Charred

 

Charcoal 1

 

Random

 I am going to pick a line from a book I am reading by randomly opening said book and seeing where my gaze lands. It is a bit of a risk. What if I land on an uninteresting line - which is very possible, probable even. I’ll look a right fool. Well maybe not a fool ... the reader will understand surely that fate played a trick on me ... though maybe there’s no need to go bringing something mysterious like fate into this, it’s just a random event, and regardless, random or not, the ordinariness of the line doesn’t reflect badly on me in any personal sense. Though then again maybe there’d be another reader out there who’d be exalting at my humiliation if the above does play out: “Look at him now, the fool!” It would make his morning.

So it seems there’s more at stake than I’d imagined. Be gentle on me reader. There’s still time for me to back out and leave this alone but no, I will be true to my word. Of course you have no way of knowing how true that word will really be - I could in truth spend forever dipping in and out of my book until something a bit exalted, mysterious, even prophetic comes out, having rejected countless boring sentences. But I’m afraid nothing can be done about that. Well maybe I could take photos which show the time they were taken which could prove when I ... no, that doesn’t really make any sense. You’ll just have to take my word for it. Well you don’t have to do that either, you can be full of mistrust if you want. I’m not going to go making demands of anyone on that front. 

So here we go. The book is ‘Demons’ by Dostoevsky. The line is ... 

“He’s in a fever, and he’s raving; something’s happened to him, very peculiar,” Stavrogin thought, looking at him once more. Both men walked on without stopping.

Silence and Propaganda

 Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth. By simply not mentioning certain subjects... totalitarian propagandists have influenced opinion much more effectively than they could have by the most eloquent denunciations.

A quote from Aldous Huxley which is very apt regarding YouTube’s stated policy of censoring and removing from their platform all videos relating to electoral fraud in the recent US Presidential election - this in spite of, or let’s be honest, because of the most obvious evidence of malpractices, particularly caught on camera in Georgia in the State Farm Arena Center where after vote counting was officially closed shortly after 10pm, once the legally required monitors had all left, suitcases of ballots hidden from view underneath tables were very swiftly produced and counting again began in earnest by the select few left behind. To depart from the pure visual evidence and hazard a theory: the many thousands of hidden ballots illegally tabulated consisted of a 100% balance of votes in favour of Joe Biden. And it is very reasonable to assume such practices were occurring in far more places than this one center. It’s far too organised to have been simply a random isolated episode, and there is a hell of a lot more evidence and claims beyond this episode. And so Donald Trump could gain the highest ever number of votes in a US election by nearly five million votes up to this point and ... emm ... lose to the charismatic Joe Biden. This is simply a logistic impossibility.  To return to Huxley’s quote, the evidence is clearly here pointing to serious and highly organised malpractice, and since there are very obvious desired outcomes at play here, suppression and silence are infinitely preferable to open debate of the issue.

 Youtube is owned by Google, and so when such an active policy of censorship is being enacted on that medium’s front, of course very similar policies are being implemented to police the Google search engine’s avenues to information, and this policy of organised silence, or ridicule, is also being replicated virtually across the entire Western mainstream media.

In ‘The Prince’ Machiavelli states that there is an eternal dynamic of a ruling nobility wishing to oppress the public, and against this is a contrary wish of the public not to be oppressed. Over time and amidst growing populations, one might expect and hope that the balance of power would inevitably move towards the public and away from a much less populous ruling elite, virtually just by weight of numbers, but Machiavelli makes the point that:

The nobles have more foresight and are more astute; they always act in time to safeguard their interests.

So taking the nobility to be a fluid term equating to the ruling elites rather than a particular aristocracy, one hugely key area of interest is the control of information which would certainly not be left to chance - and so Huxley’s quote that “the media of mass communication are controlled by members of the Power Elites.” This is just an obvious and inevitable fact. Youtube for example was not created by Google, but it was swiftly bought up by them, and for very good reason. Besides the significant financial aspect, it is a hugely important tool within the structure of society, and as we are currently very clearly seeing, a ruthless ruling elite are desperately attempting to control the flow of information within society so as to control the public’s perceptions of reality and ensure their desired political regime is in place.

