Department Of Repeated Redundancies Department

I don't know what is more utterly amazing and laughable: is it the complete stupidity and incompetence of government, or the contempt with which government views its slaves?  Perhaps it is both.

Let's start with the headline that gobbled up the weekend news cycle - the Fort Lauderdale airport shooting.  A man, known to "authorities" to be unstable, transports a rifle and ammunition in his baggage from Alaska to Florida, but is apparently not registered on any flight arriving there.  He takes his baggage to the toilet, loads up and comes out shooting.  Then the "authorities" announce that they are questioning the suspect, which would seem like a logical thing to do.  Meantime, the entire government-controlled corporate media debate focuses on adding more of the same policies and procedures that have failed time and time again.

Either the government "authorities" are completely and utterly lobotomized (and let's include their mouthpieces as well), or they think the average American is.  I suspect it is a generous helping of both.

Next headline: Indonesia wants to boost its defense industry by making and exporting bombs that could potentially be thrown back at them.  Now, to a thinking person, you would want to make and store bombs for defense, not sell them to potential enemies.  Furthermore, the Indonesian government wants to boost its defense by continuing to disarm and distrust its own citizens/slaves.

If anyone asked me, which they obviously didn't, I wouldn't be selling my bombs and I would arm and train every able-bodied (and minded) citizen, so that an invader would have to fight door-to-door across thousands of islands in order to take over the country.

But that's just me thinking again.

How about this one: government wizards (a.k.a. "scientists") say they have witnessed a Black Hole tear apart a star and spit the pieces out into space.  In the same freaking article, they say Black Holes gobble up everything and not even light can escape.  Um...maybe I'm missing something here, but didn't you just tell me that this Black Hole is "spitting" pieces of a star out into space?

Maybe nobody reads this shit, because I seem to be the only one thinking these things are just a bit contradictory.

Trump says anyone who doesn't want better relations with Russia is a "fool" and "really stupid."  Pardon me, Mr. President-Elect, isn't that why folks elected you?  I mean, it's a bit redundant to keep telling us what we already know.  How about solutions?  What exactly are Tillerson and the Evil Mass-Murdering Bastard War Criminal Kissinger doing to alleviate the problem?

Next, we have the climate.  Yes, for some reason Al Gore and the Echoettes are sticking to the story that the Earth is suffering from man-made global warming, even though the world is cooling, there are record low temperatures and snowfall all over both hemispheres, polar ice is expanding, and rainfall patterns in both hemispheres are beginning to match perfectly with past solar Grand Minima.  And just to put a cherry on the ice cream, polar bear populations are at record highs.

Still not convinced we've fallen down the rabbit hole?

The Democrats in the US absolutely insist that the Russians hacked the election, even though Julian Assange says emphatically that WikiLeaks did not get the email from the Russians, Seth Rich - DNC IT specialist - was shot dead in the back in broad daylight and NOT robbed, none of the "intelligence" agencies can produce a shred of evidence, and the Russians have no objective motivation to do so that outweighs the risk of getting caught doing it.  Oh, and did we mention that the voting infrastructure of the US is not connected to the internet, and thus can't be hacked by typical means?

In the 1940s, the CIA was created out of some Nazi left-overs and General Galen's spook network in Europe and North Africa.  In the 1950s, the CIA took over the Corporate Media with Project Mockingbird.  In 1963, the CIA assassinated John Kennedy, who refused to follow the spook script and was preparing a full-on assault on their growing power and influence.  Since then, the CIA has virtually ruled the Executive Branch of the US government, and through organizations like USAID, have set up networks in dozens of countries to control and influence those governments, as well.

So convinced was the CIA that it could install its next-in-line lackey, Hillary Clinton, that they profoundly underestimated the amount of vote flipping and ballot stuffing needed to ensure Trump, whom they have assiduously painted as a buffoon, would not get in.  Perhaps they overestimated the somnolent effect they were having on the general public, or they grossly underestimated the number of people who were slowly but inexorably waking up from the 50-year hibernation of reason.

Even though the masses truly did elect Trump, and he is the first president that is not under the direct control of the CIA since 23 November 1961, he is nevertheless controlled by a competing faction of the Deep State, knowingly or not, though I think the former.

The US, and by extension the world, is slowly waking up from a decades-long trance that was achieved in part by the US victory and subsequent economic dominance in the world after World War 2, as well as the fact that so many US males were brainwashed by military service during that war into blind obedience to government and symbols.

