Why, Mama C, Why?!?

For most of my time spent as a follower of Christ, I have taken the notion of our complete free will as human beings for granted. Clearly (I said to myself on numerous occasions, generally late at night) we were given free will so that we might exercise choice, because only through choice can we come to know God, as choice, choosing God, sanctifies us, makes our soul, little by little, into a Christ-like thing. To be with Him, we must choose to be with Him, over and over again--He did not want automatons, He wanted us to want Him (as that very famous and overplayed song goes)--that was and is the only way into the club, so to speak.

All well and good, this is basic doctrine--we must be willing to accept Him into our hearts and acknowledge Him as our Lord. We must choose to hand over our lives. As CS Lewis (one of my very favorite gentlemen) says, "[Our] free will is trembling inside [us] like the needle of a compass. But this is a needle that can choose. It CAN point to its true North; but it need not..."

So we have established that we are, in truth, creatures of free will. You could say we are creatures of complete free will (not including the freedom to condemn or judge, as Adam exemplified)--creatures with complete choice. And what does having complete free will mean? Well, "will" means one has the drive to accomplish something, some task. "Free" implies a lack of constraint by a certain entity or system. Put them together, and "free will" means that our drive to accomplish a certain task, or reach a certain goal in a certain way, should not be constrained or limited by any system.

Interesting. Are you seeing something odd? I am. We live in a culture which promotes the very opposite of this God-given right. Let me, perhaps, elaborate:

How Mother Culture Attempts To Limit Our Free Will:

--Well, first let me state the obvious, which will NOT be what this long rambling rant is about. Human laws limit our free will, as the very knowledge that we are imperfect leads to the (correct) assumption that we will exercise the imperfections in our natures in a way that hurts others, and takes away their common rights. (Here's an interesting little proof for the fallen nature of man: If we are creatures of free will, why do we need laws constraining this will? Because clearly we are not exercising it in the way it was intended to be exercised, as a gift from God would not require these limitations to be necessarily set on it UNLESS it was perverted from the way it was intended to function).

So, now that THAT little rant is out of the way, back to my dissertation on Mama C. Why has society taken this constraining, limiting form?

Well I see two answers. One is perhaps the overarching macro-answer (as it were), and the other, the little teeny terrifying answer. We shall start with number one, yes?

Number One (1): Consider this:

You have just made a somewhat bad decision--say you quite accidentally got completely smashed and hooked up with your ex-boyfriend. Probably not a good plan, right? Who would you prefer to have around afterwards, the friend who tells you it wasn't that bad a plan, and that you didn't do anything super-wrong, and not to worry about the consequences (they won’t be that awful), or the one who sensibly tells you you probably just created for yourself a situation in which someone is quite likely to get emotionally PWND like teh n00b (if not pregnant)? In other words, would you prefer the one who makes you comfortable with your decision, or the one who makes you uncomfortable (there we go with that word "comfortable" again--it's all related!!)?

Well--being the emotional creature I am, I am sorry to admit that I would quite sensibly and understandingly listen to the realistic Friend Two, and perhaps at an intellectual level understand what they were saying, perhaps even make a couple feeble attempts to embrace it, but in my heart of hearts I would be far more drawn to the words of Friend One, who makes me feel good. And I assume most of you would subscribe to that viewpoint, as well.

Well let's look at this little paradigm on a larger scale, shall we? How is society, Mother Culture, formed?

Mother Culture operates along the same guidelines as Friend One. Deep down inside, we know we make bad decisions, in all matters of living. We know we live incorrectly, I know that in many ways, I do not live in accordance with Christ. So what, in our fallen nature, have we done, to make ourselves feel better about these poor choices? We have gravitated towards a societal structure which comforts us, whispering in our ears that our every poor choice wasn't so bad and isn't that important anyway. She tells us not to fear if we selfishly hurt our friends--we can always buy new ones, and humans were meant to be completely self-sufficient anyway. She tells us not to fear a lack of communication of truth in relationships--mystery is more important and enticing. We have created for ourselves a mother who validates our every poor choice--what little kid wouldn't want that?!? It's the "Donuts for breakfast" phenomenon, and we've found a mother-figure who will pour us a glass of milk on the side, smiling indulgently all the while.