Precision

I wish this were finished already. But I’ve only just started it! Yes but how much effort will it take to get to the end? Well I could just stop here now and it won’t have taken much. That’s true but why start writing at all if you’re only trying to get to the end as fast as you can. There should be something more exalted going on surely like, I don’t know, precision of thought about something important or maybe something being relevant to something else. Precision of thought? I’m not sure I’ve cared much about that before - not that I should be proud of the fact. Who knows though, maybe there’s armies of people out there precisely proud of such things: “My lack of precision of thought is my greatest virtue.” Let me know if you’ve ever heard anyone come out with that. Admittedly it’s probably pretty doubtful anyone has ever come out with it, out loud anyway, but maybe they do think it in private. “This lack of precision affords me great mobility of movement in various directions.” They might even continue along those lines. “I am not bogged down to an entrenched position.” Why precisely precision of thought should lead to being bogged down in entrenched positions is maybe debatable, but then again, maybe yes, if the spirit on that front is a bit excessive, it could lead to all sorts of such things. 

John the Baptist in the Wilderness - Bosch

 A painting by Hieronymus Bosch, most famous for The Garden of Earthly Delights, and often a painter of hallucinatory and hellish visions such as The Temptations of Saint Anthony. This, though also of course imbued with other-worldliness, more in its inner atmosphere on the positive side of things.

A Tip for the Sleepless

 Not that you have to be troubling to sleep to listen but just thought I’d link to someone on YouTube who does readings of various literary works, with special emphasis on Sherlock Holmes, and if I ever am awake in the very early hours, I find this the best means of dropping off - to the point where it can take me forever to get through one story of an hour or so because of the success in dropping off! This though is his reading of Dickens’ A Christmas Carol which is quite a bit longer than those stories.

Christmas

 Okay, it’s Christmas Day. I must reward my many readers with something uplifting. Merry Christmas! I know that line’s been done before but we don’t always have to be slaves to innovation. And even if we did have to be, slaves that is to innovation, after a while all that innovation would probably get kind of boring. Not to mention the slavishness. So anyway, happy Christmas! 

Trump versus the Swamp

Here Trump responds to the joke of a COVID-19 Relief Bill he was presented with. A 5,600 page Bill expected to be passed with a mere few hours for people to examine it. About 5 times bigger than War and Peace to be read, analysed and decided on in an afternoon. That takes pretty good reading skills. The complete norm for many, many, many years is there was precious little restraint on these shameless, vile crooks just wallowing and thriving in their communal corruption. Of course the sick joke of the mainstream media who are at one with such peoples and interests will present an exact opposite view of things where it is Trump who is the problem. As Aldous Huxley wrote back in the 1950s in Brave New World Revisited, “The media of mass communication are controlled by members of by the Power Elites” - and in the intervening time since, regarding the mainstream forms, how much more essentially true is that truth. By definition the news when it comes to matters of significant power reflects their interests and agendas. So if they endlessly drool over someone, like they did with the presented messiah figure of Barack Obama, then it is perfectly obvious he is one of theirs; and if like never in history there is a relentless assault against someone, as has been waged against Trump, then almost certainly he is not one of theirs.

Dead-end

 A man came to a dead-end, yet he’d been making so much effort to get to this dead-end, not knowing it was dead or an end, that he had no idea now what to do with himself. Should he try to keep going regardless, even if it was impossible? To turn back or go in some other direction - the shame of it!

Are We Here

Longer version:

 

Clear Voter Fraud Georgia, US

The video below is at times a bit tedious and drawn out as it is evidence presented in a judicial setting rather than a carefully edited piece, but it could hardly offer more obvious visual evidence of very serious premeditated illegitimate practices in vote counting in Georgia in the presidential election. It has fortunately managed to evade YouTube’s policy of blacking out coverage and debate of this issue. Needless to say the mainstream news media will also have done all possible to enact the same policy of propaganda by omission. The video is already some 3 weeks old and now the Georgia State Senate Judicidary Committee, perhaps as a consequence of such matters, is apparently recommending decertifying of the electors in Georgia - whatever that precisely means! 

