New Age versus Spirituel Activism

by morton_h, the blogger 

New Age. We heard and learned the word 40 years ago.

How much does New Age differ from Old Age? New Age worldview is basically a clone of Christianity and serves as its 'hearse for the apostates'. Christianity was always control tool as much as true faith, and the super-users of these tools seem pretty much satisfied with the result.

There are three kinds of New Age modified Christianity.

A direct translation, an aggravation / overhauling on the inside and a turning upside-down.

In the following, I will use Mark Passio's 10 New Age Deceptions - the Ten Commandments for the New Age'er.

Directly translated:

Everything is good, because everything happens by the will of God

Here Islam sings the hymn too. New Agers just replace God with the fluffy concept of Oneness. When everything is equally good, indifference prevails. When everything is indifferent, nothing is different and nothing has value. Nihilism slipped in through the back door.

You must turn the other cheek
This is unmodified Christianity. It is a verbatim copy of the Roman perversion of the Messianic movement, which certainly did not turn the other cheek - and therefore the rebellious hordes should learn it. And while they were doing it, the rest of the Roman Empire as well should learn it too. This teaching of rebellious and potentially rebellious crowds are what we today call Christianity. The current New Age philosophy is an extension of this philosophy.

This leads directly to

Accept everything, do not resist
It was called Pax Romanorum and 'Peace on earth among people who have God's good pleasure' (Christmas Gospel). Those who did not have God's good pleasure went to Hell, especially in Christianity's first millennium. You may ask yourself, whether God is with a capital W og a small w?

It is one thing to be a true pacifist by refusing to perform military service for an aggressive, despotic state apparatus. It is a highly activist action, and in some communities it will have severe consequences for the passifistic activist. But it is something else to to witness assaults and injustice without saying NO! This kind of false pacifisme is found in New Age.

One can never really know
Solipsism is genuinely Catholic. It is equivalent to the Great Mystery or 'The ways of the Lord are inscrutable'. It should however be said that in all the three Abrahamic religions can confidently ask the priest, pastor, imam and rabbi, for they happen to know what they say can not be known. The New Age'er asks his/her oracle for advice by a channeling of an alien from the fifth dimension and the Pleiades. The common denominator between rabbis, oracles, prophets and channeler and media are: non-verifiable. Believe it or not. When God's intermediaries presents itself, you are not supposed to question. 

You should be afraid of chaos
It is the Christian piety and fear of the devil. One wonders again about whether there has been a mixture or confusion going on? If God is such a hell of a good guy, why must we constantly quiver at the thought? Was it perhaps Prince John, who slipped in while King Lionheart was on holiday with his horse? One can really distill the tender to: Thou Shallt Fear - period! Whether it is death, chaos, al Qaeda, Vladimir Putin, global warming, financial crisis, your neighbor or reptiles in flying kitchen tools is completely irrelevant. There is fear in you cup - suck it up!

The aggravation:
Ignore the negative, go into the light
This is a New Age worsening of Christianitys '.. and deliver us from evil' - 'Depart, Satan!'. New Age'ere afraid of the dark. It is spiritually incorrect to deal with spiritual dirt. I have met several of these - excuse me - especially women in white angle gowns, always with a crystal pendant necklace and distant look having one orgiastic experience after another in guided meditation sessions. They almost battle to outdo each other in picturesque descriptions of their total out-of-body experience 5 minutes ago, while their side-woman bakes at an even more spectacular version. It is a kind of holy spirit harem where the concubines elbows his way to first place in the spiritual sultan's attention. And I know what I'm talking about, because I've had my New Age period.

Do they actually have these experiences, or are they merely types, for whom imagination is uncontrollable? They do have an erotic experience, though. Dare we say spiritual masturbation? It is a kind of updated neo-pietism. See the picture of the female Spanish saint, Theresa of Avilla for you (google it if necessary). Does she have sex, or is she in devotion? A form of sado-masochistic disorder-eroticism. Rejoice, thou Bride of Christ.

Look into the light and be blinded. Did you think you were going to enlightened?

Never get angry. Anger is a forbidden feeling
It is an extension of the concept of forgiveness and 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself'. Forgiveness is the opposite of revenge. The Romans were shit scared of revenge, for revenge was an integral part of both Germanic and the Judean tribes outlook and basically: all the peoples they had subjugated. For neo-Romans, the Christians, it was paganism in a nutshell. Have you committed misdeeds, you put your ass smack in height and has exposed itself for revenge. Forgiveness was hogwash in the Old World. The romans saw the fall of the Empire coming and had very much need of forgiveness for their destruction and plundering of cultures. A so aggressive approach as the Roman was only possible for a certain period, for it was enormously costly. Just ask neo-Romans aka the Americans about what it costs to maintain a giant army, a corrupt state apparatus, a totally branched listen-and-subvert set and a feet of clay mythology through a 24/7/365 campaign apparatus.

