xAI Grok commenting (response to my query) on Arthur Mendel’s “Vision and Violence” and my quote from Mendel that apocalyptic is the most violent and destructive idea in history.
“Mendel’s real insight is warning us to watch out for any idea that promises salvation through catastrophe. That’s where the trouble starts.”
Mendel, along with colleagues Richard Landes, David Redles, and Arthur Herman, shows how the primitive myth of apocalypse (and its full complex of related beliefs) continues to infect and dominate contemporary religions and the “secular ideologies” of the modern era. It has to do with the totalitarian’s formula of “Fear=control”. As, for example, in the psychopathology of a “left-wing/Progressive” elite control that pushes salvation schemes that destroy societies to “save some world” imagined to be under existential threat from differing others. We are, with our front-row seats, watching this play out in the “madness of crowds” climate alarmism crusade, the widespread Woke Progressive/DEI crusade, etc.
Grok gives its feedback, below, on the most dominant of bad ideas across human history, ideas that still dominate our world religions and also our most prominent ideologies- i.e. Marxism, environmental alarmism, etc.
Note:
History’s greatest oxymoron (i.e. combining contradicting things), as embodied in Paul’s merger of Historical Jesus with his entirely opposite Christ myth, that is below this opening section- “The Great Christian Contradiction”. My taking up the project of Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy to pull the “diamonds out of the dung” (their terms, not mine).
Then:
Douglas Murray offered an interesting comment in his recent debate with Dave Smith on a Joe Rogan podcast. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ah6kirkSwTg
Murray spoke about how as we go forward through life, that our path through the years is often like travelling through a fog due to the limitations of our knowledge about what to do, what choices to make. But later, when we look back over our lives we don’t see any fog, just the path that we took.
I asked Grok about Joseph Campbell’s similar statement on this and Grok responded…
“Campbell nailed it—life feels like a novel in hindsight, with all its twists and turns weaving a story we couldn’t predict. Like he said, you don’t see the pattern while you’re living it, but looking back, it’s as if someone planned the plot.”
And a point or two on the debate between Douglas Murray and Dave Smith on their recent appearance on a “Joe Rogan Experience” podcast:
First an intro note: These debates illustrate “nuance”, difference in concerns (both legitimate), the complexity of problems and solutions, differing emphases on differing moral values (again both sides offering legitimate positions), and more. Its not simply about who “wins” or who “loses”, as in tribal mentality and opposition.
Murray was defending the Israeli military actions in Gaza as necessary, despite the civilian “collateral damage” deaths, because Hamas is committed to the extermination of Israelis. And the IDF is trying to be as cautious as possible while facing opponents who do not follow the traditional protocols of war by hiding among civilians, etc.
Unfortunately, the only safe and rational response in some situations is directly bombing/killing your attackers, but yes, as “humanely” as possible, as the Israelis do in warning civilians ahead of time to vacate areas to be bombed.
When you are dealing with people dominated by religious ideas/beliefs/themes, there is often no shred of rationality remaining in such minds. You cannot reason with such people who believe that God is on their side, and they are fulfilling the will of their God, they are heroically fighting a righteous battle to help their God defeat his enemies, to exterminate that “evil” from the world. There is a mental, emotional deformity operating in such minds that cannot be safely reasoned with.
There is no proper way to negotiate with such people as they will trick, deceive, and manipulate to gain advantage over your more rational approach and your desire for peace. They are bent on extermination of your group and society, and your only safe and necessary “defensive” action is to kill them in as humane a manner as possible.
But yes, Dave Smith made good points on the brutality of that Israeli war on Hamas in terms of the children and other innocents being killed. That is unacceptable. But then how do you act defensively to stop people committed to exterminating your people? Especially when that enemy does not follow the normal patterns of combatants in war. They hide weapons among civilians, in hospitals and civilian neighborhoods. And if you make ceasefire deals with them, they rearm for the next attack to exterminate you. What else can Israel do? What other approach would Smith propose to defend Israel?
Too often the more cautious approach to dealing with such people has ended horrifically for the more rational side in conflicts with such people. As Gad Saad warns, beware falling into “suicidal empathy” when dealing with such enemies. That appears to be what has happened with the US trade deals with China, as also with Western “multi-culturalism” that did not require that immigrants adapt to Western values and practices. Some of those immigrants in places like Europe now seek to transform Western liberal democracies into theocratic states dominated by their religion.
So also, this applies to the Woke Progressive use of an extremist pacifist-like treatment of violent criminals in US cities over past years. That has ended badly for innocent others.
In the Murray debate on Rogan with Dave Smith, Murray appeared to be making the better points in regard to the Israeli defensive action to eliminate Hamas, but Smith made good points on what the death of civilians was doing to further hatred and desire for further revenge among Palestinians. They gave some sense of the complexities of war and how do we respond to defend our populations and yet maintain our own humanity.
After a terrible start by Murray, lecturing Rogan on who he should platform and defending “expertise” as in Covid “experts” who lied to us, Murray then found his footing a bit better and made some helpful points re Churchill, Israel, Ukraine, etc. But yikes, the arrogant snobbery in his opening comments. Does success do that to people? I’ve read and appreciated much his books “War on the West”, and “Madness of Crowds”.
