The eonic effect, maitreya idiocy, and the creation as free agents of a new social economy
April 13th, 2018 •
minus the maitreya nonsense Graham Peebles’ article makes some important points, but the myth of a new epoch is, again, not really right:
These seemingly disparate threads are connected; they constitute alternate signs of and varying responses to the times we are living in, which are unique in many ways. We are witnessing the collapse of a civilization and the painful birth pangs of a new order. And whilst the responsibility for meeting the challenges of the time rests firmly with mankind, many share the view – albeit controversial – that we are not alone in this work, that a teacher or avatar is once again amongst us, working behind the scenes, waiting for the right conditions before emerging into full public work.
I recommend a study of the eonic effect: something far more complex is at work than any dime a dozen neo-buddha/maitreya could even understand, let alone change. That there are ‘enlightened yogis/buddhas/sufis’ in hiding is entirely possible but the reason for their stealth is as much a sign of a spiritual cannibalism mafia as some savior routine. Or else a fascist coup against civilization as we know it. We have tried to get to the bottom of the trump phenom, for example, at The Gurdjieff Con, and the mafias in question are more than able to produce fascist drones. Their detestation of modernity, secularism, and democracy is more than enough motive for wanting a new epoch and sabotaging the current one.
We are however beset with a capitalist potential catastrophe: that unfolding disaster was spotted almost at once by the early socialists such as marx/engels…etc… it didn’t require a maitreya to figure it out, or propose a remedy. marx/engels propose the clear need for a postcapitalist social economy. and they were militant atheists because they didn’t want reactionary religion to interfere. We have critiqued then as to theory and detail but their basic insight was entirely cogent. Unfortunately they may have injected their own epochal myth of stages of producing, with communism in a new era.
Most of these saviors are making a bundle off the new age movement, and, check out a recent ‘maitreyia’ wannabe, the guru rajneesh: cf. the recent documentary, Wild Wild Country (netflix)…the maitreya racket is worth millions…
Our modern civilization may well collapse, to the applause of the ‘maitreyas’, but the problem is that a new epoch is NOT being born. The only epoch visible is the rise of modernity and if we lose than then we simply decline into chaos. A look at a previous epoch makes that clear.
marx/engels were confused as to theory, and epochs, but in a way they sensed in the own myth of epochs that modern capitalism could prove dangerous in the end. and they were right. but a new epoch of postcapitalism isn’t the right myth. Rather we need a movement of free agents who an create a postcapitalist economy. without that the system will simply decline, or else disintegrate…
The study of the eonic effect shows something that is beyond human action, but not ‘god’, a kind of global level gaian dynamic. We have produced the eonic effect ‘neat’, without speculations as to how it works (but Enigma of the Axial Age, a successor to WHEE, considers some of the possible solutions). But it should be clear that no spiritual power known to us could effect such a stupendous complexity. Consider just one small detail of the effect: modern classical music (check our archives).
We might note that gautama, a buddha figure of the axial epoch, sensed the change of eras in his own time, but he couldn’t figure it out, or distinguish it from religious evolution or dharma (or the hindu myth of the kali yuga), clear evidence that his ‘enlightened’ was no where near the claimed omniscience, gautama and jesus being entangled in the savior legacy inherited from greater antiquity. The achievement of gautama was remarkable but its legacy has clear limits, and there is no suggestion he understood, as noted, the eonic effect, or had any grasp of the evolution of civilizations. As for jesus, he was a carpenter’s son in a primitive era: he would strike us a primitive, if not stupid, now, but a man of heart, a proto-sufi. I doubt if he even knew how he was being used by unseen spiritual powers.
That should put the maitreya nonsense in perspective.
We should note that the left has made saviors out of marx/engels, but while their basic critique is very cogent they, if anything, botched the issue of postcapitalism. The remedy is to be wary of their theory of epochs and create what they actually intended, a new social economy beyond capitalism, no simple task…
Note: there could a simple explanation for the eonic effect, in one respect: J.G. Bennett proposed a scale of energies beyond the known physical types: behind consciousness stands a ‘creative energy’. Our epochal shifts show a sudden phasing of creative action, and this is related to the distinction of system action and free action: an epochal shift could inject creative energy while the actual details are man made. Such speculative thinking is strictly banished from WHEE, but the point is apt, a ‘simple’ explanation. In any case, that doesn’t explain the larger dynamic at work, stretching over millennia, it would seem…Note that we very far now from the onset period, and that creative energy has been expended in the early modern. So any thinking about a new epoch is misleading. It won’t happen. In any case the buddahs didn’t create civilization
In any case, the issue for us is to marshal our resources for the creation of a new social economy. We have suggested ‘democratic market neo-communism’ as a range of blueprints, trying to both fulfill and move beyond marx/engels…
One might consider the ‘rajneesh commune’ (cf. the documentary) to see the incompetence of so-called ‘buddhas’ on social construction. For that matter a look at tibetan buddhism might suggest a a gang of reactionaries of the worst kind using tantric sex magic to fix political villany via …
The eonic effect is not science and we have suggested many times, here, an empirical history map of the visible intervals of world history, epochs in a series or not. But the eonic model can be taken as hypothesis, used with extreme care.
The point is that no new epoch is going to dawn for many millennia, if ever: we may have reached the end of the tugboat epochal series. We are in the ‘new epoch’ (by eonic hypothesis), modernity, and must attempt to get it right. If we examine the early modern we see an immense number of innovations, mostly benign, and then suddenly the ambiguous ‘capitalism’ taking over everything just at the end of the modern transition.
The point here is that capitalism is an outcome of modernity, but not necessarily its real or final outcome: we must create a true modernity and not get confused by postmodern idiocy or new age reactionary politics…Note how capitalism is ambiguous, villainous, or potentially benign but corrupted in action. Read Adam Smith to see if you can find a villain. Best of intentions, first class, upper class nice guy…
For a short short list of the massive flood of innovations in the early modern:
From Reformation to Revolution (http://history-and-evolution.com/whee4th/chap6_1_1.htm)
How can we explain this?