[michael3]

It may seem as if i'm posting a one-man manifesto on this my first thread, but I think that there is a chain of connections between the origins of Anarchism with Pierre Proudhon, and the thinking of Blaise Pascal and the Jansenistic Port-Royal movement. Therefore, while this is an intensely personal thread, it is certainly open to discussion. This is part of my personal journey to let go of the authoritarian structures of my thought, and the means of liberation where I have rejected Coercion and embraced Love, Charity over Power, Freedom over Tyranny.

(By the way, if anyone can show direct links between Pascal/Jansenism and Proudhon/Anarchism in a direct way, please feel free to interject such information).

I am, to further elucidate my position, a deeply religious and spiritual man. However, my former traditional Roman Catholic background, formed itself to hold on to 'something' as the confusion deepened within the Church in the 60's to the present, led me to look to Power as the glue that held all things together, instead of Power being the way I now see it, the very element of violence and coercion that corrupts all things and throws all into Chaos. Back then though, my favorite guides were thinkers like Joseph de Maistre, Juan Donoso y Cortes, and Carl Schmidt. Authoritarianism and even Fascism became my Faith, yet the more I clung to the hope of a modern-day 'counter-revolution' to sweep Throne and Altar back into power and restore the great (as I saw it) 'Ancien Regime, the more I became detached from the real world and lost sight of day-to-day reality. I do, after all, live in the Southwest region of the United States, in the 21st century....

Then I discovered Blaise Pascal. Actually, along with his works, I read the writings of Leon Bloy (almost forgotten now), and they began to erode my 'faith' in the infallibility of Popes and Kings. My next post, i'd like to further explore how it happens that this absolutely devout man of both spirit and genius managed to do this, but I hope that I have provided enough to start a good discussion for now.

[SolarCross]

welcome to pofo. I don't know anything about pascal but I think it is fair to say Jesus Christ was a forerunner of anarchism. There is a lot in his teaching and conduct that really is anarchistic. The institution of Christianity that developed over the millennia after his time of course took a different and even opposite philosophy.

[quetzalcoatl]

You might look into the political beliefs of Leo Tolstoy, if you haven't already done so.

[SecretSquirrel]

leo tolstoy pretty much sums up christian anarchist. My anarchism is based on the same fundamental conceit (no king but God)

[Someone5]

leo tolstoy pretty much sums up christian anarchist. My anarchism is based on the same fundamental conceit (no king but God)

(no king but God and the people who own the businesses that control me...)

[Goldberk]

but I think that there is a chain of connections between the origins of Anarchism with Pierre Proudhon

Anarchism has a much longer history than you seem to think (though it was not always called anarchism).

For links between Christianity and anarchism in history perhaps look into John Ball.

[michael3]

Well, I will gladly examine some of those broader aspects of the relation between Anarchism and Christianity, but regarding Pascal and Jansenism (btw, I have read Prof. Dale van Kley's works regarding Jansenism and the roots of revolution against the 'Ancien Regime'), the following lines got the 'ball rolling' in my mind;

"The result of this confusion is that one affirms the essence of justice to be the authority of the
legislator; another, the interest of the sovereign; another, present custom, and this is the most sure.
Nothing, according to reason alone, is just itself; all changes with time. Custom creates the whole
of equity, for the simple reason that it is accepted. It is the mystical foundation of its authority;
whoever carries it back to first principles destroys it. Nothing is so faulty as those laws which
correct faults. He who obeys them because they are just obeys a justice which is imaginary and not
the essence of law; it is quite self-contained, it is law and nothing more. He who will examine its
motive will find it so feeble and so trifling that, if he be not accustomed to contemplate the wonders
of human imagination, he will marvel that one century has gained for it so much pomp and reverence.
The art of opposition and of revolution is to unsettle established customs, sounding them even to
their source, to point out their want of authority and justice. We must, it is said, get back to the
natural and fundamental laws of the State, which an unjust custom has abolished. It is a game certain
to result in the loss of all; nothing will be just on the balance. Yet people readily lend their ear to
such arguments. They shake off the yoke as soon as they recognise it; and the great profit by their
ruin and by that of these curious investigators of accepted customs. But from a contrary mistake
men sometimes think they can justly do everything which is not without an example. That is why
the wisest of legislators said that it was necessary to deceive men for their own good; and another,
a good politician, Cum veritatem qua liberetur ignoret, expedit quod fallatur.We must not see
the fact of usurpation; law was once introduced without reason, and has become reasonable. We
must make it regarded as authoritative, eternal, and conceal its origin, if we do not wish that it
should soon come to an end.
295. Mine, thine.—"This dog is mine," said those poor children; "that is my place in the sun."
Here is the beginning and the image of the usurpation of all the earth"

