3) Intelligentsia or Intelligence?

What are we to learn from an openly atheistic movement whose leaders were complicit in and responsible for the deaths of millions of people through genocide, starvation, war and forced relocation to labor camps..?

The Bolshevik Revolution helped define the world of the 20th century. It led to the advent of the first socialistic government, which soon expanded into the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). The Soviet Union aggressively spread communist ideology to Eastern Europe, China, North Korea and Southeast Asia. At the same time, it enslaved its people behind an “iron curtain” of a tightly controlled political, economic and cultural system…

the October Revolution was the extraordinary success of Marxist philosophy, which was espoused by an aggressive minority. It was named after Karl Marx, a Prussian-born political theorist, sociologist, journalist and revolutionary socialist of the previous century.

Karl Marx saw the world as divided between the working class and property owners. Those of the working class labored for wages but never got ahead because they didn’t own what they created…Marxism viewed the world through glasses where everything was colored by property, money and ownership.

Marx saw the solution as communism…socialistic governments whose resources would be shared for the betterment of all.

Communism isn’t a government. It is a stateless system where everybody shares. Its motto, coined by Karl Marx, is “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” The concept is that everybody will give and take what they want, and it will somehow work out.

However, this wouldn’t happen on its own…

a dictatorship…including the military…could enforce the socialism necessary to creating eventual communism.

In communist ideology, the dictatorship of the proletariat was to be temporary because the ideals of communism were eventually supposed to take over, with the state then withering away. But that never happened. Those who took power stayed in power.

And what did the Communists do once in position to carry out their scheme?

Atheism was suddenly imposed on millions of people engulfed in Communist revolutions. The total number of Christian victims under the Soviet regime has been estimated to range around 12 to 20 million.  Mao Zedong was responsible for at least 40 million deaths and perhaps 80 million or more, occurring during deliberate eradication campaigns of landowners, potential counterrevolutionaries, and Christians. “As the Chinese Communist Party celebrates its centenary, Christianity—and other faiths—remain among the challengers it fears most.”

And why is that? Because belief in hyper dimensional Supreme Being supersedes the authority of the four dimensional Supreme Dictator and – most importantly – removes the fear of death, therefore the biggest weapon of control.. 

Most probably near 170,000,000 people have been murdered in cold-blood by governments, well over three-quarters by absolutist regimes.The most such killing was done by the Soviet Union (near 62,000,000 people), the communist government of China is second (near 35,000,000), followed by Nazi Germany (almost 21,000,000), and Nationalist China (some 10,000,000). Lesser megamurderers include WWII Japan, Khmer Rouge Cambodia, WWI Turkey, communist Vietnam, post-WWII Poland, Pakistan, and communist Yugoslavia. The most intense democide was carried out by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, where they killed over 30 percent of their subjects in less than four years.

The best predictor of this killing is regime power. The more arbitrary power a regime has, the less democratic it is, the more likely it will kill its subjects or foreigners. The conclusion is that power kills, absolute power kills absolutely.

Unless you are already one of the elite, you have no basis for faith – only arrogance – to believe that you are one of the fittest who will survive and thrive in this lifetime using the Evolutionary justification to dominate and destroy the weak.

Who best predicted the future with their dystopian novel — George Orwell or Aldous Huxley?

[B]oth of them bestsellers at the time and ever since: Aldous Huxley’s 1932 Brave New World and George Orwell’s 1949 Nineteen Eighty-Four. The two dystopias have many details in common…Both men imagined future societies completely obsessed with sex, though in diametrically opposite ways: state-enforced repression and celibacy in the case of Orwell; deliberate, narcotising promiscuity in the case of Huxley. Both men thought the future would be dominated by America. Both men thought that future governments would spend a lot of effort permanently trying to incite economic consumption…Both men were writing warnings: “the message of the book”, said Huxley, was, “This is possible: for heaven’s sake be careful about it.” In his vision, humanity was facing a future world tranquilised by pleasure and drugs and the voluntary distractions of “civilised infantilisation”. For Orwell, humanity was facing a permanent state of war and totalitarian mind-control, summed up by the image of “a boot stamping on a human face, for ever”…

Nothing, however, but nothing, could rival the sales boost provided by Donald Trump. This president embodies the insight that given a willingness to lie without compunction, norms of veracity can be abolished with extraordinary speed. It is one of the central demands of the Party, in Orwell’s book, that you “reject the evidence of your eyes and ears”. Trump put that maxim into effect on his very first day in office, with his insistence that people ignore the evidence of their senses about his Inauguration day crowds…

Huxley’s…grandfather Thomas was “Darwin’s bulldog”, the first high-profile public defender of Darwin’s ideas; his brother Julian was…a leading eugenicist…Huxley was interested in eugenics, which held a fascination for many intellectuals of the left as well as of the right. He came to see it as a sinister field…But he had first felt the lure of the idea that…science can cure some of the pain and difficulty of being human…

In Brave New World promiscuity is not just normal, it is actively encouraged; total frankness in all aspects of sexuality, ditto. Sex is a distraction and a source of entertainment, almost a drug…Huxley was completely right…Undemanding pleasures and unchallenging entertainments are central to the functioning of society. Sources of distraction play a vital role…and every effort is made to stop people from feeling strong emotion. The preferred method for this is soma, a side-effect free drug which guarantees dissociated happiness…look at the modern use of antidepressants, anti-anxiety and sedative medications, and conclude that he had nailed it.

