Tagged: Saint-Simon

Their Kingdom Come: Dominionism’s Quest for Political Capital in the Emergent World Order

by Paul & Phillip D. Collins ©, May 18th, 2008

Dominionism: Marrying Christianity to the Kosmos

In John 18:33, Pilate asked Jesus, “Art thou the King of the Jews?” In John 18:36, Jesus replied, “My kingdom is not of this world.” The original Greek word for “world” is kosmos, which connotes an arrangement, system, order, or government. Jesus was not expressing derision for the physical world, but with the usurious political systems that had come to dominate it. Some Christians have construed this response as a rationale for indolence and have embraced an apathetic brand of political abdication theology. However, Christian proponents of political abdication fail to consider the transliteration of kosmos and the historical background against which the term was invoked. Jesus was not condemning political activism. Instead, He was condemning the world’s political systems of that time, specifically the oligarchical model of the Roman Empire and its surrogate, the theocracy of the Pharisees.

That being said, there is another variety of so-called “Christians” that constitutes an equally extreme polar opponent to abdication theologians. This other polar extreme is known as “Dominionism.” While abdication theologians construe the Scriptures as a rationale for complete political abdication, Dominionists distort Genesis 1:28 to legitimize a purely political agenda. Dominionists totally politicize the Gospel, thus marrying Christianity to secular institutions. Once it is wedded to secularism, Christianity adopts the same anthropocentric premises of secularism. One of the anthropocentric premises that tend to pervade secularized Christianity is the notion that man must save himself. This was a core contention of communism, fascism, and other forms of anti-theistic sociopolitical Utopianism. In the context of Dominionism, this contention is given a marginally theistic interpretation: Man fully embodies and facilitates the march of God on earth. However, there is very little difference between the anti-theistic and theistic iterations of this contention. In both instances, the adherent’s gaze is firmly fixed on the ontological confines of this world.

As is the case with all Hegelian dialectics, the dialectic extremes of abdication theology and Dominionist theology produce the same outcome: totalitarianism. The abdication theologian surrenders to totalitarianism, whereas the Dominionist actively creates totalitarianism. Basically, Dominionism is a cult of neo-Gnostic jihadists committed to goals that almost mirror the objectives of earlier sociopolitical Utopians. Chris Hedges describes Dominionism as follows:

What the disparate sects of this movement, known as Dominionism, share is an obsession with political power. A decades-long refusal to engage in politics at all following the Scopes trial has been replaced by a call for Christian “dominion” over the nation and, eventually, over the earth itself. Dominionists preach that Jesus has called them to build the kingdom of God in the here and now, whereas previously it was thought we would have to wait for it. America becomes, in this militant biblicism, an agent of God, and all political and intellectual opponents of America’s Christian leaders are viewed, quite simply, as agents of Satan. (No pagination)

There is a crucial distinction to be made between using the Scriptures as a compass for making decisions within the political system and using the Scriptures as a rationale for co-opting and controlling the political system. In Vengeance is Ours: The Church in Dominion, Albert Dager synopsizes the three basic tenets upon which this militarized form of Christianity is premised:

1) Satan usurped man’s dominion over the earth through the temptation of Adam and Eve; 2) The Church is God’s instrument to take dominion back from Satan; 3) Jesus cannot or will not return until the Church has taken dominion by gaining control of the earth’s governmental and social institutions. (87)



MJ-12: The Technocratic Thread


by Paul Collins & Phillip D. Collins ©, Nov. 18th, 2006

B.F. Skinner, Time Magazine Sep. 20, 1971Few who have researched the UFO phenomenon are not familiar with the Majestic 12 documents. This controversial series of documents surfaced in 1984 and have been debated ever since. While a related report’s discovery in the National Archive lends corroborative evidence to the case for the authenticity of the MJ-12 papers, chronological and formatting anomalies within the documents arouse substantial skepticism. However, all debate aside, what is important about the MJ-12 papers is the portrait that they paint for the public mind. The papers present a shadowy group of policy professionals allegedly established by a secret executive order of President Truman on September 24, 1947. The underlying theme of the MJ-12 documents is inherently technocratic. That is, they dignify the concept of a Technocracy. A technocratic society, or Technocracy, can be defined as follows:

Technocracy, in classical political terms, refers to a system of governance in which technically trained experts rule by virtue of their specialized knowledge and position in dominant political and economic institutions. (Fischer 17)

Oxford Professor Carroll Quigley also wrote about a dictatorship of “experts,” suggesting that a cognitive elite “will replace the democratic voter in control of the political system” (Quigley 866). Of just such a democracy of “experts,” H.G. Wells stated:



The Social Scientific Dictatorship: The Role of the Social Sciences in the Mechanization of Mankind


by Paul and Phillip Collins ©, March 21st, 2006

The New Theocracy

B.F. Skinner, Time Magazine Sep. 20, 1971In many ways, epistemology is like an economic system. With all the right theoreticians in all the right places, one can arbitrarily bestow epistemological primacy upon those paradigms that are most socially and politically expedient. In such a climate of epistemological suppression, academic and institutional barriers prevent competitors from accessing the ideational marketplace. Meanwhile, a self-proclaimed cognitive elite monopolizes the economy of popular thought. This oligopoly of knowledge, in short, amounts to an epistemological cartel, promoting its anointed ideologues and squelching cognitive dissenters.

