Viser opslag med etiketten collectivism. Vis alle opslag
Viser opslag med etiketten collectivism. Vis alle opslag

søndag den 31. juli 2016

The Rabbit Holes in The Rabbit Hole



by ChaosNavigator


"The Buddha had already been teaching on groundlessness for some time. Many of the students there on Vulture Peak Mountain had a profound realization of impermanence and egolessness, the truth that nothing - including ourselves - is solid or predictable. They understood the suffering that results from grasping and fixation. They had learned this from Buddha himself; they had experienced its profundity in meditation. But the Buddha knew that our tendency to seek solid ground is deeply rooted. Ego can use anything to maintain the illusion of security, including the belief in insubstantiality and change. So the Buddha did something shocking. With the prajnaparamita (perfection of unconditional wisdom) teachings, he pulled the rug out completely, taking his students further into groundlessness. He told the audience that whatever they believed had to be let go. This was not comfortable
news for the audience to hear."

- Buddha's Revelations on Vulture Peak Mountain


"The Truth, when you finally chase it down, is almost always far worse than your darkest visions and fears."

- Hunter S. Thompson: Kingdom of Fear


'Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.'
- Buddha

It could be a worthwhile exercise in discernment to visit the sophisticated truth-excavator Miles Mathis, a talented artist and mathematician, as he seems to exemplify my last often-quoted dictum above by Buddha to the extreme, not to mention one of my favorite quotes; 'Everything you know is wrong'


Mathis' research is vast, and sort of the spearhead of what could be named 'the rabbit hole inside the rabbit hole'. At least.

So this is clearly not for people who are at level zero....What the hell am I talking about? 


Well, '1st level' is always the mainstream version..well..actually it's zero, cause nothing have yet been excavated by independent thinking and observation, only spoon-fed to you by lamestream robotic programming.

The 2nd level (in reality the first level, given that the above is zero) is the first layer of deprogramming yourself and the world around you.

The 3rd level narrative is much of what Miles Mathis seem to be doing and probably at a 4th level as well ( as well as the 2. level as it does not always contradict the 3rd level but can include several points)

Example: At the first level Putin is a brutal dictator - the mainstream version.

At the second level Putin is a good rebel against the brutal New World Order and CIA/Mossad/NATO proxy warriors in Ukraine and Syria - the alternative version and much evidence supports this.

At the third level both USA and Russia are playing a false dialectic - the so-called third narrative (see The Battle for the New Grand Narrative fx)

Ayatollah Khomeni fx. - it turns out - was a western intelligence asset.


The concept, 'controlled opposition' or 'false opposition' does not even exist on the radar of the mainstream subscribers, let alone real opposition. What is there to oppose anyway? To acknowledge the former you would have to acknowledge the latter first, and most people have no clue.

Well, according to Mathis there are at least 3 levels (my expression, not his).

One must assume that Mathis probably got that knack of doubting surface 'reality' via his perception/interpretation from following his own disposition (which is something many people in the so-called truth/justice- movements do and the same reason why they are not predisposed for cognitive dissonance to the same degree when confronted with 2. and 3. narratives):

"If you don't naturally notice things, you can teach yourself to notice much more than you do. The first way to do that is to ignore all the implicit advice from society to not notice things. For instance, we are taught that it is impolite to stare. Well, yes, it is impolite and impolitic to stare at a person to the point of making them uncomfortable. That won't do you any good. But if you aren't scary and if you remember to smile, you can look at almost anything or anyone as long as you like. In fact, it is your right. You have eyes and you have the right to look at whatever you wish to look at. If people don't want to be seen, they should stay home or wear a burka.

So, whenever you go out, look at everything . Do not look away from anything. If you get caught, just smile innocently. Also, it is OK to make judgments. As you look at everything, categorize it in any way you like. Practice categorizing it in as many ways as possible. Just as it is your right to look, it is your right to judge. I am not saying you should be damning people to hell, I just mean you should be free to go, “Oh, he's tall, she's pretty, that dog is dirty, that sign is stupid, and so on.” Those are all judgments, of a sort. It is just you seeing things and putting them in slots in your mind. Not only is that OK, it is necessary if you are going to get any smarter than you already are. If you put something in the wrong slot, that is OK, too: you can switch slots later. The important thing is that you have some opinion about everything that you see. It is that feeling that will make what you see stick in your mind. If you don't allow yourself to have a feeling about it, it won't stick. It will just slide through your brain like beer through the bladder.

