The Deal Works Both Ways - Or The Deal Ends

All deals work both ways. The feudal deal wasn't the best but it was a two way deal; some nobility pretended to care about their people - what they really cared about is not having to grow their own food and make their own clothes and shoes, build their own houses etc. because they literally couldn't, but at least they somewhat kept up their end of the deal.

The deal between the Federal Government and the individual States was also a deal, a better sort of deal but again one that only worked if both parties upheld their end of the deal.

Tell the Feds to fuck off, and if they don't like it physically throw them out of the state.

I find I have nothing to add to this. well, perhaps I do. One of the things I have always found a little frustrating about America is this; the people actually have hands on the reigns to all the tools necessary to ensure and safeguard their own freedoms... and haven't been using them.

In the UK, the people have never so much has had a pinkie finger on the reigns so it's hardly surprising that Government does whatever the heck it wants. The people and the Government more or less ignore each other as a consequence. Not ideal, the things Gov' has in my lifetime done are egregious. Pretty much nothing I have approved of ever, including this kind of thing.

Most of the reasons behind the fact that Gov' does only things that are against the interests of their peoples are discussed here.

In short, we are governed by a high command of usurers and speculators, from Bill Gates who invests in large farms right on the eve of the food emergency or in vaccines just before the outbreak of the pandemic, to George Soros, who speculates on the fluctuations of currencies and government bonds and along with Hunter Biden finances a bio-laboratory in Ukraine.

To think that there is no relationship between the instigators of these crimes and those who carry them out at the highest levels of national governments, the EU, and the UN is a sign of bad faith, because even a child could understand that we are held hostage by a group of technocrats who are ideologically deviant and morally corrupt. The peoples of the world need to reclaim their sovereignty, which has been usurped by the globalist elite.

Are We The Baddies?

Are We The Baddies?

Seems like a fair question.

            Looking at the Narrative Eaters, mostly not to somewhat not to somewhat by degrees.

            Looking at the Redpilled, somewhat not to mostly not.

            Looking at the Corporate Owned media and State. Mostly, by degrees, with exceptions by degrees.

            Looking at the SJW, somewhat to mostly, knowingly or unknowingly.

            I could go on, but you get the idea. It's largely ignorance that determines the answer. Willful and deliberate ignorance in some cases.

The meme titled and linked to refers to sketch in which a couple of Nazi officers grasp the difficult truth, a pointless realization without understanding what it is that makes them the baddies.

Nazism comprises three main elements.

            The integration of state and corporate heads to concentrate power in those few hands.

            Socialism for the bulk of citizens outside the root power structure.

            And the neglected third element; The strong supplant the weak.

State capture by the corporations of the west is sufficiently visible (hidden in plain sight) that I need not go into it. That one horribly flawed philosophy is the child of another is well explicated by Carl the very Sargon of Akkad in the linked piece above.

It's the third element, the neglected element that I think needs attention. That the strong supplant the weak is a part of observable reality but that does not make it a viable basis for a society for what might be obvious reasons... after all, no matter how strong the individual might be, we all have off days and if the philosophy of the society that surrounds you is that the strong supplant the weak then everyone in sight of your momentary laps in whatever area will certainly turn on you.

             Within a given State there may be, and often are different nations of peoples; if the third element is dominant in society then conflict is certain between groups when one group is weakened in some way or other... disadvantaged by new laws, for example. The slow certain pile on begins, usually with selective enforcement of the new laws. Between states you may find one dominating, using its military to break the weaker state, wreck its economy and secure mineral and other assets for immediate or later exploitation by the stronger states corporations, for example.

            Any of this beginning to sound familiar? The strong supplant the weak. A philosophy, it has been noted elsewhere by others, can be internalized by a population without notice. It's all in the incremental framing, the quiet removal of other elements to the philosophy of the people until only one is left intact, oddly invisible as it is never dragged out into the light to be seen, never explicated, never mentioned other than in vague terms. The strong supplant the weak. It's a deadly philosophy for a nation to internalize for the same reason as it is for an individual, only writ large - One day the state will appear weak, and everyone, quite literally every there state on the planet will bit by bit turn and grin a hungry grin and begin to move menacingly forward with the glint of avarice or revenge or righteous anger in their eyes.

            These things can kind of sneak up on you. Certainly they seem to have snuck up on the Ukraine: While the Russian special operation is going on in Ukraine, many are wondering what is the reason for launching it.

            It should not be considered a side issue that NATO, with extraordinary irony including Germany and lead by the Washington Empire under the symbolic Emperor of the Werewest, Democrat Joe Biden, whose son Hunter would be enmeshed in controversy concerning Ukraine if the Judiciary functioned -  are frothing at the mouth to economically excommunicate those opposing, and giving material support in the form of vast amounts of money and weapons to .... you guessed it, didn't you?

What are you, some kind of Gravity Denier? (A Story)

 

It is a story. I understand story fairly well, though it took me a while to understand what kind of story it was. It is a victim narrative; we have a victim, a victimiser and a hero, and the story goes like this:

I am Gaia, the victim; I have no power and no agency and I am being attacked by evil Civilization and too many people.

White Knight duly steps forward and responds: Don't worry Gaia, I will save you.

White Knight feels fully justified in attacking civilization, because in his own mind he is the hero defending helpless Gaia. Who wouldn't want to save the world - what a hero.

But how will he destroy civilization and save Gaia? Well, he can't destroy Civilization all on his own so he needs a plan to con people into destroying the very civilization that keeps them alive, healthy, and improves quality of life everywhere it exists. He looks around for a narrative that will serve and is conveniently offered a script as follows.

