Why Liberals Have To Rewrite History.
(Personal note.)
by
Dean Gotcher
"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
"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
"The heart is deceitful above all things [thinking pleasure, i.e., lust is the standard for "good" instead of doing the father's/Father's will], and desperately wicked [hating anyone preventing, i.e., inhibiting or blocking it from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' it lusts after]: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9 It can not see its hatred toward the father's/Father's authority as being evil, i.e., "wicked," i.e., "desperately wicked" because it's lust for pleasure is standing in the way, 'justifying' the hate.
If history contains the experiences of the past and all you believe in is stimulus-response, i.e., that which is "of the world" then you have to negate anything that is not "of the world," i.e., you have remove God, i.e., the father's/Father's authority system from history.
"To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right')
In other words, according to Karl Marx "Lust, i.e., enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., that the current situation and/or people are stimulating "reconciles" you to "the world," i.e., "Self is actualized in lust and the world that stimulates it."
"From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts." James 4:1-3 (Read James chapters 4 and 5 for the total picture.)
This 'justifies' in the mind of the liberal his negation of the father/Father and anyone who honors his/His authority, i.e., who humbles, denies, dies to, controls, disciplines, capitulates 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, expecting others to do the same—which inhibits or blocks, i.e., prevents him (along with others) from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates (that they lust after; Genesis 3:1-6).
"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." Isaiah 55:8, 9
"For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God." Romans 8:6-8
While the Heavenly Father is from above and the earthly father is from below (accountable to the Heavenly Father above; Hebrews 12:5-11) both have an authority structure (called a Patriarchal paradigm) that holds those under their authority accountable to established commands, rules, facts, and truth—that gets in the way of, i.e., that inhibits or blocks, i.e., that prevents those under their authority from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates (engendering a guilty conscience in them when/if they do; Romans 7:14-25). As foreign to carnal man is God's commands (which are spiritual) to a lesser degree are the earthly father's commands (which are temporal) to the carnally minded child—with both requiring faith and obedience on the part of those under their authority. While dad (the "earthly father") is not perfect, he may be (or may have been) a down right tyrant (or MIA/AWL)—as a child lusting pleasure without restraint—his office of authority is perfect, having been given to him by God (the "Heavenly Father") who is perfect, in which to do His will. When it comes to establishing right and wrong behavior (preaching and teaching) it is important that he discusses with his children any command, rule, fact, or truth they question, providing he deems it necessary, has time, they are able to understand, and are not questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking his authority. David, in the Scriptures having the opportunity to kill Saul (although Saul was not his father), did not do so because he respected the office Saul served in, even though Saul was not using it as God willed (1 Samuel 24:2-12).
"Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honour thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise; That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth." Ephesians 6:1-3
The liberal, wanting to 'justify' his carnal nature, i.e., his natural inclination to lust after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., that the current situation and/or people are stimulating can not accept the father's/Father's authority, i.e., can not accept being told what is right and what is wrong behavior, therefore he must (re)write history in favor of the child, i.e., in favor of his carnal nature, 'liberating' his self (and everyone else reading his history) from the father's/Father's authority (instead of honoring the father's/Father's authority, i.e., having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate his self in order to do the father's/Father's will).
"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
"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
When you KNOW what you are doing is wrong (having been told) and you do it anyway, that is sin, i.e., reveals your lust.
"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)
"O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen." 1 Timothy 6:20-21 "Oppositions of falsely called science" is the praxis of dialoguing opinions to a consensus process where no absolute right or wrong behavior is established, except for the 'moment,' in the given situation aka situation ethics—where when the environment stimulates lust, lust is right and when the environment stimulates hate (hatred toward those who get in the way of lust) then hate is right (stimulus-response). Along with lust comes hate—which to the perpetrator is not hate but self preservation, which is 'justified' in his eyes. God's limits and measures are regarding the soul, which he created, which is eternal. Man's limits and measures are regarding the flesh, which the world stimulates, which is temporary, i.e., passing away. Everything in the creation has limits and measures based upon laws which God has established for nature (observable and repeatable), which are subject to sight except for the soul of man, which God has established from His nature, making man subject to his Word (which is eternal), which requires faith on the part of man. By man making himself subject to the laws of nature only, rejecting God and His Word, he redefines his soul as being temporary, passing away, having no eternal value—resulting in him dying in his sins, i.e., in his lusts, spending eternity in the lake of fire that is never quenched, prepared for the master facilitator of 'change' and all who follow after him. "Oppositions" in the Greek is the word "antithesis" or the positing of opinions, i.e., "I think" and "I feel" back and forth to a "feelings" based outcome, where "feelings" or opinions are treated as a fact or truth. "Science" in the Greek is the word "gnosis" or "knowing" and "falsely so called" in the Greek are the words "sudo nomus" or "so called" (what seems to be, i.e., "seemeth right" but is not known for sure in the 'moment'), resulting in an opinion or a theory being perceived (accepted) as a fact or truth and put into practice (action) aka "theory and practice." The woman in the garden in Eden put what "seemeth to be right," i.e., what "ought" to be (in her mind) into praxis, negating God's Word, i.e., the truth, i.e., what "is" in her thought and action. Thus lust, i.e., "enjoying" the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates becomes fact or truth, i.e., all that is actual (practical, rational, reasonable), making the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth null and void since they get in the way of lust. In doing so faith is negated, replaced with sight and the soul (which is eternal) is negated, replaced with the flesh (which is temporary, i.e., subject only to the lusts of the 'moment' and the world that stimulates them). In the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process, opinion seems to be knowledge, making knowledge, i.e., the truth subject to men's opinions, i.e., lust ("What can I get out of this situation or these people or this person for my 'self?"—"to satisfy my lusts?") and the world that stimulates it. For the liberal, what the woman did in the garden in Eden (with Adam following after her), i.e., 'liberation' of self, i.e., lust from the father's/Father's authority is history—Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité.
History, for the liberal is based upon "human nature," i.e., "the lust of the flesh," "the lust of the eyes," and "the pride of life," i.e., that which is stimulated by the world. 'Justifying' his self, i.e. "the lust of the flesh," "the lust of the eyes," and "the pride of life" (what Karl Marx relabeled "sensuous needs," "sense perception," and "sense experience") which are being stimulated by the world, i.e., by the current situation and/or people present the liberal makes "sense experience" (his lust for pleasure and his hatred toward restraint) the basis for knowing right from wrong behavior. The idea being if he places you in an environment that stimulates lust and you do not respond accordingly (you resist or condemn it) you need to be either converted (become like him) or be silenced, censored, and/or removed from the environment for the sake of all the others who are present i.e., who are of the world, including himself. For the liberal, if he can not convert or silence, censor, and/or remove those telling him right from wrong behavior he can not establish behavior upon his own carnal nature, lusting after pleasure, hating restraint, i.e., hating the restrainer. By making truth and knowledge subject to men's opinions the 'liberal' makes everyone he meets subject to his "feels," i.e., to what he can get out of them in the 'moment' (and in the future) for his self, i.e., to satisfy his lusts.
