Part 3:11H The final 200 years

 

The final 200 years when pseudo idealism took humanity to a death-by-dogma, end play state of terminal alienation—the time when we needed to, as the Bible warned, ‘beware of false prophets’, the merchants of delusion and denial, for they are ‘the abomination that causes desolation’.

We now need to consider the situation faced by humanity in the final 200 years of its now plummeting path to self-destruction through excessive upset, because it was during this final stage in the march of upset that the great benefit of religion, which was its honesty, became too confronting, forcing the development and adoption of other forms of pseudo idealism that were so dishonest that humanity was taken to the brink of terminal alienation and extinction.

What happened around 200 years ago to dramatically increase the levels of upset in society were further serious elaborations on the factors that caused the sudden increase in upset 11,000 years ago. Firstly, due to improvements in medicine and sanitation, the world’s population increased so rapidly that in many parts of the world people found themselves virtually living on top of each other; villages became towns, which in turn became cities and even mega-city metropolises. Cities represented the most extreme congestion of people and this factor, along with their nature-eliminated, un-natural environment, which was so destructive of our innocent instinctive soul, greatly compounded the spread and increase of upset. Of course, once we humans became alienated, cities did provide a refuge from the criticising innocence of the natural world—they were a marvellous hide-out for alienation—but for the souls of the next generations who had to grow up in such soul-less environments cities were devastatingly alien, unnatural places; as the Australian historian Manning Clark said, ‘The bush [wilderness] is our source of innocence; the town is where the devil prowls around’ (Sydney Morning Herald, 18 Feb. 1985), or as the English poet Percy Bysshe Shelley wrote, ‘Away, away, from men and towns, to the wild wood and the downs—to the silent wilderness, where the soul need not repress its music’ (To Jane: The Invitation, c.1820). No wonder Christ looked forward to the time when understanding of the human condition would be found and alienating cities could gradually be dismantled (as they now will be), saying, ‘Do you see all these great buildings?…Not one stone here will be left on another; everyone will be thrown down’ (Matt. 24:2; Mark 13:2; Luke 19:44, 21:6).

The second immense influence on the spread and growth of upset and thus alienation in the world was the development of communication technology of such sophistication that, in terms of one human’s access to another, it basically shrunk the world down to one giant city—worse, one immense household. Initially, there was the delivery of letters through a sophisticated postal system, and then mass printing of documents and newspapers, and then typewriters, and then the telephone, and then television, and then credit cards, computers and faxes, and then emails and mobile phones, and then the world wide web and the likes of Facebook and Twitter. From birth, modern humans have been both immersed in an ocean of upset behaviour, especially alienated behaviour, and overwhelmed by anxiety and stress.

The overall effect of extremely congested living and of the increase in the efficiency of communication technology was that it led to upset—especially alienation from our all-loving true self—reaching a crescendo, as these quotes illustrate: ‘today’s children are probably the least loved generation of all’ (Robert de Grauw, Letter to the Editor, TIME mag. 3 Apr. 2006); ‘96 percent of American families are now dysfunctional’ (popular US therapist and author John Bradshaw quoting recovery movement statistics on dysfunctional families in America, in The Australian, 8 May 1993); ‘The 1990 US Census stated there will be more stepfamilies than original families by the year 2000, and that 66 percent of those stepfamilies break up when children are involved’ (Stepfamily Foundation, <http://www.stepfamily.org/stepfamily-statistics.html>); ‘one in two US children will live in a single-parent family at some point in childhood’ (US Census Bureau of Household and Family Statistics, 2000); ‘63 percent of the 18.5 million US children under 5 years of age were in some type of regular child care arrangement’ (US Census Bureau, 2005); ‘the electronic age has ushered in electronic parenting. Kids spend far more time sitting passively before a device such as a computer or television than they do playing or speaking with their families’ (The Commercial Appeal, 26 Aug. 2001); ‘the sexualisation of Western culture [has meant] that sex has been robbed of its emotional depth…For young men and women, it’s increasingly a physical activity, with no real pleasure and no meaning at all…one hears of lipstick parties, where teenage girls wearing different coloured lipstick line up to give oral sex to boys with the aim of giving them a candy-striped penis’ (Clive Hamilton, co-author of the report ‘Youth and Pornography in Australia’, The Australian, 24 June 2006); ‘someone born since 1945 is likely to be up to 3 times more depressed than their parents and 10 times more than their grandparents’ (psychologist Michael Yapko in his 1999 book Hand-Me-Down Blues); ‘Depression is now the leading cause of disability in the US’ (Andrew Solomon in his 2001 book The Noonday Demon); ‘Truly alarming evidence from pharmaceutical prescriptions for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) drugs shows that in 2005 one in 25 children in many poorer areas of Australia suffer from ADHD’ (The Daily Telegraph, 13 June 2006); and ‘According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), about 1 in 166 American children born today will fall somewhere on the autistic spectrum. That’s double the rate of 10 years ago and 10 times the estimated incidence a generation ago’ (TIME mag. 15 May 2006). The psychological invulnerability that the reality-detached ADHD and autistic mind adopted to cope with the unbearable levels of upset in the world will be looked at in some detail in Part 6:5.

Australia is one of the most sheltered and isolated and thus innocent countries left in the world, and yet its society is about to unravel with psychological suffering, as this 2011 report on the front page of the Sydney Morning Herald indicates: ‘The well-being of Australia’s children and young people has declined alarmingly in the past decade—and plunging marriage rates are partly to blame, a major study has found. Growing rates of child abuse and neglect, of children being placed in foster care, and of teenage mental health problems, including a rise in hospital admissions for self-harm, are rooted in the rise of one-parent families and de facto couples, violent and unstable relationships, and divorce, the report says’ (‘Decline in marriage blamed for neglect’, 6 Sept. 2011). Humans are now so alienated, so divorced from their true self, they can hardly live with themselves, let alone anyone else. The real reason for the breakdown in relationships is alienation. Revealingly, recent generations have been labelled the ‘X generation’, the ‘Y generation’, and now the ‘Z generation’ which, according to Wikipedia, comprises ‘people born between the mid-1990s and late 2000s’. The Canadian writer Douglas Coupland defined a Generation X’er as one who ‘lives an X sort of life—cerebral, alienated, seriously concerned with cool’ (Sydney Morning Herald, 22 Aug. 1994). These are all qualities associated with having had to adjust to an extremely soul-exhausted world. The adolescent psychologist Michael Carr-Gregg was reported as saying that ‘Generation Y is being ravaged by depression, anxiety disorders and stress disorders’ (‘Face it, we are all narcissists now’, Miranda Devine, Sydney Morning Herald, 3 Sept. 2009). What exactly did we mean when we said the X, Y, Z generations? The end game state of alienation, terminal alienation. After all, what comes after Z?

And the proof of this end game state of alienation is, as mentioned at the start of this presentation, indisputable. As a result of the emergence of overwhelming levels of upset in the last 200 years humanity has endured two massive world wars and countless other insurgencies, as well as the inglorious honour of inventing weapons of such ferocity that they could wipe out entire cities.

