John Paul Jones, 2007

"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two is four. If that is granted, all else follows." -- George Orwell
"In the end the party would announce that two plus two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later; the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality was tacitly denied by their philosophy." -- George Orwell, 1984

Epistemology is the study of the nature, source, and criteria of knowledge. As a "geometrical synthesis of the whole occult doctrine," the Seal of Solomon suggests a great deal about occult epistemology. To recapitulate the basic ideas attributed to the hexagram in Judeo-Freemasonry, we quote the Encyclopedia of Freemasonry: "The interlacing triangles or deltas symbolize the union of the two principles or forces, the active and passive, male and female, pervading the universe.... The Two triangles, one white and the other black, interlacing, typify the mingling of the two apparent powers in nature, darkness and light, error and truth, ignorance and wisdom, evil and good, throughout human life." (Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, Albert G. Mackey, 33rd Degree Freemason, and Charles T. McClenachan, 33rd Degree Freemason, p. 801.) In the Jewish Kabbalah, the same meaning is attributed to the "Star of David", which is what we might expect, since Freemasonry is based on the Jewish Kabbalah. (An argument could be made that Freemasonry is Judaism for gentiles. Pope Leo XIII urged the faithful to "tear away the mask from Freemasonry", and if that is done, what lies beneath is the age old enemy of the Catholic faith; namely, Talmudic-Kabbalistic Judaism. To understand this, one need only understand the meaning of Solomon's Seal. Here we focus on one aspect of that multifaceted meaning.)

As an ideograph, the Seal of Solomon emblematically equalizes, and therefore relativizes, truth and error, suggesting that truth and falsehood are equally significant, equally powerful, equally necessary, and mutually interdependent, i.e., interlocked, symbolically speaking. In "the mysticism of identity", as Ratzinger calls it, "there is in the end no distinction between good and evil", from which it follows that there is no value distinction between the good of the mind (truth) and the evil of the mind (falsehood), either. (Joseph Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance) For from the occult perspective, or what has been called "the vital lie tradition", falsehood, lie, and illusion are seen as every bit as vital and valuable as truth, and therefore, every bit as good. Among others, Friedrick Nietzsche, a Freemason, questioned the idea that truth is more valuable than lie: "Is wanting not to allow oneself to be decieved really less harmful, less dangerous, less calamitous?" What do you know in advance of the character of existence to be able to decide whether the greater advantage is on the side of the unconditionally mistrustful or or the unconditionally trusting?" After all, are there not many useful, beautiful, inspirational, comforting lies? Are there not many fearful, ugly, disheartening truths? (Gay Scienza, page 281) What Nietzsche, who was a Freemason, according to Lady Queensborough's Occult Theocracy, was apparently getting at is the idea that truth is unobtainable, that errors are needful in life, and that the conviction that man can discover objective truth is itself an illusion, in which case the moral distinction between truth and lie becomes nebulous.

George Orwell, allegedly a member of a Kabbalist magical fraternity (the Golden Dawn), evidently knew well that the epistemological basis of the Big Brotherhood behind Big-Brotherism is conceptual relativism. Speaking for the inner Party, the antagonist, O'Brien, tells Winston Smith, the protagonist: "You believe that reality is something objective, external, existing in its own right. You also believe that the nature of reality is self-evident. When you delude yourself into thinking that you see something, you assume everybody else sees the same thing as you. But I tell you, Winston, that reality is not external. Reality exists in the human mind, and nowhere else." (Orwell, 1984, pg. 249) Recently, the popular techno-hip movie The Matrix advanced this epistemological relativism, which holds that there's no reality outside of our own mind. By means of this incredibly slick subterfuge in the form of a film, young people are slyly seduced into accepting the very epistemological viewpoint that will assure their assimilation into the Masonic media-matrix, or what Michael A. Hoffman II, calls "the Videodrome". Hoffman calls the movie "a virus", and indeed, that is an apt description, since conceptual relativism is the contagion of our time. Here we will examine this relativism in light of George Orwell's famous work of fiction, 1984.