Civilization produces C02 as a byproduct and that's bad. Well, so do lots of other things, but that's not important, that's good natural C02 not bad Man Made C02 - nor is it important that it's plant food and makes healthy robust plants that produce oxygen that we breath in and breath out 23,000ppm of C02 with every breath. The number of things that are deemed by White Knight to be unimportant about C02 is legion;

Warm the surface of the oceans and they out-gas C02, so increased Atmospheric C02 is a consequence of warmed ocean surfaces (an obvious lie paints that back to front but few notice). This is chemistry and puts the lie to the C02 causes warming narrative, but he doesn't care about that.

In the geological record the peak C02 was 7000ppm, the minimum was 180ppm, at 150ppm most plants die, dropping oxygen levels so that animals also die, including us, but he doesn't care about that.

Some people bought the con and began to reduce C02 emissions, reduce the reliability of electricity and dismantle civilization that supports them.

All the things that had been done were negated by a volcanic eruption in Iceland, but he doesn't care about that. Bringing down civilization is the point.

“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”— Maurice Strong

When anyone one points out any of this, White Knight feels fully justified and branding them as bad people, giving them the label of Climate Change Denier, getting them sacked from their work (especially in the msm), silencing them on social media, calling for them to be tattooed (Surely it’s time for climate-change deniers to have their opinions forcibly tattooed on their bodies. - Richard Glover), and having a hose pipe run from the exhaust of their care and rammed down their throat so they are gassed (Arnold Schwarzenegger, I would link to the vid' but can't find it now and time is limited). 

Sound familiar? Tattooed them. Gas them. Yeah, thought you'd spot it. The White Knight self-justifies anything to be the hero and rescue helpless victim Gaia.  

So we have Victim/Gaia, Villain/Us and Civilization. 'Hero'/White Knight. A classic, manipulative victim narrative.

But, hang on a moment. The Earth can't talk. Its a bunch of geology and chemistry and minerals and thermal activity. It can't care about anything. Here for billions of years, it will be here for billions more. It would be indifferent to Civilization if it were capable of having any opinion at all. It was once hit by an object so large that it turned the whole thing molten hot rock and threw of a great chunk that became the moon. It didn't care, because it is an it, not a she. It has nothing to care with.

Gaia is a ventriloquists dummy. So who's the ventriloquist, Toto?

Toto the dog duly pulls back the curtain and we see The Wizard of Oz.

The WOO isn't great and powerful, but a weak, stupid little man who has figured out a way to trick people into giving him power he hasn't earned and doesn't deserve.

Biology is a science. Chemistry is a science. Physics is a science, and lots of other subjects are science. But Climate isn't a science, as little of the theory is subject to meaningful experiment and where it is the results are fudged, the failed predictions ignored, obscured and lied about by the WOO pushing his story. It's a made up pseudo-science. The idea came out of the humanities department of universities; that is matter of historical record. It is Junk science, Scientism, a cult dressed up as science. They literally cannot push their beliefs without lying, as has been proven many many times and openly planned among themselves. They are proven liars.

Now who do we now who push a philosophy, want unearned power and will happily lie to get it?

Tony Blair, the same who lied about weapons of mass destruction and took the UK into an illegal and unjustifiable war, recently said “We have people embedded in every Government on the planet.”

Embedded? Like covert operatives? Who's we?

Someone else said, “We are in a global conflict between those who want to control people and those who want to control only themselves.” Two sides of a conflict. Real. Everywhere. Now.

I probably don't need to lead anyone to the conclusion of what the WOOs are. The evidence is everywhere. The Conservative Government of my own country are acting like dictators and have torn up and thrown away the freedoms our ancestors fought for over centuries, being Magna Carta, The Rights of Englishmen, freedom of association, freedom to travel, the right to trial by your peers – a £10,000 and 10 Years (that figure will ring a bell with some – A Tenner), all while the inglorious leaders act as expected, as they had no intention whatsoever of doing what they make you do. The point is to make you do things. Power is only manifest when it is power over people. The stupider and more pointless the things they make you do the better, so they nudge each other and can point and laugh and say, “Look, look what I made them do! That's hilarious,” and the message to the people is clear, “Look what we can do to you any time we damn well please.”

Anything that disrupts society is good for them. Economic damage is beneficial to them. But the best trick ever was and is to trick and con you into dismantling the infrastructure of the civilization that keeps you alive.

It's a story. A victim narrative. But the truth is that the victim is you, the victimiser is the WOO, and the heroes are the ones branded climate change deniers.

Anyone who calls you a gravity denier is using obvious rhetoric. Use good rhetoric back, because these people can't use logic, you have to talk their emotion based language.

What are you, some kind of Gravity Denier? (A Story)

I saw the man walking around town with a parachute on his back. I asked him why.

“What are you, some kind of Gravity Denier?!” He snapped, aggressively.

“Well, no. But that's not relevant is it? The strong electromagnetic force makes thing solid, and gravity is a factor.” He looked triumphant. “But the most relevant factor is altitude. And you are walking on the the ground, dude.”

His mouth worked a bit but no sound came out. (Cognitive dissonance is a wonderful thing to see). He didn't say a word, just walked away looking puzzled.

Next time I saw he him he wasn't wearing a parachute. So that's something.

Gamestop Morale Boost

I haven't laughed hard enough to get the aching of the ribs for a while, so this is all very welcome.

In essence, if you've been missing this, hedge funds took advantage of their Government buddies 'Covid' strategy to force shops to close and shorted Gamestop, intent on breaking them and sucking up some free blood. This was noted and addressed.