The repercussion of upset reaching this crescendo on our strategies for coping with the human condition was that people could no longer cope with the honesty of religion—it became too confronting, guilt-inducing and unbearably depressing. Yes, the great benefit of religion—of the honesty imbued in the prophet or prophets (in the case of Hinduism) the religion was founded around—actually became a liability, because by retaining a presence of a prophet’s soundness and truth, religions reminded humans of their own corrupted state and their alienation from truth, which in turn accentuated their sense of guilt; as the author Mary McCarthy once wrote about religion, ‘Only people who are very good can afford to become religious; with all the others it makes them worse’ (Memories of a Catholic Girlhood, 1957). It was at this point when the honesty of religion became too confronting that much less confronting and less guilt-emphasising forms of pseudo idealism had to be found, with the extremely dangerous and negative effect being the loss of the precious honesty contained in religion.

When the truthful lives and thoughts of religions’ founding prophets became unbearably confronting and condemning, Guilt-Free Expressions of Idealism to support and find ‘feel good’ relief from became highly sought after. These expressions took two forms. Firstly, you could defer to Less Guilt Emphasising Forms of Religion where, say within Christianity, rather than following a denomination that focused on the study and acknowledgment of the integrity of the words and life of Christ, you selected one that emphasised worship, adoration and ceremony, such as Catholicism, or the more euphoric, charismatic Evangelical varieties of Christianity that have recently gained in popularity. Or you could associate yourself with religious groups that focused on simple dogmatic obedience to the teachings of one of the religions, becoming a more fundamentalist and literalist interpreter and practitioner of a faith. Or you could find a religion like Buddhism that avoided any acknowledgement of your corrupted condition and instead focused on extinguishing the mental trauma of your upset state through meditation. As one convert said of Buddhism, it’s ‘non-judgemental, there’s no notion of sin, there’s no notion of good and evil, you don’t embrace negativity’ (from Light at Edge of the World: Science of the Mind of Buddhism, National Geographic Channel, 2006). The problem with focusing on ways, such as meditation, to extinguish the mental trauma of the upset, human-condition-afflicted state was that, once again, they undermined the fundamental responsibility of being a conscious being, which is to think and understand, ultimately to find understanding of the human condition—as the great Russian philosopher Nikolai Berdyaev (1874-1948) wrote: ‘Man sought to escape from that terror [of the truth of ‘man’s…exile from paradise’] by extinguishing consciousness and returning to the realm of the unconscious. But this is not the way to regain lost paradise’ (The Destiny of Man, 1931, tr. N. Duddington, 1960, p.41 of 310). The point being made is that as upset increased, more and more escapist strategies for coping with the human condition simply had to be adopted, despite how irresponsible and destructive that trend was of humanity’s heroic struggle to find knowledge.

The second form of more guilt-free expressions of idealism to support and live through were non-religious and in some cases atheistic, God/​Integrative Meaning-denying Pseudo Idealistic Causes like communism or socialism, environmentalism, feminism, multiculturalism, aboriginalism, politically correct postmodernism, etc, etc—basically any idealistic cause you could find that allowed you to avoid having to think about and deal with the real issue behind all the destruction and imperfection in the world, namely your own and everyone else’s corrupted condition. TIME magazine editor Richard Stengel perfectly captured this trend when he wrote that ‘The environment became the last best cause, the ultimate guilt-free issue’ (TIME mag. 31 Dec. 1990).

Since humanity was, as we will see, trending towards ever more guilt-free but dishonest forms of pseudo idealism to cope with the exponentially increasing levels of upset in the world, there was clearly going to come a time—unless understanding of the human condition was found—when excessive dishonesty would herald the end of the all-important search for liberating understanding of the human condition and lead to terminal levels of alienation in humans. As Richard Neville summarised: ‘We are locked in a race between self destruction and self discovery’—either we found understanding of ourselves or we faced self-destruction. If we gave up the search for knowledge, ultimately understanding of ourselves, there was no hope, and, as will now be described, the virtual abandonment of that search by taking up ever more dishonest/​truthless forms of pseudo idealism did take humanity to the brink of hopelessness. By denying any confronting truth—that is, by taking the practice of guilt-stripping to the extreme—and simply dogmatically demanding we be ideal, pseudo idealism was only adding to alienation, burying humanity deeper in Plato’s cave of denial of any truth, making it harder and harder to reach liberating understanding of ourselves.

In fact, as will become increasingly apparent as this presentation progresses, to find understanding of the human condition a veritable mountain of accumulated dishonesty, especially from pseudo idealists, had to be defied and corrected. AND, if that weren’t enough, the advocates of extreme dishonesty then all but destroyed our efforts at the WORLD TRANSFORMATION MOVEMENT to bring the humanity-saving understanding of the human condition to the world! The whole journey of getting all the truth up from its almost totally buried state and then bringing the humanity-liberating understanding of the human condition that that truth made possible to the world has been so difficult that, in hindsight, it seems all but a miracle that it has almost been achieved. The Persecution of the WTM section on our website (<www.humancondition.com/persecution>) documents the horrific persecution the WTM has had to endure and our final wonderful and heroic vindication in the law courts—however, until substantial support builds for these all-precious, liberating understandings their survival remains in the balance.

To now drill down into the progression of the increasingly guilt-stripped and thus ever more dishonest and thus ever more dangerous forms of pseudo idealism that humanity developed and adopted when Religion became too confronting—commencing with Socialism and Communism. These movements denied the notion of a perfecting God and avoided the depressing recognition of a prophet’s world of soundness. Instead, they simply dogmatically demanded an idealistic social or communal world and, in doing so, denied and oppressed the whole reality of the knowledge-finding, creative, egocentric, corrupting, unavoidably-variously-upset, individualistic, competitive, combative, materialism-compensation-needing, self-distraction-necessary, human-condition-afflicted world. Karl Marx, the political philosopher whose mid-nineteenth century theories gave rise to socialism and communism, argued that ‘The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is [not to understand the world but] to change it’ (Theses on Feuerbach, written in German in 1845). By ‘change it’ he meant just make it cooperative or social or communal. Marx was wrong—the whole ‘point’ and responsibility of being a conscious being is to understand our world and place in it, ultimately to find understanding of the human condition. The attraction—and inherent lie—of socialism/​communism was that you could support and live the ideals without acknowledging the reality of the human condition and its struggle.

The limitation of these philosophies was that while there was no confronting prophet involved, there was an obvious focus on the condemning cooperative, social ideals. And so in time, as levels of upset and thus insecurity increased, the need again arose for the invention of an even more guilt-free form of idealism to live through, hence the development of The New Age Movement (the forerunners of which were the Age of Aquarius and Peace Movements). In this movement all the realities and negatives of our corrupted condition were transcended in favour of taking up a completely escapist, think-positive, human-potential-stressing, self-affirming, motivational, feel-good approach. So in truth, the new age movement was never going to transport humanity to an Aquarian new age of peaceful freedom from upset, it was only ever going to lead to an even greater state of deluded, dishonest alienation than that espoused by socialism/​communism. As the philosopher Thomas Nagel recognised, ‘The capacity for transcendence brings with it a liability to alienation, and the wish to escape this condition…can lead to even greater absurdity’ (The View From Nowhere, 1986).

