Equality/Equalism: The Modern False God And False Religion

 

The latest one will be posted here, with older posts in links:

1.  "A Pile Of Stones" - A Parable Of Pathological Denial 

2.  The Corollary To Equalism

3.  An Impossible Scenario: Parallel To The Papacy "Taken Out Of The Way" (2 Thess. 2:7)

4.  The Operating Standard Of The Operation Of Error

5.  Dissecting The Operation Of Error (planned)

[Jan.4/26]

The Operating Standard Of The Operation Of Error

 

This video spoke about book burnings, particularly that of Germany in 1933, and whether it is inherently wrong or not, without taking a position:

 

Video: The Truth About the 1933 National Socialist Book Burnings

 

It inspired a long comment (now modified) which resulted in this post. The subject of the video was a starting point which inspired a general commentary regarding the "operation of error" today. As per usual, comments like these go to oblivion on YouTube and have no engagement so it must be duplicated elsewhere:

 

 

Publishing errors, misleading ideas and outright lies ought to be censored. That is why burning those morally degenerate books was right. Books such as those give legitimacy to error. Today, thanks to the 'operation of error' (2 Thess. Ch.2) there is hardly a consensus as to what the truth is, and error is enforced. But the truth on things must be re-established, and all errors repudiated and condemned. Truth will be dogmatized; error under anathema. 

Books are about ideas, some say. This is not a discussion merely of 'ideas': "Oh you are against ideas" says the degenerate wishing to instruct your children into degeneracy. Sure, those are ideas. But we have different ideas: For instance, there is a moral degeneracy which ought not to be encouraged but to be corrected. And how about this: there are good ideas as opposed to  bad ones. Some may be good or bad; that's the idea. Here's another idea: There is such a thing as quality and standard - again, good or bad. Now we argue that some qualities and some standards are better than others. But you have those who argue that there is no standard of 'better than' or 'worse than'. These people then argue against standards, as though having them was 'worse than' not having them. So they do have a standard, and it is that they have no standard. So what ends up happening is that, instead of bad ideas being censored, we have measurable standards being censored, in that the reasons by which something may be termed 'good' or 'bad' are discounted. This in turn leads to criticism of bad ideas (which criticism in themselves are legitimate ideas) being censored, under the banner of 'not being against ideas'.

This is, in a way, circular; and like a circle it has no end in the direction it is going. What that means is there is no end to its application. It can go only one way; unless it goes the other way, which it cannot tolerate: The criticism of bad ideas by the standard that some ideas are bad and others good. This, too, also has no end; except that it is a good end as opposed to a bad end if it ends up being an end to error and untruths.

 

The argument is, in a sense, like arguing against three dimensions because one thinks there ought only be two. It does not make sense to leave out a part of the structure of reality from one's calculations. It is the same thing to say, "one ought not to be against ideas", as though there is only one sort. One may as well say "one ought not to be against". All very well until something is against you.

 

To take the 'idea' (!) a little further, it is as if to say "there cannot be no" or "there cannot be any resistance". Whether or not they (the 'woke' and neo-communists) say this does not matter; they speak as if it is true. The fundamental problem with this is the omission of standard; of whether something is 'bad' or 'good'. This is like an 'operation of error': Calculating with incomplete or broken reality with which to measure; or with no measure with which to calculate.

In metaphysical terms it is a mirror of the devil's 'non serviam'. This may seem strange until it is realized that it is applied to the world. The devil will not serve the good; but in this world he will make everyone accept the evil. Instead of doing good actively, to accept evil passively. In place of his "no" to God he will make everyone say "yes" to evil - whether or not people realize it comes from him - by an operation of 'acceptance of everything'. In theory this ought to mean that good things may be equally accepted as bad, if acceptance is the only standard, except it does not. There is yet a standard which, if one does not have his own, he will find it difficult to resist. It is what has been spoken of elsewhere: "Fairness", conflated with equality. This conflation may be called 'equalism'.

 

The operation of reality may be compared to a splash of water: So long as it is in motion it is not all level; but according to the standard of gravity it must become level. The world in its complete mode of existence, with all dimensions as it were, does not operate as though everything is in a mode or form of equality: It is in motion like a splash. But the people of the 'operation of error' speak and act as if the opposite is the natural mode of existence.

