This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
An Inconvenient Truth - The Truth Shall Not Set Us Free
An Inconvenient Truth - The Truth Shall Not Set Us Free
By
Cognitive Dissonance
There is a widely held belief among those who wish for ‘the truth’ to be exposed that once this is accomplished the insanity will begin to unravel and a new day will dawn. Unfortunately this belief is erroneous, delusional even, and by itself also a part of the insanity. The uncomfortable and extremely inconvenient truth is that ‘truth’, regardless of where it originates or whether it’s really truth or not, will never set us free because the official lies are not the ultimate source of our bondage. Instead the lies are just a small part of the overall control system, a system that relies upon our willing (some would say informed) consent not only to exist but to endure.
Hidden somewhere deep down inside any discussion of true and false statements by politicians, the Bureau of Lies and Statistics (BLS), psyops and disinformation programs, WikiLeaks or any other governmental, corporate or individual propaganda is a simple and fundamental truth that’s widely known but carefully ignored. We are being lied to by hundreds of entities about dozens of different subjects, all for the purpose of maintaining or increasing control and power over the masses. The truth of these fundamental lies is all around us and yet we are still not free.
The only way a relatively small nucleus of people can control a much larger population is through psychological manipulation regardless of whether it’s by way of brutality or baubles. Spending our days minimizing, dismissing or bargaining with these controlling lies is simply the process we use to avoid dealing with our own internal self deception. This is also a well understood and universal truth that is self evident, obvious even, to those who wish to honestly look. Yet it is denied as well.
We hide this fact from ourselves by differentiating between big and small lies, from their evil propaganda and our harmless little tales. And we always tell ourselves the ultimate controlling lie, that we don’t really ‘lie’ so much as we tell small fibs and half truths in order to feel better or to get through the day. We want to believe that we are different from ‘them’, that we know we aren’t really lying because we know ourselves and thus can’t lie. We all deceive ourselves into believing that to ourselves we are true.
The ugly truth is that we expend a tremendous amount of energy each day maintaining our extensive network of internal denial and self deception. The result is a mishmash of fact, fiction and fantasy we call our world view and the act of denial itself becomes such an integrated component of us that for the most part it’s seamless and nearly invisible. The control system enables our denial by feeding us a constant stream of ‘news’ and information that serves to reinforce this internal narrative while massaging our confirmation and normalcy biases.
Why do we need ‘proof’ of something that’s self evident, of something we know to be true? Exactly what sort of proof would satisfy us that we’re being systematically and consistently lied to? More to the point, what would we do once the perfect proof is offered that we would refrain from doing without it? So many of us fall into the trap of demanding specific and infallible proof before we’ll ever consider changing our beliefs, an almost impossible condition to meet and precisely why we require it. Others demand that the liars admit they are lying. What then? Do we forgive them for their past transgressions so we won’t need to confront them (or ourselves) the next time it happens?
What proof of truth (or falsity) do we need to receive in order to be absolutely certain? And will we ever receive enough proof to overcome our aversion to taking a stand and declaring that enough is enough? All of these questions are reasonable queries to ask, but we avoid them like the black plague because following them to their logical conclusion would sweep away all our self deceptions and delusions. Asking these questions, then candidly answering them, would force us to be honest with ourselves, an outcome we collectively and studiously avoid.
Clarity of Vision Contrary to popular belief clarity of vision, which is what truth and proof is supposed to provide for us, is the last thing we want because clarity removes any remaining plausible deniability we might cling to in order to justify hiding within the faceless herd. Clarity compels action in the same manner that a clear and present danger compels action. If we don’t act once we finally have clarity, especially after demanding it for years, then we must confront our own lack of moral courage. In effect we either deal with this cognitive dissonance or we kick the can down the road and bury our denial in another layer of justification and rationalization. For example, let’s say you’re startled awake at 3 AM by the apparent sound of someone breaking into your home. Are you going to roll over and fall back to sleep until you receive absolute “proof” of a break in or are you going to react to the information at hand no matter how limited it might be? While the answer might be obvious, the question is so simple it’s often dismissed as silly. I’m not talking about confronting the potential intruder, but simply acknowledging his or her presence instead of demanding more proof before rousting yourself from bed. Of course you’d acknowledge the potential break-in. Then you’d begin to react accordingly. What it really comes down to is not whether we receive enough proof to act, but rather how close we perceive (or deny) the danger to be in order to overcome our reluctance to deal with whatever it is we are avoiding. The noise downstairs demands our immediate attention because it’s coming from within our home at a time of night when we’re most vulnerable. It’s hard to ignore this frightening situation. However as long as we can successfully deny proximity we can avoid the singularity of confrontation regardless of the actual circumstances. And a skilful manipulator will encourage our denial using a variety of tools and methods. Consider that the Nazis took deliberate steps to enable the concentration camp inmates to remain in denial about their inevitable destruction. Most knew what was really going on, but the façade was convincing enough to enable just enough denial of proximity to keep the majority calm and under control. This was mutually beneficial for both parties involved, allowing the Nazi’s to use very few guards relative to the large number of inmates. Our master(s) benefit from our denial as well, thus they expend large amounts of energy to enable our denial rather than just forcing the issue. It appears to me that those who are unaware of, or outright reject, their inner spiritual connection are more likely to engage in fantastical thinking and denial framing all in an effort to deny proximity. Let me make it clear here that I’m not talking about a God or religious entity, but more like a centering or recognition of our presence and purpose within the cosmos. This ‘knowing’ helps us to maintain a realistic perspective and inner calm when others become deer in the headlights. Our masters are experts at frightening us with continuous fear based mental images of dangerous boogiemen while promising us that the danger will never be proximate to us as long as we do as we’re told. And we play along because doing so enables our own internal dishonesty. In the case of the downstairs burglar it rapidly progesses well beyond clear and present danger and has morphed into red alert proximity since we’re trapped upstairs and can’t leave without descending the stairs and moving even closer to the very danger we’re trying to avoid. But the insanity coming out of Washington, Europe, Libya, Japan or wherever today’s madness is emanating from is somewhere way over there, meaning not proximate to us and thus easier to push aside and deny.
