Occultism and Post-awakening Natures:

.

.

---

.

Countries Don’t Build Culture; Music and the Fungus Among Us Does [Posted initially on 16th June 2021]:  In the last few posts, we covered general semantics to cure blockages in one’s states of consciousness (towards a higher spiritual goal or oneness). However, these underlying matters must be recognised, such as the etymologies of the word and its use in modern society juxtaposed with its historical meaning. The text discusses manipulating images and symbols to create new meanings. This includes simplifying or reducing them to a basic or debased version of the original concept, particularly concerning the word “occult.” It also mentions the practice of altering words slightly while changing their definitions. If one cannot reconcile these changes, it’s best to acknowledge their existence and continue life as usual.

For decades, the university hosted a multicultural event in my town where groups with different national backgrounds, from various long-standing generations to early immigrants, celebrated their cultural heritage with dance, music, and food. Showcasing the many other traditional and ethnic cultures that suburban traditional homes might not be aware of. Intellectuals often use politically correct terminology to promote their views, especially when discussing multiculturalism. However, this term needs to be more accurate, and its definition needs to be revised. It is essential to understand that while multiculturalism may be a contested concept, multiracialism does exist. Multiracialism refers to individuals who are the offspring of two different cultural traditions.

These attempts to redefine an established concept, as culture cannot change, grow, or transform into something entirely new. For example, consider early paganism before occult traditions and mystery cults emerged. These early practitioners revered nature and expressed this reverence by celebrating the harvest during the early agricultural era. Their celebrations took the form of rituals, which evolved into mythology featuring various deities representing fertility and nature. The recognised system was closely tied to their cosmology, which recognised the sun’s journey into the underworld during sunset. Over time, these beliefs would evolve into something more dynamic.

Some have equated this dynamic change through psychedelic mushrooms, made evident through McKenna’s work on psychedelic mushrooms, which stated that early civilisations introduction of psychedelic fungus [magic-mushrooms] in the food source of early agriculture civilisations gave new rise to spirits and gods. Out of that came shamanism, which then was codified and became a religion. It became a celebration by tribes, and they would gather after the hunt and bang on the drums around the fire. The entheogenic trance of those drum beats would be reconstituted or reborn in the mystery religion of the Dionysian expression of musical culture. Occult tradition’s understanding of ‘time’ was extended in their music, which required dancing and singing around a communal experience.

These were counter-cultural movements of that time, meaning they went against the Church, so Mystery cults became a rebellion against the authoritarian state-cult gods of Zeus. The mystery cults elevated the minor gods as the saviour godhead, notably Dionysus and Isis. Isis incorporated other goddesses’ archetypes with their identity. And we know Isis turned into Mary. The Isis’s cult, with its initiation process, is described as ecstatic and psychedelic.

The Church’s suppression and patriarchal dominance didn’t outweigh those movements but only refined those expressions. In modern times, in the guise of new Christianity, centre-right intellects have equated this type of religious authoritarianism as the evolution of Judaic-Christian ethics, and it is what holds Western societies in check from slipping into chaos. Could this be an ethical imperative since everyone has a sense of just and unjustness? This would later be an abstraction in the form of fair or unfair. Is it ideology posing as truth and the accompanying certainty of belief? The antithesis force that comes with it is that other thing I mentioned, ‘the rock that’s attached to the one who can call spirits’, but in this case, it’s the constant ambition of self-interest. Evangelical Christianity is a canonization of suburban-capitalist consumer culture and has nothing to do with historical Christianity at all. It’s all about convenience and consumerism.                

These movements extrapolated among the many other cult-centred groups of the ancient mystery world, culminating in the Dionysian cult, which explored public sex, singing, dancing, and inebriation. The Dionysians incorporated the mysteries of Demeter, Isis, Kybele, and Mithras. Early cult groups in the mountains started these types of music and rituals—they became a culture full of vibrancy as they moved west to Greece and Rome.        