For New Age anger is sinful feeling. They practice darkness denial. The warrior is not welcome in their universe. Could it be, that they compensate for the rulers of the world being so very much into dark occultism? Thou Shallt Not See what is going on in the dark.

It leads directly to: 

The truth does not need to be defended
It is also a deterioration of a Christian thought. Christians were at least willing to stand up for their beliefs, even with their lives. New Age'ers just do a jellyfish. I had a meeting with one of New Age gurus, Johan Oldenkamp and one of his female 'students' and admirers - there was harem again - where I reactionary and spontaneously was called a fanatic, then later to be addressed to 'a warrior' (warrior). But it was only after the guru had to admit that anger was not an illegitimate feeling but an impetus for action. The guru came in a dilemma and was very 'human' - today this word strangely enough is a synonym for 'flawed', probably due to the Christian 'we are all sinners' - since he had started his three-day seminar with proclaiming that he was not a guru and he was opposed to New Age. And then sits one of his female admirers and says Fukushima leak is irrelevant for Nature heals it again. OK, also the Americans when they can no longer eat fish caught in the Pacific Ocean, and where their authorities now completely omits to record and publish measurements on radioactive content in foods. Tell that to the people in remote world where the Americans and NATO have used smart bombs with depleted uranium and where women now give birth to 'funny' children while dying of cancer. Just tell them that 'mind is over matter'. Tell that to all the victims of Chernobyl ... 'Well, there are only 63 who have died ..' the woman replied. NO, you un-educated moron! 2000 Russian reports have been done on the consequences and an American newspaper last year quoted a translated summary: 1 million dead since the accident!

New Age contains a horrid, good portion cowardice and stupidity
To be fair, Johan Oldenkamp in principle recants guru status. He tried, but he failed. It was in this case as most other student needs a guru, the archetype 'Big Daddy' that struck through. See me Daddy, hear me Daddy, love me Daddy!

Turning upside down:
Suffering should be avoided, we must feel good all the time

According to Christianity you suffer. You are sinful, guilty, and you should fear. Next, you must confess your guilt and your sins so that you can be saved from you sins. This whole life is a valley of tears, but in life after death you either smoke the bowels of Hell or go to Heaven if you have piety. The more you have suffered, the greater the chance for a place in the first class compartment on the heavenly train.

In New Age worldview be suffering avoided at all costs. This is done by denying all suffering, darkness, abuse, enslavement, mutilation and death and just 'go into the light'. Think positively, avoid negative thoughts. Avoid attachment (attachment), a simplified representation of a Buddhist concept.
If there is anything that makes you disgusted look the other way. If you see suffering, it is because of bad karma, meaning: it's their own fault and certainly not due to abusive powers creating a whole lot of un-necessary suffering.

The Law of Attraction in diluted form
The Law of Attraction has become the new big New Age concept, especially after the movie 'The Secret'. You create your own reality, you get what you give meaning you get all you want as long as you wish it well enough. Think only positive, and the universe will besmile you with good fortune.
There is a deeper core of truth hidden in the concept, but in New Age version, it easily turns into self delusion.

It is only in the worst kind of Catholic medieval theology, this makes sense. Blessings can not be earned through good deeds as a form of investment. You should act out of goodness, if you are a person of conscience, but you should do it with no claim to profits. So: 'Dear God, if I will help 15 old ladies across the street and donate all my money to the Church, so you have to promise that I will not go to Hell?' It does not play that way. And, by the way God responds: 'You are in Hell!'

I should be fair to say that many of the favorite topics of New Age can be particularly interesting. I grind of course all with the same brush and stereotypes the lot. Oversimplification promotes understanding. It just seems as if they have forgotten to bring the bag of salt, as they can sprinkle on their excesses. They simply lack humor. And humor is means self-criticism.

Weaponized anthropology 

C. G. Jung said, Christianity had failed to renew its myth. Was he quite right in his assertion?

I would say that Jung was right. But New Age was in a way a kind of mythological renewal. Or rather: it looked alike. It was a patchwork of everything exotic and unconventional for a westerner. It poured old and strange traditions into the same pot, a little bit of that and a little bit of a lot. Some could go deep into the exotic and end up as experts yogis, buddhists, organic farming, which could be very interesting. But for most who ran along it was just flirtation, a surface, a series of attitudes.

