An Antichristian Elite?

Thesis, Antithesis and Synthesis ... that's the basis of Hegelian Dialectics. Unless I got something wrong. But, the gist is that you form a Thesis, then you see what might speak against it, forming an Antithesis, and then you see what can be glanced from that contrast. It is something that some people did already prior to Hegel, I "used it" - unknowingly - here and there; And I don't really know how far he developed the idea. I say it's reasonable as ... I'd say "the truth is usually somewhere in-between". Except when it isn't. Which is kind of "how today feels like". But not always.
And - I do suppose that "some Farmer" might actually care. In its simplest form, it's not that difficult to understand - and I suppose that keeping it on mind can greatly help make common philosophy less stupid.

One can also try to see it as a bar. To, first of all, critically engage with your ideas - that's an effort beyond simply blurting out an opinion. Then, we may say, stubbornness follows, and how one engages with it and their environment. But ... whatever. I just felt like I had to add that to what I previously wrote.


I'm not sure though, how it might help me here.
This topic is basically just speculation. It's a theory of how Antichristianity operates, or how the body itself comes to be. And, ironically ... I'd say that this is more so ... Schopenhauer territory. Say ... "the World as Inside and Outside". Well, the book I have may be nonsense - as, when I hear Schopenhauer brought up it's usually about us not having free will. I'm really no expert. I'm dealing with scraps here!

But there's an outside. We have the images in the Bible and we have the images in the Real World we may associate them with. What we can glance from the latter is a degree of organization that implies something deeper. Speculating that it's really just Rich folks wanting to get Richer may suffice for the most part - while implying that we need to add the Biblical context to it is also just speculative.
But ... the Roman Catholic Church certainly has been around for a while ... operating in pretty much the same way all throughout. It's usually cozied up to the ruling class - and barely ever dares to step any further, outside of asking people for money.

But so there also needs to be an inside. Like, how was the Roman Catholic Church capable of injecting itself into world politics? But also: What did it gain from those centuries of political entanglements - and how might that factor into what's going on today?


We may remain puzzled about these things - but some things ... they're like there on the tip of the tongue, waiting to be expressed. Such as slapping on the term:

A Secret Society

The Bible isn't really clear about how the Anti-Christ does as they do. Instead we get these Monstrous figures that may represent entire Empires. So of the four Beasts in Daniel and of the two Beasts in Revelation there's one that is highlighted as the primary antagonist. We can bridge both accounts - given that in Daniel we get introduced to the Beast, as I see it - emerging from the Roman Empire; While in Revelation we're introduced to a Beast that's already out and about. We may see it as a beginning and an end.

We may understand what those images represent - but that's not the issue here.


As for these days, what we observer are seemingly disconnected entities and individuals that pop up that still somehow all work towards the same goal. At least in the effect. If we want to argue that there's a Conspiracy, a comparison that provides itself is that of a Mushroom Colony. So, a Mushroom Colony basically extends underneath the surface - and whether Mushrooms grow from there or whether new Mushrooms simply attach to it, I don't know. But there has to be something that binds all those different entities together. Such that they can act in tandem.

And one thing that comes to mind is Organized crime. And how that operates, at least in the movies (and we can see respective behavioral patterns also) ... there's a lot of intimidation. But, the way they 'stick together' would also be indicative of 'more convincing "arguments"'.

Like money or ... whatever. Privilege perhaps.


So, I do have a theory. Eventually it extends from a fear, or worry of mine - which is that my whole Family was somehow involved in ... exploiting me for stuff. So in a way that would have required them to know who I was, begging the question for how I ended up there.
And ... it may be difficult for me to paint you a complete picture. But raising me to be socially awkward would be a part of it. Not locking me up physically, but by sabotaging my tools to grow and extend beyond it. My early life was like ... living on a paradisaic island. My friends however were mostly just friends of my Brother - and the few I had I wasn't able to maintain. Eventually, I'm not sure when, I also was overcome by the impression that Friends I did eventually have would eventually just turn away for some reason. It's like ... the one moment we'd be close and the other they'd be distant.
Now, a lot of these worries started to form while I was exploring Faith - but persisted thereafter into my other endeavors. Something that felt like it was pushed right against my forehead was the idea that someone might just come in, copy what I did and present it as theirs. With some modifications I'd assume. That was further carried by the fact that I was essentially isolated from the rest of the world. Nobody would know what I did - while ... God knew/knows what kinds of connections "they" had. So, one time I hid some of my notes in a binder of sorts - sealed with tape and some smiley face over it. And when I got back - the seal was broken. I guess one could argue that they just wanted to see how crazy I was - but the fact remains that someone dug through my stuff while I was gone.
And apparently with little to no care about me finding out. Which is puzzling, but maybe it was a temporary lapse of judgment on their part.