I’ve lifted the following writing from https://noqreport.com/2020/12/03/bombshell-video-evidence-of-clear-voter-fraud-presented-in-georgia-for-the-first-time/

Attorney Jackie Pick presented video evidence that Georgia election officials in that State Farm Arena tabulation center instructed press and ballot observers to leave around 10:20 pm on election night because counting was going to stop until the morning. We can see the observers leave while four people stayed behind doing nothing. Once the observers were gone, the four ballot counters sprung into action, pulling boxes of ballots from under their tables to continue counting.

In another part of the video, we see suitcases full of ballots brought in to be counted with no witnesses present. According to Pick, the counting machines can tabulate around 3,000 votes per hour. With four people working and over two hours to count “votes” without observers or press present, they could have added at least 24,000 fraudulent votes to the total.

And a video on the decertifying recommendation mentioned earlier. Of course the world of serious power is so swamp-infested on all sides of supposed political divides that nothing is ever remotely to be taken for granted in terms of justice prevailing but anyway. There’s a couple of cheesy ads to fast forward within but this guy genuinely offers some good quality content.

Releasing

 Sometimes there is something to be said and sometimes there isn’t. What’s that supposed to mean? I have no idea but at least it got things going. So, repeating myself, sometimes there is something to be said and you go and say it, it’s released and you’re free to move on, but if you don’t say it it doesn’t go away, it stays there locked up inside. That’s reality. Say the tiniest irrelevant pebble falls out of your pocket onto the floor on the far side of the bed out of sight and you never go near it - come back in a year and if it hasn’t been removed in the meantime it will still be there. That’s the integrity of reality for you. Just because something seems irrelevant and superfluous doesn’t mean it will disappear out shame for its superfluousness. 

And the same with the internal world, however invisible it might look - we don’t have this perfect integrity in the physical domain but then all this order breaks down and there’s some kind of shoddiness internally. We can talk about simply being in the now, but we’re always in the now and the rest of this now we’ve always been in doesn’t just disappear just because we’d like it to. If something energetically needs to be said, as it were, felt, experienced and so released, then however blissful and calm we’d like to be wallowing around in the present without any baggage from the rest of the now we’ve always been inhabiting, some kind of spiritual amoeba or jellyfish, it’s still got to get left out somehow. 

Which is the point I guess in things like suffering, however awful the experience. All that pain isn’t just arising in that current moment, instead it’s a kind of trigger for floods of accumulated darkness and pain right through life to come to the surface in a rush and get released. That’s why the pain can be so intense - so much comes up in such a condensed period. You even get societies encouraging this releasing through rituals, tragic theatre, catharsis and so on. Even roaring your head off at some piece of sporting theatre is probably managing something similar - if it’s exciting that is. If not you’ve probably not released much! You might even come out feeling worse.

Gypsy Jazz

“What do you think of gypsy jazz?”

“What?”

“Gypsy jazz - what you think of it?”

“Gypsy jazz? What the fuck is gypsy jazz?!”

“I dunno, I suppose it’s jazz played by gypsies. Someone told me you were big into it.”

“Someone told you I was big into fucking gypsy fucking jazz?! Who told you that?!”

“I can’t remember. I’m sure someone told me anyway.”

“Well they told you wrong.”

Rebels

 “There is a class of people whose greatest act of rebellion would probably be to turn off the sound during the ad breaks.”

“Ah come on now, that’s hardly fair. ... Well maybe it is but it’s hardly fair to say it out like that.”

The State, Santa Claus, Jefferson, Marx ...

I’d advise children not to read this. Just to expand a little on an utterance in my last post that it is the person who is the living reality whilst the state is simply “an intellectual abstraction, a kind of agreement of the collective imagination for our mutual benefit.” It has no independent life apart from people behaving as though it were real, and this can be compared to Santa Claus who functions as an apparent reality by the collective efforts of people to act on this idea’s behalf. Were people, particularly parents, to stop the performance, giving presents in his name, etc, then the non-reality of Santa would very quickly be left with nothing to sustain the idea of itself.

Similarly with the behemoth of the State, and regarding the achieving of American Independence where if you read particularly someone like Thomas Jefferson it is clear the idea of the less government the better - that just as Jesus described the Sabbath as made for man and not vice versa, the state is made for man and not the other way round. Jesus is responding to a tyrannical inversion by a ruling elite of man’s relation to things that should serve him - like a day off work! Instead of this being a freedom for man, the religious orthodoxy, within the relevant passages anyway, twist this release from labour into a pathway of oppressive coercion where it is wrong to even cure someone because this is a supposed violation of the Sabbath and its obligatory freedom from labour! Freedom and a release from burden is replaced by bullying and psychological intimidation to police this ‘freedom’.

