Restitution vs. Retribution -- Hellenism vs. Hebraism

A Gay Species' Extended Essay

In this complex post we discuss the topic of "determinism." For the sake of brevity (and to give my fingers a rest), I will simply type determinism and fate, rather than specify which kind. History is replete with determinism, in which one variant or another insists that every effect has an antecedent cause, and given that every physico-chemical property (which is the entire universe) obeys causality, then everything is determined. Or is it?

Historical Overview

Historically, determinism appears and reappears with greater frequency than the "god hypothesis." The Greeks and Romans held to the "Fates," Saint Paul held to irresistible grace and predestination, Thomas Aquinas insists that providence disposes humans toward certain ends (especially those that get to enter heaven), Jean Calvin held to "double predestination" in which we are mere pawns of the human stage, Karl Marx held "historical determinism," and some scientists hold to scientific determinism. More recently, "social constructionism" (of the strong, not weak kind) equivocates on our being "socially constructed," out of which we are predetermined linguistically, from which we "construct human sexuality." What in the f*ck ? Are we merely pawns that live out a drama beyond our ability to function independently?

Self-Disclosure

Let me acknowledge my own predisposition: I accept a form of determinism, but I prefer the word Fates over the word "determinism." Some form of determinism is simply impossible to deny. I did not choose my parents, my date or place of birth, I did not choose my siblings, the elementary schools or high schools, and I did not "choose" my sex or my sexual orientation. The first major figure to consider determinism was the Greek playwright Sophocles, who wrote the Greek Tragedy Oedipus Rex, or Oedipus the King. Let's have a closer look.

Oedipus and the Human Condition

Most people probably know the term Oedipus Complex from Sigmund Freud's horrible distortion of Greek myth and stories. So nix the Freudian "complex," and return to Sophocles with me. According to the Fates, Oedipus is destined to marry his mother and murder his father, knowing he does neither knowingly -- ullike Freud's secret harbors.

When Oedipus discovers the Fates' cruelty, his shame requires him to "pluck out his eyes," rather than be an instrument of the Cruel Fates. In this remarkable story, Oedipus does none of these acts consciously or deliberately. Simply the horrific Fates have caused him to act blindly, in which he fucks his mother (violating the incest taboo) and murders his father (patricide) unintentionally, because, according to Freud, he wanted to do it "unconsciously." No one does.

The character Creon in the play is the Voice of Reason. Oedipus, in justifying his undeliberated choices, rebels at Creon's invective against him, trying to explain the inexplicable:

. . . that I was fated to lie with my mother,
and show to daylight an accursed breed
which men would not endure, and I was doomed
to be the murder of the father that begot me. . .
and I pollute the bed of him I killed
by the hand that killed him.
Was I not born evil?

Freud totally distorts the dilemma that Oedipus cannot face. Oedipus did not deliberately fuck his mother, did not deliberately murder his father, but the Fates brought both about. Or so Oedipus supposes.

But someone DID KNOW, Oedipus' mother Jocasta knew all these things, even if Oedipus did not. She manipulate her own Son for these nefarious purposes. Who, then, is to blame?

In fact, it was not so much the "impersonal Fates," but Jocasta's manipulation of her own son for her own evil intents, that was the "cause and effect." To miss this part of the tragedy is to miss the entire purpose of Sophocles' having this tragedy performed in Ancient Greece. So evil is Oedipus' mother, that she is compelled to commit suicide, rather than endure the opprobrium she alone has brought about. What Oedipus did not know, Jocasta did. So, he blames himself? Can Oedipus restore what his Mother caused? I think not.

The "Oedipus" Complex

Freud's distortion of this marvelous story is only an indictment against psychology and the psychological "blame game," because humans do not knowingly do evil. That this wonderful human drama by Sophocles is deliberately perverted -- or distorted -- by Freud is only indictment against psychology. It really says all I want these "sick fucks" to say. Freud was one "sick fuck." None of us knowingly do evil, insists Plato. To think we all do, "unconsciously," is utter nonsense -- insists Aristotle. Lacking full knowledge, we would never have Freud's sick fantasies. That Freud thinks we all have his Oedipus Complex is so twisted it defies all commonsense.

