Homo Hubris and the Disruption of The
Numinous
The Genesis of Homo Hubris
Homo Hubris is the name given to that new
sub-species of the genus Homo which has, in the last three hundred or
so years, become the dominant species inhabiting the industrialized
countries of what is called "the West".
The genesis of Homo Hubris lies in the rise of abstract concepts such
as that
of national-identity - over and above regional, tribal, differences and
local ("clan") identity -
which began to emerge in Europe, and especially in Britain, some time
before what has been termed "the Industrial Revolution". This concept
of a national, somewhat impersonal and always abstract, national
identity, is prefigured, for example, in the speech by Queen Elizabeth
the First
of England, given at Tilbury, in 1588 CE, and in the dramatised speech,
on St. Crispin's Day, given by Shakespeare to King Henry V in the play
(c. 1599 CE) of the same name, where the "nation" of England is
eulogized. A more overt expression of this particular abstraction is
the Commonwealth of England,
established by Oliver Cromwell in 1653 CE, which in many ways was
the forerunner of the modern concepts, the modern abstractions, of
nation and State theorized by people such
as Hegel and Fichte and brought into being after the French Revolution.
It was, however, what has been called "the Industrial Revolution" -
which began in the early to middle 1700's (CE) - which led to the rapid
growth and spread of this new mostly urban-dwelling sub-species, Homo
Hubris, in thrall to, and manipulated by others with, such abstract
notions as "the nation" and "the State".
Homo Hubris, by nature, is naturally rapacious, and rather war-like,
and can often be distinguished from Homo Sapiens Galacticus
by their profane "lack of numinous balance" (that is, their lack of
empathy), by a lack of knowing of
and feeling for the numinous; by a personal arrogance, by a lack of
manners, and by that lack of respect for anything other than
strength/power and/or their own gratification. One
particular feature of the life of Homo Hubris is their dependence upon,
and their
need and often respect for, machines and technology, which machines and
which technology have at best disrupted our balance with the Numinous,
and, at worst, have severed our connexion to the Numinous and thus to
Nature.
In outward appearance, Homo Hubris - that denizen of the Western
megalopolis - is often distinguished by their lack of ancestral costume
or genuine cultural apparel. Instead, they almost always either: (1)
garb themselves in mass-produced products of consumerism (which more
often than not sport some manufacturing logo or some manufacturing
name, making them walking advertisements for such consumerism), or (2)
garb themselves in what they regard, or have been informed (by some arm
of the modern mass Media) is "trendy" or "fashionable"; or (3) garb
themselves in the apparel, the outfit, of some modern urban abstract
and un-numinous "sub-culture" which they identify with, which
sub-cultures interestingly include the modern Armed Forces of the West,
with their anonymizing uniforms.
The majority of Homo Hubris dress thus because essentially they have no
personal, individual, style and generally possess a herd-like
mentality, being unwilling and/or unable to be different from their
pees, or "their mates", or their friends, or their colleagues.
Thus, even when some of them regard themselves as being "rebellious"
they are more often than not outfitting themselves (outwardly and often
inwardly) according to some "trend" or some passing "craze", which
"trend" or which "craze" are always urban-based, always disconnected
from the realness of their own ancestral culture (which ancestral
cultures are always rural) and which outward signs of "rebellion"
almost always become commercialized, given time.
This outward appearance of Homo Hubris may be said to be an outward
sign of their true inner nature, for it is in the nature of Homo Hubris
to conform, and to belong to that-which is un-numinous and which lacks
a feeling for that natural and dignified humility born from personal
experience and/or an innate empathy and sense of honour. Their
conformity is most often to some abstraction; to some-thing - such as
an idea, a dogma, a creed, an ideology - manufactured by someone else
or by some established Institution.
Thus, Homo Hubris is essentially rootless, and prideful. Their "home"
is what they make for themselves, and/or for their own family, and this
home can be anywhere, for it does not really matter to them where they
dwell; and more often than not their sense of belonging, if they have
one, is to some modern abstraction, such as some modern nation-State,
or to some religion, or to some -ology or some -ism, or to some
un-numinous idealized urban place, such as some city or some large
national region where they were born, which region is almost always
denuded of real tradition and real rural living and culture, and more
often than not has been manufactured in some past by some government
functionary or some committee and made "real" by some abstract law of
some abstract nation-State.