In retrospect, we know that there was something quite different under the radar. The phenomenon was studied. The New Age movement was exposed to weaponized anthropology, as with all mass movements. When masses move there will be wolves and shepherds in the neighbourhood. New Age arose out of a time with intense activity from the American secret services to detach a real activist movement against the US war in Vietnam. CIA infiltrated all of the protest movement and pumped drugs into the social space. It was ironically the same drugs, which were the main reason for US starting a war in the Golden Triangle, that now flooded the domestic market. The Anglo-Saxon two-headed Impere had a centuries-old practice of poisoning entire nations with opium. First of all the Empire states, that is their wealthy elite, made an humugous fortune - and still do with the CIA and NATO presence in Afghanistan - and secondly drugs are weapons of mass destruction that only destroy the software / the human beings and not the hardware / the material ressources. The weapon can be used to frame and paralyze nations out there and own your people back there.

At the same time arrived the synthetic designer drugs. Who invented LSD? Again we see the CIA fingerprints. In their infamous - and never finished - great mind-fucker project, MK-Ultra, they studied diligently how both soldiers and civilians responded. Soon the entire music industry and its consumers swam with LSD and heroin. CIA handlers poured it out at Grateful Dead concerts. Legendary musicians died either form an overdose (Joplin, Morrison, Hendrix + a few hundred others) or were taken out because they had discovered what was happening and began to comment on it (Lennon, Marley). Drug users and addicts do not have a long life.

We saw quite clearly the result in the '70s of a PSYOP (psychological operation). In the beginning there was a real anti-war movement with a lot of substance, and there was a genuine anger against the government's misdeeds. After the infiltration and the anthropological attack vaporized movement, and its members began to misbehave with psychedelia: drugs, music, porn, Buddhist Hinduist-flirtations, narcissism ... Those who did not gave up, because you can not talk politics with people on the acid and dope. Or people stoned on Krishna and Buddha. Or who had resigned from the society, as it was called, and cultivated eco beetroots and played shaman drum while they made crystal healing and free sex in the collective. Gone was the anti-war movement and al indignation against the Empire went up in funny hats and coloured spectacles. Hippie culture was one of the 20th century's most effective CIA operations and no one discovered the underlying operation before it was too late. 

Spiritual activism
It is far from obvious that spirituality and false passifism / New Age is the same. Spirituality is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, this sword in hand on the right person can be liberating. In the hands of a person without the manual for the sword is opium or stesolid. I'd be reluctant to use the term 'opium of the people', since communism was the most violent peoples opium itself in the 20th century. It sold itself as liberating but in reality was massively enslaving.

Two figures from the Indian spiritual tradition on the other hand, Sri Aurobindo and Mahatma Gandhi, was both spiritual political activists. Satyagraha is truth seeking, non violent civil disobedience, it is not being passive. Passiveness is obedience. It is totally wrong to call Gandhi for a passifist, he was a non-violent activist. Gandhi's life and philosophy is fairly well known in the West, Aurobindo less.






The activist in his old days 

Aurobindo was deeply involved in the Indian nationalist movement under the imperial yoke. Today our updated British post-empire aka the Anglo-Saxon double empire is very fond of the word terrorism, and we should make ourselves clear that both of these deeply spiritual men undoubtedly would be called terrorists. As a basic rule the terrorist state always names its opponents as terrorists. But both practiced political and social resistance without terror. Perhaps this is why they and the Indian nationalist movement came out victorious against the mighty Empire. Both had understood the enormous force that can be mobilized with a grounded spirituality that was understood by people.

Aurobindo writes in 1903 a pamphlet called Bhavani Mandir designed to guide in the revolutionary struggle. It is quite a different revolutionary tone, we find here than in contemporary communist lingo in the West:

'Is it love, enthusiasm, Bhakthi that is wanting? These are ingrained in the Indian nature, but in the absence of Shakthi we cannot concentrate, we cannot direct...Bhakthi is the leaping flame, Shakthi is the fuel. If the fuel is scanty, how long can the flame endure?...Many of us, utterly overcome by Tamas, the dark and heavy demon of inertia, are saying nowadays that it is impossible, that India is decayed, bloodless and lifeless, too weak ever to recover. It is a foolish and idle saying. No man or nation need perish unless he deliberately chooses extinction... For what is a nation?...It is not a piece of earth, nor a figure of speech, nor a fiction of the mind. It is a mighty Shakthi composed of all the millions of units that make up the nation.'