"Individuals move not from a fixity through change to a new fixity [from doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, truth, changing their position only when persuaded with facts and truth], though such a process is indeed possible [in other words, "We do not want to think about, focus on, or accept that way of thinking"]. But [through a] continuum from fixity to changingness [from belief, i.e., faith and obedience to theory, i.e., opinion], from rigid structure to flow [from "What does the father/Father want me to do?" to "What do I want to do?" and "What will 'the group' think?"], from stasis to process [from doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth to self (lust) 'justification']"." "At one end of the continuum the individual avoids close relationships [with those who are deviant, i.e., doing wrong, disobeying, sinning], which are perceived as being dangerous. At the other end he lives openly and freely in relation to the therapist and to others [those doing wrong, disobeying, sinning], guiding his behavior on the basis of his immediate experiencing [his lust for pleasure and his lust for "the group's" affirmation—'justifying' his lusts]– he has become an integrated process of changingness." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
"To study something means to study it in the process of change [by placing people in the midst of crisis, tempted to compromise their standards of the "past," i.e., the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., his/His authority in order to survive in the "present," and secure the "future," placing their hope in themselves, their fellow man, and the world and not just in God]; that is the dialectical method's basic demand." (L. S. Vygotsky, Mind in Society: the development of higher psychological development)
If you begin with "human nature," i.e., with lust (which all men are guilty of, i.e., which all men have in common) making it the means for evaluation then "human nature," i.e., lust becomes the outcome, initiating and sustaining 'change.' If you begin with established commands, rules, facts, and truth (which divides man from man based upon who is obeying or doing them and who is not) making them the means for evaluation then established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., the father's/Father's authority becomes the outcome, inhibiting or blocking 'change.'
"Despotism ... predominates in the human heart." (George Washington, Farewell Address)
This in no way justifies despotism, i.e., the despot. Even George Washington understood the nature of "the human heart," i.e., why the power of those in government had to be limited so fathers could raise their children up according to their standards, 'justifying' freedom of the conscience, religion, and speech, i.e., private convictions, property, and business, i.e., unalienable rights, under God, engendering individualism, under God, i.e., "rule of law."
"Black is black and white is white. Neither torture, maltreatment nor intimidation can change a fact. To argue the point… serves no useful purpose." (P.O.W. Major David F. MacGhee responding to brainwashing attempts by the Communist North Koreans, January 19th, 1953)
You are being "graded" today (by the liberal) based upon where along the continuum or spectrum of 'change,' i.e., "feelings" toward authority (from honoring it to negating it) you reside at any given 'moment,' in any given situation (requiring an agree, most agree, disagree, most disagree, etc., or like, dislike, undecided answer to the question). With God it is not a continuum. It is an either-or. You are either right or you are wrong (walking by faith or by sight, saved or lost). Your opinion, i.e., your "feelings" or anyone else's opinion, i.e., "feelings" (regarding right and wrong behavior) will not count on the day of judgment. What makes you think, before God your opinion (or anyone else's opinion) counts today, i.e., that your/their opinion (how the world "ought" to be—according to your/their carnal nature, i.e., your/their lusts and hate) is the foundation from which to determine right and wrong behavior? Liberals hate the world that "is" (where we are all accountable to the father/Father for our thoughts and actions) wanting it to be what they think it "ought" to be, i.e., "of and for self" only, where they (along with you, i.e., at least with your silence—to be silent is to affirm, in their mind, i.e., at least you—to some degree—are thinking favorable about lust) can lust after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates without having a guilty conscience, i.e., without being held accountable.
"We have to study the conditions which maximize ought-perceptiveness." "Oughtiness is itself a fact to be perceived." "If we wish to permit the facts to tell us their oughtiness, we must learn to listen to them in a very specific way which can be called Taoistic." An 'Ought-Is-Quest' is a religious quest in the naturalistic sense. Is becomes the same as ought. Fact becomes the same as value. The world which is becomes the world which ought to be." (Abraham Maslow, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature) In other words the more "ought" becomes "is," i.e., lust ("feelings") becomes what "is" (all there is) the more the father's/Father's authority is negated, i.e., no longer "is."
"It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is?" (President Bill Clinton testifying before the Grand Jury, August 17, 1998)
'Justifying' their lust for pleasure and their hatred toward restraint they have to rewriting history (make it what they think it "ought" to be) so they can lust after pleasure and hate restraint (and the restrainer) without having a guilty conscience, i.e., without being held accountable, i.e., with everyone's affirmation.
"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
"[E]very one of us shall give account of himself to God." Romans 14:12
"Flee also youthful lusts:" 2 Timothy 2:22
"And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever." 1 John 2:18
"There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 14:12
"The words 'seem to' are significant; it is the perception which functions in guiding behavior." (Rogers)
The woman in the garden in Eden "perceived" that "the forbidden tree," being like the other trees in the garden was not harmful for her to eat (the fruit thereof), not understanding it was not the fruit of the tree that would cause her death but her disobedience to God (with Adam following)—not having access to the tree of life. The soul KNOWS from being told. The flesh from sense experience. When God created Adam (man) he made him, unlike any other living thing in the creation, "a living soul."
"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Genesis 2:7
He then told ("commanded") him what he could and could not do, i.e., He told him what was right and what was wrong behavior, i.e., which trees he could eat the fruit of and which one he was not (lest he die).
"And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Genesis 2:16, 17
No animal, being subject only to stimulus-response (approach pleasure - avoid pain) and impulses and urges (instincts) can read or write a book, i.e., can be told or tell others what is right and what is wrong behavior, i.e., what they can and can not do. To apply science, i.e., "behavioral science" to man is to make him an animal, subject to stimulus-response and impulses and urges (which can only be known from "sense experience," i.e., pleasure-pain engendering lust and hate), negating (damning) his soul (which can only KNOW from being told, i.e., by the Word of God).
"But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Matthew 4:4
Rejecting being told what is right and wrong behavior the liberal negates the father's/Father's authority in his feeling, thoughts, and actions, i.e., negating (in his mind) his having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate his self in order (as in "old" world order) to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth that get in the way of lust, negating the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for lusting after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates in the process—'justifying' his questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking the father's/Father's authority without having a guilty conscience (as his duty) in the process, dying in his sins.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" Mark 8:36, 37
Since history, for the liberal is man liberating his self from the father's/Father's authority, history has to be rewritten, rejecting the father's/Father's authority in favor of "human nature," 'justifying' his self, i.e., his lusting after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates, establishing his self, i.e., lust, i.e., his self interest over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority.