Learned Helplessness
Until that is the danger is proximate and can no longer be denied. Of course once the obvious can no longer be pushed aside the next step is to trot out another inconvenient truth redefined in the form of an excuse, that the problem is so big that we can’t do anything about it. Intellectually we declare we’re quadriplegics trapped in our own wheelchairs and unable to do anything about the situation. This self victimization is called learned helplessness and it’s an example of how we actively participate in our own impotence and subjugation. And its use is not restricted to the uneducated and poor. In fact it’s a highly refined intellectual tool of the educated and professional classes who twist our self victimization into superiority or entitlement impulses.
What we really want, what we so desperately seek, is for someone else to shoulder the personal and emotional risk that comes with taking responsibility. We definitely want the good outcome, just not the sweat, tears and pain that might also come with it. Our insistence that we know exactly what happened, the so-called truth, followed by our never ending demand for even more proof, is simply our psychological defense to any assault upon our carefully constructed world view that we are just helpless victims and powerless to do anything except to be the perfect injured party and take care of ourselves. This is also the perfect excuse to abandon any sense of obligation to neighbor or community.
The beauty of being the unfortunate victim, of being a planned and intentional failure even if that plan is on a subconscious level, is that this condition is easily accomplished and usually requires little to no active participation on our part. Thus our needed plausible deniability comes from doing nothing, which then reinforces our apathy and justifies our inaction. It just doesn’t get any better than this. All that’s left to do is to construct an intellectual shield stout enough to justify our inaction, child’s play after decades of personal experience shifting blame to the spouse, sibling, boogie man, politician, dog or boss. Our ego immediately takes over and skillfully massages our lying eyes and guilt feelings.
Lost to Ourselves
It’s important for the reader to understand that I’m not necessarily speaking of professional, career or even political failure when I address the concept of being a planned failure. Ultimately these are all artificial constructs, fantasy representations of our denied inner being, the outward manifestation of an ‘us’ we wish to project to those around us for a variety of reasons and purposes. Instead what I’m referring to is our inner being, our spiritual entity, our essence, that part of us that might be called the soul which only we answer to.
This unique sanctuary, our own safe haven or refuge we can flee to when we wish to engage in contemplation and reflection, can be the source of our inner strength and moral courage in the face of hostility or our pitiful failure to be a moral person and spiritual entity. Because we cannot hide from ourselves while visiting our inner being, for the patently self deceptive this is a place to avoid at all costs.
The external ‘us’ often has little connection to our true inner self unless it is deliberately pursued and sought after. Our inner being doesn’t come looking for you or me, but rather the other way around. I have found that the more superficial our outer skin is, the further away we are from connecting to our inner truth and meaning, often described as our centering, knowing or intuition.
The weaker the connection to our inner self the more desperate we become to believe the self validating lie that if only we knew what really happened with unerring proof it would expose our external tormentor (and keep our internal one hidden as well) thus forcing other people to finally act. Is it really surprising that someone who lacks moral courage and strength would try to find others to do his or her bidding?
We convince ourselves that with absolute proof of the official lies in hand the illusion would be unequivocally exposed, thus compelling ‘we the people’ (meaning ‘other’ people) to reject them and it. This is the lie we tell ourselves to remain hidden from ourselves and safely within the consensus herd which acts as an extremely poor substitute for our missing inner communication.
We wish to believe that simply knowing the truth will somehow displace the lie, similar to Archimedes splashing water over the sides of the tub as he settles in for his weekly soak. Somehow this absolves us from the obligation to act because "the truth" is now known and the liars will wither away in the bright disinfecting sunlight of truth, justice and the American way. The ugly truth is that a ‘truth’ (as well as a ‘lie’) has power only when it’s embraced, not simply because it exists. Since we don’t wish to embrace the inner truth, we must support the external lies in order to use them to feed our plausible deniability. While we might not fully understand this form of self deception our masters are well aware of it and skillfully use it against us.
Many truths lay abandoned on the side of the road for years, decades even, because their abandonment serves the needs of nearly everyone, not just the official liars, to ignore their own culpability. Once a truth is exposed the liars have no control over the truth except in their (our) ability to convince us to ignore or distort it. The spin doctor’s only purpose is to enable our own self deception. They don’t ‘hide’ the truth as much as they help convince us that it’s in our own best interest to ignore or distort it. You really don’t want to look in there, do you? The con man never forces the mark, but rather skillfully leverages the situation.
