Zazen
1yr ago
Of course no evil is ever done in the name of evil. But that has nothing to do with what I’m saying, so I’ll level: I don’t think there’s anything good about this particular brand of sanity.
But if you believe there are “too many” people (I don’t)…
If you believe this surplus creates damage to the whole (I don’t)…
If you believe transgenderism is an innate and immutable condition (I don’t)…
Then these measures are defensible on any of those grounds, (albeit for very different reasons) and you’ll find yourself on the losing end of these arguments more often than not if you concede to any of those framing narratives.
Me? I believe most everything is imaginary and divisions are created or destroyed in order to meet the dictates of an unknown author. Whether it’s Von Neumann’s idea of unthinking geometrical processes to which humans are blindly governed, Steiner’s idea of competing archetypes (Lucifer and Ahriman), Jung’s idea of participacion mystique, or if some people are knowingly serving nonhuman/antihuman entities, I’m not sure and I doubt anyone who is.
Zazen
1yr ago
Since the death rate is exceeding the birth rate the system should stop employing its eugenicist gears? This is a silly thought.
To your second point, your opinion is in that area of “No one knows anything that isn’t explicitly spelled out to them, even if the pattern should be obvious without the explanation.”
Zazen
1yr ago
Insane? If I'm correct in believing a fundamental necessity of American life in the 21st century -- as far as moneyed powers are concerned -- is to prune the surplus population in ways which provoke their naïve consent, then this proposed measure is very, very sane.
Zazen
1yr ago
As a matter of fact, none of this was presented in that court of law. Odd thing that.
Zazen
1yr ago
Yeah. Sure.
Beyond a shadow of a doubt, No one died at Sandy Hook. No bodies have been recovered. No medical reports have been released.
In news footage taken on the day of the alleged event, the coroner has no knowledge of the bodies he’s just worked on. He cryptically says: “let’s hope the people of Newtown don’t have this come crashing down on their heads later.”
Robbie Parker is hot mic’d walking up to a podium, laughing, smiling and saying “I’ve never done this before should we just start?” a day after his daughter was shot. He then approaches the mic and gives the performance of a very bad actor — not only not crying (for those who “grieve differently”) but fake crying.
A Sandy Hook Elementary student is interviewed on “Dr. Oz”. Having no knowledge that his classmates and teachers were killed, he says the class was having a drill and is very happy that his teachers “help him a lot of the time.”
Sounds like nothing substantial right? That’s why you need to see the actual footage shown in the presentation.
There’s about a dozen equally telling anomalies. Taken one at a time they’re nothing, taken together it’s inescapable: Sandy Hook did not happen as reported. Watch the video.
The first link posted in the message you replied to is “evidence in proportion to how inflammatory the claim is” — it’s a 90 minute presentation that completely changed my mind about the veracity of the Sandy Hook shootings.
Edit: you might have better luck with this link (can’t get bitchute to load): Unravelling Sandy Hook
Zazen
1yr ago
As I said, I simply start at “Fake and Gay” and wait until it becomes undeniably clear it happened as stated. It may seem perverse but it serves me well in this hyperrealistic world. The default position is: “I don’t believe you. Prove it to me.” If they satisfy the demands of proof they then have to tell me what it has to do with anything I care about.
Sometimes the whole thing proves to be a sham and sometimes only
parts seem to be.
Zazen
1yr ago
I’ll bet my eye teeth it’s a Psyop. I’ve found treating all mass shootings as “Fake and Gay until proven otherwise” is an optimal heuristic. It’s probably why no one knows whether this person is MtFtM or FtMtFtM or something in between. The Newspeak is “TRANS”* this allows the usual suspects to ask why the focus isn’t on the issue of transgenderism/mental illness while the other usual suspects squawk about guns. The new talking point will be the tacit sympathy for a school shooter who was most certainly the victim of transphobia in that Jesus school…
This will also prove to corral people who are super passionate about vilifying the mentally ill (trans pushback is all the rage rn) into showing sympathy for antigun legislation. All part of the new breed of neocon: feminist, gay friendly, in favor of reasonable gun control, and most definitely not okay with trans ruining women’s sports.