One particular area of Huxley’s prescience concerned the importance of data…many features of Facebook, in particular, are anticipated by Brave New World. Facebook’s mission statement “to give people the power to build community and bring the world closer together” sounds a lot like the new world’s motto “Community, Identity, Stability”…The public nature of relationship status, the idea that everything should be shared, and the idea that “everyone belongs to everyone else” are also common themes of the novel and the company — and above all, the idea, perfectly put by Zuckerberg and perfectly exemplifying Huxley’s main theme, that “privacy is an outdated norm”…This theme, of an attack on privacy, is central to Orwell’s vision too. Thought crime is one of the most serious crimes in Nineteen Eighty-Four. It is at this point that we can start to see his and Huxley’s novels not as competing visions of the future but as complementary, overlapping warnings. Our world has sex on display everywhere, entertainment to take you out of your mind whenever you want, and drugs to make you stop feeling. It also has an increasing number of strongmen leaders who rewrite history and ignore the truth, and a growing emphasis on crimes-by-thought. We don’t have an official “Two Minutes Hate”, as Orwell’s state of Oceania does, but our social media equivalents come pretty close. The idea of permanent low-level war as a new norm looks a lot like our 18-year global war on terror — in fact the GWOT would fit in nicely in Orwell’s world of acronyms and Newspeak. The idea of a society permanently stratified into inherited or genetically determined social classes maps well on to a modern world where the most unequal societies are also the ones in which people are most likely to inherit their life chances. A globally dominant society ruled by a party and a strong leader, a society which uses every possible method of surveillance and data collection to monitor and control its citizens, a society which is also enjoying a record rise in prosperity and abundance, and using unprecedented new techniques in science and genetics — that society would look a lot like a blend of Orwell’s and Huxley’s visions…Huxley and Orwell both wrote their books to try and prevent their dystopias from coming true…

Doesn’t it make sense to question why the powers-that-be are so intent on indoctrinating the rest of us that life is meaningless and worthless and we should be content to just coast through it?

Certainly the only hope for a constructive force to reclaim and restore stability in life, from the individual to a utopian society to the entire universe, lies with power beyond the limitations of human beings.

Our only option for learning about hyper dimensionality has been, and remains, revelation from hyper dimensional beings who explain concepts like Eternity vs Time and Immortality vs Death in simple language understandable even by uneducated individuals.

Religion’s promises for power over the destructive forces of this life and assurance of a high quality eternal life has led uncountable numbers of people over thousands of years to place their belief, and their actions, in religion. Is this just, as Richard Dawkins proclaims, a God Delusion

I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.”

Is Richard Dawkins really smart to put all his trust in himself as the ultimate authority on life, the universe and everything?

Are you smart to put your trust in his unquestionably arrogant assertion of his intellect resulting in a frankly uncertain guess?

As university-level biology and science education instructors, we were very pleased to see the interesting and important paper…focusing on the acceptance of the theory of evolution among college tudents. We whole-heartedly agree with the authors’ conclusion that “evolution literacy” should be fortified at all educational levels. Unfortunately, Paz-y-Mino and Espinoza promote three significant misconceptions about the theory of biological evolution that routinely plague those of us helping students understand, and potentially come to accept, this central theme of biology...

First…the theory of evolution…both currently and as first conceived by Darwin and Wallace, neither provides, nor requires, an explanation for the origin of life…[Emphases added.]

The Human Genome Project catalogues all the genes, with their variations and combinations, that together assemble a human being. Does this scientific endeavor support evolution or Intelligent Design?

Gene Myers, the computer scientist who actually put together the genome map…confessed: “We don’t understand ourselves yet…[t]here’s still a metaphysical, magical element.” (Metaphysical means “beyond the physical”; it denotes an area of investigation that has to do with the origins of objects, hence, is outside the legitimate purview of physical science.)…Myers continued: “What really astounds me is the architecture of life. The system is extremely complex. It’s like it was designed.” Designed? Doesn’t that imply a designer, an intelligence, something more than the fortuitous bumping together of chemicals in the primordial slime? (Even skeptics have acknowledged such. In his book, Fundamentals of Critical Thinking, Paul Ricci has stated that the principle that “‘everything designed has a designer’ is an analytically true statement” (1986, 190)…Myers replied: “There’s a huge intelligence there. I don’t see that as being unscientific. Others may, but not me”.

There you have it.

It is impossible to understand how life ends without understanding its nature, including how it begins. So anyone who places their trust in Evolution’s assurance that the life experienced on earth from birth to death is all there is and can be squandered as one chooses is trusting in ignorance.

It is up to you, the jury, to determine if four dimensional Evolution can prove it was where it claims it was and did what it claims it did within its claimed timeframe, and furthermore that a superhuman Creator who documented that he did it, “did not do it”.

It is very easy to mock, ridicule and dismiss an argument. Taking the time to give a well thought out and carefully reasoned response however, is another story.”

Before rejecting a Creator God out of hand because of a bad experience with religion, stop and think for one minute.

Death is the biggest crisis we’ll face in life. Can we trust our own judgment on a condition we have no way of exploring for ourselves?

This isn’t a question I can really afford to ignore, neither can I trust my own limited experience on such a significant issue, that one way or another, sooner or later, is going to happen to each of us. And to the ones we love more than our own selves.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s