the crazy national view of Biden, the democratic party.

As discussed before, the traditional separation of politics and religion, like two-heads snakes, was once the best social structure in human history. The church’s restriction on the state prevented the state from becoming an autocratic Leviathan monster, while the state counterbalanced the church. Thus, the church was exempt from the barbarism and ignorance of the unity of church and state so that human society could develop steadily and orderly. However, there is a different scene in all non-Christian societies in human history. They always regarded the state as an ideal, the highest form of human existence, such as Plato’s ideal state. Plato believed that the state is the embodiment of good, the perfect expression of rationality. Aristotle also believed that human history has gone through several stages: family, workshop, and city-states. And city-states are the perfect formation, the embodiment of Justice. Hegel believed that “the nation is the highest form of objective spirit, the realization of ethical ideas, and an absolute self-contained rational thing. The basis of the nation is a will that can realize its own rational force. In his view, the nation is free, eternal, and absolute, the realization of the ethical spirit and independence of human will. It is the highest developmental stage and organization of the human community. Human society will eventually develop to the national stage.” Putting aside these obscure philosophical languages, in our popular words, Hegel believed that the nation is the final and best result of human rational thinking on human society and the final and best existing form of human society. It is free, eternal, and absolute, not subject to human will; each of us can only submit to the nation. Hegel’s view is actually very familiar to us; moreover, all these are well-known facts. We can also know what today’s nation theories of our secular society have inherited from this. The above is only a slight mention of several representative state theories in non-Christian society. There are many others, for example, Confucianism’s rule of the sage king. Confucianists believe that a country should be led by an emperor who knows the truth of Confucianism; that is to say, a country led by a sage king is the perfect society. In fact, the nation theories all the above are very similar. They consider the nation the perfect, best, and highest form of human existence. But it is a pity that this great and lofty ideal nation has never been realized in human history. Countries have never existed in this ideal way envisioned by secular thinkers.

While these philosophers are boasting, in fact, their concept of the state has been deeply imprinted by atheism. The abstraction they think about is not genuine universal and abstract, but just atheistic universality and abstraction. The universality and abstraction they talk about have excluded God. For thousands of years in human society, has a Godless and atheistic society really existed? Even in the most secular society, there is primitive ghost worship, fetishism, etc. How universal and abstract is to exclude the most common God in human society? You may think that I am quibbling, but Schopenhauer and others had used Kant’s antinomy to refute Kant’s own morality. Kant’s moral philosophy is rationalism, which thinks humans can naturally get morality. However, Kant’s antinomy holds that reason is indeed defective. It is powerless in dealing with the ultimate problems of infinity and finiteness, God and godlessness. Therefore, Kant’s rationalism is flawed. (Friends who want to know more can refer to Chapter 2 of this book or search Kant’s antinomy and Schopenhauer’s criticism of Kant’s morality.)

Universality and abstraction do have practical meaning in the discussion of ordinary matters. The reason is also the ability of humans to be different from animals. However, in the ultimate issue, the reason is powerless. We cannot abstract and generalize from God because God is one, Infinite, universal, and all. The reason is originally under God but wants to transcend God; how is this possible? Thus, How does a universal world exist without God? How does a godless morality exist? I have stated that you can’t find a universal world without gods, fairies, and fetishism in reality. That is, universality cannot surpass God, and the concept of God is universal. So even, In the end, Kant had to admit that “reason is flawed and not enough to rely on completely.” therefore, he introduced the concept of God into his philosophy. It is not my sophistry, but that godless world doesn’t exist. It is impossible and absurd for reasons to surpass God. The crazy American leftist thinkers ignore the flaws of human reason, ignore that there has never existed an atheistic society, and ignore the reality that the rational ideal state of Plato and others in human history has never been realized. They take the inference from flawed human reason as the discipline of human society, use it to replace God and religious beliefs, and build a country. What a terrible thing it is? How ridiculous and terrifying will the consequences follow this? And how much madness and chaos will be dragged into human society? Human society will eventually collapse with it.