So, to me at first it was all about my Mission. But ... well. So, when it comes to that, I've had experiences that date back into my Childhood. Nothing spectacular - but ... enough to supplement my ... "imprisoned mind" with counter-impressions that would help me identify with my religious curiosity. So from remembering. Like, we had audio-cassettes of Bible stories. One time listening to one I fell asleep - and later, much later, felt like I was told that I'm one of those Characters. But, nevertheless, there were other things.
I had vague - possibly made up images of how my previous life ended. Images, pertaining to some creative work, floating around in my head while I was still a child - and eventually the name "J.R.R. Tolkien" got stuck in my mind.
It must have been a Video I saw on the contents or themes of the Silmarillion that triggered it. Because ... that seemed familiar. So, those images.
But then I learned that he was a Catholic. And I was baffled - because how or why in the hell would I be a Catholic, like ever? But what if Catholic Baptism works like a Tag - so that by virtue of that, I could be resurrected into a new Body?

So - that'd suggest that I wasn't there because of me being the Chosen, but because of my Creative mind.


Now, on the one hand side that'd allow them to cultivate ... "personalities". Like, once born into a Catholic household - there's a chance one might get stuck there. Enough so that "being catholic" might qualify as a Red Flag. But it may very well extend far beyond that already.

On the other hand side ... that's like a ticket into a form of immortality. But also a way to ascertain some kind of internal cohesion. Like, normally Children would be some kind of wild-card. They might come after you - or just not. But if you could make sure that your offspring is as depraved as you'd need it to be - there's like ... no threat that some woke offspring might ruin all that capital or whatever.


So, regarding Dialectics, there isn't a lot of room here. Perhaps because the idea is already synthesized to a degree that leaves little room for improvement. Inside and Outside are in agreement with each other - so, it's a solid idea ... without any real evidence to go along with it. As such ... we might call it a curiosity.
Perhaps it can be a basis for further speculation - but how to make it more than just a curiosity is beyond me.


To me, personally, it's somehow a given. It sits with me - but I'm also scared of the truth sometimes. So, to me it's also more like a Meme. And still, I might still have WW1 PTSD. As from having not had enough time between that life and this life to recover. I mean, occasionally there are these "bangs" in my head or neck that go off while I'm trying to sleep. Is that shell-shock? Did Tolkien suffer from PTSD? Is it something I somehow acquired during this lifetime? I don't know. But it's also not ... all that important I suppose.

But so, the real question here might be:

Was Tolkien Trans?

I mean ... I've heard an interview - and as it got to the topic of ... Galadriel I assume, or whatever ... he eventually mentioned Aphrodite as one source of inspiration - and his speech became ... what's the word/term? More rambly, more introverted, less intelligible. So, a case can be made that Galadriel is 'a' self-insert of some kind, rather than Aragorn or Gandalf or so. So, arguing that there was something - and speaking about Galadriel triggered it.

Well, I'm no expert of psychology - but I know myself. And when it comes to that particular interview, I Do know THE feeling that would have gone along with it, had it been so as I suspect. Just like ... when bringing up Tolkiens dislike for Analogies. That also sits within me - where I like ... I just have to like "jump up" and supplement the argument.
But yea, "I can neither confirm nor deny".


So, there is however enough to pin a 'maybe' to the wall.
But - I don't really need to refer to Tolkien to say, that had my life gone differently I too would have procreated. Like so, there's love like this and love like that. And while I had way too much time thinking about my emotions - it was easier for me to get confused over that.
I'd argue.
And when in a stable relationship ... there's more than just whatever is wrong inside. And related to that is one of the bigger issues one of the Psychiatrists I needed an OK from regarding my name Change and Surgery had with me. That ... I might also just be gay or seemed to otherwise have a somewhat functional male sexuality. And sure enough: Sexuality and Sexual-Orientation is broad enough a thing such that Trans-sexuality isn't always the answer. Though, the modern "LGBTQ+ internal" understanding of Trans-sexuality isn't as rigid. Enough so that there's a little bit of a divide between "the OG Trans-issue" (Dysphoria -> Surgery) and "the modern Gender spread" (beyond the three major classes of gender). And so there may even be more that identify as Femboys or Tomgirls (or how to put it?) than who identify as binarily Trans.

