Individualism. by Dean Gotcher

by
Dean Gotcher

"It is not individualism that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society is the necessary framework through which freedom and individuality are made realities." (Karl Marx, in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx)

What is it about individualism that Karl Marx hated?

"For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." 1 John 2:16

What Karl Marx was saying, "It is not" having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate one's self in order to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., in order to do the father's/Father's will that "fulfills the individual," "on the contrary" it is compromise, i.e., having to set aside established commands, rules, facts, and truth that get in the way of relationships, i.e., negating the father's/Father's authority in one's thoughts that "freedom" from the guilty conscience that the father's/Father's authority engenders for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for lusting after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., that the current situation and/or people are stimulating, i.e., that "freedom" to do wrong, disobey, sin, i.e., to lust after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., that the current situation and/or people are stimulating, i.e., that "freedom" to be one's self, i.e., to be only of the world is actualized, i.e., becomes reality. The 'justification' of self, i.e., "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life" and the negation of the father's/Father's authority go hand in hand. You can not have one without the other.

"No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." Matthew 6:24

"Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?" Romans 6:16

"[E]very one of us shall give account of himself to God." Romans 14:12

"For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" Matthew 16:26

It is what distinguishes (divides) you from others that creates individualism. No matter how many people are in the room or in the world, You are You, i.e., you are an individual talking to your self—talking to your self about who (or what) you like, i.e., who you want and who you do not want to be around (or be around you) as well as talking to you self about what you did in the past that was right or wrong, what is the right thing (and not the wrong thing) to be doing in the 'moment,' and/or what is the right (and not wrong thing) to do in the future. To get the point across I tell people there are two of you. There is you and there is your self. You can talk to your self as I can talk to my self. You can not talk to my self as I can not talk to your self. Only you, as an individual can talk to your self as only I, as an individual can talk to my self. No one can know (for certain) what you, as an individual are talking to your self about, except the Lord. It is here, as you will see that Karl Marx establishes self, i.e., man's carnal nature, i.e., lust, i.e., self interest as the 'drive' and the 'purpose' for life, i.e., for communication.

"For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." Hebrews 4:12

"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths." Proverb. 3: 5-6

When you leave "the word of God" out of your conversation with your self, you (in your mind) become God, establishing right and wrong behavior (in your mind) upon your carnal nature, with right being that which satisfies/fulfills (or promises to satisfy/fulfill) your carnal desires, i.e., your lusts, i.e., your self interest of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., that the current situation and/or people are stimulating and wrong being anyone who gets in the way.

"There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 16:25

"And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever." 1 John 2:16

"Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the Holy family, the former must then itself be destroyed [vernichtet, i.e., annihilated, i.e., negated] in theory and in practice." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #4)

What the "earthly family" and "Holy family" have in common is the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the father/Father telling his children what is right and what is wrong behavior, requiring them to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate their self in order to do right and not wrong according his/His established commands, rules, facts, and truth, holding them accountable for their actions. Making the child's (his) carnal nature ("human nature"), i.e., the child's carnal desires, i.e., lust, i.e., the child's self interest of the 'moment,' that the world stimulates the 'drive' of life and its augmentation the 'purpose' Karl Marx could only hate the father's/Father's authority that got in the way. Sigmund Freud felt the same way.

"'It is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one's father or abstained from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same [the father no longer exercises his authority over the family]." "... the hatred against patriarchal suppression—a 'barrier to incest,' ... the desire (for the sons) to return to the mother culminates in the rebellion of the exiled sons, the collective killing and devouring of the father." (Sigmund Freud in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: a psychological inquiry into Freud)

The Father's authority is the core of the gospel message.

