[Morgoth discusses the parallels between modern liberalism, the Left, with its focus on rationalising freedom from innate morality and nature, and Milton’s Paradise Lost, an epic poem that tells the story of Lucifer’s rebellion in heaven and the becoming of Satan.
Paradise Lost and
the Birth of the Left
Nov 12, 2021
Click here for the video:
Published on Nov 12, 2021
Paradise Lost And The Birth Of The Left
Nov 12, 2021
The audio book mentioned:
Buy me a pint here:
Buy me a coffee
Thanks to Theberton for the intros and outros
Thanks to Theberton for the intros and outros
[Intro music and imagery by Theberton.]
Well, hello again there folks.
So I recently saw this post going around by a Left-wing activist. And I thought it says so much. And I was just thinking, how did we arrive here? How did we arrive in these mountains of madness? How did it come that we are now staring straight into the abyss, here? And they have brought us here as well. And I’m not going to leave this up on the screen for too long, because it makes me feel sick!
But let’s just like have a look at what he said here. And we’ll try and answer the question of how we got here:
“Because I’ve got a bunch of angry Right-wing reactionaries saying being a pedophile is wrong and not natural. I’m simply asking they back up their claims. Thus far, not a single one can.”
And so he’s asking for a peer-reviewed study as to why paedophilia is unnatural. Now the first thing here, like let’s just dispense with the sophistry. He’s neglected any kind of moral framework. He’s making an appeal to science. Like a scientific study as to why paedophilia is wrong, because he knows morally speaking he doesn’t have a leg to stand on. And, in fact, he wouldn’t even accept that there is such a thing as morality, because he’s a pure materialist. And this is kind of like where we are. This is where they’ve brought us.
I mean, on other issues, of course, which are more close to their heart, they are the most hyper moral people you will ever come across! But when it’s about being degenerate, when it’s about sending civilization into darkness and into hell, you’ll find all of a sudden they make an appeal to “scientific realism” and even here, he’s wrong.
Because the simple fact is, and this is why I don’t like this subject. But the simple fact is children can’t breed. And it’s not healthy for them to have sex. There’s reasons why we have these blocks. There’s reasons why civilizations set these things up.
But what I think’s very interesting to explore is why the Left don’t seem to have any kind of moral framework. And leaving aside the hypocrisy. Leaving aside that on other issues they are the most hyper-moral clique that you could ever come across. Let’s just take this on face value, because it is, in my view, the driving force of their entire world view, their entire ideology.
So I’ve recently been reading Paradise Lost, John Milton’s great epic poem. And so Paradise Lost is, by the way, there’s also an amazing audiobook on YouTube where the Emperor from Star Wars, Ian McDiarmid, does the role of the devil.
Because, if you are not very familiar with Paradise Lost – I’m sure many people have heard of it – it’s an epic poem that tells the story of Lucifer’s rebellion in heaven. And then the war in heaven and how he and his lieutenants and around about a third of all of the angels in heaven were thrown out! They were defeated and mauled, and thrown out of heaven, to cast down into the abyss!
And one of the things that really jumps out at you is the character of Satan. Which over the centuries – it was written in 1690, I think, so just kind of beyond before the onset of the Enlightenment. And one of the things that jumps out at you when you’re reading Paradise Lost is Satan. And, as I said, been controversial over the years how Milton depicted him. And there’s a lot of discussion around it.
But Satan, in Paradise Lost, he isn’t just kind of this seething demon that wants to roast people over a fire, and do all of these depraved and horrible acts! Satan, you could almost call him an “anti-hero”, or some people would even say the “hero” of Paradise Lost. Which is why there’s so much sort of discussion about it.
But he’s very charismatic. And he’s a leader of his rogue captains. People like Belial, and Moloch, and Mammon. He’s also prone to making these big, very articulate, grandstanding, speeches in front of his minions, and raging against God. And this, I think, touches on something quite profound. Because you have to ask yourself what is Satan’s main problem here? What is his main bone of contention with God?
And what he has a problem with, beginning right from the start, in heaven is the authoritarian nature of heaven and God. Satan questions how it can be good if they aren’t free. He will say like:
“Why is it that we are in this perfect God-created heaven? And yet we don’t even have individual freedom! We don’t have liberty!”
