Tagged: Phillip D. Collins

When Malthusians Become Messiahs

by Phillip D. Collins, August 27th, 2009

Nowadays, anyone and everyone who raises a disparaging word about the Obama Administration’s policies is immediately assigned the stigma of “alarmist,” “scaremonger,” or “paranoid.” Perhaps such stigmas are actually applicable in some cases, like Genesis Communications Network radio talk show host Alex Jones and Fox News talk show host Glenn Beck. In both of these cases, there are, no doubt, serious sanity issues involved. However, those who have familiarized themselves with the résumé of President Obama’s recently appointed Science Czar, John Holdren, have good reason to be afraid.

Before I proceed any further, allow me to dissuade readers from ascribing any sort of partisan biases to me. I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican. Foreign policy commentator Robert Kagan once observed that this false dichotomy represents “two variations of the same worldview.” The dialectical commonalities exhibited by Republicans and Democrats bear out this contention. Neither party is interested in dismantling the labyrinthine machinations of Big Government or restoring the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. Both are merely committed to the maintenance of their two-party political cartel.

‘Nuff said.

Having dispelled any accusations of partisan prejudices, allow me to provide a brief overview of Holdren’s résumé. In 1977, Holdren co-authored Ecoscience with Paul and Anne Ehrlich. Of course, Paul Ehrlich was the environmental scientist who published The Population Bomb in 1968.

(more…)

More

The Faustian Face of Modern Science: Understanding the Epistemological Foundations of Scientific Totalitarianism

by Phillip D. Collins, June 11th, 2009

Scientific totalitarianism is certainly not a new topic in the halls of political science and history. Given its bloody legacy of democide (i.e., state-sanctioned genocide, mass murder, and politicide) and its prolific spread throughout the world, scientific totalitarianism remains a preoccupying sociopolitical phenomenon of the 20th century. Yet, few researchers have examined the epistemological foundations of scientific totalitarianism. In turn, an understanding of scientific totalitarianism’s epistemological roots elucidates an occult conception of science, which edified the sundry Weltanschauungs of sociopolitical Utopians (e.g., socialists of either the communist or fascist ilk). In light of this core epistemological commonality, all forms of sociopolitical Utopianism could be considered the manifestations of a trans-historical occult counterculture movement.

To understand the occult conception of science, one must first establish a working definition for traditional science. The word “science” is derived from the Latin word scientia, which means “knowing” or “knowledge.” Thus, there is an epistemological dimension to science. After all, epistemology is etymologically derived from the Greek word episteme, which also means “knowing” or “knowledge.” In recent years, science has been couched in the epistemology of radical empiricism, the theory that all knowledge is derived from the senses. Within such epistemologically rigid parameters, the gaze of contemporary science has been firmly fixed upon the ontological confines of the physical universe. Whether the modern scientist realizes it or cares to admit it, radical empiricism is the epistemological nucleus of the occult conception of science.

(more…)

More

America, Inc.: Land of Corporate Reign

by Phillip D. Collins ©, July 11th, 2008

Benito Mussolini said, “Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.”

This model of economic fascism was adopted by Germany and Italy in the 1930s. And, I submit to you that such a marriage between the state and corporate power has taken place here in the United States.

Does this sound like a baseless contention? Allow me to substantiate it with history.

A form of Corporatism began to infect our constitutional republic in the 1930s. It propagated itself under the euphemistic appellation of “planned capitalism” and was hailed as a desirable inevitability. In 1936, Lawrence Dennis published The Coming American Fascism, a polemic contending that America’s adoption of stringent public regulation and the enshrinement of corporate power would invigorate “national spirit.” However, Dennis believed that economic fascism had a major obstacle to overcome.

Dennis wrote, “It cannot be repeated too often that what prevents adequate public regulation is liberal norms of law or constitutional guarantees of private rights.”

Dennis proffered a chronocentric portrait of America’s traditional republican model of government, caricaturing it as an outmoded “18th-century Americanism” that would eventually be supplanted by “enterprises of public welfare and social control” (i.e., economic fascism).

(more…)

More

Monetary Reform: The Only Cure for the Hidden Tax

by Phillip D. Collins ©, June 18th, 2008

The old adage opines, “Only two things are certain in life: death and taxes.”

While the parameters governing death seem fairly well-defined, taxes are somewhat more ambiguous. Our system of taxation is labyrinthine and confusing, which is precisely the way that the welfare statist likes it. Americans are already busy enough dealing with the complexities of their daily lives and do not have the time to familiarize themselves with all of the vagaries of an increasingly socialistic tax system. Amid the cacophony of quotidian pressures, important details invariably elude public attention.