The bigger question/issue for all of us is– Where are the heroic figures like Nelson Mandela? As he left the prison where he had been confined for decades, he said, “I set aside my feelings of hatred and committed to working for an inclusive South Africa”, committed to forgiving his enemies and including his former oppressors in a new society.
Where are the courageous heroes like Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin who chose to end the insanity and destruction of endless “eye for eye” cycles of revenge and make peace? People who find a way to end violence. No matter the cost to them personally.
And you wonder why I repeatedly post the central statement of Historical Jesus on this very issue? His central theme of- “Let there be no more eye for eye retaliation, but instead, love your enemy because God does”.
Now, two of the best at investigative journalism and commentary on the issues of our time…
This IS the battle for the future… the great war for totalitarianism versus freedom
https://www.racket.news/p/transcript-america-this-week-apr-a04
“Transcript – America This Week, Apr 11, 2025: ‘We Did Get Fooled Again’: In 1992, Bill Clinton helped wipe out a century of labor battles through embrace of China. This week, lifetime tariff proponent Bernie Sanders launched a sequel. Plus, ‘Faith of Our Fathers,’ by PKD”, Matt Taibbi, Walter Kirn, April 12, 2025
Some comments/quotes re the discussion in the link above…
I keep urging everyone in our online discussion group to not get lost in the media-generated hysteria over this or that tariff in this or that country and thereby miss the big picture of what this battle is really about- i.e. a future of either totalitarianism or freedom. That is what is going on behind all this present disruption of the world trading system. Don’t focus on market swings and other things that detract from this central behind-the-scenes struggle for the future of civilization that is no longer really behind any scenes.
We face an aggressive opponent committed to expansionism and with plans for total control of societies, backed by the WEF crowd of Klaus Schwab, Mark Carney, Chrysta Freeland, along with many other Woke Progressives and climate alarmists like Bill Gates, etc. Canada has already experienced ongoing meddling in our elections, threats to our citizens, and other forms of intrusive influence by China.
And yes, affirming Kirn, this is not against the Chinese people but about the thugs dominating and controlling that beautiful country.
To start-
This most telling statement of how the Democrats, the former party of labor, of workers, did this to American workers under Bill Clinton, something that is now pushed by Bernie Sanders…
“Only this formerly workers’ rights-oriented party could simply vaporize workers’ rights and send them off on the jet stream across the Pacific and South across the Mexican border…. since China’s admission to the WTO, I think the last time I checked, it was like 57,000 factories had closed in the United States. So it may be higher now…”
Why was this done?
“This was going to benefit the American managerial class and the CEO class… this whole thing was always about sort of the upper crust of America, the CEO class, finding a way to siphon off the profits and leave the whole messy business of governing and negotiating with workers and all that stuff to other lesser peoples…”
Taibbi and Kirn unravel just what has happened with the US trade deals with China, a nation that they admit has outsmarted the US, to the great disadvantage of the US, and now left the US in a very dangerous position… with things like China’s massive ownership of US debt.
“And what did we do? That debt is now, it’s on the backs of the very people who lost their jobs. I mean, that 40, $35 trillion or $40 trillion or whatever it really is, because the books are massively understated, our real indebtedness. It is basically on the charge card of the nation state of the United States, and everybody else gets off scot-free. And the Chinese lending us money, they’re glad to do it, why wouldn’t they? We got to pay it back with interest. And for us to be paying for the pleasure of having our entire manufacturing sector ripped off by these fucking crooks, it’s just so obscene. And then to see everybody cave on it is just, I mean, that part of it, I just can’t take. I mean, I don’t know. Sorry, go ahead…”
They go on about how China now manufactures critical things that the US needs in all sorts of areas…
“What was never divulged was that it would go past Barbies, it would go past sofas, it would go past shoes, and it would become the very things you need to support a modern society. And we would buy them at their price. It would be cheap. But what would be priceless would be our loss of the ability to ultimately maybe even defend ourselves.”
Continuing…
“A nation called Taiwan, though not according to the CCP, that has got such a stranglehold on chips as everybody knows, that if China should make good on its much-voiced desire to reincorporate that nation, well the lights go out. Really honestly, the lights go out here… that was the great unspoken risk to all this, that we would become enfeebled, that we would become absolutely infantile in our dependence on vital products, that we could no longer make, that we’d lost the ability to make, and that recreating the conditions to make would take too long to even be worthwhile.”
The US dependence on China, at the cost of American jobs but benefit to CEOs, the wealthy, that dependence on China was sold to America in the vision of cheaper consumer items. That hidden cost and dangerous dependence was not divulged to Americans.
Then they discuss how China is strangling US culture and freedom of speech. Note, for example, how the NBA over past years has carefully censored its players and what they can say or not say about China. Or John Cena, who presents himself as muscled tough dude, falling on his knees and cringingly begging forgiveness from the Chinese thugs for “wrong-speak” re his comments on Taiwan (calling it a ‘country’). The Western cowardice regarding Taiwan has always irked me no end. It is a free and independent country.