The limitation of the new age movement, in terms of being an effective means of escaping the horror of the human condition, was that while it did not stress the cooperative ideals like socialism and communism did, in seeking to transcend humans’ upset state it still offered up a constant reminder of the issue of our variously upset, embattled, troubled, estranged, alienated condition—a problem the next level of delusion sought to dispense with by simply denying its existence; yes, the Feminist Movement maintained there was no real difference between people, especially not between men and women. In particular, it denied the legitimacy of the exceptionally egocentric, combative male dimension to life that, as will be explained in Part 7:1, had taken on the heroic frontline role in fighting the ignorance of our instinctive self. Based on extreme dogma, the feminist movement could not and has not produced any real reconciliation between men and women, rather, as this quote points out, ‘What happened was that the so-called Battle of the Sexes became a contest in which only one side turned up. Men listened, in many cases sympathetically but, by the millions, were turned off’ (Don Peterson, Courier Mail, June 1994). Only by winning the battle to champion the ego—that is, explain the human condition and establish that our egocentric conscious thinking self is good and not bad—could the polarities of life of so-called ‘good’ and ‘evil’, that women and men are in truth an expression of, be reconciled.

Again, as far as offering an effective way to transcend the realities of the human condition, feminism’s flaw was that while it superficially dispensed with the problem of humans’ divisive reality, we still remained the focus of attention and that was confronting. The solution that emerged to counter this limitation was the Environmental or Green Movement, which removed all need to confront and think about the human state because all focus was diverted from self onto the environment. Of course, the truth is that by not addressing the cause of the destruction of the natural world, namely the issue of our human condition’s massively upset angry, egocentric and alienated state, there has been no real let up in the pace of our world’s devastation, as these quotes emphasise: ‘The trees aren’t the problem. The problem is us’ (Simply Living mag. Sept. 1989), and ‘We need to do something about the environmental damage in our heads’ (TIME mag. 24 May 1993). The guilt-stripping dishonesty of the environmental movement was recognised by the Australian businessman Ray Evans when he wrote that ‘Environmentalism has largely superseded Christianity as the religion of the upper classes in Europe and to a lesser extent in the United States. It is a form of religious belief which fosters a sense of moral superiority in the believer, but which places no importance on telling the truth [about the real issue of our corrupted human condition]’ (Nine Facts About Climate Change, 2006, p.2 of 27).

So for all its guilt-relieving benefits, the environmental movement still contained a condemning moral component: if we were not responsible with the environment, ‘good’, we were behaving immorally, ‘bad’. Moreover, nature in its purity exists in stark contrast to humans’ corrupted condition.

At this stage in the march of upset yet another form of pure pseudo idealism had to be manufactured in which confrontation with the by now extremely confronting and depressing truth of the dilemma of the human condition could be totally sidestepped. What was required was a completely guilt-stripped dogma that was devoid of any need to confront and wrestle with the issue of soundness and Godliness; with whether you are a cooperative, social person; with the issue of your troubled self; with the morality issue of men and women’s treatment of each other; and with the issue of whether or not you are being kind to the environment. Upset had become so great that the need was to simply be ideal without question. This demand for a totally non-confronting form of relief from feeling ‘bad’ resulted in the establishment of the Politically Correct Movement, which has had no other focus or requirement beyond simply choosing, from the two simplistic, fundamental, ‘political’ options in life—of being either ‘good’ or ‘bad’—to be ‘good’.

The politically correct culture was a pure form of freedom-denying dogma that fabricated, demanded and imposed ideality or ‘correctness’, specifically that of an undifferentiated world, which was in complete denial of the reality of the underlying issue of the existence of and reasons for humans’ variously embattled and upset states, and beyond that of the deeper question raised by those ‘non-ideal’ states of the issue of the human condition. For instance, the politically correct argue that the children’s nursery rhyme Baa Baa Black Sheep is racist and must instead be recited as ‘Baa baa rainbow sheep’ (London’s Daily Telegraph, 18 Feb. 1997).

Within the politically correct culture the need for relief from guilt was all-pervasive; the mind was constantly on the hunt for opportunities and ‘good causes’ through which to be ‘idealistic’ and achieve that rush of psychological relief of feeling that at last you are a ‘good’ rather than a ‘bad’ person. Wherever there was a victim of humanity’s battle, there was an opportunity to take up their cause and access that all-important relief. Shortly, we will see that Christ described this development in much harsher terms when he said, ‘Wherever there is a carcass [the extremely upset], there the vultures [the false prophets, the merchants of delusion and escapism] will gather.’ With the levels of upset in the world becoming extreme, relief-hunting became a huge industry, to the extent that we became, as the sociologist Frank Furedi recognised, ‘a society that celebrates victimhood rather than heroism’ (The Culture of Fear, 1997).

Again, while there was an ever increasing need for more dishonest, guilt-free forms of idealism to live through, for humanity to arrive at this desperately insecure state where people were only concerned with finding relief from their own guilt through supporting the cause of those who were suffering or less fortunate was an extremely dangerous development because it meant the human race had, in effect, abandoned the battle to find the all-important liberating understanding of ourselves. This is not to say that in a critical battle, such as the one humanity has been involved in, showing care and compassion towards those who were suffering from the effects of the battle was not important. It was very important, because although we have all been involved in an upsetting battle, selflessness is still, as has been explained, what binds wholes together; it is the glue within humanity’s army. However, while caring for those struggling to keep up was important, it was obviously critical to support those on the frontline who were still carrying on the battle, otherwise the whole war would surely be lost. In this light it can be seen how very dangerous and irresponsible the politically correct movement’s focus and insistence on caring only for the victims of the battle was.

In fact, while care and compassion for those suffering from the battle was (‘was’, because the battle is now over) certainly something a healthy society had to practice, caring for them in order to delude yourself you are an upset-free, ideal person seriously discredited the whole practice of consideration and kindness itself. Indeed, using idealism to delude yourself that you were good gave idealism such a bad name that no relatively sound, secure person wanted to be part of the left-wing political movement where relief-hunting had become endemic. In the end, there was no longer any authentic, trustable, credible, healthy, meaningful idealistic movement in society to counteract any excessively selfish and destructive right-wing behaviour—there was only moderate factions within the right-wing that the sane and rationally-behaved could join and support.

The whole democratic process that our society depended on for there to be effective progress and functionality was being destroyed by mad desperados—by a group of people who were misusing democracy for their own selfish need to make themselves feel good, rather than for what democracy was designed to be: a tool to decide the right or wrong way to manage any particular course of action. How could you possibly have an effective discussion about how best to handle a certain situation if participants in that discussion were not interested in whether the action was right or not, only in whether their participation would make them feel good and/​or whether the course of action itself would ultimately make them feel good? The answer is you couldn’t. It was a derailed, ineffective, dysfunctional, highly imperfect, pointless—in fact, defunct—debate. It was like being in mid-ocean on a life-boat, desperately trying to find your way to the safety of land, when someone on board decides to hijack and destroy the mission by capsizing the boat because they had become obsessed with wanting to cool off in the water. As has already been carefully explained, it was totally irresponsible, selfish—in fact, mad—behaviour. The human race was trying to save itself from destruction by finding knowledge, ultimately understanding of the human condition, but the extreme practitioners of pseudo idealism were only interested in making themselves feel good. Contrary to what their banners said, pseudo idealists no longer cared about the future of the world. Theirs was completely selfish behaviour and not at all the idealistic behaviour they made it out to be and deluded themselves it was. Thank goodness the arrival of understanding of the human condition stops this madness, because it was only while it wasn’t possible to explain humanity’s great heroic battle that it was possible to get away with such mad behaviour—‘Can’t you see we are being idealistic, we are making a better world.’ What rubbish—such behaviour is nothing more than a selfish attempt to gain relief from the agony of the human condition!