The inflation tax is one of the most significant cases in point. Haven’t heard of it? If so, don’t be too hard on yourself. Most Americans don’t even realize that an inflation tax exists.

(more…)

More

The Political Cartel Of Republicrats and Democrats

by Phillip D. Collins ©, June 18th, 2008

With the presidential elections steadily approaching, a question is being asked with increasing frequency: Who are you voting for? Personally, this questions aggravates me. Why? Because it is framed within a distinctly Hegelian framework. This framework consists of the confining dialectics of left vs. right, liberal vs. conservative, and, of course, Democrat vs. Republican. The latter of these dialectics is, for me, the most frustrating. Why? Because there’s no real difference between Republicans and Democrats.

Whenever the religious adherent of partisan affiliations attempts to “convert” me to their creed, I direct him or her to a quote from an obscure book entitled Tragedy and Hope. In this book, Georgetown University Professor Carroll Quigley writes, “The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea. Instead the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy…It should be able to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which … will still pursue with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.”

In truth, the purpose of a two party system is the maintenance of a political cartel. Within such a framework, viable alternatives are overlooked and the same logically bankrupt status quo remains enshrined. To qualify this contention, I will briefly examine one major issue that occupies the mind of the voter: the war. To be sure, this is not the only point of convergence for the Democrats and Republicans, but it is one of the most transparently fraudulent dichotomies on the political landscape. The dominant perception holds that Republicans are “hawks” while Democrats are “doves.” However, history does not bear out this dualistic portrait.

(more…)

More

The Mythmakers of Modernity

Featured-Origin-of-Species-Paradise-Lost

By Phillip D. Collins

Author’s note: The following is excerpted from the forthcoming book, Invoking the Beyond, which I am co-authoring with Paul David Collins.

As all of humanity’s treasured metaphysical propositions (e.g., the soul, the noumenal realm, God, etc.) swiftly vanished behind the barrier that Immanuel Kant arbitrarily erected between noumenon and phenomenon, there was a corresponding tendency among the critics of traditional theistic outlooks to ascribe noumenal characteristics to the phenomenal world. One case in point was, of course, the biologicized pantheism of Darwinism. Ironically, the premises for this latest iteration of pantheism were established by Spinoza, a theoretician of whom Kant was deeply critical. Nevertheless, the Kantian Rift engendered epistemic incertitude concerning noumenon, thereby rendering ostensibly tenable the subsequent incorporation of noumenal qualities into the conceptualization of a self-sufficient immanent order. Essentially, Spinoza suffused the phenomenal world with divinity, which is a categorically noumenal state of being. Another case in point was Georg Hegel, who advanced the notion of a Weltgeist that was directing “an ongoing developmental (evolutionary) process in nature, including humanity” (Taylor 381-82). This process was historically expressed as a “dialectical struggle between positive and negative entities,” which invariably resulted in a “harmonious synthesis” (381-82). Naturally, such a Manichean process would entail a substantial amount of violence and bloodshed. Not surprisingly, Darwinism “gave credence to the Hegelian notion that human culture had ascended from brutal beginnings” (386). To be sure, there are some disparities between a Spinoza and a Hegel, but a common penchant among such thinkers is a propensity to conflate noumenal attributes (e.g., eternality, infinitude, omnipotence, etc.) with objects of phenomenal experience (e.g., nature, the material cosmos, genetics, biology, etc.).

(more…)

More

Environmentalism: The Religion for an Eco-theocratic Superstate?

by Phillip D. Collins ©, Apr. 11, 2007

In a recent address to the CATO Institute in Washington, D.C., Czech President Vaclav Klaus declared, “Environmentalism is a religion. It does not belong in the natural sciences and is more connected with social science” (Mooney, no pagination). According to Klaus, this religion is purely a statist one designed to enthrone policy professionals that hope to “rule from above” (no pagination). Klaus asserted that this religion worked in tandem with “multi-culturalism,” “internationalism,” “social democratism,” and other fashionable ideologies to accelerate the global tectonic shift towards “supranationalism” (no pagination). These contentions seem to be reinforced by the admonitions of one of the environmentalist movement’s leading ideologues: Albert Gore.

A cursory perusal of Gore’s Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit reveals the religious character of environmentalism. Replete with inherently religious terms like “heretical,” “moral,” and “spirit,” Gore’s book virtually qualifies as a sacred text. However, the religion that Gore espouses is hardly amicable to Christianity. Gore assails Christianity for the purported suppression of the “goddess religion,” which he contends provided humanity with a “spiritual sense of our place in nature” (260). According to Gore, those who think otherwise hold “heretical” beliefs (258).