 

(The second law of thermodynamics does indicate the universe is tending towards a levelling out; that energy will eventually run its course. But the point here is that it is not there yet, and it is not the point to be there yet. The point of this reality is to provide a framework for life, not to be already in inert motionlessness of death, which is the same thing as 'absolute equality').

 

The concept of hierarchy is actually the natural mode of existence of anything which exists, as, for anything to exist, it must be greater than nothing. Fundamentally, creation is a hierarchical construct. The 'operation of error' denies and opposes the acceptance of this truth of reality. It cannot work in practical terms; but in spiritual terms it works as a deadening of moral fortitude.

In basic terms, the 'operation of error' is like the devil's "non serviam" but in reverse; by saying "yes" to everything, there is no law; if there is no resistance, there is no existence. But this applies to the material world which, by its nature, is built on a kind of resistance. What it does is take the place of nothing. By this we mean that for something to exist, it cannot be contradicted by another in the same place. So one thing is true and another is not. This is an imperfect analogy; but what is meant is that a thing must have some kind of integrity to exist. But we digress somewhat; what we are concerned with here concerns the clash of wills in the world and how they are manipulated by this operation of error.

 

In practical terms, applied to the world today, we see the 'law' of equality applied with a kind of inexorable force against which there must be no resistance; there is no 'law' against it. What it amounts to is 'every will is good' if it does not resist, but persists. This is contradictory, as there are any number of wills which may resist another's will; except for the standard of equality, which is the only standard - of the 'operation of error'. It is a form of communistic error: The one judged to 'have' must give way to one judged to 'have not' by this standard; what one wills must overcome what one will not.

 

(In a sense, it is the law of envy, or the law of desire. If one wants or desires something but there is nothing else around, it can be argued that this want or desire cannot actually exist. It can only exist outside of the one who desires, and this comes in conflict only in an opposing will which possesses that which the other wants. The thing about the 'law of equality' is that there is no justification for one having a thing that the other wants; to say "no" means to deny the equality of the wills concerning the object. Now this is taken in isolation; but that, too, is a part of the 'operation of error': It is always taken in isolation. But there is no isolation from God's judgement, Who judges between the two wills we have seen, not merely that they are not equal, but whether the one has the right to the object that the other does not. According to equality, this cannot ever happen). [1]

 

This resembles somewhat the satanic dogma of "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" except it is not actually applied equally (ironically). There is one reason for this, which we shall arrive at shortly:

This standard is ruthlessly employed against Europeans and the West because they 'have more' by this judgment. It may be said to be a natural result of a greater understanding of the universe, which resulted in technological advancements, which results in having more. But that is not the real reason; it is the excuse for the real reason. The actual reason is hidden in plain sight.

The Catholic Christian patrimony of the European past can be said to not be 'equal' to the rest of the world. In the time to come, the devil will doubtless blaspheme the Catholic past by 'not treating everyone equally' which means more of this people is in Heaven than this or that people (Apoc. 13: 6). There is something to be said in response to this, which begins with 'the last judgement is not here yet'; but before that, we must add that this is not the real reason either. It is yet another layer of excuse over and against the real reason.

The real, actual reason behind this particular mode of evil is related to equality/equalism but not in a way which will actually benefit anyone over another. The devil is the Adversary and has no good will towards anyone. In The Faith Undermined (1958-1965)  and Two Timelines Of Apocalypse (Part Three) we have seen that with his defeat at the 'decisive battle' and also the book of life beginning to be unsealed that the rest of the world and their ancestors have a better chance then they did before. [2]  In a perverse way this, too, offends equality - to the devil, everyone should be equally in hell. So, using envy under equality he is goading the rest of the world to hate the descendants of their benefactors (whether or not they realize that this is the meaning for it); [3] moreover, this envy will align many souls to him once again who otherwise might not be so aligned (according to the 'book of life standard' which must remain largely undefined; but it is centered around not following the antichrist). And this is but one facet of the whole thing; but it seems to demonstrate a course change on the devil's part as a result of the 'second timeline path' of Apocalypse.