The responses from the self appointed elites have been predictable. WallStreetBets Proves The System Is Rigged but not in the least bit successful.

For fun I recommend the whole thing In essence, but the following meme is priceless 1:19:20

The swamp creatures aren't even bothering to pretend to wear any kind of mask at this point. so it really isn't about the money, it really is about sending a message in response to their message.

The truth is that people can simply buy and hold a single stock make them burn their own house down.

If they can't play fair - and the elites have collectively proven that they not only will not but are psychologically incapable of it - then maybe taking their toys away is the simplest answer. It isn't that hard. They are not that smart.

Obviously, I'm not advocating that any individual pour all the assets that the self-anointed elites want to take off you anyway into a stock just to break the system the very same parasites collectively feast on.

That would be irresponsible.

The Message Is Clear

Agree, approve, accept, capitulate, repeat the approved message or we will make you invisible.

In competition with Twitter? This site cannot be reached however, there is Gab as an alternative, apparently not set up to fail (or perhaps to be a honey pot designed to trap dissenters to the narrative?). Gab currently has infrastructure problems related only to the vast and sudden influx of new users. (I can't imagine why that's happening.) Give them time to catch up to new demand.

Removed from YT but available to those who go looking.

Simply Talking About Censorship is Enough to find yourself censored

You can't stop the signal, Mal. You can never stop the signal.

Newsworthy Stories at Project Veritas not much covered in the 'news'

It has been known for a good long time now that the msm is controlled by a very small number of corporations with significantly aligned agendas.

Looking for alternatives seems only prudent

Of course there will be some material on alternative sites that express ideas you don't approve. So what? Rejecting ideas is within the purview of the individual.

I find little to argue with in this article, for example

Finding newsworthy stories that are not in the news is surprisingly easy but does take a little effort.

C N N involved? How surprising.

As many have pointed out, there are those who took 1984 to be an instruction manual rather than a warning. Unsurprisingly, they are fairly easy to detect by approx half a given population base. Surprisingly, the other half of any given population base seem incapable of grasping that they are backing the bad guys, that they therefore are the bad guys, no matter how obvious it becomes.

Orwell spoke of the condition where "words and meaning have almost parted company."  

The core problems are evident all through the western world, throughout the whole world. One message, one narrative, no dissenting opinion permitted. That there is no dissent permitted is the prime reason opposition builds.

We are a self organizing species by nature, building hierarchical structures from the many up to the few; the few then develop the delusion that we are a species organized from the top down, a point of view appealing to those who want to control other people and insufficiently resisted by those who want to control only themselves. In part, this may account for the cyclical nature of the rise and fall of civilizations.

In general, things go on until the cannot any longer. Then they stop.

Extreme Panic Ensues

It's perfectly normal to panic when you win legitimately, it seems. A handful of days remain of President Trumps first term, yet the 'winners' are desperate to turn a few days into zero days. Now, why would they feel the need to do that? 

I offer the following in no particular order.

 

Sensible of Tony Heller to use YT for teaser vids with the main act elsewhere, but I can link to YT, so here it is, the main event is a simple enough click through.

Of course we should all stop using their platforms, and as they ban people like 'Computing Forever' who now resides on Bitshute, and hundreds, thousand of other content providers for wrongthink of one sort or another, it's perhaps still worth linking. After all, there are still those who don't yet know how controlling the bigtech companies are:

A Letter from the Nye County Chairman

"Let me be clear: Trump will be president for another four years. Biden will not be president. Yes, I know those are shocking words in these crazy days."

Not everyone submits to the narrative

The Night Of The Digital Long Knives

"Control of the Internet, which used to be a flexible network designed to automatically route information around blockages, has now fallen into the grasp of a handful of companies, all of them seemingly eager to institute a Red Chinese social credit system. Conservatives and populists have relied for too long on Section 230 to protect us from exactly the kind of hamfisted behavior that Jack Dorsey, Sundar Pichai, Jeff Bezos, and Tim Cook are engaging in right now. We have a very limited amount of time to find and use alternatives like blogs, e-mail lists, Telegram, Signal, and Gab; we must also build alternative financing structures so the wokerati running Mastercard and Visa can’t cut off the flow of funds. People used to accuse Vox Day of being paranoid when he said these things a few years ago. What’s keeping me awake nights is that Vox might not have been paranoid enough."

And many saw the purge coming

"Kirk Wiebe is not some fringe conspiracy theorist. He worked as a senior analyst at the nsa from 1975 to 2001 and was awarded the Meritorious Civilian Service Award—the nsa’s second-highest distinction. With his colleagues William Binney and Ed Loomis, Wiebe developed many software programs to find, monitor, and track terrorists worldwide. But he retired from the nsa in 2001, after uncovering a government program to illegally monitor millions of U.S. citizens’ communications. Yet while the media treated Wiebe as a hero when he exposed the Bush administration’s surveillance operations, they lost interest in him when he continued to expose the Obama administration’s unlawful surveillance operations."

And

"Now Wiebe has joined with retired nsa crypto-mathematician William Binney, retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney, and retired Army Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely to expose a “deep state” plot to steal the presidency and hijack America."

MSM Oddly Not Interested

That'll do, I think, though I could share links all day long that point to the underlying reality so desperately being banned and obfuscated as we watch. Anyone who wants to know the November election was a massive fraud enacted against a sitting President and, more importantly the people, knows. Of the majority who know, roughly half know and like it, roughly half know and don't.

So why are the 'winners' so obviously panicked?

Could it be as simple as this?

1) The intelligence services, of which there are many, have always investigated everyone remotely connected to politics. The material is classified.

2) President Trump has the absolute authority to declassify anything he chooses to.