A little glossary:Tamas is one of the three gunas, the universal life forces: Tamas, Rajas and Sattva. They are parallels to the Taoist Yin, Yang and Tao - with a twist. Tamas is darkness, inertia, inactivity and materialism, the introvert / astringent. Rajas is energy, action, change and movement, the extrovert / expanding. Sattva / Dao is balance, harmony, joy and intelligence.
Shakthi is a parallel to the Daoist primordial chi. It is the universe's fundamental energy and dynamic force.
Bhakthi is devotion.

Aurobindo gives his country men and the nationalist movement a kick in the ass with terminology that is rooted in the Vedic understanding of the world. The essence we can find in the Bhagavad Gita, where the archer Arjuna is in a dilemma while he sees the two armies drawn up. In his dialogue with Krishna, he learns to understand why he should not refrain from playing a role in this struggle.

When the British came to India, they were especially excited about the Indian caste system. They saw a direct parallel to feudalism and the British class system, and it became part of their administration of the Imperial Crown Jewel, India. The nationalists stroke of genius was to go deeper than the caste system, which over time had degenerated. In the distant past, it has given full meaning, but in 20th century India, it was just a repressive apparatus.

Aurobindo writes in a letter to his wife about his three forms of 'madness'. The first is to give it back to the universe, you you do not need. The other is his desire to speak directly with God, which he knows is possible, but only with complete dedication. That he did in the second part of his life after his time as a political activist.

The third madness is the concept of India as the great mother:

'My third madness is with regard to Mother India. I look upon India as my Mother, I am devoted to her, I worship her. If somebody mounts on the chest of his mother and to drink her blood, what does her son do? Does he sit down for meals and settle down with a calm and a quiet mind to enjoy life with his wife and children? Or does he run to the succour of his suffering mother?' 

He chose the latter. And was thrown in jail for it.
Aurobindo engagement with the militantmovement


This is usually a stupid move of the Empire, for it simply creates a martyrdom and gives the oppressed momentum. It was, therefore, that the British colonial chose to fight back through the Indian police, who were trained by them. In this way they sought to avoid 'we-they' confrontation. But it failed. That is also why the Empire our time uses terrorist groups like al Qaeda and ISIL to do their dirty work, as was the practice in the Empire's early days to take advantage of 'privateers', pirates for plunder and murder, so the crown was not defiled and had to explain her crimes. Today's Empire do not want 'boots on the ground', as they have to explain the flow of body bags to their own people, AND why it was even necessary to attack and destroy other nations.

New Age versus spirituel aktivisme

New Age. Den nye tidsalder. Vi lærte ordet for 40 år siden. 

Hvor meget adskiller egentlig New Age fra Old Age? New Age-verdensbilledet er stort set en klon af kristendommen og fungerer som dets 'ligvogn for frafaldne'. Kristendommen var altid lige som meget kontrolredskab som den rette tro, og superbrugerne af disse redskaber, det nye som det gamle, virker stort set tilfredse med resultatet.

Der er tre slags New Age-versioner af kristendommen

En direkte oversættelse, en forværring / en overhaling indenom og en bagvending.
I det følgende tager jeg udgangspunkt i Mark Passio's 10 New Age-bedrag (deceptions). Altså de Ti Bud for New Age'eren.  

Direkte oversat:
Alt er lige godt, for alt sker efter Guds vilje
Her synger Islam med på salmen. Newagerne erstatter bare Gud med Oneness. Når alt er lige godt, hersker ligegyldigheden. Når alt er ligegyldigt, er intet gyldigt. Nihilismen har sneget sig ind ad bagdøren.

Du skal vende den anden kind til
Det er umodificeret kristendom. Det er en ordret kopi af den romerske bagvending af den messianske bevægelse, der bestemt ikke vendte den anden kind til - og netop derfor skulle de oprørske horder lære det. Og mens man var i gang, kunne resten af Romerriget ligeså godt lære det. Denne belæring af oprørske og potentielt oprørske menneskemængder er, hvad vi i dag kalder for kristendom. I gængs New Age-filosofi glider den rent videre.

Det fører direkte videre til:
Accepter alting, gør aldrig modstand
Det hed Pax Romanorum og Fred på jorden blandt mennesker, der har guds velbehag (Juleeangeliet). De, der ikke havde guds velbehag, røg som bekendt ad helvede til, især i kristendommens første årtusind. Det er også her, man kunne begynde at spørge sig selv, om gud mon skal staves med lille eller med Stort.

En ting er at være ægte pacifist ved at nægte at gøre militærtjeneste for et aggressivt, despotisk statsapparat. Det er en særdeles aktivistisk handling, og i visse samfund får det alvorlige konsekvenser for den passifistiske aktivist. Noget andet er stiltiende at være vidne til overgreb uden at sige højlydt NEJ! Det er denne falske pacifisme, som findes i New Age. 