Meanwhile, the ultra-reasonable approach of taking anything piped out of any media publication with a giant: “I don’t believe you and even if I did, I’m not so sure I would care,” will be as unpopular as ever. Go figure.
—
*It being a Christian school is a good twist. It hearkens back to the Evangelical meme of the late 90s / early-aughts “Yes. I do believe in God” — the answer given by a young girl to a gunman who asked each potential victim if they did so. (Allegedly he killed everyone who said “Yes”.) Funny, that wasn’t about guns to them either.
Thanks for your reply.
Casual sex results in more sex which results in a higher likelihood of having children. The new quasi-Puritan movement is there to make just about every form of potentially procreative sex "icky" whether it's the Rad Fem "All P in V sex is rape" or the more mainstream "You're 30 and she's 19!? Yuck!". The exceptions to this ickiness of course are the ones which couldn't possibly lead to children (hence the "don't kink shame"-type dogma). This is why no one in a mainstream film is having straight sex but gay sex is all the rage*. If you can funnel the sexual appetites of the masses into avenues which are fundamentally incapable of leading to children (especially by accident) then you're sustaining development. A careful look at every social institution, standard, and taboo suggests the very shape of society is to ensure only those who really really really want children are going to be able to have them, and if they're going to have them without the necessary personal wealth and self-establishment the children will simply be wards of the State. It's a de facto eugenicist world.
Discovery of blowback is a non factor if it's effective. Agitprop is only effective when no one knows it's agitprop. Very little has changed since the days of Socrates and the Tyrants, most any "grass roots" movement is in actuality a top-down initiative. Planned Parenthood and early Feminism were explicitly eugenicist at their inception and nothing but the selling model has changed in their goals and practical social effects.
Even the flags of the Woke movement displayed on every large company's logo (and their corresponding changes in personnel) can be traced to a series of Orwellian letters written from the CEO of Blackrock to every major Fortune 500 company (these changes were presaged by a document released by the U.N. in 1994, btw).
I think the goal is ultimately stasis, not destruction, not "depopulation" or anything sinister. This is why the Woke movements and suchlike are all-permeating and so incredibly loathsome to any decent person, they're meant to be biological dead-ends for the foul. If anything, I'd say it's good -- it's a Conspiracy of Benevolence if you will.
*Ever see a woman get eaten out by another woman in a mainstream film or TV series? Heaven sings. Her sex with men is usually a close up on her having a bad time (unless she's a light skinned woman having sex with a dark skinned man). I'd encourage you to look at the most popular TV shows and films with a particular focus on their sex scenes (or lack thereof). I marvel at how uniformed the tropes are and I suggest a centralized node. I think this is the way all ideas have ever worked, it's odd to me how it's considered unthinkable to most everyone else -- that they honestly think "Monkey see monkey and do" and think that's less magical than the notion of propaganda being a top-down process.
Zazen
1yr ago
I don’t think there’s anything “Shadowy” about the U.N. or their explicitly stated goals. Sustainable development is also a good thing, and the effect of “MeToo” isn’t chilling, it’s necessary.
One mustn’t alert whom one is forced to deceive.
Being out of fashion has never bothered me. I’d like to hear your counterargument if you have one.
Zazen
1yr ago
You’re not?
The more barriers to men and women having sex with one another, the less babies there will be. I’m not sure where you’re getting tripped up. Every major social standard we have left is fundamentally dedicated to damming this drive.
“Darkly hinting?” Sustainable development is the U.N.‘s term. Haven’t you heard? There are too many humans. “Sustainable development” is a euphemism for the correction of this large problem.