Seductive Submission
This entire process reminds me of the quintessential seduction scene in a Harlequin romance novel. The women is ‘taken’, seduced in the arms of someone who may or may not have her best interest at heart. Very little is said about her willingness to believe the lies and promises, of her own desire to suspend disbelief and accept the attractive lies, other than to present the supposedly mitigating factor that she’s emotionally overwhelmed and thus ‘not herself’. After all if you’re not yourself you certainly can’t be held responsible for anything your ‘self’ might do, right? Naturally no one wants to ask where we might find the ‘self’ if it’s not ‘here’.
She’s being told what she wants to hear and its music to her ears. The incredible natural high we receive when our egoic lies are confirmed by outside sources, conceits we actively solicit precisely because they induce that endorphin buzz, puts to shame any man made pharmacological magic created to date.
Of course this behavior isn’t restricted to the fairer sex. Males are just as accomplished at self medicating as the female side of the species. I guess surrendering to passionate desire (and greed) is justification for any transgression as long as the emotion is pure, intoxicating and oh so good. We wouldn’t let our children get away with a bullshit excuse like this yet it seems fine and dandy for the adults in the room.
This is a classic example of self victimization, but it’s diplomatically presented as a near innocent who is being intentionally harmed by a scheming evil doer who’s only after her lying labia lips. Notice that it’s rarely pointed out how the liar would never be in her arms in the first place without her willing consent and active participation. We hear about his ‘power’ over her, but very little about her willingness to submit and let someone else be responsible for her (in) actions.
Layers of self deception this deep can only occur when we are patently dishonest with ourselves, yet this type of behavior is glorified in far more ways than just romance novels. Nationalism is a perfect example of the process we use to allow ourselves to be controlled by others, to surrender to the herd mentality and any responsibility for our actions. We’re all familiar with the seductive urge and the invisible pull to engage in herd behavior where the anonymity of the crowd washes away any personal responsibility for ones actions.
There’s nothing more we need to know, no other proof needed, other than the certain knowledge that we are lied to on a daily basis. This is obvious and widely known, but rarely openly acknowledged. Our need to know the truth and our demand for unequivocal proof that it is the truth, proof that we often insist must come from a person of ‘authority’ (usually one of the authorities who told us the lie in the first place) is a reflection of our inner reluctance to remove the liars from our lives, starting within ourselves.
Doing so would require us to move out of our comfort zone and face who and what we really are, co-conspirators and dance partners rather than helpless soap bubbles blowing in the wind. Our masters know this and to further enable our self deception they constantly shrink our comfort zones, giving us all the more reason to remain safely huddled within our contracting world.
We say we want freedom yet true freedom is just as frightening to us as truth itself. For the most part we are kept animals and as distasteful as this may be to our sensitive egos we like it this way. Many years ago I overheard one woman tell another that “Children like it when we set boundaries and rules for them.” I agree. Very young children want, in fact need, to know they are safe in a world that is capricious and unfathomable.
So it makes sense that externally imposed rules and boundaries would give children an artificially implanted sense of order and predictability, at least until their own conditioning is complete and they can maintain their own illusion of personal safety through denial. The same applies to us as adults. We all want our freedom just as long as it comes with a reasonably clear set of rules that thankfully keeps us from straying to far into personal accountability and responsibility.
Love Your Captivity
While few among us would actually admit this we are trained to love our hamster wheels and for the most part we do. Or more accurately, we fear having no hamster wheel because then we would need to be self sufficient and personally responsible for all our actions in a world that has no overall order imposed upon us. That’s the key difference here because presently the prevailing attitude amongst us hamsters is quite simple. Just show me the maze, hand me the rule book and I’ll figure it out as I go along. Or at least I’ll survive long enough to feed and breed. This is of course a crass oversimplification of our social order, but you get the idea.
Because we allow ourselves to be seduced by the rules of a world that’s created for us we are easily manipulated by the controllers and the control system. It does this by making the rules……wait for it……wait for it……capricious and unfathomable if we don’t submit to the whip. By surrendering our inalienable right (and I submit our inner moral and spiritual duty) to be free and independent souls in return for a set of externally created and manipulated rules and conditions we condemn ourselves to a life of predictable infantile responses that are easily controlled.
The cognitive barriers that define our comfort zone and the lines we claim we don’t wish to be violated are all an illusion presented to us. And after sufficient assimilation they are perpetuated by us. They are thus easily modified by us each time the line is crossed by the liar, affording all of the liars plenty of wiggle room. “OK, I’ll give you one more chance. But don’t cross this line or next time you’re really gonna get it.” The inconvenient truth is that the battle isn’t with the external liars; it is with us and within us. And our external liars, our masters, unquestionably know this which is precisely why the insanity is escalating as they pile lies on top of more lies.
As this spinning top begins to wobble out of control and despite our protestations and demands for the truth, we really don’t want the lies to stop because if they do the day of our own internal reckoning will also be at hand. The definition of collective insanity is our willingness to be destroyed as a group so long as we are not judged as individuals. Or worse that we are not forced to judge ourselves. But even this we’ll deny knowing in order to maintain our plausible deniability. Thus we begin to understand the reason for the continued lying by all the parties involved, victims as well as the victimizers, and why I constantly describe the insanity at its most basic level as self induced.