Man kan aldrig rigtig vide
Solipsismen er ærkekatolsk. Her hedder det bare Mysteriet eller 'Herrens veje er uransagelige'. Det skal dog lige siges, at man i alle de tre abrahamiske religioner trygt kan spørge pateren, præsten, imamen og rabbien, for de ved dét, de siger ikke kan vides. New Age'eren spørger sit orakel til råds, der ved det hele fra en kanalisering af et rumvæsen fra 5. dimension og Plejaderne. Fællesnævneren mellem rabbinere, orakler, profeter og og kanaliserende medier er: ikke-verificerbart. Tro det eller ej. Når Guds mellemhandlere byder sig til, er du på Herrens Mark. 

Du skal være bange for kaos
Det er det kristne Gudfrygtighed og frygten for Djævelen. Man spekulerer igen over, hvorvidt der er sket en sammenblanding eller forveksling her? Hvis Gud er så fandens god, hvorfor skal vi så konstant bævre ved tanken? Var det måske prins John, der smuttede ind, mens kong Løvehjerte var på ferie med hest? Man kan egentlig destillere budet til: Du skal frygte, Basta! Om det så er døden, kaos, al Qaeda, Vladimir Putin, global opvarmning, finanskrisen, din nabo eller reptiler i flyvende køkkenudstyr er fuldstændig underordnet.

Overhaling indenom:
Ignorer det negative, gå ind i lyset
Her er New Age en forværring af kristendommens '.. og fri os fra det onde' - 'vig bort, Satan!'. New Age'ere er nærmest mørkerædde. Det er spirituelt ukorrekt at beskæftige sig med spirituelt snavs. Jeg har mødt adskillige af disse - undskyld mig - især kvinder, der går i hvide bomuldsgevandter, altid med et krystal-halssmykke og fjernt blik, som får den ene orgiastiske oplevelse efter den anden i guidede meditations-seancer. De kæmper nærmest for at overgå hinanden i maleriske beskrivelser af deres totale ud-af-kroppen-oplevelse for 5 minutter siden, mens side-kvinden småsurt bager på en endnu vildere version, når det er hendes tur. Det er en slags helligåndens harem, hvor konkubinerne albuer sig frem til førstepladsen hos den åndelige sultans bevågenhed. Og jeg ved, hvad jeg taler om, for jeg har haft min New Age-periode.

Har de reelt disse oplevelser, eller er de blot typer, for hvem fantasien er ukontrollerbar? De har i hvert fald en erotisk oplevelse. Tør vi sige spirituel onani? Det er en form for opdateret neo-pietisme. Se billedet af den kvindelige spanske helgen, Theresa af Avilla for jer (google det om nødvendigt). Har hun sex, eller er hun salvelsesfuld? En form for sado-masochistisk lidelses-erotik. Fryd dig, du Kristi brud.

Du må aldrig blive vred. Vrede er en forbudt følelse
Det ligger i forlængelse af tilgivelsesbegrebet og 'Du skal elske din næste som dig selv'. Tilgivelse er det modsatte af hævn. Romerne var hunderædde for hævn, for hævn var en integral del af både germanske og de judæiske stammers livssyn eller for at generalisere: alle de folkeslag, de havde underkuet. For neo-romerne, de kristne, var det hedenskab i en nøddeskal. Har man begået udåd, lægger man sin røv i klaskehøjde og har blottet sig for hævn. Tilgivelse var noget pladder i den gamle verden. Romerne forudså tilbageslaget i rigets forfald og havde vældig meget brug for tilgivelse. En så aggressiv fremfærd som den romerske var kun mulig i en vis periode, for den var enormt ressourcekrævende. Spørg blot neo-romerne aka amerikanerne om, hvad det koster at opretholde en gigant-hær, et korrupt statsapparat, et total-forgrenet lytte-og-subversions-apparat og en mytologi på lerfødder via et 24/7/365 kampagne-apparat.
For New Age'erne er vrede en syndig følelse. De praktiserer mørke-fornægtelse. Krigeren er ikke velkommen i deres univers.