We live under what he calls “the tyranny of heaven”. And so from Satan’s perspective, and he says it throughout all of the speeches that he makes:
“God is something of a tyrant! God is like the big daddy who you need to have liberty from! You can’t express yourself under the tyranny of heaven! Under the authoritarianism of God!”
And so what we find is that Satan is actually a man of the intellect. Which is how it kind of segues into the Enlightenment, which of which was coming at that time.
Because then what you can do is replace that with God, with the King, or with religion in general. God is a religion, or even the state. You’ll see these things kind of repeating again, and again. And they become this oppressive force which you need to be liberated from.
And, in my opinion, this is the essence of the Left. This is where the Left is “birthed”, if you like, in this idea of all things being oppressive. Because today when we think of the Woke Left. And then some of it just seems downright ridiculous.
But there’s a clear line there which goes all the way back to when we were much more religious. And an example of that would be something like the French Revolution. So in the French Revolution, the reason we have a Right and the Left is because the revolutionaries of the Left wanted to destroy the old order, the traditional order, which was the peasant to the aristocracy to the King and then up towards God, and the great chain of being.
They wanted to annihilate all of that, because they thought that it was oppressive. And then in the National Assembly, after the French Revolution, the Left, the revolutionaries sat on the Left side of the chamber, and the Right representing, defending tradition, sat on the Right side, the conservative side. But it would be genuinely conservative.
And this is how we got the Left and the Right.
And when you look at some of the thinkers of the time, you look at some people like Rousseau, where:
“Man is born free, but everywhere he’s in chains!”
It kind of brings back again Satan’s speeches in Paradise Lost. Except this time it’s the King and the Church, which is the oppressive force.
And so once you’ve abolished the, let’s say, the heavenly order, the great chain of being, of God, to King, the traditional order, the question then comes, … Because then at least you had a set morality. The morality which everybody understood and everybody obeyed.
And so then the question becomes that if you are going to marginalize this, if you are going to brush all of, … I mean. In the case of the French Revolution, which is completely annihilated! And you’ll see again the religious were persecuted. The Royal Family was executed.
But then the problem that arises from that, is how then do you arrive at laws? Like, where do you see your morality come from? And, of course, this is an Enlightenment thing, where we will use our own reason. So man will decide that! Our laws and our, … And then you get “Rights”, you get “Constitutions”. And you get all of this talk of “Liberty” enshrining Rights, and all of this. But it’s all man-made, because now God has been brushed off to the side. The old order has been brushed off to the side.
And so in place of having an objective morality, you’ve got man-made laws, and mad made constitutions, and politics. And so this is essentially what the French Revolution, to pick one example. The big one in my view.
This is actually what the revolutionaries ushered in. And to go back to Paradise Lost, you can see that in Satan’s speeches, it’s literally mirrored in this! Because Satan revolted and rebelled against God. And when he’s down in heaven having a like a conference with his lieutenants, the question then arises about what to do next, and how to frame things. And Satan is typically of the Enlightenment. He’s a man of intellect! And he says that he rationalizes all of this in a way which he can say, the famous line being:
“It’s better to reign in hell, than serve in heaven.”
So basically he comes to the conclusion that it doesn’t really matter, because he can create a mirror version of heaven, in hell. And:
“What is good to God, evil will be to him!”
And it’s this kind of relativistic mindset that he’s got. Which is like, this will all work itself out and one isn’t really any better than the other. It doesn’t make any difference.
So this is his version of bringing in these laws, and you brushed aside the “absolute”. And you will just do it yourself using “pure intellect”, about how you look at the world. And so Satan in Paradise Lost is a “liberal”! [chuckling] It seems paradoxical, and it seems strange, but he is a liberal. What he’s rejecting is “authoritarianism”, and what he’s driving towards is the intellect of the individual, and being free to express that in any way that he can.
So when people say the Left have become something “satanic”, what I want to explore here is the idea that it always was! Because people will say:
“Well, they were just a bunch of socialists, but in more recent years it became corrupted, and it became something toxic, and insane, and satanic!”