We talk about financial moral hazard on Wall Street and within the Too Big To Fail (TBTF) banks as central to their escalating greed and corruption. And yet we all participate in a similar social moral hazard that fully enables our abusers. We’re trapped inside this insanity because to acknowledge it means dealing with a life time of denial. It’s so much easier to accept one more beating by our master rather than to come to terms with a lifetime of self abuse.
Presumed Informed Consent
Tragically, because we willingly participate in our own subjugation, regardless of whether it’s occurring on a conscious or subconscious level, the abusers see this as informed consent and the green light to continue the abuse. This is why they often tell us exactly how they’re going to abuse us long before doing so. In our role as victim we declare the abusers to be sociopaths and ourselves as virginal bleeders in order to shift blame and responsibility away from ourselves. It’s all part of the dance of denial and the abuser will accept the role of the heavy in exchange for his or her own rewards.
We may say we want the abuse to stop, but our verbal and non verbal communication says otherwise. How is this any different from the Harlequin woman saying “No, please stop” in the arms of her seducer while returning each kiss with passionate urgency? This is the unspoken communication between the abused and the abuser that is witness to and evidence of the real insanity of the dysfunctional relationship, regardless of whether it’s between husband and wife, nation and citizens or Ponzi and the world.
By the way I am in no way, shape or form justifying or condoning the abuser, rapist or thief simply because I’m explaining the process involved along with our own participation. My position is simple. If we can’t even honestly discuss our own weaknesses and foibles, we are well beyond self redemption. I often say that we are only as sick as our deepest darkest secrets and examining how much of our world is considered verboten and not to be discussed demonstrates this concept superbly.
We’ve all been in relationships where the dysfunctional discourse goes something like this. I won’t ask difficult questions of you if you won’t ask them of me. And I’m not talking about being sensitive to someone’s unsightly mole or dandruff, but rather avoiding a healthy discussion about our spouse’s basic character flaws in order to be spared our own undressing.
This is the fundamental basis for all dysfunctional relationships, including the present one between an intentionally self absorbed and distracted population and our enabling and manipulative masters. As long as we are given the choice between believing the lies and rejecting them, the vast majority will accept the lie rather than risk the perceived emotional and psychological harm of challenging our victimhood which supports our fantasy view of how the world works.
Because we don’t wish to undergo a rigorous self appraisal or emotional unveiling, we completely blow out of proportion the intellectual and emotional harm we will suffer if we do so. This serves the dual purpose of creating plausible deniability while feeding our inner victim. In this way we fulfill both roles of the dysfunctional relationship, that of the abuser and the abused. I call this process a familiar circle jerk with me, myself and I. Add anyone else and the room would become too crowded.
The master’s lies are a direct and personal challenge delivered to us on a daily basis and our controllers know that as long as their lies are not seriously confronted they are safe………and so are we. So they work very hard at keeping the lies from being contested, expertly using a variety of tools including ridicule to turn public opinion against truth. In reality it’s really not that hard to seduce us with lies when so very few of us really wish to hear the truth to begin with.
This explains perfectly the assault upon Assange and Wikileaks from all sides. He’s promoting himself as a truth speaker and thus challenging the lies not so much by what he’s exposing, but by the very fact that he exists. He is a danger to everyone, not just the official liars. If he is accepted as a truth speaker, we the people must then do something about the truths he speaks of. We definitely don’t wish to be forced to confront those who lie to us because then we would be required to openly admit we participated in the lying. This is why we want them to lie, to allow us to remain out of harm’s way. “Daddy, tell me another lie so that I can believe it’s the truth.”
True or False, it Doesn't Matter
Assaulting the truth messenger also removes the need to know if he’s a disinformation agent or a real truth speaker. What’s missed entirely in this discussion is that it doesn't matter if he is or is not a psyops operative. It's the message of ‘truth’ he's delivering that’s the source of our power, not the actual revelations. The powers that be don’t fear the truth; they fear people embracing the truth. Ultimately this is the secret to our inner peace and freedom. Understand that it is not the truth that will set us free because we can free ourselves at any time. The inconvenient truth is that perpetually seeking the truth while doing nothing about the ‘truths’ already established is the crutch we use to avoid facing the original lies that begin within.
When we have abandoned the willingness to honestly look within for truth, when we are complete strangers to ourselves and no longer posses the capacity to 'know' something without the need for external affirmation we then desperately turn to poor substitutes from corrupted external sources. This is why there’s an increasingly desperate need by the population at large to seek 'proof', 'truth' and 'facts’ which must always be secured from those who are widely considered to be 'authorities'. The only authoritative source worth consulting when seeking truth lay deep within us, unless of course we are also hopelessly corrupted.