That would certainly constitute at the very least a metaphorical nuke if as is proposed by some who should certainly know, that approx 70% of Senators and Representatives are crooked to a degree that would shock everyone and rock the world.

I honestly can't think of anything else that explains five years of non-stop legal and illegal attacks, beginning before the man was even elected.

Did he say, Drain the Swamp? That's Us! Panic!

 

The Truth vs. The Lie

 A Tale Of Two Tapes

1) The words matter, for they are true.

2) Turn the sound off, make it full screen. Just watch the neckline interactions with the collar of the shirt.

The truth stands up to scrutiny. The lie does not. It's as simple as that.

"Congress Is A Paper Tiger"

 "The reason these people are not held accountable is there's no way to hold them accountable. Who investigates the investigator? Who prosecutes the prosecutor?" Senator Ron Johnson. 

Understanding the problems has not lead to solutions.

  

Until recently, Tony Heller confined his activity to the AGW climate scam, but he has belatedly grasped that everything is related.

(I'm linking to the YT site, but recommend the click through link for the reasons he states; both are fairly short and worth your time).

Maybe one day we'll be able to go back to minding our own business and being left alone to do so. Of course, the fact that we did that for decades is itself part of the problem.

Who watches the watchmen? We do. Or we don't. 

Of Sadness & Anger

 No, I'm not going to speak of either but I will link to show the why.

This link seems most relevant to the times, considering what levels of censorship have just been reached:

https://www.infowars.com/posts/police-officer-responsible-for-killing-trump-supporter-suspended-pending-investigation/

I watched the tape, but don't feel like you have to. That was cold, deliberated, deliberate and utterly without justification.

RIP Ashli Babbitt

The guy with the gun in his hand... well, there are things we have to trust God to take care of because no one else possibly can.

Of all the manifold related matters, I remind myself that despair is a sin, as Jerry Pournelle used to say. Despair removes the ability to think clearly, I believe he meant.

Speaking of clarity of thought, here's something by someone who seems to have some concerning matters not entirely unrelated. I recommend it be read to the end.

When you run a business you will get audited by the government. If something your company does raises a red flag with the government, they will audit you. If there is an anomaly in your government mandated paperwork you must legally submit, it can trigger an audit. And sometimes, various agencies will just randomly audit you to make sure you are obeying all their regulations.

https://monsterhunternation.com/2021/01/05/one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the-other/

For the rest, time will tell. Nothing is over until it's over.

Merry Christmas

Shared without further comment.

Solvable Problems

 If you've spent any time teasing apart the ideas of any philosophy you will likely know that each has some kind of foundational statement or concept upon which everything else is based. For example, Jordan Peterson's attempt has the foundational concept "Everyone acts as though pain is real, therefore pain is real." He cites this in one of his early Maps of Meaning vid's as the foundation by including the statement "You have to start somewhere." Taken at face value, that might pass, but the statement is false: Sociopaths do not feel emotional pain at all, they literally have no idea what it is. Those rare individuals with congenital analgesia do not feel physical pain, they literally have no idea what it is. Peterson's attempt at a coherent philosophy abruptly has the foundation snatched out from beneath it and everything stacked on top collapses into the component parts; some of those are interesting, and some may have some value, but they are bits and pieces, not a coherent whole.

The entire body of left leaning philosophy has the concept of equality as it's foundation. Yanking the foundations out from left-wing thought is effortless; there is no equality in reality, you can't have or enforce what does not exist. Impossible things don't happen. Equality of opportunity is just as absurd a goal as equality of outcomes. Variance obliterates any idea of equality. It's no surprise that any attempt to implement the ideas stacked on the false foundation always lead to mere failure at the very best.

What brought that to mind was something said in the linked interview below; at around 61:07 the question is asked, can these problems be solved? The answer involves the different between solvable problems and manageable problems, and is worth your time - the whole interview is but this bit particularly.

https://rumble.com/vbkjyv-ep.-1407-exclusive-interview-with-general-mike-flynn-the-dan-bongino-show.html?mref=16emn&mc=6kk5f

The idea of holding people elected or appointed (or in general for that matter) accountable is hardly new, but has grown in importance over the last few decades.

On a related note, Vox Day shares a link to work being done to shine a light on recent electoral fraud that the msm would have us all believe is imaginary ("Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?" - Groucho Marx, if I remember correctly).

https://voxday.blogspot.com/2020/12/dominion-and-virtual-precincts.html

There are further links within Mr Day's post, and if you have the time they are worth your time.

I seem to be on a roll here, so I'll just link one more site that is significant and of interest, just in case you are unaware that there are an army of citizen reporters stepping up to the plate to do the work journalists of the msm choose not to do... well, there are. I picked a vid' not entirely at random.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4cZ65HZfEk

Where's The Evidence Of Vote Fraud?

 Where isn't there evidence?

The Biggest Crime In History

The false media narrative(s) must be apparent to everyone by now. For example, almost all media are calling Biden the President elect, which they cannot not know to be false. The only reason I've looked at the msm for roughly twenty years is to see what they are lying about, then go find out what the truth might be.

 

The difference between these and msm outlets (including goog/twit/tube/booface etc.) is striking.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/exclusive-rep-devin-nunes-biden-team-is-putting-on-a-facade-that-theyve-won_3587971.html

Devin Nunes has a few interesting things to say here.

"It's so much worse than people imagine." Including even myself, he goes on to say.

Sometimes I stumble onto interesting speakers on Tube, only to find them removed from the 'platform' within days. It's been getting worse, numbers are increasing, and thus it's becoming more obvious.