And what happened after we created this incredibly validating, comforting societal structure? Well...think of it this way:

Why do you trust name-brands more than generic brands? Why do you trust your professor more than spotty old Uncle Joe when it comes to the date the American Civil War started? Why do you listen to your coach's corrections, but not your fellow swimmers'? Here's why: You accredit a certain amount of power and knowledge to those you choose to follow; to live by the lessons of someone whose precepts you did not respect would be foolish.

So then, what must we do in order to further validate Mother Culture? If you want to feel valid in your bad choices, you must find some way to convince yourself that the entity validating those choices is in possession of a higher knowledge, and more power, than you are. So, we must accredit Friend One with power and knowledge, so that we might feel wise in subscribing to her "codes" and "laws": we must give up our power of choice to Mother Culture, so that we might feel wise in our acceptance of her as a stronger, smarter guide. We must give her credentials, and thus give up our own right to choose.

And that, friends, is what we've done. We have found a big fluffy blanket to cover over our bad decisions, and now we have accredited said fluffy blanket with enough credentials to back up her every statement, so that we might feel comfortable following her blindly into the "anesthetic fog" (an incredibly apt term, if you think about it--thank you again, CS Lewis).

So we have accomplished two steps of our macro-societal journey: I like to think of them as Personal Validation (directed at our poor choices) and Extra-Personal Validation (the creation of "credentials" for this governing entity). What next?

Next is a little term I like to use, the "Great Forgetting" (stolen and reconfigured, thank you Daniel Quinn):

Well the problem is, we've truly managed to convince ourselves that Mother Culture is omnipotent, that she is the dictating force. So focused were we on self-validation, we decided to conveniently FORGET that we made her what she is, thus we FORGOT that we gave her her power to begin with, in an attempt to make her that much more convincing and ourselves feel that much more justified in listening to her. We have in an attempt to make her power and thus our own validation complete, FORGOTTEN that it was once not that way at all. We forgot we gave her a large part of our free will, which means we also forgot that we can GET IT BACK.

------------------------An Elaboration------------------------

What do I mean when I say we forgot that we gave her some of our free will? Let me tell you. What I mean is this: we forgot there is a way to not let her rule us, to take back our will, to live in a way which is not defined by the system, by her.

It is not, of course, to rebel against the system, and leave it—opposing a system continues to define the system, and perpetuates its existence (opposing a set of rules at every point will define what the rules are. For example, if your mother tells you not to spoil your appetite before dinner, and you turn around and spitefully consume a tur-duck-en, you have, in opposing your mother’s will, acknowledged the presence of her will, and the form that it takes, and so acknowledged the system).

So we have placed ourselves in an anesthetic fog, ever deepened and perpetuated by the Deceiver. And we, having forgotten we ever gave up this will to choose how to live, do not think there IS a will to choose how to live. The only way is, of course, through big Mama.

And she soothes us, telling us not to worry, that we haven’t truly given up our freedom of choice to her. She tells us, on a constant basis, that in ever way, we have control, we have every choice in the world. A few examples (with a little help from some friends):

---A fine fellow named Albert Borgmann provides me with my first example.  Technology.  Think of all the little
instruments you use, you rely on, every day.  Not just your car, your shower, your high-powered fruit-juicer (okay
 actually that’s at home).  Think more critically—you cannot convey thought to a large audience without the use of
some machine—a microphone, a bullhorn, a gun, even.  Wide dissemination of ideas is impossible without a pen
or computer.  In every way, we have become cyborgs—we live in a symbiotic (perhaps parasitic) relationship
with metal and plastic.  And what does each and every one of these instruments whisper of?  Control. 
Borgmann discusses a means/end relationship, in which the only purpose of a tool is the commodity it produces. 
Seems harmless at first, yes?  But look at it this way:  We flick the switch.  Hey presto!  Let there be light! 
We slip into a car—and the journey of complete control (temperature, visibility, journey itself) begins. 
No microphone?  Two people hear me sing.  Microphone?  Millions cringe in distaste as my vocals perform the
auditory equivalent of the fat man stripping down to a Speedo at the public beach. Technology, Mama Culture’s
 great triumph, lulls us to sleep, telling us not to fear giving up our freedom to the system, because we still, in all
these multitude of little ways, have control over our actions and the world at large.  (But, as a friend of mine says,
what happens when the power goes out?? ;)

--Through social “formulas” (disseminated in every magazine you can find), the untruth of complete control is
perpetuated.  Look at Redbook, Cosmo, even Health and Fitness.  “10 Tips To Great Sex”— so if I memorize
these ten small notes on this bright pink page my sex life will without a doubt make Hugh Hefner cower in abject
fear?  Do I have that much control?!?  Well yes, that’s what Mother Culture would say—she’s all about
means/end relationships:  “If you do x, you will receive y.  You are in complete control of receiving y because you
have the complete free will to choose whether or not you do x, and there is no process in the middle which may
affect this completely direct relationship.”  That is her message.