"Lawfulness without law." (Immanuel Kant, Critique of Judgment)
Immanuel Kant established the law of the flesh (lust) over and therefore against the law of the father'/Father (the father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience it engenders). The child's carnal nature is then no longer viewed as being above the law (breaking the law, retaining the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for lusting ....). It is the law (there is no law but lust and the world that stimulates it). It is therefore the guilty conscience (that gets in the way of lust when the father/Father is not present, retaining the father's/Father's authority in the child's thoughts and actions) that has to be negated.
"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)
"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) A definition of the guilty conscience from a Marxist's perspective.
Kurt Lewin explained (in two sentences) how the guilty conscience (the "negative valence") is 'created,' preventing 'change,' i.e., lust and how it could be negate, emancipating 'change,' i.e., lust.
"The negative valence of a forbidden object which in itself attracts the child [the guilty conscience] 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)
In other words, the "negative valence," i.e. the guilty conscience (which the father's/Father's authority engenders for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for "lusting") is negated when the father's/Father's authority is negated in the child's thoughts, thus 'justifying' (in his mind) his carnal actions, i.e., lust—with "the group's" support, i.e., affirmation. This requires his participation in "the group."
"... the superego 'unites in itself the influences [impulses and urges, i.e., lusts and hates] of the present and of the past [which all children, i.e., "the group" has in common].'" (Brown)
"Superego development is conceived as the incorporation of the moral standards of society [of "the group"]. Therefore the levels of the Taxonomy should describe successive levels of goal setting appropriate to superego development." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain)
The guilty conscience is based upon discussion, with established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., the father's/Father's authority having the final say while the super-ego is based upon dialogue, where the child's carnal nature, i.e., lust has sway. This is why those who hate history turn to their student's opinions in evaluating current situations and events—rejecting the lessons of the past, turning to "human nature," i.e., lust for pleasure and hatred toward restraint instead.
"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, i.e., the father/Father retains his authority in discussion, i.e., has the final say, i.e., "Because I said so," "Never the less," "It is written." Majority vote retains the father's/Father's authority system although the father might lose out on the particular issue at hand.
"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, i.e., the child retains his carnal nature in dialogue, having the final say (against authority, i.e., absolutes, i.e., the father's/Father's authority). There is no father's/Father's authority in dialogue, or in an opinion, or in the consensus process. There is only the child's natural inclination to lust after pleasure and hate restraint being 'justified.' Dialogue moves opinions to a consensus, negating the father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience it engenders in the process.
While the father's/Father's authority engenders "individualism, under God" "the group" makes each individual accountable to what he has in common with "the group," requiring him to compromise (at least set aside) any command, rule, fact, or truth, i.e., the father's/Father's authority in order to "get along," i.e., in order to be a part of "the group." It is his lust for the approval of others, affirming his lusts, i.e., "What can I get out of this situation or this person for my self?" that keeps him 'loyal' to "the group," i.e., "What will happen to me if they reject me and/or turn on me?" "Individualism, under God," i.e., 'loyalty' to the father's/Father's authority, i.e., to established commands, rules, facts, and truth is sacrificed at the alter of "group approval," i.e., affirmation, i.e., the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process.
"Experience is, for me, the highest authority." "Neither the Bible nor the prophets, neither the revelations of God can take precedence over my own direct experience." (Rogers)
The liberal does not perceive his self as being above or against the law. He perceives his self as being the law. That is why it is difficult if not impossible to persuade him that he is wrong, since for him being wrong is not a part of his carnal nature. In other words the only one who is wrong is you for questioning (judging, condemning) him for the way he feels, things, and acts toward his self, other, the world, and authority.
"Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the Holy family [where those under the father's/Father's authority must humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate their self in order to do the father's/Father's will], the former must then itself be destroyed [vernichtet, i.e., annihilated, i.e., negated] in theory and in practice" (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #4)
While Karl Marx negated the father's/Father's authority in society. Sigmund Freud did it in the individual.
"... 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)
"Self-perfection of the human individual is fulfilled in union with the world in pleasure." "According to Freud, the ultimate essence of our being is erotic." "Eros is fundamentally a desire for union with objects in the world." "Eros is the foundation of morality." "Freud saw that in the id there is no negation [no parental authority, i.e. no Godly restraint, i.e. no "Thou shalt not"], only affirmation and eternity [only the child's natural inclination to lust after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates]." "Children have not acquired that sense of shame which, according to the Biblical story, expelled mankind from Paradise, and which, presumably, would be discarded if Paradise were regained [if pleasure (lust) became the agenda, i.e., the 'drive' and 'purpose' of life]." "The repression of normal adult sexuality is required only by cultures which are based on patriarchal domination [on doing the father's/Father's will]." "Our repressed desires are the desires we had unrepressed, in childhood; and they are sexual desires." "Parental discipline, religious denunciation of bodily pleasure, . . . have all left man overly docile, but secretly in his unconscious [in his urges and impulses of the 'moment' which are being stimulated by the world] unconvinced, and therefore neurotic [caught between his desire for parental approval and his lust for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world is stimulation, having a guilty conscience for thinking about or doing the latter]." "The foundation on which the man of the future will be built is already there, in the repressed unconscious; the foundation has to be recovered ['liberated' from the guilty conscience, requiring the negation of the father's/Father's authority]." (Brown)
Sigmund Freud's history of the prodigal son is not of the son coming to his senses, humbling his self, returning home, submitting his self to his father's authority, learning his inheritance was not his father's money but his father's love for him, but of the son joining with his "friends," returning home, killing the father, taking all that was his (the father's), using it to satisfy their carnal desires, i.e., their lusts of the 'moment' that the world stimulates, killing all the fathers in the land so all the children could be the same, i.e., like them.