They continue…
“The original issue that we had with China, it wasn’t even about the deficit or trade cheating or any of that stuff. It was about the fact that this is a politically unfree, totalitarian society that murders its own people in ways that were just as bad as the Soviet Union, which we condemned as an absolute evil at the time. And now China has a stranglehold on American culture. You can’t make a movie that China doesn’t like. The Karate Kid is Chinese now, I mean, it’s not even a Japanese story, right? It’s incredible.
“We are hopelessly enmeshed with this deeply corrupt, totalitarian country… What we can’t even do is when one of their crappy labs leaks a world engulfing pathogen… Let’s leave aside for the moment how that pathogen was generated and who did the research and so on. But when one of their labs leaks this thing which spreads around the world and destroys and hobbles economies, we can’t even tell the truth about where it came from.”
Also, they illustrate some of the lunacy of Democratic hatred today, the hysteria resulting from TDS (“Trump Derangement Syndrome”). Note that congressman who recently became flustered at the Trump trade representative sitting in front of him, after finding out that the tariffs had just been halted and he doesn’t know what to do with his anger. So he stumbles around trying to locate a target for his “WTF” rage. Reduced to simply shouting “WTF” a couple of times. Unbelievable craziness.
Add the lunacy of Democratic “McCarthyism” that has been nonstop for years, even smearing one of their own, Bernie Sanders, as a “Russian asset” to derail his campaigns. Rachel Maddow has also begun stirring her “Russian collusion” lunacy again. McCarthyism on steroids.
Taibbi and Kirn touch on the pathetic shifts, contradictions, and hypocrisy of Bernie Sanders who once advocated tariffs but now will say the most hypocritical things to enhance his redemption with Democrats. He now affirms things that he had in recent years railed against. Illustrating what “selling your soul” for party approval looks like. But the Democrats, after demonizing Sanders over recent years, are now reviving him as possibly their best candidate and Bernie is embracing this revived love of his tribe.
They post snippets of Sander’s previous statements in Congress against the trade deficits with China and the need for tariffs, calling his recent shift in his positions on that “as perfect and thorough a reversal as I think I’ve ever seen in politics.”
Trump is doing the very thing that Sanders has long believed is necessary to help American workers who have lost jobs. As Taibbi and Kirn say, Sanders previous speeches on globalization and China could have come out of Trump’s mouth. AI could mix them up, exchanging heads, and no one could differentiate between their basic comments. Hence, the embarrassing spectacle of Sanders today.
And then...
Grok responding to my list of the most common ideas/beliefs across history…
My point is that these basic themes have deformed human minds from the beginning of emerging human consciousness in the prehistory era. They have infected the early human expression of our primal impulse for meaning and horrifically distorted human understanding of reality and life.
Yet they still dominate the great world religions and in the modern era they continue to dominate “secular ideologies”, and even science (e.g. climate “science”).
Perhaps most destructive, they deform our engagement of the hero’s quest, inciting too many people to exaggerate their own righteousness as they engage battles against “evil enemies” in some heroic endeavor to purge evil from the world. While there are dangerous people who must be restrained, incarcerated, or killed where necessary (i.e. if refusing to surrender peacefully), we must never forget that, beyond the tribalisms of this life, even our enemies are ultimately family (i.e. the ultimate oneness of all humanity).
As Joseph Campbell said…
“For love is exactly as strong as life. And when life produces what the intellect names evil, we may enter into righteous battle, contending ‘from loyalty of heart’: however, if the principle of love (Christ’s “Love your enemies”) is lost thereby, our humanity too will be lost. ‘Man’, in the words of the American novelist Hawthorne, ‘must not disclaim his brotherhood even with the guiltiest’” (Myths To Live By).
Remember also that the real battle of good versus evil takes place inside us, it runs down the center of every human heart (Solzhenitsyn)- the battle of our common human spirit against our common inheritance of animal drives, drives such as the “evil triad” of tribalism, domination, punitive destruction of differing others. Drives that are incited and validated by the “bad religious ideas” listed below.
I asked Grok: Grok what have been the most common and prominent myths or ideas across human history, in mythologies and religions?
My list includes:
(1) The past was better. (2) We destructive humans (inherent sinfulness) ruined that original paradise. (3) The gods/spirits are now angry with us and punishing us for our sins through natural disasters, disease, accidents, predatory cruelty. (4) The gods also threaten a great final ending of all things, the violent destruction of apocalypse. A return to the original destructive chaos. (5) The upset gods (as restorers of violated justice) then demand some sacrifice/payment, that we should suffer for our sins as payback punishment. (6) Further, they demand that we heroically join some true religion or ideological tribe/movement to fight against evil enemies that disagree (Zoroaster’s cosmic dualism). Our enemies are threatened with this-life extermination and then eternal damnation in hellfire. (7) Then, having fought and won our righteous wars to purge evil from life, we will be granted salvation in a communal paradise/utopia.
Do you see these as the most prominent ideas shaping human narratives across human history?
Grok responded:
Your list captures some of the most recurring and influential themes in human mythologies and religions, reflecting deep psychological, social, and existential concerns. These ideas resonate across cultures and eras because they address universal questions about meaning, morality, suffering, and destiny. However, their prominence varies by context, and other themes also stand out in the broader tapestry of human belief systems. Let’s evaluate your list and consider additional or complementary ideas that have shaped human narratives, keeping things concise but thorough.