Det fører direkte til:
Sandheden behøver ikke at blive forsvaret
Det er ligeledes en forringelse af kristendommen. Kristne var i det mindste villige til at gå i brechen for deres tro, også med livet som indsats. New Age'erne gopler bare helt ud. Jeg havde et møde med en af New Age guruerne, Johan Oldenkamp og en af hans kvindelige 'elever' og beundrere - der var haremet igen - hvor jeg reaktionært og spontant bliver kaldt en fanatiker, for så senere at blive rettet til 'en kriger' (warrior). Men det var først efter at guruen måtte indrømme, at vrede ikke var en illegitim følelse med et afsæt for handling. Guruen kom i et dilemma og blev meget 'menneskelig' - i dag er ordet sjovt nok blevet til et synomym for 'fejlbehæftet' - da han havde startet sit 3-dages-seminar med at proklamere, at han ikke var en guru og at New Age var ham imod. Og så sidder en af hans kvindelige beundrere og siger, Fukushima-lækken er uden betydning, for naturen helbreder det igen. OK, sig også det til amerikanerne, når de ikke længere kan spise fisk fanget i Stillehavet, og hvor deres myndigheder nu helt udelader at registrere og publicere målinger om radioaktivt indhold i fødevarer. Sig det til befolkningerne i udkantsverden, hvor amerikanerne og NATO har brugt smart bombs med afberiget uran, og hvor kvinderne nu føder sjove børn og selv dør af cancer. Sig det til samtlige ofre for Tjernobyl ...'Jamen der er kun 63, der er døde ..' svarede konen. NEJ! der er lavet 2000 russiske rapporter om følgerne, hvor en amerikansk avis citerede et oversat sammendrag: 1 million døde siden ulykken!

New Age indeholder en fæl, god portion fejhed og dumhed
Det skal retfærdigvis siges, at Johan Oldenkamp i princippet fraskrev sig guru-status. Han prøvede, men det lykkedes ham ikke. Det var i denne sag som de fleste andre elevens behov for en guru, arketypen 'Big Daddy', der slog igennem. Se mig Far, hør mig Far, elsk mig Far!

Bagvending:
Lidelse skal undgås, vi skal føle os godt tilpas hele tidenIfølge kristendommen lider du. Du er syndig, skyldig, og du skal frygte. Dernæst skal du bekende din skyld og dine synder, så du kan blive frelst fra disse. Hele dette liv er en tårernes dal, og i det næste liv efter døden ryger du enten lukt i Helvede eller kommer i Himlen, hvis du har være from. Jo mere du har lidt, jo større chance for en plads på 1. klasse i toget.
I New Age-verdensbilledet skal lidelse for enhver pris undgås. Det gøres ved at benægte lidelse, mørke, misbrug, underkuelse, død og lemlæstelse og 'gå ind i lyset'. Tænk positivt, undgå negative tanker. Undgå tilknytning (attachment), en forsimpling af et buddhistisk koncept.
Hvis der er noget, der får dig til at væmmes, se den anden vej. Hvis du ser lidelse, så skyldes den dårlig karma. Den skyldes i hvert fald ikke din mangel på medfølelse.

Tiltrækningens lov i udvandet form
Law of Attraction er blevet det nye store New Age-begreb, især efter filmen 'The Secret'. Du skaber selv din virkelighed, du får, hvad du giver, du opnår, hvad du ønsker, blot du ønsker det godt nok. Tænk kun positivt, og universet og forsynet vil tilsmile dig med gode gaver.
Der er en dyb kerne af sandhed gemt i konceptet, men i New Age-versionen bliver det meget nemt til en gang selvbedrag.
Det er kun i den værste form for katolsk middelalder-teologi, at dette giver mening. Man kan ikke gøre sig fortjent via gode gerninger som en form for investering. Man handler ud fra godhed, hvis man er et menneske med samvittighed, men man gør det uden krav på fortjeneste. Altså: 'Kære Gud, hvis jeg nu hjælper 15 gamle damer over gaden og forærer alle mine penge til Kirken, så må du love, at jeg ikke kommer i Helvede?' Den spiller ikke.


Det skal dog igen retfærdigvis siges, at mange af deres favorit-emner er særdeles interessante. Jeg skærer selvfølgelig alle over én kam her og stereotypéer dem. Forsimpling fremmer forståelsen. Det virker bare, som om de har glemt den dér pose salt, som de kan strø ud på deres udskejelser. De mangler simpelthen humor. Og humor er selvdistance og selvkritik.

Det antropologiske våben 
C.G. Jung sagde: Kristendommen har forsømt at forny sin myte. Han havde ret, men havde han helt ret i sin påstand?

Jeg vil sige, at Jung havde ret. Men New Age var på sin vis en form for mytologisk fornyelse. Eller rettere: det lignede. Det var et patchwork af alt, der var eksotisk og utraditionelt for en vesterlænding. Man rørte uddrag gamle og fremmede traditioner ned i samme gryde, en lille smule af det og en lille smule af en masse andet. Enkelte kunne gå dybt ned i det eksotiske og ende op som eksperter yoga, buddhisme, økologisk landbrug, hvilket kunne være særdeles interessant. Men det meste forblev en flirt, en overflade, en serie attituder.