The American idea in its original form is very conscious of and a safeguard against the tendency of the rulers of the state to accumulatively develop the state apparatus into a tyrannical despot. By contrast, with leftist ideologies, principally Marxist, the balance of power is in the opposite direction where once again it is man who is most certainly subservient to the state, and rather than the ideal of within reason the less external governing of man the better, the more state control the better. The state owns everything, man nothing. And this relates to the nonsense one often sees that Marxist countries have been much less wonderful than desired only because they have failed to be Marxist enough or true to the ideal. The ideal is one-party absolute state control over the individual.

One thought that just struck me in the writing of this is how the word ‘reactionary’ would be used as very much one of accusation by proponents of leftist ideologies towards contrary viewpoints, and with themselves presumably as being ‘revolutionary’. But actually at a deeper ideological level if one compares to Jeffersonian democracy the aspiration of liberty of the individual from state tyranny, the natural over the unnatural, it is actually the leftists who are at the core reactionary as they are seeking to maintain the dynamic of supremacy and despotism of the state over the individual. The identity of the rulers may have been shuffled around a little but it is the same psychological essence as the absolute monarchy with man beneath the state, and now actually much more helplessly beneath. Here there is most certainly no place for dissent from within. It’s a mentally contrived structure where there are no internal contradictions permitted, a firmly set and controlled mathematical equation as it were where man must obey or be eliminated as an impermissible violation of this perfect system. So when we see the liberal left being vehemently anti-free speech if it is contrary to themselves and their mores, this is utterly consistent with the totalitarian nature of their desired system. All this of course all ties very much in with The Great Reset and its seriously unhinged and diabolical narrative of absolute state control at almost unimaginable levels, and towards which realisation there are very great efforts being made.

The Great Reset - “You Will Own Nothing”

 It seems quite amazing this guy is on regular tv in Australia, but anyway this is a video on the Great Reset where it is promised by these movers of global society that “You will own nothing and be happy.” That its apparent architect in chief Klaus Schwab says this Fourth Industrial Revolution will affect and change everything in society including our biological structures. It will come in at breathtaking speed, ‘like a tsunami’ he says. He and his ilk are also talking of COVID offering a perhaps never to be repeated window of opportunity to usher in this new era.

First just to say perhaps in the context of a very localised tribal structure or a monastic environment owning nothing is plausible in some kind of healthy sense. But anyway, at the psychological core of our beings though is a sense of self, that regardless of the societal structure we inhabit, this autonomy of self is sacred. Apart from perhaps the individual’s sense of relationship to God, he/she is not owned by some greater power. Otherwise he is ultimately a slave. His status as being owned and subservient to the state is the hallmark of totalitarianism - the state owns the  person despite the fact that it is he who is a living reality while it, the state, is simply an intellectual abstraction, a kind of agreement of the collective imagination for our mutual benefit. Which isn’t to say we’re not bound as peoples by far more than convenience but we’re simply talking of the power structure of the state here rather than such matters.

The individual’s right to own things is of course unquestionable, and it is absolutely entwined within our world as of now. We do not inhabit some relatively simple closed environment like the ones mentioned above, and in this highly technologically evolved world to “own nothing” is to, within the structure of that environment, be entirely disempowered and helpless beneath the status of the state and its rulers. This Great Reset is unarguably a movement to disempower the great mass of humanity beneath the absolute power of a ruling elite whom it would be insane to trust with such authority.

Parasites

There was a dog plagued with fleas and various parasites who were tormenting the poor creature. So its owner applied an ointment to its coat to which the parasites were allergic, and though they in their panic bit and tormented the poor animal all the more for a little while, soon enough all who had remained on the dog’s flesh had died whilst the rest had hopped off.