"Marxian theory needs Freudian-type instinct theory to round it out. And of course, vice versa." "Third-Force psychology is also epi-Marxian in these senses, i.e., including the most basic scheme as true-good social conditions ['liberation' of "self" from the father's/Father's authority] are necessary for personal growth, bad social conditions [submission of "self" to the father's/Father's authority] stunt human nature,... This is to say, one could reinterpret Marx into a self-actualization-fostering Third- and Fourth-Force psychology-philosophy. And my impression is anyway that this is the direction in which they are going now." "The whole discussion becomes species-wide, One World." "This is a realistic combination of the Marxian version & the Humanistic. (Better add to definition of "humanistic" that it also means one species, One World.)" (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of Abraham Maslow)
"Human consciousness [lust] can be liberated from the parental complex [the father's/Father's authority, i.e., restraint] only by being liberated from its cultural derivatives, the paternalistic state and the patriarchal God." (Brown)
"A democratic society repudiates the principle of external authority." (John Dewey Democracy and Education)
"In a democratic society a patriarchal culture should make us depressed instead of glad; it [a patriarchal culture] is an argument against the higher possibilities of human nature, of self actualization." "In our democratic society, any enterprise—any individual—has its obligations to the whole." (Abraham Maslow, Maslow On Management)
"The family [with the father/Father in authority] is one of these social forms which ... cannot be changed without change in the total social framework." (Max Horkheimer, Kritische Theori) In other words: the language of the home (preaching, teaching, and discussing established commands, rules, facts, and truth to be obeyed a given, by faith) has to be 'changed' along with the language of society ('changed' to the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process) if 'change' is to be initiated and sustained.
"In the traditional society each child is at the mercy of his parents. The 'natural processes' by which they socialize him makes him a replica of them." "The family has little to offer the child in the way of training for his place in the community." "In loco parentis" retains the parent's authority in the thoughts and actions of the child, inhibiting or blocking 'change.' In other words, without the "help" of someone outside the home children will remain subject to their parent's authority, i.e., to doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth. (James Coleman, The Adolescent Society)
The first liberals were two "children" in a garden in Eden who, refusing to humble their self before the "Father" and repent for their sin, i.e., refusing to admit they were wrong, blamed someone else for their "bad" behavior instead, with Adam blaming the woman, i.e., "throwing her under the bus," (along with God for creating her, i.e., for creating an "unhealthy environment" for him to live in) and the woman blaming the Serpent, i.e., the master facilitator of 'change,' i.e., "throwing him under the bus" for "helping" her 'justify' her lust.
"To experience Freud is to partake a second time of the forbidden fruit;" (Brown)
"... the 'original sin' must be committed again: 'We must again eat from the tree of knowledge in order to fall back into the state of innocence.'" (Marcuse)
"He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son." 1 John 2:22
When you start with the child, making the child's carnal nature, i.e., lust the thesis, i.e., the foundation from which to determine right and wrong behavior the father's/Father's authority becomes the antithesis, i.e., "the problem."
"The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such [once he is 'liberated' from the father'/Father's authority to become as he was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into his life (separating him from his "self" and the world), "of and for self" and the world only]." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life)
Inscribed on Karl Marx's tombstone is his eleventh Thesis on Feuerbach,
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways, the objective however, is change." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #11)
Rejecting the father's/Father's authority Karl Marx made the child's carnal nature, i.e., lust and the world that stimulates it the foundation from which to establish right and wrong behavior; blaming the child for 'creating' the father's/Father's authority in his act of obedience.
"The life which he has given to the object sets itself against him as an alien and hostile force." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3).
"The problem," according to Karl Marx was, while children resent/hate the father's/Father's authority for inhibiting or blocking them from enjoying the carnal pleasures (lusts) of the 'moment' that the world stimulates, once they grow up and have children of their own they force their children to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate their self in order to do their will, reestablishing the father's/Father's authority in society.
"... the central problem is to change reality.… reality with its 'obedience to laws.'" (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?)
Without someone coming between the children and the father/Father, "helping" the children identify with the world, i.e., with that which is in harmony with (stimulates) their carnal nature they can not overcome the world they have 'created.' For the liberal, truth and knowledge are not found outside of "human nature," i.e., which makes them unchangeable but are the result of "human nature" responding to the world around it, making truth and knowledge readily adaptable to 'change' according to the world the person finds their self in in the 'moment.'
"We recognize the point of view that truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and fast truths which exist for all time and places." (Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 1: Cognitive Domain)
"In the eyes of the dialectic philosophy [using dialogue, i.e., "feelings" to come to the "truth"], nothing is established for all times, nothing is absolute or sacred." (Karl Marx's ideology, as explained by Friedrich Engels)
Benjamin Bloom simply paraphrased Karl Marx's ideology (without giving him credit, for obvious reason). All educators are certified and schools accredited today based upon their use of what are called "Bloom's Taxonomies" (Marxist curriculum) in the classroom. To question them is to put their job and reputation at risk—being labeled as "unfit to teach."
"Every form of objectification [faith in and obedience to parent or God, above "human nature"] results in alienation [not only the separation of self from lust (repression) but also the separation of self from others who lust (alienation)]." "God [faith in and obedience to God] is thus the anthropological source of alienation." (Stephen Eric Bronner, Of Critical Theory and its Theorists)
The liberal has to rewrite history in order to make the father's/Father's authority the cause of the world's problems, i.e., the source of "repression" and "alienation" (the antithesis) and the child's carnal nature, i.e., lust and the world that stimulates it the 'drive' of life' (the thesis), making the 'purpose' of life the negation of the father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience it engenders so all children, i.e., they can become their self, i.e., of the world only (synthesis), lusting after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates without having a guilty conscience.
"In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself [one's lusts] 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) "Building relationship upon self interest" is the hallmark of Marxism.
"Every one that is proud in heart ['justified' in his own eyes] is an abomination to the LORD: though hand join in hand [he is 'justified' by others], he shall not be unpunished." Proverbs 16:5
History has to therefore be (re)written (the environment has to be rearranged) in favor of the child's carnal nature (liberating his self from the father's/Father's authority in the classroom; "Be 'positive' to the flesh, i.e., to lust not 'negative' to it") in order for him to become at-one-with the world, i.e., in order for him to find his identity in all the children of the world, who, like him lust after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates, thereby 'justifying' (in his mind) his/their need to negate the father's/Father's authority (in his/their thoughts and actions) in order to initiate and sustain "worldly peace and socialist harmony."
"The philosophy of praxis is the absolute secularization of thought, an absolute humanism of history [where all thought and action is void of the father's/Father's authority]." (Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks) The name for the national test for teachers is Praxis.
"Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds [the Greek word for deeds is praxis];" Colossians 3:9 The "old" man sinned, i.e., lusted after the things of the world without fearing judgment, i.e., without fearing God (without bringing judgment and God up in his conversation with his self and with others), 'justifying' his sins (lusts) and the sins (lusts) of others, making sin (lust), i.e., "human nature" the "norm." The "lie" being you can sin (lust) without being held accountable, i.e., without being judged (and condemned) by God, i.e., without having a guilty conscience.
"Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others." Ephesians 2:2,3
"For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life." Titus 3:3-7
"And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever." 1 John 2:18
"Let no man deceive you with vain words [self 'justifying, i.e., lust 'justifying' words]: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Be not ye therefore partakers with them." Ephesians 5:5-7
"[T]he 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
"and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." 1 John 1:3
"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." Colossians 2:8
"... it is clear that Paul wants Christ alone to be taught and heard. Who does not see how the universities read the Bible? ... it has been so bothersome to read and respond to this filth." (Luther's Works: Vol. 32, Career of the Reformer: II, p.259) "Miserable Christians, whose words and faith still depend on the interpretations of men and who expect clarification from them! This is frivolous and ungodly. The Scriptures are common to all, and are clear enough in respect to what is necessary for salvation and are also obscure enough for inquiring minds ... let us reject the word of man." (Luther's Works: Vol. 32, Career of the Reformer: II, p.217) "In vain does one fashion a logic of faith, a substitution brought about without regard for limit and measure." (Luther's Works: Vol. 31, Career of the Reformer: I, p. 12) "My advice has been that a young man avoid scholastic philosophy and theology like the very death of his soul." (Luther's Works: Vol. 32, Career of the Reformer: II, p.258) "The sophists have imposed tyranny and bondage upon our freedom to such a point that we must not resist that twice accursed Aristotle, but are compelled to submit. Shall we therefore be perpetually enslaved and never breathe in Christian liberty, nor sigh from out of this Babylon for our scriptures and our home?" (Luther's Works: Vol. 32, Career of the Reformer: II, p.217) "The sophists, nevertheless, rise proudly up, hold their ears, close their eyes, and turn away their heart just so that they may fill all ears with their human words, and alone may occupy the stage so that no one will bark against their assertion[s] ... The word of man is sacred and to be venerated, but God's word is handed over to whores ... the meaning of sin ... is dependent on the arbitrary choice of the sophists." (Luther's Works: Vol. 32, Career of the Reformer: II, p.216) "I greatly fear that the universities, unless they teach the Holy Scriptures diligently and impress them on the young students, are wide gates to hell. I would advise no one to send his child where the Holy Scriptures are not supreme. Every institution that does not unceasingly pursue the study of God's word becomes corrupt." (Luther's Works: Vol. 1, The Christian in Society: p. 207) "We do not become righteous by doing righteous deeds but, having been made righteous, we do righteous deeds." (Luther's Works: Vol. 31, Career of the Reformer: I, p. 12)
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2:8, 9
"But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." Hebrews 11:6
"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:17
"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
The liberal, perceiving his self as being the personification of "the people," who, like him, lust after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates and hate restraint is 'justified' in his eyes in rewriting history in order for the next generation to become their self, i.e., to become self-actualized, i.e., like him—void of the father's/Father's authority in their thoughts and in their actions, refusing to hear (receive) the truth since it gets in their way.
"Prevent someone who KNOWS from filling the empty space." (Wilfred Bion, A Memoir of the Future)
'Changing' education, i.e., the classroom environment from the preaching, teaching, and discussing of commands, rules, facts, and truth which are to be accepted as given and obeyed to the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process negates the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the child accepting being told what is right and what is wrong behavior.
"Concerning the changing of circumstances by men, the educator must himself be educated." (Karl Marx, Thesis on Feuerbach # 3)
"A change in the curriculum is a change in the people concerned—in teachers, in students, in parents ....." "Curriculum change means that the group involved must shift its approval from the old to some new set of reciprocal behavior patterns." "... people involved who were loyal to the older pattern must be helped to transfer their allegiance to the new." "Re-education aims to change the system of values and beliefs [paradigm] of an individual or a group." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)
"Change in methods of leadership is probably the quickest way to bring about a change in the cultural atmosphere of a group." "Any real change of the culture of a group is, therefore, interwoven with the changes of the power constellation within the group." (Barker, Dembo, & Lewin, "frustration and regression: an experiment with young children" in Child Behavior and Development)
"The child takes on the characteristic behavior of the group in which he is placed. . . . he reflects the behavior patterns which are set by the adult leader of the group." (Kurt Lewin in Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education)
'Change' has to take place in "the group," where the individual, finding his identity in "the group" is liberated from the father's/Father's authority. "Old school," i.e., traditional education reflects the father's/Father's authority in the classroom with 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, i.e., the educator'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 child who does right and obeys, 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 (expelling/grounding) any child who questions, challenges, defies, disregards, attacks the father's/Father's authority system (1-4).
"Protestantism was the strongest force in the extension of cold rational individualism." (Max Horkheimer, Vernunft and Selbsterhaltung; english: Reasoning and Self-Preservation) Doing your best as unto the Lord, "the priesthood of all believers," etc., engenders individualism, under God.
"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 5:30; 12:47-50
"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
"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
"And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it. For what is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world, and lose himself, or be cast away? For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, and in his Father's, and of the holy angels." Luke 9:23-26 1) deny your lusts, 2) endure the rejection of others for not affirming their lusts, and 3) follow the Lord, doing the Father's will.
"Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 1 John 2:15
Replace the father's/Father's authority in the classroom with the facilitator of 'change, i.e., the group psychotherapist and the culture is 'changed.'
"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, The Farther Reaches Of Human Nature)
"Blooms' Taxonomies" are "a psychological classification system" used "to develop attitudes and values ... which are not shaped by the parents." "Ordering" "different kinds of affective behavior," i.e., "the range of emotion(s)" "organized into value systems and philosophies of life." "It was the view of the group that educational objectives stated in the behavior form have their counterparts in the behavior of individuals, observable and describable therefore classifiable [true science is "observable and repeatable," i.e., objective, i.e., constant not "observable and describable," i.e., subject to an opinion, i.e., subject to 'change']." "Only those educational programs which can be specified in terms of intended student behaviors can be classified." "What we are classifying is the intended behavior of students—the ways in which individuals are to act, think, or feel as the result of participating in some unit of instruction." "… ordering and relating the different kinds of affective behavior." "… we need to provide the range of emotion from neutrality through mild to strong emotion, probably of a positive, but possibly also of a negative, kind." "… organized into value systems and philosophies of life …" "...many of these changes are produced by association with peers who have less authoritarian points of view, as well as through the impact of a great many courses of study in which the authoritarian pattern is in some ways brought into question while more rational and nonauthoritarian behaviors are emphasized." "The student must feel free to say he disliked _____ and not have to worry about being punished for his reaction." (Book 1: Cognitive Domain and Book 2: Affective Domain)
"To create effectively a new set of attitudes and values, the individual must undergo great reorganization of his personal beliefs and attitudes and he must be involved in an environment which in many ways is separated from the previous environment in which he was developed.... many of these changes are produced by association with peers who have less authoritarian points of view, as well as through the impact of a great many courses of study in which the authoritarian pattern is in some ways brought into question while more rational and nonauthoritarian behaviors are emphasized." "The effectiveness of this new set of environmental conditions is probably related to the extent to which the students are 'isolated' from the home during this period of time." "… objectives can best be attained where the individual is separated from earlier environmental conditions and when he is in association with a group of peers who are changing in much the same direction and who thus tend to reinforce each other." (Book 2: Affective Domain)
The following section is from a book explaining how the Communist Chinese brainwash their victims.