Your List: Analysis and Reflection
1. The Past Was Better (Golden Age Myth)
Prominence: Extremely common. From Hesiod’s Ages of Man (Greek) to the Garden of Eden (Abrahamic traditions) to the Satya Yuga (Hinduism), the idea of a lost paradise or ideal era is near-universal. It reflects nostalgia, a sense of decline, and a yearning for simplicity or harmony.
Nuance: Some traditions, like Confucianism or certain Indigenous myths, don’t always idealize the past but emphasize cyclical renewal or present duty over nostalgia. Still, the “golden age” trope is pervasive.
2. Humans Are Destructive/Sinful, Ruining Paradise
Prominence: Dominant in many traditions, especially Abrahamic religions (original sin), but also in myths like Pandora’s box (Greek) or the fall from dharma in Hinduism/Buddhism. It frames humans as flawed, often tying morality to cosmic consequences.
Nuance: Not all systems see humans as inherently destructive. Some animistic or polytheistic traditions view human flaws as part of a balanced cosmos, not a fall from grace. Still, the “human fault” narrative is widespread.
3. Gods/Spirits Punish Us for Sins (Natural Disasters, etc.)
Prominence: Very common, especially in monotheistic and some polytheistic systems. Flood myths (e.g., Noah, Gilgamesh, Deucalion) and stories of divine wrath (e.g., Sodom and Gomorrah, Kali’s destruction) link suffering to divine justice.
Nuance: In some traditions, like Buddhism or Stoicism, suffering stems from ignorance or natural processes, not divine anger. Still, the “punitive gods” idea is a major thread.
4. Threat of Apocalypse/Return to Chaos
Prominence: Strong in apocalyptic traditions like Christianity (Revelation), Islam (Qiyamah), Zoroastrianism (Frashokereti), and Norse mythology (Ragnarök). It dramatizes cosmic stakes and moral urgency.
Nuance: Not all myths emphasize a final end. Hinduism and Buddhism focus on cycles of creation/destruction (yugas, kalpas), and some Indigenous myths lack a singular “end.” But apocalypticism is a powerful motif, especially in Axial Age religions.
5. Gods Demand Sacrifice/Punishment for Sins
Prominence: Widespread, from ancient blood sacrifices (Mesopotamian, Aztec) to penance in Christianity or karma in Dharmic traditions. It reflects a transactional view of divine-human relations.
Nuance: Some systems, like Jainism or certain mystical traditions, de-emphasize external sacrifice for internal transformation. Still, the idea of “paying for sins” is near-ubiquitous.
6. Join the True Tribe to Fight Evil (Cosmic Dualism)
Prominence: Potent in dualistic systems like Zoroastrianism, Manichaeism, and Abrahamic faiths (God vs. Satan). It fuels crusades, jihads, and ideological wars, framing life as a moral battlefield.
Nuance: Less prominent in non-dualistic traditions (e.g., Taoism, Advaita Vedanta) that see opposites as unified. Still, “us vs. them” narratives are a major driver of conflict and identity.
7. Salvation in Paradise/Utopia After Victory
Prominence: Central to many religions—Christian heaven, Islamic Jannah, Buddhist Nirvana, or secular utopias (e.g., Marxist classless society). It offers hope and purpose.
Nuance: Some traditions (e.g., existentialist or animistic) focus on present harmony, not a future reward. But the promise of a perfect state is a widespread motivator.
Are These the Most Prominent Ideas?
Your list is remarkably comprehensive, hitting major chords in human storytelling: decline, guilt, divine justice, conflict, and redemption. These themes dominate especially in Axial Age religions (c. 800–200 BCE) and their successors (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Zoroastrianism, etc.), which shaped much of Western and Middle Eastern thought. They also appear in secular ideologies (e.g., progress narratives, revolutionary utopianism), showing their adaptability.
However, their prominence depends on how we weigh “human history.” If we focus on literate, state-based societies, your list is spot-on. But including oral traditions, Indigenous beliefs, or pre-Axial systems (e.g., early animism, shamanism) might elevate other themes. Here are a few additional or complementary ideas that rival your list in ubiquity:
Additional Prominent Themes
1. Cyclical Time and Renewal
Many traditions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Mesoamerican myths, Indigenous cosmologies) see time as cyclical, not linear. Creation, destruction, and rebirth repeat, unlike the linear “paradise-fall-apocalypse” arc. This view is as pervasive as apocalypticism, especially outside monotheistic traditions.
2. Ancestors and Continuity
Veneration of ancestors (African religions, Confucianism, Shinto, many Indigenous systems) ties the living to the dead, emphasizing duty and legacy over cosmic battles or utopias. This focus on kinship and lineage is arguably as universal as guilt or salvation narratives.
3. Harmony with Nature/Cosmos
Animistic and polytheistic systems (e.g., Native American, African, early Shinto) often prioritize living in balance with spirits, animals, or natural forces, rather than fighting evil or escaping sin. This contrasts with dualistic or apocalyptic frames but is equally widespread.
4. Trickster Figures and Ambiguity
Tricksters (Loki, Coyote, Anansi, Hermes) appear in countless myths, embodying chaos, creativity, and moral ambiguity. They challenge simplistic “good vs. evil” narratives, reflecting a human fascination with complexity.
