Woke ideology is doomed to fail because its foundational premises are not grounded in reality. Or, more specifically, “wokeness” is rooted in human emotionalism as opposed to truth. Such applied moral irrationality has also been identified as relativism or subjectivism.
In truth, the Woke Religion is merely one leg of the three-legged stool upon which the central planners behind The Great Reset are currently enthroning themselves. The other two legs underpinning the proposed New World Order are economic and political. Although all three legs of world control are manifesting by means of relativism, or subjectivism, these manifestations are not occurring through random chance. On the contrary,
Hegelian / Marxist Luciferian dialectics are being strategically applied toward the consolidation of global power: solve et coagula vis-à-vis ordo ab chao. Dissolution and coagulation are occurring now so that chaos concludes in the form of controlled order.
The negation of truth allows the Luciferian puppet-masters, and their puppets, to do as thou wilt – and by means of modern technology, they are operating beyond the construct of moral realism that has previously constrained, and ultimately conquered, various tyrants throughout history. Hence, the Religion of Wokeness has been conjured to psychologically manipulate humanity into accepting the new economic and political system that is now manifesting through medical tyranny, war, and the Climate Agenda.
The “ideological subversion” (i.e. demoralization) of the West, as described by former Russian KGB defector turned whistleblower, Yuri Bezmenov, is near complete.
Collectivist utopias derive from the mind of Man, but perhaps the original source is actually as U.S. Climate Envoy John Kerry has recently claimed: extraterrestrial.
There are those who claimed Karl Marx was a Satanist. But, at the very least, Marx and his adherent’s appear to have wielded the Hidden Hand of Freemasonry. What difference, at this point, does it make?
The Bible’s Apostle Paul warned there would be “terrible times” in the latter days as some would profess a form of “godliness but denying its power” and, perhaps, a better definition of moral relativism and woke “virtue signaling” could not be found:
People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— having a form of godliness but denying its power.
– 2 Timothy 3:1-5
Throughout history, the Christian Church has traditionally stood against such unorthodox behavior, but no longer. It seems many Christians now value the socially-perceived “godliness” of acceptance over the power of repentance.
Although British author C.S. Lewis was a Christian apologist and widely regarded as one of the most influential twentieth-century Christian writers, his book “The Abolition of Man” was not a theological or ecclesiastical exploration, per se. It is, instead, a philosophical exercise comparing the reality of what Lewis called “The Tao”… or the sphere of traditional values universal to all cultures… and in relation to the non-reality of faux values that are inherent to ethical subjectivism /moral relativism.
In the final analysis of “The Abolition of Man”, Lewis predicted that a small group of wizards, in the pursuit of power, would perfect psychology and technology to the point they could create a new reality – but the wizards would not be human because they will have erased the age-old system of values that has always constrained humanity across all cultures.
Accordingly, the “Abolition of Man” is divided into four parts:
1.) “Men Without Chest” which addressed the present
2.) “The Way” which addressed the past
3.) “The Abolition of Man” which addresses the future
4.) and the Appendix providing examples of “The Tao” from various cultures throughout history
In the first segment, Lewis critiques a book written by two educators who, perhaps inadvertently, or ignorantly, subverted traditional values by claiming that value judgments are derived solely from feelings. To paraphrase Lewis, modern educators have created “men without chests” – young people with heads full of knowledge and bellies full of instincts, but minus the mediating middle that rightly divides truth as it relates to reality:
By starving the sensibility of our pupils we only make them easier prey to the propagandist when he comes. For famished nature will be avenged and a hard heart is no infallible protection against a soft head.
― C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man
Throughout the book and, especially, in the second part of the book, Lewis explains the totality of “The Tao”:
The Tao, which others may call Natural Law or Traditional Morality or the First Principles of Practical Reason or the First Platitudes, is not one among a series of possible systems of value. It is the sole source of all value judgments. If it is rejected, all value is rejected. If any value is retained, it is retained. The effort to refute it and raise a new system of value in its place is self-contradictory. There has never been, and never will be, a radically new judgment of value in the history of the world. What purport to be new systems or…ideologies…all consist of fragments from the Tao itself, arbitrarily wrenched from their context in the whole and then swollen to madness in their isolation, yet still owing to the Tao and to it alone such validity as they possess.