According to Eric Fromm in the introduction to my version of 1984, Orwell shows the great illusion of the assumption that epistemolgical relativism and freedom can continue to co-exist. Since this view runs so contrary to what we are led to think today, it's one worth questioning at length. The danger that nucleor weapons pose to an open democracy is obvious. We have no difficulty understanding how the threat of nucleor terrorism or war can be used as the justificaiton or pretext to implement a seamless and all-encompassing surveillance system. But what connection there is, if any, between relativism and Big-Brotherism is not so obvious, and it certainly seems a subject less commented upon. Since, in my view, relativism was soundly refuted by Socrates over two thousand years ago, it won't be our task here to address the epistemoloigcal soundness of that theory. The theory owes its success not to any epistemological soundess, but rather to it's almost irresistable sex appeal. After all, if there is no objective truth, all things are permitted and the only rule is the rule of the jungle, or social Darwinism. The sex appeal of Darwinism is obvious; what better excuse to behave like an animal than the theory that that's all we are?

In "Truth and Tolerance", Joseph Ratzinger points out that "relativism has become the central problem of faith of our time. It by no means appears simply as resignation in the face of the unfathomable nature of truth"; rather, he observes, relativism today defines itself as something positive, as the definitive idea of our age, one that promotes tolerance, dialectic discourse, and intellectual freedom. (Truth and Tolerance, page 117; quotes by Ratzinger should not be taken to mean that the author of this article supports Vatican II.) "In current thinking", says Ratzinger, "the conscience appears as an expression of the absolute value of the subjective self, above and beyond which there can be no further judgement in the moral realm. What is good as such cannot be known. The one God cannot be known. As far as morality and religion are concerned, the self is the final arbiter. That is logical, if we have no access to truth as such." In other words, epistemological relativism leads logically to ethical relativism, which makes the self or one's will the absolute: "Do As Thou Will Shall Be The Whole of the Law." As we will see, however, that this "FREEDOM IS SLAVERY", to use the slogan of the inner party in Orwell's novel.

Ratzinger notes, also, how we've been led to think that relativism is the philosophical basis of democracy, which is constantly threatened by those who claim to know "the truth", the only right way to go forward, a presumption which is used to force one view of the truth down the the collective throat of society and the world. "A free society is said to be a relativistic society; only on this condition can it remain open and free", writes Ratzinger. Not that Razinger embraces this fallacy, but he does present the opposing view fairly and thus frames the problem well.

Interestingly, however, Orwell's book advances a theory altogether at odds with the cultural relativism that's being touted as our only salvation from intellectual imperialism and tyranny. Unbeknowst to most, this relativism forms the basis of Solomonic magic and modern satansim as expounded by Aleister Crowley: "In order to do that (to become free) we must become a new kind of person, and we have to start that process the same way the legendary Knights Templar did -- by first liberating ourselves from the great delusion that keeps most of us in a state of spiritual bondage -- the delusion that we do not create our own reality..." Lon Milo Duquette, "The Key to Solomon's Key", page 102. The idea that we each create our own reality is of course a form of relativism, and it sounds exciting and exhilerating to think we have this magical freedom to mould our reality. That's the sucker-bait anyway.

The epistemology of the inner Party in Orwell's novel is based upon Solomonic magic, and more precisely, that branch of Kabbalist magia which is called black magic, as opposed to the white magic that's common in the outer Party. The relevant distinction between white and black magic is this: in white magic, evil is done so that good may come of it, but in black magic, good is done so that evil may come of it. In other words, the white magician invokes evil spirits (demons) because the end justifies the means; that is, as set forth in "Between Good and Evil" by Golden Dawn magician William Grey, the good magician utilizies those dark forces of his nature, the so called demonic aspects of the psyche, but uses them for good, allegedly, and in any case, rather than trying to suppress or deny or revile those forces, the "good" magician calls forth the demonic powers, commanding and cajoling them, via magical talismans and incantations, to do what the magician percieves as good rather than evil. In psychoanalytic circles I suppose this might be likened to sublimation, but it's quite different because the white magician is actually trying to consciously evoke and exhibit the dark fores, to summon them from the deep subconscious so that they can be dealt with and used, supposedly, to do good, despite the obvious reluctance that evil spirits would presumably have to good.