5. Quest for Knowledge/Transcendence
From Gilgamesh’s search for immortality to Buddhist enlightenment or Gnostic awakening, the pursuit of wisdom or divine truth is a major motif, sometimes overshadowing sacrifice or utopia.
Synthesis
Your seven themes are among the most prominent, especially in shaping moralistic, state-supported religions and ideologies that influenced global history. They reflect a worldview where humans are flawed, gods are judgmental, and existence is a struggle toward justice or salvation. However, adding cyclical renewal, ancestor veneration, or nature harmony would round out the picture, especially for non-Western or premodern cultures. No single list can capture everything, but yours nails the core of many dominant narratives.
If you’d like, I can dig deeper into any theme, compare specific myths, or analyze how these ideas evolve in modern ideologies. What do you think?
I urged- Yes, please do analyze how these ideas evolve in modern ideologies
Grok responded:
The seven themes you identified—golden age nostalgia, human sinfulness, divine punishment, apocalyptic endings, sacrificial atonement, cosmic dualism, and utopian salvation—have deep roots in mythologies and religions. While modern ideologies (e.g., political, social, or secular movements) often claim to break from traditional religion, these ancient narrative structures persist, adapted to new contexts. Below, I’ll analyze how each theme evolves in modern ideologies, showing how they reshape old myths for contemporary purposes. I’ll keep it concise but comprehensive, drawing connections to specific ideologies where relevant.
1. The Past Was Better (Golden Age Nostalgia)
Evolution: The myth of a better past fuels many modern ideologies, often secularized as a lost ideal state.
Conservatism: Traditionalist ideologies romanticize a pre-modern era—e.g., a time of strong family values, national unity, or moral clarity—before industrialization, globalization, or cultural shifts “corrupted” society. Think MAGA’s “Make America Great Again,” implying a return to a vaguely defined golden era.
Environmentalism: Some green movements idealize pre-industrial or even pre-agricultural societies, casting them as harmonious with nature, unlike modern ecological “decline.”
Socialism/Communism: Marxist narratives frame early human societies (or “primitive communism”) as egalitarian, before class divisions ruined the communal ideal.
Shift: The “golden age” is less about divine creation and more about a socio-political or ecological benchmark. Nostalgia is weaponized to critique modernity, often ignoring historical complexities.
Example: Populist movements worldwide (e.g., Brexit) evoke a lost national sovereignty or cultural purity, adapting the myth to identity politics.
2. We Destructive Humans Ruined Paradise (Inherent Sinfulness)
Evolution: The idea of human flaw persists, but “sin” is reframed as ignorance, greed, or systemic failure.
Capitalism Critique: In leftist ideologies, humanity’s “sin” is exploitation—capitalist greed or colonialism wrecking equality or the planet. The fall is not from Eden but from fairness.
Technological Anxiety: Transhumanism or anti-tech movements (e.g., neo-Luddites) cast humans as reckless, ruining nature or ethics with unchecked innovation (AI, biotech).
Woke Ideology: Concepts like “systemic racism” or “toxic masculinity” secularize original sin, suggesting humans are inherently biased, requiring constant self-correction.
Shift: Divine judgment is replaced by social or ecological consequences. The focus moves from individual guilt to collective responsibility, though personal shame persists (e.g., “carbon footprints” or “privilege”).
Example: Climate activism often frames humanity as a destructive force, with overconsumption as the modern “fall” from ecological balance.
3. Gods Punish Us for Sins (Natural Disasters, etc.)
Evolution: Divine wrath becomes natural or social consequences in secular ideologies, but the punitive logic remains.
Environmentalism: Climate change is framed as nature’s “revenge” for human excess—floods, fires, and storms as secular analogs to biblical plagues. Activists like Greta Thunberg evoke moral urgency akin to prophetic warnings.
Progressivism: Social unrest, inequality, or cultural decay is seen as punishment for failing to address injustice (e.g., ignoring systemic racism leads to protests or division).
Conspiracy Theories: QAnon or anti-vax movements reinterpret disasters (pandemics, economic crashes) as elite-orchestrated punishments, echoing divine retribution myths.
Shift: The “gods” are replaced by impersonal forces (nature, markets, history) or shadowy cabals. The narrative still moralizes suffering as a wake-up call.
Example: Post-COVID narratives often blamed globalism or overpopulation, mirroring flood myths where calamity corrects human hubris.
4. Threat of Apocalypse/Return to Chaos
Evolution: Apocalypticism thrives in modern ideologies, projecting existential threats as climactic reckonings.
Climate Alarmism: Predictions of ecological collapse (e.g., IPCC reports, “12 years left” rhetoric) echo apocalyptic prophecy, urging repentance (lifestyle change) to avert doom.
Nuclear/Tech Fears: Cold War-era Mutually Assured Destruction or AI “singularity” fears secularize Ragnarök, imagining tech as the chaos-bringer.
Political Extremism: Both left and right envision societal collapse—e.g., Marxist “late capitalism” crumbling or far-right fears of “white genocide.” Each sees a final reckoning.