The contention I’m trying to make here is that two cultures of different expressions may not cohere in a multi-cultural sense from a technicality viewpoint [definition]. However, the underlying constant here is music and the growth of new cultures that can be derived from it. All of the different tribes of the world have danced around the fire at one point, and its synthesis grew into something else, something new, and the details and differences in that process are merely semantic. Some cultural-inclusive-individuality guides the resistance to this view. While this is important, it only ever relates to cultures and their nations that have a long history. Countries built on federation don’t have this ‘history’, and their culture is derived from an amalgamation of different cultures from different countries alongside their history. And even those countries with a long history have a modern model of civilisation and society that aligns with those federation countries, the model of capitalism. And so, in many ways, culture is a memory of history. 

Memory and history often lead to romantic myths. The idea of Rome prevails in New Atlantis and New Jerusalem. New Jerusalem is the romantic idea presented in a Manichean manner [light vs. dark]. The avenging superhero [gods] that may choose at will to do good or evil things. Or become fragile and can only find strength in reason by becoming a creature [possessed], so it loses itself, detached from life. However, ethics is the opposite of romantic tendencies. In reality, New Jerusalem is really about the return of Jews to Palestine, described by the Anglo-sphere [Britain, US, Australia, Canada] as a significant moment in history. Fulfilling an ongoing realization for the revelation of the Bible – where Biblical demands were part of the last phase in the European colonization plan. However, these religious principles are centred in the United States since Christian Zionism goes further back than Jewish Zionism. Israel is essentially a military stronghold for the U.S., and whether it’s a good thing or bad thing is always debated endlessly.        

Throughout the centuries, the excitement of the mystery cults was put to rest when Rome went from worshipping sky-gods and headed towards individualism towards authoritarianism and a consolidated synthesis god. This would then lead to the rise of Henotheism, which would later become Christianity, and the of-shoot of that would become Christianity, with the idea of elevating one god above all other gods. As we covered, this was a guise: the one-god [solar saviour] is not different to any other sky-gods [Jupiter]. The idea was more important as it was far-reaching.

The mystery cults would have gone underground disappeared or was forgotten. Its magical practices and ideals would re-materialize or be co-opted as secret society cults like Freemasonry and Templars. Freemasonry originates from the middle Ages, in fraternities of actual stonemasons. They would interact with other secret groups inspired by the mystery-cults like Rosicrucians, Kabbalists and Alchemists, and this interaction were the basis of a new revival of the ancient mysteries in Europe. Freemasonry gets a lot of credit from Christian-conspiracy-theorist, who act as a reveller of truth for the people but, at times, do the very opposite, thereby invoking a type of controlled opposition. Anti-masonic revolution would rise in France, and these secret groups would find themselves in Scotland.  

In reality, Freemasons in the late 17th century did not reflect the ancient world [but tried to be in a romantic sense] because most of the ancient text hadn’t been discovered or translated yet. The early revolutionary period worked its way through secret masonic lodges. They broke away from England and created the confederation of the United States as a new governmental system. Successful revolutionaries often become reactionary, and after the Revolutionary War, they were ruled by the ruling class. During that time, you had settlers and explorers who were part of masonic groups around the new country and constantly disagreed with each other, usually over land titles. Not all founding Fathers were Freemasons, but most were part of other particular secret orders and often were rivals.            

There have always been ‘Cults’ [secret societies] throughout cultural civilisations. A misconception is that they are an aberration, but this is untrue. They were the rock to those who could call spirits, but it would seem they’ve become the rock who can contact spirits and rule a country. While the rest of the people would experience great forgetting, the spark within them would be extinguished. A modern notion of secret societies is just the elite ruling class that has sway over managerial governance—an elite ruling class that is very religious, capitalistic, and pro-Empire.  

