"Wherefore We must interrupt a silence which it would be criminal to prolong, that We may point out...as they really are, men who are badly disguised." Pope St. Pius X, September 8, 1907, Pascendi Dominici Gregis

Sunday, July 30, 2017

Have You Seen This Yet?

These people are satanists. That's why they've gutted the Catholic Church. They want to kick the Pope out of Rome. They would have already if there were a real Pope. And if they could they would wipe Russia off the face of the map. They already tried once with communism.

"To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of Reparation on the First Saturdays. If My requests are heeded, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer, various nations will be annihilated. In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to Me, and she will be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world."

....Is it starting to make sense??

Wednesday, July 26, 2017

Make Every Error Into A Partial Affirmation of the Truth

We have searched for the most accurate description of the strange political twilight that has seemed to emerge since the inauguration of Trump as president. While somewhat vocally radically conservative, the Trump administration has nevertheless given us more posturing than effect. And while we do our best to hope that Trump remains a potential agent for change, we refused to be fooled by our enemies again.

In their latest podcast Novus Ordo Watch gives us the words for which we have searched in their own comments on a video we posted here. The basic concept is that the enemies of truth, both political and spiritual, dare not bring their agenda fully into the open right away. Instead they vary the speed of implementation. They begin with very small deviations from truth and proper order, accustoming us to a certain pace of change, which they describe as inevitable or even 'progressive.' Once we are accustomed to change in general, they vary the pace. The leaders which preside over the most aggressive change are hailed as the most progressive, and often a certain social resistance builds in the population as under the Obama administration. Then a new 'conservative' leader slows down the rate of change, and even undoes some but not all of the most aggressive changes from the prior progressive leader. This 'conservative' is really no such thing, as he is also a progressive if judged by the standards of where society started. Too often the social reaction against the changes is placated.

Trump demonstrates himself so far as one of these 'conservative' consolidators of the new progressive order. Case in point: Under Clinton, it was debated whether homosexuals should be allowed in the military. His "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy was a step towards loosening standards, allowing homosexuals to serve as long as they were not open about their spiritual malady. Today, this issue is no longer part of  the debate, as Obama has made open homosexuality acceptable. Now under Trump we see the debate has moved so far left, we are debating whether so-called "transgendered" people, people who openly mutilate themselves in order to portray a different sexuality from their birth, should be allowed in the military.

Savvy political scientists call this 'moving the Overton window.' We like NovusOrdoWatch's phrasing better. This is all about making every error into a partial affirmation of the truth.

As long as we accept a partial standard of justice, we will leave our enemies room to say 'Well, this isn't that evil. It could be worse.' By this logic then do we proceed in an ever worse direction, since still it could be even worse. There is no substitute then for a culture based on the full and absolute truth of God, as embodied in a non-apostatized Catholic worldview.

Monday, July 24, 2017

Is Distributative Justice The Quickest Route to Communism?

This article is first in a series of reactions to reading "To Build the City of God" by Brian McCall - See Next


ADDED 9/23/2017 : Please see the rebuttal to this article here and why we likely misunderstood the true sense of 'distributive justice.'

The following comments upon the first chapter of To Build the City of God by Brian McCall.

I find the distinction McCall admits between that of distributive and commutative justice inadmissible. A series of objections have raised themselves in my mind. I will attempt to lay those down cogently here.

I start with the most fundamental objection. “In the beginning was the Word (logos), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

We see here that there is ultimately no distinction between God himself, the logic or laws that govern the universe, the full and correct abstract concepts which represent those laws in the human heart and mind, viz., “word(s),” and the son of God, the word or law made flesh, who perfectly as both human and God embodied those laws.

Thus if God is so, as we know him to be. If he is perfectly and simply constituted such that He will admit of no distinctions between Himself, His laws, the proper representation of those laws and His son who embodied in all perfection and cogency the forgoing three, then justice itself which is based entirely on the same must admit of no distinctions if it is to be properly and fully understood.

Yes, the human mind, which McCall admits is “weakened by the effects of the Fall” may allow for a distinction between the norms of commutative justice and the particular distribution of goods that inherently follows from such norms, but that does not mean any such distinction resides in the proper notion of justice as such, since perfect justice based on perfect logic will not admit its constitutive parts to contradict one another. Taken from this more perfect perspective, the distinction between commutative and distributive justice is a distinction representing no actual difference in reality (‘a distinction with no difference’).