Once we are completely lost within our own insane world of distortions, lies and self deception we become obsessed with finding ‘truth’ everywhere else in order to validate and sanctify ourselves so that we may continue to perpetuate our own lying. This infantile need for affirmation after we have lied to ourselves and to others is similar to the child who has just lied, then seeks confirmation from the authority figure that the child is still loved. Often the adult knows s/he was just lied to, but chooses to say nothing to prevent opening their own can of worms. This in effect makes the lie socially acceptable and further cements the bond between the two dysfunctional parties. It’s also how we teach our children the art of self deception.
The pathological liars and self deceivers we have become serves to compel us to continuously seek external affirmation that we are not a ‘bad’ liar, meaning socially unacceptable, precisely because we can’t provide that ‘proof’ internally. We can’t hide from our own lies since the one thing we always know is the source of them. As was so wonderfully illustrated in the movie ‘Inception’ we know where the root of the lie originates, thus we must dig ever deeper into our own insanity in order to bury our self deception. This in turn just compounds our raging dysfunction. Because everyone engages in this behavior, yet no one talks about it, everyone’s insanity is considered to be a normal part of human nature.
This is the pathology of our insanity and precisely why it must be vigorously dug out and then thoroughly rejected. A quick splash of paint or a rough wall papering will not suffice. If this is not done, ultimately we revert to worshiping Golden Truth Idols and false True Gods as saviors of our lost and abandoned souls. If we are honest in our desire to seek truth and we begin a fearless search within, we eventually come to realize that the external seeking of ‘truth’ is immaterial and all just part of the control system we gratefully embrace in order to hide from ourselves.
04-10-2011
Cognitive Dissonance
- advertisements -
The last thing I had to learn (or ideal I had to give up) about the current American fascism is that in private industry (including banking), truly dishonest and evil men couldn't rise to positions of power becuase they were inherently unproductive and inefficient. Then I had to face the simple fact that when the industry's product is pure "power" (the boot stamping on the face 'til the end of time), dishonest and evil men ARE the most productive and efficient.
I knew men were basically evil and had to be taught to be good. I read Orwell and Rand. I grabbed onto the personas of The Prisoner and The Scarecrow. I had a Biblical handle on fallen human nature. I even rejected the idea that any politician might be "honest" (although Ron Paul comes pretty damn close). But I guess I just wanted to believe that good 'ol capitalism was always self-correcting through the wisdom of the marketplace. The main mistake I made was not realizing that many entites like The Fed, JPM, GS, GE, and GM were having very little to do with good 'ol capitalism and a great deal to do with gathering raw power over other human beings.
Once I wedged that correction into my 'world view', everything else I believed started working much better as a system. I am embarassed now by my previous errors.
AU AG BTFD
I'd be very careful in dealing with Ron Paul.
He is 33rd degree Mason.
So was Saddam.
So is Putin.
So is Ademinajab.(sp)
So is George Bush - Sr. & jr.
So is Bill Clinton.
So is John Kerry.
So was William H. Buckley.
I could keep going.........................................................
http://procinwarn.com/freemasons.htm
If feel sorry for the 32 degree masons....being outsmarted by these Shits!
So was Josef Blutowsky--and that phucker peed on my shoe back in the day and it STILL...
I liked your "concentration camp/nazi guards" analogy. However, I take exception to this statement:
because it is an unsupported absolute. Furthermore, that statement presumes, by default, the top 1% are smarter and possess knowledge which the bottom 99% do not.
I believe the reason why the top 1% dominate is much simpler because:
That might be what you presume, but not me. When I think about something skillfully done I presume that the person has a great deal of exerience and the willingness to examine their mistakes and learn from them in order to improve. I rarely if ever think of someone being smarter or more intelligent if they are skillful.
But that's just me.
I would say that the "timeless mission statement" would be a modern euphemism that they seek to dominate others around them. Whereas many other people have no interest in dominating those about them. For example - someone who espouses a libertarian belief system - really seeks to be left alone - and more importantly - to leave others alone.
I believe that people seek power over others to cover up their many weaknesses and fears. How many generals in history sought to avoid personal combat as soon as it became possible to do so? Gosh - we have it in spades nowadays - the president commits our forces to combat - not only at no risk to himself - but no risk to his family - no risk to his friends - no risk to his friends families...truly a golden age.
"someone who espouses a libertarian belief system - really seeks to be left alone - and more importantly - to leave others alone."
is it "to leave and be left alone" or is it "to live and let live"?
there is a subtle but key difference between the 2.
no man is an island.
bingo
In his Bull of 1302, Unam Sanctam, Boniface VIII proclaimed that it "is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman pontiff"
credits:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Boniface_VIII
The last Pope to proclaim theocratic supremacy. He got his come-uppance during the French assassination attempt at Agnani...which led to his speedy, subsequent demise, then to election of puppet Pope Clement V by his royal french sponsor king Philip the Fair. The papal siege moved to Avignon. From then on the Pope was the clerical serf of french kings...then of Spaniards... under Charles V. Until the Reform occurred. So papal dominance ended when Boniface VIII kicked the can too far, when papal bull turned to cow shit...
true; except, the mission statement was never retracted. That's the NWO pursued by the financial arm of vatican, on behalf of vatican.
someone made a reference (+links) to Michael Tsarion's work in previous posts. I may be duplicating the source as I didnt look; however, here's one to support the mission statement:
http://tinyurl.com/dfztye
also, using your fav search engine, look up - rothschild vatican banker - and see if it fits with the mission statment. You may find that that banking laws are based on Int'l Maritime Admiralty Law. The Maritime Laws were derived from vatican Canon Law. The War Banks a.k.a. Central banks are controlled by SMOM in Switzerland. The Fed pays the Bank of England which is connected with the Swiss BIS. Examine the SMOM and its members to know who's who in banking. Then get back to me if you disagree.
you sound like a member.