The individuals of Homo Hubris have little or no genuine ancestral
culture; nothing that ties them to a real, living (and thus small),
ancestral homeland; no sense of belonging to a specific local place or
rural area which they have a natural empathy and love for and which
they personally know through dwelling there for a length of time of
many years. They have no feeling for, and little or no practical
experience of, the natural Time - the natural rhythm and cycle - of
Nature, but instead only have experience of the abstract measured out
causal and urban Time of "clocks". They have little or no awe of and
respect for Nature: of their own smallness and impotence compared to
the power and longevity and fecundity of Nature; instead, they exhibit
that innate prideful and arrogant attitude of Homo Hubris where they
believe or feel - because of some machine, or because of some
technology or because of some abstract idea or some ideology or some
dogma - that they are "powerful", or "important", or have some
"Destiny" or can "make some difference" or, worse, that they must and
should and can "change things for the better" according to some idea,
some ideology, some dogma or some -ism.
They have little or no experience of the slowness and the numinosity of
regular manual toil or of manufacturing things using only their hands
and hand-tools. Instead, they only have experience of using powered
machinery and powered machines which serve to distance them from the
materials they are using or which they use to manufacture something
which someone else wants or desires or which someone or some oligarchy
or some product of capitalism has decreed is necessary for "change", or
for "progress" or from which someone somewhere can make a profit.
They have little or none of that genuine learning and personal
knowledge that arises slowly from direct practical personal experience
extending over many years and from extended contact with those of a
previous generation who have practical skills and practical knowledge
to impart, individually, in a natural and slow way. Instead, their
knowledge and their learning are abstract, learnt in groups in
classrooms or in lecture-rooms or from books or other material
published by others, or, now, from the Internet (See Footnote 1) - and
is almost always of no immediate, and pressing, relevance to
themselves. That is, knowledge, learning, have not grown out, slowly,
from within they themselves, and are not rooted in a numinous locale,
in
an area where they belong by virtue of ancestry and culture and toil.
Instead, such knowledge and such learning as they possess are abstract,
and have been imposed upon them, by some Institution, or some
nation-State, or which they have imposed upon themselves because of
some abstract interest or some enthusiasm or because it will help them
"get on in life" and enable them to earn more money by toiling in some
abstract profession or in some industry or some concern connected to
some modern-State or some megalopolis.
In essence, therefore, the fundamental distinction is between: (1) a
living, rural and ancestral way of life - which living (and which
culture arising from it) always derive from some dwelling in a certain
small area by some tribes or some clans - and (2) the artificial,
manufactured, living of Homo Hubris: the living exemplified by
industrialized cities and towns which towns and cities are now part of
some large nation-State.
In the former, there is a knowing of and a respect for Nature, born
from personal experience and the often harsh nature of a rural working
life, which working life is one of reliance upon hand-crafts,
hand-tools and the work of animals.
In the latter, there is a prideful ignorance of and a disrespect for
Nature - except, perchance, when Nature touches some individual,
bringing thus some misfortune - and a reliance upon powerful machines
and machine-driven tools and technology, which powerful machines and
machine-driven tools and which technology enable individuals to
rapaciously and arrogantly destroy Nature and to rapaciously and
arrogantly manufacture and build what is lifeless and abstract and
barbaric, inhuman, and urbanized.
Machines, Technology, and The
Disruption of The Numinous
Fundamentally, all machines and machine-driven tools - those things
which extend the power, the reach, the ability, of a single individual
beyond that which they could do, by themselves, during a day of work,
with or without the help of other living-beings, such as horses or oxen
- usurp the Numinous. That is, they possess the potential to: (1)
re-inforce and extend the natural pride and natural arrogance and
natural hubris of human beings; and (2) distance the user from Nature
and that natural rhythm and natural way of life which encourages
empathy and from which genuine (numinous) culture arises. Technology
takes this
usurpation of the Numinous even further.
