August 15, 2017

Superficiality Is Destroying Us


Take a glance at the comments posted below any essay of thoughtful analysis on a subject of significance. What do you notice? If you don't notice anything striking as a common characteristic of most comments (on 'American websites', at least) you may be part of the problem!

What hits my sensibilities is the glibness, the vacuousness, the inanity, of the vast majority of posted comments, almost always under pseudonyms... which are almost always lugubrious, themselves. 
As a quick measure of the intelligence level of cyber-citizenry, posted comments tell a sad tale. Not just the intelligence, but more importantly, the spiritual level of the netizens is indicted by their blathering in response to published essays.

Many of the fools who post their rubbish can't spell in English, can't write a grammatical phrase, and can't reason from A to B. Mercifully, these morons tend (perhaps as a result of the foregoing) to respond with brief, barely intelligible sentence fragments, mainly consisting of expletives. Those ravings can be easily dismissed. It's the more elaborate responses that often display the endemic superficiality that typifies the thinking of 'average' perusers of the web.

Naturally, such commenters, puffed with self-importance, deploy the usual bag of well-known underhanded tactics, such as attacking the writer with nasty hate-words, as if they had the slightest acquaintance with the person. When they disagree with the substance of the article, the nay-sayers generally fall back on all the 'everybody knows' clich├ęs on whatever the subject may be. Let's look at some of the 'favorites' that I find especially irksome.

In numerous essays, I've described how we, today's society, exist in a virtual reality matrix of illusions created by the mass media on behalf of the dark, hidden eminences that manipulate humanity for their own ends. This matrix is purposefully crafted on a global scale, from birth to death, using the influence of every institution at hand to create and sustain it. By the time a person is a young adult, they are already so thoroughly 'acculturated' (programmed) that it's almost impossible for them to see reality and so escape the delusory world they inhabit.

Worse than the false beliefs held by the masses, is the regrettable fact that they show no interest in discovering truth. If they are told something by an 'authoritative source,' that settles the issue for them. Sure, they might check one or more other authorities, but once they find consensus, they become smugly assured of their 'knowledge.' Any suspicion that those authority figures are all part of a 'consensus matrix' does not occur to the conditioned masses.

For instance, so many people of this modern age have 'freed themselves' of religion... with nary a fleeting qualm that they have then imprisoned themselves in a substitute belief system.
But that's exactly what they've done-- thrown off the chains of religion, only to lock their mind in the atheistic prison of 'the Theory of Evolution.'

Ha! You, poor reader, have already decided after the last statement that this essay is 'wrong;' your mind-shields are fully activated; this message does not accord with your 'knowledge,' therefore it must not be believed! Well, just wait a bloody moment, take a deep breath, and don't close this window! If you leave, you just proved my title regarding the superficiality of this Age. Stick around; you might learn something... if you dare.

Somewhere along our early journey, we are trained not to ask impertinent questions. We may ask approved questions, for which the authorities prompt us, because they already have 'canned answers' ready. That's why every issue is reduced to an 'A vs B' duality, where the 'correct side' has been pre-determined for us. But they hate those 'why?' questions that get to the deep issues of human existence. Let me try a few on you.

Q: Why are you so confident in the Theory of Evolution? A: because you read it in a book written by a journalist who paraphrased from the original research? (Often, the answer to a question is another question!) My point is that if you'd studied the scientific claims, you'd be aware that the theory is riddled with gaps that Darwin himself admitted. The honest scientists admit that the universe is too complex to be dismissed as accidental. Yet you want to stake your life and your unacknowledged 'after-life' on this flawed theory that you 'understand' at second or third hand!

Q2: Why do you disbelieve 'religion?' A: Because you haven't died to see for yourself, nor has anyone you know come back from death to inform you? Okay, there could be several 'logical' reasons one could offer. But those reasons are all based on sensate, physical reasoning. E.g. You can't see God, therefore he can't exist. Or: there's so much evil in the world, therefore God mustn't exist.