Well, alternatives exist. I recommend people use them (parler etc.). After all, it's no coincidence that I can only directly link to Tube here, and have to put in a raw link to rumble.

https://rumble.com/vb8jzh-teaser-devin-nunes-the-man-behind-the-explosive-memo-american-thought-leade.html

This is the point in our story where our heroes are being overwhelmed, but there is a way yet to win a path to freedom.

As individuals we should do what we can; after all, it is our freedom that is at stake.

More Lies Exposed

A huge number of employed medical specialists know they are lying, and do so because their careers/incomes depend upon it.

There's really too much covered here to comment on any individual point. In short, everything the msm and governments are telling us is false, and known by them to be false. In the last 20 years or so, this has become increasingly blatant. 

Perfectly Normal.

 

I'd love to say the current situation is shocking, surprising or even mildly unexpected. But let's face it, everyone knew this was going to happen.

I mean, he told you what he had done and was doing:

And Pelosi is on record with a parallel quote: "I feel very confident that Joe Biden will be elected President on Tuesday, whatever the end count is..." Whatever the count is, because that's totally how elections work.

The only thing that has changed here is the scale and the brazen nature of the fraud. Optics? At this point, caring about how things look is irrelevant. Don't waste too much time on this vid', unless you are lucky enough to have massive amounts of spare time, but there a a few interesting points here and there: The Pelosi quote from above is at about 11:30

An former auditor has a few interesting points to make (he's a little sweary about it).

In auditing you look for red flags. That’s weird bits in the data that suggest something shifty is going on. You flag those weird things so you can delve into them further. One flag doesn’t necessarily mean there’s fraud. Weird things happen. A few flags mean stupidity or dishonesty. But a giant pile of red flags means that there’s bad shit going on and people should be in jail.

The massive turn out alone is a red flag.

But as for doing better…

The late night spikes that were enough to close all the Trump leads are a red flag.

The statistically impossible breakdown of the ratios of these vote dumps is a red flag.

The ratios of these dumps being far better than the percentages in the bluest of blue cities, even though the historical data does not match, red flag.

The ratios of these vote dumps favoring Biden more in these few battlegrounds than the ratio for the rest of the country (even the bluest of the blue) red flag.

Biden outperforming Obama among these few urban vote dumps, even though Trump picked up points in every demographic group in the rest of the country, red flag.

The poll observers being removed. Red flag.

The counters cheering as GOP observers are removed, red flag.

The fact that the dem observers outnumber the GOP observers 3 to 1, red flag (and basis of the first lawsuit filed)

The electioneering at the polls (on video), red flag.

The willful violation of the court order requiring the separation of ballots by type, red flag.

USPS whistleblower reporting to the Inspector General that today they were ordered to backdate ballots to yesterday, red flag.

The video of 2 AM deliveries of what appear to be boxes of ballots with no chain of custody or other observers right before the late night miracle spikes, red flag.

Any of those things would be enough to trigger an audit in the normal world. This many flags and I’d be giggling in anticipation of catching some thieves.

And it isn’t that I have to do better. I’m just an gen pop observer who happens to be a retired auditor with a finely tuned bullshit detector. This is going to the courts.

https://monsterhunternation.com/2020/11/05/the-2020-election-fuckery-is-afoot/

When I say that the only thing that has changed here is the scale, here's a lone example that can stand for the hundreds that exist in American history.

"Johnson election theft took place in 1948, when he was running for the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate against Texas Governor Coke Stevenson, one of the most admired and respected governors in the history of the state.

It was later discovered that one of Parr’s men had changed the total tally for Johnson from 765 to 965 by simply curling the 7 into a 9."

And somewhat later in the text...

"Where did the extra 200 votes come from? The last 202 names on on the election roll in Box 13 were in a different color ink from the rest of the names, the names were in alphabetical order, and they were all in the same handwriting. When Caro was researching his book, he secured a statement from Luis Salas, an election judge in Jim Wells County, who acknowledged the fraud and confessing his role in it."

https://www.fff.org/2020/11/02/dont-forget-lbjs-election-theft/

At least in America there is a reasonably clear choice on offer in this specific election. Here in the UK the situation has developed to the point where it visibly and obviously makes no difference where the X goes on the ballot, the people will get the merely a slightly different version of the same thing. That may change, but is unlikely to change fast enough.

History continues to unfold according to the scripts already written, but remember that causality runs in one direction only and nothing is settled until the present becomes the past.

We do what we can.

Fun (or should I say Interesting) Times

Billed as satire, but these people - individually and as groups - are entirely serious and acting to 'muster their forces' and force their dreams to be our nightmares.

It's not a conspiracy theory when they tell you what they are doing.

Harrison Bergeron & Us

Harrison Bergeron is a short story by Kurt Vonnegut that I've seen mentioned several times recently, including here (fairly randomly as this is simply the latest place I saw the story mention and discussed):

And here's a link to the story itself: http://tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html

It's a short read, and not desperately subtle. The underlying theme is those that believe everyone should be made equal do not have anyone's best interests at heart, coupled with the idea that the innately superior will always rise above any amount of handicapping and therefore must be ended by the equalizers.

Whoever does the deciding is obviously motivated to disadvantage everybody else so that they themselves are and remain advantaged. This is how this philosophy has always played out when implemented in reality. It is no coincidence that any implementation of a plan to pick out any group deemed to be disadvantaged and rise them up always ends in that group being further disadvantaged.

On what may seem to be an entirely different topic, and while I'm in the mood for sharing things, here's something rather more interesting (in the sense of being rather less obvious and therefore rather more worth your time). There are roughly a dozen in this sequence and each is short and to the point.