Is such a crazy society the most perfect, the best, and the highest nation? Which ignores and magnifies the defects of human reason infinitely. Let’s look at the marriage concept of monogamy, a man and a woman, once considered the symbol of human civilization. The marriage concept of monogamy, a man and a woman, is originally a religious concept. It comes from the “Bible,” from ancient ages when humans and God communicated most closely, and from the depths of the mysterious universe. It is connected with the ultimate world of eternal life and eternity, most in line with the common sense of human ethics. Through thousands of years, the practice has proved that it is the best and warm traditional custom and the most stable social microstructure, which can ensure the healthy and happy growth of the next generation. Obviously, the marriage concept of monogamy, a man and a woman is not the result of reason; reason cannot generate such a concept of marriage. According to the principle of rationality, no harm to others is good, so we can draw countless strange concepts of marriage, such as the marriage of homosexuals, the marriage in Incests, the marriage between humans and animals, etc. Aren’t these conclusions all absurd and terrifying? It is not an exaggeration to say that they are crazy from the common sense of human ethics. They just lie in the flaws of human reason. However, these will prevail in the society and state promoted by leftist thinkers. Then why can this society and state exist? only because human reason has flaws. We know from the above that if faith is lost and God is gone, reason cannot deny these crazy marriage concepts of rational existence. However, today’s leftist thinkers are trying to use the flawed reason to overthrow the traditional and most reasonable marriage concepts of monogamy, a man and a woman. They promote strange concepts of marriage, such as homosexual marriage, incest marriage, and human-animal marriage. They use reason to build an atheistic and rational society, which is crazy and ignores the common sense of human ethics. If this is not anti-human, then what is anti-human? It is actually because of this that American society falls into chaos and madness today? Therefore, the universal, abstract, atheistic, rational states of Plato and others have no basis for existence at all.

It can be seen that these leftist thinkers are essentially pursuing atheism, and their real aim is to overthrow God and replace God with their rationality. Then they will become the new God, guide and lead a new life of humans, making them enveloped in the halo and glory of being worshiped. Whether human beings will be crazy or destroyed is not their concern. This is the actual thought of the American leftist thinkers, and this is the primary purpose of their continuous pursuit. If a person is not out of self-interest, even if he does not recognize the flaws of reason, he will come to a conclusion similar to the early leftist sociologist Durkheim. Durkheim suggested that religion was created to stabilize the order of human society. The marriage concept of monogamy, one man and one woman from religion, was also created for the stability of human society. Of course, this marriage concept is impossible to overthrow or break casually, but this bottom line does not exist for today’s leftist thinkers.

From the perspective of the common sense of human ethics, we not only can see the leftist thinkers’ massive flaws and craziness of the rational and universal ideas of the state. And in real life, we can also see that this secular state is turbulent in fate, which is constructed by a theory similar to rational and universal ideas. There is a society in human history closest to the pursuit of leftist thinkers in the United States. This is the eastern secular society. In these countries, religion is reclusive and secluded. Its main religions, Buddhism and Taoism, paid attention to cultivating vital energy and non-action and tried to avoid contact with secular society, leaving a huge space for the secular government. The secular government had tremendous power and had a decisive influence on life. Isn’t this the society that leftist thinkers are pursuing? Do the secluded religions like Buddha and Dao give rise to the eastern secular society? Or does the powerful secular government suppressing religion result in the Buddha and Dao having to retreat from the world? This is a question of the chicken and the egg; no one can Answer. I can only say that they may complement each other. However, in the history of the eastern secular society for thousands of years, the country has almost disordered in development, peaks, and collapse, struggling in the cycle of changing dynasties. No one of the secular countries is immortal, and there has never been a country that can remain prosperous. It can only show that leftist thinkers’ universal and abstract concept of the state is problematic.

