YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH
There is an idea that has been floating around now for at least as long as history has been recorded. It seems that wherever large populations of humanity appear, there are those who feel that since some are more intelligent than others that it is only logical that the bright ones run things, and become keepers of the truth about reality. The less intelligent majority of society is obviously not up to making important decisions, and in fact would become too upset if they knew the truth about man, nature and the universe we live in. So they must be told dumbed-down engaging stories to satisfy their lesser minds, while only a few hold the real knowledge and power.
Sound like a 'Conspiracy Theory'? Well, actually, this idea draws on known history, not anything so controversial. In our most ancient records, it is usually the Priests that hold the power in society. They are the Wise Men, and either directly rule, or influence with authority those who have the title of ruler.
Our first records of civilization are of Sumeria, around 4000 B.C. As advanced as they were in crafts, agriculture, irrigation and other professions, they were basically Temple-Cities, run by Priest-Kings. The Priests told the people what was real, and interpreted truth for them, from the 'gods'.
In ancient Egypt, it was the Pharaoh and the Priest that ruled. The Pharaoh was the caretaker of the people. His duty was to look after them. The Priests were caretakers of the gods. If all was going well, the Pharaoh and Priests were doing their jobs. (This parental caretaker of the people idea is something which has been passed down through time, apparently.) The people were not allowed direct access to the gods. Only the Priests had access. The people could pray outside the gates of the Temple, but could not enter. Or they could pray to the Pharaoh as an intermediary, but could not gain direct access. They were not allowed to know the secrets of life and living which the Priests had through direct contact with the 'gods'.
The Druids were Priests and the center of the religion of the Celtic people. These Priests were the most powerful people in the society, and it was said that on their word wars could be started or stopped. Their decisions were like laws and adhered to by all. Yet, little is known about the actual religion of the Druids since they taught it only to select disciples or acolytes by word of mouth. Again, we find the important data and wisdom about life being withheld from the masses and kept only in an elite selected group.
In ancient Hebrew tradition there were Priest-Kings (priests are different than rabbis). Along the same pattern, they did many secret rituals and the High Priests especially, were considered the holders of wisdom. The Kabbalah is said to be a reconstruction of the teachings of the ancient Jewish Priests, though in a coded and cryptic form. Solomon's Temple, built somewhere between around 500 B.C and 1000 B.C. is shrouded in mysteries.
Of course, when Rome took over the Christian religion, and Constantine called the First Ecumenical Council, the teachings started getting censored and hand-feed to the people. They were told what they could and couldn't believe in and what books were official and what shouldn't be read. And, at the same time, the true teachings started to go underground. Later, the Church was declared senior to government, and ruled all. The Church was to 'look after' the people, and make sure they were thinking the right thoughts about God. The annihilation of opposing sects, and 'witch-hunts' became common. Also, Papal secrecy grew. (see Pivotal and Pithy Points in our Past)
The Freemasons, as revealed in such writings as the extensive works of Manly P. Hall, seriously and sincerely believe in the principle that only the select intelligent few are capable of leading and ruling, and that the lesser intelligent of the species must be given something to believe, like a religion, that will satisfy their simple instincts. Only those who are initiated up through the ranks are worthy to receive the real truth. This seems to be the idea behind the much ballyhooed 'Illuminati' also.
Additionally, the origins of Neocon philosophy as proposed by Leo Strauss indicated that, similarly, the people need popular myths to believe in, because they can't really comprehend the complexities of what is going on. (see Peas in a Pod?) So, we see that this central concept has carried forward from our most ancient histories, up to current political and societal times. It is a worthy question to ponder then. Did we really need to be sheltered from or have truth hidden from us in the past? Even if this was true in the past, does it still apply to modern man.? Should government keep secrets from the people it serves, and should they be parental care-givers for the populace?