I just spent a little time looking around for a transcript of these, for those who read faster than people speak, but can't find one in a reasonable amount of time and don't have time to do that work. Pity, but there we are.

How Do You Go Bankrupt? Very Slowly. And Then Very Quickly.

You want the truth? You can't handle the truth.

Or maybe you can. It hardly matters. The truth correlates to the facts and the facts are embedded in reality. Reality doesn't change, so you are going to handle reality, the facts, the truth, like it or not. Or, put another way, failure to observe reality will not stop reality impinging on you. So far, this all sounds self-evident, but give me a minute and I'll get to where it isn't. If you find the current reality confusing, it will all become clear by the time I'm done.

To clarify requires some structure that is solidly based in reality. The first questions should be, what is real? What is the most fundamental statement about reality that pertains?

Biological organisms compete.

If anyone cares to undertake the endless quest for a biological organism that does not compete, feel free.

Competition is conflict.

No matter how passive that conflict may be, it is still conflict. A strangler vine is unaware of the existence of the tree, but at the end of the day the tree is still dead.

Conflict is war.

That may seem a little less firm, but observe that though there was no malice on the part of the strangler vine, the tree is still dead. It may have reproduced before it dies, but so did the strangler vine. The conflict continues. You might argue that war is a property of organisms that organise, but that is us so I find no comfort there.

Competition is conflict and conflict is war. No malice is necessary on the part of anyone at all.

Just for fun, let's take a human example. 'The abiding mystery of Easter island' is one of my favourite falsehoods. Observe the events in sequence and there is no mystery. Europe stumbled across the island accidentally; Europe being the Dutch, the accident being that they were looking for a posited continent that didn't exist. They fund an isolated nation, a people of one culture, without internal conflict, without external contact and so no external conflict. They apparently didn't even have weapons, subsuming the natural desire of young men to compete in an annual competition, the winner gaining some advantage. The Dutch describe a fairly stable farming nation. The statues were in place at the edge of the island. By the mid 1800's the statues had fallen and the island was a depopulated ecological disaster zone.

So, what happened? Did the Dutch arrive with the malicious intent of destroying the nation of the people of Easter island, wrecking the totemic statues and destroying the ecology? No. They primarily stopped to re-supply food and water. The conflict of cultures was sufficiently immediate that on the beach a dozen people died, despite being welcome enough to land, lead by a local, greeted with curiosity by locals who didn't recognize a gun as a weapon and so tried to take it from the hand of someone who did know it as a weapon. The Dutch wanted food and water, they got food and water, they left.

As ships from other European nations stopped by to visit, the interactions resulted in further losses. Pathogens from outside the isolated people took a toll, the introduction of a non-indigenous religion lead to internal conflict, they people toppled their own totemic images, ships took some for sailors due to losses of their own men to disease, some were taken as slaves and were later freed from Peru, taking smallpox home with them. This would be the mid 1800's and soon after the almost unpopulated island was turned into a sheep farm – and that accounts for the destruction of the ecology.

Competition is conflict and conflict is war.

How much malice was involved in the destruction of the nation of the people of Easter island? Some at some times over that few hundred year competition-conflict-war, but for the most part, very little.

[If you're wondering how the statues were moved into place in the first place, the locals were asked on many occasions and answered the same way, “They walked.” I see no reason not to believe them. Having walked an upright fridge-freezer across a kitchen floor and a wardrobe across a bedroom floor, it looks to me like an eminently sensible answer. The scale is different, but the principle is the same.]

Off the coast of India, there is another island. The nation of people here kill anyone who turns up. No one goes there.

Competition is conflict, conflict is war.

Views through this lens, the whole of human history adjusts itself into better focus.

It should be obvious that a competition of ideas is a conflict of ideas is a war of ideas. Any doubts about that are easily dispelled by by a brief examination of The 30 Years War, The Cold war, or indeed most or even all wars to some degree or another, in that ideas played a part in the divisions.

If you think that's bad, this next obvious logical deduction will make you wince (or howl or something). Different nations of different peoples express different cultures and have different ideas about what is right and wrong, good and bad, lawful and unlawful, and self-evidently want to live under political systems laws that reflect that. Where two nations inhabit the same territory, there will be competition to determine these things; some people(s) will find themselves living under laws they find abhorrent, and this will lead to conflict.

Shall we take a look at some of these conflicting idea? Well, why not. You must be familiar with some of them, or at least aware of the existence of same.

Equality.

Of all the dumb ideas I have come across, this one is so self-evidently absurd that it's barely worth a mention, yet it will get the longest. There isn't any. It isn't possible to have what doesn't exist. Equality of outcome is impossible, equality of opportunity is equally impossible. That the bell curve concept exists in mathematics and can be applied to any and all areas of human endeavour makes the impossibility of equality obvious. The consequence that there are things I can never have and never be is mitigated by the fact that there are thing is I can be and can have. Same for everyone.

Tolerance

You won't have to think very hard before you stumble across something you will not tolerate. It probably took you about three seconds.

Inclusion

The same as tolerance. No, I don't want to include cannibals in my family, community, town, country, culture, nation.

Diversity

Diversity simply ensues competition of what must by the definition of diverse be different from each other, ensuring competition between the diverse, and competition is conflict and... well, you know the rest.

Freedom of Speech

If you are surprised to see this one included on the list, I would respectfully suggest that you have not been paying sufficient attention to some of the things some people are openly saying. Some of those things are openly and self-evidently evil (and there's a word I don't use often) and no, I can see no justification for a society permitting freedom of lying and freedom of promoting evil things. A society is partly defined by those things which are a taboo, verboten, or whatever. The only competition is over which things, competition over this is conflict, and I'm not going to bother saying it again.

