The Promised Land

Tower of Babel (מִגְדַּל בָּבֶל)
By Lucas van Valckenborch

The Promised Land |
Monday – October 12, 2026

The Tower of Babel (מִגְדַּל בָּבֶל) should perhaps be considered again, especially when we consider the great utopia. Yes, whenever we are forced to contend with certain ideological narratives, we should always ask ourselves: why and how? Why would such a society, such an organization, be considered better than how the world is manifest already, and how would this ever be put into practice? Yes, these questions matter and it seems that most ideologues rarely ask them, and indeed it does not even seem that most ideologues are motivated by a real belief anyways: would be be mistaken in assuming that most ideologues are motivated by some kind of internal conflict, read "Frugality", and if so would it not be unlikely that ideologues are even motivated by a kind of anti motivation? Well, let us perhaps return to this a little bit later. The fact that there is so much emotionality and sentimentalism involved when it comes to all of these grand claims and promises should be bad enough to start, and so we should perhaps begin to assume that most ideologues and their promised lands are anti-conservative or rather the very opposite of what could be said of the conservative default or impulse. Yes, would anyone in their right mind consider the story of the Tower of Babel prudent or even desirable? Of course not, and so the ideologue has to start off by leaving his human default state, if we assume this to essentially be conservative and anti-ideological to begin with, but this effort does require a lot of willpower, because it is rather difficult for most men to not fall back into the orbit of his own environment. And so, yes it is perhaps not entirely inaccurate to assume that most ideologues are motivated by some kind of hatred for the default state of affairs, and really that perhaps, just perhaps, he is motivated by a need to "let it all burn down". Yes, these things happen when you are forced to contend with conflict that appears to be unsolvable: the pain has to emanate from somewhere. Is this perhaps one reason as to why the Bolsheviks were so spectacularly successful at really reducing human life to nothing but material states in relation to other material states? Maybe, but we must not forget that we assumed that the default state of humanity was essentially conservative and anti-ideological, but this is only an assumption. Surely, there must be some people who are actually motivated by the supposed goodness of their ideology? It is often assumed that young people tend to be more ideological, and why not? Of course, we should also remind ourselves that young people tend perhaps to suffer the most from internal conflict and "auto confusion", and so while younger people may be more prone to ideological ideation, if you will, it would perhaps also not be so strange if young people are more likely to be motivated by internal conflict that other people.

    Sure then, let us drop the assumption that most people are conservative, let us short circuit this whole assumption: what would happen in that case? Well, if it was the case that most people were idealists, then we would still have to expect conflict, and perhaps even more conflict, and in fact this is perhaps a case for conservatism rather than a case against it. See, there has been a lot of talk about supposed "Jihadism" in the Western world, and of course the assumption here is that Jihadists are completely compelled and motivated by their strong ideological ideation, and if we grant this, would it not be the case that we should be seeing more of these terrorist attacks, more acts of violence in the name of some kind of Jihad? Perhaps you would be quick and point out the fact that most intelligent operations have been quite able to shut all of this down, and perhaps you would be right, but what about all the individual acts of violence: why are we not seeing more of those, read "Another Day in Europe"? Again, this could perhaps be explained by effective work and intercommunication between the police and intelligence agencies, but it would also be a pattern. Perhaps we should all be thankful that more people are not so coloured by their ideas that they are willing to go into martyrdoom for them? Whatever the case, this must be said to be a conservative position. And if not a conservative position per se, perhapst most people are not aware enough, at least we can assume that they do tend towards some kind of sceptical and automatic default?

    So we are left to conclude that there is no promised land, not even in the imagination of most ideologues, and if there indeed is a promised land, perhaps totalitarianism is the closest match, and I really mean that. Perhaps all of these perceived "mistakes" in the name of ideology were not that mistaken in the first place? It is a good practice to not doubt what you see over and over again; at some point reality must catch up, at least this would be the hope, read "Transhumanism". Of course, in the past most of these disorders were inoculated by the lived reality of divine power, something that is mostly lost and forgotten today.

    There is also a different point that must be made about "The Promised Land" here, and that is the point about religious conviction, read "Should You Have Fait?": in certain "faiths"—"faith" being the shorthand for the exoteric belief in tradition—it is commonplace to assume that there must be some kind of afterlife and that this afterlife will be experienced in "The Promised Land", and yes from this concept it is the case that we can assume that a mutation has occurred, several mutations actually, and that these "mutations" have created principles that have proceeded directly from this concept of a utopian afterlife. I must also add that individualism and individuation is a prerequisite in the course of this development as well. Really, it is surely the case that ideology to a very rather large extent is derived from the individualism of faith and from the hope of individualism, and in the end most of these things do tend towards the same thing and away from the primordial principle of the world. Perhaps one could also assert that the material circumstances of many people have simply led them to believe that they can prefer the world in a certain light, because they can simply afford to avoid reality, really a luxury that certain individuals can afford these days. Perhaps this is why so few people in the modern world tend to have an iron will and an inflexible sense of righteousness?

Reginald Drax (AKA, M. C. Dutt) – October 12, 2026.