Perhaps, it is true that there is such a thing as a mob mentality. Perhaps, it is dangerous to do anything but hand feed reality to the masses. After all, I have seen street interviews where the 'average' person is so ignorant of the world around them, outside of their little plastic bubble reality, that it makes you laugh in disbelief. Very high percentages of the population are illiterate, and it seems to be getting worse not better. Perhaps there is justification for having only the elite intelligent and educated few rule and make decisions for the rest. Carrol Quigley (Tragedy and Hope), who had an insiders look at the makers and shakers of American life, seems to verify that this is indeed the mindset of the elite in our country and western Europe.
I guess I personally don't have a total problem with this concept except for a couple of fatal flaws. One, if this is the setup, how have they done so far. Hmm... not very good I would say, but I will let you evaluate that for yourself. Secondly, who is monitoring this group? How do we know they are not just out to screw us over? I mean I think there has to be some visibility on their enterprises. But of course that would blow the whole game of secrecy.
And I am sure there are those who are just the rebellious slave type and will say 'no effen way'. I will not be ruled or manipulated by anyone. But those are few who know enough to raise their heads and rebel, and can be easily discredited by name-calling and labeling as 'conspiracy theorists', or 'cults', or 'anarchists', in derogatory ways. And then create similar groups with really crackpot operations to discredit the real groups. Old hat intelligence tricks. So, probably there is nothing to worry about.
But back to the philosophical principle involved here. Is it a valid concept to have an oligarchy who rules? And if so, are they justified in having secrets, and feeding the masses myths or religious beliefs to placate them? What do you think? According to Jessup, "You Can't Handle the Truth".
Sound like a 'Conspiracy Theory'? Well, actually, this idea draws on known history, not anything so controversial. In our most ancient records, it is usually the Priests that hold the power in society. They are the Wise Men, and either directly rule, or influence with authority those who have the title of ruler.
Our first records of civilization are of Sumeria, around 4000 B.C. As advanced as they were in crafts, agriculture, irrigation and other professions, they were basically Temple-Cities, run by Priest-Kings. The Priests told the people what was real, and interpreted truth for them, from the 'gods'.
In ancient Egypt, it was the Pharaoh and the Priest that ruled. The Pharaoh was the caretaker of the people. His duty was to look after them. The Priests were caretakers of the gods. If all was going well, the Pharaoh and Priests were doing their jobs. (This parental caretaker of the people idea is something which has been passed down through time, apparently.) The people were not allowed direct access to the gods. Only the Priests had access. The people could pray outside the gates of the Temple, but could not enter. Or they could pray to the Pharaoh as an intermediary, but could not gain direct access. They were not allowed to know the secrets of life and living which the Priests had through direct contact with the 'gods'.
The Druids were Priests and the center of the religion of the Celtic people. These Priests were the most powerful people in the society, and it was said that on their word wars could be started or stopped. Their decisions were like laws and adhered to by all. Yet, little is known about the actual religion of the Druids since they taught it only to select disciples or acolytes by word of mouth. Again, we find the important data and wisdom about life being withheld from the masses and kept only in an elite selected group.
In ancient Hebrew tradition there were Priest-Kings (priests are different than rabbis). Along the same pattern, they did many secret rituals and the High Priests especially, were considered the holders of wisdom. The Kabbalah is said to be a reconstruction of the teachings of the ancient Jewish Priests, though in a coded and cryptic form. Solomon's Temple, built somewhere between around 500 B.C and 1000 B.C. is shrouded in mysteries.
Of course, when Rome took over the Christian religion, and Constantine called the First Ecumenical Council, the teachings started getting censored and hand-feed to the people. They were told what they could and couldn't believe in and what books were official and what shouldn't be read. And, at the same time, the true teachings started to go underground. Later, the Church was declared senior to government, and ruled all. The Church was to 'look after' the people, and make sure they were thinking the right thoughts about God. The annihilation of opposing sects, and 'witch-hunts' became common. Also, Papal secrecy grew. (see Pivotal and Pithy Points in our Past)
The Freemasons, as revealed in such writings as the extensive works of Manly P. Hall, seriously and sincerely believe in the principle that only the select intelligent few are capable of leading and ruling, and that the lesser intelligent of the species must be given something to believe, like a religion, that will satisfy their simple instincts. Only those who are initiated up through the ranks are worthy to receive the real truth. This seems to be the idea behind the much ballyhooed 'Illuminati' also.