That is in large part the reason why the West is being 'punished' in this way and set on a path to erasure. [4] It is one thing for the devil to try to erase a people for being Catholic - that is expected - but it is another to try to erase a people because they had been Catholic. Even the Bolsheviks of Russia (1917) did not try to erase everybody. This signifies a sea change. As we have seen, there is only one reason which comes to mind, and it is also the reason for this corner of the internet.

 

Conclusion

The measurable standard by which things are judged to be 'good' or 'bad' is God, Whom we know as Christ the King. Whether one believes God in this way or that way or not at all let us set aside for a moment; the point is that the standard by which things are judged as 'good' or 'bad' is measured against an ultimate standard. Whether people realize it or not they make this standard, their highest value, their God. So if they really believe in 'equality' as the highest good (against which anything else must fall short) then that is their god.

This is behind the 'operation of error' of today's errors: Everything which is deemed not to be equal (conflated with 'being fair') is judged as falling short of this standard and is therefore bad. And this begets a continual miscarriage of justice as injustices are performed to 'correct' inequalities in the name of justice.

This is, in simplified form, the 'operation of error'. It has other facets of course; but this one can be seen in every application. #thefalsegodequality

 

 

Footnotes

 

[1]  There is yet another dimension to the 'injustice', as it were, of inequality. The 'state' of inequality is taken in isolation, and judged as if it were in isolation, but there is also time and collectivism to take into account. This bundle of words has already run far longer than anticipated so we will not go deeply into it; the things spoken of is in the narrative and one will recognize them if one is conscious. Past injustices if applied to a group seem to last in perpetuity if they were done by a group judged to be 'unequal on the wrong side'. Here the error of collectivism is seen to be inherently antithetical to justice. So if groups are judged to be unequal, the 'greater' must give way to the 'lesser' every time (also called the 'oppressor' and the 'oppressed' because to be in a state which is not equal is likened to active persecution). But with the perpetual guilt, for example, of slavery we see one group cannot ever be exonerated because the injustice of the past cannot be redressed in this world, so it is perpetual. Now this is in conflict with treating every incident or example 'in isolation' except if time is included as a dimension of the 'standard' of equality, in which such judgements can be rendered across time, and always in a negative sense, so long as the person, group or entity is judged not yet to have enough less than before (this may be equated to 'expiation'). But as this is perpetual, it cannot end without the annihilation of those judged as 'oppressor'. This is related to what has been said about the 'circular' aspect of this error only ever going one way: However an objective moral standard, to which 'equality' as the only standard is inimical, will always avoid this error.

To try to sum up: The devil prefers this mode of attack against the descendants of Christendom because the accusation can be made in perpetuity, as this 'inequality' exists both in the material and spiritual spheres and cannot ever be 're-balanced' (as though it were a zero-sum game) because the unchanging past is perpetual. What this omits is that some can benefit from others without redistribution or retribution.

[2]  As we have said elsewhere we cannot know the full extent of this change. But that something is different there is no doubt.

[3]  As the bulk of the body of Catholic faithful over the centuries which had eventually led to the 'unsealing' path of Apocalypse, it is true that this people is generally the benefactor of others, through the merits of Our Lord and the Book of Life. This will be denied of course, but nothing can be done about that.

[4]  The erasure involves not only the rewriting of history, but the writing out of history even the existence of Europeans peoples. Thus it is that 'historical documentaries' are replacing European lineage with other racial types as if they had always been there (for example, Cleopatra and Anne Boleyn).

Politics of envy is easy to do, and unfortunately many will consent to these things, but what they do not realize is that they are setting themselves up to follow the antichrist, by the number of sins they build up in the meantime and for those reasons. Thus, under the banner of 'fairness' the devil is attempting, if not an equality, at least an increase in damnation. This is consistent with his character.

We do not forget the 'spiritual chastisement' spoken of by Sr. Lucia to Fr. Fuentes in 1957 and the chastisements that are long overdue due to sins. But we have developed a different viewpoint on it, which is Apocalypse-centered. The chastisement for sins is one thing; the actions of the devil are another, even if one admits that he is allowed to do these things as a consequence of sins. But the devil's attempt to erase the descendants of the bulk of Christendom (with 'migrations', etc.) and their past seems to be not a short-term plan, which does not seem to make sense if the world were very near its end (see Apocalypse chapter 20). What is not understood is why this should be important for him to do. At present, it is probably better not to know.