"The manner in which the prisoner came to be influenced to accept the Communist's definition of his guilt can best be described by distinguishing two broad phases—(1) a process of 'unfreezing,' [see the issues on Kurt Lewin, Unfreezing, Moving or Changing, Refreezing People, Force Field Analysis, and Group Dynamics; "Unfreezing. This term, also adopted from Lewinian change theory, refers to the process of disconfirming an individual's former belief system." (Irvin D. Yalom, The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy) "A successful change includes, therefore, three aspects: unfreezing the present level, moving to the new level, and freezing group life on the new level." (Kurt Lewin) "In brief, unfreezing is the breaking down of the mores, customs and traditions of an individual – the old ways of doing things – so that he is ready to accept new alternatives." (Edger Schein and Warren Bennis, Personal and Organizational Change Through Group Methods: The Laboratory Approach) ] in which the prisoner's physical resistance, social and emotional supports, self-image and sense of integrity, and basic values and personality were undermined, thereby creating a state of 'readiness' to be influence; and (2) a process of 'change,' in which the prisoner discovered how the adoption of 'the people's standpoint' and a reevaluation of himself from this perspective would provide him with a solution to the problems created by the prison pressure."
"Most were put into a cell containing several who were further along in reforming themselves and who saw it as their primary duty to "help" their most backward member to see the truth about himself in order that the whole cell might advance. Each such cell had a leader who was in close contact with the authorities for purposes of reporting on the cell's progress and getting advice on how to handle the Western member . . . the environment undermined the (clients) self-image."
". . . Once this process of self of self re-evaluation began, the (client) received all kinds of help and support from the cell mates and once again was able to enter into meaningful emotional relationships with others." (Interpersonal Dynamics: Essays in Readings on Human Interaction, ed. Warren G. Bennis, Edgar H. Schein, David E. Berlew, and Fred I. Steele) Anyone who has participated in the "group grade" classroom or in the consensus process can identify with this procedure, having experienced it in some way, shape, or form.
"The affective domain [the student's natural inclination to "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world (including "the group") stimulates and hate restraint] contains the forces that determine the nature of an individual's life and ultimately the life of an entire people." "The affective domain is, in retrospect, a virtual 'Pandora's Box' [a "box" full of evils, which once opened, can not be closed—once the father's/Father's authority, i.e., fear of judgment, i.e., "the lid" is removed it is difficult if not impossible to put it back on again].' It is in this 'box' that the most influential controls are to be found." "In fact, a large part of what we call "good teaching" is the teacher's ability to attain affective objectives ['liberating' the child's carnal thoughts from the father's/Father's authority] through challenging the student's fixed beliefs [challenging the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth] and getting them to discuss issues [evaluating the world through their carnal desires, i.e., their "lusts," i.e., their "self interests" of the 'moment']." (Book 2: Affective Domain)
"In the more traditional society a philosophy of life, a mode of conduct, is spelled out for its members at an early stage in their lives." "A major function of education in such a society is to achieve the internalization of this philosophy." "This is not to suggest that education in an open society does not attempt to develop personal and social values." "It does indeed." "But more than in traditional societies it allows the individual a greater amount of freedom in which to achieve a Weltanschauung1." "1Cf. Erich Fromm, 1941; T. W. Adorno et al., 1950." (Book 2: Affective Domain)
Erick Fromm and Theodor Adorno, who Benjamin Bloom built his "Weltanschauung" (world view) on were Marxists, i.e., members of the "Frankfurt School."
"Fromm gave the humanitarian, idealist, and romantic proponents of the New Left a Marx they could love." (Stephen Eric Bronner, Of Critical Theory and its Theorists)
"We are proud that in his conduct of life man has become free from external authorities, which tell him what to do and what not to do." "All that matters is that the opportunity for genuine activity be restored to the individual; that the purposes of society ["the group"] and of his own become identical." "... to give up 'God' and to establish a concept of man as a being ... who can feel at home in it [the world] if he achieves union with his fellow man and with nature." (Erick Fromm, Escape from Freedom)
"Authoritarian submission [humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining, capitulate "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will] 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." "Submission to authority, desire for a strong leader, subservience of the individual to the state [parental authority, local control, Nationalism], and so forth, have so frequently and, as it seems to us, correctly, been set forth as important aspects of the Nazi creed that a search for correlates of prejudice had naturally to take these attitudes into account." "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." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)
Adorno's error in connecting the father's/Father's authority to Hitler is that Hilter, as with all socialist (Local, National, and Global), had to destroy 'loyalty' to the father's authority in the home/the Father authority over all men (including the leader of a people), replacing it with 'loyalty' to "the group," i.e., to society, with him in control over all, in order to rule over "the people." "For larger groups, this means that a hierarchy of leaders has to be trained which reaches out into all essential subparts of the group. Hitler himself has obviously followed very carefully such a procedure. The democratic reversal of this procedure, although different in many respects, will have to be as thorough and as solidly based on group organization." (Benne)
"Our aim is not merely to describe prejudice [established commands, rules, facts, and truth that get in the way of lust, i.e., "human nature"] but to explain it in order to help in its eradication. Eradication means re-education." "Using social-environmental forces to change the parent's behavior toward the child." (Adorno)
". . . any intervention between parent and child tend to produce familial democracy [replacing discussion, which retains the father's/Father's authority with dialogue, which 'justifies' the child's carnal nature 'liberates' the child from the parent's authority, i.e., from having to do right and not wrong according to the parent's (the father's/Father's) established commands, rules, facts, and truth] regardless of its intent." "The consequences of family democratization take a long time to make themselves felt—but it would be difficult to reverse the process once begun. … once the parent can in any way imagine his own orientation to be a possible liability to the child in the world approaching." "… Once uncertainty is created in the parent how best to prepare the child for the future, the authoritarian family is moribund [the father's/Father's authority is negated in the child's thoughts, directly effecting his or her actions—questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking the father's/Father's authority for getting in the way, doing so without having a guilty conscience], regardless of whatever countermeasures may be taken." "The state, by its very interference in the life of its citizens, must necessarily undermine a parental authority which it attempts to restore." "For however much the state or community may wish to inculcate obedience and submission in the child, its intervention betrays a lack of confidence in the only objects from whom a small child can learn authoritarian submission." (Warren Bennis, The Temporary Society)
"The peasantry [the traditional family] constantly regenerates the bourgeoisie [the father's/Father's authority system]—in positively every sphere of activity and life." "We must learn how to eradicate all bourgeois habits, customs, and traditions everywhere." (Vladimir Lenin, Left-Wing Communism: an Infantile Disorder An Essential Condition of the Bolsheviks' Success May 12, 1920) Millions (hundreds of millions) died violent deaths (were "eradicated" and continue to be "eradicated") as a result of this ideology. The road to Utopia is paved with the bodies of those who got in the way, including the unborn, the elderly, the innocent, the righteous.