So viewed, these "evil" entities, which in the Catholic world are considered evil spirits and cardinal sins, such as envy, pride, lust, etc., can no longer be seen as evil by the magician insofar as they are percieved as necessary, inevitable, and if properly utilized, "good" forces in the sense that their power is directed by a supposedly good magician to achieve supposedly good ends.

In Grey's words: "If the real Satan is the sum total of human Evil, it is bound to ultimately destroy us unless we can bring it under our control and utilize its energy beneficially. There is an almost exact parallel between evil and nuclear energy..." Evil, he adds, like nuclear energy, is an extremely powerful force, yet it has side effects such that, even when harnessed to do good, e.g., to provide electrical energy for our cities, it entails negative and seemingly unavoidable side effects., such that, even knowing its power, we are rightly reluctant to rely upon it. Like evil, nuclear energy has long-term effects on human genetics, which we call mutation. The physical deformity caused by exposure to radient energy is more obvious perhaps but no less devastating than the moral effect of what might be called "bad seed", i.e., people who have no concern for others and precious little even for themselves. Evil thus seems to become part and parcel of our collective DNA, or a sort of hereditary original sin if you will.

Yet later, after saying as much, Gray postulates the theory that all energy is energy pure and simple, so there's no fundamental difference, so to speak, between "good" and "evil" energy; it all depends upon how it's used: "Since theoretically energy is energy pure and simple, and only intention motivates that energy for Good, Evil, or any intermediate purpose; the same energy that empowers a brutal murder might equally well be applied to saving a life or to some corresponding benefit to one's fellow human." The decisive factor is the motivation, Grey tells us. But how does this fit in with his earlier contention that evil is to magic what nulear energy is to applied physics; namely, extremely powerful but not without negative, i.e., evil, side effects, such that, despite its tremendous power, one might well be reluctant to rely upon it? Also, what appears to matter, as a practical matter, is not what good intents we have but what the actual consequences will be if those intents are acted upon. Thus the most important intent, one which can be corrupted by relativism, is our intent to know the truth of the matter, i.e., what will the consequences be in fact.

Implicitly, the inherent evilness of evil is demonstrated when the white witch draws down a circle as protection from the spirits invoked. Presumably, such protection would not be percieved as necessary if the forces were seen as benign, but in fact it's known that these spirits are often not only recalcitrant and reluctant to perform the will of the white magician, but what's more, the witch is in constant danger that the evil forces will use and abuse the witch to do evil rather than be controlled by the white witch to do what is percieved as good. Thus Grey's books contains the typical warnings to magicians by magicians.

Without trying to refute this occult view of good and evil, let it suffice to say how it differs from the Christian view, where good and evil are considered two mutually exclusive, incommensurable, irrecociliable, and fundamentally antagonisic and seperate powers. The Bible makes no distinction between white and black magic but simply forbids magic altogether. This is because, in the Christian veiw, evil is completely lacking in any moral justification. Evil is simply evil. Period. And good is good. End of story. In other words, from the Christian viewpoint, the end can never justify any evil means. Perhaps the worst consequence of magic is that it confuses and confounds the mind concerning good and evil, making evil seem good, good seem evil. There is no better symbolic icon to represent this conflation of good with evil, light with dark, than Solomon's Seal, where the two triangles, representing goond and evil, are interlocked, forming one symbol--suggestive, then, that the two are one, that the two so conjoined and equalized are more stable and solid than either seperated. In the occult paradigm, this represents the effective use of polarities, the equilibrium of opposites, the balance of good and evil.