Another thing has helped me get where I am, and it is very important. It is the fact that I believe in truth. I am not a relativist. Whenever I have been taught relativism of any kind, I have simply handed it back to the teacher. We don't even need to get into a long discussion about truth here, since even if you don't believe in truth, you should pretend you do. I happen to believe in it very strongly, but I don't think it is something you can convince someone of. If someone has no strong innate connection to the idea of truth, it is unlikely I am going to be able to give it to them. So I will just argue in utilitarian and political terms here. In my opinion, relativism makes you less intelligent, and it is sold to you for that reason.

Relativism prevents you from making those judgments I was talking about above. Without those judgments, things don't stick in your brain. If you are a relativist, you just don't care one way or the other, and if you don't care, then your brain has no reason to hold on to data. So you have to find some reason to care. Believing in the truth is the natural way to do that. Some will say that you can't pretend to believe in truth if you don't, and that is probably true. So start with those things you care about. Call them your truths, and build from there. You will find that those things you care about require you to look at and care about other things, and as you widen your net, your truth grows. The point is, you want to care about more things, and include more things in your truth, not less. Relativism is sold to you to make you do the opposite."

- Miles Mathis, 'Robert Anton Wilson: Spook-Baby. I out another nest of probable agents'

Mathis is very slowly beginning to make a buzz among the '2. level narrativists' across the internet (at the Daily Bell fx [3rd level mostly] , Veteran's Today, etc.).

To add more labyrinths to the maze of Russian Dolls some ask whether Mathis himself is COINTEL damage control to the enormous awakening happening on level zero and level 2. Or is it the other way around - that he is onto something? That eternal 'conspiranoid' point about 'who is who?' COINTEL notwithstanding, and in spite of certain things that might be beyond credibility, his work is still an exercise in discernment for mostly 2. and 3. 'narrativists'.

This is only an introduction to his works. Mathis is a lone rare voice in the wilderness, as all 3rd level narrativists are. Is he a testimony to the fact that it's easier to mislead many men than one (in itself the implication of his work) on an even deeper level than the 2nd? He is challenging many of the 2. level most cherished assumptions.

How deep does the rabbit hole go? You be the judge - a selection of Miles Mathis' work - fasten your seat belts:

A short selection from: http://mileswmathis.com/updates.html:



The Hippie Matrix. How the government co-opted the hippie, anti-war, and environmental movements. Including an outing of Ram Dass, Stewart Brand, and Larry Brilliant.



Elvis Aron Presley: Intelligence Project. A long paper that will likely blow your socks off. It surprised me, and I wrote it.



Noam Chomsky is and always has been a Spook. I have appended a long email I received from a reader—a reader who was a graduate student in linguistics at MIT. He confirms my reading of Chomsky, adding some tasty bits.



Looks Like David Irving is Jewish. So what, you say? He is also the world's most famous Holocaust denier.



JFK - The Hidden King: Camelot ruled from the Cave of Merlin.
If you thought you had hit the bottom of the rabbit hole, click on the title here. Take a deep breath first, though.of apiece: nothing you think you know, all the way back to 1944, is true.



What I Finally Understood. Commentary on famous people, gun control, Smith&Wesson, and Larouche.



Learn to Recognize Government Disinformation. I link to Edward Snowden's leaked documents, which prove government agencies are using lies and other dirty tricks in online forums to discredit people.



Steve Jobs: Bold, Brilliant, Brutal. . . Fake. We find that everyone involved in the Apple project is not who you were told.



Proof John Lennon's Death was Faked. Also includes a short analysis of Michael Jackson's alleged death.



Fidel Castro: CIA Agent. Where we learn more about Castro, John Wilkes Booth, Gram Parsons, Harry Belafonte, and others



I don't Believe in Elon Musk. I compile evidence that Musk is an Intel creation.




A Game of Fakes. Where I look at “Game of Thrones”, Spotlight, David Bowie, and Prince.



Kabbalah, Hermeticism and the Occult. I go back five centuries and show you that even then you could substitute “Intelligence” everywhere you found “the Occult.” Including a close look at the Medicis and the Rockefellers.



The Earth is not Flat. A short response to a deluge of emails.