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise." "I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." "For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." John 5:19, 30; 12:47-50

"And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." Hebrews 12:5-11

"Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty." 2 Corinthians 6:14-18

"Protestantism ["Doing your best as unto the Lord," "The priesthood of all believers," etc.,] was the strongest force in the extension of cold rational individualism." (Max Horkheimer, Vernunft and Selbsterhaltung; Reasoning and Self-preservation)

Individualism is engendered (initiated and sustained) in the traditional home where each child is personally held accountable by the father for his actions (which to those of the world is equated to "authoritarianism," needing to be negated).

"Authoritarian submission was conceived of as a very general attitude that would be evoked in relation to a variety of authority figures—parents, older people, leaders, supernatural power, and so forth." "God is conceived more directly after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a guiding and sometimes punishing authority." "The power-relationship between the parents, the domination of the subject's family by the father or by the mother, and their relative dominance in specific areas of life also seemed of importance for our problem [how to 'change' the world]." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)

"I have found whenever I ran across authoritarian students that the best thing for me to do was to break their backs immediately." "The correct thing to do with authoritarians is to take them realistically for the bastards they are and then behave toward them as if they were bastards." (Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Management)

Local control is likewise initiated and sustained in the traditional home with the father establishing the commands, rules, facts, and truth each child is to abide by in the present and in the future, engendering a guilty conscience in the child when he does wrong, disobeys, sins, i.e., when he lusts after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating.

"The guilty conscience is formed in childhood by the incorporation of the parents and the wish to be father of oneself." "What we call 'conscience' perpetuates inside of us our bondage to past objects now part of ourselves:" (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)

"The personal conscience is the key element in ensuring self-control, refraining from deviant behavior even when it can be easily perpetrated." "The family, the next most important unit affecting social control, is obviously instrumental in the initial formation of the conscience and in the continued reinforcement of the values that encourage law abiding behavior." (Dr. Robert Trojanowicz, The meaning of "Community" in Community Policing)

Local control, i.e., the father's/Father's authority is eroded, i.e., is set aside outside of the home, where compromise is "required" in order to "get along," i.e., in order to build (initiate and sustain) relationships in the world. It is only in compromising the father's/Father's authority, i.e., setting aside established commands, rules, facts, and truth that get in the way of relationships that society and self can become actualized. Not until the father's/Father's authority, i.e., accountability for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for lusting after the carnal pleasure of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating, i.e., fear of judgment is negated in the thoughts of the children (removed from the environment) can the guilty conscience, i.e., "the negative valance" for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for lusting after the carnal pleasure of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating be negated.

"The negative valence of a forbidden object which in itself attracts the child thus usually derives from an induced field of force of an adult." "If this field of force loses its psychological existence for the child (e.g., if the adult goes away or loses his authority) the negative valence also disappears." (Kurt Lewin; A Dynamic Theory of Personality)

Compromise, i.e., tolerance is "positive" to the child, 'justifying' his carnal nature, i.e., his carnal desires, i.e., his lusts, i.e., his self interest. Restraint, i.e., the father's/Father's authority, which inhibits or blocks (prevents) the child from satisfying/fulfilling his carnal desires, i.e., his lusts, i.e., his self interest is "negative" to the child. Society, based upon common carnal desires, i.e., lust, i.e., self interest is "positive" to the flesh, while individualism, under the father's/Father's authority, which requires the individual, i.e., the child to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate his self in order to do right and not wrong according established (the father's/Father's) commands, rules, facts, and truth is "negative."

"... once you can identify a community [where people are willing to 'compromise,' i.e., are willing to set aside their belief or faith, i.e., are willing to set aside the father's/Father's established commands, rules, facts, and truth in order to get along (in order not to "hurt" other people's "feelings")], you have discovered the primary unity of society above the individual and the family that can be mobilized ... to bring about positive social change." (Robert Trojanowicz, Community Policing The meaning of "Community" in Community Policing, emphasis added)

"Driving forces are those forces or factors affecting a situation which are 'pushing' in a particular direction; they tend to initiate a change and keep it going." "Restraining forces may be likened to walls or barriers. They only prevent or retard movement toward them.... the first step may be to determine what forces, if any, must be dealt with before a change can occur." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Bennie, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