And this from Pensee #299;

"No doubt equality of goods is just; but, being unable to cause might to obey justice, men have
made it just to obey might. Unable to strengthen justice, they have justified might; so that the just
and the strong should unite, and there should be peace, which is the sovereign good."

And this;

304. The cords which bind the respect of men to each other are in general cords of necessity;
for there must be different degrees, all men wishing to rule, and not all being able to do so, but
some being able.
Let us, then, imagine we see society in the process of formation. Men will doubtless fight till
the stronger party overcomes the weaker, and a dominant party is established. But when this is once
determined, the masters, who do not desire the continuation of strife, then decree that the power
which is in their hands shall be transmitted as they please. Some place it in election by the people,
others in hereditary succession, etc.
And this is the point where imagination begins to play its part. Till now power makes fact; now
power is sustained by imagination in a certain party, in France in the nobility, in Switzerland in the
burgesses, etc.
These cords which bind the respect of men to such and such an individual are therefore the
cords of imagination.

And this;

"We can only think of Plato and Aristotle in grand academic robes. They were honest men,
like others, laughing with their friends, and, when they diverted themselves with writing their Laws
and the Politics, they did it as an amusement. That part of their life was the least philosophic and
the least serious; the most philosophic was to live simply and quietly. If they wrote on politics, it
was as if laying down rules for a lunatic asylum; and if they presented the appearance of speaking
of a great matter, it was because they knew that the madmen, to whom they spoke, thought they
were kings and emperors. They entered into their principles in order to make their madness as little
harmful as possible."



Empahsis on the lines in bold. However, since Blaise Pascal knew that Man is quite mad and addicted to Might, it does little good in one respect to simply know the truth about the 'lunatic asylum', thus he counsels this;

310. King and tyrant.—I, too, will keep my thoughts secret.
I will take care on every journey.
Greatness of establishment, respect for establishment.
The pleasure of the great is the power to make people happy.
The property of riches is to be given liberally.
The property of each thing must be sought. The property of power is to protect.
When force attacks humbug, when a private soldier takes the square cap off a first president,
and throws it out of the window.

Keep your mouth shut, and remember that everything we think of as the 'State' rests on physical violence....

Nonetheless, the 'Pensees' were Pascal's notes on an intended 'Apologia' for Christianity, and subsequently have been read by thousands and thousands, who might have not been impelled to follow Pascal into Christianity, but read with great intent the unmasking of the pretensions of the Rulers of this World. He had to have known his words and ideas would be seen and thought upon, and the wise would 'read between the lines'. Like Pascal also says about military 'killing';

"Why do you kill me?" "Because you live across the water"...."If you had lived here where I am and I killed you, I would be a murderer, but since you live over there, I am right and just."

Behind all the pretentious BS, It's Murder....And deep down, every Soldier who experiences the cognitive dissonence of PTSD seems to realize that fact, at least unconciously.

[michael3]

welcome to pofo. I don't know anything about pascal but I think it is fair to say Jesus Christ was a forerunner of anarchism. There is a lot in his teaching and conduct that really is anarchistic. The institution of Christianity that developed over the millennia after his time of course took a different and even opposite philosophy.

Thank you. I'm rather inclined to think that Jesus of Nazereth was the first 'Anarchist', with the following caveats;

1. This label in no way whatsoever is prejudicial to His claims within traditional Christianity, as God and Ruler of Mankind. Anarchism is against involuntary heirarchy and is not against government and order.

2. I reconcile 'Free Will' and 'Predestination' by a philosophical stance known as 'Compatibilism', a position similiar to that of the original Jansenist parties. If you concieve God as being an Anarchist with full liberty, some interesting conclusions follow....