--Now this last bit is truly terrifying (if the first two weren’t enough for you). Many of you may have heard of the advent of subliminal messaging in commercials. Do you know how deep this runs? I am just beginning to formulate a mental image, and it is highly disturbing. Think of it this way:

We have just been lulled to sleep by our mother, Mama C. We have been sung the lullaby of control, the means/end lullaby in which our free choice leads to desired outcomes. Now what? Well, now that we think we have complete control, now that we cannot see two feet in front of us through this fog of comforts, it is time for the Enemy to move in for the kill. Think about it—the best way to attack someone, if you really want them dead, is to attack when they can’t see you, attack when they’re defenseless and confused, lost in a proverbial fog. Scarily enough, we’ve provided the Enemy with the cover of night, and he slipped in unnoticed. Still wondering how? Let me elaborate:

You’re happy. Friend One has you completely comfortable in your decision, and has completely won your trust. She has taken you out dancing to forget your troubles, and has bought you a celebratory drink (or four) in honor of your latest brush with fate (and Planned Parenthood). You are feeling warm, fuzzy, slightly inebriated, tired, and lazy. Thinking does not sound appealing. She’s right, after all—she’s a knowledgeable person on matters of the heart and you very much respect her opinion. So why not just relax in the comfort of her words?

Here’s why--what you don’t realize in your happy fog of excess Whiskey Sours is that she has slipped out back and is busy calling up your ex-boyfriend, and telling him that you want to get back together with him, and are an emotional mess (why is she lying? I don’t know…think up your own reason). She is busy moving in where you can’t see her, slowly taking away your options and your choices, in terms of who you are, how you are perceived, and what actions you will take in your future. She has taken away your free will in this situation and replaced it with limited choice, choices which bad, wrong and deceitful, that can only lead to disaster.

So you see how it begins:

1) We created an entity which validates our bad decisions and poor choices, which validates our fallen nature, through comfort and distraction and endorsement of poor morals and complete self-sufficiency. This entity is Mother Culture.

2) In order to feel sensible in subscribing to the product of this creation process, we had to do two things:

--accredit her with an amount of knowledge and power which would justify our dependence upon her.

--forget that this process of creation and accreditation went on; AUTHENTICATE her, as it were.

3) In the dictatorial power we have ascribed to her, she creates a haze of pseudo-control so that we may not fear continuing to live by her precepts.

4) In steps the Enemy. We are lost and confused, without bread or water. It is the perfect time for a full frontal assault. He, like the deceitful Friend One, steps out back whilst we are doing the equivalent of river-dancing on the nearest bar-room table, and begins to, without our knowledge, take away our options, take away our free will.

How does he do this? In many ways I know nothing of, but one I'm just beginning to see: he takes away our choices by completely circumventing our will to choose. And here's it is circumvented: If there was a way he could make you NOT KNOW he was leading you toward choosing the wrong thing-- that he could make you NOT KNOW you were being led blindly, that he could make you NOT KNOW he was there, wouldn’t that be a brilliant strategy on his part? You would not even feel your will being stolen.

And here is one example of this (thought there are of course many more): our ideas-machine, our advertising machine, one of the many war machines of the Enemy. Gradually, the enticing subliminal messages insidious in every aspect of society draw us toward a poor choice, a choice made because we don’t think we have any others, because our very free will, our very free will which God gave us as a gift, has been rendered vain, has been crippled.

Scary thought, no?? We have, in conjunction with the Great Deceiver, affected a triumph of negatively-based automatism, unless we can awake from this anesthetic fog and begin the struggle to regain the free will which was so graciously and necessarily given to us.

Now remember—I am not an anarchist. Do not oppose the system, be a creeper: USE the system. To Christ’s ends.

And I do not endorse the random detonation of fireworks.

….Unless you’re going to call me and tell me beforehand so I can come and watch…