We are all guilty. All of us look! As such we all contribute to this "face in" type of goverment, a world wide system. We get the cold and ruthless governing effects of what we have in. What we put in.

The free speech theme that runs everywhere these days (not without profit ) can be also viewed as a hook. Free speech was never ever endangered! It will never be. If we are looking for free speech in the merchant's square then we should also remind ourselves this is private ground. The synagouges belonged to whom? Where did the great orators deliver their free speeches? If we seek the mind as a collective to deliver our speech, it sounds a bit presumptuos to expect it for free. The collective mind has been purchased! Socrates had access to a few minds and was killed. Reality is consent has glorified the god you mention above. The fact that we seek the collective mind, for profit, be it monetary or fleshly, only contributes to this type of system with a curving end. If all systems have risen and fallen, why should this one be any different? I am exited to see a new rising one, maybe coming soon.

Expand full comment

@I-am-the-equator-so-defer-to-me solar noon (aka halo) there is no shadow (all things being equinoxes … because we mighty make righty say so), & Plato’s shadow-puppets inhabit sumptuously, tho not shadowly, appointed wo/mancaves.

And some of those have told me they wouldn’t want to live inside my head.

There’s no accounting for taste. Or solipsism.

Expand full comment

"...pure religious doctrine, a wholesale return to theocratic power. It assumes a level of wisdom and knowledge not of mortal hearts and minds, and thus assumes commensurate religious authority to manifest as brute power."


Voddie Bacuham refers to this as "ethnic gnosticism". As such, it become inarguable, innate, with an entirely social, experiential - indeed personal!! - locus of truth.

Ahh... the delicious fruit of post-modernism. Sweet, eh?

Expand full comment

Authentic spirituality requires consciously accepting and relating properly to the shadow as opposed to repressing, projecting, acting out and remaining naively unconscious of its repudiated, denied, disavowed contents, a sort of precarious pseudospirituality. ‘‘Bringing the shadow to consciousness,’’ writes another of Jung’s followers, Liliane Frey-Rohn (1967), ‘‘is a psychological problem of the highest moral significance. It demands that the individual hold himself accountable not only for what happens to him, but also for what he projects. . . Without the conscious inclusion of the shadow in daily life there cannot be a positive relationship to other people, or to the creative sources in the soul; there cannot be an individual relationship to the Divine’’.

Expand full comment