"The antithesis of the 'authoritarian' type was called 'revolutionary.'" "By The Authoritarian Personality [Theodor Adorno's book] 'revolutionary' had changed to the 'democratic.'" (Martin Jay The Dialectical Imagination: The History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research 1923-1950) This is why President Ronald Reagan stated, "I did not leave the democratic party. The democratic party left me [became Marxist]."
Replacing the father's/Father's authority with "the people's," i.e., "the group's" opinion (likes-dislikes) of the 'moment' 'changes' the individual, i.e., 'changes' the world.
"Prior to therapy the person is prone to ask himself, 'What would my parents want me to do?' During the process of therapy the individual come to ask himself, 'What does it mean to me?'" (Rogers)
"Without exception, [children] enter group therapy [the "group grade" classroom] with the history of a highly unsatisfactory experience in their first and most important group—their primary family [the traditional home with parents telling them what they can and can not do]." "What better way to help [the child] recapture the past than to allow him to re-experience and reenact ancient feelings [resentment, hostility] toward parents in his current relationship to the therapist [the facilitator of 'change]? The [facilitator of 'change'] is the living personification of all parental images [takes the place of the parent]. Group [facilitators] refuse to fill the traditional authority role: they do not lead in the ordinary manner, they do not provide answers and solutions [teach right from wrong from established commands, rules, facts, and truth], they urge the group [the children] to explore and to employ its own resources [to dialogue their "feelings," i.e., their desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' in the "light" of the current situation, i.e., their desire for "the group" approval (affirmation)]. The group [children] must feel free to confront the [the facilitator of 'change'], who must not only permit, but encourage, such confrontation [rebellion and anarchy]. He [the child] reenacts early family scripts in the group and, if therapy [brainwashing—washing respect for and fear of the father's/Father's authority from the child's brain (thoughts) ] is successful, is able to experiment with new behavior, to break free from the locked family role [submitting to the father's/Father's authority, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will] he once occupied. … the patient [the child] changes the past by reconstituting it ['creating' a "new" world order from his "ought," i.e., a world "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the current situation and/or people are stimulating, i.e., a world void of the father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience which the father's/Father's authority engenders for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for "lusting" after pleasure in disobedience]." (Irvin D. Yalom, The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy)
"It is not individualism [doing the father's/Father's will] that fulfills the individual [that satisfies his lusts], on the contrary it destroys him [it prevents him from becoming his self, i.e., from satisfying his lusts, i.e., from fulfilling his self interests]. Society [compromise in order to "get things done" in the group] is the necessary framework through which freedom [freedom from the father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience it engenders] and individuality [freedom to lust after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates without having a guilty conscience, with affirmation, i.e., the groups approval] are made realities." (Karl Marx, in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx)
"It is not the will or desire of any one person which establish order but the moving spirit of the whole group. Control is social." (John Dewey, Experience and Education)
"The real nature of man is the totality of social relations." (Karl Marx, Thesis on Feuerbach #6)
"The individual is emancipated [liberated from the father's/Father's authority] in the social group." "Freud commented that only through the solidarity of all the participants could the sense of guilt [the guilty conscience which is engendered by the father's/Father's authority] be assuaged." (Brown)
"It is usually easier to change individuals formed into a group than to change any one of them separately." "The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs by accepting belongingness to the group." (Kurt Lewin in Benne)
"Change in organization [from 'loyalty' to the father/Father to 'loyalty' to "the group" and the facilitator of 'change'] can be derived from the overlapping between play and barrier behavior [between dialogue and discussion, which when used together (in establishing right and wrong behavior) engenders confusion i.e., cognitive dissonance—"The lack of harmony between what one does and what one believes." "The pressure to change either one’s behavior or ones belief" (Ernest R. Hilgard, Introduction to Psychology)]." (Barker, Dembo, & Lewin, "frustration and regression: an experiment with young children" in Child Behavior and Development)
"(T)he group to which an individual belongs is the ground for his perceptions, his feelings, and his actions" (Kurt Lewin, Resolving social conflicts: Selected papers on group dynamics)
"There is no more important issue than the interrelationship of the group members." "To question the value or activities of the group, would be to thrust himself into a state of dissonance." "Few individuals, as Asch has shown, can maintain their objectivity in the face of apparent group unanimity." (Yalom)
"Group members must be able to synthesize individual 'felt' needs [lusts] with common group 'felt' needs [lusts]." (Warren Bennis, The Temporary Society)
"Only when the immediate interests [lusts, i.e., self interests] are integrated into a total view and related to the final goal of the process do they become revolutionary [overthrowing the father's/Father's authority]." (Lukács)
Mao's long march across America began in earnest in the fifties and sixties with the introduction of Marxist curriculum in the classroom—called "Bloom's Taxonomies." We are seeing its effect in America today. By 1971 over one million of Bloom's "taxonomies" were published for the Communist Chinese education system. (Benjamin Bloom, Forty Year Evaluation) Ask any teacher today if they have ever heard of "Bloom's Taxonomies" and they will probably smile, thinking you are a fellow comrade ready to inform them on some new way of applying it in the classroom. Any teacher questioning and/or challenging their use in the classroom will be looking for another job, if they can find one—having been labeled "unfit" to teach.
"There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (Book 2: Affective Domain)
The "educator" (facilitator of 'change') does not have to tell the students to question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack their parent's authority when they get home from school, if they were not doing that already (telling them would be "old school," maintaining the "old" world order of being told even if it was done for the 'purpose' of 'change,' i.e., for the 'purpose' of creating a "new" world order), all they have to do is use a curriculum in the classroom that "encourages," i.e., pressures the students to participate in the process of 'change,' i.e., into dialoguing their opinions to a consensus, 'justifying' their carnal nature, i.e., "lust" over and therefore against their parents authority. Being told to be "positive" (supportive of the other students carnal nature) and not "negative" (judging them by their parents standards) pressures students to 'justify' their and the other students love of pleasure and hate of restrain, doing so in order to be approved, i.e., affirmed by "the group," resulting in "the group" labeling those students who, holding onto their parents standards, i.e., refusing to participate in the process of 'change' or fighting against it as being "negative," divisive, hateful, intolerant, maladjusted, unadaptable to 'change,' resisters of 'change,' not "team players," lower order thinkers, in denial, phobic, prejudiced, judgmental, racist, fascist, dictators, anti-social, etc., i.e., "hurting" peoples "feelings" resulting in "the group" rejecting them—the student's natural desire for approval and fear of rejection forces him to participate. The same outcome applies to all adults, in any profession who participate in the process of 'change,' i.e., of 'justifying' compromise for the sake of lust. Once you are 'labeled,' you are 'labeled' for life.