Idealism was being misused—in fact, extremely, horribly misused. A particularly dysfunctional aspect of the misuse was the arrogant extent of pseudo idealists’ delusion that they were actually ideal, that they held the moral high ground. In the situation that has existed, where the reality of the upsetting battle to find knowledge couldn’t be explained, idealism—albeit the bastardised form of ‘victim-hunting-to-make-yourself-feel-good, politically correct’, pseudo idealism—had a field day mocking realism as evil. In the vacuum where the reason for humans’ upset, corrupted state was not able to be explained, the ‘intellectuals’/ ‘liberal elites’/ ‘chattering classes’/ ‘left-wing trendy café society’/ ‘chardonnay socialists’/ ‘radical chic’/ ‘Hollywood Left’/ ‘CBS-New York Times, BBC-Guardian, ABC-Sydney Morning Herald, Time and National Geographic ‘left-wing rags’, etc, etc axis’/ ‘high-minded do-gooders’/ ‘rainbow extremists’/ ‘strident bleeding hearts’/ ‘feel good, warm inner glow, blissed out compassion junkies’, as the relief-hunting, pseudo idealistic left-wing are variously referred to, conceitedly promenaded about with a holier-than-thou attitude, while the right-wing advocates of freedom (from the oppression of idealism in order to participate in the corrupting search for knowledge) were arrogantly and disdainfully treated as morally bankrupt and contemptible. For example, the right-wing so-called ‘Tea Party’ that recently emerged in American politics was derided by the left-wing Democrats for being devoid of any sound arguments for their cause—they were accused of being nothing more than promoters of ‘fear, xenophobia, cryptofascism, creationism, inequality and ignorance’ (from a cartoon by Turner in The Irish Times that was re-printed in The Australian, 3 Nov. 2010). It is no wonder politics became so polarised—to the point where the two sides, rather than providing humanity with a healthy equilibrium, existed in totally opposed and different continents, and may as well have lived completely apart on separate planets. The deluded arrogance of the extremely dangerous dishonesty of the left became insufferable, unbearable, overwhelming, terrifying, sickening.

Again, the problem at base was the inability to explain the human condition. While it was easy to argue the case for the idealism of the left-wing, it was almost impossible to argue the case for the realism of the right-wing. How could you justify any selfishness or inequality; how could you defend behaviour that appeared in every way to be inhumane; how could you argue that not being ideally behaved was good? The answer is that until we could explain the paradox of the human condition we couldn’t, well not sufficiently. Writers like the Russian-American Ayn Rand (1905-1982) did well to mount some sort of a case for right-wing free enterprise, but countering such efforts were the ‘Capitalists are Pigs’ placards used in protests at G8 summits, and left-wing advocates like Michael Moore, the American film maker and activist who, at the conclusion of his 2009 documentary, Capitalism: A Love Story, smugly announced that ‘Capitalism is evil.’ The truth is, it was capitalism that kept the human race going, not communism. Without the relief, reward and distraction of materialism/​material goods that the exchange of money or capital facilitated humans would not have been able to cope with and carry on their upsetting, idealism-defying, heroic search for knowledge. With understanding of the human condition we can now explain that socialism/​communism, the pseudo idealistic dogmatic insistence that everyone be social and communal—live for society and the communal good rather than seek a degree of material relief and reward for yourself—ignored the reality of the upsetting battle that humans have had to wage to find understanding of themselves, of their less-than-ideal human condition. With understanding of the human condition finally found what is revealed is that it was, in fact, the left-wing that was morally bankrupt, not the right! The truth was not as it appeared. In the Adam Stork analogy, upset angry, egocentric and alienated Adam is the hero of the story not the villain; it was his condemning, ridiculing, upsetting idealistic opponent, which the extreme pseudo idealist came to represent, who was actually the villain and not the hero he deluded himself to be and would have others believe he was.

At this point we need to return to the progression of the development of even more guilt/​truth stripped forms of idealism to live through and look at what emerged after the development of the politically correct movement. While being interested only in those who were suffering was so extremely dishonest and dangerous, from the perspective of the do-good, feel-good politically correct supporter, relief from guilt/​self-confrontation/​depression/​the agony of the human condition was all that mattered—when the truth is killing you, you have no qualms about escaping it. So to help ensure no subversive questioning could creep in and undermine this strategy, a philosophical justification for truthlessness was bolted on to the political correct culture. This was Postmodern Deconstructionism, ‘a bewilderingly complex school of continental philosophy, or pseudo-philosophy’ of ‘intellectual assumptions—truth is a matter of opinion, there is no real world outside of language and hence no facts independent of our descriptions of them’ (Luke Slattery, The Australian, 23 July 2005).

We saw how the politically correct culture considered the children’s nursery rhyme Baa Baa Black Sheep racist and insisted it be recited as ‘Baa baa rainbow sheep.’ The 1994 postmodernist teaching guide From Picture Book To Literary Theory similarly argued that school children shouldn’t be read stories about witches on broomsticks because they were sexist for ‘narrowly defining women’s roles’, or the Three Little Pigs fairy tale because of its elitist promotion of ‘the virtues of property ownership and the safety of the private domain which are key elements of capitalist ideology’. In his 2001 book The Liar’s Tale: A History of Falsehood, Jeremy Campbell described ‘postmodern theory’ as having elevated ‘lying to the status of an art and neutralised untruth’. It ‘neutralised untruth’ because by denying the existence of the whole issue of humans’ variously embattled and upset states it made any discussion of such differences—any pursuit of insight into the human condition—impossible.

With levels of upset in people becoming extreme and the associated levels of guilt becoming unbearable, pseudo idealistic, politically correct, postmodern relief-hunters—empowered by their own self-righteousness and the right’s inability to defend itself—took over almost everywhere. Drawn together by their shared overwhelming need to find causes through which to feel ‘good’ they captured such major institutions as the national broadcasters in the UK and Australia. As a former British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) correspondent, Robin Aitken, said, ‘[I] could not raise a cricket team of Tories [conservatives] among BBC staff’ (The Australian, 10 Oct. 2005). The British journalist Melanie Phillips similarly observed that ‘With a few honourable exceptions, the BBC views every issue through the prism of left-wing, secular, anti-Western thinking’ (Daily Mail, 16 May 2005). As government-owned bodies, national broadcasters like the BBC in Britain and the ABC in Australia (who, unsurprisingly, did everything they could to destroy the honest, human-condition-confronting work of the WTM) are supposed to represent all the people, not one extreme faction. A blogger who called himself ‘Marcellus’ (because, he said, ‘In 44BC the tribune Gaius Marcellus tried to prevent Julius Caesar overturning the Roman Republic and becoming a tyrant…he failed at that time’) posted this alarm: ‘The broadcasters particularly in the BBC are…acting like the militant wing of the Labour Party. They have completely lost all restraint and integrity. They are completely out of order…[it’s] a national outrage…[that they] are allowed to control the most influential power centre in the history of mankind. The BBC is run by an extreme, unrepresentative and unelected cυlt. The Left have finally ruined the BBC…The BBC is now irreparably infiltrated and broken…All responses to the Tories are to give the impression that whatever the Tories say, do or propose is immoral or incompetent, or imply that selfish, self-serving or somehow bad motives are the real reason for them—that they are not proposed altruistically for the genuine benefit of the country and therefore cannot be a credible alternative to what is being done by Labour, who are altruistic’ (‘How the Left have corrupted broadcast news’, 1 Feb. 2010; see <www.wtmsources.com/124>). As mentioned, the pseudo idealistic left-wing sanctimoniously strutted around as if they held the moral high ground while the right-wing was treated as morally bankrupt and contemptible when, in truth, it was the left-wing that was morally bankrupt and contemptible.