The Grand Awakening is due to two primary factors: 1) the 50-year effort of independent researchers to undo the magic spell over the population, which used to be called the underground media, but which was emerged as the Alt Media (or Free Press as I prefer), and 2) the human mind can only take so much rewiring and layers of bullshit before it reboots.  We are in the reboot phase of history at this very moment.

It is also a particularly vulnerable point.  When the mind reboots, there is a time while the OS is loading that one can access the BIOS and change the system parameters.  This is what we see with the "Russian hacking" narrative.  The spooks are desperately trying to reinstall the "fear factor" before things get too far out of hand.

What makes all of this visible is the failure of the classic "black is white" operation that has gripped Western civilization for half a century.  When the flip-flop narrative becomes this obvious, then it is clear that the spell has failed and people are clearly not buying the brute-force attempt to make them believe things that are clearly in conflict with the senses and basic reason.

In so many ways, the institutions of control, such as religion and government, are losing their power over the masses.  The Big Three Monotheisms - Judaism, Christianity, Islam - which have enjoyed millennia of control, both directly and through their secular government counterparts, are falling apart.  All of the war mongering we see is these institutions attempting to drive everyone back into nationalistic, and by extension religious mindsets.  This is the real hegemony that has dominated the world for longer than any of us care to imagine.

The classic "black is white" narrative is nothing more than dressed-up "faith."  Religions have inspired fanatical loyalty by spinning fantastical tales that prevent people from thinking or acting independently by deferring everything to sometime after death when the evil-doers will get theirs, or by waiting futilely for a Messiah who will come to set everything right.  This deference is a poison that destroys critical thinking and creates bovine nose-to-tail herd behavior.

For three centuries now, the Enlightenment has sought to re-awaken the pre-frontal lobes of mass humanity by destroying the "black is white" narrative and the institutions that spin it.

The problem is that a part of the Enlightenment was corrupted and instead sought to take over the institutions of control.  The reasoning that led to the perversion is rather convoluted, but suffice it to say that they figured they could use the control structure to reprogram humanity in their own image.  This is where the Illuminati storyline comes from.

Fortunately, is seems that the true Enlightenment has survived underground and has been busily working to spark the Great Re-Awakening, a process that quite obviously the US Founding Fathers had hoped to achieve with their New Republic, the Shining City Upon The Hill.

Despite herculean efforts on the part of the ancient Controllers and the splinter group called the Illuminati, the Enlightenment has rooted and is just now starting to bear fruit.  But it is a dangerous time.  Entrenched and power-hungry organizations do not relinquish power without a fight, and that fight has only begun.

There is a covert war going on just out of sight, but it is increasingly visible to the masses.  Ultimately, it will become an all-out war in which the ensconced powers will win or leave nothing but scorched Earth behind. It is a war of profound ideologies whose prize is nothing short of an entire planet.  The one weakness of the Good Guys is that they want to prevent the scorched Earth and so are unwilling to go to the extremes that the Bad Guys are.

The next few years will be a true spectacle, even for all its gory destruction and waste.  The clash of two completely and utterly incompatible philosophies will be nothing less than cataclysmic, though it must be said that not all of it will be fought in the real world - most of it will be mental and spiritual.

If you want to see what the other side is capable of, just look at the post-election mayhem in the US.  Black teenagers streaming vile hate and complete lack of compassion on Farcebook.  Paid rioters looting and destroying neighborhoods and randomly killing passers-by.  This sociopathic violence and mindless destruction is only a tiny taste of what the Bad Guys will unleash to keep their privileged perches.

The Good Guys are neither mentally nor spiritually prepared for the hell that is coming.  Far too many people believe that electing a few representatives is enough to fix the problem, when it is in fact the very heart of the problem to begin with.

People like Trump are not the solution, though they are symptomatic of the correct instinct on the part of the masses.  He also represents to a great many people the power that they truly have, though when Trump fails - and he will - there is a terrible risk of despair and hopelessness on the part of the newly awakening masses.  At that point, they will be most susceptible to re-immersion into the control grid.

Both sides have now fired their first volleys, though the Bad Guys know how far they will go to protect their domain.  The Good Guys need to wise up fast and steel the mind and soul for the battle to come.  We have a brief moment for a little R&R, but it is dangerous to let one's guard down.

Black is White...War is Peace...Hate is Love.

A Spooner-Fed Radical

Take a moment, if you will, to ponder these two propositions:

• Compulsory membership in any organization is, in fact, slavery;
• The US Constitution offers citizens only two choices: ballots or bullets.

Interestingly, the anti-Trump riots in the US at this time are legitimate reactions, because there is no other remedy allowed by design of the US political system, according to these two propositions.