Set i bakspejlet ved vi, at der foregik noget ganske andet under radaren. Fænomenet blev studeret. New Age-bevægelsen blev udsat for weaponized anthropology, som man gjorde med alle massebevægelser. Når menneskemasser rykker på sig, holder ulve og fårehyrder til i nærheden. New Age udsprang af en tid med heftig aktivitet fra det amerikanske efterretningsvæsens side for at afmontere en egentlig aktivistisk bevægelse mod USA's krig i Vietnam. CIA infiltrerede hele protestbevægelsen og pumpede drugs ud i det sociale rum. Det var ironisk nok de samme drugs, som var hovedårsagen til, at USA absolut måtte starte en krig i Den Gyldne Trekant og som nu oversvømmede det hjemlige marked. Det angelsaksiske to-hovedede Imperium havde en århundreder gammel praksis med at forgifte hele nationer med opium. For det første tjente de kassen - og det gør CIA og NATO stadigvæk i Afghanistan - og for det andet er drugs et masseødelæggelsesvåben, der kun ødelægger softwaren / mennesket og ikke hardwaren. Våbnet kan bruges til at ramme og lamme nationers befolkning derude og egen befolkning derinde.

Samtidig ankom de syntetiske designerdrugs. Hvem udviklede LSD? Igen ser vi CIA fingeraftryk. I deres berygtede - og aldrig afsluttede - store mind-fucker-projekt MK-Ultra, studerede man flittigt, hvordan både soldater og civile reagerede. Hvad kunne man ikke få folk til at gøre? Hele musikindustrien svømmede snart med LSD og heroin. CIA-handlere delte det ud ved Grateful Dead-koncerter. Legendariske musikere døde på stribe enten af en overdosis (Joplin, Morrisson, Hendrix + et par hundrede andre), eller fordi enkelte af dem havde opdaget, hvad der foregik og begyndte at udtale sig om det (Lennon, Marley). Bevægelsen masseproducerede narkomaner, og narkomaner har ikke et langt liv.

Vi så ganske tydeligt resultatet i 70'erne af en PSYOP (psykologisk operation). I starten var der en reel anti-krigs-bevægelse hvor der blev talt substans, og hvor der var reel vrede mod regeringens ugerninger. Efter infiltrationen og det antropologiske angreb fordampede bevægelsen, og dens medlemmer begyndte af skeje ud med psychedelia: stoffer, musik, porno, buddhist-hinduist-flirten, narcissisme ... Dem der ikke skejede ud opgav ævret, for man kan ikke tale politik med folk, der er på syre og dope. Eller som stener med Krishna og Buddha. Eller som har meldt sig ud af samfundet, som det hed, og dyrkede økogullerødder og spillede på shamantromme mens de lavede krystalhealing og fri sex i kollektivet. Væk var anti-krigs-bevægelsen og al indignation mod Imperiet gik op i hat og briller. Hippiekulturen var en af det 20 århundredes mest effektive CIA-operationer og ingen opdagede operationen, før det var for sent.

Spirituel aktivisme 
Det er langt fra en selvfølge, at spiritualitet og falsk passifisme / New Age er det samme. Spiritualitet er et tveægget sværd. På den ene side kan sværdet i hånden på den rette være frigørende. I hånden på den forkerte eller personen uden manual til sværdet er det opium eller stesolid. Jeg vægrer mig ved at bruge udtrykket 'opium for folket', da kommunismen var det heftigste folke-opium i det 20. århundrede, der solgte sig selv som frigørende men i realiteten var massivt slavebindende.

To skikkelser fra den indiske spirituelle tradition derimod, Sri Aurobindo og Mahatma Gandhi, var begge spirituelle politiske aktivister. Gandhis liv og filosofi er ret kendt i vesten, Aurobindos i mindre grad.Aurobindo var dybt involveret i den indiske nationalistbevægelse under det britiske imperiale åg. I tider, vor det opdaterede britiske post-imperium aka det angelsaksiske dobbeltimperium slynger om sig med ordet terrorisme, bør vi gøre os klart, at begge disse dybt spirituelle mænd uden tvivl ville blive kaldt for terrorister. Som grundregel kalder terrorstaten altid sine modstandere for terrorister. Men begge praktiserede politisk-social modstand uden terror. Måske netop derfor vandt de og den indiske nationalistbevægelse over det overmægtige Imperium. Begge havde forstået den enorme kraft, der kan mobiliseres med et grundfæstet spirituelt afsæt.

