The Breakdown of the Separation Between Church and State

Without fully recognizing it, the Founding Fathers had a strong sense of the emotional plague that is endemic in human beings, and they did everything in their power to prevent it from organizing and destroying this country.

This sense of evil was based on the healthier character structure of the people in those times. Their authoritarian character structure allowed them to recognize the importance of separating secular and religious authority as a safeguard against tyranny. But then, as a result of the breakdown of the old authoritarian order into anti-authoritarianism around the 60s, the plague organized itself and infested every area of social life.

This was accompanied by the dissolution of the authoritarian family, of a decrease in people’s muscular armor and an increase in their ocular armor. The contactless masses became secularized and so did their latent tendency for mysticism. Instead of having faith in the afterlife, people now demanded heaven on earth. Freedom peddling politicians on the left appeared and supplied disillusioned followers of the church with the political illusion that they wanted.

This was the time of the marked shift of the social mainstream to the left of political center and the decline in the census of faithful church goers. Seeing the handwriting on the wall, the church leaders of all denominations had no other option than to embrace the policies that the leftist ideologues in America were peddling.

Together with the personal idealistic tendencies of Pope Francis, the operation of the emotional plague through socio-economic factors is the real reason that the Catholic Church on the political right is currently cozying up to Barack Obama, a political activist on the far left. For the first time in America’s history, a pontiff addressed members of the joint session of Congress and sermonized, among other things, about what they should do about the environment, about income inequality and that they should learn how to get along with each other.

This collusion of church and state is one more step in the globalization of the emotional plague as the ideologies and the moralities of the far left and the far right merge into one.

What is Functional Thinking?

Q. What is functional thinking?
A. Functional thinking is thinking according to the way nature functions.
Q. Who discovered functional thinking?
A. Functional thinking was discovered by Wilhelm Reich M.D.
Q. What is the importance of functional thinking?
A, Functional thinking provides a way to integrate all the natural sciences into a unified body of knowledge.
Q. What is the difference between functional thinking and ordinary thinking?
A. Ordinary thinking is either mechanistic or mystical.
Q. What is mechanistic thinking?
A. Mechanistic thinking is thinking about nature as if it were a machine.
Q. What is mystical thinking?
A. Mystical thinking is thinking as if there was a purpose to nature.
Q. What’s wrong with thinking mechanistically and mystically about nature?
A. Since nature does not operate like a machine and since it has no purpose, mechanistic/mystical thinking cannot provide a satisfactory understanding of how nature operates. Furthermore, erroneous mechanistic/mystical thinking often has destructive consequences.
Q. How does mechanistic/mystical thinking work?
A. When mechanistic thinking fails to provide a satisfactory understanding of nature, mystical thinking enters to provide a purpose to what is left to be understood.
Q. What is an example of mechanistic/mystical thinking?
A. An example is the statement: The heart pumps blood in order to bring oxygen to the tissues of The body. First, the heart is compared to a mechanical pump. Then, a purpose is given to explain why the heart pumps blood.
Q. What is the functional understanding of this example?
A. The function of biological pulsation defines the goal of bringing oxygen to the tissues.
Q. Where can I learn more about functional thinking?
A. The American College of Orgonomy gives a course on functional thinking to qualified students.

Apropos of Climate Change

The climate is always changing. To say that the climate is changing is one thing. To say that it is changing because of human activity is another. To say that the climate is changing because humans are using fossil fuels is still another. To say that the use of fossil fuels by humans is causing climate change and causing global warming is yet another. Scientists and leftist ideologues often confuse them so that they can blame human activity as the culprit behind climate change. Mechanistic scientists and political ideologues cannot tolerate spontaneous changes in nature because they have no way to explain them according to their ways of thinking. Therefore, they try to immobilize nature in their minds according to their computer models to fit into their preconceived mathematical views of how nature should function. These models say more about the mechanistic scientist and politician than about nature that they seem to be trying to understand.
Moreover, generating confusion about the climate by saying that it is due to human activity is a tactic of the emotional plague character. The effect is to paralyze people’s work function and the economy.
It is first important to understand the effect of the emotional plague character’s destructiveness on the planet before we can think about the relationship between human activity and the climate. At present, there is no conclusive proof that the changes that are occurring in the climate are due to humans using fossil fuels.

The Impending Demise of the Two Party System

The following excerpt is from my upcoming book, Clueless:
“The function of the two Party system was the foundation of American politics. It is about to become a thing of the past and people are unaware of what is happening or why. This system functioned to maintain the opposing ideological forces of the political left and the right in the authoritarian social order of the past when there were generally an equal number of liberals and conservatives in the Democratic and Republican Parties. The equal numbers functioned to balance the opposing forces.
In today’s anti-authoritarian society, the two party system no longer represents a balance of opposing fundamental ideas to maintain social stability. It has become an anachronism.
The breakdown of the two party system started with the anti-authoritarian transformation of society and the radicalization of the Democratic Party in the 1960’s. This was accompanied by the shift in the political mainstream to the far left of center, the so-called socio-political red-shift. The upshot of the red-shift was that in their attempts to gain the support of the electorate’s demands, both parties found themselves in varying degrees to the left of the political center. Both Parties were endorsing the same socialist policies and vying for political dominance through them. This, in effect, destabilized the opposing political forces.
People from both Parties are increasingly becoming disillusioned with the spectacle of “politics as usual” but they have no satisfactory alternative. When a politician with a non-political persona like Donald Trump comes along, many people become enthralled with him. They may be tired of politicians but they are still looking for political answers.
But, politicians have no answers to understand what is happening in America because the solutions are not in the province of politics. Trump may not be beholden to others because of his enormous wealth but he still has a socio-political character structure that is what ultimately determine all people’s including Donald Trump’s political behavior and character trumps everything.”

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 139 other subscribers
  • Follow Charles Konia, M.D.’s Tweets on Twitter

  • See Charles Konia, M.D. on Amazon

  • See Charles Konia, M.D. on Facebook

  • American College of Orgonomy