear. I am not an Anthroposophist, and have only been reading Steiner for about a year- so I don't want to claim expertise here. But it has been bothering me that I keep seeing him lumped in with Crowley and the like (not just here). I think if you did an honest assessment of his work, you'd see he has more in common with Schiller than Crowley. Start with the Karma of Untruthfullness then maybe do a search on the Steiner archive website for "secret brotherhoods". He always champions the intellect and reason as prizes the human race has won with much striving. His main message involves strengthening our heart, which unites our animal nature (lower) with our divine nature (head) through following the example of Christ. This is not similar to Crowley or Otto Gross at all. He does have lots of "kooky" ideas which I am not readily swallowing, but he seems sincere and more positive than negative in my opinion.
Thanks for your good work! It is very valuable and I always enjoy it.
Getting a 'page not found' message on that last link.
Just a note: Max Weber died in 1920 and had nothing to do with the IfS.
The madness of the “modern” intellectual where it’s felt everything had been denied to them as a pampered immature child would think of its universe.
Death awaited its Inspiration rather than to live in its undefinable ways.
They nailed it down onto their cross.
"However favorable may have been the conditions for mystic phenomena, it should be clearly understood that Jesus of Nazareth never resorted to such methods for communion with the Paradise Father. Jesus had no subconscious delusions or superconscious illusions." The Urantia Book, Paper 100, Section 5.
Thank you for this very informative essay Cynthia. Regarding “sex magic” I advise you to do some research on the connections between the OTO and the gnostic church. I also advise you to do some research on the oldest and once most secretive mythology/history on the planet. (Bock saga).
Here a link to a page.
https://bocksaga.substack.com/.
Symbology is essential to show the links and mentions of the secret societies
From the Bock saga you will learn the true meaning of sex magic.
You will also learn the true meaning of the Ouroboros or snake biting its own tail, and the reason why is now and as always been the ultimate symbol to describe fertility and eternity.
Feel free to ask me more about it ;)
Look forward to the next part of this and more of your great essays.
Is part 4 forthcoming soon?
Since you have done such a great job exposing the Progressive movement and how long it has been in motion, at some point will you suggest a counter that those who are feeling overrun can employ or will you simply advise that this is the way of mankind/civilization that must be played out and endured?
Hi Martin, yes Part 4 is coming but it probably won't be published for a few weeks. I am most certainly not suggesting we adapt to this current that I am exposing in this series. The first step is always to be aware of where the roots that dominate much of popular thinking in the west come from. Many still regard the counter-culture movement as a good thing, thus it is important they understand, that even though well-meaning people were caught up in all of this, that the movement has always had a sinister intention from its very inception. In terms of a solution, this is pretty much the raison d'etre for the non-profit organisation I started with my husband, called the Rising Tide Foundation, which you can view here https://risingtidefoundation.net/ . It is meant to be primarily educational and focuses on the solutions to the problems we see today and the need for a dialogue between the east and west which includes our understanding of the history and culture that comes with this. We do weekly classes, with a focus on the need to rebuild a healthy culture, which contrary to this idea of COUNTER-culture, requires that we take the best from the past, a classical cultural background, rather than attempting to build everything anew from broken scraps after we have smashed everything to pieces, which is inherently an anarchistic view that has done much damage worldwide during the 20th century and on. The solution to this problem is thus first recognition that it is a problem and second I would say in terms of a more immediate solution, is the need to educate ourselves about the best of our culture in the past and that of other countries in the east. Much of the problem today stems from the fact that westerners do not know history, they do not know their own history and they do not know the history of other cultures. I know this is the kind of answer that many in the west do not like hearing but that is precisely the problem. We are in a situation today that is full of injustice, but it is also a consequence of the decisions western people have made. That is, the western people are victims of their government, yes this is true, but they also have not done anything to really address it in a serious manner, since the days of protesting Vietnam which was snuffed out by a wave of assassinations including JFK, since then there has been an absolute failure to address a government system that has become a monstrosity and how this has also affected other countries' well being across the globe. People were comfortable enough and so there was not a lot of push back for decades! Thus, the western people need to take some responsibility for where they find themselves today, it is not just pure victimization. By constantly turning a blind eye to the crimes committed, such as the very evident Iraq war being based on a lie, it is no surprise that such a monstrous injustice would come home to roost. But most western people only complain when it comes home to roost, that is not right. And if a society is encouraged to be overly individualized (the me generation) and cares mainly for their immediate welfare, this society will be doomed for they do not have the moral fiber to bring about something that can last for generations since they do not think of the welfare of the future, only the welfare of the now which will cause only further and further compromise with such a monstrosity, whereas welfare for the future is to be willing to suffer and even die for a better future. Thus, the solution is for people to understand how their culture was targeted for destruction, since this is the heart and soul of a people, they must come to understand what were the better parts of their culture that they need to return to and build upon, and they must correct the ignorance they have of other cultures in the world which actually have a lot of wisdom to offer. The solution is that we must learn to see clearly who are our true friends and who are our true foes. This is not something I can prescribe or dictate for you, but as I said, we offer a curriculum of a sort on our Rising Tide Foundation website (with articles and lectures and readings of classics) that aim to help facilitate such a process. However, to go from blindness to knowledge takes effort on the individual's part, it is not something that can simply be given. This is was a proper educational process is supposed to do, but as I am sure you are aware, this has been destroyed here in the west, people are taught to simply memorise and have the answer their teacher wants to hear. Thus in the end, the solution in part lies in your decision to want to acquire wisdom, and if you desire such a thing, it will require much of your time and effort to set yourself upon that life long path.
“Thus, the solution is for people to understand how their culture was targeted for destruction...”
Well said. It really was targeted for destruction. And I think it continues to be targeted in various way and sometimes targeted at various subgroups/cultures.
While there was a wave of creativity in the 60’s and early 70’s, in art and science, rooted in the space created by blowing up tradition, in conjunction with space created by economic prosperity, I think the engineered counter culture “movement” ultimately led to a massive existential crisis, which I believe is what you are saying in some sense (?). To quote Nietzsche : sometimes when you stare into the abyss, it stares back at you.
Once culture and tradition were smashed, it left in its wake a sea of paranoid freaks, susceptible to suggestibility, as you have alluded in other context.
This all reminds me of Adam Curtis “Fuck you buddy” and game theory. I think Sargant was highlighted in that doc as well.
Anyway, nuff said...thanks another good article.
I attempted to reply to your email personally as I didn't want all I wrote on public forum. Is there a means for private responses? Thanks.
yes, you can email me using this address cynthiachung.substack.com, it should work. otherwise, you can register for free and when you receive a welcome email you can reply to that and contact me.
Thanks!