
What is the "politically correct" parallel today? From Rise of Mystery Babylon, we've discovered what led to the modern "parallel" of the political and religious side of Mystery Babylon. From The Way of Cain we understood the culture, attitudes, and mannerisms that paralleled "the days of Noah", and how they are with us today. How about political thought in our society as a whole? Who or what is behind the politics of "political correctness" we hear so much about today? Does it have ideological elements that mirror the ancient beliefs and practices of Babylon, as well? We will now see how certain "politically correct" elements actually originated in the ancient political and religious system of Babylon, and before. We will also see how these new political "rules" in our society are beginning to bring us right back to the mindset of this same era. To begin, the author of this site wants to give his own conjecture on modern politics, what this "politically correct" ideology really is, and what each side believes. In regards to how people live their lives in our world, the political thought-processes of many cultures in the world (especially Europe and the United States) can be divided into two political views, or "wings": the "Left" wing the "Right" wing ----------------------- -------------------------- - also known as - the liberal side the conservative side the democratic side the republican side The true "left" wing can be loosely categorized by some rather simplistic human motivations: - a personal desire to have freedom from rules, surveillance, authority, or any dominant form of censorship or oppression; a desire to entitle someone to individual freedom of expression, thought, and emotion. - a compassion for other people; a concern for equality (in regards to another person's status in society, their monetary wealth, or power), as well as a concern for individual human rights. It is a compassion for the environment, as well. If we generalize the politics of the "left", liberal, or democratic side, we might be able to sum it up by these two "blanket" phrases - the ideologies of personal freedom and a compassion for others. If someone heads toward the extreme end of this political "left" spectrum, they could head towards a socialist, communist, or atheist way of life: everyone is ultimately the same. No one should be richer than anybody else. There should be no distinction in race, gender and sexual orientation, and no restraint on how a person lives their lives. Choices of personal behavior become the right of the individual, not society around them. Government is there to help them and provide for them, not tell them what to do. Religion is no longer the authority behind a person's life, and no longer behind a government. The true "right" wing can also be loosely categorized by some rather simplistic human motivations: - a personal desire to stay within the bounds of certain (religious or political) ideologies. It is more of a strict, or logical, approach to the way someone lives their lives. A person is part of a bigger culture or society, where common courtesy and personal responsibility to the accepted ways of a society are a requirement. - a more rigid way of relating to other people, and the environment. Compassion and charity are important, but a person should also take more responsibility for their own actions. People often "reap what they have sown", and should contribute to their own successes and accept responsibility for their own failures. Each person has a duty to maintain his or her role as a productive member of society. They are to do their part to contribute to the "bigger (political and/or religious) picture". If we generalize the politics of the 'right', conservative, or republican side, we might be able to sum it up by these two "blanket" phrases - more strict in morality and more rigid in terms of personal responsibility and lifestyle. If a person heads toward the extreme end of this political "right", they could head towards a fascist way of life: there are rules everywhere; to break the rules could ensure someone to suffer consequences. There are differences in people; each person has their own role in society. Society "works like clockwork". Choices of persons actions and morality are often limited, dictated by the accepted leader, politician, religion, or culture above them. We use these two extremes to discover the truth. As we see: these two schools of thought go way back to the Garden of Eden! It's interesting when we look at it. Much of what separates us ideologically had it's origins even before Babylon - in the stories of the antediluvian world! - Let's look, for example, at the freedom element of the "left" side. In the Garden of Eden, the serpent Nachash could have had sex with Eve. This act led her to eventually be convinced to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, which disobeyed the one law of God. This, ultimately, caused Adam and Eve receive the fruits of their own destruction. Sex is significant in many religions of the world. It, as well, has many moral and religious stigmas attached to it. This single act of Eve and the serpent helped to enact the great division between the two seed lines, and, to a lesser degree, the above "left" and "right" extremes. Those on the "left", for example, often may think sex should be more or less free and open. It should not be contained, except for extreme cases; the choices of sexual preference is entirely up to the individual. Those on the "right" often may think sex should be contained - done within certain bounds. Interesting, this one act of Eden would become such a political "hot button", in regards to so much of our religious thought today! The personal desire to have almost complete freedom becomes the essence of pagan religion. Pagan religion, in essence, is contrary to God and the Bible. The thought of the pagan mind is simply: "as long as you don't harm anyone, do whatever you will". The sexual practice is so revered in this belief system it is actually called "The Great Rite", or ritual (for the origins of paganism, please see Origins of Babylon 2)! Interesting how this same act used to manipulate Adam and Eve in the garden had become so revered by religions such as this. The conservative side, on the other hand, sees obvious reasons to restrain the uses of sexuality: at some times it's appropriate, some times excessive. Their rationale is to maintain sexual boundaries, as well as other personal boundaries. The reason is simple: certain things might become harmful or self-destructive when used in the wrong way. Almost anything can be used improperly, and made detrimental to the individual and those around him or her. The solution to handling a political view of freedom is simple: there really is no true freedom without laws or restraint The way of our dangerous world often necessitates religious or political morals. God's rules for the individual may not make sense to everybody, at every time, but just because a person does not think it is a good rule for them doesn't make it improper overall. - Let's look at the compassion element of the "left" side. The result of the disobedience of Adam and Eve was death. Adam and Eve were sentenced to an uncomfortable life, and eventual death, because they ate the fruit of a tree they weren't supposed to. Originally, man was given dominion over the animals and the earth. There could also have been a hierarchy in the Garden - Adam was in charge of everything and everyone , and Eve his helpmate (Genesis 2). Liberals and "left-wingers" seem to have a problem with punishment, pain and death - the uncomfortable aspects of life. It seems hard for them to understand why people and animals are meant to suffer. It is hard for them to understand why women have been traditionally under the authority of men; why some groups of people don't prosper as much as others; why some have more wealth than others, and why some are poor, etc. Hence, what spawns is a lot more of the political or ideological beliefs those on the "left" traditionally have adhered to: a compassion for people and animals, the abolishment of capital punishment, charity for the poor, and civil rights for the aged, children, or anyone deemed oppressed or underprivileged. The "left" side seems to be truly sympathetic for any "human element" of the situation. Why can't we all be the same, and get the same; why does God allow bad things to happen to good people, etc.? The solution to dealing with this compassion element is simple: people and things in the world suffer because of Adam and Eve's disobedience, and not God. As long as a person does things in a moral way, and follows correct rules, they can utilize their God-given dominion over everything in the world, and act responsibility to fulfill their purpose in life. Man was given a position in society, and should not abuse it. Eve, for example, chose to partake of the seduction of the serpent, and convinced Adam to eat. Therefore, the woman gained a position of subjection to Adam because of it. A lot of people reject traditional roles and positions, but a lot of the reasons for traditional roles were because of the Garden of Eden, the structured environment that once was, and the results of the punishments dealt out there. Individual thought for fairness or compassion today seems to outweigh the greater good of society, which helps to bring an organized working order down. When someone breaks a law they should pay the consequences, not given enough leniency to allow them to believe they could get away with it again. Punishment isn't often nice, but people often don't learn except by example. Sometimes, the need for punishment also trumps compassion. Compassion is limited to the situation: a person should be responsible for their own actions, and not look blame others or their society when it's their own situations or mistakes that led them there. People should have common courtesy for others in their society, and realize what freedoms they do have truly come at a price. To maintain their freedom and peace, a person has to work to maintain their own individual responsibility to themselves, and those around them. There needs to be effort, and positive attitude. How do people come to desire more of these "left" wing, or liberal, views? Once we begin to follow the Western European model, or a progressively secular and liberal society, we begin to follow the politics of the seventh "revived" head of Mystery Babylon (see The Rise of Mystery Babylon). Much of Europe, under the influence of ancient Rome (in one way or another), follows these "left" wing, or socialist, ways. These political views appear noble on the surface, but a perfect, "Kumbuya" world just plain does not work. Experimental societies such as those in The Soviet Union and China show how human motivation and greed are "human elements" left out of a typical "left" wing "Kumbuya" theology. The real world has imperfect, irrational, or otherwise evil people in it - people who must be dealt with according to their actions. Mankind has to fight with and punish others, sometimes, because human beings strive to achieve, and they do not want to give up everything they have to someone else - especially when that "someone else" doesn't put forth as much of an effort as they do. Any sort of "political correctness" that comes from man should not take the place of God and His Bible. Man's thought and opinion on life is not his own redeemer. Man should follow God's law in regards to his or her own life, but not, on the other extreme, judge others. A person's conversion to this "left" ideology may make them look good or wholesome at first, but there has to be something more than an individual's search for some sort of divine right or entitlement - there has to be individual effort and responsibility for one's actions. Once people start to follow the "way of Cain", and begin to take on these liberal or "politically correct" ideologies, their whole sense of personal guilt and responsibility for their own actions goes out the window. There is no guilt or individual accountability if there is no law - this results in societal chaos. One quote from another article on this very topic, in regards to a person adopting this entitlement mentality, is very compelling: “(You have) no reason to feel guilty. Your heart continues to tell you that you are the center of the universe. Your problems are somebody else’s fault. This world owes you happiness. You are basically good and unselfish. You’ll be happy if you get what you want. You will be happy when you follow your own heart… You are under a curse.” What curse? Could this be the Curse of Cain? God cursed Cain because of his attitude and disobedience. The ancient system of Babylon adopted the ways of Cain - these alternate views established soon after Eden - and used them to, at least in their minds, overcome these "strict" and "rigid" ideologies of Christianity they deemed as "oppressive". Does human motivation reflect a true desire for a "Kumbuya" world, or could there be influences on a human mind that come from something far more sinister? Is this "Way of Cain" influencing our society as a whole, to convince people to take these political views - the views that, ultimately, drag a person away from God and the Bible? There is so much more beyond this in the book The Rise of Mystery Babylon. First, for a deeper look at the "spark" behind a desire to follow these ways, see Psychology of Babylon. Copyright 2010, Brett T. All Rights Reserved |