The problem of pseudo idealism in the media was not confined to the national broadcasters. A 2005 UCLA-led study into the political leanings of media in the US revealed that ‘almost all major media outlets tilt to the left…there is quantifiable and significant bias’ (‘Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist’, UCLA News, 14 Dec. 2005). While ‘Marcellus’, like the original Gaius Marcellus, was unable to prevent the ‘ruin[ing]’ of the BBC, there was at least some active resistance to what was happening to the media in the US—in a 2010 campaign run by the Media Research Center, a watchdog group that analyses the media for liberal bias in America, ‘Four billboard trucks bearing the message “Stop the Liberal Bias, Tell the Truth!” began circling the Manhattan headquarters of ABC, CBS, NBC and the New York Times’ for ‘four weeks’ (‘Trucks Encircle ABC, CBS, NBC, Challenge ‘Liberal’ Media to ‘Tell The Truth’, by Michael W. Chapman, 4 Oct. 2010, CNSnews.com).

Much of academia, the supposed home of higher learning, has similarly been hijacked by overly upset, guilt-escaping, truth-hating relief-hunters. A ‘comprehensive’ survey undertaken in 2005 by political science professors at the University of Toronto revealed that ‘87 percent’ of the teaching faculty ‘at the most elite’ ‘American universities’ were ‘left-wing’ ‘liberal’. A co-author of the study, Professor Robert Lichter, commented that ‘What’s most striking is how few conservatives there are in any field [of study in US universities]…It’s a very homogenous environment’ (‘College Faculties A Most Liberal Lot, Study Finds’, Washington Post, 29 Mar. 2005). That ‘87 percent’ of teachers in the major American centres of learning held a distinct bias of thought was certainly a ‘most striking’—indeed truly frightening—statistic. The literary scholar Harold Bloom recognised the danger of this hijacking of academia by truth-hating relief-hunters in his 1994 book The Western Canon, which, as a TIME magazine review summarised, asserted that a ‘rebellion in U.S. schools against Dead White European Male authors’ (or ‘D.W.E.Ms’) would lead to ‘the end of civilization’ through a ‘triumph of the forces of darkness’ (TIME mag. 10 Oct. 1994). In The Western Canon, Bloom lamented that ‘Batman comics…will replace Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Wordsworth’ (p.485 of 560). A 2006 article in The Australian newspaper reported that Australia’s then Prime Minister, John Howard, ‘believes the postmodern literature being taught in schools is “rubbish”…accusing state education authorities of “dumbing down” the English syllabus and succumbing to political correctness. [He said] “I feel very, very strongly about [this situation where]…traditional texts, are treated no differently from pop cultural commentary”’ (21 Apr. 2006). In the article, Howard, Australia’s greatest ever Prime Minister (in my view), also referred to postmodern discourse as meaningless ‘gobbledegook’. In his insightfully titled 1987 book The Closing of the American Mind, the political scientist Allan Bloom also wrote of the devastating effects of postmodern so-called ‘deconstructionist’ teaching in American universities, contending that ‘we are producing a race of moral illiterates, who have never asked the great questions of good and evil, or truth and beauty, who have indeed no idea that such questions even could be asked…deprived of literary guidance they [students] no longer have any image of a perfect soul, and hence do not long to have one. They do not even imagine that there is such a thing…If the classics are studied at all in the universities they are studied as curiosities in the humanities departments, not as vital centres of the liberal tradition, and not as texts offering profound insight into the human condition’ (The Australian, 25 July 1987).

Not so long ago, HRH The Prince of Wales (whose mentor or main influence in his philosophical life was, like mine, Sir Laurens van der Post, and who also attended Geelong Grammar School where, like me, he benefited from the influence of Sir James Darling’s soul-rather-than-intellect-emphasising, Platonic education system) wrote a letter of deep concern to the Lord Chancellor of Great Britain, questioning the extreme bias that is now also apparent in legal thinking, stating that ‘The Human Rights Act is only about the rights of individuals. I am unable to find a list of social responsibilities attached to it and this betrays a fundamental distortion in social and legal thinking’ (The Australian, 27 Sept. 2002).

Dr William Anderson, the Assistant Professor of Economics at Frostburg State University in the US, similarly observed that ‘Justice pretty much is dead in the United States…Like so many other trends, this one has its intellectual underpinnings in that academic refuse pile we call Post-Modernism…a line of thinking that denies any possibility of Truth, and is the dominant “guiding light”—darkness?—in academe these days…right now, the post-modernists are winning battle after battle. It is one thing when post-modern nonsense dominates a history or English class; it is quite another when it becomes the bedrock of modern law’ (‘Post-Modern Prosecutions’, 25 Nov. 2006; Accessed 31 Jan. 2011: see <www.wtmsources.com/115>).

The American lawyer Gary Saalman also wrote that ‘In recent years…postmodernism has risen to the forefront of legal theory. Postmodern theorists…claim the law cannot have any foundation because there is no foundation for objective knowledge of any kind…Principles of law could never reflect universal truths, they argue…According to these scholars, it is senseless to talk about whether a law is right or wrong or moral or amoral…most observers agree that postmodern theories of law are exerting a huge influence today in the courtroom and the legislature…Remember, these are not a lunatic fringe at the margins of legal practice. They include department heads, and leading professors of law schools…practicing lawyers and legal authorities’ (‘Postmodernism and You: Law’, Gary Saalman, 1996; Accessed 31 Jan. 2011: see <www.wtmsources.com/109>).

And, in his 2006 book Understanding the Times: The Collision of Today’s Competing Worldviews, the American religious leader Dr David Noebel had this to say about the dangers of Postmodernism: ‘Harold J. Berman, former professor of law at Harvard Law School…explains that today…foundational beliefs are rapidly disappearing, not only from the minds of philosophers, but from “the minds of lawmakers, judges, lawyers, law teachers…the historical soil of the Western legal tradition is being washed away in the twentieth century, and the tradition itself is threatened to collapse”…Postmodernists are intent on eliminating religious roots and transcendent qualities from Western law. They desire more fragmentation and subjectivity, and less objective morality than the Judeo-Christian tradition demands. In the end, they are intent on creating and using their own brand of social justice merely for left-wing political purposes’ (‘Postmodern Law’; Accessed 31 Jan. 2011 at <https://www.allaboutworldview.org/​postmodern-law.htm>).

The media, our centres of education and learning, the judiciary—these are all pillars of society that were being destroyed. The world was in danger of being hijacked by those who were no longer concerned with humanity’s heroic journey to enlightenment and who only wanted to escape the depressing effects of the human condition. Total self-preoccupation, selfishness disguised as selflessness, had arrived. Terminal levels of alienation were upon us.

So, with understanding of the human condition finally explained, the truth that is revealed is that the underlying, real progression in all the great, so-called, ‘social reforms’ of the last 200 years was not to a more ideal world but to greater upset and its associated need for ever more guilt-stripped forms of pseudo idealism through which to live. From Religion, the original, thousands-of-years-old, relatively honest, alienation-free form of pseudo idealism, developed Socialism and Communism, then the New Age Movement, then the Feminist Movement, then the Environment or Green Movement, then the Politically Correct Movement, and finally totally dishonest, completely alienated, extremely autistic Postmodern Deconstructionism—‘autism’ being ‘a complex mental structure insuring against recurrence of…unthinkable anxiety’; in this case, ‘anxiety’ about being extremely corrupted/​upset/​hurt/​soul-damaged in your infancy and childhood.