A possible objection to this is the example of the barons who unjustly withhold grain from their serfs during a famine. You argued in this situation it would be just for the king to force the barons to provide their grain to the serfs. Let us put aside for the moment a discussion over whether such an arrangement of things corresponds ultimately to the dictates of commutative justice or not. Let us stipulate for the sake of the example that it does. Thus, one says, aha, look here, we have a situation where the dictates of commutative justice (those who currently have, up to this point in time, rightful use of their possessions) and the dictates of distributive justice (those who now should have rightful possession of the goods in question after the advent of the famine) seem to contradict one another. Fair enough, let us go ahead and admit to the possibility that such a situation might exist. Here the mere human encounters an epistemological problem. How does one determine with sufficient certainty that a.) a famine exists that the serfs did not have a direct hand in creating themselves, b.) the barons, who would in most cases see it in even their self-interest to keep their serfs alive, do not have a legitimate higher reason for withholding the grain c.) the King, who is so convinced of the injustice of this situation, is not simply taking away the barons’ grain in order to establish precedent that weakens the independence of his rightful aristocratic competition in the long run, especially if he is not willing to lead by the example of providing the serfs with his own grain for the time being d.)  the peasants who may or may not have a direct role in bringing about the famine will not learn to work less than they should because they will see the barons’ surplus is always something to be openly taken if their sloth leads to crisis.

No single human arbiter, especially if taken from the forgoing parties, is likely to have sufficient information and clarity of thought to see through the myriad of contentions to determine with confidence that the norms of commutative justice do not correspond to the norms of distributive justice for the whole of society in this situation. And even if this arbiter could come to a confident judgment, it is another question entirely how exactly to re-arrange resources so as to rectify the deficiency between the two, overlooking that it will yet take even more resources to accomplish this rearrangement. Sure, in the abstract it is easy to say the barons should give their grain to the serfs. But, how much? At what rate? For how long? If, as we said, commutative justice has been perfectly served up to this time, then it seems most reasonable to assume that the two-fold combination of a lack of human omniscience and the presumptive unity of justice would render any second-guessing of whether justice has been served mute. It would seem more reasonable to assume the distribution of goods remains just, and God has endowed each owner of the goods in question the ability to judge via his conscience on how best to use those goods, since every human participant retains knowledge unique to himself and his situation and the ultimate responsibility he is to serve. The owner of goods will have to answer to God for their distribution, but not to his fellow man who is not a disinterested party.

Furthermore, these are not empty objections. Let me give but one example. A baron, as wise as the magi that brought gifts to our Lord, uses his knowledge of astronomy to understand that the sun has just hit a solar minimum and forecasts that harvests will fail for the next ten years. He rightfully withholds his grain in order to ensure his knights and he will have sufficient food for the next ten years, during which it is extremely likely the neighboring kingdoms will invade due to their own short-sightedness in this matter. Thus, the kingdom on which the serfs depend for their protection will not disintegrate completely if the grain is withheld. And while the serfs may barely survive, eating rotten squirrels and roots, some of them even dying, this is still better than the fate they would have under a victorious invading army, which would happily kill them all.

The other barons of the realm, not nearly as sophisticated as this baron, nevertheless take his example to heart, and perhaps for short-sighted selfish or copy-cat motivations alone also withhold their grain from the serfs. The king has long resented the barons since shortly after his election as king when the barons threatened to never vote for his offspring to inherit the throne because of their disapproval of the king’s choice to marry a princess from a neighboring enemy kingdom. The king knows little about astronomy, and resentment has built in his heart since that time, so he is in no mood to listen even to the wise baron. Or, even if he did listen, he might suspect it as some sort of trick. He sees a chance to weaken the barons’ future independence. If the king can strip the barons of their grain on the pretext of any crisis, maybe those crotchety barons will think twice before they refuse to elect his offspring. And so, the king forces the barons to empty their granaries and within the first two years of famine, all the grain is exhausted, the kingdom disintegrates taken over by the neighboring kingdoms and the serfs are slaughtered.

Let us go back to the start, where we stipulated that the barons having all the remaining grain, at least until the occurrence of the famine, corresponded to the dictates of commutative justice. If this is the case, then it follows the barons are barons for a reason and the serfs are serfs for a reason. The barons are in their position rightfully because of some quality they have, a greater amount of virtue, an ability to see the long range consequences of their actions more clearly, something of this sort however one chooses to phrase it. The serfs are similarly weaker; they are more prone to fits of unjust anger and vengeful jealousy. What good does it do to have such a properly ordered system, if the moment there is a crisis such as a famine which must be met with the most consummate wisdom, those who were rightly in a position of superiority prior to the crisis find themselves stripped of the appurtenance of that superiority at the very time when the skillful management of resources is needed most!

Thus, I cannot buy into a distinction between commutative and distributive justice. It seems all of society’s effort ought to go towards ensuring the integrity of the former, and the later will correspondingly find itself properly ordered as well.

ADDED 9/23/2017 : Please see the rebuttal to this article here and why we likely misunderstood the true sense of 'distributive justice.'
And don't stop there! Continue your studies with St. Thomas Aquinas' Summa...