These are extraordinary statements to many people.  If you live in a country that has a constitution, as the US and Indonesia do, then you are a slave, and your only options are to support slavery by voting, or start shooting if you are a US citizen.  The Indonesian constitution offers no such choice.

These are the propositions of a rather extraordinary political thinker named Lysander Spooner.  To most people, his name is completely unfamiliar, but his writings are the foundation of my own political reasoning.  He lived in the US from 1808 to 1887, and is probably one of the great anarchists of all time.  He is also the spiritual father of UPS, FedEx and DHL, but that's a different issue.

Spooner is probably as close as I get to having a "hero." His thinking was so far off the beaten path as to make him one of the few truly free thinkers of all time.  He influenced writers like Henry David Thoreau and Ralph Waldo Emerson, and his essays form the basis for much of modern libertarian thinking.

I first encountered Spooner at a place called Patriot Oil in Midland, Texas in the early 1990s.  Patriot Oil was the most underground of underground bookstores anywhere in the country.  Located off the interstate in a remote part of West Texas, it was owned and run by a man who had turned his independent gasoline station into an outlet for any and all materials generally considered subversive - meaning they successfully opened people's minds to the tyranny all around them.

By the way, you could also buy surplus ordinance obtained from a near-by military base.  Everything from hard-to-get caliber rounds to mortars and small rockets were arranged in displays around the property.

I had made a pilgrimage to this isolated gas station for the express reason of obtaining materials that could not be had anywhere else (the internet had not yet become what it is now).  Many of the titles in this other-worldly bookstore in the middle of nowhere were photocopied texts of public domain pamphlets, books, essays and letters.  They were arranged haphazardly on shelves in the office, outside and scattered across the garage, where spattered motor oil and tire black smudges had made the top pages unreadable in many cases.

Here. one could obtain copies of The Anarchist's Cookbook and The Poor Man's James Bond, as well as Lysander Spooner and Ludwig von Mises.  This was radical stuff, and my heart was pounding as I scanned the saddle-stitched volumes.  I was in the presence of words that had put men in jail and even gotten them killed.  This was heady stuff for a fledgling radical.

I purchased enough reading material to fill a carry-on bag, since the 36-hour round-trip to remote West Texas was not something one wanted nor could afford to do on a regular basis.  Among those materials was a rather short book called No Treason, by Lysander Spooner.  I had no idea at the time, but it was destined to heavily influence my thinking up to this point.

Spooner is the radical's Radical.  He presents some of the most insightful and erudite arguments against government of all kinds, and especially constitutional governments, that I have ever encountered.  He makes the case that the individual is, for the most part, self-governing and doesn't need massive institutions full of blowhards making lofty speeches about unobtainable concepts.  Humans merely need a judiciary to mediate contract disputes among themselves.  The rest is complete bunk.  And when you finish reading his arguments, it is hard not to agree.

Writing at the time of the American Civil War, Spooner argues that any union from which the members cannot extract themselves is, in point of fact, slavery.  Thus, the Civil War did not end slavery, but rather expanded it to all citizens.  By denying the States the right to leave the Union, the federal government was basically stating that the Union was a compulsory thing, much like prison for felons, and therefore was not dedicated to liberty and freedom.

Furthermore, Spooner argues that the Constitution has no authority.  The phrase often used is the "social contract," in which the Constitution forms a contract between the People and the government, noting the powers granted and the structure desired.  However, as he points out, the Constitution does not contain several of the parts of a contract, such as Warranty and Performance, nor does it have a place for the Parties to signify their compliance.  In other words, it is not a contract and the government is not bound to behave in any particular way.  The only means by which the People can indicate their complicity is by voting, so that voting becomes not a right but a binding agreement to follow whatever they are told.

After reading Spooner, one is convinced that, instead of the People agreeing to a form of government, they have instead volunteered for slavery, because the government has no penalty for non-performance and it has the force of grievous bodily harm to force the People to comply.  Voting is simply a voluntary submission to this one-sided arrangement, since the individual is forced by threat of death to submit to government without the means or right to force government to heel.

In the case of the US Constitution, the only two remedies that the individual is given are either to vote, or to shoot.  There is no middle ground, since the government reserves the right to reject any law suit brought against it, and protest and petition - as has been shown again and again - is completely useless.  Even when one refuses to vote, one is still compelled to submit to the System, even though one has clearly demonstrated a lack of willingness.  

In polite circles, this is known as slavery.

