Dialectical materialist views of history
are the doctrine of four ages taught in ancient mystery
schools without the pesky, overt supernaturalism
which would be unsuited to an age of naturalism,
a procedure Jefferson & Tolstoy follow –
doubting Thomases without a prayer? – who think to hollow
out the Tree of Life then hallow the remaining dead wood
into a totem pole & build the world a world of good
with minarchist & anarchist ideas that don’t bear fruit –
that is, eternal life; rule over many things -- & loot
scripture of salvation, thinking they do men a favor.
Libertas binds men the more! Hath their salt lost its saviour?
Plato’s daemons fell & tarnished their beloved Golden
Age, seduced the hearts of Socrates & Jung. From olden
days unto modernity, the selfsame writhing snake nest
wrestles with free wills that God designed to choose a house guest.
Why don’t you invite the one whose yoke is not deception?
Jesus christened you with His zinc spark at your conception!
"O sing unto the Lord a new song: sing unto the Lord, all the Earth!" -- Psalm 96:1
The Bible says that we are slaves to sin.
Well, one is much the same as other men,
in this regard, but can articulate
the fact that lust is shaped the same as hate
in one’s mind’s eye. Are these, then, "unclean"?
I will explain exactly what I mean,
but first would like to mention Djuba’s work --
“Temptations, Afterwards” -- where 'cthulhus' lurk,
where what was throbbing is unraveling.
One mentions this for those whose traveling
is less internal & more visible,
whose consciousness is less divisible
into compartments & comparisons.
Most horses don’t see their caparisons,
so that is why I’m holding up a glass.
It isn’t just a pretext to be crass.
It’s why the human male smokes afterwards
& why it says “unclean & hateful birds”.
Such pairings are not simply accidents,
& what at first seems simple can be dense.
Paul says, “[that] which I would not, that I do”.
It’s shaped like the recurrence when we stew
about someone or something, or we lust
about someone or something. So, I trust
the Bible’s psychological insight.
We need not merely believe who know the Light.
Nomadic territorial religiosity
of Canaan’s conquest Alexander Islam Genghis Khan
explodes like telegraph or fiber optic cables, but
animists (such as the Mongol Horde) or polytheists
(such as Alexander's or apostate Solomon's) break
up like a marriage or a fragmentation hand grenade.
Nomadic territorial religiosity
may be a prairie fire like Marxist-Leninism or
a slash & burn bell curve of Rust Belts & fresh markets orsome other coatrack burning coal mine time release snafu.
Her face would be unrecognisable,
but there’s a blind spot to Enlightenment.
No wall can trump an ancient prophecy.
No ideology can stem the tide.
They vomit from clay souths into iron norths.
They’re in the book of Daniel, Ch. 2;
atop Tren de la Muerte roofs; crowded
on decks of overloaded, sinking ships.
To rule those feet of iron & clay, you’ll end
up with dictatorship* to keep the Pax.
* In the model by which one understands human governance, and because of which one has never voted, there are soft oligarchies & hard, covert oligarchies & overt. Iron brings forth soft, covert oligarchy of its nature -- the so-called 'representative democracies' whose reality Machiavelli describes in The Prince; but if iron should mix with clay, then that which sufficed for the iron must change to suffice for the admixture. So it is that the soft totalitarianism becomes both increasingly hard & obvious at once.
