Something from a while back I’ve tried to tidy up a bit tonight.
A headline from The Telegraph newspaper. Researchers just can’t figure out what has changed that, along with mysterious huge rise in heart issues affecting young people, there also now appears to be a surge of ‘epidemic’ proportions in cancer amongst fit young people.
Rockstar Spruce Pipedream has teamed up with Sir Tony Blair to record a new song, titled Wearing Denim to Show My Support for the Common Man. The song has a nostalgic 1980s vibe, whilst still feeling relevant to our times. Sir Tony and Spruce are advising listeners to “turn it up loud!”
From Nietzsche's Of the New Idol chapter in Thus Spoke Zarathustra:
There was a bunch of arseholes, and they banded together and tried to make themselves into one great arsehole.
However successful they’d end up I admit to being of in ignorance, but I’d just suggest to never particularly trusting much in the union of arseholes.
A man fell into a well, and when he came out he was full of darkness.
Someone else emerged from another well, and when he came out he was full of light.
I don’t think I’ve posted this one before, which I’ve had lying around for a good while and just touched up a bit.
“Perhaps what you desire is not happening, but what needs to happen is occurring.”
Father Thaddeus of Vitovnika.
.
There was a great battle amidst a great conflict going on, and there were these soldiers, all ready for the fight, but unfortunately they were facing the wrong direction, didn’t recognise who was who and fired at their friends instead of their enemies.
There were two devils who always worked together in a kind of good cop bad cop scenario or alliance. The first devil would tempt someone with pleasure, and as long as the tempted gave into these temptations - whatever their particular form - then there was little need for the second and perhaps more formidable devil to make an appearance. But if someone made some concerted efforts and resisted the first devil’s temptations, for let’s say a week or even more, then the second devil would come in and tempt with pain. That is he would harass the thoughts of the one trying to get free with thoughts of despair, blasphemous accusations of God’s heartlessness and so on. Then eventually the tempted, perhaps just to get respite from these awful assaults, would return and give in to the temptations of the first devil, and the poor tempted one would be back to square one again. The thing was of course to push past both of them and then onwards to whatever or would come next.
Just a quick thought on the World Economic Forum, whose good people and doctrines your government and mine are most likely aligning themselves with.
So, what I’d like to do is unite their famous promise of “You will own nothing and be happy” with the description of humanity by one of their best known ideologues, Yuval Harare, as “soulless, hackable animals.”
And so we end up with:
“You are soulless, hackable animals who will own nothing and be happy.”
You’d have to be some kind of far-right, conspiracy theory loon not to buy into a vision like that. I think the idea of the actually being happy in this scenario, rather than being a reassuring solace, is maybe the most terrifying aspect here! - and which is exactly the warning of Huxley’s Brave New World. Actually, just now coming to mind is a think-thank scenario with these WEF beings - Klaus Schwab, etc:
My interactions with the emanations from the media are as minimal as possible and so I’m not ever likely to be too informed on the debates of the day, but a very quick observation on the governmental targeting of farmers so as to reduce their output and impact on ‘climate change’.
Well if a world was experiencing catastrophic climate change, you know how one should expect one of the most crucial manifestations of this to be: lands turning to wastelands and a lack of agricultural output, and onwards to food shortages and mass starvation. If on the other hand we have an abundance of agricultural output, and where governments are intentionally stepping in to impede all this production of food, well then such an environment is not experiencing any climactic catastrophe. Repeating myself, the signs of a catastrophe would involve a lack of food, not a surplus of food. To think otherwise is simply the perversion of logic. It’s akin to saying a business is in trouble because it is making too much profit.