Aurobindo skriver i 1903 en pamflet kaldet Bhavani Mandir beregnet på at træne i revolutionær kamp. Det er en ganske anden tone, vi finder her, en de samtidige kommunistiske i vesten:

'Er der kærlighed, entusiasme, Bhakthi, der er brug for? Disse er integreret i den indiske folkesjæl (nature), men i fraværet af Shakthi kan vi ikke koncentrere, vi har ingen retning ... Bhakthi er den springende flamme, Shakthi er brændstoffet. Hvis der er mangel på brændstof, hvor længe kan flammen da brænde? Mange af os, der er overmandet af Tamas, den mørke og tunge inertiens dæmon, siger i dag, at det er umuligt, at Indien er forfaldet, blodfattig og livløs, for svag til at komme sig. Det er tåbelig og unyttig tale. Intet menneske og ingen nation behøve at forgå, medmindre han selv vælger at lade sig udrydde. For hvad er en nation?...Det er ikke et stykke jord, det er ikke en tale-floskel ejheller en fiktion i sindet. Det er en mægtig Shakthi sammensat af millioner af enheder, der skaber en nation.'

Lidt ordforklaring: 
Tamas er den ene af de tre gunaer, de universelle livskræfter: Tamas, Rajas og Sattva. De er paralleller til det daoistiske Yin, Yang og Dao - with a twist. Tamas er mørke, inerti, inaktivitet og materialisme, det indadvendte/sammentrækkende. Rajas er energi, handling, forandring og bevægelse, det udadvendte/udvidende. Sattva/Dao er balance, harmoni, glæde og intelligens.

Shakthi er en parallel til det daoistiske chi (primordial chi). Det er universets grundlæggende energi og dynamiske kraft.

Bhakthi er hengivelse.

Aurobindo giver sine landsmænd og den nationalistiske bevægelse et spark i røven med terminologi, som er rodfæstet i den vediske verdensforståelse. Essensen findes i Bhagavad Gita, hvor bueskytten Arjuna befinder sig i et dilemma mens han ser de to hære opstillet. I sin dialog med Krishna lærer han at forstå, hvorfor han ikke skal afstå fra at spille en rolle i denne kamp.

Da briterne kom til Indien, var de især begejstrede for det indiske kastevæsen. Her så de en direkte parallel til feudalismen og det britiske klassesamfund, og det blev en del af deres administration af Imperiets Kronjuvel. Nationalisternes genistreg bestod i at stikke spaden dybere ned end det kastevæsen, der over tid var degenereret. I en fjern fortid har det givet fuld mening, men i det 20. århundredes Indien var det blot et undertrykkende apparat.

Aurobindo skriver i et brev til sin kone om sine tre former for 'galskab'. Den første består i at give det tilbage til universet, man ikke har brug for. Den anden er hans ønske om at tale direkte med Gud, hvilken han ved kan lade sig gøre, men kun med fuldstændig dedikation. Det brugte han den anden del af sit liv til efter sin tid som politisk aktivist.

Den tredje galskab er begrebet om Indien som den store moder:

'Jeg betragter Indien som min moder. Jeg er hende hengiven (devoted). Jeg tilbeder hende. Hvis nogen sætter sig på hendes bryst og drikker af hendes blod, hvad gør hendes søn da? Vælger han i ro og mag at indtage et måltid, sætter han sig ned med stille sind for at nyde livet med sin kone og børn? Eller iler han for at hjælpe sin lidende moder?'

Han valgte at ile. Og blev smidt i fængsel for det.
Aurobindos involvement with the militant movement
Det kommer der som regel ikke noget godt ud af for Imperiet, for det skaber blot et martyrium og giver de undertrykte vind i sejlene. Det var derfor, at den britiske kolonimagt valgte at slå igen via det indiske politi, der var trænet af dem. På denne måde søgte de at undgå 'vi og dem' konfrontationen. Det lykkedes ikke. Det er også derfor vor tids Imperium benytter sig af terrorgrupper som al Qaeda og ISIL til at lave deres beskidte arbejde, ligesom det var praksis i Imperiets tidlige dage at benytte sig af 'privateers', pirater til at plyndre og myrde, så kronen ikke blev besudlet og blev nødt til at forklare sine ugerninger. Nutidens Imperium ønsker ikke 'boots on the ground', for så skal de forklare strømmen af body-bags overfor deres egen befolkning - OG hvorfor det overhovedet var nødvendigt at overfalde og ødelægge andre nationer.