Choose the Middle Way: From here on, civilisations embraced secular beliefs from a satellized cosmos [Atheism] to a form of theistic Christianity [a paradoxical theology] that followed that same idea but with a firm belief in God. Because both are secular in many ways, both have gone (and are going) through their versions of a micro model of the fall of Rome. The collapse of confidence in institutional Christianity paved the way for Atheism, which began with the satellite idea, which is still present in the modern day. The fall of Christianity started with the notion of ushering in the kingdom of God, which was/is played out in the middle-east … a continuous undertaking that started many centuries ago. Right-centric Christians believe that what had held American society together, which is ‘Christianity’, has begun to implode. And what replaced it was Atheism and Nihilism. Although at this stage, it’s fifty-fifty [meaning for a half millennia, both religion and atheism concepts were present] because it’s an assumption to conclude that Christianity or society acting out the Christian ideal is the sole factor for stability in society when this is just an ethical imperative brought about by reason not so much religion. Let’s not forget that reason is only a tool to help us deal with many shades of ethics and is not the source of truth. Treating it as such leads to relativism.    

Both camps, Christian Religion and Atheism-Scientism, like to use ideology that poses as truth – and both have ambition for self-interest. Self-interest [narcissism, to a lesser extent] does not hold the core of our ethical principles. Take, for instance, Evangelicalism, which would become a modern concoction for corporations as an adversary for Bolshevism in the 1920s. Along with this denomination grew the fear – a fear of something that hasn’t been around for almost 100 years. At the same time, they preach a version of their truth alongside a post-Bolshevism fear – a fear with missing context is an ideological reason and not so much for God.

Atheism, new atheism, and scientism use reason and general semantics—exceptionally corrupted orders of abstraction—as tools against arguments. To them, ‘reason’ is the only thing that can articulate ethics, and our imagination and memory are inferior to reason. Their problem is approaching ethics as a sub-genre of reason. However, it’s about the assumption of intellectual form, central to distancing ethics from real life. A satellized worldview is also flexible enough to have a God in its equation [at least for theistic Christians]. So an Atheistic Cosmos [and its off-shoots evolution, etc.] along with the Christian ideal had both held together society. The contention as to whether each side was responsible for causing more chaos, I will leave that for debate. Just consider that wars have broken out in the last two centuries, and there is the ongoing mandate for heaven on earth to mirror a modern war in heaven. And that it was Christian Civilisation that took part in the mascara of Jews in the world.          

So, there is only falling with the other. It’s not that Christianity imploded and took on Nihilism as a consequence of Atheism, which gave rise to communism; perhaps this is a misconception, given communism is a religion without a theistic aspect. A better claim is to suggest a point of measure that a percentage of Christians took on Nihilism. Fundamentalism’s inherent fear of communism is an intrinsic dysfunction. Communism to right-centric Christians is rather like their debased definition of occultism that mirrors an occult of personality ideology rather than what it is – an unethical and immoral increase of power to the government and the occult as something hidden or secret. Although it became two modes of the same ideal, Atheism and religion, it’s just that Atheism likes to act out a religious structure rather than deny it. There is also this false assumption that Atheism and the rest of its ideological subsidiaries, nu-atheism, scientism, etc., are not masonic [remember, it’s a religion without the theistic aspect]. 

The two modes share a commonality in that they are both religious. However, this is often portrayed as a split between two opposing viewpoints. The public perception is that a divide exists similar to the one seen in early Greece, characterized by a conflict between the mythical and the rational mindsets. This divide manifests today in the contrast between Atheism and Theism, with both sides employing various argumentative models to support their positions. Atheism often incorporates ideas of objective morality and scientism—not to be confused with science but rather an approach that aligns more closely with faith—which can be challenging to counter. In response, Theism takes the arguments posed by Atheism and asks, “Who is responsible for the existence of all these elements?” It also introduces animism to argue for a supernatural being rather than a purely supernatural power in its reasoning. Atheism, on the other hand, tends to focus less on who is responsible and more on understanding how things function. Thus, the debate continues indefinitely.

The mythical to the rationale [logical] was a gradual process in the early times, and Plato played both sides. This would bring us forward to the age of reason. I believe today there is the same movement but in reverse – there is an apparent uptake of the mythical to the rationale. However, those types of splits back then were never clear-cut or absolute. Francis Cornford [Religion to Philosophy] made this aware that both dictums are needed; he called the two permanent needs of human nature.      