Zazen
1yr ago
Every major liberal social movement of the past century has one goal in mind: sustainable development.
Transgenderism, Feminism, Gay Rights/Equality, Abortion are the best because they sustain development.
The goals of “MeToo” and the issues of “Groomers”, “Creepers”, “Cheaters” and “Power Imbalances” are all about one thing: sustainable development.
Turning the age old practice of seducing a younger woman or a workplace subordinate into an unthinkable social crime is about one thing: sustainable development.
These are cultural safeguards set in place to ensure our betters “guide reproduction responsibly” (their words).
Zazen
1yr ago
Atheism/Agnosticism is a priori Wokeism. Just as belief in God is a priori Christianity or Islam. Ergo, there is no Wokeism without the coordinated popularity of the New Atheist movement just as the New Atheist movement itself wouldn't have been possible without popular culture's increased secularization (going back to the mid-60s) and the collective shift in epistemological standards resulting after the invention of the internet (and the events of 9/11).
Wokeism has the exact size and shape of any religious movement. How Christianity subsumed Paganism is how Wokeism is subsuming Christianity. If the Woke are fire-and-brimstone Bible thumpers then the New Good Person is the reasonable type who yes, goes to church on Easter, and yes, believes Christ died on the cross for her sins but really can't be bothered to convert anyone and truly finds Evangelicals to be mostly aggressive and distasteful, despite their fundamental agreements about Black Lives Mattering, (Gay) Love Being (Hetero) Love, and the Future Being Female.
New Atheism's function was to remove the metaphysical ground from underneath the critical mass, that it would invariably lead to the creation of new ground -- as a rule, something as filled with holes as the old ground -- was guaranteed, as these are meant to be useful paths for a governing body to traverse its people towards its desired ends, nothing more. Science would then stand in for God and anything that can't be made to be traced thusly would be called a heresy (i.e. unscientific).
Zazen
1yr ago
This is an old trope. Mocking-while-being goes back to ‘Arsenic and Old Lace’ and it was perfected in ‘Murder by Death’ (1976). It was a franchisable concept by the time Scream (1996) came around. There is nothing unique or original about the MCU, its only saving grace is that it doesn’t take itself seriously.
Zazen
1yr ago
You're a bit rough on Cohen (his debut album stands with most anyone's) but I'd take Lightfoot as well. His masterpiece is 'Sundown' (1974) -- odd how the invasive production frills help him where they hurt Cohen (e.g. his adventures w/ Spector).
I'm enjoying this series you've got going. A few years back, I took on a similarly ambitious task. To it I added the strict arbitrary limitations of no more than 2 albums per artist and no more than 2 per year. The omissions kept me up at night. Did you impose any such criteria on your list?
Zazen
2yr ago
Yes, it’s post-modernism at work. Re-framing Jezebel, Salome, or Delilah lives on in the flicks about Malificent, Cruella DeVille, or Ursula the sea-witch. Same principle, same aim.
Interesting read of the Abraham story. In Kabbalistic thought, it’s Abraham’s willingness to kill his son, to give up what’s dearest to him that moves God to stop him just before the act and bestow his blessing. The lesson being that providence shines only when you’re willing to give up the thing you’re most afraid to lose.
Your reading reminds me of the reading many have of Jacob, who is so stubborn he manages to wrestle God-himself to a stalemate. God congratulates him, then — just to show him who’s God — dislocates his hip, giving him a limp for life. He then changes his name to Israel. The Kabbalist’s reading of this story is that the Jewish people are prized by God specifically because of their “unreasonable” stubbornness.
What really gets me is how the methodologies of the Torah are used all of the time now. They’re really myths of the highest order.
For instance, Edward Bernays got women to smoke cigarettes in the early-20th century by convincing them the only reason they hadn’t already been doing so was because men didn’t want women to be like them. With this new frame he re-named them Freedom Torches and they sold like hotcakes.
