Alexander Dugin blames the Enlightenment for what we would call the woke ideology. He says that even communism came from the West. In fairness, I think that he's more right than wrong about communism and the fruits of the Enlightenment. Marx, Engels and Trotsky all praised the French Revolution, especially the Paris Commune. Dugin says that transhumanism is the inevitable tomorrow if we agree with what our today is, and that if we want to change our fate we must go back in time to where we committed the fatal mistake. For him, that's the Enlightenment. Perhaps he misses the link between the Reformation and the Enlightenment. Or perhaps he doesn't because some might say that Eastern Orthodoxy was a kind of prototype for Protestantism, fragmenting Christianity giving us national churches with those national churches being subservient to the State. The Enlightenment does seem to be something of a sacred cow nowadays in the West, especially with American Protestants. Perhaps that's because the Enlightenment is often credited with having inspired the American Revolutionaries and the separation of Church and State. I've noticed that people from both sides of the Russia/Ukraine and Israel/every neighbouring country conflicts tend to cite the Enlightenment in support of their position. I don't see how any appeal to the Enlightenment can be persuasive to Catholics but Dugin's blaming it for Western degeneracy might explain why he was painted as the evil brain behind nasty Putin by mouthpieces of the three letter agencies. Nevertheless, I'm very wary of Dugin, especially his stirring up East/West divisions. Anyway, love him or loathe him, here's Dugin on transhumanism.
I like what he said in this video, I like that he puts what he thinks out there. Even if it stirs up divisions, it also generates conversation at the same time. We cannot accept modernity while claiming to fight it. I think he makes a good point that the goal of transhumanism is somehow supposed to be liberation. Which IMO is a kind of childish view of reality that doesn't take people deeper in life but is a distraction from where God wants to lead them.
Transhumanism, like other 'trans' ideologies, seems a rejection of God's gift to us of our being. It seems to be a declaration that He got it wrong and that we can do better, even the absurd idea that we don't need Him at all, although He maintains our being at every moment. It reminds me of the futile attempts of those using cryogenics to preserve themselves in the hope of a later resurrection. Dugin is right on the money, I think, about the Enlightenment. It was a culmination of a series of disloyalties to the Church, probably traceable to William of Ockham and his nominalism, a mode of thinking that underlies almost all the modern madness. This was followed by a succession of bizarre sects, culminating in Hus, Luther and Calvin who exploited the confusion. There was also the Renaissance, a movement that paid excessive homage to pagan antiquity. Additionally, we had the disloyalty shown by Galileo, who made his move to change astronomical perceptions before the data had come in (and we're still waiting). This was the beginning of the elevation of theory over evidence, which has corrupted science ever since. But, perhaps the most significant moment which led to modernism was Descartes' "I think, therefore I am". The latter was a good Catholic and his weak reasoning was probably well-intentioned. But, his idea led to the separation of the concepts of soul and body, in contradiction to St Thomas Aquinas' view that 'the soul is the form of the body', in other words, the two are inseparable, except via death. Descartes' notion soon led to men forgetting about and ignoring the soul, which contributed to the dehumanisation of many people and eventually led to a disbelief in the concept of a soul altogether. We are now at the stage that many scientists disbelieve even in the idea of consciousness, although they don't seem to care or realise that this view negates their own arguments. All this dehumanisation has left us wide open to political mass-movements which are prepared to use any means to achieve their nefarious ends, perpetrated by men who have an intellectual excuse to abandon all morality and empathy and many of them who see themselves as god-like in their abilities. To them, human beings are not children of God, made in His likeness, but material objects malleable in whatever way they choose, in their 'wisdom', in pursuit of their objectives. It is certain that their wicked ideologies don't live up to their errant expectations and their hubris is more likely leading us to a more common-garden civilisational collapse, but will lead to untold misery as all this unfolds.
I sincerely believe that transgenderism comes from the same spiritual source as sodomy, which would be idolatry and a spiritual void of God. Saint Paul tells us that God gives idolaters over to their own lusts, so they end up dishonoring their bodies, surrendering to passions that go against natural law itself. If we consider that the French Revolution adopted its own goddess called Reason, which is the antithesis of the faith that makes us God’s dwelling place, we could say that 1789 was a spiritual turning point for the West. Although the sexual revolution in the legislation of these countries exploded in the second half of the 20th century, this coincided with an increase in sexual scandals within the clergy. This might support the theory that the East, even if not Christian, through a synthesis of Islam, Judaism, and Orthodoxy (although this generates a reaction within the Church comparable to our traditionalism), could respond differently. As for Alexander Dugin, he does not seem like the most suitable person to discuss the West’s spiritual degeneration.
Without forgetting, of course, that abortion legislation in the West—Satan's sacrament and Moloch's altar—may have opened the doors to all forms of sexual perversion.
