By Ehud Would
“Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.”
~Romans 1:21-22
Amidst the Coronavirus lockdown PBS has done something shockingly uncharacteristic, and at just the right time: they have actually addressed the philosophical crux of the matter — the question of authority.
Even so, because they draw precisely the wrong conclusion, it may be the most insidious thing they’ve ever broadcast.
Beginning on the matter of foreign policy, Tom Nichols mocks the knee-jerk conviction of many Americans concerning the prospect of war on the fictional country of Agrabah:
“For experts in foreign affairs, however, there was no way around the alarming reality that so many Americans had a well-defined view on bombing a cartoon.”
Even if half the hoi polloi were eager to bomb foreign nations absent any knowledge of them, it would still amount to a less hawkish track record than that of experts like Nichols. Even those Democrats who identify as staunchly anti-war turn on a dime to rubber stamp every war of aggression boosted by AIPAC. Turns out, the closer one is to the levers of power (and thereby, expertise), the more uniform his bellicosity. So we see the knee-jerk inclination of the unwashed proles proves far less ‘alarming’ than the informed and consistent whoring malice of the experts.
“How did this happen? How is it that people now not only doubt expert advice, but believe themselves to be as smart, or even smarter, than experienced professionals? Parents who refuse to vaccinate a child, for example, aren’t really questioning their doctors. They’re replacing their doctors.”
Perhaps, m’lord, it has to do with the experts lying to the public for decades in regard to diet (something which your beloved NPR even acknowledges)?
Perhaps, oh, sage, it has something to do with Operation Mockingbird?
Perhaps, my liege, it pertains to the fact that the clerisy has lied to us about nearly every essential detail of the COVID-19 outbreak?
Nonetheless, issuing solemn warning against “intellectual saboteurs” — i.e. those who dare check the work of the experts — He concludes:
“[U]nless we start accepting the limitations of our own knowledge, then each of us is failing in our obligation to participate in our democracy as involved, but informed citizens.”
Catch that? According to the folks at PBS, citizens’ obligation to participate in an informed way means to dispense with all critical thinking and blindly trust notorious liars.
Either Mr. Nichols thinks you’re an idiot, or is one himself. I mean, really, this is MK Ultra stuff. The guy is putting you on notice that you’re obliged to confess 2+2=5.
Take a gander at the state health directors handling the COVID-19 hullabaloo. As James Woods says, “Not the greatest optic to have your health director moonlight as a Walking Dead extra.”
In terms of narrative, Stephen Gladwell has made a helpful distinction based upon the locus of authority in the Thriller genre. The four story-types he identifies are:
The Western: A Western takes place in “a world in which there is no law and order, and a man shows up and imposes, personally, law and order on the territory, or community.”
The Eastern: An Eastern is “a story where there is law and order, so there are institutions of justice, but they have been subverted by people from within.”
The Northern: In a Northern, “law and order exists, and law and order is morally righteous, the system works.” (A prime example is, of course, Law and Order.)
The Southern: A Southern is “where the entire apparatus is corrupt, and where the reformer is not an insider but an outsider.”
Gladwell notes men’s native affinity for the Western especially; but also for the Eastern and the Southern relationships to authority.
However, the Northern narrative proves almost exclusively the preoccupation of women. Despite gritty themes, shows like Law & Order have a virtually all female audience. Concurrent with their overall socio-political bent, women seem to have the more pronounced need for confidence in credentialed authorities — something which a moment’s reflection confirms to us all instinctually.
Unfortunately, full examination of why that is exceeds the scope of this discussion. Suffice it to say, the superficial surety offered by system-sanctioned experts seems to be a feminine tendency; or in men, an effeminate one.
Furthermore, expertise is a term which begs the question of its own content because every path to mastery is pursued in and through a given worldview. And in contemporary education, perhaps even more than in other times, he who pays the piper calls the tune. So governments and foundations define expertise in virtually every subject today while the expertise of those educated contrary to the state-sanctioned frame of reference are dismissed as having none.
As you all likely know, citing a credential in place of (or overruling) an argument is not only a logical fallacy, it is prideful and petty. And rule by philosopher kings has proven a taproot of democide and general mayhem at least since the French Revolution.
But the Christian conception of expertise, captive to Revelation and Christ’s Lordship, means we can acknowledge the authority of experts only insofar as it comports with truth. This was a central thrust of the Reformation, after all. Not to mention Orwell’s maxim that “Freedom is the Freedom to say 2+2=4. And if granted, all else follows.”
Though Scientism is the present occasion for the debate, the argument is ancient. If you recall, the pretense of medicinal expertise was first adopted by old Scratch himself as he chided our mother Eve for trusting in God’s revelation as the basis for her health.
As an aside, we might note the medical industry’s signature emblem, the Caduceus, otherwise known as the Staff of Hermes, is knowingly confused by the medical establishment with the Rod of Asclepius.
Where the latter is actually associated with medicine and healing, the former “two-snake caduceus design has ancient and consistent associations with trade, eloquence, trickery, and negotiation.” (ibid.) Which makes sense of its being featured as the phallic girdle of Baphomet in the infamous sculpture touring state capitals presently.
Which begs the question — why would the allopathic medical establishment pass off a symbol of deception in place of a symbol of healing? If not ineptitude on the part of the experts concerning the symbols of their own profession, we’re forced to take it as a matter of malice. But neither option engenders confidence in that system, let alone as regards the apocalyptic prognosis concerning COVID-19; and even less so for their truly catastrophic shutdown orders.
But this effeminate tendency toward magisterial authorities over plenary Revelation is front and center in all arguments contra Protestant methodology: be it PBS, big Pharma, or the Roman magisterium, the claim to unimpeachable institutional authority amounts to Idolatry, and Pantheism; or alternately stated, functional Atheism.
If this idolatrous bent is not kept as a dog at heel, it savages all from within. Which is what we’ve seen across the spectrum even in Presbyterian circles. To our shame, we have proven the Papists right about something — that the Protestant churches have traded one pope for many.
Moresthepity, that perception only further entrenches the Romanist’s delusions concerning his own estate. Far from vindicating his magisterial religion, it all the more condemns it. Because the very dog which has slipped our leash in this capacity has been their master for a millennium.
But we confess, it is heart-wrenching to hear those who profess sola scriptura deny it in practice by subordinating Revelation to experts — essentially, priests of scientific Humanism. And that is precisely what they are doing by closing their churches and affirming the secular narrative.
That’s not to say every doctor or scientist is a pagan priest, just that there is a tendency to it. Especially since the contemporary system holds them up as such.
For goodness’ sake, these are the people making Tik-Tok videos dancing with mock corpses amidst a “pandemic”.
It’s a rare thing indeed for me to quote the likes of CIA shill Bill Buckley, but his opinion of the expert class rings entirely true:
“I would rather be governed by the first 2000 people in the Manhattan phone book than the entire faculty of Harvard.”
Given a free hand, the experts are a far greater danger than the virus, or Mama’s home remedies.