Once Oedipus becomes aware of his shame, he takes steps to prevent any other cruelty, in which his own mother used her son for his mother's kind of evil purpose. He plucks out his "windows on the world" -- his eyes. If castration would have worked, he would have done that. If cutting off his arms would have worked, he would have done that. NO ONE, according to Greek Ethics, knowingly does evil himself. BUT, evil people use other people for their nefarious gain, and at humanity's expense. How did Freud totally misunderstand Sophocles' point of view?

The Greeks understood restitution, while we today Hebraism only understands retribution. The Hebrew scriptures are beyond vile; they are abhorrent. Erst, we come to my theme.

Restitution vs. Retribution

The Greeks firmly believed that justice requires restitution of those harmed. Restitution is NOT the Hebraic retribution -- in fact, the two could not be more opposite. Restitution requires that we "restore" what we have deprived in and of others. Hebraic retribution demands that others suffer for their harms.

Today's Drug War is based on Kissinger's retribution, not restitution. Punishment, not correction. Inflicting harm on to harm doers, not making up for another's harm.

Today's pedophilia is based on "retribution," not restitution. One CANNOT restore what one lacks, but one can do good to make up by other harms.

For example, restitution for pedophilia -- the abuse of children for one's own perverse sexuality -- requires castration -- so it cannot happen again. But what of the child's lost innocence? Locking pedophiles in prison to be abused sexually by other inmates is retribution, not restitution. Punishment, the Hebraic tradition, was abhorred by the Greeks. The Greeks extolled restitution, and Zionists and the entire Hebraic tradition extol retribution (as do Christians and Muslims). Only restitution is ethical and moral, retribution is cruel.

"Karma" and Hate

The Hindu and Buddhist conception of "karma" is based on the very same principle as the Greek's conception of restitution. Yes, we are responsible to others for both the good and evil that we inflict on others. We don't expiate our bad actions through prayer; not even early Christianity believed that was possible.

Indeed, the Doctrine of Repentance in Roman Catholicism is modeled on "karma." The "guilt of sin" is forgiven by absolution -- pronouncement of forgiveness -- but the "consequences of sin" -- penance -- is only expiated by acts of goodness to counter the "harm" we've done. Early Christians -- unlike today's variety -- understood "restitution." They understood "karma." Because every "effect" has a "cause." Evil effects require "good effects" to counter them.

Early Christians, like the Hindus and Buddhists, expiate the harm they've done -- not by incense and prayers, not by pronouncing themselves "born again" -- but by restitution. The Doctrine of Penance in early Christianity is the Doctrine of Karma.

If Jocasta, Oedipus' mother, who caused Oedipus's travails and tragedy, had any ethics and morality, she would not have simply committed suicide to escape her shame. She would have made "restitution." She would have endeavored to "correct" her evil, not escape it. Like Hitler who could not face his consequences, he took the "easy way out." Like Jocasta, today's evildoers have no sense of "restoring their harms," but takes cyanide pills, or pronounce their "sickness" cured. What fucking cowards and intemperate evildoers. A pill to make someone feel better? How escapist.

"Karma" Today

I don't know if Roman Catholic priests still tell pedophiles to pray ten Rosaries -- but that would have never been the Penance in early Christianity. Indeed, all Penance, was originally "in public," so that the Shame of isn would become apparent, and the restitution obvious. Early penitentials tell of bishops and priests prescribing 400 days of penance working with lepers for their human evil -- whatever that "evil" was deemed (however aberrant it was conceived).

Today, the Enchiridon of Indulgences simply equates "three Hail Mary's" for the "400 days." What kind of "restitution" is that? Where is the "justice" or "karma" in offering incense to the gods, and then listening to Gregorian chant to soothe one's anxieties? The Greeks would have been appalled at such simplistic and irrational notions. Even the early Christians would look a pedophile in the face and demand: What have you done to make restitution? Where is your sense of justice?

Visit any psychologist or psychiatrist today, and both will try to "find your Oedipus Complex" to blame your mother for your secret desire to fuck her while murdering your father. No expiation. Only a "blame game." How many of these "excuses" does one recognize?