The American psychologist Arthur Janov developed the technique of ‘primal therapy’ in which adults are helped to work their way back in their minds to memories of the original (primal) hurt to their soul that occurred in their infancy and early childhood as a result of growing up in the extremely human-condition-embattled, insecure, have-to-somehow-establish-your-worth world of today. In the following extracts (which come from as well as serve as a condensation of his famous 1970 book The Primal Scream), Janov describes very clearly how the more upset humans became, the more they needed to find a way to escape their ‘personal horror’, summarising that ‘Some of us prefer the neurotic never-never land where nothing can be absolutely true [the postmodernist philosophy] because it can lead us away from other personal truths which hurt so much. The neurotic has a personal stake in the denial of truth.’ Janov wrote: ‘Anger is often sown by parents who see their children as a denial of their own [human-condition-embattled] lives. Marrying early and having to sacrifice themselves for years to demanding infants and young children are not readily accepted by those parents who never really had a chance to be free and happy [p.327 of 446] …neurotic parents are antifeeling, and how much of themselves they have had to cancel out in order to survive is a good index of how much they will attempt to cancel out in their children [p.77] …there is unspeakable tragedy in the world…each of us being in a mad scramble away from our personal horror. That is why neurotic parents cannot see the horror of what they are doing to their children, why they cannot comprehend that they are slowly killing a human being [p.389] …A young child cannot understand that it is his parents who are troubled…He does not know that it is not his job to make them stop fighting, to be happy, free or whatever…If he is ridiculed almost from birth, he must come to believe that something is wrong with him [p.60] …Neurosis begins as a means of appeasing neurotic parents by denying or covering certain feelings in hopes that “they” will finally love him [p.65] …a child shuts himself off in his earliest months and years because he usually has no other choice [p.59] …When patients [in primal therapy] finally get down to the early catastrophic feeling [the ‘primal scream’] of knowing they were unloved, hated, or never to be understood—that epiphanic feeling of ultimate aloneness—they understand perfectly why they shut off [p.97] …Some of us prefer the neurotic never-never land where nothing can be absolutely true [the postmodernist philosophy] because it can lead us away from other personal truths which hurt so much. The neurotic has a personal stake in the denial of truth [p.395].’ What has been said here makes it very clear that Postmodern Deconstructionism was extremely autistic behaviour; ‘a complex mental structure insuring against recurrence of…unthinkable anxiety’.

So, what is finally revealed about these claimed great, progressive, enlightened social reforms is that instead of those involved being more ideal people, behaving in a more ideal way and bringing about a more ideal world, as they trumpeted themselves to the world as being and doing, they were actually more corrupted/​upset/​hurt/​soul-damaged people, behaving in a less ideal way and bringing about a more alienated, devastated world. The truth was the complete opposite of what the pseudo-idealists, especially the latter day, more-advanced-in-denial pseudo idealists, were claiming. What was being presented to the world was a totally fraudulent, dishonest sham—and, as emphasised, the great danger of the ever-increasing levels of dishonesty was that humanity was being taken to the brink of terminal alienation.

We humans had to do what we had to do—create a guilt-free yet truthless environment in order to stay alive—but the situation got way out of hand, taking humanity perilously close to the perpetual darkness of terminal alienation. Humanity was facing a death by dogma, ‘The Closing of the…[human] Mind’, as Allan Bloom so accurately described it, and ‘the end of civilization’ through a ‘triumph of the forces of darkness’, as Harold Bloom predicted. As necessary and tempting as it could become, to indulge dishonesty to the point of actually shutting down thought was the greatest weakness and failing possible on a planet where the fully conscious thinking mind is its culminating achievement. Preventing the search for knowledge represented a failure of all the effort and sacrifice made thus far by life on Earth. It represented a complete loss of nerve—as Jacob Bronowski was recorded earlier as saying: ‘I am infinitely saddened to find myself suddenly surrounded in the west by a sense of terrible loss of nerve, a retreat from knowledge…[which doesn’t] lie along the line of what we are now able to know if we devote ourselves to it: an understanding of man himself…Knowledge is our [proper] destiny. Self-knowledge.’

While the danger for humanity’s journey to enlightenment came from the increased levels of delusion and denial that we humans had to employ in order to cope with our increasingly insecure condition, to be truly free we had to confront and understand our condition, not escape it by adding more and more layers of denial. Denial blocked access to the truth, that being its purpose, but we had to find the truth, especially the truth about ourselves. As the great Greek philosopher Socrates (c.469-399 BC) famously said, ‘the only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance’ (Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, c.225 AD), and ‘the unexamined life is not worth living’ (Plato’s dialogue Apology, c.380 BC, tr. Benjamin Jowett)—but in the end a preference for ignorance and the associated need to oppress any examination of our lives, oppress any freedom to think truthfully, question and pursue knowledge, threatened to become the dominant attitude throughout the world. George Orwell’s bleak prediction that ‘If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face [freedom] – for ever’ was about to be realised—as was Aldous Huxley’s fear (which he wrote about in his famous 1932 novel, Brave New World) that we would become a trivial culture where ‘the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance’.

While the greed of capitalism was causing immense suffering and devastation, it was not greed that was taking the world to the brink of destruction, as everyone was being told—no, our society was being taken over by a desperate and madly behaved faction. It was a very, very serious matter that was made doubly so by the fact that almost no one was raising the alarm. Pseudo idealism had almost everyone intimidated, bluffed or seduced. Warnings about the real danger facing the world were only being voiced by a rare few, like those just mentioned—Socrates, Orwell, Nietzsche and Allan Bloom. As Geoffrey Wheatcroft recognised, while ‘the great twin political problems of the age are the brutality of the right, and the dishonesty of the left’, it was the dishonesty of the left that had the potential to—and was poised to—destroy the world.

I should explain that in the picture of the fossil skulls of our ancestors right through to modern man, I described the last stage of Adolescence as ‘Pseudo Idealistic Adolescentman’. The reason for this demarcation was that although extremely angry Hollowman was also an element of this last stage, it was the pseudo idealism involved in this final stage that posed the most danger and was thus its most significant feature. Of the three aspects of upset of anger, egocentricity and alienation, alienation was the really dangerous one. Interestingly, anthropologists—in their defensive, mechanistic, denial-complying, dishonest mindset—named the final two varieties of humans in the series Homo sapiens and Homo sapiens sapiens, which literally translates as ‘wise man’ and ‘wise wise man’, as ‘sapiens’ is Latin for ‘wise’ and ‘homo’ is Latin for ‘man’. Certainly, humans were gaining wisdom or knowledge, but the more truthful description of what we were really like, is ‘False or Alienated Man’, and ‘False False or Alienated Alienated Man’.

Nietzsche’s warning of the danger of the ‘many sickly people’ who ‘have a raging hate for the enlightened man and for that youngest of virtues which is called honesty’ can’t be emphasised enough. To repeat what he wrote: ‘Purer and more honest of speech is the healthy body, perfect and square-built: and it speaks of the meaning of the earth [to face truth and one day find understanding of the human condition]…You are not yet free, you still search for freedom. Your search has fatigued you…But, by my love and hope I entreat you: do not reject the hero in your soul! Keep holy your highest hope!’ Yes, yes, we could not afford to lose our nerve, but everyone nearly did.