Sorry, but those answers make no sense to me. They betray the utterly superficial thinking that is so typical of this benighted age. Atheists dismiss the Bible on any number of fatuous excuses... but have they actually read the scriptures for themselves or, again, are they deferring to authorities? Oh, right; you read a few isolated verses, hand-picked to demonstrate the 'inconsistencies' of the Bible so that you can dismiss it and continue doing what you want.

Or maybe you read some 'expert' who wrote a paper 'conclusively proving' the Bible is a hoax. A book that has survived millennia of experts trying to disprove it by all the usual human contrivances... and you want to toss it out because some so-called authority has concocted a theory that has a semblance of reason that tickles your fancy.

Do you finally 'get it,' or are you terminally superficial? My point is that almost all of what people 'know' these days is simply vaguely retained memes that are generated and repeated endlessly by the dominant cultural programming machine. We know very little, first hand. We know very little from hours of researching original sources and a variety of commentary.

Moreover, this glibness is killing us. By buying into the superficial (and mostly obvious b.s.) 'news' and expert opinion (by paid-off shills from academia) we have sealed our long-term fate on this planet. Without in-depth, wide-ranging analysis by a majority of citizens, our society is utterly vulnerable to the machinations of skilled lying programmers who are propelling us back to feudal barbarity.

Thus, the pillaging of the planet proceeds briskly; the phoney, 'zombie economy' approaches the precipice of collapse; World War 3 looms on the event horizon as a certainty; our enslavement by 'protective' governments continues with every new false-flag terrorist event; the dumbing-down of our education system advances unabated; and so the beast slithers forward with gathering speed.

The criminal cabal can do all this with facility because there is no critical mass of clear minds among the populace to oppose them. They can do this openly now because they control all aspects of modern culture. As Terrance McKenna stated, culture is the operating system of our brains. In the latest releases of their 'mental OS,' they have corrupted our vocabulary, using the power of words to advance their agenda, and significantly, to shut down all opposition.

This OS add-on is known as the 'political correctness' module, and it is a deadly piece of code replete with Leftist linguistic baffle-gab [1]. Few mavericks can find an effective work-around to 'PC talk,' because it invokes the power of peer pressure. No one wants to be labelled with one of the PC sobriquets that has been carefully crafted to carry all kinds of negative baggage that is very hard to discard. Just think of the manufactured labels 'anti-semite,' 'racist,' 'homophobe,' 'climate-change denier,' 'holocaust denier,' and on it goes.

Even words that were once honorable or neutral have now been given a distinctly dark overtone by the media social engineers. For example, 'nationalist' used to be similar to patriot, now it's somehow identified as undesirable... go figure! Or how about 'populism?' We used to call it democracy; now, it's sullied by the Ministry of Truth as some kind of misguided provincialism!

Our dark over-lords keep getting away with this atrocious mind-screw because the general level of consciousness of the governed masses has been abased to a dangerously low point. The system they have created-- mass consumer capitalism hybridized with secular socialist patrimony-- has sucked the spirit out of most people (including most Christians) with dire results.

Primarily, without a spiritual basis or outlook of some sort, the minds of the populace have become defenceless against relentless mental attacks. At the physical level, the PTB have added fluoride and all manner of pollutants to the water we drink; they've allowed all kinds of 'additives' (sounds rather benign, doesn't it?) to the foods we consume; and then they've promoted, even mandated in places, the insertion of noxious substances into our very blood, via ever-increasing vaccinations of highly dubious value to our health.

Against such a concerted onslaught on our mind/body/spirit entity, it's a marvel that society still manages to function at even a minimal level of efficiency! But their sick strategy has effectively succeeded-- their satanic parasitic pathology permeates every institution of society to such an extent that to eradicate it, or even counter-balance it, is practically impossible at this stage.