(more…)

More

Contingent Divinity: The Golden Calf of the Universe

Featured-Monboddo-Darwins

By Phillip Darrell Collins (August 1st, 2014)

Author’s note: The following is excerpted from the forthcoming book, Invoking the Beyond, which I am co-authoring with Paul David Collins.

In Romans 1:25, St. Paul pens the following comments concerning the practices of idolaters: “They changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever.” St. Paul’s identification of the “creature” as the idolater’s surrogate for God elucidates a parallel between the ancient world and modernity. To understand this parallel, one must first examine the etymology of the term “creature.” “Creature” is derived from the Latin word creāre, which means “created thing.” The material cosmos qualifies as a “created thing” and, within the dominant cultural milieu of modernity, it is the material cosmos that tends to occupy the lofty status of divine. Today, the idolatry of the ancient world is expressed through the Weltanschauung of naturalism and enjoys pseudo-scientific sanctions with evolutionary theory.

Naturalism holds that nature brought itself into being without a Creator and continues to arrange itself through purely organic processes. Of course, structure and organization imply design, which, in turn, implies a Designer. Since the naturalist views nature as the originator of its own structure and organization, he or she is tacitly deeming nature a de facto designer. Essentially, the material world is hypostatized. Within the context of this discussion, the term “hypostasis” is being invoked to denote a fundamental, self-sufficient rational entity upon which all else is contingent. Ironically, those who advance the hypostatic depiction of the universe typically contend that their immanent surrogate for the Divine is anhypostatic. Yet, given the irreducibly teleological nature of their cosmology, such an anhypostatic characterization of the universe is not logically sustainable. Invariably, the elevation of the sensate cosmos to the status of the Divine results in the hypostatizing of the contingent universe, a reality tacitly underscored by the anthropomorphic terminology that scientific materialists tend to invoke in discussions concerning the material world. This hypostatic depiction of the universe provides the basis for the virtual apotheosis of material agencies and the enshrinement of immanentism.

(more…)

More

The Bruce Collins Show- 07/13/14- Phillip Collins

scientific-dictatorship

Phillip Collins joins us to discuss Contingent Divinity, which will be discussed in a section of the Collins’ brothers forthcoming book, tentatively titled, Invoking the Beyond.

More

Nothing Beyond the Flesh: The Theocracy of Prima Materia

by Phillip D. Collins ©, Sept. 9th, 2006

Anatomy of a Weltanschauungskrieg

Historically, humanity has divided somewhat evenly into two diametrically opposed camps: those who subscribe to a spiritual, theistic Weltanschauung and those who do not. The philosophical milieu of ancient Greece illustrates this division. In the theistic camp, one would find the likes of Socrates and Plato. In the atheistic camp, one would find Democritus and Protagoras. While the more deistic philosophies of both Lucretius and Aristotle might present some exceptions to this division, one could convincingly argue that deism is little more than a camouflaged form of atheism.

Since the inception of the anti-theistic and anti-spiritual Weltanschauung, numerous permutations of this philosophical camp have emerged. Materialists, behaviorists, physicalists, functionalists, secular humanists, and Marxists are just a few of the resulting variants. To be sure, the countless theoreticians of these anti-theistic and anti-spiritual camps have had their occasional epistemological feuds. Yet, all share the same core metaphysical convictions: matter holds primacy and the ontological plane of the physical universe constitutes the totality of reality itself.

Of course, the anti-theistic and anti-spiritual Weltanschauung adamantly opposes most, if not all, religions. However, most contemporary movements that have ostensibly eschewed a spiritual outlook have sociologically behaved like religions. Communism and fascism are two such cases in point. How does one explain this paradox? It is this researcher’s contention that the anti-theistic and anti-spiritual Weltanschauung was spawned by an older religion. This religion is purely occult in character and, because it acted as the progenitor for the anti-theistic and anti-spiritual Weltanschauung, it remains deeply embedded within the ostensibly secular mind. Thus, even the most stridently secular movements are conceptually predisposed to religious thought and behavior. Ultimately, the anti-theistic and anti-spiritual Weltanschauung is designed to relocate the Eschaton of Heaven and Hell within the ontological plane of the physical universe. Simultaneously, it relocates God within man himself. The final result is a control ideology devoted to the transformation of prima materia and a secular religion devoted to the apotheosis of man.

(more…)

More