Sir Laurens van der Post—who I regard to be, as I’ve mentioned already, the most exceptional denial-free thinking prophet and philosopher of the twentieth century; indeed, in his full-page obituary in the London Times he was described as ‘a prophet out of Africa’ (20 Dec. 1996) (view Sir Laurens’ obituary that was reproduced in The Australian at <www.humancondition.com/​vanderpost-obituary>)—was another who was ‘pure’ and ‘honest’ and ‘square-built’ enough to speak out strongly against the extreme danger of pseudo idealism, writing that ‘the so-called liberal socialist elements in modern society are profoundly decadent today because they are not honest with themselves…They give people an ideological and not a real idea of what life should be about, and this is immoral…They feel good by being highly moral about other people’s lives, and this is immoral…They have parted company with reality in the name of idealism…there is this enormous trend which accompanies industrialized societies, which is to produce a kind of collective man who becomes indifferent to the individual values: real societies depend for their renewal and creation on individuals…There is, in fact, a very disturbing, pathological element—something totally non-rational—in the criticism of the [UK] Prime Minister [Margaret Thatcher]. It amazes me how no one recognizes how shrill, hysterical and out of control a phenomenon it is…I think socialism, which has a nineteenth-century inspiration and was valid really only in a nineteenth-century context when the working classes had no vote, has long since been out of date and been like a rotting corpse whose smell in our midst has tainted the political atmosphere far too long’ (A Walk with a White Bushman, 1986, pp.90-93 of 326).

Two of the Bible’s denial-free thinking, exceptionally sound, ‘pure’ and ‘honest’, ‘square-built’ prophets—Daniel and Christ—also warned of the extreme danger of pseudo idealism when they spoke of ‘the abomination that causes desolation’ taking over the world. The Bible has, without a doubt, been the most influential book in history because it contains extraordinary honesty; indeed, it has been the most denial-free book humans have had for guidance. As Daniel said of his own contribution to the Bible, ‘I will tell you what is written in the Book of Truth’ (10:21)—and his ability to think in a denial-free, truthful and therefore effective way meant Daniel was in a position to ‘explain to you what will happen to you people in the future’ (10:14). However, since there was no science in his day to evidence his argument, all Daniel could do was draw upon analogies to describe what he could see so clearly happening in the future. In one analogy he described ‘The king of the South’ (which we can understand is the freedom-upholding, answer-searching but immensely upsetting and corrupting right-wing) constantly at war with ‘the king of the North’ (the freedom-oppressing, dogma-based, pseudo idealistic, dishonest left-wing). He described how, for a long time, power would switch between these kings (as it did in democratic politics), until the complete polarisation of the two kingdoms, the two political states, came about (which has occurred), at which point ‘the abomination that causes desolation’ of pseudo idealism would finally threaten to take over the world. After describing many changes of power, Daniel said: ‘the king of the North will muster another army larger than the first…The forces of the South will be powerless to resist; even their best troops will not have the strength to stand [pseudo idealism becomes increasingly seductive and powerful as people become increasingly upset]. The invader will do as he pleases; no-one will be able to stand against him…[but eventually ‘he’/​pseudo idealism] will make an alliance with the king of the South…[some bipartisanship between the left and right wing will occur, but then the left-wing] will stumble and fall…[however, in time] He will be succeeded by a contemptible person [even more dishonest forms of left-wing pseudo idealism will emerge] who will not be given the honour of royalty [they will lack religion’s honesty]. He will invade the kingdom [the religious kingdom of honesty]…and he will seize it through intrigue [through the dishonesty of extreme forms of pseudo idealism masquerading as real idealism]. Then an overwhelming army [from the South] will be swept away before him; both it and a prince of the covenant [religion] will be destroyed…when the richest provinces feel secure, he will invade them and will achieve what neither his father nor his forefathers did [no force has been able to overthrow religion before]…His armed forces will rise up to desecrate the temple fortress and will abolish the daily sacrifice. Then they will set up the abomination that causes desolation [pseudo idealistic causes and fundamentalist misinterpretations of religious teaching will take over the world and lead humanity to terminal alienation]. With flattery [the truth-and-guilt-avoiding, do-good, feel-good self-affirmation that pseudo idealism feeds off] he will corrupt those who have violated the covenant [pseudo idealism will seduce the more upset away from religion’s infinitely more honest way of coping with the human condition], but the people who know their God will firmly resist him [the more secure, less dishonest will not be deceived and must strongly resist the seductive tide]…The [left-wing pseudo idealistic] king will do as he pleases. He will exalt and magnify himself above every god and will say unheard-of-things against the God of gods [such as Richard Dawkins, Oxford University’s Professor of Public Understanding of Science, would you believe, who has said that ‘“faith is one of the world’s great evils, comparable to the smallpox virus, but harder to eradicate. The whole subject of God is a bore”…those who teach religion to small children are guilty of “child abuse”’ (quoted by Garth Wood, The Spectator, 20 Feb. 1999)]. He will be successful until the time of wrath [until the all-exposing truth of understanding of the human condition arrives to save the world, as it is doing in what you are reading right here]…He will invade many countries and sweep through them like a flood…he will set out in a great rage [the stridency that I and Sir Laurens van der Post talked about of those trying to persuade themselves and others that their pseudo idealistic causes represent real idealism] to destroy and annihilate many…Yet he will come to his end, and no-one will help him…[when understanding of the human condition arrives pseudo idealism will be totally exposed and brought to an end. However, while ‘he’/​pseudo idealism reigns] There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then’ (from Dan. ch.11&12).

In another analogy that describes the same progression, but which in some ways is even more explicit, mentioning as it does how ‘truth was thrown to the ground’, Daniel, appropriately enough, used the symbols of a (determined) ram for the right-wing and a (stupid) goat for the left-wing. He said that initially ‘No animal could stand against him [the ram], and none could rescue from his power. He did as he pleased and became great…[greed and indifference to others was so great that even children, for instance, were put to work in coalmines, but then the] goat…charged at him in great rage…[the left-wing emerged and] The ram was powerless to stand against him; the goat knocked him to the ground and trampled on him, and none could rescue the ram from his power. The goat became very great…It set itself up to be as great as the Prince of the host [it set itself up to be more important than religion]; it took away the daily sacrifice from him, and the place of his sanctuary was brought low…It prospered in everything it did, and truth was thrown to the ground…“How long will it take for the vision to be fulfilled—the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, the rebellion that causes desolation, and the surrender of the sanctuary and of the host that will be trampled underfoot [the rebellion against religion’s honesty]…It will take [a long time]…understand that the vision concerns the time of the end.”…[when humans] have become completely wicked [and], a stern-faced king [the extremely upset], a master of intrigue, will arise [the left-wing pseudo idealistic, false prophet merchants of escapist denial and delusion will arise]…He will cause astounding devastation and will succeed in whatever he does. He will destroy the mighty men and the holy people [even the strong will begin to succumb to the intimidating tide of pseudo idealism]. He will cause deceit [the misrepresentation of pseudo idealism as being real idealism] to prosper, and he will consider himself superior [the extreme delusion that left-wing pseudo idealism is based on will spread everywhere]…“The vision…concerns the distant future [that finally arrived]”’ (Dan. ch.8).