"'Now that we know how positive reinforcement works [dialoguing opinions to a consensus, i.e., dialoguing our feelings (our carnal desires of the 'moment') to a feeling of oneness ('discovering' through dialogue the common carnal desires that we can all agree on, thereby affirming ourselves, and working together, as one in fulfilling them, we establish our carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e., our "self" over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority], and why negative doesn't' [the father's/Father's authority that gets in the way of relationships]... 'we can be more deliberate and hence more successful in our cultural design. We can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled [the seduced, deceived, and manipulated] though they are following a code much more scrupulously [more government regulations and oversight (sight based management)] than was ever the case under the old system, nevertheless feel free. They are doing what they want to do, not what they are forced to do. That's the source of the tremendous power of positive reinforcement—there's no restrain and no revolt. By a careful design, we control not the final behavior, but the inclination to behavior—the motives, the desires, the wishes. The curious thing is that in that case the question of freedom never arises."
"We know how to change the opinions of an individual in a selected direction, without his ever becoming aware of the stimuli which changed his opinion." "We know how to influence the ... behavior of individuals by setting up conditions which provide satisfaction for needs of which they are unconscious, but which we have been able to determine." "If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors [our potential ability to influence or control the behavior of groups] will follow." "We can choose to use our growing knowledge to enslave people in ways never dreamed of before, depersonalizing them, controlling them by means so carefully selected that they will perhaps never be aware of their loss of personhood." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)

"[D]o I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." Galatians 1:10

It is in compromise, for the sake of "society," i.e., in order to "build relationship" that Karl Marx was interested, making his desired outcome, "the building of relationships upon self interest," i.e., the negation of the father's/Father's authority in the thoughts and actions of the individual.

"Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." James 4:4

Compromise for the sake of "society, i.e., in order to "build relationships" is antithetical to the Word of God, which is based upon the Son, and those following him doing the Father's will, i.e., adhering to the Father's authority (no matter what).

"For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." Matthew 12:50

"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven." Matthew 7:21

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6

"... and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." 1 John 1:3

"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." Matthew 23:9

One means of communication, with your self (and with others) is through discussion, i.e., evaluating your thought and actions (and their thoughts and actions) from established (the father's/Father's) commands, rules, facts, and truth, humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining, capitulating your self in order to do right and not wrong according to them (him/Him), expecting others to be doing the same. The other is through dialogue, i.e., evaluating the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people around you (imagined or real)—which includes any established (the father's/Father's) commands, rules, facts, and truth—from your carnal desires, i.e., from your lusts, i.e., from your self interest of the 'moment,' readily identifying with and therefore building relationship with those who have the same carnal desires, i.e., lust, i.e., self interests.

"In an ordinary discussion people usually hold relatively fixed positions and argue in favour of their views as they try to convince others to change." (Bohm and Peat, Science, Order, and Creativity) Discussion divides upon being right and not wrong, i.e., knowing, which is formal, i.e., judgmental.

"A dialogue is essentially a conversation between equals." "The spirit of dialogue, is in short, the ability to hold many points of view in suspension, along with a primary interest in the creation of common meaning." (Bohm and Peat, Science, Order, and Creativity) Dialogue unites upon "feelings," i.e., "I feel" and/or "I think," i.e., an opinion, which is informal, i.e., non-judgmental.

Discussion sides with the father's/Father's authority, i.e., established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., the father/Father has the final say, i.e., the established command, rule, fact, or truth determines right and wrong behavior. Dialogue on the other hand sides with the world, i.e., with your carnal desires, i.e., with your lusts, i.e., with your self interest of the 'moment,' establishing your self over and therefore against any established (the father's/Father's) command, rule, fact, or truth that gets in the way—of what you want, i.e., your carnal desires, i.e., your lusts, i.e., your self interest of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating.