To elaborate further on these splits being in reverse today, we first must understand that early philosophy could hold to myths symbolically rather than literally. Then, the essential split would take form, not in the explicit but in a literal sense, by trying to understand what symbols mean in a larger symbolic way. This is what the Neo-Platonists started to do. They, however, would lose their grip with the rise of the practical (or quantifiable) way. This approach gained favour throughout the decades, so the idea of the imagination took a back seat. The mythical traditions, having had a cognitive grasp on how we perceive the world, were undermined.      

However, in our modern time, there is an apparent reversal that what we hold as quantifiable or practical is being exposed as false or a simulacrum. And this is mainly due to scientism, and to combat this fall – in a last-ditch effort, they [possibly] instigated a program called ‘Woke.’ However, the question of whether it’s a conspiracy or something that came about organically – is put into question. Scientism has come undone, realised in the scientism community upon their technocratic and futurist endeavours, having had nothing to show for it. All their efforts, even with all the billions of dollars given to their programs, cannot be denied.       

The implosion of Christianity and the rise of communism is more about a fundamentalist fear of old gods awakening and, therefore, a fear of our imagination rising. And more so in the fear that protestant-religion may go more gnostic or even Catholic. The truer fear is the change away from the status quo of a static religion. Due to religious idolatry, dogmatism, narcissism, corporatism, and being pro-military/empire – the so-called Christian conspiracy theory groups happened to act more like damage controllers than altruistic speakers of the morally just. This can all be stifling and cult-like, which incidentally mirrors the same kinds of processes being made with woke.

Therefore, the inevitable change from both sides takes form through changing camps. One can only hope one chooses the middle way rather than switching from one extreme to another. And having awakened from psycho-spiritual transformations, you’ve come to realise you are living in a simulated satellized-cosmos. And you come to know it’s one domino in an effect that grew a life of its own. Furthermore, realising a split in the conscious reality also wreaks havoc on consensus reality. Or, instead, perhaps our holographic reality is changing because of that split.

Woke Woke and Cult Jam: French philosophers took on the idea that words, ideas, and thoughts are patterns with traces that never really go away. So, if you use a word associated with something terrible and if that word is still used today, then it carries a negative trait. The moral panic on the psychological side is fuelled by an incomprehensible idea that words have to mean what they mean in the first place.

This is similar to my earlier contention about etymologies [Restraint and Catharsis post]. How ‘words’ are used in modern society juxtaposed with their historical meaning, and not just the history, the idea of context because it must be heard in the context of others at that time [which requires memory] – this is when memory can morph into its opposite. This is why I defend the word multiculturalism because people must hear it in the context of this [present] time. Funny enough, this contention was raised by centre-right intellects [who didn’t believe in the definition of multiculturalism] to separate politically-correct-contention in ‘words’ for articulation and differentiating oneself from politically correct concepts with woke-ism [which has other connotations].           

Moral panic, on the psychological side, combines the corruption in the levels of abstraction I discussed in general semantics with ‘reason’ as a tool. For instance, film director James Gunn faced condemnation on Twitter for joking about controversial subjects. These posts, made over a decade ago, were already addressed by Gunn with an apology. However, they were resurfaced and seized upon by conservative Christian groups, leading to Gunn being vilified long after the original events. This situation predates the era of cancel culture and did not involve so-called woke groups. This dynamic overlooks personal growth, suggesting that a person’s past actions will forever define who they are.

The contention I’m trying to make here is that the tools, for a reason, are not the culprit. They’re just the tools. It’s the varying groups that wield it. Blaming it on the tools opens it up for confusion and generalisations towards an idea that is predominately safe. This confusion would be a modern misunderstanding. This pre-cancel culture would find itself in the woke group, which happens to have no religious structure but acquired religious cult ideologies as well as religious cult processes for indoctrination. That uses tools for reason as a mechanism in which there is no way to argue.

The result will entail scenarios such as this: white middle-class people wrestling with inner fears about race, and within their inner turmoil [white-fragility], concluded that the very act of wrestling with it means all white people are, therefore, also conflicted [racist]. Not only is there this narcissistic quality entailing the assumption that one white person is the spokesperson for an entire group of people, but a quality inherent to fundamentalist-Christian-(Conspiracy)-groups, and that is solipsism. Although in this variant, ‘I exist and everyone else is an illusion,’ in as much as ‘when my thoughts change, so does everyone else.’ They have not concluded that their inner turmoil lies within them only.     