The Monica Lewinsky Scandal was Faked. Lots of photo analysis, plus commentary on Bill and Hillary, Vince Foster, the Jacobs family, Skolnick, and much more.



The Great Harry Potter Hoax. Where Rowling is shown to be a probable front.



Was Dresden also Faked? In a 6-page addendum, I discover Raphael's Sistine Madonna is a fake.



Graham Hancock Unmasks Himself. Also an outing of Daniel Pinchbeck, Russell Brand, and Rubert Sheldrake.



Reading the Signs: Karl Marx. A reader wrote in to tell me Marx was closely related to the Rothschilds, and it turns out he is right. What he didn't tell me is that Borat is probably related to both. No, really.



The Unabomber was Another Psy-op. Also includes a look at Gerald Gardner (Wicca), Son of Sam, and the Wicker Man.



The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Commentary by request, where—as usual—I take a third side, confounding all previous analysis.



Why I think Kevin MacDonald and the Occidental Observer are Controlled Opposition. Also Lasha Darkmoon.



Breaking News: Most Americans cannot tell fake news from the Onion from news from the New York Times.



The Real Matrix. Language as the deepest Matrix.



The Beer Hall Putsch. Oh, the maze of tunnels when you are down the rabbit hole.



The Bikini Atoll Nuclear Tests Were Faked. Easy photographic evidence.



The Nuclear Hoax. My second paper on this, where I look mostly at the Trinity test.


Strange Plagiarism. Veterans Today has updated their article with a small nod to me, but are still not indicating a direct quote. Legally, as it stands, the text is still plagiarized, since it is still acting as misdirection. 



Strange Plagiarism. Plagiarized text from my book The Un-unified Field at Veterans Today.

søndag den 14. juni 2015

Freedom Perversion


by morton_h, the blogger 

This is a difficult subject. It is about the perversion of our language, especially the core words and core values that make up our whole view of the world and ourselves.

 
An assault has taken place. It is an assault on Nature and thereby Human Nature. A Human Being is regarded, treated and educated as either an animal, a machine or a ressource and caught up in a strange prison. This is why the subject is difficult. A human being is set free from the natural bonds and obligations of his nature. A human being is free to do things, he would never do in a society, where people lived according to the rules of nature. But at the same time a human being is a slave of this big machine that has been built around him. 

A fish doesn't know that it lives in water, before it is pulled out of the water. The prison of perverted freedom is all around us, and most people have no clue of why they have this feeling of unease, suppressed angst or numbness. They don't know why they are obese, abusive and always want to buy stuff. They don't know what is going on in the world, why wars and poverty is the new natural. They don't know why they get sick and why food and water and air no longer is, what it used to be and should be. They don't know why rivers of shit seem to pour out of the media, and why the people in powerful positions, that were supposed to act in their interest are making youact in theirinterest and as though is was in your own and your fellow countrymens interest. They don't know why they are not allowed to mention, question and have answers to certain things. So they have long ago stopped thinking certain things. 

But they do feel the unease. This means that there is a piece of hope, that they - or at least their descendants - someday will say: enough! and will start to want more than this perversion of a human society. This fact may also be the reason, why those that created the society - and it did not create itself, sorry to say - today seem to be more interested in creating a human machine than hearding a human animal. Animals can be fenced and held in fear, but when the moment comes, they will break ouf of the fence and take back their nature.

Let's review some aphorisms from the former blogpost. 

Free Newspeak:
Free Speech - when those in power may insult those who cannot defend themselves while YOUare supposed to shut up
Free Trade - the freedom of BigBizz to dictate the rules to peoples and nations
Free Bar - NB! only for syndicates, cartels, corporations, bankers, globalists and sycophants - with YOUpaying the bill
Free Press - non existing
Free-Dom - heard about it somewhere 

Free, then, means something else now that what our forefathers meant. 
Free from responsibility.
Free from conscience.
Free from empathy.
Free from logic and critical thinking.

Freedom is as non-sense as Human Rights. The same people, that perverted the former, invented the latter. Also former blogpost.

Freedom is not our birth right. But when noone stops us from living according to our nature, the freedom of Nature will be given to us by Nature itself. Not 'for free', because then we will eventually start acting out certain limits to our behaviour towards others and to Nature. We will regain respect for a world in balance, and abundance will re-emerge.