When you wanted to go out and play with your friends and your father told you you could not you tried to get him into dialogue , i.e., "Why?" (there is no father's/Father's authority in dialogue, i.e., there is only your and his carnal desires, i.e., lusts, i.e., self interest of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating) with him either going into dialogue with you (a "win-win" situation, with you getting to go out and he, in order to initiate or sustain "good" relationship with you, abdicating his authority to your carnal desires, i.e., your lusts, i.e., your self interest—making him a socialist), going into discussion, where he has the final say, or cutting off dialogue with his "Because I said so," thus retaining his authority (negating any hope of you going out, i.e., of you having your way—unless you sneak out, i.e., disobey or, according to Karl Marx kill him, Sigmund Freud had a "better" way, get him into dialogue, abdicating his authority for the sake of relationship with the child, let him kill himself).

The father's/Father's authority (the Patriarchal paradigm) is based upon the 1) preaching of established commands and rules to be obeyed as given, the teaching of established facts and truth to be accepted as is, by faith, and the discussing of any question(s) the children might have regarding the commands, rules, facts, and truth being taught, at the father's/Father's discretion, i.e., providing he/He deems it necessary, has time, the children are able to understand, and are not questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking his/His authority, 2) rewarding the children who do right and obey, 3) correcting and/or chastening the child who does wrong and/or disobeys, that he might learn to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate his "self" in order to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., in order to do the father's/Fathers' will, and 4) casting out any child who questions, challenges, defies, disregards, attacks the father's/Father's authority.

How we communicate with our self (and with others) directly correlates with whether we want to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., to do the father's/Father's will we or want to do what we want, to satisfy our carnal desires, i.e., our lusts, i.e., our self interest of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are (person is) stimulating. Discussion is objective, truth, i.e., right and wrong lie outside of us, making us accountable to it. Dialogue on the other hand is subjective, truth lies within us, making the world around us accountable to satisfying our carnal desires, i.e., our lusts, i.e., our self interest of the 'moment.' In dialogue, whoever satisfies ('justifies') our lusts is real, i.e., is "actual," i.e., is "rational," i.e., "reasonable," i.e., "understanding." Whoever gets in our way is "irrational," i.e., "unreasonable," i.e., "just does not understand."

Discussion divides on right and wrong. What divides us from one another is our desire to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth that differ from one another. If I have a class of twenty students from twenty different homes, with fathers having different positions on personal-social issues, I have twenty individual students who disagree with one another based upon their father's position, i.e., their father's authority. I can only discuss with the students that which all fathers agree on, or face removal from teaching. The only way I can "unite" the students, making them one is through dialogue, i.e., through their sharing with one another their carnal desires, i.e., their lusts, i.e., their self interests of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating, i.e., through their 'liberating' their self from their father's/Father's authority, i.e., from individualism.

"In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence." (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest, Chapter Three: The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory)

Dialogue unites on "feelings." What we have in common with the world, i.e., with all of mankind is "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life." If I want to unite the students on "feelings" I must move communication in the classroom away from discussion, i.e., from having to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., from doing the father's/Father's will to dialogue, i.e., to the students "feelings," i.e., to their carnal desires, i.e., lusts, i.e., self interests of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating, "helping" them 'discover' what they all have in common, i.e., "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life."

In discussion God is God, establishing right and wrong for us. In dialogue, we are God, making right and wrong subject to our own carnal desires, i.e., our lusts, i.e., our self interest of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating.

When we, for example, determine from a menu what we are going to eat for lunch, we go to dialogue (with our self and with others), i.e., to "I feel" and "I think" in order to eat what we want, i.e., what we like. When we go to discussion we are determining (from established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., from what we have been told) whether what we want to eat, i.e., what we like is good or right for us to eat or not. If it is not good or right for us to eat (but we want to eat it anyway) we go to dialogue, 'justifying' to our self (and to others) our eating it, only feeling guilty (if we go to discussion with our self or get sick) afterwards.