Things that I feel important to remember:
Even if you win the rat race, you are still a rat
We act as human havings, but we really are human beings
Unless you are aware that you are a prisoner, you can not scape your prison
You are the builder of your own prison, the warden, the garde and the inmate
Other people and take advantage of me because I let them
I am afraid of freedom and so are you
The truth that will make us free, is the truth about ourselves.
Only once we know who we are, can we know what we want and where we want to go
Great article CD, I will have to look at all your other ones thanks for posting them. Here's something you might find fascinating http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8545585184878490822# Michael Tsarion's "Future of Mankind", one of his best lectures, I remember watching it back in 2007. What I like about him is he gets into the psychological aspect of the global manipulation/conspiracy. Which is what it all boils down to. The battle to control your mind, or better yet, the battle of oneself that keeps themselves from looking within themselves because they are afraid of what they might see. External's are but a mere reflection of ones innerself beit your friends, clothes or material items they possess but having said that psychic vampires do exist http://psychicvampirism.com/pg2.html. Didn't mean to take anything away from your article by posting, figured you might find them interesting.
I am a HUGE fan of Michael Tsarion. Unfortunately the average Joe is often put off by his delivery because they mistake his matter of fact straight forward attitude as ego. Plus he can get way off the beaten path which frightens those who still believe most of what they were taught in school, particularly history. Michael Tsarion has forgotten more about the subjects of philosophy and psychology than I will ever hope to know.
I know what you mean, Michael's knowledge is a Godsend for sure, I'm completely dumbfounded by the amount of data in his head, it is staggering. He is just so fed up with the ignorance of the general public but more so of the deliberate manipulation of the human species because he has profound knowledge of the occult practices including those being utilized by those in power today. I've been researching him, Jordan Maxwell, the great Alan Watt and many others for a while now and am so thankful we have access to these great minds and their work.
Thank you for this most thoughtful and generous contribution, CD.
It touches on so much of where my own thinking has brought me,
and names the fears that I am encountering.
So much of what ails is so easily blamed upon the external.
Each day brings more and more potential distraction from the true purpose of the quest.
Yes, it would be nice to have the whole world situation laid out, neatly wrapped in solid, footnoted evidence, yet, as you state, then what?
The ball is back in my court, it is red hot, and I must play it.
Great Sunday evening read.
Thank you.
Truth and pain have a symbiotic relationship, as do fantasies and lies. It's not the lies we are told that causes the most harm, but the ones we tell ourselves. If we don't know ourselves, almost strangers to ourself we can be easily mislead. "To know thy self" is to feel all my feelings, not just the pretty-happy feelings. To endeavor to work at understanding my subconscious. The dark side of who I am. To paraphrase what Cog is saying. I have met the enemy and it is me, myself, and I. Change the only reality you can. YOU. I believe it to be a life long journey in the spiral.
Excellent post CD. This is what we need more of. Thanks for the links to your related articles. The so called "news" is quickly becoming irrelevant. I can now finally quit wondering why, when the truth is so self evident, that we continue to support the systems that will eventually destroy us.
For anyone interested, there is a great book that follows this line of thinking. It is called Awareness. It was written many years ago but the message is timeless. It's a short and simple read. Basically it assists one to recognize what reality truly is.
There are several books available with the title "Awareness". Would you perhaps have a bookstore link to share? Thanks.
Excellent article CD. And the comment with all your articles is handy.
On the topic of books, Propaganda by Jacques Ellul, would seem to be right up your alley. It reminds me of some of the topics you touch on. The author seems to be the antithesis of Bernays (which is always good).
Keep up the good work. It is much appreciated.
As long as there are human beings involved - there will be no perfection. Think of the organizations of people - supposedly created for "good purpose" that have gone terribly awry. For me - the Catholic Church comes streaking to mind. All of the most noble ideals...so terribly executed. Yet, in spite of the organizations many problems - it remains an institution that reminds us of what we should aspire to.
Sorry - I realize that some people do not like religion - and for good reason - but it is a good example (I think) of what I am talking about - and talk about "compromises"...oy vey.
Organized religions are all just control devices masquerading as a just cause. Their story is follow me and don't even question me because I am the word of a diety that can't be questioned. The belief in them that has been so well cultivated over the centuries is exactly what Cog Dis is talking about.
CD - A good read and a reminder for us all. I think that many great men in history have called upon us to develop our culture and our character. I think that the US of A in spite of being the "richest" or "most powerful" nation (depends on the measuring units I suppose) has really failed on the culture and character front.
It feels like we have made so many little compromises in what we know to be right - we end up in a situation that is totally beyond our ability to remedy.
I always come back to that which we rail against is our own besetting fault - if we can stand to look at it.