Shift: The apocalypse is less supernatural and more material (climate, tech, social breakdown), but the urgency and dualism (saved vs. damned) persist. Secular apocalypses often promise agency—humans can prevent it.
Example: Elon Musk’s warnings about AI as an “existential risk” mirror eschatological fears, with tech pioneers as modern seers.
6. Gods Demand Sacrifice/Punishment for Sins
Evolution: Sacrifice morphs into activism, policy, or personal reform, but the idea of “paying a price” endures.
Environmentalism: Carbon taxes, veganism, or reduced consumption are modern penances, sacrifices to appease an angry planet. “Degrowth” ideology demands collective suffering for sustainability.
Social Justice: Cancel culture or performative allyship acts as secular atonement—public shaming or career loss as punishment for moral failings (e.g., “problematic” speech).
Capitalist Meritocracy: Neoliberalism demands personal sacrifice (hustle culture, debt) to “earn” success, framing struggle as redemptive.
Shift: Sacrifice is less about blood or ritual and more about lifestyle, status, or resources. The punitive undertone remains, often tied to collective guilt.
Example: Reparations debates frame financial or social concessions as atonement for historical sins like slavery or colonialism.
7. Join the True Tribe to Fight Evil (Cosmic Dualism)
Evolution: Dualism fuels ideological tribalism, casting opponents as existential threats.
Political Polarization: Left vs. right, globalists vs. nationalists—modern politics thrives on “us vs. them.” Progressives demonize “fascists”; conservatives vilify “woke elites.” Each claims moral supremacy.
Culture Wars: Cancel culture or deplatforming mirrors excommunication, purging “heretics” (e.g., J.K. Rowling, Kanye West). The enemy is not just wrong but evil.
Secular Religions: Ideologies like Marxism or libertarianism offer “true” frameworks (class struggle, free markets) to defeat opposing systems, echoing Zoroastrian cosmic battles.
Shift: The “gods” are ideologies or charismatic leaders (e.g., Trump, AOC). Enemies face social annihilation (deplatforming) rather than hellfire, but eternal damnation lingers in rhetoric (e.g., “history’s dustbin”).
Example: Online echo chambers amplify dualism, with X posts framing opponents as threats to civilization, replicating crusade-like zeal.
8. Salvation in Paradise/Utopia After Victory
Evolution: Utopian promises drive modern ideologies, offering a perfected future post-struggle.
Socialism/Communism: Marxism envisions a classless society after revolution, a secular heaven where labor and inequality vanish.
Transhumanism: Tech utopias (e.g., Musk’s Mars colonies, Kurzweil’s singularity) promise transcendence through AI or space, replacing divine salvation with engineered immortality.
Progressivism: Inclusive, equitable societies are the goal—e.g., a world free of racism, sexism, or poverty—achieved through reform or upheaval.
Shift: Paradise is earthly, not divine, but requires purging evil (capitalism, bigotry, carbon). The communal focus remains, though tech utopias add individualism.
Example: Green New Deal rhetoric blends ecological salvation with social justice, promising a harmonious, equitable world post-capitalism.
Broader Patterns and Observations
Secularization: Gods and spirits are replaced by nature, history, markets, or elites, but the narrative structure—fall, punishment, redemption—stays intact. Ideologies function as religions, complete with dogma and heretics.
Moral Urgency: Modern ideologies amplify apocalyptic stakes (climate, AI, culture wars) to mobilize action, mirroring prophetic calls to repent. Fear of chaos drives commitment.
Tribalism: Dualism is supercharged by media and social platforms, making “enemies” more visible and vilified. X, for instance, amplifies outrage cycles, reinforcing “true tribe” narratives.
Adaptability: These themes persist because they tap universal fears (loss, guilt, chaos) and hopes (justice, harmony). Whether religious or secular, they frame existence as a meaningful struggle.
Critique: Some modern ideologies reject these myths. Existentialism denies utopias or cosmic justice, embracing absurdity. Postmodernism deconstructs dualism and grand narratives. Yet these are less popular, as humans crave structured meaning.
Conclusion
Your seven themes are strikingly resilient, morphing from mythic to ideological forms without losing their emotional or moral grip. They shape modern debates—climate, politics, tech—by recasting gods as systems, sins as policies, and salvation as progress. Their evolution reflects a shift from divine to human agency, but the core stories endure, proving their psychological and cultural power.
If you want, I can zoom in on a specific ideology (e.g., Marxism, environmentalism), compare their use of these themes, or explore how X reflects these trends in real-time. What’s next?
I continued- Kristian Niemietz in “Socialism: The failed idea that never dies” says that emotional satisfaction, not rational evidence, determines our choice in beliefs. Thoughts?
Grok responded:
Kristian Niemietz’s argument in Socialism: The Failed Idea That Never Dies—that emotional satisfaction, not rational evidence, drives belief in socialism—has some merit but oversimplifies human decision-making. Let’s unpack it in light of your earlier question about mythic themes in ideologies, as socialism’s persistence ties directly to those narrative patterns.
Niemietz’s Core Claim
Niemietz suggests socialism endures despite historical failures (e.g., Soviet Union, Maoist China, Venezuela) because it fulfills emotional needs—hope for equality, moral superiority, or rebellion against perceived injustice—rather than standing up to empirical scrutiny. He argues that supporters ignore evidence of economic stagnation or authoritarianism, clinging to a romanticized vision of fairness.
