Jurisprudence of Terror.
"Jurisprudence of terror takes two forms; loosely defined rules which produces unpredictable law, and spontaneous changes in rules to best suit the state." (R. W. Makepeace and Croom Helm, Marxist Ideology and Soviet Criminal Law)
When the leaders of the nation, in all branches of government, become children of disobedience—usurping the restraints of the constitution by making laws subject to their own carnal desires, i.e., "self interests," i.e., opinions, i.e., "felt needs" of the 'moment' (under the guise of "for the greater good," or "for the common good," or "for the good of the people")—the citizens are oppressed—who believe in "rule of law" where all citizens, including those in government are accountable to the laws of the land, i.e., subject to doing right and not wrong according to the laws which are established through representative government, thus limiting the power of those in government. By judges, leaders, or "representatives" making decisions according to two different standards, i.e., siding with ('justifying') the 'liberal's opinion, i.e., their carnal desires or "self interests" of the 'moment' and questioning (setting aside or dismissing as irrelevant) the conservative's facts and truth, i.e., his belief in doing right and not wrong (according to established laws), 'liberal's are 'liberated' from the restraints of law while conservatives are found guilty and sentenced according to them. How this works is, when it comes to the 'liberal' judge's desired outcome, the 'liberalizing' of the nation, the 'liberal' witness's opinion, i.e., "feelings" are regarded as fact or truth (credible) and the conservative witness's position, i.e., facts or truth are regarded as an opinion (questionable), with the 'liberal' judge's opinion ("feelings"), subject to all the 'liberal' witness's opinions ("feelings")—which supersede the conservative's facts or truth—determining the outcome of the trial in favor of the 'liberal's opinion.
Georg Hegel, for example (rejecting right-wrong thinking, i.e., commands, rules, facts and truth, i.e., established law, i.e., "rule of law") used the word "badly" (opinion, a subjective evaluation) in place of wrong (an either-or objective position), making right-wrong, right-"badly," making commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., laws subject to the 'liberal's' opinion ("feelings") of the 'moment,' i.e., subject to rapid 'change.' Hegel wrote: "When a man has finally reached the point where he does not think he knows it better than others, that is when he has become indifferent to what they have done badly and he is interested only in what they have done right, then peace and affirmation have come to him." (G. F. W. Hegel in Carl Friedrich, The Philosophy of Hegel) By doing so he defended the 'liberal' over and therefore against the conservative since you are punished (thrown in prison) for doing wrong, reprimanded (maybe) for doing "badly." My, how a change in word can make such a big difference.
Karl Marx wrote: "Laws must not fetter human life; but yield to it; they must change as the needs and capacities of the people change." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right) When the 'liberal' uses the phrase "the people," he really means himself (unlike the conservative who really means "the people," i.e., all the people, including those in public office). In other words, according to Karl Marx, laws must progressively move away from restraining him, i.e., they must become of and for his carnal nature only if he is to become himself, i.e., "of and for self" and the world only, 'liberating' himself, and the rest of the world—"following" after him (by force or threat of death)—from Godly restraint, i.e., from "rule of law."
Immanuel Kant wrote: "Zweckmäßigkeit ohne Zweck; Gesetzmäßigkeit ohne Gesetz," i.e. "purposiveness without purpose; lawfulness without law." (Immanuel Kant, Critique of Judgment) Thus, according to Kant, purpose and law must emanate from nature only, i.e. from the laws of the flesh ("human nature"), i.e., "lawfulness" if man is to supersede (negate) any external authority (the laws of God), i.e., "law" which get in the way of pleasure. Karl Marx wrote: "To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right') Thus the laws of nature (the "feeling" or sensation of pleasure and hate of restraint) must become the drive of life and its augmentation the purpose if man is to become "of and for himself" and the world only.
When the law of the child, 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority, i.e., from parental/Godly restraint (dialogue) becomes the law of the land then anarchy (abomination) reigns (with impunity). It is where we find ourselves these days, in a land 'liberated' from Godly restraint, subject to the abominations of man's wicked heart, with those in public office "leading" the way, showing the children how to do it. "The heart is deceitful above all things [thinking pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the father's/Father's will], and desperately wicked [hating whoever prevents, i.e., inhibits or blocks it from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' it desires]: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9 "Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God." Luke 16:15
For example, motive (inclination put into thought) can not take the place of facts or truth in a trial or opinion, i.e., "feelings" end up determining the outcome instead of facts and truth, making the defendant subject to the judge's or juror's "feelings" of the 'moment' instead of the evidence, i.e., the facts or truth—which effect the conscience. When done, a person's "social worth" takes precedence over any crime or non-crime he has committed. It is why children seek to get their parents into dialogue, i.e., dialoguing opinions, i.e., "feelings" instead of discussion, i.e., discussing commands, rules, facts, or truth so they can have their way, i.e., do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity, since there is no wrong, disobedience, sin, i.e., guilty conscience in the praxis of dialoguing opinions to a consensus.
