David Icke's version of Gnosticism is a ridiculous farce
There is this rumor going around that Aldous Huxley, George Orwell and David Icke would all be shills and communists and controlled opposition.
I totally agree that David Icke is a shill - I mean that much is obvious to anyone who doesn't believe that we live in a Matrix run by reptilians with its hard disk being the rings of Saturn (yes, that's what David Icke seriously tells people).
But the other 2... well, ALL 3 of them are Gnostics - or at least "know" about Gnosticism, so they DO have that in common. But David Icke is the only one who actually teaches Gnosticism and propagates it (that whole Saturn Matrix stuff actually comes from Gnosticism, though he gave it a ridiculous Science Fiction spin that originally it of course didn’t have).
But with Huxley it's actually his brother Julian Huxley who was into that stuff and Aldous exposed it in Brave New World. Same with Orwell, yes, he too was exposed to that stuff through (“inner”) socialist groups like the Fabian Society, but he too actually (at least eventually) opposed it.
If you know anything about Gnosticism and read 1984 and Brave New World, you know that what BOTH of these books truly oppose and expose, is Gnosticism, whereas Icke is the one who propagates it.
Yeah, Gnosticism is a broad term, but I mean the stuff involving the "evil demiurge" who traps us in this physical world that would be a mere prison and illusion and what not, you know, that stuff.
And it actually goes on to conclude that not only would the God of the old testament be evil and incompetent and keep us trapped, but we (meaning the Gnostics) would actually be the true God, we just didn't know it as we didn't have that gnosis before.
So we would be like Neo in the Matrix and have supernormal powers and be able to control the “Matrix”, as our physical reality would be a mere illusion that could be entirely controlled by the mind (of those who have awakened to the divine and secret knowledge that they are gods). And also like gods, those gnostics would be able to create man in their image or according to their wishes. It's exactly that type of mentality that both Aldous Huxley and George Orwell mock in their novels to no end.
"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable—what then?"
"GOD IS POWER He accepted everything. The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia. Jones, Aaronson, and Rutherford were guilty of the crimes they were charged with. He had never seen the photograph that disproved their guilt. It had never existed, he had invented it. He remembered remembering contrary things, but those were false memories, products of selfdeception. How easy it all was! Only surrender, and everything else followed. It was like swimming against a current that swept you backwards however hard you struggled, and then suddenly deciding to turn round and go with the current instead of opposing it. Nothing had changed except your own attitude: the predestined thing happened in any case. He hardly knew why he had ever rebelled. Everything was easy, except! Anything could be true. The so-called laws of Nature were nonsense. The law of gravity was nonsense. 'If I wished,' O'Brien had said, 'I could float off this floor like a soap bubble.' Winston worked it out. 'If he thinks he floats off the floor, and if I simultaneously think I see him do it, then the thing happens.' Suddenly, like a lump of submerged wreckage breaking the surface of water, the thought burst into his mind: 'It doesn't really happen. We imagine it. It is hallucination.' He pushed the thought under instantly. The fallacy was obvious. It presupposed that somewhere or other, outside oneself, there was a 'real' world where 'real' things happened. But how could there be such a world? What knowledge have we of anything, save through our own minds? All happenings are in the mind. Whatever happens in all minds, truly happens."
(1984)