In general semantics, the referent must be experienced to function as quality or a ‘thing’. From here, it would go towards ‘reference’, which is about acquiring states of consciousness [memory or thought files]. How does one go from referent to reference when the context of meaning for the word changes every often? The answer is your intuition. The success of falsely labelling woke-isim as a radical-left, Postmodern or cultural Marxism exemplifies what I’m talking about. Remember, cultural Marxism has never been about culture but about class. Woke-isim is normative, not postmodern, and non-ideological. The confusion lays in postmodernism jargon being appropriated by woke-isim, hence the false label to which centre-right intellects have popularised it. However, we know we can’t go from referent to label without the reference, without the relationship of function.    

Another example of mislabelling and exclusion of quality is when the ‘right’ purposely mislabels the word ‘fascism’ or ‘Nazism’ as a leftist or socialist ideology. There is only one problem: This argument is untrue. Although the Nazis did pursue a level of government intervention in the economy that would shock doctrinaire free marketeers, their “socialism” was, at best, a secondary element in their appeal. ‘What’s in a name’ – Shakespeare. The Nazi regime had little to do with socialism, despite it being prominently included in the name of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party.

The concept of the simulacrum, which involves the transformation of opposites to sustain itself in a controlled form, can be utilised as a tool, similar to a Trojan Horse. This approach distances people from the fear of ethics, suggesting that ethics may be appropriated by any specific religious or non-religious group, thereby emphasising perceived divisions and differences. However, one can observe no objective ethical differences across all significant religions when examining the hierarchy of spirits or gods. Ultimately, the focus shifts to developing the erroneous aspects of abstract orders. For example, the Quran reflects many themes found in Judaic and Christian texts.

The standard or confusion in the orders of abstraction towards Islam is that Islam is violently militant, promotes its martyrs to paradise and admires revenge. But Christianity has precisely the same tendencies within it. Both cases are expressions of ‘transcendental good intentions,’ not of their ethics. When it comes to history, Christian militancy has wreaked far greater destruction than anything managed by Islam. The ongoing mission for New Jerusalem and the war in heaven is further clarified when we know Christian Zionism predates Jewish Zionism. This can indicate European and North American aggressive nature towards Arabs. And that over the last half-century, it has less to do with Middle Eastern politics but almost a psychotic need to forget. This comes from a guilt-ridden past that entailed Christian civilisation’s responsibility for past atrocities like the genocide of six million Jews.

You will better understand what woke is because of this guilt-ridden past. This guilt would manifest in the West as a wound through civil-religious movement [shared spiritual, political, moral vision and ideology with a national foundational impact] with German guilt pride. It’s grounded in Christianity and republic pride, focusing on activism, moralism and social issues. It marks a shift from theological transcendent values. Civil religion had schisms that matched modern-day political schisms. Woke-isim and what it is to be a leftist is fundamentally in opposition, meaning woke-isim has never been leftist but is post-leftist.

When it comes to left and right politics, its experience or quality is different from what it once was. Left meant a republican mindset – and the right meant a monarchy mindset. This would change with the rise of Marxism and became more of a socio-economic designation. The left became more of a socialist who was more critical of capitalism and took on working-class causes. The right became a modern capitalist, which favoured a liberal market and was anti-communist. It’s a modern misconception to think woke-isim comes from the left because leftism is with identity politics, and woke-isim is not primarily political or economic but about identity or hyper-individualism. It doesn’t value class issues or capitalism’s struggle, so it aligns more with the left of neo-liberalism.      