In actual fact, if you traced back the Leftist thinking, Leftist thought, all the way back to its origins in somewhere like the French Revolution, I think it’s been satanic from day one. Because it kind of corresponds perfectly with the story of Paradise Lost.
It’s this idea that there can be no authority over you, and you must then enshrine all of these laws which, basically, you’ve just made up yourself! They’re just purely man made.
I mean, even in the case of something like socialism, the end goal of socialism is supposed to be the liberation of the masses from capitalism. They’re actually on some firmer ground there, because it brings in the question of whether, or not, capitalism is itself a legitimately Right-wing force. But that’s another subject.
The end goal in the socialist utopia, which you see them talking about now, “luxury space communism”, it is that the individual has been liberated from work. They’ve been liberated from all of these institutions, and structures of capitalism. And so they are then finally set loose into the world to express themselves as they see fit.
Again there’s another paradox here, because they also think that everybody is just formed by their environment. So if you’re then gonna change the environment, you’ll change the person. But if you’re going to liberate them, completely liberate humanity, to do what they want, and they no longer have any higher power over them, or any kind of structures sort of moulding them, then what is it that you’re actually going to set loose? Because there’s not really any essence there! It’s just a void, if it can just be moulded by society. But so I don’t see how that makes any sense very much either.
And you see in the Russian Revolution, once again, which is also from the Left. Again it’s this rebellion against the old order. It’s a rebellion against God. Again the religious institutions were annihilated.
And once again you have all of these horrible laws coming in, and which are purely man-made, and not rooted in any kind of like sort of metaphysics at all. And you’ll see that straight away. It’s a tyranny, because of what they have to deal with. Because they’re trying to figure all this out as it goes along and it ends up in a bloodbath and a tyranny, over, and over, again! Because all they have to rely on is the intellect, is the human. And they can kind of just make stuff up on the fly, and change the rules willy-nilly, because they’ve rejected an absolute morality.
I mean, an interesting thing, and I already know what many people in the comments are going to be thinking, is that when we look at the revolutions, the Russian Revolution in particular. Also the French Revolution, and even the American Revolution. Which again, is all about liberty from the old tradition. Liberty from, freedom from, the old order. And look how America has turned out. America is what people think of as being the greatest satanic force in the world today!
But nevertheless what you see in all of these things is this idea that it’s “top down”. In other words, it’s secretive groups, and cliques, with their own agenda, pulling the strings from behind the scenes. All you’ve got to do is look at them, like Freemason symbology on America’s currency. And all of this. The same thing about the French Revolution. Something slightly different about the Russian Revolution. But it’s there as well.
In Juri Lina’s amazing documentary, Under the Sign of the Scorpion, he does a bit of a deep dive into some of the more esoteric, and secretive, groups that had a hand in bringing down the Russian aristocracy and then formulating the Russian Revolution. It was more groups than one.
But in Paradise Lost it’s not like a head-on sort of attack against the law, like the traditional order, it’s always covert. And it’s always being done from behind the scenes.
And in Paradise Lost there’s actually a scene when Satan, and Belial, Moloch, and mammon, and the rest of his lieutenants. They when they get cast out, and they’re all bloodied, and they’ve been thrashed, and they’re in hell, deciding what to do next, Moloch comes up with the idea that they need to basically just go straight back into battle against the forces of good. And Satan comes up with the, or Belial, mouthing Satan, comes up with the idea that they should be more covert. And this is where Satan hatches the idea that he will sneak his way back into God’s realm, into Eden, as it would become, because he was basically busy creating man. And he would use covert means to corrupt from within. And so this again, it’s funny how this repeats itself again, and again, and again throughout the history of like Leftist destruction on earth.
But what’s so surprising about it, is the way today we’re so like saturated in liberalism, that we automatically think of it are as a “good”, or as a “softening force”, a force of freedom and liberation, away from tyranny. And yet, Satan in Paradise Lost he isn’t like a communist, or something like that. He is more like a liberal. He’s a liberal raging against the traditional order and God’s authority. And so what he’s doing is setting people “free”.
And the perfect example of this, of course, will be when he goes into the Garden of Eden, and he tempts Eve to eat the Apple, the forbidden fruit. And this is where we really get to it, of course, when we go back to that disgusting fella at the beginning of the video.
