Another Awakening?

 

Our Great Republic has, from time to time, been subject to what have been called "Awakenings."  These are episodes of typically Protestant Christian revivals during which people enthusiastically proclaim their faith and strive mightily to live by it, and to cause others to do so as well.  America has been more prone to showy evangelism than Europe, which has been relatively free from fundamentalist frenzy since the Renaissance.

There have been three of these "Great Awakenings."  They took place from the late 18th to the early 20th century.  It's claimed there was a fourth that took place in the 1960s and 1970s during the days of the Jesus Freaks, but there's no consensus on this claim.

It seems that some believe another Great Awakening is taking place.  This one, though, may not be wholly Protestant. The so-called "Catholic Woodstock" in which hundreds of thousands of young people celebrated in Rome in Jubilee style with the Pontifex Maximus is cited in support of this belief.

It's interesting to speculate regarding the causes of these events.  It strikes me that Christianity isn't a religion that celebrates humanity or the way we live our lives.  In fact, it denigrates us.  This may be the result of Augustine's charming doctrine of Original Sin, according to which we're sinful and indeed on the highway to hell from birth, if not conception, all due to Adam and Eve, who made the mistake of seeking knowledge.  According to Augustinian Christianity (Pauline as well, I think) we're to burn in hellfire unless we're saved, and saving is a matter of God's grace which is, like all other things, in his discretion, regardless of our merits and good works.  It was on this basis that the Bishop of Hippo maintained that even the great pagan philosophers and moral figures were condemned, because they did not know Christ.  They were long dead before Jesus is said to have lived, but apparently they should have been aware of Jesus and his mission nonetheless.

For believers, then, as they are induced if not compelled to think that eternal torment awaits them unless they "awaken," it's hardly surprising that they'll be eager to "awaken" when the opportunity arises.  They'll be especially eager if they have in fact been sinful not merely by association, as it were, being the spawn of Adam and Eve, but sinful by their own word, thought and deed.  Most of them have sinned as that conduct is described by Christianity, and the desperate hope they will be saved is likely to have motivated Great Awakenings in the past.

I think that the sins of others or the perception that others have sinned also contribute to these awakenings.  The sinful conduct of others has always fascinated and ideed delighted faithful Christians, who look forward to watching their neighbors roast while they sit in heaven, cherished by God.  But more than that, it seems a maxim of evangelical and fundamentalist Christianity that God in his wisdom will punish humanity at large for sinful behavior.  God has famously done so by flood, but will also hurl hurricanes and tornados, incite wars, spread deadly disease, cause famine, and inflict other horrors on us all should people engage in homosexuality, for example, or legalize abortion.

It happens that there is every reason to think our society is corrupt and immoral if the conduct of our leaders, and the wealthy and the powerful of our time is any indication of our state of sinfulness.  It wouldn't surprise me if people, and particularly young people, look at the world and perceive it to be depraved, cruel and where politicians are concerned incredibly venal.  As a consequence they search for something or someone moral and admirable, which will save the world from the selfish and hateful people who dominate it.

It's unfortunate, however, that the awakening that's sought and takes place is to a system of belief which is exclusive and intolerant.  It admits of only one faith, one way of living, one way of thinking.  That's what it is believed will save those who awaken, and nothing else.  The Great Awakenings which have taken place are narrow and limited; moral conduct is not sought, nor is wisdom, or happiness.  Adherence to doctrine is what is demanded.  Nothing more.

Myth and Manipulation

 

The Siege of Masada was, and perhaps still is, a myth treasured and propagated in Israel since it's founding.  Not that the siege itself is a myth. It took place.  But the actual siege differs from the myth.

The myth states that a relatively small (about 1,000 people) group of Jews defended the fortress/palace of Masada against the mighty Roman Empire after the fall of Jerusalem during the great first Jewish revolt for about three years. Finally, when the Romans managed to breach the fortress, the Jews chose to commit suicide rather than surrender.

The myth served to inspire a new nation made up largely of people who escaped the Holocaust, many of whom believed they were entitled to rule land long lived in by others hostile to them.  They, like the ancient Jewish defenders of Masada, would fight long and courageously against great odds and, if necessary, die by their own hands rather than surrender.

If you've seen pictures of Herod's great fortress or better yet visited it, it's not difficult to believe it would take years for it to be conquered.  But modern analysis and investigation of the site using drones and advanced technology now available establish the Roman legion and auxiliary troops consisting of 6,000 to 8,000 men took the fortress in a matter of weeks.  In that time, they built camps surrounding it, a wall around it, constructed a massive ramp to its gates high above the desert and siege engines allowing for the successful assault.  Even the mass suicide is now being questioned.

So, the siege now seems more a testament to the ferocity and efficiency of the Roman army than anything else.  The myth, on the other hand, is shown to be incredible, even absurd. One who believed in it must feel silly or naive, I would think. Perhaps even feel a fool.  I would, in any case.

One who feels he's been a fool may feel he's been made a fool of; may resent those who propagated the myth.  This is a danger when a myth is used to gain an end through or advantage over others.

Modern cults are generally based on myths in the modern sense of beliefs that are untrue.  Modern cult leaders are thus dependent on untruths.  It's been proposed that the person I'll refer to here as "El Presidente" (like the leader of a banana republic) is the leader of a cult. And it does seem that he and his minions delight in the propagation of myths.  Inconvenient truths are not merely questioned.  They're not merely denied. Myths are substituted for them. 

This is the case even where numbers are concerned.,  It isn't far from firing someone whose department advises of statistics El Presidente would rather not acknowledge to claiming, as in Orwell's 1984, that 2 + 2=5, and as we've seen insisting that what's clearly true is untrue.

I hope someday those being manipulated by myths will understand they've been made fools of and react accordingly. Or they may take their place in the cult as many have already, hoping to profit from those fooled.