Why? We have discussed countless times that human nature is not perfect, good, and rational. Humans yearn for good and rationality but are selfish, love pleasure, covet life, and fear death. Humans cannot resist the temptation of greed and depravity and are often in a state of sin. This is why no ideal country envisioned by secular thinkers can maintain for a long time. The individuals who make up a society are usually in a state of sin; how can the community they constitute remain in an ideal state? If people are not restricted, they will inevitably go to depravity and greed. Similarly, any country without restrictions will go to its opposite. According to Aquinas’s reinterpretation of the famous category of six regimes, namely, monarchy, aristocracy, democracy, tyranny, oligarchy, and majority tyranny, they are actually three regimes and their opposite. He believed that in the absence of the restriction of the church, human society would inevitably generate tyrants under the monarchy, oligarchs under the aristocracy, and majority tyranny under the democratic. This is a damn right idea. In reality, these are common phenomena in non-Christian societies. In Israel’s dynasties, in the autocratic monarchy of the eastern secular society, each dynasty appears some tyrants, which conducts to the change of dynasties. Ancient Greek democracy also ended with majority tyranny. Aquinas was a man of the 13th century. I can’t conceive how he had such a sharp understanding of democracy, which often shames me as an oriental. I really don’t know how far our eastern society distances from westerns’ in the constitution. Many people always think that the modern American political system, the separation of powers, the mutual checks and balances, etc., can last forever. However, Aquinas pointed out so sharply hundreds of years ago that without the restriction of the church, any democracy, including the democratic system of the United States, will inevitably slide into majority tyranny. And the current situation proves this true. In a Christian society, whether it is a monarchy or a democracy, there will inevitably be some bumps in development due to the selfishness and greed of human nature. However, because of the church’s constraints, the stability of the regime is different from non-Christians.

France has more than a thousand years between the Capet dynasty and the Bourbon dynasty. Although it experienced the Valois dynasty during the period, the Valois, the Capet, and the Bourbon dynasty were all cousins; They completed the smooth transition of the dynasty without any bloodshed. All British kings have blood relations from William I to the current Queen Elizabeth. And the regime has lasted for more than a thousand years. Although they have also experienced several battles for the throne, except the red and white rose battle of the Canary Dynasty, which was relatively fierce, the others were local wars, which basically did not cause damage to society. From the perspective of democracy, the British constitutional system lasted for more than 300 years after the Glorious Revolution. The United States has established a constitution for more than 200 years. Only today has there been a fatal crisis, which is just caused by non-Christianization and secularization. Ancient Greek democracy can’t compare with them, whose golden years only sustained forty years. So you have to admire the penetrating power of Aquinas’ thoughts and compliment the greatness of real thinkers.

From these historical experiences, we can also see that the two-headed style social structure of the state and the church can well lead to social stability. Its essential reason lies in what we have discussed. The dualism of human nature in Christian ethics can well resolve the contradiction between selfish human nature and traditional virtues. The separation of state and religion of the Christian states based on this dualism of human nature is also extremely reasonable. Christianity believes that human nature is greedy and depravity. Humans come to this world with original sin and are naturally inclined to crime, licentiousness, and material enjoyment. These are true and credible. They are the same as the conclusions of empiricism and in accord with real life. At the same time, Christianity, like rationalism, believes that humans can get virtues and believe that these virtues are the sweet memories of the Garden of Eden, the impression of heaven left in the heart of humans. Humans only lost the inner power to obtain these virtues because of the original sin. Humans have been unable to obtain the virtues through their own efforts. At that same time, Christian ethics believe that virtue should be regained only through the grace of God and faith in God. In this regard, Christian ethics is completely different from any secular moral philosophy. Empiricism tries to base virtue on interests, while rationalism tries to obtain virtue through reasoned pursuit, but this does not exist. From the comparison with empiricism and rationalism, we can see that the most significant difference between Christian ethics and secular moral philosophy is that Christian ethics has an additional factor of faith and believes that humans obtain virtue only through faith. Christian ethics believes in the existence of God and the mysterious forces of the universe and trusts that humans can come to an ultimate world that is immortal, eternal, sacred, and beautiful, transcending death. It assumes that virtues are the sacred order of the ultimate world. Humans can only get salvation and access to heaven by practicing these virtues of the ultimate world based on faith. Therefore, faith becomes the driving force for humans to eliminate the temptation of interest, material enjoyment, honor, and vanity, leading to morality. Faith is the only driving force. As a result, faith drives people to move towards morality, and faith becomes the glue between selfish human nature and traditional virtues. This also shows the magical power of religious faith and its substantial positive effect on society.