Now, you may want to object to this in basically two ways.
Ordbog over nysprog

The first objection
A Darwinist, a Liberal, a Culture Marxist, a Puritan or a Nihilist - and I say that these 'isms' are part of the same overall philosophy of the rulers of the world - will object to it by claiming, that the human being is basically evil and aggessive in his nature and that his need for someone to tell him what to do and a whole bunch of rules, regulations and management to go with it.

This elitist philosophy is basically bullshit and bunkum. A foul piece on nonsense does not become less foul by being repeated over-and-over-again. How often have we not heard this? It is nothing else than a way of ex-cusing the motivs and deeds of the self-proclaimed rulers of the world so they won't be a-cused. People have bought into this philosophy, because they have been traumatized generation after generation by the constant wars, that were never theirwars, but the wars of their rulers. Every time someone tried to claim the basic goodness, ability to peaceful co-existense and the sovereign nature of humans, some screwed up dumb-ass or willing agent of the powers-that-shouldn't-be would instantly step up and shoot down the claim by saying: But look at how people have been killing each other for centuries and millennia. They clearly have to be kept in strict ties, since people by nature are so eeevil!

What people?, though, was always the missing number in the equation. When a ruling elite consists of a majority of psychopaths, the last thing they want to hear is the word: psychopath. Everyone else are the evil ones and the potential psychos.

Darwinism is the pseudo-scientific ideology concocted by the British ruling class to excuse their aggressive, imperialistic plunder of the world by claiming, that it is 'natural'. It describes nature as one big aggressive war. In reality nature is a system of co-existing organisms, that complement and supplement nature in endless ways. The Darwinist concept of nature as a monstrous, self-devouring creature is non less than a psychological projection of the highly disturbed minds of this ruling class.

Liberalism in its later stages went hand in hand with Darwinism. We see the advanced results of Liberalism in the predatory, monopolistic, Crony Capitalism which is basically one Big War in the realm of business, finance and economics. And there is a direct connection between financial wars and killing-wars. It is the same perverted mindset that is behind both, and to no surprise we always see the exact same people promoting and performing both.

The Puritans created the British way of thinking. It is the mindset of the Protestants (financed by non less that the Venetians, that created the City of London) who created the whole basis for Industrialism. To be a willing labourer in the industrial age, it took a special kind of mindset, where you willingly gave up your natural freedom for a scrap of bread - while all the time dreaming of your lost freedom.

To encapsulate this dream, Marxism and socialism were created - dare we say as the new opium for the masses. It was created no other place than in London, which is not a coincidence. Give them a dream, but do never ever fulfill the dream!It only served as the carrot on a stick driving the donkey. This shows the true essence of Marxism-Leninism aka Socialism aka Communism aka Maoism aka Collectivism. In societies created to realize this ideologi, freedom was most effectively tamed and destroyed. Again, the masses were perseived as a bunch of cattle and machines to be led by an avantgarde via the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Meaning: the same old types of bastards in new uniforms creaping into power, so they could have their Champagne and Caviar, while the masses- note how human being now are mentioned as non-individual elements of a swarm - were sweating day-and-week long for a minimum wage in a society of fear, terror, censorship, prison camps, lies and misery. 

 

A socialist society was totally unsustainable and deeply dependant on subsidiaries from the West. This is a fact, that is not known to people and not taught in schools. Billions of $ were transfered to Sovjet Russia from the West to ensure, that Russia and the whole Eastern Block would survive but never compete - until of course the walls of the Cold War went down. Luckily the EU and NATO was there to take over, where the Sovjet dropped out ...

Did we forget to mention, that the Russian Revolution was invented and financed by financial/industrial oligarchs in the City of London and Wall Street in order to crush the strength of traditional Russia and the power of the families, that ruled, the Romanovs, the Csars. The immense envy of the British-American elite towards all perceived rivals (including the German Empire) drove the world into revolutions and world wars. Hundreds of millions of people were slaughtered to satisfy this indescribable envy. The Tychoon families Schiff and Kuhn-Loeb - Jewish, by the way - basically financed the revolution and for their own interest - not for concern of the 'suffering' of the Russians, that did quite well before the revolution. Jewish like Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, the Bolsjevik Commisarians, Ilya Ehrenburg (Stalins Goebbels), all the leading figures in the Culture Marxist re-invention of Marxism, and the leaders of the zionist movement, of course, + a majority of investment bankers and financial manipulators in Goldman Sachs (just to mention one major finance corporation). Just a side note, probably a coinsidence.
Ideology Sucks!