Additionally, the origins of Neocon philosophy as proposed by Leo Strauss indicated that, similarly, the people need popular myths to believe in, because they can't really comprehend the complexities of what is going on. (see Peas in a Pod?) So, we see that this central concept has carried forward from our most ancient histories, up to current political and societal times. It is a worthy question to ponder then. Did we really need to be sheltered from or have truth hidden from us in the past? Even if this was true in the past, does it still apply to modern man.? Should government keep secrets from the people it serves, and should they be parental care-givers for the populace?
Perhaps, it is true that there is such a thing as a mob mentality. Perhaps, it is dangerous to do anything but hand feed reality to the masses. After all, I have seen street interviews where the 'average' person is so ignorant of the world around them, outside of their little plastic bubble reality, that it makes you laugh in disbelief. Very high percentages of the population are illiterate, and it seems to be getting worse not better. Perhaps there is justification for having only the elite intelligent and educated few rule and make decisions for the rest. Carrol Quigley (Tragedy and Hope), who had an insiders look at the makers and shakers of American life, seems to verify that this is indeed the mindset of the elite in our country and western Europe.
I guess I personally don't have a total problem with this concept except for a couple of fatal flaws. One, if this is the setup, how have they done so far. Hmm... not very good I would say, but I will let you evaluate that for yourself. Secondly, who is monitoring this group? How do we know they are not just out to screw us over? I mean I think there has to be some visibility on their enterprises. But of course that would blow the whole game of secrecy.
And I am sure there are those who are just the rebellious slave type and will say 'no effen way'. I will not be ruled or manipulated by anyone. But those are few who know enough to raise their heads and rebel, and can be easily discredited by name-calling and labeling as 'conspiracy theorists', or 'cults', or 'anarchists', in derogatory ways. And then create similar groups with really crackpot operations to discredit the real groups. Old hat intelligence tricks. So, probably there is nothing to worry about.
But back to the philosophical principle involved here. Is it a valid concept to have an oligarchy who rules? And if so, are they justified in having secrets, and feeding the masses myths or religious beliefs to placate them? What do you think? According to Jessup, "You Can't Handle the Truth".
posted by Eclectricz at
6:52 PM
1 Comments:
Well, imagine you are one of those intelligent people. All of your life you've met people who either don't know anything and don't care about it or they think they know something and you can clearly see (and prove) it is wrong. Then there is the kind that can be so easily manipulated to think one thing, then the other, then the first thing again, that it becomes laughable.
Then you realize that there are more of these people than there are of "your" people. Then you realize that in any type of human gathering (not only democracy) in the long run the power is in the hands of the many.
There are two options here (actually three, but one of them is stupid: tyrany). One is to accept this, become ruled by the stupid, try to find your own patch of reality where you can escape, bothered by no one (this is the "scientist way") and the other is to fight back, using (if you are truly smart) all the weapons at your disposal. That logically makes you a politician, a man who uses his influence and smarts to control armies of stupid people thus becoming majoritary.
In the long run, there can be no morality attached to any of this. One is escapism, the other one is control. Either way is a separation from the "crowd", the engine of accepted morality.
But also, in the long run, there can be only one alternative, and that is the political one. The number of people is growing, the patches of reality that can be safely guarded by outside invasion become smaller and less of them and in the end the scientists also become the drones of politicians.
All this is a logical consequence of expanding population with limited resources. All the "glory days" refer to periods in time where vast patches of reality were open game to few people. Then it all closes in on you.
The only alternatives I see are: 1. the Internet, the only human invention that allowed true escapism and it is virtually infinite (but you know the world is already fighting back and trying to control it) and 2. other worlds. Which (over) simplifies to finding a power source cheap enough to allow us escape from this one, but not powerful enough to instantly link others into a single entity. In other words, forced separation by geo(cosmi)graphy.
Since the second solution is both costly and easily controlled by said politicians, the only alternative is ... this! :)
By
Unknown, at 2:06 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home