So this sorry tale must play itself out. The looney leftists in America will blindly follow the Alinsky rules of attack against the 'right' and the muddled 'middle' until it ignites the second civil war. Fact is that this war is already raging, albeit mostly in non-military confrontation, using conventional media, TV, movies, websites, and 'social media.' Like the first civil war, it will be incredibly bloody and destructive; but this time, there will be no recovery. The 'ordo ab chao' that results will just be ordered tumult, a vindictive reaction by the 'winners' against the losers. Recall the French Revolution for chilling reference.

Superficiality... once begun, is self-reinforcing. You readers who made it this far are part of the remnant of deeper thinkers... true homo sapiens, perhaps the last of the species. May God have mercy on the sleep-walkers.

[1] www.henrymakow.com/2017/08/Ten-examples-of-illuminati-doublespeak.html

August 5, 2017

Latter-day Leftist Lunacy


It's yet another indication of these morally inverted times that I find myself moved to write about the lunacy of those who espouse the 'left' side of the political spectrum. By left, I refer of course to those concepts considered liberal and socially progressive. 
Those concepts used to sound noble, even self-evidently so. Now they require ironic quotes to denote their new degeneracy as expressed by the current crop of rabid practitioners.

Once, I even wrote an essay denouncing conservatives as fearful and reactive. Today, I have to acknowledge the 'right' as exhibiting common sense in a world of suicidal progressives. Every day brings new examples of the insanity of the left. And like all insane entities, they're not even aware of their sickness. No, they're convinced in the justness of their cockamamie causes, and oblivious to their inherent contradictions.

The left believe in 'diversity,' all the while doing everything possible that will erase diversity! They want to fling open the doors of their nations to an inflow of immigrants from all over the world, but especially, these days, from the Islamic countries. This will diversify the indigenous cultures, they proclaim. They also encourage inter-marriage among all the diverse cultures, races, ethnicities, etc, in the interests of 'diversity.' However, they can't extrapolate their reasoning to its logical conclusion, which is that, over time, everyone would be absorbed into a multicultural mish-mash in which few diverse characteristics survive.

If we look at Europe, we see the rapid disappearance of the very ethnicities that made Europe what it was-- a collection of homogenous societies, each with its unique language, traditions, religions, shared beliefs, national characteristics, music, literature, and so on. The first step in dismantling all of this diversity was the creation and imposition of the economic union, which culminated in the present EU.

In the EU, the individual sovereign nations gave up their national currency to adopt the 'euro.' The euro currency was imposed regardless of the large differences in the strength of the local economies (but that's a story in itself). As trade barriers came down (which sounds like a benefit) and movement of citizens across borders became freer, there began a mingling of cultures. But said mingling, and 'necessary' uniform supra-national laws, were also accompanied, inevitably, by a dilution of each individual culture... the uniqueness of each country began disappearing (at a faster pace than it had already, under the all-pervasive influence of proliferating Americanism).

Whether individual European ethnicities would survive the growing homogeneity of the EU in the long run became a moot point when the Brussels parliament decided to throw open the gates of immigration to a flood of so-called refugees from the Muslim world. Today the question is not whether French or German or Italian or Swedish culture will continue to exist in some identifiable fashion. No; now one wonders if Europe will endure at all as its former collection of Caucasian countries, or will it become a racially hybridized outpost of Islam.

While I've always prided my country on its overt multiculturalism, I now realize that such a society can only cohere peacefully under ideal conditions. Those conditions presume for granted a stable economy that provides decent jobs for the great majority; a common set of social norms and values accepted by all the diverse sub-cultures; a balance in the numbers or 'social weight' of the main ethnic groups, along with tolerance of the special interest groups that may exist. If any of those factors becomes aberrant or shaky in some way, then the multicultural mix can become unstable, if not explosive.

In countries where multiculturalism seems to work, it's usually because the society is dominated by one 'group' whose outlook and values are accepted as standard by all new-comers and minorities. And, no special interest group exerts disproportionate influence over the collective. Once you get an influx reaching critical mass, of immigrants with significantly different ideas from the 'indigenous majority,' things can rapidly deteriorate. This is exactly what is happening in Europe as thousands of migrants from the middle East and North Africa flood into the EU bringing their jihadist Islamic zealotry which they don't even try to disguise.