As Spooner so adroitly points out, this is the fundamental flaw in Enlightenment thinking.  Just because an elite few draft a Constitution that becomes the Supreme Law of the Land does not compel the individual to comply with it if he or she does not sign the "social contract."  When any of the Parties to a Contract are forbidden under pain of death to withdraw from the agreement, it is no longer a Contract, it is servitude.  Since the masses are generally inculcated from birth with submission to the government, none of the People freely choose their slavery and none have any means to extract themselves from it, short of the use of arms.

Not only is it vital for the thinking person to read the Enlightenment writers to understand just how revolutionary and profound that philosophy was - and what the Illuminati were really trying to achieve - but it is equally important to read Lysander Spooner to understand exactly how the Snakes have usurped that amazing awakening, and turned humanity's greatest attempt at liberty and freedom into a tool for even deeper enslavement.

Spooner is a sobering read for the conservative and liberal alike.  He demonstrates clearly and succinctly the basic flaw in the thinking of both sides.  He also makes a solid case for enlightened anarchy and why we really don't need government at all.

Truly, the greatest weapon We the People possess is education.  It is the only means by which we can fight the true root of all evil: government.  As Henry David Thoreau so beautifully put it, "There are thousands striking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root."  Reading Spooner is to watch in amazement a man who is striking deep blows to the root.

Civilization's Waterloo

There's a weird kind of insanity sweeping the world.  It's a feeling of extreme anxiety.  Everyone seems wildly impatient, yet profoundly apprehensive about getting started.

The feeling seems to be coming from the top down.  Leadership, and by that I mean the "elite" power behind the babbling faces in the media, appears to be itching for a fight, yet terrified of getting one.  It's like a heavy-weight prize-fighter going up against a bantam-weight challenger and feeling dread that this may be the mouse that roared.

In the late 1600s and early 1700s, a group of French, British and German philosophers devised a rather amazing set of concepts that became the Enlightenment.  They proposed that a well-educated populace was more than capable of leading itself without the need for "divine" monarchies.  They also proposed that individuals were endowed at birth with rights that were above human ability to amend or edit.

Governments, they said, were devised by the masses to protect those basic rights from any individual or group that wanted to take them away.  This included secular and religious leaders and institutions who claimed "divine right" to do so.  In effect, every single person was his or her own "sovereign" within the confines of his or her property, which included one's self.

I am convinced that a group, founded in Ingolstadt, Germany in the late 1700s, that called itself the Bavarian Illuminati (lit. the Enlightened Ones), was founded based on the ideals of the Enlightenment and charged with undermining social institutions, especially the Roman Church and the various European monarchies, in order to bring about the Great Awakening, the New Atlantis or Golden Age, that they believed was possible using this revolutionary new philosophy.

Certainly, the US and French Revolutions can be traced directly to the work of this group.  World Wars 1 & 2, which did away with most of the monarchies and left the Roman Church severely neutered would easily fall within their charter.

But then the backlash happened.

The Bavarian Illuminati were infiltrated by loyalists and conservatives who liked the Old World Order.  They thrived using complete control and "divine right," especially the Roman Church, which under Pope Bonaface VIII, had declared dominion over the entire world and everything in it in the form of the Unam Sanctam.  They didn't take kindly to having all that wealth and privilege swept out from under them, and sovereign individuals in no way fit their worldviews.  As Mel Brooks so aptly put it, "It's good to be da king!"

Seeing their thousand-year reign of absolute power and privilege slipping away, these desperate folks made a deal with the Devil, so to speak.  They allied with forces that had no one's interests at heart.  As Alfred put it in The Dark Knight, "Some men just want to see the world burn."

These deposed kings made a deal with forces whose only motivations were to destroy everything.  They didn't want power or wealth, they wanted death and destruction.  The great kinds of old didn't understand this mentality and thought they could easily control the dark forces with carrots and sticks.

It didn't work and it set up an epic battle that began in the 20th century, with deeply entrenched forces on both sides that would never give up until they were ultimately victorious.  The dark forces infiltrated every secret society on both sides of the battle, and like the Sorcerer's Apprentice, each time one of these dark minions were cut down, the pieces would animate and come back in greater numbers.  And just when either side thought they had things under control, and would make their next move, everything would spiral out of control, making any plan, any action a parody of itself.

Thus, we find ourselves in a world no one understands.  We normal folks can't comprehend forces that do not have any motivation other than utter destruction.  The Old Powers and the New Powers unleashed something they can't control, and all their intricate and centuries-old plans fly quickly out of hand any time they try to advance their causes.