Uninteresting Times

 

There's nothing particularly interesting about the times we live in.  The supposed Chinese curse ("may you live in interesting times") is apparently apocryphal but also inaccurate.  It's intended to be ironic, of course. "Interesting" is to function as a condemnation. Interesting times are supposed to be bad times.

The times are bad, and in many ways.  But there's nothing interesting about them.  It would be mild to describe them as "banal" though of course they are--remarkably so, in fact, as odd as that sounds.  The people who dominate the nation and our society are common, boring, dull, greedy, ignorant, crude characters.  They're extraordinary only because they're despicable and in their brutish way capable of doing great harm.  There's nothing interesting about them.

Hannah Ahrendt wrote of the banality of evil in connection with the trial of Adolph Eichmann and the Holocaust. To simplify and summarize, her point was that Eichmann and the other perpetrators of the various atrocities committed by Nazi Germany were "normal" people; not evil geniuses or psychopaths.  Our rulers believe themselves to be entirely normal, and those who have exposed us to their rule delight in their supposed normalcy.

Perhaps normality is itself a curse. Where nothing is different or interesting and all people have the same thoughts, interests and desires, what is there to hope for or to do which hasn't been done or achieved already?  What enlivens our lives?  There is no interest in discovering or experiencing anything new.  We drown in a culture of sameness.  We fester. We rot.

It's easy enough to infer how those who are abnormal or considered different will be treated in such circumstances.  We haven't (yet) even begun to approach the level of evil achieved in the past but the normals of our time have made it clear that there will be no concern or mercy for the others who appear in their midst.  They'll be isolated or sent away, or worse.

Perhaps the curse should be:  "May you live in uninteresting times."  Beware the normal. Especially the zealously normal.

Hoisting the Black Flag

 

The "black flag" referred to by the Sage of Baltimore, H.L. Mencken, in the quote at the head of this post likely is the flag associated with piracy.  It would sometimes be adorned with a skull and bones, crossed, and be called the "Jolly Roger."  The black flag may be contrasted with the white flag which signals surrender.  Black symbolizes defiance and anger; fury and rage, in fact.  No quarter given or expected.  Violence.  Thus the reference to slitting throats.

We can take comfort in the use of the word "tempted" here.  No claim is made by Mencken that a normal person must or would or should actually slit throats.  Nor do I make any such claim.  That's something no aspiring Stoic could do.  But the times are such that a person may be tempted to hoist the Black Flag, metaphorically speaking at least.

I don't recall a time during my sadly rather lengthy lifetime (relatively speaking) when our politics and society have been so clearly corrupt.  The corruption of our politics is exacerbated by the incompetence and venality of our politicians.  Worse is the abject, cringing manner in which they carry out the commands of their paymasters and the morally if not yet physically scabrous figure lurking in White House.

If we look to humanity's long history we'll find instances in which governments have been as wretched and even more wretched than that which now abides.  But I doubt we'll be able to identify one which held the history and ideals of the nation and people it governed in contempt.  Yet that's characteristic of this government.  It flaunts it's contempt for freedom of thought and expression.  It demands that private institutions act as it deems fit; it actively hinders efforts to assist the poor and needy; it's intolerant of views which differ from those it relentlessly promotes.  In these respects and its hatred for the rule of law it's decidedly against the idea of American exceptionalism.

It's this determined effort to subvert constitutional rights and the Constitution itself that renders our so-called leaders despicable. Their smugness and self-righteousness while going about this subversion adds to the temptation referred to by Mencken.  It's difficult to believe our Great Republic has devolved so entirely, so quickly.

The Unenlightenment

 

The Enlightenment refers to the time in the intellectual history of the West from about 1700 forward which featured an emphasis on the use of reason and the methods of science in gaining knowledge.  Enlightenment thinkers are said to have believed that progress was possible in human affairs, and that certain values were universal.  The Founding Fathers of our Great Republic are generally considered men of the Enightenment.

It became the fashion starting in the 19th century to criticize the Enlightenment and the reliance on reason and science to explore the world and solve humanity's problems.  This critique became prevalent in the 20th century, the heyday of existentialism and postmodernism. It's unclear, to me at least, whether any alternative method of discovery or problem solving was ever seriously proposed by the critics.  But the First World War was thought to have demonstrated that reason was an inadequate guide, and humanity fundamentally irrational.

Attempts were made to harness scientific discoveries in the quantum world to establish the universe is disordered and makes no sense.  These discoveries were made by scientists, however, employing the methods of science. Just why these discoveries are thought to establish anything besides the fact we have much yet to learn is unclear.

Assume it's true that we're fundamentally irrational, and that the notion of continual progress through reason and science is baseless.  Assume intuition, the various forms of the so-called "Will", the Elan Vital or whatever other mysterious, unanalyzable forces you care to name play a part in our wretched lives.  It doesn't follow that reason and the scientific method have no part to play.  They may not have brought about universal peace but have been spectacularly successful in improving the quality of life and explaining how things work and what they are.  They may be misused, but remain most useful.

The Enlightment replaced a world view which relied on dogma, appeals to unquestionable authority and revelation.  Before it and setting the stage for it, the Renaissance revealed what had been achieved before the world was throttled by a narrow, intolerant and exclusive theocracy.

By abandoning the ideals of the Enlightment we're regressing. The New Dark Age dawns. The current regime appoints the equivalent of witch doctors to secure the health of the nation through fads and unfounded theories.  We embrace autocracy, being less and less inclined to think for ourselves. We're willing to accept untruths despite evidence to the contrary because they're consistent with dogma.

In a way, it's a lazy, comfortable path through life provided we're willing to accept our place and content to let our lords govern us and reap the benefits of our toil.