Because what is that? What is pedophilia? It’s a forbidden fruit! And that’s now where they are heading towards. And it begins, and the framing of it as well, they are using like the language of “freedom”, to do. So so you arrive, at this point, where there are no constraints left at all! Anymore! And they’ve done away, long ago, with any sense of right, or wrong. And what they have done is make up these man-made laws. And the man made laws that they can just be changed, because it’s just ink on a piece of paper.
And so when we go back to Paradise Lost, and we see the interaction with Eve, this is precisely what is happening here. It’s a temptation away from the divine authority and towards personal freedom. But once you go into the idea of personal freedom, then you’re kind of cut loose! You don’t really have any kind of direction anymore.
And this was compounded in the history of Leftism. When we come into the more modern era and you begin to see post-modernism enter the scene, because what we begin with all of these rights. And all of these laws. And all of these man-made constructs, to replace the old order.
And then post-modernism comes in. And post-modernism which is also from the Left, of course, and riddled with pedophiles, it then begins to deconstruct all of the laws which were brought in by what amounts to this previous incarnation of itself.
And you can see the famous thing in France with Foucault, and Sartre, and all of these others. And they were all hell-bent on abolishing the age of consent! Why? Because it was arbitrary.
And you can go back to that tweet at the start of it there. And what was also on that thread was this idea he was coming out with was it, … So it was in America, and the age of consent is 16 in this State, and it’s 17 years old in this State, and it’s 18 years old in another State. And then another time they will point out:
“Well, you know, Henry VIII had a 13 year old wife!”
And all of these kinds of things. And what they’re doing is saying:
“Well these laws and the way we thought about this, it hasn’t been consistent. It’s changed slightly over time.”
But especially when it was man-made laws, it changed a lot, because there was no longer any divine authority. It was just men making it up and trying to do the best that they could, to put some constraints and some blocks on society, when they could no longer call on a higher authority.
And so then what the postmodernists do is point out that the things that men made in the past, these laws, doesn’t really make a whole lot of sense. So we have to sort of deconstruct them. And we have to abolish them. And we have to point out that it’s just about power. It was just those with power, were making these laws. And it doesn’t really have anything to do with right, or wrong.
So now we’ve arrived at the point where we abolish that too! Eve cannot explain through a peer-reviewed scientific study of experts why she shouldn’t eat the apple. And so she does! And is therefore liberated.
And so what this does, Satan’s general arc over the course of the whole poem, is one of degeneration. So he begins with the grandstanding, charismatic, sort of defiant speeches against what he calls “the tyranny of heaven”. And then over the course of the story he kind of degenerates. And then it becomes more, and more, that he becomes the sort of the pure hellish creation of nightmares, and, you know, lava and blood, and all of this kind of thing. You can see that he’s going in that direction. He enters as a comet. And by the end of it, he’s just this lisping snake!
And Milton puts his words in a certain way, where the lisping is like very pronounced. There’s lots of s’s, there’s lots of syllables at the start of his words. So it sounds like he’s lisping more, and more, as he goes on. And this mirrors the sort of the way that like liberalism which starts with these grandstanding speeches and appeals towards personal freedom, and man-made laws, based on reason, degenerates and collapses in under itself. And this is again mirrored in Paradise Lost.
And I was reminded of an article that I did, a blog post that I did some years ago on Richard Dawkins. And Richard Dawkins was engaged in a similar issue that I raised at the beginning of the video. And Richard Dawkins was engaged in the debate on abortion. And he was kind of owning a kind of patriotic American.
And Dawkins had been in Africa to some sort of conference about saving the elephant and he pointed out that the an elephant, a baby elephant, or a young elephant, is more worthy of saving. Because the person had said:
“We’re aborting millions of babies across the Western world, and you’re trying to save the elephant.”
And so Dawkins response was that the elephant, it’s been born, it’s alive, and it has empathy, it has feelings, and it has emotions towards it’s family. And a human embryo doesn’t! And so therefore based on reason, it makes more sense to be worried about the elephant than an unborn human embryo.
And the problem is what he’s describing there in the elephant, again, so often this stuff relies on sophistry. Because. If you take that what he’s saying about the baby elephant. The elephant is a noble creature. The elephant is, you know, it’s majestic. People like elephants.