My mother made me do it.
The Fates made me do it.
My father fucked me over.
When I was eight, my mother hated me.
Because Freud was pervert, so I can be.

Where's the Karma in this "blame game?" Apparently, in our stars and because god made us do these evil things. If you cannot face yourself, psychiatry has lots of drugs to escape your "excuses." Psychologists think human torture is normative. I think psychologists are abnormal. Who else tortures for pleasure?

Can you look yourself in the mirror, or must you "pluck out your eyes," like Oedipus, rather than confront the fact that the only evil is what you and I commit? Not what others "caused" in us. For among all of the Fates, none of the Fates are so fucking powerful that they cause us to be evil. Others may be evil, but we have the freedom to join their co-conspiracy. We cause it in ourselves. But what about Jocasta's contribution? Is it entirely Oedipus's fault that she "used her son" to get laid and kill the man she hated?

And unless we accept the fact of human evil, we can pray to all the gods to deliver us, just like psychotherapists try to replace the mega-church evangelicals. Just like Freud endeavored to "blame" his "unconscious" for desiring to fuck his mother and kill his father. What a perversion! Enter therapy, and then another "blame game" will follow. How many excuses before one accepts responsibility. Oedipus has an answer. Evil stops with "me."

Restitution? Not Me! I'm "Born Again."

Attend any Evangelical Christian community service. What retributionists these perverts are. But only of OTHERS. They forgive themselves, offer no restitution, but demand "Jewish retribution" of others for fucking their mothers and murdering their fathers. Freud's nonsensical Oedipus Complex demonstrates he had no clue about Hellenism, and his psychologists -- espousing determinism of the "social constructionist" kind -- insist we and they are not responsible for ourselves. Our mothers, our fathers, our environment -- not we -- are to blame? Right, Sigmund.

Their mothers and fathers caused them to be freaks. Yes, we call it the "blame game." Blame others for ourselves. Hebraic Retribution. Murder the Palestinians for Jewish hate. Exterminate the Jews for Nazi hate. And when the "judgment comes," take the easy exit out, like Hitler. Take a "pill.' It's the modern psychiatry and psychological "blame game." Even Oedipus could not take that easy solution.

Hellenism vs. Hebraism

The Greeks would have recoiled at such horrible behavior. Justice, I repeat, requires RESTITUTION, not retribution. Retribution is pure Hebraism, the Yahweh of Hebrew Scriptures, the Yeshua of Christian Scriptures, "an eye for an eye," castration that Jesus demands for the kingdom, not because a pedophile needs to "restore" what he "took" from someone else, but because being without a cock or foreskin is divinely approved. The angels decree it. Our dreams confirm it. And our sick minds validate others are at fault.

How does one restore "lost innocence?" How does one replace lost foreskin? One cannot. One can only make a "karmic" restitution of goodness toward others -- as early Christian penance once demanded. Today, our Muslim, Christian, and Jewish believers think god "has elected them" to the Chosen Few, the Predestined Few, the "Royal Priesthood of Believers." If they believe bullshit, then they are exonerated from the harm they do themselves and others. Total Freudian fuck-ups.

Integrity Requires Restitution

Give me a person of integrity that endeavors to RESTORE, then we can talk about Jewish retribution. Even Sophocles' Oedipus Rex understood what none of his Hebraic interpreters can possibly fathom. Even today's Jews, Christians, and Muslims "blame others" for their own dastardly deeds. See a Psychotherapist when all other "blames" are exhausted. Or see a priest, who will absolve your "guilt," with the punishment in purgatory to follow on the wings of a prayer. "Four Our Fathers, ten Hail Marys" and the kingdom is ours? What fucking cowards.

PostScript: For your penance, say "four Our Fathers," and "ten Hail Marys." Consider yourself absolved and above reproach, because you 'are born again' or your Mother, like Jocasta, caused YOUR suffering. If we cannot understand Sophocles Oedipus Rex, but twist it to mean Freud's "blame game," we deserve each other's crimes against ourselves. (n.b., Firefox won't allow visuals. sorry.)