There comes a point where the perceived weight of all the little transgressions is so large that we become frozen in the headlights, unable to come to grips with such a huge cognitive dissonance. From that point on the downward spiral begins to rapidly accelerate and people unconsciously begin to believe that the only way out is collective suicide, in a way a massive national/cultural atonement for past sins.
We see this play out wherever we look in history at the collapse of Empires. In every example I've looked at, when you get past all the normal excuses cited in the history textbooks, what I see is a massive national madness that brings about a collective self destruction. I've been thinking about this for months and I've been wondering if I could condense it down into something that would work in under 10 or 15 pages.
The biggest roadblock to an article like that is the massive amount of assimilated mainstream history that would need to be undone in order to accept that type of idea. We are conditioned to believe history is such and such. For so many people it's just too difficult to believe that our history books might not be accurate, that they might even be misleading or down right falsified.
Everyone understands the concept that the winners get to write the history books. But when it comes right down to it, most people don't believe "we" would actually do what they believe others would and have done. Call it a national egoic conceit. If we are to believe that we have distorted or out right lied about our own history, what does that say about other things we want to believe. It's so much easier to remain in denial and push the entire idea aside as silly.
Remember......we are the good guys, right. We don't do those sort of things.
"what is truth?" Pilate asked
ack.
truth is a place where a lie will never take you...
I'll take a stab at it.
Truth is a relative idea that someone accepts, under various assumptions.
Absolute truth is a deception we accept, without challenging our assumptions.
Objects and situations and ideas/concepts are neither true nor false. They simply are. When we wonder if something is true, we are not wondering if a cat is true. We are wondering if a statement is true. When considering the concept of truth, it is useful to keep that distinction in mind. Is this statement about something else correct? If yes, then it is true. If not, then it is false.
Someone makes a statement about an object, an idea, or a situation. Do we have the personal knowledge to know whether the statement is correct/true or not?
Truth exists, regardless of our ability to perceive it.
Truth exists, independent of our ability to perceive it.
We are surrounded by true statements. Most of the time, we do not have the personal knowledge to determine for ourselves whether the statements are correct. How, then, do we ever get out of bed in the morning and get anything done?
At best a fungible commodity. At worst the club with which I am beaten into submission.
http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/
www.tarpley.net
www.deanhenderson.wordpress.com
www.geofinancial.blogspot.com
for a coherent view of events without the bullshit
Engdahl makes for stimulating reading, but for some reason he doesn't seem to believe in Peak Oil, which I find bizarre, and I think he overdoes it elsewhere at times. Caveat lector.
Tarpley has reputedly done a certain amount of decent work over the course of his career, but I think he's lost his head more recently. Also a long-term LaRouchie. Caveat lector.
The other two? No clue.
CD,
You're working on the premise that we all want to believe 'all is roses' - not all of us do. I want to know what is 'true' (whatever that might be and, ultimately, it can only be what we as individuals know and perceive as 'truth') whether it includes roses or dung. I suspect many people who read ZH are of the same mind.
DavidC
Please point to where I state or infer this. Based upon public polls I've been reading over the last 40 years, very few people think or even want to believe all is roses. On the contrary I suspect most people are not trying to believe all is roses, but rather deny all is dung.
CD, my apologies, I was obviously the one making inferences!
Personally though, and keeping the metaphor going, I would like to think I see and smell roses where there are roses and see and smell dung where there is dung.
DavidC
I often make a huge mistake when reading other peoples work. I assume they are talking to me or to those who are similar to my thinking. This is my ego reacting or being triggered and it's one of the reasons I will read something twice before leaving it behind or commenting.
The first read is for my ego. The second read is for comprehension after the ego is done playing in the sand box. And sometimes there is a third read just for the fun of it.
Often times the author is directing his or her comments to a much wider audience than I am giving them credit for. May I submit that this is the case with my essay.
@ CG
Excellent article and whatever, it bears the signature of the eternal truth. Unfortunately or should I say serendipitly, the Buddhists came to the same conclusions prior to their entry into early India from the Russian steppes.
The life of each individual becomes from a series of organization of fragments of inputs from the time of conception within the womb until the current date stamp. This tends to twist and torgue the structure of one's belief system aka cognitive dissonnace and all the information organizations attached thereto in emotive colours and humids.
The Siberian sharman developed a system of truth -- for, indeed there is nothing but truth - except for the perception of that which is inside Mind, which even so, is The Spirit of Truth -- which is called the "Purification", a deterministic process. Purification requires one to examine and re-examine every thought, every moemory, every experience, every instance of one's life from as far back in one's memory as one can reach, and re-analize one's actions, belief's, reactions and memories at each specific instance based on the knowledge of Self at the Date Stamp.
You then repeat this over and over, each repeat brings new adjustment. It took me first round 15 years. And 15 years later, I do it automatically ad continuum.
Ok, you may say too long, rubbish, and it doesn't change anything: Wrong on all accounts, but there is one little detail that one must never indulge and that is the shame that some memories bring to light. Remember it is a process. The immediate effects which are good is a vastly improved memory as it rids the Mind of having to believe all the lies and those lies that support all the other lies. You see things far differently but in a core perspective, quickly and almost instantaneously. It also gives a sense of prediction or extrapolation' It leads to moments of consilience or "Kundalini". and it forces one to reduce the words of speech and sek values.