Tuesday, July 18, 2017

What Does This Russian Street Sign Mean?

We found this street sign in Moscow while using one of the common street viewer websites. We're not sure if it means Russians consider car washes to be a universal right or alien abductions are rather common in Moscow.

Sunday, July 16, 2017

Time to Test the Trump

Image result for test the trump
666 or A-ok? Remains to be seen.
- - -
At the present time it is unclear whether the promises of the Trump administration hold any merit or not. There is no need to repeat a tirade about the silliness of our current predicament, which shows for now no signs of change. The Trump administration's greatest accomplishment to date seems to be getting even CNN to join "the great" - but pointless if only rhetoric - "meme wars."

While we remain agnostic as to the ultimate righteousness of Trump himself, and it may be likely that he does as well, we retain a lurking suspicion that the Trump Presidency will ultimately manifest its ulterior motives in the form of an economic renewal that is finally implemented after favorable mid-term elections, but only on the basis of a new monetary order of which Trump will appear the father.

But, again, we remain ultimately agnostic because we believe the Trump administration and the accompanying ideological movements, possibly like Russia in another vein, remains merely a vehicle, a potential, if you will - as in the Scholastic or Thomistic sense, that has yet to be fully actualized. As such, merely a source of power, the movement behind the Trump phenomenon remains a unwritten book.

It is time for conservatives to write that book. I believe that the Trump administration, faced with a type of crisis that requires a Presidential response will force its hand, possibly in the right direction.

I think most conservatives will admit that the liberal segment of the populace by and large controls the centralized levers of power, which still, the internet not withstanding, retain the greatest stranglehold over our country. The universities and public schools, with their hands in our pocket for our tax dollars are but one example. Thus, we have very little to lose, and a small window with the Trump administration in which to act which may be rapidly dwindling.

Something along the lines of what we envision, though this is also just an example, is a successful Texas secession movement. Yes, even many so-called 'conservatives' would voice opposition to such a movement, but it nevertheless has precisely the appeal of the Trump phenomenon, at least during the election, of a conservative ideal no longer beholden to the existent power structures, but willing to rearrange them to the greater benefit of conservative ideals, and thus humanity, particularly the American people, itself.

We have outlined such a movement not so long ago. But now seems the time to act. IF the Trump presidency is presented with such a crisis, say the secession of a conservative state of the union, he will be forced either to:

- prove his conservative bonafides, and look favorably on such a development

- show that he is merely a shill as was Obama and every other president since at least Kennedy for the globalist interests

An important note is that Trump has demonstrated consummate skill in talking a good game, but delivering less than expected. Whatever this ultra-conservative crisis leverage point would be, and we are open to suggestions, it must be persistent and push Trump into a corner that he has to exit.

Our larger point is that the temptation for conservatives is to go back to our proverbial sleep as the reliable warrior of Trump takes on the evil forces that have threatened us until now. This may prove the gravest mistake, as we must, as the left does during their reign, create a catalyst for the Trump phenomenon to realize its potential, rather than remain merely the possibility of change as it is now.

Tuesday, July 11, 2017

"We Are Open, We Are Free People"

At 20:33 Dr. Tulaev Pavel, mentioned before here, demonstrates his knowledge of the power structures that rule the West.

Perhaps we weren't too far off the mark:

Monday, July 10, 2017

Is Individualism What Ails The West?

For those who haven't taken the hints, we do believe that Western culture and its ultimate metaphysical foundation, the Catholic Church, find themselves in one of the greatest crises of their existence. It is perhaps on par with the Aryan heresy which nearly overtook the Church but for a single violent bishop or two or perhaps, as the Blessed Virgin Mary warned at La Salette, the Great Apostasy of Revelation itself, in which Rome becomes the seat of the Anti-Christ.

Speaking of Saint Nicholas punching a heretic gets us quickly to our thesis, which is while there are valid truths that flow from viewing things from the individualist point of view, when this becomes the only context from which truths are derived, as has become commonplace in the West, other truths are missed, and a portion of the truth is mistaken for the whole.

One possible side-effect of this hyper-individualism is the utter pacifism of the Western Church. To be sure, Our Lord's message is almost entirely one of suffering evil rather than violently overcoming it. Except, even for Our Lord, there were certain lines such as buying and selling in His Father's house which were not to be crossed, lest the whip and noble wrath finally be put to their deontological use.

But when one is overly focused on the validity of one's own actions, it is hard to escape the conclusion of pacifism. None of us can judge as God judges, none of our justice is good enough or executed properly and because our suffering has merit, one might be tempted to conclude that violence can never be justified when compared perennial option of long-suffering.