So here we sit, caught between two entrenched forces, one trying to reestablish "divine right," and the other seeking the "sovereign individual."  Both sides think their goal is to bring about the Great Rebirth of the Golden Age, yet both have built their redoubts on the foundation of a dark force neither can control.  Every attempt they make to advance their cause results in several steps backward.  It's a Chinese Finger Puzzle of massive proportions, and what was ultimately a European battle has now engulfed the world.

Suppose every act of kindness you made resulted in death and destruction.  Your natural instinct is to help people in need, but every time you do, you cause unspeakable pain and suffering.  How would you react?

That is where we stand.  Civilization is fighting its own greed and lust for power.  Two formidable and diametrically opposed ideals went to war with each other.  Out of desperation, one or both of them made a deal with a third force that neither could control, and which wanted neither to win.

It's as if we face another Tower of Babel.  Seeing that humanity will join together to "achieve whatsoever they imagine to do," the gods have stepped in, by our own invitation, to scramble our efforts and reduce everything to rubble once again.  It at least explains a great deal of the insanity and anxiety that we see in the world now, and to an even greater extent the insane brinksmanship that is evident in global events.

Everyone is gearing up for a war no one wants, with goals no one understands, using weapons and tactics that are doomed to fail.  It's the proverbial rock-and-a-hard-spot writ large.

If you've got a better explanation, I am all ears.

A Gift Unopened

Have you ever stopped to consider how much time, effort and wealth is squandered on leaders?  Or how utterly useless they are?

What is it about humans that make us go through so much toil and trouble to prop up people who are rarely better equipped to lead than anyone reading these words?  Most leaders in the world are no more capable of leading than any one of us, and yet we go through absurdly expensive selection rituals to find one person who can survive the process and then invest all our hopes and desires in them.

These leaders are no more intelligent or special than any one of us.  In many cases, they are far less so.  These leaders are little more than functionaries whose job it is to push papers and attend banquets.  So if the leaders are nothing special, then what is it about the rest of us that compels us to go through these rituals and then wait in vane for the leaders to fulfill the desires we have invested in them?

It's not for lack of trying that we haven't gotten rid of these useless figureheads.

The Enlightenment had a vision of the "sovereign individual."  All of the powers of the State were to be invested in each human being.  Through a social focus on education, the individual would be empowered to rule himself, and his home and property would be, in effect, his realm of supremacy.  In effect, every human of majority age would be a king or queen, a sovereign over their own lives and property, made benign and beneficent by access to learning never before made available to the masses.

Marx and Engels envisioned a system labelled Communism, where the State would ultimately be made irrelevant and the individual finally empowered to be their own supreme authority.  Few people realize this, since few have read The Communist Manifesto, but these men didn't want another system to replace something else, they wanted the ultimate demise of systems altogether, and created a roadmap to achieve it, if it were ever followed, which it has never been.

  Libertarianism is a sort of amalgam of these two, which is not difficult given the very similar goals.  The only difference between all sides is the means by which to achieve the target.

These three roadmaps were based on the Protestant Reformation and the idea that individuals were just as capable of reading the Bible and interpreting it for themselves, and didn't need a centralized power structure guarding the keys of wisdom and selecting compliant leaders to promulgate the system, rather than the common good.

What all of these concepts have in common is the empowerment of the individual over the collective and the need for leaders and authorities.  They are all predicated on a single event in history: the invention of movable type and Gutenberg's press.  By making books infinitely reproduceable, without the need for rooms full of scribes and caligraphers, prices plummeted and information became available to huge populations that were never able to access it before.

With one invention, the need for authorities and leaders was wiped out and the masses empowered with the same information as the elite.  This led to an explosion of creativity: the Industrial Revolution, the Enlightenment, the Scientific Revolution.  Every single person now had access to the same resources that were once the sole purview of the elite.

The internet is no less revolutionary.  Now cheaper and broader than at any time in history, individuals have access to vast libraries of information.  Books and data formerly only available to scholars and select elites is now just a click away, and most even downloadable to a personal library.  My own digital library probably contains a significant proportion of the library at Alexandria, and can be accessed without leaving my chair.

And yet...

People still turn to leaders and authorities.  We still prefer to have a perceived expert tell us what an author said, rather than going direct to the source.  We still think we are incapable of self-sovereignty and self-determination.  We still flock in annual rituals to select leaders who have spent inconceivable amounts of time and money to gain a position of power over us.