― C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man
Obviously, training generations with knowledge subject to instincts, and minus ethics, won’t end well. Hence, the book’s third segment, as a warning to mankind: “The Abolition of Man”.
Using the examples of the airplane, wireless radio, and contraceptives, Lewis demonstrates how Man’s acquired power over Nature, through science and technology, is actually “power exercised by some men over other men with Nature as its instrument.”
At the end of the book, Lewis explained the reader’s probable perception of science as progressing forward, like numerals counting upward in order. However, Lewis argued, the last count will be “sui generis”, or unique to all of the other steps before; and, thus, explains how mankind will use science to jump-the-shark, so to speak:
You cannot go on “explaining away” for ever: you will find that you have explained explanation itself away. You cannot go on ‘seeing through’ things for ever. The whole point of seeing through something is to see something through it. It is good that the window should be transparent, because the street or garden beyond it is opaque. How if you saw through the garden too? It is no use trying to “see through” first principles. If you see through everything, then everything is transparent. But a wholly transparent world is an invisible world. To “see through” all things is the same as not to see.
― C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man
In the “Abolition of Man”, Lewis provides the following warning (once again paraphrased): In Mankind’s seemingly fanatical quest to conquer nature (i.e. reality), Man has failed to see that nature is simply engaging in a temporary strategic retreat while Man erases himself.
A few years after the publication of The “Abolition of Man”, Lewis also published a fiction series entitled “The Space Trilogy” whereby the contentions made in “The Abolition of Man” were taken to their full manifestations. In the final book of “Space Trilogy”, entitled “That Hideous Strength”, Lewis showed how western civilization could transition toward a dystopian society controlled by science and technology.
Paradoxically, another British dystopian writer, by the name of George Orwell, reviewed “That Hideous Strength” and wrote the following:
His [Lewis’] book describes the struggle of a little group of sane people against a nightmare that nearly conquers the world. A company of mad scientists – or, perhaps, they are not mad, but have merely destroyed in themselves all human feeling, all notion of good and evil – are plotting to conquer Britain, then the whole planet, and then other planets, until they have brought the universe under their control.
All superfluous life is to be wiped out, all natural forces tamed, the common people are to be used as slaves and vivisection subjects by the ruling caste of scientists, who even see their way to conferring immortal life upon themselves. Man, in short, is to storm the heavens and overthrow the gods, or even to become a god himself.
There is nothing outrageously improbable in such a conspiracy…
– Source: “THE SCIENTISTS TAKE OVER”, Manchester Evening News, 16 August 1945. Reprinted in The Complete Works of George Orwell, ed. Peter Davison, Vol. XVII (1998), No. 2720 (first half), pp. 250–251
In that same critique of “That Hideous Strength”, Orwell claimed the story “would have been stronger without the supernatural elements” – and in a July 2020 article entitled “Dystopian Societies Derive From Displaced Ethics and Values”, this blogger even speculated that Orwell’s novel “1984” may “have been written in response to Lewis – about a world devoid of logic and morality, except without the ‘supernatural elements’”.
Time has shown, however, that Lewis as a prognosticator had remarkable insight – even as he compared science with the supernatural elements of magic. In fact, Lewis considered science as“The Magician’s Twin” and that both science and magic shared the following similarities:
A. Science and magic can function as a religion
B. Science and magic encourage a lack of skepticism
C. Science and magic seek power over reality
Certainly, these similarities would explain the apparent fervor underlying the de facto “faiths” of evolution, climate change, and Covid. In other words, these have become like a religion upon which people accept on faith.
Certainly, there has been a profound lack of skepticism as “followers” have instinctually embraced scientific and medical “authority figures” like witch doctors wearing white coats. People trust “the science”…. whether believing human reason developed by means of a mindless evolutionary process or having faith in Freud’s claims of humanity being solely driven by sub-rational impulses… Lewis identified both evolution and Freud’s theories as proof of how gullible people can be.