We have stated, then, the difference that exists between black and white magic, but it remains to show how Orwell's novel depicts a dystopian world that's given itself over to magic completely. Malcolm Pittock, in his essay "The Hell of Nineteen Eight-Four", points out that the regime depicted 1984 has been widely percieved as in some sense Satanic. It's a "hell without a counterveiling heaven", the reign of anti-Christ without Divine deliverance or a New Jerusalem, where the rulers have "the kind of powers traditionally attributed to demons", e.g., telepathic suggestion, etc., and where some of the characters, e.g., Charrington, almost take on the appearance themselves of being shape shifting demons. Yet the numinous nature and diabolic darkness of Orwell's dystopia is no allegory of hell, no Inferno of Dante brought to earth, and it stems not from any supernatural powers possesed by the elite but rather from the possession of the elite by supernatural demonic powers as a consequence of the pervasive practice of magic. This is never stated explicitly, but it's the only hypothesis that can explain the keen observations made by Pittock and other commentators.

The Inner Party members are practitiners of black magic, and Orwell's novel is not only a warning about totalitarianism but a subtle warning to the world about giving itself over to the practice of magic, whether black or white. In Orwell's novel the distinction is clearly made, when Winston Smith, a member of the outer Party, erroneously assumes that the Inner Party, the Big Brothehoood behind Big Brother, justifies its machinations as a means to the common good: "He (Winston) knew in advance what O'Brien would say: that the Party didn't seek power for its own ends, but only for the good of the majority. That it sought power because men in the mass were frail, cowardly creatures who could not endure liberty or face the truth, and must be ruled over and systematically decieved by others who were stronger than themselves.....That the Party was the eternal guardian of the weak, doing evil that good might come, sacrificing its own happiness to that of others."

But O'Brien divests Winston of this illusion: "The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested soley in power. Not wealth or luxery or long life or happiness; only power, pure power...The object of persecution is persecution. the object of torture is torture. the object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" Power, O'Brien tells Winston, is power over other people, and there's no better way to demonstrate that power than through the infliction of pain. Thus, the dogma of the inner Party, as put forth by O'Brien, is simply Crowleyanity, the unmystified mystagoguey that is evil with eyes wide open, though never openly evil to the outer party or the proles, whom they must and do decieve. It is, no less, the power worship depicted in J.R.R. Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings"; namely, the black magic of the Dark Lord Sauron, and thus the end result is the same all-seeing Eye of Evil. The all-seeing eye is just as much the inveitable product of the process of Solomonic sorcery as Solomonic sorcery is the inevitable process of the occult paradigm. Thus the all-seeing eye surfaces in both works of fiction because both works are fundamentally historical, not in the sense that they are allegories of the actual historical events of any particular time, but in the grand sense, or the deeper and more illustrative sense, in that they are based upon a careful study of history and reveal the lessons or meanings of history.

O'Brien goes on to boast: "We are the priests of power. God is power." There it is; the dogma of Kabbalist dualism plainly stated; God is a force, which force is power, a power that can be utilized by the magician to good or evil end, but the Dark Side of the Force is where the greatest power is, so the inner party is given over to black magic. because they're Priests of Power, who worship power as Ministers of Pain and Death. This is kabbalistic satanism, or Crowleyism, plain and simple, and anybody who doubts the reality or danger of the Crowleyite Qabalist conspiracy does so at their peril and the peril of posterity and the people they love. In short, Orwell's dystopia is Satanic because its rulers are in fact Satanists.

The insanity of this paradigm is based on the erroneous epistemology of relativism. Reality, according to the Inner Party, doesn't exist outside of oursevles, but as Freemason Duquette says, "we make our own reality" because reality exists in the human mind and nowhere else. Whatever the Inner Party holds to be truth is truth because the party, unlike individual minds that must soon die, exists both in the present and future as a perpetual collective consciousness established and sustained by what is essentially black magic. Even the past doesn't exist, except in the Party mind, because whoever controls the present controls the past. This is arguably the future as planed by the innermost sects of Kabbalistic Freemasonry, and George Orwell knew it because he was himself a member of the Golden Dawn, a magical fraternity composed of high-level Freemasons and Qabalists. As Aleister Crowley, himself a member of the Golden Dawn, who initiated Orwell, said: "...the whole basis of our theory is Qabalah." The Invisible Empire of Freemasonry, which is a secret soceity within a secret society, a religion within a religin, and a state within the state, comprises, at its higher levels, the Big Brotherhood behind Big Brother, and it's no coincidence, then, that the "All Seeing Eye" remains one of their central icons. They know full well, at least at the top. that it represents, to use an analogy, the eye of the dark lord Sauron, as depicted in JRR Tolkien's trillogy.