Revolutionary Act

 Okay, time for today’s revolutionary act. Revolutionary? Am I going to take down the system with my bare hands? No, I’m just going to do a bit of writing and we’ll see where it goes. It mightn’t go anywhere... well it’s bound to go somewhere but maybe that somewhere won’t be anywhere particularly revolutionary. Maybe I’ll even make a few snide remarks about people seen as revolutionaries but who really haven’t a thought of their own in their heads. Regardless, whatever I write, I’m setting things into motion, the energy of myself, and think about it, a planet revolves around a sun, that’s revolutionary, it doesn’t have to be smashing into things as it’s doing so. It can all even be very elegant. For some people though that’s probably exactly what they have to do, that and no more, to see themselves as revolutionary, at the cutting edge - smash into things and do it with as much noise as possible. 

You could say I’ve gone off on a tangent, but when this whole thing is as it were a tangent, without any beginning but to write and see where it goes, then that mightn’t be a fair criticism. Though maybe it is. Maybe there should be some clear and unifying element, a solid theme, and looking back I did start off with the mention of being revolutionary, and perhaps despite myself I am somehow circling around and within that theme. I might have to pause to consider the point. Okay, a few seconds of considering and perhaps this very freedom of movement in this kind of writing is all very revolutionary, not a slave to some thought, my own or someone else’s. I could even subtly allude to the freedom of movement in the physical sense that has suffered greatly this past year, and how favourably this creativity comparatively compares. I might even be beginning to verge on dangerous territories here. And never mind freedom of physical movement, there’s people out there making great strides these days in even denying us this internal freedom of movement, to think certain thoughts and give utterance to them - and a very rapidly widening range of thoughts at that. The very people posing as liberal, concerned with liberty, shutting liberty down. I’m getting all serious and specific,and perhaps boring, but anyway, that brings to mind a thought I’ve read somewhere about the devil or the energies embodies within that concept if preferred - that there is no creativity within him, all he can do is parody. 

I’m not quite happy with where this went but it’s had time enough of my time, and so I’ll unashamedly, allegedly anyway, post it!

Fulcrum

 In this age of whatever it is unfolding rapidly into whatever it will be, it is perhaps my role to be a centre point, a fulcrum of stability around which all else revolves. Unlikely though. That it would be very fine though is something even the most sceptical of us must surely admit - though perhaps out of some perversity, some need for self-assertion, some wouldn’t admit it. Admitting it or not though there would be the world revolving, in harmony, in tumult and everything in between, and there at the centre me, a calmness preventing as it were chaos. Maybe someone else though would be better suited to the role, someone for whom all that calmness might be more natural and who after a while wouldn’t get bored. Maybe I’d be better out amidst the tumult, engendering it even, and the tension between the likes of me out at the edge and this great calm at the centre would be some great force, in balance and yet always in extension, dynamic and not destructive. And just to say I wouldn’t be one of those snarling idiots out there just destroying things thinking I was doing something wonderful. I’m not quite sure what I’d be doing but I’m sure it’d be more in the lines of construction than destruction. But it’s all the same isn’t it at the end of the day? No, it’s not.

It’s amazing where you end up after pushing out a few words into nothingness and then follow along in their wake so to speak. The boundaries of the real have been stretched.

Warrior!

 Candace Owens Sues Facebook. On the theme of Big Tech censorship and intimidation.

Part 2: 

Just to add one point which is her reference late in the second video to not letting the communists win, which I’m sure to many of us might sound hyperbolic in the extreme. I’ve seen Donald Trump make the same point recently in a rally in Georgia. Well here https://m.facebook.com/worldeconomicforum/videos/10153920524981479/?refsrc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F&_rdr is the Facebook page of the World Economic Forum in which they give a list of predictions for the 2020s. Point number one says “You will own nothing and be happy. This is how our world could change by 2030.” You  can’t get much more communist than that. Who are these nutcases? And I should add, very powerful nutcases. Here is a short related video.

Law

[I wrote this a few years back and just looking at it recently it has it seems to me to have become more apposite, that there is a sifting process going on at the moment, particularly vividly in the States, and so anyway with that in mind I’ve dug it back out from its dusty virtual shelf, even if it is kind of unfinished. To add, when I write something like this it’s not done strategically, which would involve having a firm idea what underlying reality I may be referring to, and what relevant points are then being made. Instead I try to keep such thoughts away and insofar as possible allow the piece to flow on its own terms so it can look after itself without my conscious mind intervening and trying to direct things, which would inevitably result in far narrower and more finite energetic/artistic structures.]

