Much love goes to New York City;
And mad respect to London;
The glorious foundations of civilisation begin in Africa, however, through the years there developed through the then tribal cultures an exclusivity and closed-mindedness among the peoples.
The problem was they were oppressed from the very beginning; the tribal leaders oppressed their subjects (whether culturally or socially) with daily activities of servitude, while they enjoyed the benefits.
They were not regarded as equals, though they may have been at one time, they were held aloft by the masses and considered to be better.
This discrepancy begins with the adults treating the youths as underlings, which was to be expected, then continued to the elders getting treated with privilege by the younger adults.
Finally, a whole stratification system was created based on age and ageism.
Nevertheless, the stiffest part of the ancient culture was most likely the fatalism on the part of the subjects and the fanaticism on the part of the leaders, who themselves were usually oppressed by chiefs and tribal elders.
The innocence of most of the subjects was due to their growing accustomed to the oppression of the leaders and the submissive instinct that came along with it.
This stratified tribal system was also able to evolve into a stratified social system in which tribe competed with tribe to prove its worth, value, and greatness.
The god or goddess of one tribe would supposedly assist in its courageous victories and deeds of valour while the god or goddess of the other brought shame and humiliation upon defeat.
Any great or powerful tribe could conquer or assimilate other tribes to itself through alliances, competition, and outright warfare.
Thus the fanaticism of the conquerors grew through conquest into an unyielding intolerance of anything outside of their definition of greatness and godhood.
This intolerance then morphed into even greater oppression and harshness for the conquered who, in most cases, became the subjects of the conquerors.
One coming from without this system, or from within, who desired to see its collapse could easily produce it through playing to their weaknesses.
First, it was a very autocratic/oligarchical system in which decisions were made and fearfully enforced by the power centre.
In this case all one needed to do was exploit their lack of social cohesion and cause social unrest and tensions among the subjects.
Second, its class structure may not have been as oppressive and harsh (being class based on age) but in this case the youthful desire for freedom, especially from the feeling of underappreciation, insensitivity, insult, and fault-finding from the tribal and social leaders could have been used.
All one really needed to do was offer them acceptance, toleration, and freedom of movement and to err and it would have been enough to move them.
Third, the superstitious ideas and lessons taught by the leaders, tribal elders, and prophets to oppress the masses and produce the fatalism within them could have been easily exploited by a crafty propagandist and used to his or her advantage.
Basically, fatalism is not completely wrong, it is just its being used to justify and perpetuate oppression that is wrong, fatalism when used to justify liberation, on the other hand, is only good.
However, in the case of a true believer who desired public support, their superstition could have been helpful in gaining that public support as the public definitely still believed in superstition.
But considering that most of the ancient cult deities were encased in stone, wood, or some form of metal, exposing their vanity and the vanity of their superstructure was possible and that is exactly what most of the Hebrew prophets did.
The Hebrew prophets often found themselves in opposition to the religious, tribal, and governmental establishment in the centres they preached in.
A prophet was not so much concerned as to whether their word came to pass as much as with whether their word was heeded.
Any good prophet would rather ten heeded words to a thousand fulfilled any day.
The eschatology of a prophet was generally based on Judgment Day: it was a message of judgment, and the judgment was by way of war.
But the prophets were children of the Mosiac culture: born of strict Djahwism, they declared Djahwe’s word based on the Sinai revelation.
The prophets had a distinct outlook and distinct way of viewing events that separated them from the false prophets and the masses in general.
They saw all events as coming from Djahwe and as a result of Djahwe’s word, the same word by which the world was founded and by which it would be destroyed.
That word bought creation and that word would bring judgment: that word would judge the same creation Djahwe had bought into being by his word.
The general revelation of a prophet was by oracle, the prophet would receive the oracle before they transmitted it.
Oracles came by auditory hallucination of the word of Djahwe: the voice they heard was the very voice of Djahwe.
The passing on of this message to the masses was the occupation of the prophet.
Prophets also had the visionary hallucination of second sight, that is, of insight, through which they also had foresight and hindsight, which greatly increasing their versatility.
Their eschatology was usually based on the perception of war through related illusions.
These illusions coming in the form of visions, dreams, and hallucinations, tended to reveal the plan of Djahwe to draw the world closer to him through war circumstances.
In a civilisation there can be many powers but to a theocrat power should be vested solely in God.
Tribal chiefs and leaders are no different from idols and superstitions: they are false powers unequal to the great divine presence.
The closeness of a divine to a prophet should be inseparable.
The prophet should walk with the divine as often as possible and seek to be in their presence as much as possible.
As for the divine, they must manifest the loving presence of Djahwe at all times: they can be rebuked but they cannot be false.
Lies are not possible for the divine, they speak Djahwe’s word directly while their prophets speak as by unctioning from what they hear in the presence of the divine.
As a side note divines also see the world as created and judged by Djahwe’s peace, which to them is the principle element not his word.
The theocracy is not a stretch of land but a stretch of time.
It begins personally when an individual overthrows all the illusions and vanities in their life and allows Djahwe to rule in their life.
It begins nationally when a country overthrows all the laws and protocols and adopts a God-centred social programme.
Ultimately, the theocracy begins when the person or nation adopts a theocentric system.
Theocrats are Gods and Goddesses in their own right as they have overthrown the daemons and spectres of devilishment and become the incarnation of holiness and godliness.
All that is owned by the theocracy: whether lands, businesses, or productive property should be held by all in common.
Everyone should have a common right to eat from the same pot.
As the theocracy spreads more peoples, lands, and businesses will become theocentric and will practice righteous living.
Those who honour money will receive the benefits of honouring money, those who honour integrity will receive the benefits of honouring integrity.
There are no material benefits to honouring integrity only communal; if one values respect – self-respect and social-respect – then integrity will pay off.
Therefore, the theocracy makes people Gods and Goddesses while also being a period of time entered into before which one may have been uncivilised, unrighteous, or savage.