However, what is wrong, what is un-numinous and un-ethical, are not
such manufactured machines, tools, and technology, per se, but rather, the use to
which they have been put, by human beings. Let us consider, for
instance, two examples: the automobile, and the agricultural tractor.
1) The automobile - or hubrismobile - has profoundly changed the way of
life of not only the countries of the West, but of most of the world.
This machine - and similar machines, such as the railway engine - has
made travel easy, and often affordable. With the building of roads, and
bridges, previously inaccessible areas have been opened up, and
developed. A journey that might have taken months on foot, or weeks by
horse, could be accomplished in far, far, less "time" and without the
rigours and difficulties previously encountered. Isolated communities
have been "connected" to towns and cities; and people no longer had to
live near where they worked, for they could "commute", by hubrismobile,
by train, by omnibus. People from the cities and the towns could,
without much difficulty, swarm into and "enjoy" the countryside, and
seek out ever more "remote" places where they, without much effort,
could indulge in "leisure activities and pastimes".
Modern-nations - their people just as much as their governments -
enthusiastically embraced these, and associated, new machines. The
result has been devastating for rural, isolated, often clannish,
communities, their way of life and their culture. Furthermore, the
hubrismobile - and similar machines - has distanced modern human beings
even further from the realness of Nature and from that slow, natural
and necessary toiling effort that walking and riding provided, and
which effort enabled the cultivation of empathy and that attitude to
life from whence true numinous culture arises. That is, things have
been made "too easy" and too disconnected from their realness, from
their natural place of dwelling, and as a consequence the haste and the
profanity and arrogance of the city and the town have spread,
displacing the slowness and toil of walking, the symbiosis required to
work with and ride a horse, which slowness, toil and symbiosis
engendered a certain numinous attitude to life, a certain natural
respect and thence a real human dignity. And it is dignity which is so
woefully lacking in Homo Hubris.
2) The agricultural tractor - and associated agricultural machines -
have transformed agriculture, leading to the decimation of small
diversified family farms, loss of work for farm labourers, and to
increasingly large "agri-businesses" which specialize in one, or
perhaps, two crops, and which crops are grown for profit and resale and
not for the consumption of those growing and tending them.
That is, the emphasis has shifted totally away from small family owned
farms whose diversified crops and stock were produced and reared for
the consumption of the farmer and his family, with whatever surplus, if
any, being sold locally for usually a very small amount of money, or
bartered for needed items. Instead, there is now the cult of
mono-culture and the agri-business (often employing only a few people
and cultivating hundreds if not thousands of acres) which depend on
making enough profit to buy and keep (often through usurious loans) the
expensive farm machinery required to run such concerns, and which
profit motive has required the use of fertilizers, herbicides,
insecticides, and genetically engineered crops, to artificially
increase yields. The result - in places such as rural English counties
- has been devastating for both Nature and for the rural way of life,
and while it is true that such a machine as a small agricultural
tractor can and often has made farming easier on the individual
undertaking such work, it has led to unchecked and un-numinous change,
and to the spread of the arrogance and the ways of Homo Hubris.
An example may illustrate this. This
example concerns a village in a rural English county; what it once was,
and what it is now. Less than a hundred years ago, this village was a
small
collection of cottages and farms. The farms themselves contained apple
and pear orchards, and many fields of various crops. These crops had
been
found to be suitable to the type of soil in the area, and each year
several
fields were left "fallow" so that the fertility of the soil could be
regained
following a harvest. Naturally, given the orchards, the village and the
surrounding area produced cider and perry - with every farm making its
own. Indeed, cider was the regular and preferred drink in those days
when
the water itself was often suspect, and before tea drinking became
common
and affordable. The surplus crops, when harvested, were taken to the
nearby
small town,
where there was a thriving market. At this time, most of the villagers
worked either on the land itself, or in trades or crafts connected with
them. For example, there was a village farrier, and a wheelwright, and
thus a relative and local self-sufficiency, for most things the
village, the farms, needed for their daily life
were made
of wood, locally cut, shaped, and crafted: carts, fences, gates, doors,
even pumps.