There was a law, and what are laws but to be broken, but this it seems was an absolute law, in full accord with reality, and so could not be broken. It was a law of nature. And so what did man do - man in the collective - but gather himself together and strain himself to the utmost to try and break this law, to test its absoluteness. All means, instruments, tools were used in all kinds of ways but to no avail. The law remained, unbroken - which was very satisfactory. Man put down his tools. Now he had his law. 

But after a while it turned out not all had put away their tools, or if they had, some of them, they'd taken them back up again. Whatever was wrong with them - they must have been possessed of some kind of infection - they could not be stopped. They were met at first with bemusement, but this soon turned to anger, outrage even, and out of all proportion one might have thought to the scale of things, but maybe they feared some kind of response from above, so to speak, some collective form of retribution, for what kind of way was this to behave towards the law? 

And so tolerance of those who refused to put away their their tools became intolerance - requests gentle and stern having been ignored, threats of excommunication and exile likewise, their instruments were confiscated, smashed, leaders imprisoned; but the infection it seemed was a fatal one, and those in its grip went underground and carried on their tests in some kind of darknesses, modern catacombs as it were beneath the city.

What did they hope to gain? Did they really think this law could be broken? And even if they were to find points of weaknesses within it, however impossible and unlikely - what could they expect to do then? They could hardly expect to be able to bring these findings - however dubious - overground, not now. But you can't really ask a man in a fever to logically justify why he is feverish - why he doesn't just discard his fever. And anyway whatever they might do later with their findings could, they might answer, look after itself then. 

And whatever about the law in its core, they were led in their pursuits down all kinds of tributaries, sometimes confined for ages within the most torturous of currents, but which would suddenly and unexpectedly open into grand spaces, illuminating darknesses - darknesses they hadn't even realised were darknesses - and having gazed all around, having peered into all the corners, then a choice of tributaries, directions, would be theirs, where to next, and so their explorations were rewarded more and more, and on and on they were drawn further and further down into the unknown.

Did they stop and wonder at all where they they might be being led? Were they keeping pace, internally let’s say, with their discoveries? Should they, to try and keep some sense of perspective on things, come up for air a bit more often? Let’s say for example someone found out how to split the atom, one giant step for whoever, but at the same time he has the emotional maturity of a ten year old. What’s he going to do with his atom?

But anyway, whatever about the mental health of these people underground, in time word of their mysterious workings began to seep upwards, this word behaving akin to some gaseous substance, to which however the older generation, in general, seemed immune. These gases could writhe slowly all about them, but it was as if they were encased in some impenetrable shell. But for the younger people though, these vapours from below seemed often to seep through every pore and even take possession.

And so the finest minds, who it seemed were most vulnerable, were ever more being drawn underground, joining the strange mental crusade, the momentum of which was gaining, while above, the city now largely bereft of the finest of the rising generation, became more stagnant and brittle, and whose shrill cries of condemnation of what might be going on underneath appeared all the more desperate.

And then as time passed, numbers began to emerge from below, with papers and proofs, solemn but not far beneath the solemnity, jubilant, fearful and mocking; and what could the city leaders do but welcome them back, obsequiously; and so pale from lack of sun and with hard, fixed eyes, these inhabitants of underground returned and took up their seemingly unquestioned places at the head of society, redirecting its flow. 

The time-piece upturned, underground was now overground, and what, a little further in time happened but some of the most archetypal beings of overground began to go underground. These most emblematic of people were not as you might expect so much the leading establishment figures, who with a little bit of shuffling managed to cosy themselves in with the new order, and go on in truth much as before. 

No, the people most in tune with the previous way of life, those who most believed in it, believed in it with their very blood so to speak, were much less noticeable. They departed quietly, made little fuss, but left, at least in the immediate aftermath of their absence, an uneasy impression - their departure only being noticed after the fact. Why had they left? It was puzzling, but still, whatever it was about, they were obviously no loss. There was more room for the rest of us. 