According to this state theory based on the duality of human nature, the Christian society believes that the secular government and the Christian church should exist separately and simultaneously. The secular government exists for the greedy and degraded human nature. It is material, hedonistic, realistic, and holds God’s material sword. And the Christian church exists for faith; it is spiritual, transcendent, moral, and holds the spiritual sword of God. They think that the two swords are inseparable and indispensable in a normal society. Their relationship is like a two-headed snake, helping and supporting each other. Christian ethics considers the two contradictory human natures, namely, the pursuit of material pleasure and the pursuit of moral nobility. It separates them to form two different systems, the state, and the church, so they can supervise each other and avoid their own flaws. Therefore, the country in the Christian society is very stable and orderly.

Moreover, the history of the United States has also proven that the church representing faith and spirit should dominate society as much as possible. This kind of society is the strongest and most prosperous; that is to say, the state must not interfere in church affairs, but the church can intervene in state affairs. A society with a more advanced view of separation of state and church is the most reasonable. The secular philosophers’ state theory does not recognize that human nature is greedy and depraved. They believe that humans are rational and can reach the perfect state through themselves, and humans can shape an ideal country. Therefore, there is no church representing faith and spiritual power in their state theory, so they can not restrict human nature. Thus, an ideal country conceived by Plato and others in history has never appeared. The country closest to the ideal country created by Plato and others is the eastern secular society, but they are always in turmoil, far away from their ideals.

On this basis, let’s discuss in detail why the eastern secular society, which is closest to Plato’s rational and universal country, has been in the cycle of changing dynasties? Because there is no faith or weak faith in the society, the secular regime of the eastern secular society is composed of purely greedy and depraved people. Without the restriction of religion, the greed and corruption of the secular regime flow out arbitrarily. And morality soon completely degenerated, and society was hard to sustain, finally collapsing, turmoil, and war. All these prove that the rational and universal theory of the state is problematic. Of course, this is a vast subject. Due to limited space, we can only briefly talk about it. The specific reasons are as follows: first, in the eastern secular society, the church gradually shrank and weakened, eventually becoming a tool of the state and dispensable. Although there were no firm religious beliefs in each dynasty’s early days, the founders of the dynasty were still alive. They also knew the abuses and cruelty of the previous dynasties; the morality was generally healthy and clear. Because there was no restriction through church and faith, there were more and more rampant villains in the development of society. In the middle and late stages of each dynasty, The society was filled with plenty of villains calling white black, calling a stag a horse. The community’s morality had decayed, and such a society would inevitably collapse and perish. Second, due to the shrinking and weakening of the church, all power belonged to the secular government. It could do whatever it wanted, completely ignoring any morals and beliefs. This kind of society would inevitably go into a police state and use violence to enforce its own will. In the 2,000-year history of eastern secular society, any dynasty’s army, police, and prison were highly formidable. Such a country could ignore any public opinion and act by its own will. It is also the reason why I, as an Oriental, don’t think “1984” is so classic because the 2,000-year autocratic monarchy society in the East is a more classic police society, a typical Leviathan monster. In such a society, the country had become a monster that swallowed everyone, including the bureaucratic group itself, including all royal relatives and nobles.