In the quirky logic of the neo-left, every special interest group deserves all the rights of the 'majority' (however that is defined). What happens when one group wants rights that oppose the rights of another group? In practice, of course, this formula just doesn't work; which is exactly what we've been seeing since at least the eight-year Obama regime. How can, say, Christians have religious freedom when they're forced to acknowledge 'marriages' between same-sex (or the various trans-gender 'identities') couples, against their beliefs?

Note that it's not a matter of the majority simply tolerating the rights of a minority. No, they must be compelled to place the minority's rights above their own! Something has to give; and for 'whatever' reason, it's almost always the majority or the traditional member(s) that are forced to defer to the minority.

Democracy originally meant that the majority held sway, even if by the narrowest margin. That's how most 'democratic' elections are conducted. Now, the left refers to 'liberal democracy' when talking politics. Apparently, in liberal democracies, the majority no longer rules but must accommodate itself to the desires of every group that can capture the attention of the media.

In the leftist paradigm, the majority is identified as the enemy (the white, European, 'power-holders') who must be stripped of their influence and even wealth. In the USA, every possible 'evil' (i.e. perceived social slight) identified by the hyper-sensitive leftists is immediately attributed to the 'white majority,' even by ideologically programmed caucasians themselves. It's the same suicidal racism that is unfolding in Europe.

In Planet-Left, the tail wags the dog, where the tail represents some bleating minority with a good sense of PR, and the dog is the hound of civil society. Problem is, there are many tails to this bedraggled canine; they all want to wag this dog in a separate way. It's a formula that clearly must result in chaos... and that's what we're seeing!

One of the primary, lethal weapons of the neo-left is political correctness, just as in the old Soviet Union. Anyone who dares to point out the inconsistencies and sheer foolishness of the progressive agenda is attacked as a reactionary social pariah, and under relentless media censure, soon serves to illustrate to the populace what can and cannot be stated and what views are now acceptable. By such means, liberalism has completely subverted Western society in the span of a generation.

It was all done before, in the late, great USSR, in the guise of Communism. The same social poison is again being administered, this time to the USA and its Western flunkies. It always sounds so good-- we're all going to be 'equal,' all given a basic monthly income, all given free health-care, and we'll all live happily ever after. People may give up the fairy tales of childhood only to embrace new adult fairy tales sold to them by the invisible matrix that hides in plain sight!

Sadly, there is, practically speaking, no way to reverse this descent into madness, chaos, and final destruction. The reason I can be so categorical is because changing the direction of society (especially after a couple generations who've been programmed in one way) would necessitate the stating of bare, harsh, and by now unbelievable, truth. And that is essentially impossible; we have hard-wired the mechanisms of our destruction. How would the corporate media suddenly start telling truth when all they've ever done is tell lies? Who would dare be the first to tell truths in a miasma of endemic deception? How could a population fed lies all their lives suddenly accept the myth-busting truth?

No society can survive when truth has become anathema, as it has in the modern, Western world. It's been said that 'the truth hurts;' and today's coddled neo-lib generation can't tolerate anything that hurts, be it physical, emotional, political, or moral. They preach tolerance for all kinds of perversions, but not for anyone who speaks truth to their delusions.

And so we've come to the point where no one (of influence) can speak the truth publicly about climate change; about Muslim immigration; about the 'LGBTQ+++ community;' about US aggression world-wide; about the risk of WW3; about looming ecological catastrophe; and on it goes. Consequently, policy decisions continue to be made on the basis of pure nonsense and falsehood, in every area that matters, with unavoidable, ultimately disastrous results. That those results have not yet manifested in everyone's lives doesn't mean that they will never happen-- this is what the vast masses are oblivious to.

Aye, we've slid too far down the slippery slope to be able to scramble back up to sanity. As virtue is its own reward, so is folly its own consequence. Tant pis, as the French put it. The only question that matters now is, how long will it be before the explosion; before the real violence begins?