Notice this is the exact appeal the serpent makes to Eve. “God knows you’ll be like him if you eat” becomes “Man knows you’ll be like him if you smoke.”
The same framing was used to get women to go to work.
It’s the reason why most goods are marketed to women. Give her a false promise and an appeal to her vanity and she’ll chomp every time.
Zazen
2yr ago
The description I offered is not complete. I’d point you to ‘Jung and Frodo’ by Robin Robertson.
Here’s a brief primer as well: https://old.reddit.com/r/tolkienfans/comments/83n53k/gnostic_elements_in_tolkiens_mythology/
Zazen
2yr ago
Good question. There are many actually. It requires a slightly different set of rules though. The Gnostic man has to answer a call. His quest is to overcome himself by piercing through the illusory veil built by the demiurge, then sacrifice himself for the good of the world. He is able to do this via the authentic love of a woman (heiros gamos).
The Gnostic reading of the Jesus story is its prototype. There are hundreds of movies that make use of its cosmology.
All the Marvels, ‘Star Wars,’ and other Disney property (everything from ‘Pinocchio’ to ‘Jungle Book’). ‘Lord of the Rings’, ‘Harry Potter’, ‘The Matrix,’ ‘The Truman Show,’ ‘Blade Runner,’ and hundreds of less familiar titles are explicitly Gnostic.
Zazen
2yr ago
Yes, I think you’ve hit something there.
I would formulate it thusly:
What we call the masculine develops from two things: austerity and challenge.
Its ultimate goal is freedom.
What we call the feminine develops from from emotional, spiritual, and spatial fullness.
Its ultimate goal is love.
The profound silence of deep meditation is a monstrosity to her. For she requires fullness, not emptiness.
Singing, dancing, drinking, laughing, and the like is where the feminine finds it home and flowering.
A man indulging thus because a lump of uselessness. Just as a woman indulging in a life of challenge becomes a bearded lady.
I believe this to be archetypal.
Zazen
2yr ago
The heroine’s journey is an essentially Gnostic reading of women and culture. I don’t think it’s possible to understand the moral intent behind the majority of Western film or literature without knowing the Gnostic worldview.
The Gnostic reading of the Eden Myth is that Eve was right. She was right to be seduced into eating the fruit and she was right to entice Adam into doing the same. Whether it’s because she’s more innately wise than him or whether it’s because even her apparent mistakes are charmed is immaterial: she is complete in and of herself.
The Patriarchal Demiurge punishes her in the story because he’s unable to rule her the way he wants, this is why he punishes her but doesn’t credit her with the sin, (that’s reserved for Adam). The Gnostic reading is that Eve liberated herself and humankind by just letting her curiosity/feeling/intuition (depending on your reading) be her guide.
This is the struggle Cpt. Marvel, Moana, Mirabel in ‘Encanto’, the girl in ‘The VVitch’ et al. have to overcome: a world with inferior men who try to mask how perfect a woman already is with their blind expectations.
It strikes me as borderline repulsive but then again, I’m a man.
Nice work.
The re-invention of the Bible as a Greek text with a folded narrative, wherein a teller of parables is represented as a parable itself is the true invention of today's human. Bloom missed this (for obvious reasons) even though he catches the phenomenon in Hamlet and Tempest and so credits Shakespeare w/ the invention of self-reflexive narratives, thereby conceding this is where the human starts: folded storytelling.
More interesting to me is how this was only made possible by what the Greeks reappropriated from the Persians. The first folded culture, wherein they conceptualized a being who could both: a) be itself and b) create itself at the same time. The story needed a story about the story itself in its telling. It's the Hebrew (see Egyptian) "I am become" tailored to the microcosm. This was destroyed by the Greeks and replaced with the twined notions of Truth and Logic but it lived on in their texts.
We now live in a world where our stories and our stories about stories (and ourselves) require explicit folding. This self knowledge is what we call "Human" today.
More options
Context Copy link