Just as archaic magicians wished to harness the power of nature in order to control it, Lewis argued that many scientists have the same objective. In modernity, people have come to view science as savior and as a means to create utopian dreams; except, where magic fails at controlling nature, Lewis warned that science does have the power to bring all of mankind’s dystopian nightmares to fruition.
Lewis claimed that, absent applied ethics derived from beyond the realm of science, the manifestations of what he called “scientific utopianism” would be dire: Sterilization, eugenics, selective breeding, biochemical conditioning, experimentation on humans, and the creation of a new humanity unconstrained by previous restraints.
Consider what the conjurings of the wizards have inaugurated over the last three decades: The “smart” surveillance society, “Dominion” voting machines, bait and switch elections, the January 6th entrapment and persecutions, the subversion of constitutional law by all branches and agencies of U.S. Government, a “woke” society where some are more equal than others , and widespread deception, deaths, and injuries via bio-warfare and vaccine sorcery.
The modern magicians have coopted sovereign governments. They have harnessed the power of Medicine, they own the Media, and they can even manipulate weather patterns – all from outside the view of The Overton Window. The wizards have conjured up the technological magic to make their
narratives spells come true – and as average minds believe what is seen on faith.
Now imagine how an alien deception could expand the faux reality even further, with mind-blowing signs and wonders.
How did we get here? Slowly, then suddenly.
In an undercover operation by Project Veritas, an employee of Pfizer exposed Big Pharma as tinkering with virus mutations to sell more vaccines. But when he was later confronted with his own statements, he threw the mother of all hissy fits. And, after the video footage went viral, Pfizer was forced to respond.
C.S. Lewis was right. Modernity is reaping the whirlwind that modern education has wrought; or as Lewis sublimely summarized in “The Abolition of Man”:
In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.
In like manner, Yuval Harari, an agenda contributor for the World Economic Forum, has claimed mankind will one day be as gods via technological transhumanism.
These wizards have heads full of knowledge that are subject to their arbitrary instincts and whims; and like the Greek myth of Icarus who flew too close to the sun, they will eventually be erased in their vain attempts to overcome reality.
As men without chests, they resemble what the Apostle Paul long ago identified in the Bible’s Second Timothy Chapter three: “Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.”
The Greek term for “word” is “logos” of which the word “logical” is derived – and the writing is on the wall; it appears the words were written there long ago.
Although George Orwell’s book “1984” hauntingly illustrated a collectivist dystopia in the final convulsions of madness, C.S. Lewis and Aldous Huxley most accurately foretold the “Brave New World” of scientific dictatorships, operating sans ethics, which would ultimately drown humanity in an electronic sea of subjectivism.
The wizards have whipped their words far and wide with technology, casting spells meant to divide and conquer; and their magic incantations have been accepted on faith: Flatten the Curve ®. Together Apart.® Safe and Effective. ®
But whereas magic spells are fleeting, right values are eternal – even when they appear not to be.
Time reveals all things.
And, in the interim, those who still can, choose.
During former U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s farewell speech to the nation on January 17, 1961, he warned about a developing “military-industrial complex” that had “the potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power” and that “public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite”.
Three months later, on April 27, 1961 newly elected U.S. President John F. Kennedy warned of “secret societies” infiltrating America, and of “secret oaths”, and about a “monolithic and ruthless conspiracy” that was a “tightly-knit, highly efficient machine” combining “military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations”.
Eisenhower and Kennedy witnessed that of which Lewis and Huxley had warned. These men saw the rise of The Technocracy. And, paradoxically, C.S. Lewis and Aldous Huxley both died on November 22, 1963 of natural causes – the exact day that John F. Kennedy was murdered.
What were the odds?
By Doug “Uncola” Lynn Via https://thetollonline.com/2023/01/31/the-abolition-of-man-amid-the-consequences-of-reality/