Are we so weak, so gullible that we can't see how much power we posses, and how little we require over us?  Has our educational system been so diluted that we don't see the power that is sitting right in front of us?  Are we so mis-led that we truly believe we cannot read and understand information for ourselves?

If so, then it is a sad commentary on both our leaders, and ourselves.  Our leaders have betrayed us by taking power away from us, rather than handing it out to us.  These leaders have destroyed our educational system, which is the key to personal empowerment.  They have made us more dependent on them, than on ourselves.  They have given us fish, rather than taught us how to fish.

The promise of such great movements as the Enlightenment is all but dead, even at the moment when we have been most empowered.  We would rather spend hours on YouTube watching empty content, than reading Plato and discussing it in online fora.

How sad.  How utterly wasted is this personal empowerment.

When authorities censor information, it is an admission of fear.  They are afraid that we will know what they know, and act on it.  If the history of the world for the past 500 years has taught us anything, it is that authorities will do anything to keep us ignorant and enslaved.

It is the greatest irony in history that at the very moment the power of the ages is at each of our fingertips, that we are the most controlled and enslaved people of all time.  And all because our leaders would rather we learn to put condoms on cucumbers, than to learn the basic skills of liberty and independence: grammar, logic and rhetoric.

In fact, if you search "trivium" on Google, the entire list of top references are for a pop band.

How we have squandered our birthright.

The Angst And The Apathy

Well, the proverbial cows are coming home to roost, to butcher a couple of metaphors at once.

What I consider to be one of the most cloying, namby-pamby and ridiculous movements in history is finally starting to pay dividends in the form of an entire US generation - termed the Millennials - who have no spirit or identity at all, outside of their complete lack of motivation.

About 20 years ago, the slimy liberal education system won out and instituted the "self-esteem" movement.  The idea was that the smarmy leaders of this movement (think bowel here) didn't want our little babies to ever feel left out, incapable or to get their feelings hurt, because this would damage their precious little psyches.  Instead, the reward system was reversed, and instead of glamorizing achievement and exceptional contribution, these sick psycho-babble numbnuts began rewarding every meaningless utterance and finger painting that the class morons made.

This has produced an entire generation of individuals who have no volition at all.  The smart ones are not motivated to achieve because there's no incentive, and the stupid ones are not motivated to try because they get rewarded for sucking up air and generating heat.

I never thought that I would agree with Martha Stewart on anything but recipes (occasionally), but when I saw this article the other day, I had to think that perhaps she does have some redeeming value.

Where I depart with Martha is that I don't entirely blame the kids.  I put most of the onus on the parents and the system they created.

Having bought into the Socialist programming, the parents completely forgot that Capitalism requires, nay demands competition.  By raising a generation of emotional basket cases who think that that they are owed the world, the parents have done a massive disservice to their progeny.

The whole Self-Esteem (bowel) movement posited that children receive permanent psychological damage from losing.  Games were modified or banned if there was the least possibility that someone could lose.  It also claimed that competition is harmful and everyone should receive everything in equal dollops, rather than the exceptional ones getting bigger dollops.

This had a two-fold effect on the kids.  The exceptional ones decided there was no point in striving to achieve, because no matter how well they did, the morons got the same attention, adulation and rewards.  Meanwhile, the morons came to believe that they didn't have to strive harder because they could sit in a corner and drool and get the same attention, adulation and rewards as the geniuses.

Result?  An entire generation who doesn't care.  The exceptional Millennials figure there's no point in trying and the moron Millennials believe they will receive all the benefits without trying.

Add to this rather toxic mix the Psycho-Babblists, who told everyone that they should never control their emotions.  They had to let it all out the very nano-second they felt anything.  They told us that if we controlled our emotions in favor of rationality, we would all end up damaged goods.

As a result, the Millennials are emotional basket cases, too.  The least little discomfort will cause them to break down in hysterical blobs.  They can't deal with human society out of fear they will face a situation that causes them emotional pain.  Without the capacity to reason, the Millennials are at the mercy of marketers and advertisers, who can easily push emotional hot buttons to make an entire class of society do whatever they want.

Put all this together with technology that allows these under-achieving, emotional kids to retreat from real interactions and disappear into a digital world of their own making.  The cell-phone zombies are people terrified of interacting with real life.  If they look up, they may encounter something that will cause emotional damage or require them to achieve a goal.  Instead, they retreat into Pokemon Universes.

Part of the collapse of the Soviet Union can be laid directly at the feet of Socialism.  The Russians had built a society in which no matter how much or how little one worked, one received the same (poor) return: everyone got the same squalid apartments, went to the same mediocre schools, and stood in the same lines to buy the same useless toilet paper.  There was no incentive to excel, so the economy ultimately collapsed because of it.