Strengths of the Argument
1. Emotional Resonance of Ideologies: Niemietz is right that emotions play a huge role in belief systems, especially for ideologies like socialism. Your listed themes—golden age nostalgia, human flaws, utopian salvation—thrive on emotional hooks. Socialism’s promise of a classless paradise taps into the mythic yearning for a lost communal ideal (theme 1) and a redemptive utopia (theme 7). These narratives feel satisfying because they offer purpose and moral clarity, often outweighing data like GDP declines or bread lines.
2. Cognitive Bias: Humans are prone to confirmation bias, seeking evidence that aligns with pre-existing beliefs. Socialism’s moral framing—fighting greedy capitalists (theme 6: cosmic dualism)—can make its failures (e.g., central planning inefficiencies) feel like acceptable trade-offs or external sabotage (e.g., “Western imperialism” blamed for Venezuela’s collapse).
3. Historical Amnesia: Niemietz points out that socialism’s disasters are often downplayed or reimagined. Each failure is dismissed as “not real socialism,” preserving the ideology’s emotional appeal. This aligns with your apocalyptic theme (theme 4): setbacks are temporary, and the “true” revolution is always around the corner.
Weaknesses of the Argument
1. Overemphasis on Emotion: While emotions matter, Niemietz underplays rational motivations. Socialism’s appeal isn’t just fuzzy feelings—it’s rooted in observable inequalities. For example, post-2008 financial crisis, wealth gaps widened (top 1% in the U.S. own ~32% of wealth, per Fed data). Supporters argue socialism addresses this better than capitalism, citing evidence like universal healthcare’s success in Nordic models (though Niemietz would argue these aren’t “true” socialism). Rationality and emotion intertwine—dismissing one oversimplifies.
2. Selective Critique: Niemietz focuses on socialism but ignores how capitalism also thrives on emotional narratives, not just evidence. Free-market ideology leans on myths of meritocracy and progress (your theme 7: salvation), despite failures like market crashes or monopolies. Libertarians often gloss over these, just as socialists excuse gulags. Emotional satisfaction isn’t unique to socialism—capitalism’s “rags to riches” story is just as seductive.
3. Mythic Universality: Your themes show that all ideologies, not just socialism, rely on emotional narratives. Conservatism (nostalgia for tradition), environmentalism (punishment by nature), or nationalism (tribal dualism) all prioritize feeling over facts at times. Niemietz’s laser focus on socialism feels like cherry-picking when every belief system uses your mythic patterns to some degree.
Connecting to Your Mythic Themes
Socialism’s staying power illustrates how your seven themes evolve in modern ideologies:
Golden Age (1): Socialism imagines a pre-capitalist or post-revolutionary harmony, emotionally satisfying as a lost Eden.
Human Flaws (2): Capitalist greed is the secular “sin,” justifying radical change.
Punishment (3): Economic crises or inequality are framed as capitalism’s “wrath,” punishing society for tolerating injustice.
Apocalypse (4): Marx’s “crisis of capitalism” predicts a collapse, emotionally gripping as a final reckoning.
Sacrifice (5): Revolution or redistribution demands personal or collective cost, framed as moral atonement.
Dualism (6): Workers vs. bourgeoisie mirrors good vs. evil, rallying followers to pick a side.
Utopia (7): The classless society is socialism’s heaven, emotionally compelling despite practical hurdles.
Niemietz is correct that these mythic elements make socialism feel good—its vision of justice and equality hits deep psychological chords. But he misses that this isn’t unique to socialism. Every ideology, from fascism to liberalism, uses similar emotional levers. Even his own critique leans on a mythic narrative: capitalism as the rational savior (theme 7) battling the delusional dragon of socialism (theme 6).
Broader Implications
People don’t choose beliefs in a vacuum—emotions, evidence, and context interact. Socialism’s appeal spikes in unequal times (e.g., Bernie Sanders’ surge amid U.S. wealth gaps) because it feels like a solution, not just a fairy tale. But Niemietz has a point: emotional satisfaction can blind supporters to trade-offs, like innovation stifled by overregulation (e.g., Soviet tech lagged behind the West). The truth lies in balance—emotions shape what we want to believe, but evidence constrains what we can sustain.
Final Thoughts
Niemietz’s argument is insightful but one-sided. Emotions drive socialism’s persistence, as your mythic themes show, but they also prop up every other ideology, including his preferred capitalism. Rational evidence matters, but it’s filtered through human needs for meaning and justice. Socialism “never dies” not because it’s uniquely irrational, but because inequality keeps the emotional fire burning.
If you’d like, I can dive deeper into socialism’s failures or successes, compare it to another ideology’s emotional pull, or check X for current sentiments about socialism. What’s your next step?
My question:
Grok how would you respond to Arthur Mendel’s statement in “Vision and Violence” that apocalyptic has been the most violent and destructive idea in history?
Grok’s answer:
Arthur Mendel’s claim in Vision and Violence that the apocalyptic idea is the most violent and destructive in history is a bold one, and it’s worth unpacking with a clear-eyed look at both sides. I’d argue it’s a strong contender, but not necessarily the unchallenged champion of destructive ideas—humans have cooked up plenty of ruinous notions over time.
