Eric Schmitt had no compunction with quite clearly referring to theology as being integral to political questions. Among the areas in which Schmitt made it clear theology had left its footprint was on the legal interpretation of the state which is very much one unchanged from medieval interpretations of the omnipotent God as well as the katechon.
Of greater importance is the presence of theological concepts in the theodicy of Hegel, Marx and the left (part of the left) as well as the advocates of Fukyama’s end of history thesis. At times, even the sections of the left let their guard down and are explicit in the theological water in which politics swims, as can be seen in this fascinating series of articles in the Guardian. The killer section in a consistently insightful series being the following
“For this reason his historical materialism called upon the services of theology, which, however, had to be kept well-hidden from public view even though it was often pulling the strings. To those who criticise communism and Marxism as “merely” a new form of religious belief, Benjamin’s position – as with Ernst Bloch, whom I shall look at next week – was that religion was actually a vessel that contained within its authoritarian history and structures the spark of liberation which could only be fully realised through historical materialist transformation. In that sense religion is “merely” an old form of a future and as yet unrealisable dream.”
The extraordinary depths of the communist theological structure are explored in great depth by Pellicani in his revolutionary apocalypse, a work which I plan to return to often in the future. Of key importance is the connection that Pellicani makes between the Marxist developments and Gnosticism which is echoed in the work of Vogelin. Gnosticism as a concept is something which arouses some controversy, but this appears to be a result of the deep and dark connections between early Christianity and various movements which are now deemed Gnostic. This BBC programme explains some of the tensions around the issue in an entertaining, if degenerate way (much lamenting of the patriarchy.)
If Pelicani is to be taken seriously, which he really should, then Gnosticism is a reoccurring phenomena which is linked to sub-elite alienation resulting from societal problems reducing their ability to act in accordance with their perceived roles as moral guardians. This could be in the form of extreme economic problems, or even as appears to be the case now – elite over production. This has echoes of both Turchin and Schumpeter, but as the issue of Gnosticism is such a hot topic, it might be helpful to dispense with it at present and create a meta category which is able to capture modern Gnostic type systems and older Gnostic systems without dropping into a no true Scotsman argument (“Can’t be Gnostic because there is no clear demiurge” etc.)
To this end I propose Phronima in homage to Kurt Rudolph’s observation that
“A further peculiarity of the gnostic tradition…lies in the fact that it frequently draws its material from the most varied exiting traditions, attaches itself to it, and at the same time sets it in a new frame by which the material takes on a new character and a completely new significiance….Since this view of the world attaches itself in the main to the older religious imagery, almost as a parasite prospers on the soul of “host religion,” it can be also described as parasitic. To this extent Gnosticism strictly speaking has no tradition of its own but only a borrowed one. Its mythology is a tradition consciously created from alien material, which it has appropriated to match its own basic conception.” 1
Phronima are therefore Gnostic style systems which function as parasites on productive and effective civilisation metaphysical structures. Universalism proper is a phronima. To this effect Jims observation that
“Progressivism wears the religions it has devoured like a monster that dresses itself in the skins of people it has eaten.”
Is apt, very apt. Genius in fact.
Other phronima include post-modernism, feminism, multiculturalism and all of the other sects which make up the progressivism super structure. All of these phronima are independent and spate entities united in their parasitic format directed at the central structure of society. Western society is producing them at a prodigious rate. To understand why we have to defer to Szabo, MM and De Jouvenal.
For any insecure power, a key necessity is to not only undermine enemy Powers in foreign affairs, but also in domestic affairs. In this light such things as CIA funding and involvement in such bizarre things as feminism make perfect sense. In this light the list of signatories to the UAF make perfect sense, and in this light the effortless success of the likes of Anita Sarkeesian, anti-colonialist, race hustlers, multiculturalists and black rioters makes perfect sense. Once one step is taken by power to include the low into government then an instant incentive is created to exacerbate the situation, and the block and barrier against it are weak. The ratchet is entered and Phronima proliferate.
These phronima all contain the same essence. There is always a mystical demiurge type existence which is spreading evil in the world (racism, patriarchy, misogony, hate) and holding secret knowledge is key. These systems set a utopian end goal which is deferred to at all points and requires the liquidation of the existing to reach. This liquidation needs the non-corrupt state which is not beholden to materialistic desires, and is manned by an enlightened elite to enact the changes. Power is thus feed amply with the destruction of those base elements which impede the coming light, and impede its access to the individualised population and levelled peoples it rules over. That this is ultimately the cause of chaos and collapse is neither here nor there. Insecure power has no eye on the future, only on the immediate desperate struggle against near threats. Phronima and power act in tandem, one encourage by the other which then encourage further Phronimas as part of the orgy of destruction that flowers in repetition as civilisations suicide themselves as noted by Arnold Toynbee.
As Schmitt outlines in Politische Theologie , only a politics conscious of its limits, origins and ultimate fate can properly secure and defend itself, and such a consciousness can only be provided by theological concepts such as the katechon
1 Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism, Kurt Rudolph