And what was not so made and crafted of wood, was more often than not
made by the local blacksmith, or of stone quarried from somewhere
nearby.
There was a sense of identity among the villagers - they were, for
the
most part, proud to be from the area, and proud of their local
ancestry.
Of course, it is easy to idealize such village life. But there was
an
awareness of and a real sense of belonging. Life, for most of the
villagers,
was often harsh, sometimes cruel. But there was real individual and
local character in the people.
There was a real, living, community which, despite the hardship - or
perhaps more correctly because of the hardship - slowly
prospered over the centuries.
There was a real balance with Nature - with the seasons, and the
soil for the most part understood and respected, partly because old
ways
of doing things were carried on, with these old, ancestral ways having
been found to be effective. (See Footnote 2.)
Today, however, in this village, this balance, this understanding
and this respect
for Nature no longer exist, even on the two farms which still remain.
The
village itself has grown tremendously. Over three score new houses have
been built on land once owned by two of the farms. Dozens of trees have
gone, and scores of hedges removed, to make way for these new arrivals.
One of the other farms is no longer a "working farm" - it is occupied
by
a "townie" family, and its Barns have been converted into houses, lived
in by other "townies" who commute to the nearby city in their cars. The
orchards themselves have gone (save for some apple trees in the garden
of one of the farms on the edge of the village) as have the fields of
crops.
Nearly all the fields now grow the regulation wheat, in large fields
made
by removing boundary hedges so that machines can plant, cultivate and
harvest
more. And the tragedy is that this wheat often ends up stored in an
enormous
warehouse where it forms a tiny part of the great and never used
European
"wheat mountain".
Furthermore, even the few farmers who remain seem to have lost their
respect for and understanding of Nature, ploughing as they do almost to
the hedgerow, spraying the fields as they do with dangerous chemicals,
and tearing the heart out of their remaining life-sheltering hedges as
they do when they
recklessly flail away at the wrong times of year with mechanical
flails:
stripping the berries and buds off in Autumn and decimating the
surviving
buds in early Spring. Farming has become a business at worst, and at
best
an occupation. No longer is the land farmed to provide food for the
people
who farm, with the excess produce being traded for essential items. No
longer is there an understanding of husbanding the soil: of caring for
it, treasuring it, for the benefit of future generations.
Nearly all of the new villagers work in the nearby city and the
nearby
towns. They have little knowledge of, and even less understanding of,
Nature
and the land around them shielded as they are by their
centrally-heated,
electric-light houses with its running water and flushing lavatories,
and
conveyed as they are from place to place by their heated,
rain-shielding hubrismobiles. To such people, the place where they live
is really irrelevant, as
long as it is convenient. One of the few remaining attractions of the
village
is its lack of street lighting, on even the new estates of intruding
houses.
Thus can the beauty of the stars still be seen, at night, as there can
still be a feeling of rural isolation in the darkness. But of course,
the
majority of people find this darkness - this intrusion of Nature -
dreadfully
"inconvenient" and have petitioned the local Council to install street
lighting, which doubtless the unfeeling townie technocrats will, in
time.
Meanwhile, many of these village residents have installed intrusive
high-power
"security" lights on their houses, so keen are they to dispel anything
which is natural, and fearful as they have become due to recent spates
of burglaries, often by louts from nearby cities and towns who, of
course, have easy access to such "rural" places by means of their
hubrismobiles.
In particular, the lives of these new "village-dwelling" people are
not connected to Nature: they do not depend on Nature, on the soil, the
land, around them. Instead, their living depends on the business, the
industry, the commerce, of the towns and cities, with such business,
such industry, such commerce being for the most part unnecessary and
unnatural, existing only to provide more and more unnecessary luxuries
and goods, or existing only to implement abstract political and social
policies totally unconnected with the land, and the way and traditions
of their ancestors.