And importantly, the body's health improves markedly.
I appreciate your article, very much. It is indeed a classic truth.
Good article.
If you aren't lucky enough to be born a sociopath - or into a family of sociopaths - the best you can hope for is to be aware that the sociopaths always win. Of course, knowing this makes people unhappy, so if you're not a sociopath and you know the truth you are always unhappy. Best to just be an oblivious dumbasses then.
A sociopath is just one type of predator. And predators do not necessarily or always win. You are suckering for one of the errors the author warned against. To be sure, in the world today, the predators-that-be and predator-class do indeed dominate everyone else... as a generalization, but not in every specific.
The observation and lesson that your comment should invoke is, "predators do not inherently always win" and "predators do not in fact always win"... and therefore honest and ethical people should do the obvious and prudent thing to predators... exterminate them, or at least do not sanction or feed them.
The observation and lesson that your comment should invoke is, "predators do not inherently always win" and "predators do not in fact always win"... and therefore honest and ethical people should do the obvious and prudent thing to predators... exterminate them, or at least do not sanction or feed them.
Perhaps..
However, the sociopaths might not be JUST predators. What if they are higher evolved humans? Being a predator is just one OF the many ways they consume the dumbasses. Then it's not a matter of the "honest and ethical" exterminating them (the sociopaths), as this "honesty and ethics" is what prevents the masses from "seeing" the sociopaths right in front of their noses in the first place. "Honestly and ethics" might be a burden of lower humans.
I think you are assuming "honesty and ethics" is worth something.
@NOTaREALmerican:
The ability to experience empathy has been shown to be associated with the higher brain functions. The sociopaths, can be shown to have atrophied or conflicted "empathy" brain function and the true psychopaths can be shown to lack any empathy at all! Considering the greater numbers who do survive with "empathy" and the fact that the lack of empathy was a feature of the earlier reptilian class of animals, to argue in terms of "higher evolved humans" is a rather interesting take on things and might tell me more about you than about the state of nature.
It might be interesting to know if psychopathy was an acquired adaption in the sense of "higher evolution" or a retrograding based on an ecological niche along the lines of a species loosing the ability to see within dark caves after tens of thousands or more of generations. Just keep in mind that in environments where people will not survive if they are incapable of cooperating, the psychopaths and to a lesser extent the sociopaths, are going to be in a difficult place, provided they have not stored up enough to last through how ever long their "winter" lasts. And they must be wary of everyone, not just the "normal" but all their fellow "ethically" challenged suspects as well.
To be philosophical for the moment, I would argue that those without "empathy" experience "love" and "joy" perhaps in a similar way to those adapted to dark caves can't "see" but have other senses and abilities they fall back on to "survive". So think about the ability to deeply appreciate a "Beethoven" and his work, or try to understand the value of life lived when one is able to "love" compared to those who lack that ability.
So if you still have a choice, where do you prefer to hang out, in the world with Beethovens, great deeds motivated by love of others, and the ability to "see", or a world of cunning darkness where you give up the joy of Beethoven's work, universal kinship, and are willing to prey upon any other creature that strays along, especially the "young ones" who for what ever reason have not yet "grown up" yet and are easy prey? "Woe unto those who cause the 'little ones' to stumble!"
Again, "know yourself", (if there is any "self" inside "you" to know), and choose your fate!
Like it is possible to choose to be without empathy.
there's no such thing as a "socio-pathic predator." That's like calling a politician "a well heeled cannibal." it can become the case--but they're not shaking our hands day after long day because "in fact that hand...and the arm looks Yummy!" If what you mean "pathological people are dangerous" then yeeesssss--you're on to something. In other words "more often than not they're not predators at all" but "on the path and incapable of veering off it." That's far more dangerous in my view than "a predator"--we're talking Guyana and Hitler for example--movements that cause us to not in Apple's famous '84 at to "not open the blind fold" and thus "self-destruct ourselves en masse."
Disqualified - If that were be true, we can stop thinking about or discussing that topic.
Maybe you can tone it down a bit to "The easiest way..."
You left out the remainder of my sentence.
War, occupation, financial panics, state sponsored terrorism, false flag attacks, State Crime(s) Against Democracy (SCAD).......whatever method you wish to name it is all just different methods of psychological control.
I left out the remainder, because it doesn't add anything to the sentence to change it's meaning.
So every kind of control is a lie? Governments is all cases are pure piles of lies? Laws, the legal system, courts, every single instance is and will always be a lie? (Religions... )
The only option left is "true" anarchy
Malek, I think you need to go back and re-read what CD wrote. I think you missed quite a bit of the 'meat' that CD was trying to convey...
He has already admitted he didn't read the majority of the essay.
I find that I learn the most when I push through the initial triggers I hit when reading something that I might not initially agree with or if the author says something I find patently wrong or nonsensical. Often I find that I misunderstood what was being said or the author explains more later. Or just that other than a few ideas I'm in general agreement.
It takes a bit of courage to wade into a pool of water you already know is filled with ideas that might bite you. I can always find a dozen reasons not to go into the water. The key is to find the one reason to go swimming.
The only option left is "true" anarchy
WINNING