German guilt-pride is a reactionary idea stemming from post-war Germany, where the country was divided about their fascist past. In East Germany, notions of Communist Germany found themselves anti-fascist. They saw themselves as victims of the Nazis as well as liberators for Germany from fascism. West Germany acknowledges that it was a state of Nazi Germany, but it also believes that it was also a crime. So, they admit the guilt but simultaneously adopt a sort of penance to clear away the debt for that crime. After the breakdown of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, Germany united from their schism. They formed a new Germany symbolised in the holocaust memorial centre, representing the acceptance of guilt but also knowing that it can never be paid off. Guilt inherited from previous generations is internalised. Paradoxically, with this admittance, they have elevated themselves morally and can be proud of accepting such enormous guilt.   

Guilt-pride becomes this paradoxical redemption and moral self-elevation through guilt admission. The same can be said with former Prime Minister of Australia Kevin Rudd apologising to the Indigenous people of Australia and Torres Strait Islanders in 2008. Woke-isim is this sort of German-style guilt pride in identity politics that took form in 1989 after the breakdown of communism and the fall of the Cold War. However, America is problematic as they’re deeply proud, and adhering to notions of ‘admission’ is probably out of the question. Still, it can’t deny the fact their guilt is deeply rooted in colonialism and slavery. Having no guilt admission, it manifested itself in woke – a combination of American individualistic liberalism and civil religion with a strong focus on identity.    

Now you know what woke is all about. It doesn’t make it less dogmatic than any other cult religion with certain taboos and thoughts. Even humour becomes suspect. The dogmatic side comes from this decisive-morality component that parallels Biblical notions like Matt 12:30: ‘He who is not me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters abroad.’ This binary good vs. bad distinction gives no credence to a middle ground. Then, this ritualistic conformity became popular among celebrities and Hollywood studios. Then there is the woke washing of capitalism and imperialism, which serves as a moralistic profile creation of capitalist and imperialist institutions [the intelligent agencies vs. billionaires]. Then, there is this strong personal internalisation of woke-isim that matches the zealotry of fundamentalism.  

At the same time, there are these complex issues regarding culture in countries built on a federation state with no real history compared to those with it [particularly of identity]. On the other hand, the Chinese gave us the Tao Te Ching, yet most of them do not live out those philosophies. This could be the effect of countries with longer histories becoming static. While in relatively newly formed countries, this energy matches those early mystery cults of Greece. The negative impact of this federation enterprise, however, would come into effect among the disenfranchised white males, having had no real identity to cling to. They have this emptiness among those generations, even though they are among other ethnic cultures [perhaps there are these micro-cultural-separations]. Having no real identity, they started heading towards something ecstatic or metal, a new rebellion. Like the rise of punk culture intermingled with the increase of (Nazi) skinheads during the late 70s and early 80s. However, beyond that dreary cultural descent, other micro-cultures started to arise, and they became leaders in cultural trends.

However, anything culturally related is under threat by woke-isim, and so one must realise that institutions or cults do not hold our imagination. They are only the rock to those that can call spirits. Imagination transcends the self, and Adam Smith elaborates on this truism. Realising that we don’t initially have ‘immediate experience’ of what others experience or feel. We can only try to conceive what they experience and feel. And it’s by the imagination that we can form any conception of what others think. So, here lies the heart of society, and it’s anti-narcissistic, or at least that’s what we wish it to be.

Both imagination and ethics are not inherently romantic, and talented people are not automatically romantic either; they possess exceptional skills. Along with the transcendent self and the intuitive act, these abilities can be a powerful force for creativity. It’s important to remember that assigning cultural heritage to the subject of creation cannot be owned. The concept of “woke” often struggles with shared knowledge as a form of common sense. It does not attempt to own the subject but seeks to dictate who promotes creative subjects for a specific agenda. This limitation prevents it from reaching beyond itself to engage with a sense of the other, a key aspect of true imagination, allowing creativity to be free from dictation or agenda.                          

The Dionysian expression of Drum Beats is the modern expression of syncopated breakbeats intermingled with loops and acapellas rhythmically accentuated with scratch notations of turntables, mixers, and beat pads. The marriage doesn’t end there, as the Dionysian expression of dance is modernised as breakdancers pop to a tune developed by a musically synchronistic madman on the turntables. The dance engulfs amazement as they play out the cymatic sound of musicality and language coming to life in dance.          

.

.