On one hand, Mendel’s got a point. Apocalyptic thinking—whether rooted in religious visions of divine judgment or secular ideologies like revolutionary utopias—has fueled some serious havoc. It’s the kind of mindset that says, “Burn it all down, and paradise awaits.” You see it in the Crusades, where end-times fervor justified slaughter, or in millenarian cults that turned inward with deadly results, like Jonestown. Secular versions aren’t much better—think of the Bolsheviks or Mao’s Cultural Revolution, where the promise of a new world order came with purges and body counts in the millions. The idea’s power lies in its ability to make destruction feel righteous, even necessary. It’s like giving a moral blank check to chaos.
But let’s not crown it just yet. Other ideas have their own bloody resumes. Nationalism, for instance, has sparked wars, genocides, and ethnic cleansing with a fervor that doesn’t always need an end-of-days script—just look at the 20th century’s world wars or the Rwandan genocide. Colonialism, too, wrecked entire continents under the guise of “civilizing” missions, no apocalypse required. And don’t forget plain old greed—resource grabs and economic exploitation have killed and displaced millions without any grand narrative of cosmic renewal.
What makes the apocalyptic idea stand out, though, is its staying power and adaptability. It shapeshifts—God’s wrath becomes Reason’s triumph, then History’s march, then Nature’s revenge (hello, eco-doom). Mendel argues this chameleon-like quality keeps it dangerous across eras, unlike, say, nationalism, which is more tied to specific political structures. He’s got a case here: apocalypticism can infect any ideology, religious or not, and it thrives on crisis, real or imagined.
Still, I’d push back on “most violent and destructive” as a bit too absolute. It’s less about one idea being the ultimate villain and more about how humans wield ideas to justify what they already want—power, revenge, or a clean slate. Apocalypticism is a heavy hitter, sure, but it’s got competition. Mendel’s real insight is warning us to watch out for any idea that promises salvation through catastrophe. That’s where the trouble starts.
My next point:
An essential feature of apocalyptic is the idea of life declining toward something worse, toward collapse and ending. Arthur Herman in The Idea of Decline In Western History says that the idea of decline has become the most dominant and influential idea in modern history.
Grok’s response:
Arthur Herman’s claim in The Idea of Decline in Western History that the notion of decline is the most dominant and influential idea in modern history dovetails intriguingly with the apocalyptic mindset you’ve described, where life spirals toward collapse and an end. Let’s dig into this, keeping it sharp and focused.
Herman’s argument hinges on the idea that decline—whether cultural, moral, economic, or civilizational—has shaped modern thought more than any other lens. Since the Enlightenment, thinkers like Rousseau, Nietzsche, Spengler, and even modern environmentalists have leaned into narratives of decay, painting history as a slide from some golden age toward catastrophe. It’s a powerful story: things are getting worse, and we’re either doomed or need to act fast to stop the rot. This resonates deeply with the apocalyptic feature you mentioned—life worsening toward collapse. Decline is the setup for the apocalyptic punchline, the grim prelude to an imagined end.
Take the 19th and 20th centuries: Romantic nostalgia for a lost pastoral idyll fueled anti-industrial movements, while Marxist visions of capitalism’s inevitable breakdown fed revolutionary fever. Fast forward, and you’ve got post-World War II existentialists mourning spiritual decay, or today’s climate doomsayers warning of ecological collapse. Herman’s point is that this declinist mindset isn’t just a mood—it’s a driver. It’s pushed policies, sparked revolutions, and shaped how we see progress (or its absence). The idea that we’re on a downward slope has a way of making people either despair or double down on radical fixes, both of which can shake the world.
Now, connect that to apocalyptic thinking. Decline is the slow burn that sets the stage for the apocalyptic explosion—the belief that things aren’t just bad but headed for a final, transformative crash. Religious apocalypses, like those in Revelation, see moral decay culminating in divine judgment. Secular ones, like Marxist or eco-apocalyptic visions, swap God for History or Nature but keep the same arc: decline, then rupture, then (maybe) renewal. Herman’s decline obsession and Mendel’s apocalyptic warning from Vision and Violence feel like two sides of the same coin—decline primes the pump for apocalyptic fantasies of collapse and rebirth.
But is decline really the most dominant idea? It’s got competition. Progress, for one, has been a rival heavyweight. Enlightenment optimism, industrial revolutions, and tech-driven dreams of utopia have convinced plenty that history’s arrow points up, not down—think Silicon Valley’s gospel of innovation. Yet even progress often gets tangled with decline: every “better future” pitch implies something’s wrong now. Decline might not rule alone, but it’s sneaky—it worms into even the sunniest ideologies.
Where Herman nails it is showing how decline makes us act. It’s not just philosophy; it’s psychology. People who buy into decay—whether it’s “Western civilization is crumbling” or “the planet’s dying”—move mountains to either hasten the end or dodge it. That’s why it feels so apocalyptic: decline isn’t static; it’s a story that demands an ending. Whether that’s violent collapse (Mendel’s worry) or a desperate scramble for salvation, it’s a script we keep rewriting.