This is why Georg Hegel made society (the Universal) subject to the child's carnal nature (the Particular)—with the child dialoguing with his "self," i.e., 'justifying' his "self," i.e., 'justifying' his carnal nature, i.e., 'justifying' his love of pleasure and hate of restraint, i.e., Reasoning (dialectic, i.e., dialogue aka dialogic 'reasoning') becoming his only means of "salvation" from the father's/Father's authority, i.e., from the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., from the "rule of law," i.e., from accountability to established rules and laws. "The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such [once he is 'liberated' from the father'/Father's authority to become as we was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into his life (separating him from his "self" and the world), of (and now for) "self" and the world only]." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life) By doing so Hegel was able to negate the right of private convictions, property, and business, under God, negating "rule of law," i.e., limited government. Hegel, sounding more like Karl Marx than Karl Marx himself (who was not yet born), stated: "On account of the absolute and natural oneness of the husband, the wife, and the child [their common "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, including (and especially) their desire for ("lusting" after) approval from one another (affirmation)], where there is no antithesis [no "top-down," "right-wrong, "Mine, not yours" way of thinking and acting] of person to person or of subject to object, the surplus is not the property of one of them, since their indifference is not a formal or a legal one."
Vladimir Lenin (Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov) believed in the same thing, liberating the children, i.e., the proletariat from the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the king and the bourgeoisie who supported him. He stated: "...a more powerful enemy, the bourgeoisie [the citizens honoring (submitting to) the Kings authority over them, the property and business owners expecting the workers to do the same to them, i.e., to honour (submit themselves to) their authority over them, as children, honoring (submitting themselves to) their father's authority over them, as man honors (submits himself to) God's authority over him; all being the same in structure, system, or paradigm (patriarch)—"top-down," "do it right, i.e., My way, or else," "Mine. Not yours"], whose resistance ... and whose power lies in ... the force of habit, in the strength of small-scale production [in private business and property, where workers must submit to their bosses authority as children must submit to their father's authority]. Unfortunately, small-scale production [local control, under the father's authority] is still widespread in the world, and small-scale production engenders capitalism [capitulating to the father's authority] and the bourgeoisie [the middle class which initiates and sustains, i.e., engenders and supports the father's authority, demanding that their children learn to do right and not wrong in order to get ahead] continuously, daily, hourly, spontaneously, and on a mass scale. Capitalism and the bourgeois environment … disappears very slowly even after the overthrow of the bourgeoisie, (since the peasantry constantly regenerates the bourgeoisie [restores the father's/Father's authority, i.e., "rule of law" in the home]) give rise to what is essentially the same bourgeois careerism, national chauvinism, petty-bourgeois vulgarity [belief or faith in a higher authority than themselves], etc. —merely varying insignificantly in form—in positively every sphere of activity and life. … until small-scale economy and small commodity production [private property and business under the father's authority] have entirely disappeared, the bourgeois atmosphere, proprietary habits and petty-bourgeois traditions will hamper proletarian work both outside and within the working-class movement, … in every field of social activity, in all cultural and political spheres without exception. We must learn how to master every sphere of work and activity without exception, to overcome all difficulties and eradicate all bourgeois habits, customs and traditions everywhere." (Vladimir Lenin, Left-Wing Communism: an Infantile Disorder; An Essential Condition of the Bolsheviks' Success, May 12, 1920)
"The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes. For he flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful. The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good. He deviseth mischief upon his bed; he setteth himself in a way that is not good; he abhorreth not evil." Psalms 36:1-4
This is taking place in America today. Through the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, "rule of law," i.e., the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning is being removed from the thoughts and actions of the people. The carnal nature of the child, i.e., the child's love of pleasure and hate of restraint is taking its place resulting in "jurisprudence of terror," i.e., "loosely defined rules" and "spontaneous changes in rules" oppressing "the people."
"And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them. And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour: the child shall behave himself proudly against the ancient, and the base against the honourable." "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:4-5, 12 "... and children shall rise up against their parents, and shall cause them to be put to death." Mark 13:12
"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:3, 4
"Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein. Also I set watchmen over you, saying, Hearken to the sound of the trumpet. But they said, We will not hearken." Jeremiah 6:16, 17
"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie [that pleasure is the standard for "good," instead of doing the Father's will]: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth [in the Father and in His Son, Jesus Christ], but had pleasure in unrighteousness [in their "self" and the world]." 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12
© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher, 2014-2015, 2018