In the New Testament, Christ gave exactly the same warning as Daniel, even referring to Daniel’s description of pseudo idealism as ‘the abomination that causes desolation’—but Christ went further, truthfully and courageously advising people to head for the hills, ‘flee to the mountains’, when pseudo idealism and strident fundamentalist misinterpretations of religious teachings threatened to destroy humanity. Referring to ‘the sign…of the end of the age’, Christ said that ‘At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other [a great deal of upset will develop], and many false prophets [pseudo idealists claiming to be leading the way to peace and a new age of goodness and happiness for humans] will appear and deceive many people…even the elect [even those less alienated, still relatively sound and strong in soul, will begin to be seduced by pseudo idealism]—if that were possible. See, I have told you ahead of time…Wherever there is a carcass [the extremely upset], there the vultures [false prophet promoters of delusion and denial to artificially make the extremely upset feel good] will gather. Because of the increase of wickedness [upset], the love of most will grow cold. So when you see the “abomination that causes desolation,” spoken of through the prophet Daniel, standing where it does not belong [throwing out religion and falsely claiming to be presenting the way to the human-condition-free, good-versus-evil-deconstructed, post-human-condition, better world]—let the reader understand—then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let no-one on the roof of his house go down to take anything out of the house. Let no-one in the field go back to get his cloak. How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! Pray that your flight will not take place in winter because those will be days of great distress [mindless dogma and its consequences] unequalled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equalled again. If those days had not been cut short [by the arrival of the liberating understanding of the human condition], no-one would survive’ (extracts from Matt. 24 & Mark 13 combined). In summary, when Christ said to ‘Beware of false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves’ (Matt. 7:15), he was saying we had to be on guard for those who hid their extreme upset behind pseudo idealistic causes in order to delude themselves that they were sound and ideally behaved people leading others to a sound and ideal world. True prophets confronted the issue of the human condition while false prophets were merchants of delusion, advocates of escapism from the issue of the human condition.

The most common criticism the WTM receives about our video presentations and their transcripts is the denunciation of pseudo idealistic causes such as environmentalism, but that is a measure of just how seduced almost everyone was by pseudo idealism. As Daniel foresaw, in the end ‘even their best troops will not have the strength to stand’ against the seductive tide of pseudo idealism. He said ‘no-one will be able to stand against’ it and it will ‘invade many countries and sweep through them like a flood’ and ‘cause deceit to prosper’. Christ similarly warned that ‘false prophets will appear and deceive many people…even the elect—if that were possible. See, I have told you ahead of time.’

For such exceptionally sound, ‘pure’ and ‘honest’, ‘square-built’ prophets throughout history who weren’t living in denial and thus ‘who know their God’—from Daniel to Christ to Nietzsche to van der Post—to so ‘firmly resist’ and warn of the great danger of the ‘dreadful’ ‘abomination’ that causes ‘astounding devastation’ ‘unequalled from the beginning of the world until now’ of those who have such a ‘raging hate [of]…honesty’ that they have created a pseudo idealistic ‘rotting corpse whose smell in our midst has tainted the political atmosphere far too long’ where ‘truth was thrown to the ground’ and ‘trampled underfoot’, emphasises just how extremely serious the threat of ‘the end of civilization’ through a ‘triumph of the forces of darkness’ of pseudo idealism and fundamentalist misinterpretations of religious teachings became. Their influence and hold became so great that any remaining political opposition would soon, as Daniel predicted, have been ‘powerless to stand against’ it. The West defied and fought with all its might the spread of oppressive dogma in the form of communism in the former USSR and South East Asia, but it was proving incapable of resisting the takeover of its own culture by the oppressive dogma of pseudo idealism. Humanity had reached the precipice of self-destruction, so this understanding of the human condition arrived only just in time to ‘cut short’ that tragic end.

Humanity’s two million year journey to find understanding of the human condition finally came down to a so-called ‘cultural war’ between the philosophy of the political left-wing and the philosophy of the political right-wing. Both sides were determined they were right, but with the human condition now explained what is revealed is that, in terms of a future for the human race, the philosophy of the left-wing was completely wrong and the philosophy of the right-wing was completely right. What is now revealed is that the left-wing was all about dogma, delusion and escapism, while the right-wing was comparatively all about realism, honesty and responsibility.

Interestingly, there is one final irony to the saga of humanity’s great journey through ignorance, which is that the ideal world that the left-wing was dogmatically demanding is actually achieved by the right-wing winning its reality-defending, freedom-from-idealism, corrupting-search-for-knowledge battle against the freedom-oppressing pseudo idealism of the left-wing. As was explained in Part 3:10, with the freedom-from-dogma right-wing’s search for understanding of the human condition completed, the justification for the egocentric power, fame, fortune and glory life of the right-wing ends and the ideal-behaviour-obeying attitude that the left-wing sought takes over. In a sense, when the right-wing wins we all become left-wing; through the success of the philosophy of the right-wing we all adopt the philosophy of the left-wing—but, most significantly, this time we are not abandoning the battle, we are leaving it won.

In reality of course, finding understanding of the human condition ends the inability to explain what humanity’s journey has been about, the result being that the different philosophical positions of the left-wing and right-wing are completely obsoleted. Now that it can be explained that humanity has been involved in a corrupting search for knowledge, corruption is explained, which in turn exposes the unrealistic position of the left-wing’s dogmatic insistence on idealism and in so doing brings it to an end. Similarly, for its part, the right-wing’s corrupting search for knowledge is also brought to a close with the finding of the key knowledge it was searching for, that being understanding of the human condition. Of course, the search for knowledge continues, but it is no longer the priority. The priority for the immediate future, as was explained in Part 3:10, is to take up the TRANSFORMED LIFEFORCE WAY OF LIVING. Thus, with the arrival of understanding of the human condition, the concept of ‘politics’ comes to an end, which will undoubtedly be of great relief to everyone.

Finally, it should be reiterated that in the greater context of the human-condition-understood view that we now have, upset is a heroic state, with the most upset being the most heroic individuals of all because they have necessarily been involved in the battle that humanity has been waging longer and/​or more intensely than any others. While the stark descriptions that have been given of the extremely upset as being ‘wicked’, ‘stern-faced’, ‘cold’, ‘sickly’ ‘carcasses’, ‘vultures’ and ‘ferocious wolves’ involved in creating a ‘rotting corpse’ of ‘abomination’ were necessary to match the no-holds-barred, totally brutal assault on the truth that was being ‘thrown to the ground’ and left ‘trampled underfoot’ by pseudo idealists, in the human-condition-understanding new world such rhetoric is entirely wrong and redundant.

In fact, it shouldn’t even be necessary to talk about the old struggle between the left and right wing philosophies any more than what has now been done in this presentation. As was explained in Part 3:10, humanity now moves on to an entirely new existence. Thankfully, there will be many subjects that no longer have to be discussed now that humanity is able to move on to another existence. We get the truth up and we move on. We leave our suitcase of experiences that took place in the old ignorant, human-condition-afflicted, power-fame-fortune-and-glory-seeking-and-pseudo-idealistic-coping world behind and move on to an entirely new, instinct-and-intellect-reconciled, human-condition-liberated, TRANSFORMED world.

 

 

 

The following drawing should be included again to summarise humanity’s overall journey from our species’ original innocent Childhood through an insecure, human-condition-afflicted, immensely upset Adolescence, to a secure, human-condition-reconciled, mature Adulthood.

 

 

So that’s it—the greatest of all stories, our story, the story of humanity’s incredibly, unbelievably heroic journey from ignorance to enlightenment told for the first time!