If you what to know what the New World Order that they plan will really be like, read George Orwell's famous novel. Freedom is indeed what they plan, but lest you be decieved by their propaganda, recall that, in Orwell's novel, one of the Inner Party's slogans is FREEDOM IS SLAVERY. After all, our slavery is their freedom to do whatever they will with us, whether it be robery, rape, or torture--you name it. Therein lies the crux of the matter. There, plainly stated, is the reason you should resist the New World Order lest you commit high treason to our Constitutional Republic, and what's worse, much worse, high treason to the King of Heaven, the one true God of love and truth, Jesus Christ, who is the only Way away from evil. When O'Brien says to Winston, in Winston's dream, "until a time when ther is no darkness", this is characteristic Kabbalistic crypto-mockery on O'Brien's part; what he really means is; until the time when we have you incarcerated in the Ministry of Love, where the lights are always glaring. The whole socieity is based on this kind of crypto-mockery.

"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face--forever." (George Orwell, 1984) If you want a picture of an incontrovertible refutation of relativism, ask yourself this question: Is the excruciating pain of Hell relatively painful, or is it absolutely so? How proud, how tough, how smart, or how clever do you think you would really feel after two minutes in Hell? Even a satanic Qabalist Crowleyite should be able to fathom the obvious answers to these questions after but a few minutes in the tortures that they would gladly inflict upon us. This is the irony at the end of Orwell's book, that the inner party, the Priest of Pain, the Ministery of Misery, inflict torture which is both the bulwark thier contrived consensus (i.e., reality) but ultimately the utter refutation of relativism.

Joseph Runzo defines this relativism as follows: "In general, conceptual relativism is the view that what is true depends on a society's conceptual schema(s) - that is, depends on those cognitive resources, principally concepts, beliefs, and their interrelationships, which the members of any given society bring to experience, thereby ordering their 'world'. Rephrased then, conceptual relativism is the epistemological position that the truth of statements (3) is relative to the conceptual schema(s) from wihch they are formulated and /or assessed. Expressed in theology as theological relativism, this is the view that what is religious truth within one perioud of church history, or within one period of church history, or within one religous society, is false or merely mythological within another society, and vice versa." (Runzo, pg 117)

The logical implications of epistemological relativism, if it's accepted: (1) Moral or ethical relativism: "Do As Thou Will..." (2) Might is right, i.e., "POWER IS GOD" (3) Reality is what the greatest power says it is. (4) There is no higher moral authority than the State, the greatest power; whereas objectivists appeal to truth as the only legitimate basis of power, relativists can only appeal to the dictum that "might makes right", (5) Dissenters from the conceptual schema of society are ipso facto insane (6) Isolation, alienation, desolation, lack of trust; the all seeing eye as the abomination of desolation.


* Bloom, Harold (2007) 1984: Bloom's Modern Critical Interpretations
* Crowley, Aleister, (1986) The Equinix, Vol. III No. 10
* Duquette, Lon Milo (2006) The Key to Solomon's Key
* Gray, William (1989) Between Good and Evil
* Hoffman, Michael A. (2001) Secret Societies & Psychological Warfare
* Hoffman (1986) Psychology and Epistemology of 'Holocaust' Newspeak
* Kreeft, Peter J. (2005) The Philosophy of Tolkien
* Naudon, Paul (1991) The Secret History of Freemasonry 
* Neitzsche, Freidrick () The Will To Power
* Orwell, George (1949) 1984
* Ratzinger, Joseph (2004) Truth and Tolerance
* Runzo, Joseph (1986) Religious Experience an Religious Belief: 
  Essays In The Epistemology of Religious Belief
* Tolkien, J.R.R. () The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien

Winston's faith, unbeknownst perhaps to Winston, remains the faith of Christianity, which was also the faith of Plato, that God is truth, that truth is divine, and that truth is not only worth seeking and keeping, but it's the only legitimate basis of power or authentic criterion of sanity. It is this faith in objective truth, of course, which the Qabalistic anti-Christian Crowleyites are determined to destroy, and thus they seek out heretics, whose resistence to the relativism of the party is seen, rightly, as heresy against the anti-Christ, or Satan, the Father of Lies, who is the hidden power behind Big Brother's mysterious smile. We might well wonder, then, if George Orwell, in the throes of a desperate struggle with his deathly disease, Tuberculosis, and not willing to die until he completed his book, 1984, shared Winston's faith, not knowing, perhaps, how Christian, how non-humanistic, how alien his faith was to the Corpus Anti-Christi from which he had presumably been estranged.

The motto "Do As Thou Will Shall Be The Whole of the Law", which is the logical implication of epistomelogical relativism, by no means owes its origin to cretin Crowley; Sir Francis Dashwood, the founder of the infamous Hellfire's Club, used it, according to Secret Soceities of America's Elite by Steven Sora. Also, in another book we read: "In his rule at the abbey of Theleme, Rabelais (1494-1553), who was certainly an accepted mason, has left us with the constitution of a society of free men. The sole rule of the Thelemites was this: Do What You Will..." (Paul Naudon, pg. 39-40, The Secret History of the Freemasons) Thus, although Crowley supposedly recieved this revelatory maxim from a spirit guide, this may be but another among the multifarious frauds perpetrated by Crowley and clan.

"The first impossibility required of the adept is Black Magic is therefore that he should love God before he bewitches his neighbor; that he should put all his hopes in God before he makes a pact with Satan; that, in a word, he should be good in order to do evil." (Freemason and black witch A.E. Waite, "The Book of Black Magic", as quoted from page 136)

"Magical Theory accepts the absolute reality of all things in the most objective and absolute sense. But all perceptions are neither the observer nor the observed; they are representations of the raltion between them. We cannot affirm any quality in an object as being independent of our sensorium, or as being in intself that which it seems to us. Nor an we assume that what we cognize is more than ap artial phantom of tis cause." (Magick in Theory and Practice", page 110)

"Magick recognizes frankly (1) that truth is relative, subjective, and apparent; (2) that Truth implies Omniscience, which is unattainable by mind, being transfinite; just as if one tried to make an exact map of England in England, that map must contain a map of the map, and son on, ad infinitum; (3) that liogical contradiction is inherent in reason, (Russell, 'Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy', p. 136; Crowley, 'Eleusis', and elsewhere); (4) that a Continuum requires a Continueem to be conmmensurable with it: (5) that Empiricism is ineluctable , and therefore that adjustment is the only possible method of action; and (6) that error may be avoided by opposing no resistance to change, and registering observed phenomena in their own language." (Crowley, "Magick In Theory and Practice", page 78)

Malcolm Pittock observes that the regime depicted 1984 has been widely percieved as in some sense Satanic; it's a hell without a cooresponding heaven, the reign of anti-Christ without Divine deliverance, a dystopia with no dearth of demons, yet devoid of angels, where the rulers have "the kind of powers traditionally attributed to demons", e.g., telepathic suggestion, etc., and where some of the characters, e.g., Charrington, almost take on the appearance themselves of being shape shifting demons. However, although the regime in in command of supernatural powers, they are neither ominpotent nor omniscient.

In other words, the Brotherhood is a phantom opposition, completely fabricated and fictional, else controlled opposition, completely compromised and complicit in the conspiracy.

"Know the truth and the truth shall make you free." -- Jesus Christ



Kabbalah Unmasked
"THEIR GOD IS THE DEVIL. THEIR LAW IS UNTRUTH. THEIR CULT IS TURPITUDE." Pope Piux IX, speaking of Kabbalistic Freemasonry
What's Behind Freemasonry
What's Beyond Freemasonry?
Double Triangle of Solomon
Six Exoteric Ways the Hexagram Means 6 6 6
Warning to Catholics from Council of Toledo
Kabbalist Dualism Debunked
Pope Leo XIII's famous Encyclical Against Freemasonry
Prayer for Freemasons