"And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God." Luke 16:15

In discussion we are (our mind is) freed from our carnal desires, i.e., our lusts, i.e., our self interests of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating. In dialogue we are (our mind is) 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority, i.e., from established commands, rules, facts, and truth that get in the way of our carnal desires, i.e., our lusts, i.e., our self interests of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating.

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9

Your heart is "deceitful ("deceitful above all things") thinking pleasure, i.e., "lust" is the 'purpose' of life instead of doing the father's/Father's will, making you wicked ("desperately wicked") in your effort to negate the father's/Father's authority that gets in your way. You can not see your heart as being wicked because your "lust" for pleasure (your "lust" for "lust") is standing in the way. Karl Marx is in your heart, waiting for you to 'justify' him, i.e., your "self" over and therefore against having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline your "self" in order (as in the "old" world order) to do the father's/Father's will, so you can do wrong, disobey, sin, i.e., can "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating without having a guilty conscience, i.e., so you can become like him, i.e., become "self actualized." "Lust" blinds you to the consequence (cost) of "lusting" after pleasure.

Your heart is subject to dialogue, i.e., to self (lust) 'justification' until you make it subject to discussion, i.e., to doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., to doing the father's/Father's will, making you subject to the father's/Father's authority,

"Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee." Psalms 119:11

"[I]t is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." Jeremiah 10:23

Without the father's/Father's authority, i.e., being told right from wrong behavior (according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth) all you have to direct your steps is your carnal desires, i.e., your lusts, i.e., your self interests of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating. The soul knows by being told, making man subject to God. The flesh by "sense experience," making man only subject to the world.

"[E]very man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death" James 1:14,15

"Sense experience must be the basis of all science." "Science is only genuine science when it proceeds from sense experience, in the two forms of sense perception and sensuous need, that is, only when it proceeds from Nature." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3)

God gave Adam two commands, i.e., told him what he was to do and what he was not to do, i.e., what he could eat and what he could not eat. Animals, only being subject to stimulus-response and instinct, can not read or write books, i.e., can not tell one another or be told what to do and what not to do. Only man, made in the image of God can do that.

"I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet." Romans 7:7

"... the central problem is to change reality.… reality with its 'obedience to laws.'" (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?)

Karl Marx hated individualism because it made the individual (himself) subject to a higher authority than "human nature" and therefore subject to laws that are contrary to his own carnal nature, i.e., his carnal desires, i.e., his lusts, i.e., his self interest of the 'moment' and the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people were stimulating.

"The life which he has given to the object sets itself against him as an alien and hostile force." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3)

By man submitting to laws which go contrary to his carnal desires of the 'moment' he, according to Karl Marx, 'created' God. Only by man being made subject only to the laws of his carnal nature could man, according to Karl Marx become his self, i.e., "of the world" only. By simply redefined "the lust of the flesh," "the lust of the eyes," and "the pride of life" as "sensuous needs," "sense perception," and "sense experience" Karl Marx made man subject only to "the world," i.e., to "Nature."

"To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right')

According to Karl Marx it is in man's lusting after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates (what he has in common with all men and all men have in common with him) that he is "reconciled" to the world, requiring the negation of the father's/Father's authority, i.e., having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate his self in order to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., in order to do the father's/Father's will. It is therefore in lust, according to Karl Marx, that self becomes actualized, i.e., that man and the world become one. Sigmund Freud had the same idea.

"Self-perfection of the human individual is fulfilled in union with the world in pleasure." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)

"Bypassing the traditional channels of top-down decision making our objective centers upon transforming public opinion into an effective instrument of global politics." "Individual values must be measured by their contribution to common interests and ultimately to world interests transforming public consensus into one favorable to the emergence of a stable and humanistic world order." "Consensus is both a personal and a political step. It is a precondition of all future steps." (Ervin Laszlo, A Strategy for the Future: The Systems Approach to World Order)

It is only by setting aside, i.e., negating the father's/Father's authority, i.e., established commands, rules, facts, and truth in his thoughts that man can 'discover' his common identity, i.e., what he has in common with the world (the bases of common-ism). It is only in the act of compromise, i.e., "bypassing the traditional channels of top-down decision making" that self and society can become actualized, i.e., that self and society can become one, i.e., all there is.