Very amazing post, full of details I will likely never comprehend the implications of. It is clear you are very educated on the subject. Part of the reason I love this site. I have heard that we aren't truly capable of knowing anything and therefore we operate at all times on faith. When scientists, theologians and philosophers start coming out with points of view seemingly contrary to the faith, the church has to be able to battle in the realm of faith, which it has done and still does. I say seemingly, because often a new idea may not be contrary, it has to be investigated. Sometimes an idea comes out and it takes a few years to be squashed, sometimes a lot longer. One thing I really liked which Dugan pointed out is that the "elites" throughout all generations are the ones who move the direction of humanity overall, most often at the upset of the general population. These elites are constantly dabbling in the world, breaking the commandments to move their agendas, which are always dark. So it becomes a matter of using propaganda to force a consensus, which is driven until it fails. So I would argue that a lot of the divisiveness/contrariness we see in the church historically isn't even authentic, it's just a forced narrative to consolidate power. Divide and conquer. So much happens behind the scenes. Today we are seeing a lot of conversation on social media which is amazing. In many ways we are entering into a new frontier in regards to this. Amazing people having amazing discussions that are having a lot of positive influence. The old information power centers are in the process of being displaced, everyone sees this. Even within the church people are bringing up amazing things, like Fr. Ripperger. I think it is arguable that he has had more influence in the last 15 years than Pope Francis. Which reminds me of St. Francis, how God used him, who is possibly the most influential person in the world since the 13th century. So I have some hope. Did you know that Prescott Bush (father of President GH Bush, grandfather of President GW Bush) and a bunch of bakers/industrialists in 1933 tried to cause a fascist coup in the US, and nothing even happened to him or his cohorts? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot
What struck me about his take on transhumanism is that it doesn't seem to me to be incompatible with what the Catechism says about the final deception: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/catechism/index.cfm?recnum=2449 Luan's post containing the video about Dugin being a follower of Crowley prompted me to do a search to see if there were any more recent links (that video is nearly 30 yeara old) but I couldn't find any. Being a Crowley devotee wouldn't make him a villain in the estimation of the three letter agencies or the New World Order elites. Crowley is widely reported to have been a British intelligence asset, John Lennon's "Imagine" gets plenty of air time to this day, Paul McCartney was knighted, and Ossy Osborne is treated like everyone's favourite celebrity eccentric. There had to be another reason. This article does a good job of setting out the reason: https://legacy.quadrant.org.au/magazine/2016/10/russian-regret-alexander-dugin-ends-history/ . The article is dated October 2016, the author being an associate professor at the University of Sydney. His predictions that Dugin's plans for Russia had no hope of success are looking like they didn't age well but his assessment of Dugin is worth reading because he actually provides quotes from Dugin when making his point. I also found this article from 2018: https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...ns-narrative/CAF11EDE51F7C4016D541CD40A096C61 The author is an associate professor at Indiana State University. He was born in Ukraine during the Soviet era and seems to be highly regarded in US academia. I'm not sure, but I think that he may be Jewish. Just on the basis of those two articles, Dugin strikes me as a bit weird. Very clever but weird but I suppose that one would need to read his books to get a real insight to what makes him tick and I can think of a whole lot better ways to spend my time. My eyes will need a month's rest after ploughing through those articles. I did watch a video of a debate between Dugin and a French film maker and philosopher. Dugin won the debate hands down despite being in what struck me as a rather hostile setting. The debate was organised by a non-profit named the Nexus Institute. Here's a link to their website where their donor list is topped by US AID and the Clinton Foundation: https://nexusinstitute.net/about/ Anyway, after they assassinated Dugin's daughter, the mouthpieces of the three letter agencies seem to have moved on to casting Patriarch Kirill in the role of Rasputin.
Yes, he is right about the Enlightenment. What amazes me is that Americans with opposite viewpoints see the Enlightenment as pivotal to Western civilisation, Protestant believers look on it as the cornerstone of freedom of religion, Non-believers see it as the cornerstone of freedom from religion. All seem to imagine themselves to be enlightened free thinkers. We all would be well advised to heed this advice in 1 Timothy: "Turn away from Godless philosophical discussions and the contradictions of the 'knowledge' which is not knowledge at all; by adopting this, some have missed the goal of faith." Maybe that's what happened to Descartes? May the Lord have mercy on his soul and the souls of any he may have led astray. I'm noticing a trend towards the super race delusion coming from Russia. God help us when all those super races run out of proxies and choose to square off against each other. The best we can hope for is breeze from the West to give us a few days to stockpile clean food and water before the radioactive clouds reach us.
Crowley's occultism would not necessarily make Dugin a villain in the West; it simply makes him an incompatible figure to lead any kind of opposition to the West’s new world order that is even minimally based on Christian values. I should mention, by the way, that just because I consider the Eurasian project somewhat negative does not mean that I view the project of Western elites as positive. Instead, in the context of the Fatima prophecies, I see Russia as the divine instrument of punishment for the West.
With all due respect, no Catholic needs the opinion of Western three-letter agencies to know that any connection with Crowley not only puts a person’s soul at risk but also makes them unfit to have any influence over Catholics.
Listen to the first 45 minutes of this interview with Jason Evert to see how active the occult world is.
And with all due respect to you, try reading what's written in the context of which it is written. Nobody here is promoting Crowley or any of his devotees. Try cleaning up your own mind before projecting the worst of intentions on others.
I don’t need to clear my mind because I don’t project the worst intentions onto others. Anyone with even the slightest connection to Crowley is the one who needs to clear their mind and perform some kind of exorcism prayer, as any influence from evil can linger for years. Clear your mind first and stop justifying wrongdoing when it stands in opposition to the West.
Great contributions here and please don't fall out. I knew nothing of this Dugin, I just can't resist admiring critics of the Enlightenment. If he has anything to do with Crowley, that would not be good on his CV. I wouldn't be too hard on Descartes. I don't think he realised the implications of his "I think, therefore I am" statement. I think he was a good Catholic. Mistakes don't damn one.
I don't get the impression that Whatever is trying to promote Dugin, Crowley or his devotees. Dugin is making some solid points and the fact that he is well respected in Russia makes this worth talking about. Especially given the nature of Fatima.
I don’t think she promoted Aleister Crowley here; rather, she downplayed the significance of the 1995 video because it’s very old. I simply don’t find his anti-Western militaristic rhetoric irrelevant in light of that obscure event from the past. I only wonder what he wants to rise from the ashes of the West's destruction. It honestly doesn’t seem to me that it’s the Catholic social reign.
You're making unfounded accusations. Show where I justified wrongdoing. I won't hold my breath waiting for an apology.