With their departure underground these exiles found something they didn't expect to find, which was that these realms weren't quite as empty as they'd expected. Evidently not everyone had gone back above ground, and those they found who had remained were it seemed the purest forms of the earlier waves downwards. Those who were heading back up to take possession looked on these few as mad; and when these mad few had in response to the mockery of the more worldly majority simply ignored them, this had only raise their contempt all the more. They were going up to usher in a new age, and meanwhile these mad fools didn't even bother to glance over their shoulders at their departure, they mattered so little to them. That these madmen were the most gifted of the experimenters was a bit inconvenient, but somehow or other could be explained by their very madness. In their very addiction to truth they had lost sight of it - or something like that.

And with the arrival of the newest wave from above, the denounced retrogrades, interestingly, the two unworldly groups seemed to recognise each other - inwardly. They had found themselves together underground by some kind of sifting process, some sieve, as could perhaps also be said of those overground. Sheep and goats as it were.

And so how did the two hemispheres progress? Naturally, upstairs – so to speak – the old Law was overthrown, but not with any great fuss. It was discarded, thrown in the rubbish, amidst, insofar as it was noticed, laughter. Word of its departure went largely unmentioned but for the odd mocking reference; its presence had been imaginary in the first place so what was there to miss. New laws had been put in place but funnily these laws and their nature tended to go unmentioned also. It was more a case of inferring their existence than anything else, though there were very few it seemed to do much inferring. Whatever these new laws were though, they were essential. One could be sure of that.

Commitment

I have committed myself to writing every day something or other. The why behind this commitment I’m not too sure about, and to be honest I’m a bit dubious about the strength of the commitment also.  I can’t even actually remember making any commitment. Maybe it just arose in the act here of writing about it and I’m just going along with it for the sake of ... emm ... art.

But what if even if I fulfil the commitment and do write away every day something or other but what gets written isn’t worth writing? Any fool can string some words together, but that doesn’t mean they’re worth stringing. Even that just there ... worth stringing ... it’s awful. But at least you might say I know it’s awful. And I could of course go back an erase it, replace it with something a little more elegant, but I think I’ll leave it there instead for the sake of integrity. What kind of integrity would that be? Who knows. Maybe it’s really just laziness.

Anyway am I really supposed to place those kind of words there - stringing and so on - as if on top of a hill, like a standard, and stand back proudly? Look at me there. I even look like I’m expecting something. Praise no doubt, and maybe even something tangible to go with the praise. I wonder is it the writing or the commitment I’m so pleased about. Probably both. 

So this will do for now. I have fulfilled my word. I wouldn’t exactly be full of expectations regarding future actions regarding all this but I can hardly be held accountable for that. I only inhabit the present after all. Pledges about future virtues are always a bit dubious.

In General

 “What do you think of tyrannical fuckwits?” 

“What do you mean - in general or individually?”

“More in general I suppose.”

“Well I wouldn’t think much of them in general but then again you have to treat people individually.”

Intervals

 It is my duty to write but for that I must await inspiration, otherwise I could come out with any old rubbish, set it down and leave, fully satisfied with myself: ‘There, I have written. Let them read and be filled with my words” - not caring what kind of words they are, it’s enough that it’s just me at the other end of them. So anyway while I wait there is an imbalance, between you and me I mean. I could be sat here for days between sentences, waiting to come up with something, whilst you come along then and read it all in one flow and reap the harvest. Maybe I should get out a stopwatch, if I had one, and time the gaps so the reader could be made more aware of these intervals where on the surface perhaps nothing was happening, just me sat there doing nothing, but internally all this waiting and alertness or whatever was going on, and so if desired the reader can partake of those gaps in some measure to offset the imbalance. So for example you are made aware there was a pause of 17 minutes whilst I was waiting to come up with a next line, maybe it was quite an elusive subject, and so in communion with my act of creation you now also sit there for 17 minutes, or if that’s a bit excessive or inconvenient maybe a set percentage of the relevant time, and then you move onto the next line.

This sounds on the surface all very wonderful and idealistic but now that I’ve had one of those pauses I’ve been going on about I’m not sure how plausible it is really. For one thing I’d have to keep editing my piece after the in the moment fact of its production, and then sticking in new sentences between the original ones informing the reader of time gaps for him or her to follow. Even if the reader was ideologically and emotionally on my side, willing to play his/her/its part, it would surely be disastrous for the flow of composition, the creation itself. I’d never get anywhere. I’d probably be more lost in the world of time gaps than inspiration. That’s the thing about these utopian visions - you can get yourself tied up in all kinds of knots with them.