That there are people who will immediately attempt to jump all over me for expressing the above repudiation of ideas that have been permitted to become so mainstream that conservatives now passively or actively defend them will be proof of the underlying reality – competition is conflict...

While I'm here, a quick word about Sumto. The series is called The Price of Freedom, and really that should have been phrased as a question, because that's what I was trying to have Sumto work out over time. Well, reality overtook the project and I have put the work aside for now. The truth is that the price of freedom is everyone else's freedom. And the price is too high. A culture develops over time, through competition and conflict and war, over what freedoms the people of the nation decide they can give up, enforce others giving up, and which freedoms they can afford to keep or cannot abide to live without. This process is ongoing. It never ends. These are decisions the individual doesn't get to not make. They are what make an individual who he or she is, a family what it is, a community what it is and a nation of people what it is. The process becomes particularly sharp where different nations of different peoples inhabit the same territory, as they have different answers and … well, again, you know the rest.

I'm about done here. Read back from the top and you will come to a place where I point out that malice is not necessary for competition to be real (it's optional). Competition may be real yet unnoticed by one or either party, that conflict arises by the nature of the competition inherent in being a biological organism, no matter how passive that competition may be. As we are a species that organizes, war is an inevitability and viewed through this lens it should now be no surprise that history is written as though it were the history of war (and attempts to avoid or defer war), as war is conflict and a history of conflict is a history of competition, and competition cannot be avoided, even if no malice existed in any human heart.

Now I recommend that everyone go and sort themselves out.

I was going to leave it there, but by chance I came across someone literally frothing at the mouth. This concerns specific subjects, current subjects, but is as an apt expression of the foundational reality expressed above.

Competition is...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkP65B8q0pU

https://web.archive.org/save/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkP65B8q0pU

On Belief

Thoughts as a River

Yes, my own thoughts on the subject meander some, as usual.

If belief is the consequence of our interactions with observable reality before we are even conscious enough to be aware of either ourselves or observable reality, then no wonder it's no wonder that belief is so foundational as to be practically unnoticed within our own minds.

An infant cries from instinct and is fed, and so believes if it cries it will be fed. The interaction with observable reality forms the belief, and the belief is reinforced as true. That this is selective in an evolutionary sense is clear; the parent who does not respond to the cry permits the infant to die from hunger and the genetic material of the parent is removed from the gene pool.

Perhaps belief is the foundation of observable reality for the individual. That our earliest beliefs matched observable reality before we were even conscious seems clear enough. When an infant make a noise the infant will get fed. Belief in that is reinforced with repetition. A different noise gets the infant cleaned so that sores do not develop, become infected and kill the pre-conscious individual. Belief then, might be said to be selective. When belief did not match up with observable reality, the individual died and the genetic material of the neglectful parent disappeared.

Belief that a noise in a tone of voice would get one cleaned and fed so that continued life occurred is foundational to experience. Further interactions with observable reality laid down further beliefs.

Belief can then be considered as the banks of a river though which our thoughts process. The more experience, the more interactions with observable reality, the more substantial and fixed the banks of the river of our thoughts.

Inevitably, some beliefs will not match up with observable reality though the individual continues to survive. Some beliefs are not selective, at least not immediately. The belief you can fly unaided is usually immediately selective when tested against reality. The belief that it is possible to lie without consequence is not usually immediately selective, though it is corrosive to society. The belief that you can lie to yourself about being able to fly unaided may eventually prove to be so, if ever tested against reality.

As the individual develops and encounters more ideas, often in fragmentary, unconsidered form, beliefs are added to the banks that channel our thoughts. Our thoughts erode the bank and our beliefs shift and adjust. Ideas are what we think with, so exposure to an idea can build up and channel our thoughts in new directions, linking up with other ideas and making firm channels. A good deal, perhaps even most or even all of this shifting of our beliefs may happen without conscious direction by the individual.

In the information age it is possible to be bombarded with ideas contextualized by other peoples beliefs.

Sometimes the banks of the river wear away completely and our thoughts flood. What is real? What is true? What is good?

Belief, the banks of the rivers of our thoughts, gets worn away here and reinforced there by interactions with observable reality in a process that is only sometimes selective. A belief may be initially harmless to the individual, yet harmful to others when applied to reality. For example, a belief in Global warming-Climate Change is not immediately selective to the individual, yet the decision to burn grain to produce energy has the immediate causal effect of reducing the amount of grain available to the market, the law of supply and demand kicks in immediately and the price of food increases, subsidized exports cease and a number of countries who relied on cheap grain imports find themselves unable to supply sufficient food to their domestic markets, the population finds itself unable to purchase the more limited supply of food, food riots follow, suppression of food riots follow logically - as burning down the bakery is never a successful strategy... and yes, I'm talking about the middle-east here, though I'm not going to go into it further as I suspect my point may be made. Belief can be selective on those who do not hold the belief when those who do believe test their belief against reality.

Causality is often obscured by its own existence. As individuals we move through time at one second per second though a sea of perceptions, many of which bare little or no relation to each other. Without notice, belief can build up from fragments of ideas that appear to link to others the mind has already been exposed to, each snagged from the sea of information that washes past our senses in a constant stream. AGW, or Climate Change, is a fair example. To the best of my knowledge, from some thirty years of paying attention to the subject, there is exactly zero evidence supporting AGW and an absolute mountain of evidence which causes the belief to dissipate like morning mist exposed to sunlight (ironically enough); yet the belief persists in the minds of a multitude of people for a variety of reasons almost as plentiful as the individual who hold the belief. Had every individual who believed in AGW had the idea tested against reality in a fashion design to be selective in evolutionary terms the belief would have faded from reality almost immediately. The actions taken to combat this demonstrably false belief have been selective, and will continue to be selective, over time. Nations that continue to pour hard won resources into imaginary methods of producing energy will decline economically as lower production increases price – when the price of energy is increased due to lower production the price of every single commodity is increased and the methods of generating wealth to purchase commodities is also increased. That cannot end well.