The US, being incapable of learning from history, pursued the same course.  It added the same Edu-Babble and Psycho-Babble that destroyed the Soviet system.  Now, the US is harvesting the first generation of useless and unmotivated individuals.

The Millennials want to enter to workforce at the upper management level, or better, have all the perks and pay without the work.  They want everyone to stop and acknowledge their emotional outbursts.  They want everyone to be absolutely equal, even if that means bringing everyone down to abject poverty, rather than lifting everyone up.

All of this came about because somewhere back, someone convinced the rest of us that Capitalism was evil.  Since people weren't educated enough to distinguish between Mercantilism and Capitalism, they were sold down the river and this Socialist rubbish became institutionalized in the US.  The Millennials are the consequence.

One of the most profound aspects of culture is that it requires a continuity of education from one generation to the next.  If the chain is broken for even one link, there is a very real risk that it can never be repaired.  With the Millennials, there is a very real risk that US culture has been destroyed forever.  If this generation is unable to overcome the failure of their parents to give them a proper education, then the nation may be irreparably damaged.

Given that Millennials are already without motivation, emotionally impaired and unable to educate themselves due to a lack of tools, the situation is dire.  If they are not able to change themselves, there doesn't seem to be a will or ability on the part of their seniors to do it, either.  As it exists now, the US is most likely lost.

Given the horrors that country has unleashed on the world in the past century, that may not be entirely bad.  However, the founding principles of the US were rooted in the Enlightenment, which represents the first time in history that humanity began to codify individual rights and promote concepts like equality under the law.  Since the US has squandered that rich heritage, it may be quite some time before another generation takes up the fight that brought down the monarchies of Europe and began the long fight to end slavery, both political and abject.

The Millennials, while seeming ridiculous and pitiful on the surface, may represent the end of the Enlightenment, at least for this epoch in history.  This is no doubt by design, and the ongoing effort to make those who believe in a malevolent "elite" out to be "conspiracy theorists" and thus unworthy of attention have effectively prevented the majority of people from seeing the problem, and rather dismissing it as pure fantasy.

Perhaps you think I am engaging in a bit of hyperbole, but I think the case cannot be overstated.  The Edu-Babble, Psycho-Babble and Socialist movements can be traced with some accuracy to various "elite" groups, and it seems rather certain that they have manipulated systems to install these programs to achieve the current ends.  The reader can find ample research on these matters.

The issue becomes one of trying to reverse the damage before it is too late.  Can an entire generation be remediated?  That remains to be seen.  Without the will or desire on their part, as well as the ability of the previous generations to repair the damage they have done out of (willful) ignorance, there is little more to do than sit back and watch the return of medieval servitude and the destruction of centuries of philosophical and societal advancement.

The damage has been done.  The question is, what will we do to fix it, if anything can be done?

Metaphysically Conjoined Twins

What are culture and morality?  The definitions of these two concepts have vexed philosophers and theologians for most of recorded history.  For a great many centuries, they were consigned to the realms of the secular and theorlogical, respectively.  Yet, they were inextricably united in the whole that we commonly call civilization.

At one time, the civil and theological powers were bound together, with one reinforcing the other.  In many cases, they were the same force, as in the millennium where the Roman Church ruled the throne, or even today were Shyaria has surfaced among certain political forces, so that secular and religious authority cannot be isolated.

As a species, we seem to have arrived at a unique nexus in history.  Largely beginning with the Protestant Reformation and into the Enlightenment Period (for Western culture, at least), a process was begun to separate the conjoined twins of culture and morals that is having profound consequences now 500 years later.  In the case of then and now, the upheaval is predicated on new forms of communication, and the resulting loss of control by the elite classes, the Priesthood, if you will.

Indeed, we must call them the Priesthood.  “They” is too vague and undefined.  What we are dealing with is a group of elites, who for centuries have wielded the combined swords of culture and morals.  Having watched their authority erode from the time of Gutenberg until now, we know from documents such as the 29 Protocols that this Priesthood is trying to reset society.  By creating a ‘culture’ where anything goes and there seem to be no rules or authority at all, the Priesthood is trying to bring civilization to its knees to use the opportunity to re-establish their wide-ranging controls over humanity. 

We are witnessing this deconstruction right now.  The crumbling secular structures of government, police powers, religion, education, and so forth, is leading inevitably towards a moment of catharsis in which we will collectively cry out for some authority to step in and save us from ourselves.  Enter the currently deposed Priesthood, who have sought to regain their former status as rulers and arbitrators since the moment we unwashed masses were able to own and read a copy of Gutenberg’s Bible.