The truth is that we still are, and have been, too immature, as a
species, to use machines and technology wisely; we have let ourselves
be overcome with the power, with the capacity for change, with the
pleasure and the ease, that they have imbued us with, just as we have
forgotten the natural wisdom that we are and should be toiling,
working, human beings who, through the natural toil of our work with
our hands or with the aid of other living-beings, such as horses with
whom we form a symbiotic relationship, can achieve, can establish and
can maintain, a natural and a numinous balance with ourselves, with
Nature, and with the community where we dwell. We have forgotten that
such a simple rural life, such a way of living, does not need to be
harsh if we exist in balance - if we co-operate with - others local to
us in an empathic and honourable way for our mutual benefit and for our
local needs, accepting that we need a little, but not too much, and
eschewing out of choice a life of material wealth and luxury,
preferring instead a less materialistic, but more satisfying, numinous
way.
Machines, and technology, have undermined and then destroyed this
balance, and as a result we have now all but lost our natural connexion
to Nature, to other human beings, to other life, as we have lost that
natural, slow, rural local way of self-sufficient living which slowly
grew, century after century.
Machines, and technology, and the abstractions and artificial goals of
modern nation-States and modern ways of material living have grossly
allowed us to place profit before individuals, and luxury and personal
greed before a natural balance with Nature, a natural balance with
ourselves, and with the place where we dwell.
Machines, and technology, and the abstractions and artificial goals of
modern nation-States and modern ways of material living have done
almost irreparable damage to Nature and to our very humanity. One man
with just one machine can now decimate and almost effortlessly destroy
in one day acres upon acres of living countryside, of a centuries-old
forest, just as one pilot flying one aircraft can in a few seconds, and
effortlessly, fire and drop missiles and bombs enough to kill and maim
hundreds, thousands, and tens of thousands, of human beings.
That is, machines and technology have made us more arrogant, more
prideful, and far more inhuman than we ever have been, as they have
given us the capacity to be far more barbarian than our so-called
"barbarian" ancestors, which barbarity we have, in the past hundred
years, shamefully and zealously embraced, as witness the hundreds of
millions of people that we have killed, injured and maimed, in our wars
and our conflicts these past hundred years, which wars and which
conflicts used and use a multitude of murderous weapons and in which
wars and conflicts our much vaunted modern technology plays an
increasing role.
Allied to the use, and important for the spread and acceptance, of
machines and technology, has been the abstract idea of "progress",
which particular abstraction is, along with the abstract concept of the
modern, and now increasingly tyrannical, nation-State, one of the most
profane and destructive and un-numinous abstractions ever manufactured.
The Destructive Abstraction of Progress
The modern Western abstraction (idea) of progress is inseparably bound
up with: (1) a desire for and a belief in "change"and continued
"growth"; (2) with the belief that we human beings can and should set
ourselves abstract goals, unrelated to anything natural or numinous,
and strive to achieve these goals; (3) with the belief that such
"change", such "growth", and such goals will enable us to achieve such
things as "happiness", "wealth", "contentment", "freedom", and so on
etcetera; and (4) with the belief that we can manufacture various
"things" (abstractions) - such as, for example, a State, an economy,
some laws, some government policy or planning - which will lead us
toward the attainment of the aforementioned "happiness", "wealth",
"contentment", "freedom", "equality", and so on etcetera. For instance,
Hegel's Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Weltgeschichte,
Marx's Das Kapital, and
Comte's Système de politique
positive, contain all of these concepts, in greater or lesser
degree, concepts eulogized by individuals such as John Stuart Mill, and
Herbert Spencer.
Furthermore, one of the fundamental tenets of the Zeitgeist
of the modern West is that machines, technology and science can aid,
ensure and even achieve the abstract progress that is desired, and that
some new "invention" will enable us to make even more "progress".
All these concepts - like all abstractions - usurp or limit or
constrain our own individual judgement, which individual judgement - to
be numinous and thus ethical - should and must be based upon empathy,
that is, upon: (1) a
direct and personal knowing of other individuals, of other life, and of
Nature; and/or upon (2) a dwelling in a particular area or locality
which we directly know, and have experience of, and where such changes
as are made, are undertaken by us or others dwelling there in a natural
harmonious way with as little disruption, with a genuine respect for
the locality and Nature, and in the knowledge that we are but one small
and transitory emanation of Nature. All abstractions
distort or destroy our correct, and of necessity our individual,
perception of other human beings, and of Nature.