And long-suffering certainly aptly describes how we've chosen to deal with the decline of the Church in the face of the revolutions and upheavals since Protestantism arrived on the scene. One wonders what the world would look like if a Pope or two had encouraged the Christeros, as one example, to fight and overthrow the Masonic atheists then [and still] in control of Mexico rather than give up the fight in favor of compromise.

If we consider the matter at the societal level for a moment, we recognize that it might be better for certain individuals to practice long-suffering in the face of unjust retribution, rather than to rule out retribution altogether. For long-suffering as mentioned before in the face of our mortal enemies might embolden them, but long-suffering in the face of the inevitable injustices of human applied justice might just keep existential crises at bay.

Of course, the perfect balance in justice, not available at the present hour, is for the aggrieved party always to have the means and recourse to use just sufficient violence to keep those that accost them at bay and exact the due amount of restitution. As we have mentioned in last article, this seems to be conceptualized by the Hoppean ideal in the West, and the concept of Sobornost in the Eastern Churches.

Monday, July 3, 2017

Will Russia Realize the Hoppean Ideal?

The various portents of both Catholic and satanist writings that Russia is to emerge as the ever more perfect cultural iteration of the faith of Christ in time, the true Church of all ages, has led us to a search into Russian culture to find the seeds of this development. Sources as varied as the Virgin Mary herself to arch-confederate and Freemason Albert Pike to the paranoid fear of Democrats of anything traditional or patriarchal - especially Russia - attest to this destiny.

Our search is no less informed by the Austrian School of economics, rightful heir to the [Catholic] Spanish Scholastic school, whose curriculum is today perhaps most succinct and refined in the writings of its dean-apparent Hans Hermann Hoppe.

Critics and sympathizers alike acknowledge the uniqueness of key tenents of Hoppe's philosophical libertarianism. These concepts include physical removal of those opposed to natural social order, strictures on the free movement of peoples, the necessary marriage of libertarian economics to traditional Christian cultural norms, preference for monarchy over democracy and other conclusions at odds with the hyperindividualistic [classical or otherwise] liberalism of the West that seemed to birth libertarianism in the first place.

Indebted to Mises and Hayek for demonstrating that the fundamental decentralized nature of knowledge makes modern economic success radically dependent upon capitalistic institutions like free-market pricing, double-entry accounting, and entrepreneurialism, we conclude that the peace and concomitant prosperity promised to us by the Virgin Mary with the conversion of Russia would not be possible unless the fundamentals of modern economic production methods become fully reintegrated with the social teachings of the Church.

While Hoppe sees both Catholicism and Protestantism as compatible with capitalism, he tends to stress the later in deference to the protestant 'work ethic.' But Hoppe knows well where this protestant focus on labor gets us. It was protestant economist Adam Smith whose labor theory of value became a fundamental starting-point in the rise of Marxism. Perhaps the more balanced culture typical of Catholic countries in the past provides a more sustained basis for economic development. Similarly, if it is ok to throw-off the yoke of papal governance for the Church as is the impetus in Protestantism, perhaps history demonstrates that in this line Hoppe's monarchy is next to go?

Finally to Russia, where we find the Pan-Slavists have a notion seemingly identical to the economic methodological individualism that Austrian Economics derived as a synthesis of the acting individual and the institutions they constitute, but used to describe the development of society as a whole, economically, culturally and spiritually. It is essentially a synonym to spontaneous order. Further, it also incorporates the recently popular concept of God as put forth by Jordan Peterson as the ideal of all ideals, a truth literally more real than reality itself and derived from the same.

Dr. Tulaev Pavel describes Sobornost as "a concept that expresses free aggregative personal organic self-developing unity. It derives from the word 'sobor' which means a process of coming together, of moving from different directions toward one point. ... Many Russian thinkers developed the universal ideal of sobornost and Sergei  Trubetskoy is one of them. His personal view refers to the supra-individual nature of human consciousness - human mind and language - through the principle vector of its development, from a syncretic view of the world through the individualistic to a synthetic view uniting all forms of comprehending reality - intuition, religion, art, philosophy, science and practice. It teaches us to see the eternal in time because every person - every I and you - is a part of the divine soul. Sobornost is manifested in many forms of human life - family, unities, free-statehood, various religions and international organizations. Some saints and prominent persons ... turn after their death in the symbols of sobernost too. And we pray to the sobor of all saints who have achieved glory...and believe that our souls will unite with them and God after the final trial."

Out of Russia will we see a synthesis of all orthodoxies emerge, dislodging the modernist errors, the synthesis of all heresies in which the West is today ensnared?

In this year, the centennial of the apparitions at Fatima, let us pray that we may finally obtain the consecration of Russia. Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.

Get up to speed on the Hoppean critique of democracy today!