But the problem is what he’d actually described were the basic traits of any mammal. And a rat is a mammal. And the rat studies have shown also has empathy. A rat also cares about it’s siblings. And a rat also knows fear. And it knows degrees of happiness, just like an elephant does.
And so now we can switch, we can remove the elephant from the equation. And we can say:
“Let’s bring the rat in instead.”
So now that argument is, all of a sudden, the rat is worth more than an unborn human child, or an embryo is, in this case! So now an unborn human actually doesn’t have as much empathy. And it doesn’t have as much feelings as a fully grown rat, amongst its siblings.
So according to Dawkins’s logic, the rat is more important. And so you see that very quickly what is supposed to be this rational mindset, it very quickly takes you towards hell, if it isn’t kind of shackled to ideas of objective goodness in the world. You can see how quickly it degenerates, just like Satan.
Because eventually he’s rationalizing the most hideous acts that you can possibly imagine. You can see this playing out in Dostoevsky’s work, as well. Something like Crime and Punishment.
So in the story of Crime and Punishment you’ve got the young student in his dilapidated department building, disaffected with the world. And he looks at his landlord, which is a woman, an old woman, and she’s a horrible person, and she’s greedy, and she’s charging them too much rent. And she doesn’t really offer the world anything good at all.
And so Raskolnikov’s sort of runs the maths and comes up with the conclusion that the world would be better if she was dead! Like the world is not going to be any worse off, if he takes an axe and murders his landlady, because she’s just a terrible person! She’s greedy, she’s unpleasant, and she doesn’t give anything back. So if you remove her from the world, then will be a better place. It’s as simple as that. And that’s what he does. And then he has to suffer the consequences on his conscience, and everything like that.
But what really comes in there is a kind of utilitarianism, so that what constitutes “good” becomes a matter of running the numbers. And you can see the technocrats in the world doing that today. Which is why I kind of speak out about it so much, because I can’t stand it! Because you end up rationalizing your way into committing acts of complete barbarism! You end up asking for a scientific peer-reviewed study on why paedophilia is wrong! You end up saying:
“Well a creature such as a rat has empathy, and feelings, and an unborn human doesn’t, therefore the rat is more worthy of life!”
And at each stage it began with just rationalism. It began with:
“Well, we can use our reason as men, to formulate all of these laws. And all of these moral norms. And everything will be just fine! We’ll just do it all ourselves. And then we’ll write it in.”
And then slowly, but surely the laws change. Because the thinking changes. And it always deteriorates. And it begins with liberalism, and it brings you where you are now. So to the question of, have they been hijacked? Has this like thought been hijacked in recent years? And that we can get rid of the Woke stuff, and everything will be grand?
No! I’m afraid this is the path that which began a long time ago, reaching it’s final kind of hellish conclusion. And at every stage it seems to mirror the descent of the rebellion against authority, against God. And then you end up where you’re having to say:
“Okay, well we, like Satan, I’ll just make it up! I’ll just relativize all of this stuff. And I’ll just make up my own laws. And we will at least be free! We will be liberated And that’s what happens. We’re going to liberate everybody! Everybody should be able to do whatever they want. And what we will do, we’ll just put some laws in, here and there!”
And it’s been [chuckling] just a bloodbath for hundreds of years, at the end of the day! And the question is, what is the response to this? What has become a political philosophy which, even if we grant, which a lot of people would dispute, even if we grant that it meant well, which, you know, … when you look at what happened in something like the French Revolution, doubt! But even then, like it’s obviously degraded into something now which is quite literally satanic.
So, what is the response to this? What is the response to this problem?
Let me know in the comments below.
And thanks for listening folks.
[Outro music and imagery by Theberton.]
[Readers: If you see any errors (however minor), or ways to improve things, in the transcript, please let me know in the Comment section. Also please share the link to this transcript, so others can benefit. Thanks.]
* Total transcript words = 4,517
* Total post words = 5,007
* Total images = xx
* Total A4 pages = xx
Click to download a PDF of this post (x.x MB):
Version 2: Corrected name McDermott > McDiarmid. Thanks to commenter Heimdall in Africa.
Version 1: Nov 13, 2021 — Published post.