Time for more aphorisms.

Liberal Newspeak 
Free Newspeak, only in latin. 
Neither Liberal nor Conservative mean anything any longer. Meaning nothing means, though, that they can't be opposites, but the same soup. 
Liberals and Conservatives of the World Unite and become Nihilists!
A Liberal is a variation of Cultural Marxist.
A Cultural Marxist is a variation of a Puritan.
A Puritan is someone that believes, that Nature is a filthy thing and should be fought with all means and by all means. Which includes the human nature. 
Liberal education is the destruction of critical thinking and healthy logic by the means of political correctness.
The result of the war on human nature is what we see all around us. It is not a happy site.
Liberal then means something after all. I am contradictin myself, hurrah! It means the exact opposite of liberal aka itself, which qualifies it as newspeak of the first degree.

The second objection
Let us repeat the statement, that could provoke objection:

Freedom is not our birth right. But when noone stops us from living according to our nature, the freedom of Nature will be given to us by Nature itself. Not 'for free', because then we will eventually start acting out certain limits to our behaviour towards others and to Nature. We will regain respect for a world in balance, and abundance will re-emerge.

As I have argued, the rulers of the world simply denies in their own interest that this may hold any truth. Let us look at the objection of the concerned sceptics.

The position of the first objection I have expelled from my system by an act of mental detoxing. Regular readers of paradigmet.blogspot.comwill know this and may even aggree. The position of the second objection is still an ongoing internal dialogue within myself and with others. All dialogue seems to be internal and external at the same time.

The second objection again shows the complexity of the subject. An image, an example: A tortured, traumatized slave or prisoner is released from his confinement. But he refuses to be released. His life as a prisoner formed his behaviour to an extend, that he became dependant on his own imprisonment. You may say, that he fell in love with his trauma.

The wet dream or favorite scenario of the rulers of the world is, that people will learn to love their own enslavement. This is the Fabian Socialism as described by people like H.G. Wells, Bertrand Russell and the brothers Aldous and Julian Huxley. The strategy of the Fabians are to nudge peoples and nations small steps by small steps into a new technocratic version of collectivism, Communism 2.0. These people and their networks, societies and institutions were not marginal but highly essential and influential in social ingeneering our present society.

SO: the claim of the sceptics is, that these people have already won the battle, and that our societies and the mindset of a majority of people of this world is now ripe for the takeover of the Globalists to form theirNew World Order as theysee it. They have the technocratic means to do it - the means that both Orwell and Huxley predicted and/or wished for. Huxley for sure, Orwell for uncertain.

This is the whole battle of optimism and pessimism, that is the ongoing discourse. It is inside my head, for sure, and I find it ever present in the debates among concerned people. The skisma is between analyzing the dying world and visualizing another coming world. A New World Order will come, for sure. But the term has been hi-jacked by the ruling class to mean theirNWO. Some have claimed that this is what the rulers of human history do every time, a major shift of Paradigm is about to occour. It may very well be so.

My objection to the objection is, that it is far too subserviant to the perversion of freedom. By the way, did you notice, that the US draconian Homeland Security Act now is re-branded as Freedom Act? How disgusting will it be?

I understand and respect the objection of inevitability. It even seems plausible. But I reject it as defaitism. If we fall in love with the analyzis, we loose. We accept once more in a same-same-but-different way the narrative of the rulers. This is not to discredit the analyzis, since I would then discredit the overall project of paradigmet.blogspot.comdoing this analyzis for the most part. It is to reclaim hope, respect, honor, honesty, integrity, strength, fidelity, truth, virtue, morality, chivalry, conscience, empathy, pride, all the good and old stuff, that has being assaulted by the Cult of Perversionfor decades and centuriesby us saying:We neither submit to your narrative and your agenda when you are NOT admitting, nor when you - caught with your filthy pants down - ARE admitting, yet arrogantly continuing your rape of humanity with a grin on your face.

I suggest that we reclaim language. Let us reclaim the word Freedomas a word that really means something. Let us thereby dismantle Global Nihilism, that feeds on and perverts meanings as a whole.

Let us re-introduce the concept of True Speak as a respond to New Speak.