Within the traditional theocratic power structures of antiquity, state sanctioned priesthoods constituted epistemological cartels. The Pharisees that engineered the crucifixion of Jesus Christ provide a stellar example. The Mystery cults of Mesopotamia supply another. In both cases, an elite few exercised rigid control over the knowable. In so doing, they maintained the socioeconomic dominance of political oligarchs. Within their authoritarian economy of thought, ideas like “liberty” and “human dignity” were appropriated no currency.

However, it was a state of affairs that would inevitably change. As the ruling elite’s religious institutions began to lose credibility with the masses, it became apparent that the oligarchs would have to adopt a more secular system of control. The result of this transformation was the emergence of what Aldous Huxley called a “scientific dictatorship.” Huxley explains:



Psychologizing Subservience: The Era of Psuchikos Man


By Phillip D. Collins ©, Jan. 8th, 2014

I Corinthians 2: 14-15 establishes a binary opposition that defines the modern historical struggle in which man finds himself mortally locked. This passage of Scripture, as it is translated in the amplified version of the Bible, reads: “But the natural, nonspiritual man does not accept or welcome or admit into his heart the gifts and teachings and revelations of the Spirit of God, for they are folly (meaningless nonsense) to him; and he is incapable of knowing them [of progressively recognizing, understanding, and becoming better acquainted with them] because they are spiritually discerned and estimated and appreciated. But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and discerns all things], yet is himself to be put on trial and judged by no one [he can read the meaning of everything, but no one can properly discern or appraise or get an insight into him].”

Verse 15 presents the reader with the “spiritual man.” The adjective “spiritual” is etymologically derived from the Greek word Pneumatikos, which relates to the human spirit or rational soul. Pneumatikos is that which was breathed into man by God in Genesis 2:7. In fact, the word pneumatikos also pertains to breath, as is evidenced by respiratory-related terms like “pneumonia.” The concept of Pneumatikos forms the basis for the Christian doctrine of imago viva Dei, which teaches that man occupies the unique position as a creature created in the image of God.

In contradistinction, verse 14 presents the reader with the “natural man.” The adjective “natural” is etymologically derived from the Greek word psuchikos. It denotes the principle of animal life, that which men have in common with the brutes. It also connotes the sensuous nature with its subjection to appetite and passion.

Interestingly enough, the term “psychology” is etymologically derived from psuchikos. Through the interpretative lens of modern psychology, all those elements of man that initially fell under the descriptive category of pneumatikos are biologicized. With the soul divorced from metaphysics, every thought, feeling, and idea becomes biochemical in origin. Remaining consistent with its etymological root, psychology reduces man to little more than a brute whose behavior must be sculpted by those few conditioners who are accountable to no moral master.



Zeitgeist Addendum: Toward a Technocratic, Communitarian, Cybernated Society

Originally Published at Conspiracy Archive on 2008/10/18

Peter Joseph is naive, and has been swayed by one after another “teacher.” In the first Zeitgeist – a Hegelian concept coined by Johann Gottfried Herder of the Bavarian Illuminati – he was obviously enamored with ‘Acharya S’ and her occult Theosophical “secret tradition” interpretation of ancient history. In ‘Addendum,’ he has found a few new (solution-oriented) gurus of the same ilk.

The one-time New Age Theosophical Christ-Maitreya, J. Krishnamurti — thrust upon the occult, Utopian socialist underground at the beginning of the 20th century by Theosophy head, Fabian socialist Annie Besant and pederast-Freemason, C.W. Leadbeater — begins and ends the film. For something that purports to espouse “a modern, non-superstitious based understanding” of the world, well, let’s just say that it is hypocritical and deceitful not to even identify the theosophical current throughout both films, or the outright socialism of the latest. Though Peter Joseph hasn’t admitted his Theosophical debt, at 1:35:37 he tips his hand by the obscure mention of “intellectual materialism” – a term used by Blavatsky herself in Lucifer magazine (also, see here for another theosophic source) – and touts the “true divinity” of Man (1:48:25). New Ager aka “economic hitman”-Perkins has experienced the seething energies of Lucifer as well. At 1:43:07 he talks of the bliss of connectedness and our “God spirit,” while an “Illumined” man makes a gesture with his hands of a triangle in front of the sun.