TO my understanding it also takes a lot more for an introverted Trans person to come out, than it takes for an extroverted one. The extrovert innately requires their modes of expression - so their true gender expression is almost guaranteed to come out, while for introverts it's like ... it takes a lot more. So, from my understanding - my life vastly takes place in the mind, in the theoretical, in the immaterial. Gender isn't really required there. Or, whether I produce my ideas feeling like this or feeling like that ... doesn't really require an acknowledgment.


Today however, the cat is like ... out of the bag.
I mean - to me the issue here is that I assume that some people may feel like this could be some Gotcha; As to shove the cat back into the bag as it were. Then people might bring up Tolkien's kids - and do the whole "how would you feel if you had been aborted?" routine. Well, I guess ... sorry to the Children I may have potentially had. "It was beyond my control".
Or "I tried". I mean, I really did.

But yea. I could also have taken steps for my semen to be preserved - should I ever feel like having kids - but from what I gathered, that'd also cost me money that I don't have.

From how I feel, I also would assume that Tolkien wouldn't have been too keen on a transition. Like, on a purely pragmatic basis - at the time - it would have been a lot of trouble for basically no gain at all. In that regard, my life was a lot closer to the hypothetical that one would have to produce to get to the bottom of it. Like, if I had no life, no friends, no nothing - and it was all just and only about me and my own well-being in my own existence freed of any possible ties or responsibilities. Also, I didn't feel like I had a choice. Or like it was a choice. It was a need. And ... so, it is what it is.


The knowledge is there. And based on that I did acknowledge for quite some time that I was trans - but not quite willing to pursue that. So, I was a closeted Trans-woman - "an Egg" as the slang goes - but ... not quite because I understood that I was ... based on the pathology ... definitely Trans. So, there was no egg to crack. I coined the term "Gray Apple". So: Well aware but not convinced. But eventually that position became more like a farce - at least I recognized it so after I started to transition.

Hmm ... here's a bit of a curiosity: Based on the movies I gather that there aren't a lot of Women in the Lord of the Rings stories. The Hobbit is like ... entirely just guys. And from what I've heard - the Hobbit is more like ... Tolkien telling stories to his kids. And it would come as a way of self-preservation, or shame, or confusion over what's going on - that women would be left out of those stories. In the main story however - the one that Tolkien wrote perhaps for himself, there was space to work out female Characters. These are however ... also like ... tucked away. You could totally tell the whole story without ever mentioning any one of them. And how about that line "I am no man!". Is that in the books also?


So - whether or not I could have suppressed my Gender identity is one thing. Whether or not that's healthy is another. And the one lesson I learned from History classes in school is: In history there's no "what if". Many a great work, we may say, has been produced under circumstances that we'd deem ... bad. Or horrible. I however don't think that Trauma is a way to produce those stories. Trauma however provides context that isn't part of "the normal experience" and may thus lead to insights, ideas and such that may be intriguing.
It shouldn't however be our goal to produce what we think are "sufficiently sub-optimal circumstances" because ... creativity or whatever. I'd say that every person that produces art from a position of trauma would want their problems to be understood such that MAYBE one day we can right the wrongs.

The story of the Ring could be considered an Allegory. A parable. A metaphor. But in very concrete terms, the Ring is synonymous with Power - and everyone exposed to it is also exposed to the allure of it. It corrodes the minds of those in its vicinity - eating away at their resolve.
So, maybe there's more to Tolkiens warfare against the allegorical. Maybe there's themes in the books that Tolkien was ashamed of. Maybe he was serious - and seriously trying to remove these ... personal aspects from the story. To focus on a story that is self-contained and consistent within.
The ring could have been "symbolical" for his own gender confusion. In my current life, there's a kind of self-loathing. Depression or Melancholy works in similar ways.
Maybe he knew - and tried to comment on the challenges of admitting to that.
But what remains - as distilled from all that - is the story as it is.

Like so - the comforts we enjoy. The familiar. Like people who are stuck in abusive relationships. We may start out with a clear idea of what the problem is - what needs to be done - but the closer we get to solving it, the more we have time to second guess ourselves.


And so ... there's this question. There's the second guessing, the familiar, the holding on to what has worked so far - the fear of ... losing something that ... maybe makes no sense but it has infested our hearts nonetheless. And then there's the truth. The solution. Redemption, Salvation. Something ... that may very well shake the very foundations of the world - but are we brave enough to go there?