In essence. the abstraction of "progress" disrupts, undermines,
decimates, and then destroys our natural connexion to Nature, to other
individuals, to our past, and to the Cosmos. For instance, this
abstraction of so-called "progress" often or mostly requires or
involves the rejection of the old, tried, tested ways of the past,
which ways have slowly evolved in a natural manner from personal and
local experience. In their place, there is some new fangled idea or
some new theory or some new, "more progressive", more "enlightened" way
of doing things, all of which derive from somewhere other than direct
local experience and local personal knowledge, and all of which disrupt
or severe our numinous connexion with our ancestral past, with others,
and with Nature.
For instance, this abstraction of so-called "progress" replaces the
slow rhythm of Nature's own Time with the abstract "Time" of some
abstraction, such as "achieving prosperity and material success"
through change and growth, be this individual, regional or national.
Thus, and for example, in the name of such material achievement and
prosperity, industrial, or commercial, or retail, or some other type
of, development is undertaken, and justified as being "of benefit to
the people" and a sign of "commitment to the future", which development
and its associated infrastructure almost always disrupts, displaces, or
destroys some aspect of Nature, and often encroaches upon, or
undermines, or displaces or destroys, small rural, and often locally
self-sufficient, community or communities, with the peoples of such
communities then becoming dependant upon or part of the new (often
local or national government planned) developments and their
infrastructure, effectively making them rootless and severing what was
often an ancient connexion with Nature and an ancestral way of living.
Thus is the abstraction of so-called "progress" - and the concomitant
change and disruption - either imposed upon individuals, by some
abstract entity such as a government, or individuals mistakenly impose
it upon themselves, singularly, or in collaboration with others,
believing that it is "necessary", or that some other concept, said to
make such progress achievable, will improve or otherwise enhance their
own life.
However, the numinous reality is that true "progress", true and
numinous change, is only and ever individual and only ever arises -
like wisdom - slowly in a natural way, and only "exists" as a greater
presencing of the numinous, a reconnexion of ourselves with The Numen,
and an enhancement, and evolution of, that connexion. That is. genuine
progress - that which is real because it is not a human-manufactured
abstraction we have imposed upon ourselves and upon life - cannot be
created or achieved by anything other than an inner change within an
individual; by the natural evolution of the individual; or by those
small, local, and incremental and generally non-disruptive outer
changes (for example to our locality) that work with, and which
balance, and which continue, what already-is, based as such small and
local changes are on the respect for such natural balance that arises
from a knowledge that we are but one small and transitory emanation of,
and thus a connexion to, Nature.
Conclusion
What, therefore, are the numinous solutions to the problems of the
destructive abstraction of "progress" and of the disruption of the
numinous caused by machines and technology? What is the numinous way to
proceed to restore the natural balance that Homo Hubris has upset?
The solution - the way - is to return to a more rural, less
materialistic, more clan-based,
way of living. To return to the slow and natural toil of manual labour
and a working in harmony with animals. It is a consciously-made - an
evolutionary - decision to honourably co-operate with others who feel
as we do in order to slowly bring-into-being new rural and clan-based
communities where we can live such a way that our natural balance with
ourselves, with Nature, is restored.
It is a consciously-made - an evolutionary - decision to restrain and
control ourselves, and control our lust for comfort and for luxury, and
to place empathy with and compassion for all Life at the centre of our
own lives. It is a consciously-made - an evolutionary - decision to
distance ourselves, internally and externally, from the profane,
materialistic, egotistic, profit worshipping, machine-worshipping,
societies of our age. It is a consciously-made - an evolutionary -
decision to appreciate, understand and know our place in Nature and in
the Cosmos: as but one small nexion of life, which small nexion affects
all other living beings and which small nexion has the opportunity to
evolve to be the awareness, to be part of the-being, of Nature and of
the Cosmos itself.
It is, in summary, the decision to restore, and to then enhance and to
evolve, that connexion to the Numinous which machines, and technology,
and the abstractions and artificial goals of modern nation-States and
modern ways of material living, have severed, and which connexion has
its foundation, in genesis, in empathy, in personal honour and in those
small clan-based communities where such empathy and such honour can
thrive.