"Self-actualizing people have to a large extent transcended the values of their culture [their parent's/God's authority aka the father's/Father's authority]. They are not so much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of the human species first and foremost." (Abraham Maslow, Human Nature)

"Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth; and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: but know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment." Ecclesiastes 11:9

"The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes. For he flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful. The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good. He deviseth mischief upon his bed; he setteth himself in a way that is not good; he abhorreth not evil." Psalms 36:1-4

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:3, 4

Facilitators of 'change,' i.e., psychologists, i.e., behavioral "scientists," i.e., "group psychotherapists," i.e., Marxists (Transformational Marxists)—all being the same in method or formula—are using the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus (affirmation) process, i.e., dialectic 'reasoning' ('reasoning' from/through the students "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., from/through their "lust" for pleasure and their hate of restraint, in the "light" of their desire for group approval, i.e., affirmation and fear of group rejection) in the "group grade," "safe zone/space/place," "Don't be negative, be positive," soviet style, brainwashing (washing the father's/Father's authority from the children's thoughts and actions, i.e., "theory and practice," negating their having a guilty conscience, which the father's/father's authority engenders, for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process—called "the negation of negation" since the father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience, being negative to the child's carnal nature, is negated in dialogue—in dialogue, opinion, and the consensus process there is no father's/Father's authority), inductive 'reasoning' ('reasoning' from/through the students "feelings," i.e., their natural inclination to "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment'—dopamine emancipation—which the world stimulates, i.e., their "self interest," i.e., their "sense experience," selecting "appropriate information"—excluding, ignoring, or resisting, i.e., rejecting any "inappropriate" information, i.e., established command, rule, fact, or truth that gets in the way of their desired outcome, i.e., pleasure—in determining right from wrong behavior), "Bloom's Taxonomy," "affective domain," French Revolution (Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité) classroom "environment" in order (as in "new" world order) to 'liberate' children from parental authority, i.e., from the father's/Father's authority system (the Patriarchal Paradigm)—seducing, deceiving, and manipulating them as chickens, rats, and dogs, i.e., treating them as natural resource ("human resource") in order to convert them into 'liberals,' socialists, globalists, so they, 'justifying' their "self" before one another, can do wrong, disobey, sin, i.e., "lust" with impunity.

"Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein. Also I set watchmen over you, saying, Hearken to the sound of the trumpet. But they said, We will not hearken." Jeremiah 6:16, 17

Home schooling material, co-ops, conferences, etc., are joining in the same praxis, fulfilling Immanuel Kant's as well as Georg Hegel's, Karl Marx's, and Sigmund Freud's agenda of using the pattern or method of Genesis 3:1-6, i.e., "self" 'justification,' i.e., dialectic (dialogue) 'reasoning," i.e., 'reasoning' from/through your "feelings," i.e., your carnal desires of the 'moment' which are being stimulated by the world (including your desire for approval from others, with them affirming your carnal nature) in order to negate Hebrews 12:5-11, i.e., the father's/Father's authority, i.e., having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline your "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will, negating Romans 7:14-25, i.e., your having a guilty conscience when you do wrong, disobey, sin, thereby negating your having to repent before the father/Father for your doing wrong, disobedience, sins—which is the real agenda.

"And for this cause [because men, as "children of disobedience," 'justify' their "self," i.e., 'justify' their love of "self" and the world, i.e., their love of the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) which the world stimulates over and therefore against the Father's authority] God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie [that pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the Father's will]: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth [in the Father and in His Son, Jesus Christ], but had pleasure in unrighteousness [in their "self" and the pleasures of the 'moment,' which the world stimulates]." 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12