Since the Enlightenment, Western culture has strived to locate a moral code and authority in Nature.  By taking the moral authority away from monarchs and religious institutions, they were forced to find some new force in Nature that established and enforced a set of Universal Morals.  The secular Western states and legal systems began to evolve as moral arbiters, legislating what God once declared through secret revelations to religious authorities.

In other words, the Priesthood was deposed from their central role of wielding cultural, secular and financial power over all aspects of life.  They were replaced by Jeffersonian concepts of Universal Equality and Sufferage, though the realization of those ideals is still evolving.

In some cases, moral authority was bestowed on society’s institutions by Nature’s God – a sort of amorphous and non-sectarian power.  In other cases, such as Soviet Communism, all religious authority was to be purged and a moral code was to be forced on society by a central authority, whose job it was to become obsolete and fade away.  Still others, such as Japan, Thailand and Britain, maintain a monarch invested with both secular and religious authority, though of necessity, the role of the monarch has been elevated to a point where they have almost no day-to-day control, due to their lofty natures.

In some cases, such as Russia, there is a swing back to a more central role of the Church in secular affairs, in the person of Putin and his cronies.  In the US and Indonesia, there are many voices proclaiming that those countries were founded on religious authority, though those voices are very wrong.  The mistake comes in not understanding what a republic is, and how a republic seeks to establish a core set of “rights” (a modern replacement for morals) that cannot be undone or modified by the governmental power.

In concept, these “rights” are to be upheld and enforced by all society.  Every member agrees that these “rights” are bestowed by some higher authority than government (undefined).  In practice, though, “rights” are malleable and mutable.  They are subject to changing moral standards.  They have become much closer to “privileges” than “rights”.  A perfect example is the “right” to bear arms, or the “right” to free speech.  Almost as fast as those “rights” are declared, people begin finding occasions when they are seemingly inappropriate, and so immediately begin the process of creating “privileges” out of “inalienable rights”.

Since the Enlightenment, we have found ourselves trying to define Universal Morality.  Is there indeed a set of rules that apply in all times and places?  We claim that it is wrong to kill, but almost in the same breath call self-defense an important exception to that rule.  We claim it is always wrong to steal, yet in the very next paragraph authorize taxes and civil forfeiture. 

In other words, cut loose from the religious authority, morality becomes a kind of contrast ratio, where a a sliding scale occasionally brings certain “rights” into view, while others fall outside the framework.  Relativism takes over and suddenly morality becomes defined by each and every individual’s circumstance and context.  What makes this unacceptable, though, is the fact that one can be punished in the future for a moral choice in the past that was within the framework then, but is not now.  This retroactive feature of the moral ration of relativism is what places us at the nexus, where we find ourselves now.

In other words, it is immoral for someone to torture and kill without some kind of socially defined process, unless you wear a uniform and/or carry some sort of “badge” that gives license to ignore the rules.

So we find ourselves at the crucial moment in history: the ancient Priesthood is fomenting chaos in order to insert themselves back into the throne;  secular power has been divorced from the “higher authority” that once kept it in check; the individual is without moral compass because the framework is constantly sliding around the scale of right and wrong.

Our civilization is coming to a mighty clash – a perfect storm of immovable objects and irrisistable forces – where the very old, the old, the new, and the very new will battle it out using the unique creation of the internet.  The result, in a century or so, will be the first truly Universal Moral Code, acceptable to all individuals. 

In the meantime, however, it will be nasty.  There will be many casualties as the various camps battle it out over who will ultimately control this new authority.  Some, such as the Religion, Illuminati and Capitalist camps, have suffered severe blows and are fighting back like cornered and wounded animals.  This epoch may end in a revolutionary conflagration that will leave nothing standing of our cultural past.

What emerges from this unique period in history will be the ruling paradigm for centuries to come, and we likely will not recognize the outcome.  Most of us reading these words will probably not be around to see the result.

However, we are obligated by our duty to future generations to begin talking about this battle and profoundly exploring the conceptual framework that will emerge from it.  In the quest to destroy something old, there must be a plan for replacing it.  This is the vital part of the current culture that is conspicuous in its absence.  We are at a unique point in history, with a unique tool called the internet.  Ultimately, we have two choices: destroy everything, or create something.

It is quite obvious that the old paradigms are doing a sufficient job of destroying things, so it is up to the rest of us to start creating