"Certainly the Taxonomy was unproved at the time it was developed and may well be 'unprovable.'" (Benjamin Bloom, Forty Year Evaluation)
"It has been pointed out that we are attempting to classify phenomena which could not be observed or manipulated in the same concrete form as the phenomena of such fields as the physical and biological sciences. It was the view of the group that educational objectives stated in the behavior form have their counterparts in the behavior of individuals ... observe(able) and discrib(able) therefore classifi(able)." (Book 1: Cognitive Domain) When "human nature," i.e., "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life" becomes the standard for "good" behavior, than the individual who retains 'loyalty' to the father's/Father's authority, i.e., to "bad" behavior must be either converted, silenced, censored, or negated.
Benjamin Bloom dedicated his first Taxonomy to Ralph Tyler, who's student Thomas Kuhn (quoting Max Planck) wrote "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." (Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolution—As Irvin Yalom in his book, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy pointed out: "The current generation is the first in the history of the world which has nothing to learn from grandparents;") "If a paradigm [a 'change' in culture, from Patriarch to Heresiarch] is ever to triumph it must gain some first supporters, men who will develop it to the point where hardheaded arguments can be produced and multiplied" which eventuates "an increasing shift in the distribution of professional allegiances" whereupon "the man who continues to resist after his whole profession has been converted is ipso facto ceased to be a scientist." "Thomas S Kuhn spent the year 1958-1959 at the Center for Advanced Studies in the Behavior Sciences, directed by Ralph Tyler, where he finalized his 'paradigm shift' concept of 'Pre- and Post-paradigm periods.'" "Kuhn admitted problems with the schemata of his socio-psychological theory yet continued to urge its application into the scientific fields of astronomy, physics, chemistry, and biology [which found its way into the classroom]." (Kuhn) All Tyler, Bloom, Kuhn, et al. did was 'shift' communication in the lab from discussion, which holds everyone accountable to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., to limits and measures to dialogue, which makes the experiment itself (opinion) the outcome, putting the theory into practice (praxis), silencing any true scientist who (using established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., limits and measures, i.e., "rule of law") questions and/or rejects the outcome, i.e., the theory.
"Whether or not the classification scheme presented in Handbook I: Cognitive Domain is a true taxonomy is still far from clear." (Book 2: Affective Domain)
The "classification scheme" (the "taxonomy") grades the child's "feelings" along a spectrum (a continuum) from 'loyalty' to the father's/Father's authority (bad grade) to 'loyalty' to "the group," the process of 'change,' and the facilitator of 'change' (good grade), not upon his learning established commands, rules, facts, and truth (absolutes) that reinforce his 'loyalty' to the father's/Father's authority, a way of thinking that gets in the way of 'loyalty' to "the group," the process of 'change,' and the facilitator of 'change.' It is not a true taxonomy, i.e., scientific but an ideology (theory) being put into practice (praxis), under the guise of being "scientific". Everybody loves taking part of an experiment (like the foolish fly, in this case not knowing they are the experiment). People do not normally get up in the morning saying "I can hardly wait for someone to seduce, deceive, and manipulate me today. I hope they do it so well I will never become aware of it (or, if I become aware of it, I become good at it, seducing, deceiving, and manipulating others myself)."
"And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Romans 1:28-32
History for the liberal is not the lessons (restraints) of the past being passed onto the next generation but liberation of the next generation from the restraints (lessons) of the past so they can become their self—lusting after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates without having a guilty conscience (without restraint), hating the restrainer—i.e., now only of the world (with the facilitator of 'change,' having taken control over the children, now in control).
"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." "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." We can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled though they are following a code much more scrupulously 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." "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." (Rogers)
"Dr. Skinner says: 'We must accept the fact that some kind of control of human affairs is inevitable. We cannot use good sense in human affairs unless someone engages in the design and construction of environmental conditions which affect the behavior of men.'" (Rogers)
Freedom from lusting after dopamine emancipation is different than freedom to lust after dopamine emancipation.
"And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you." 2 Peter 2:3
All the facilitator of 'change' has to do is, through the use of dialogue, 'discover' what you covet, i.e., what you lust after, i.e., your self interest. He is then able to gain your trust, i.e., he has your best interest, i.e., your self interest in mind. Having gained your trust he "owns" you, i.e., he is able to use you (as "human resource") to satisfy his lusts, i.e., his self interest with your affirmation, casting you aside when you no longer satisfy his lusts, i.e., his self interest or you get in his way, doing to you what you did to the father/Father for getting in your way—it is the "game" you decided to play when you turned to him for direction (advice) instead of to the father/Father. He is dependent upon you, i.e., your affirmation in order to gain and retain power, getting rid of you when you get in his way (without having a guilty conscience). The 'moment' the master facilitator of 'change' got the woman in the garden in Eden into dialogue, i.e., into sharing her lust (to touch the "Ye shalt surely die" tree) in a non-judgmental (in a safe space/zone/place, i.e., in a non-hostile, "Thou shalt not surely die" environment), he "owned" her.
Evolution, "Climate Change," etc., (which—refusing to let facts and truth get in the way of the theory/opinion—are not based upon true science) are only the efforts of the liberal to get the next generation to reject God's authority (His judgment upon sin) and make their self, i.e., their lust for pleasure and their hatred toward restraint the foundation from which to determine right and wrong behavior.
History books—having been replaced with socialist (Marxist) propaganda—are no longer being published, directly effecting the policy making of people around the world. As Ervin Laszlo, one of the founders of the "Climate Change" ideology (agenda) wrote: "Bypassing the traditional channels of top-down decision making [the father's/Father's authority] 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) In the consensus process, as in dialogue and in an opinion there is no father's/Father's authority, i.e., truth and knowledge are subject to the person's carnal desires, i.e., lusts, i.e., self interests of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., that the current situation and/or people are stimulating, blinding them to their hatred toward those who preach, teach, and discuss the truth since their lust for pleasure is standing in the way, 'justifying' their hate.
"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
"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
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," "open ended, non-directed," 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)—as predators, charlatans, pimps, pedophiles, 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,