White Supremacist

 A funny little clip using a charming bizarre moment from a white man snarling at a black man that if he doesn’t vote for him he’s not black. “Yes master. Just as you say boss.”

The same white guy previously described Barack Obama as “the first mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice looking guy- I mean that’s a storybook, man.” 

Sometimes there’s nowhere left for satire to go.

Longer

 Originally this was a much longer piece. I’ve edited it down. I’m not saying it was necessarily better but it was indeed as I intimated or even said outright much longer.

Where’s the proof, you might demand, of how long it was? I applaud your attitude and it pains me to say it but I must admit there is no proof. You’ll just have to take my word for it.

BBC Bias by Design, Dostoevsky and so on

Excellent short piece by former BBC journalist Robert Aiken, author of Can We Trust the BBC, and The Noble Liar: How and Why the BBC Distorts the News to Promote a Liberal Agenda.

And from the same site

I have probably very much overly avoided the world of current affairs over the past good few years, more or less as it seemed to be an arena devoid of any reason for optimism, with both sides of whatever supposed spectrum, regardless of the supposed disparities, ultimately propelled and ‘owned’ by the same very powerful elements. There have been some extremely surprising developments however, one would imagine surely outside of the scripted agenda, such as Britain seemingly leaving the EU, and from outside of the normal political establishment in the US Donald Trump becoming President, vowing to “drain the swamp” and so we’ve had the astonishing situation of the US President actually calling out the mainstream corporate media as ‘fake’ and utterly corrupt - which of course they are. This is almost unimaginable given how condensed and impenetrable the political power structures had seemingly become to infiltration from outside. Such above developments of course have been relentlessly assaulted by the mainstream Western media outlets as catastrophic scenarios, even if for the sake of appearances more right-wing outlets have I presume had to seem positive about Trump.

However the point I had hoped to make, and why I included the second video above about the rolling over of the UK establishment to ‘woke’ ultra-liberal’ elements, is how all this brings to mind Russia of the 1860s onwards, particularly through the fulcrum of the great writer Dostoevsky. What had begun as a laudable movement towards liberty and idealism was instead leading as the years passed towards attitudes amongst the ever more radicalised elements of total nihilism towards existing societal structures, culture and beliefs, especially religious beliefs. The original liberals, educated, refined and with reverence towards higher ideals, looked with growing horror at how the next generations were far more driven by attitudes of nihilistic destruction than for reverence for such effeminate luxuries as art, and of course the highest ideals of the spiritual were beneath contempt. This especially shown in Dostoevsky’s novel Demons which focused very much on the revolutionary movement, its underlying core and where it would most likely lead, namely tyrannical and absolute totalitarianism. Within it and elsewhere the use of the media as a propagandist tool of subversion and intimidation is also touched on, then of course very much in the printed form. That last point about the increasing extremism within the ‘liberal’ leftist movement came to mind recently in a video I saw recently with a former Antifa member.

In ‘The Idiot ‘Dostoevsky in one section focused in on how these elements expected complete liberty of expression for themselves, particularly when accusing others of whatever reactionary vices, but then on the other hand a complete closing down of freedom of expression to elements contrary to themselves. Since by their own definition they themselves were virtuous and anyone at odds to themselves were of course without virtue, then this oppression of these others’ rights to free speech was of course a self-justified process towards the realisation of their already perfectly understood just society, run by themselves. All this is especially relevant to the second video above and its discussion of immense totalitarian powers of prosecution regarding Hate Speech being enshrined within the UK justice system, if in conflict with the ‘woke’ view of things. 

A quick mention also is within Crime and Punishment in the mid 1860s Dostoevsky focused and satirised that movement’s intentional subversion of sexual dynamics and especially the ideal of the family structure in favour of a very liberalised unattached sexuality, where for example an ardent but naive believer in the new ideology proclaims unfaithfulness by one’s wife should even be applauded by the husband as an expression of her liberated spirit and exaltation over moral and institutional bigotry!

This has gone on much longer than intended, and I’m certainly not for now at least going to read it back so apologies for any hypothetical readers out there for both grammatical errors and overall shapelessness.

Charcoal landscspe

 

Les Bateaux - de Stael