David Myatt
Footnotes:
(1) The Internet itself provides an excellent example of (a) the
mis-use of technology by Homo Hubris, and (b) of how such technology
enhances the profanity and arrogance of Homo Hubris, and disrupts the
Numinous itself.
Genuine learning and a genuine wisdom arises from a reflexion born
from personal,
direct, practical experience: from an alchemical, inner, symbiosis;
from that personal and very individual growth that requires a long
period of causal time, often in one place. The Internet, however,
encourages and easily facilitates two Homo Hubris like things: (1) the
dissemination of abstract, rootless, "knowledge"; and (2) the
immediate dissemination of the mostly fatuous, often ignorant and
almost always dishonourable opinions and views of the Homo Hubris
hordes. In addition, it is increasingly used, and often covertly
censored by, functionaries and flunkeys of modern nation-States to
spread their grossly un-numinous abstractions and their propaganda; and
now possesses a commercialized Media-infested nature.
Thus, there is the availability and the encouragement of the worthless,
the profane, the abstract, the lifeless, the un-numinous, the
propagandistic, allowing for and encouraging as never before a
pretentious pseudo-intellectual type of "knowledge" and of "knowing",
and an immediate spewing forth of personal dishonour.
Thus, instead of being primarily used - as it might have been - as one
new means of communication between rational, empathic, enlightened
individuals, it has been used and is being used in the service of Homo
Hubris, and of those oligarchies and interest groups which have a
vested interest in the continuing profanity of Homo Hubris and in the
continuing existence of the un-numinous abstractions on which the
modern West is based.
As with many things modern, machine-based and technological, the
disadvantages of this Internet now far outweigh its few remaining
advantages. In addition, and in particular, the truely empathic, the
truely wise - those connected or re-connected to The Numen - have
little or no need of the immediacy of such a modern medium. The only
minuscule value of the medium of the Internet is that it still
currently allows the free dissemination of items contrary to the
material, un-numinous Zeitgeist of the modern West, enabling those few
who might be interested in more numinous matters to reflect upon such
matters, and, after such reflexion, if they consider it suitable, to
act upon them, in their own species of causal time and in their own
individual way.
(2) As I wrote some years, in a letter to a friend:
" Do not believe that I yearn for some
non-existent romantic rural
idyll. I
know [from years of personal experience] the hardness of this life, of
how the work, the days, the weather,
can wear
you down, make limbs, back, hands, ache; of how some days I become
wearied with
a particular wearisome, repetitive task, and yearn for the day to end,
to sit
outside in the garden of the local Pub, alone with my pint of liquid
food made
from water and barley and flavoured with hops..... But this
simple life is
my choice; there are good days, and bad days; usually more good days,
especially
when - as today and yesterday - the Sun warms and I can see the beauty
of this
Earth's blue sky. In many ways, I yearn for the warm, sunny days of an
English
Spring, Summer and Autumn, as I know there must be life-giving rain,
and clouds
to bear that rain. There is balance, which has brought the numinous
beauty of
this rural landscape, this land.
The toil of earlier times was often much
harder than it is now; but
the toil
that is necessary, now, to live simply, frugally, is not that hard -
although it
will be so for those who have never done such work! I remember how many
people -
especially young people - started work in the fields at my previous
place of
work. Some lasted a few hours; some lasted a week; a few lasted a few
weeks.
None lasted longer, leaving us two [old farm hands] with our hoes, our
taciturn ways, to
knowingly smile.
The important thing is that we now
have, and can make, a conscious
choice -
to live in the world, as it is, has become; or to live as we can, and -
I believe - we should,
simply, in an unaffected way, in harmony, symbiosis, with Nature, thus
restraining ourselves, especially our desire for material possessions,
for the
things we really do not need, for the things which harm Nature, the
living
beings of Nature, and we ourselves, if we but knew it..."
(3) This particular tenet - this particular abstraction - may be said
to have its modern origins in the writings of Francis Bacon.