And I think that is where I am going to stop for now, partly because I just read this: “The more I contemplate the universe, the more I am convinced that the fundamental core of Man's philosophy must revolve around a single question: to pretend or not to pretend. So much human evil stems from the fact that we deceive ourselves, we deceive each other, and we seek to deceive God.* And one of the primary locuses of deception is the language we choose to employ.” - Vox Day

What Vox says here neatly expresses an idea that I have been struggling to tease to the fore sufficiently clearly to state succinctly. I'm just as happy to see someone else get there first as it saves me the bother of getting the idea crystal clear so that I can think with it.

*The whole of Society, past, present and future has been for me a very useful conceptualization of the many meanings of the word God and is useful in this context. I should say that the work of Jordan B. Peterson is quite simply full of useful ideas.

Just to finish up here for now, the subject is belief and selectivity. The meaning of a given word is a belief as well as being a deliberate structure to express meaning. A fair example is the word discriminate, a word that is now generally used to be, and therefore believed to be synonymous with prejudice. Society has long accepted that prejudice is bad. Discrimination is prejudice. Discrimination is bad. The bank of the river of belief is shored up in one section and the thoughts of the individual are channeled. Belief is selective. The word discriminate has a primary meaning which is now no longer to the fore of those who accept the belief that discrimination is wrong. Discriminate means the ability to tell the difference between one thing and another and make value judgments between them.

If a man believes discrimination to be bad then he might neglect to discriminate between boiling and warm water taking a dip at Yellowstone Park. When I heard the story of a group of youths literally diving into boiling water when there was warm water to swim through just a few yards a way I did wonder how it was possible to be so willfully negligent of their own survival potential. They did not take time to discriminate between boiling water and warm water. That lack of discrimination killed them. Being negligent of discriminating between snakes with similar markings to a Copperhead might well also lead to negative consequences. There is a mushroom that looks exactly like a button mushroom but is deadly poison, and it would clearly be wrong to discriminate between them. The use of the word discriminate as only synonymous with prejudice is insidious and undermines the individuals relationship with observable reality.

Belief is not some bolt on optional extra to existence.

Belief is instinctive and initially in accordance with observable reality.

Belief is selective in an evolutionary sense.

That is clear enough. Where things get muddy is in the established fact that evolution favors good enough solutions and that false belief need not be immediately selective. Existence would be a good deal simpler if belief that was not in accordance with observable reality were immediately selective, though if it were I seriously doubt any of us would survive to adulthood.

The quote from Vox Day was on a slightly different subject

I really don't care what people think. I really do care that people do think. Most of what we call thinking isn't. 

Why Do We Tell Stories?

Why do we tell stories?

It's a fair question and I guess the answer is clear enough from our evolutionary biology. Once our species grasped the idea that the future is real, that the fat lion under the shady tree will tomorrow be hungry and we might be its prey, then we needed a way of conveying the idea of what might be done about that fact, especially to our children, in a form they would accept and remember. A story.

JBP (link below) has shown clearly that the idea that the future is part of reality was selective in evolutionary terms, that our distant ancestors who planned for the future were more likely to nurture children to adulthood. So telling stories about that is clearly also selective in evolutionary terms. We express ideas in stories – such as The Boy Who Cried Wolf. A child who hears and understands that story, who acts the principle out in reality, is literally more likely to survive to adulthood than a child who does not.

Stories are thus demonstrated to be selective in evolutionary terms, and brain functionality follows trends that are selective. We likely evolved to accept the premise of a story and act it out in reality. True stories clearly lead to better results than false stories, and when evolutionary pressure was high this would have become a dominant trait. Societies who tell true stories, that acted out improve life for everyone, succeed, while societies that tell false stories break against reality, they fracture, fragment and collapse, often with great loss of life. But there are always survivors, and evolution favours 'good enough' solutions. Survivors of failed communities, built on false stories, will still reproduce. The trait of accepting a story as true and acting its premise out regardless of how it resolves itself in reality is a good enough solution.

As a species, we literally evolved to accept stories as true and act them out in reality. Results of this vary, but those who have a feel for or who tend to analyse a story for factual accuracy and imagine forward before acting it out in reality, are apt to be more successful. As a consequence, there are more people who have a feel for the truth of a story than not... but the trait to uncritically accept any story will always be part of the whole of a given society and part of the brain functionality of the individual.

The tendency to compare the consequences of a story acted out in reality, say stories in history, with a currently prevalent story and imagine the story forward to its consequences should become dominant over time. Fact checking, comparison with the known consequence of similar stories recorded in history, critically analyzing a story and rejecting or accepting it accordingly is also selective – those who do this would literally be more likely to produce children who survive to adulthood and perpetuate the trait. I say 'would' here because we now effectively live in a human version of Mouse Utopia (link below), a situation where practically all individuals might well survive to reproductive age regardless of what survival strategies they are taught and adopt.

With this in mind, it might be as well to now take a look at what is frequently called 'the sacred narrative of the left' and dig into the foundations of that collective story to see for yourself what veracity the story might contain.

Jordan B. Peterson & The Significance of Stories

Mouse Utopia