Carnies And Rubes, Part 4

The reader is encouraged to view Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3 for the complete argument.

Understand that by the nature of the medium, this series is necessarily cut short.  The Protocols is a rather long and detailed document with a multi-spectrum approach to global domination.  I will reiterate that despite the use of terms like "Jew" and "Goyim", the writer is not Jewish, and is most likely coming from some off-shoot of Roman Catholicism, which would perforce include the Knights Templar and the Western banking system.

Before concluding this analysis, it is necessary to look at one final passage, called Protocol No. 16.  This one deals with education and the take-over of universities to re-educate (stupefy) the masses.  The key paragraphs are:

"1. In order to effect the destruction of all collective forces except ours we shall emasculate the first stage of collectivism - the UNIVERSITIES, by re-educating them in a new direction. THEIR OFFICIALS AND PROFESSORS WILL BE PREPARED FOR THEIR BUSINESS BY DETAILED SECRET PROGRAMS OF ACTION FROM WHICH THEY WILL NOT WITH IMMUNITY DIVERGE, NOT BY ONE IOTA. THEY WILL BE APPOINTED WITH ESPECIAL PRECAUTION, AND WILL BE SO PLACED AS TO BE WHOLLY DEPENDENT UPON THE GOVERNMENT.

"8. In a word, knowing by the experience of many centuries that people live and are guided by ideas, that these ideas are imbibed by people only by the aid of education provided with equal success for all ages of growth, but of course by varying methods, we shall swallow up and confiscate to our own use the last scintilla of independence of thought, which we have for long past been directing towards subjects and ideas useful for us. The system of bridling thought is already at work in the so-called system of teaching by OBJECT LESSONS, the purpose of which is to turn the GOYIM into unthinking submissive brutes waiting for things to be presented before their eyes in order to form an idea of them .... In France, one of our best agents, Bourgeois, has already made public a new program of teaching by object lessons."

 It is as if the writer is describing events at Western universities, especially in the US, in the past decade from a vantage point 120 years ago.  The degradation of the Humanities and Sciences, the "safe spaces" and violent attacks on unsanctioned speech, the mindless repetition on mantras (misogynist, racist, sexist, etc.), and the demonisation of "white patriarchal" history all fall neatly into these two paragraphs.

It is incredible to believe that a document that accurately predicts the events and trends of the last century is a forgery, as is often claimed.  Even the very abridged sample of the text given in this analysis shows that is far too prescient to be dismissed lightly, and a thorough reading brings up many more such parallels.

It is my contention that this document was purposely planted in the public domain for several reasons.

First, we know from experience that conspirators relish placing their plans in people's faces as a means of toying with the aware individuals.  This is true both of mass murderers (the recent "Facebook killer" for one) and global cabals.  This kinds of behavior grants the perpetrator a feeling of power and superiority, in that their plan is publicly known, yet they cannot be caught.

Second,  the liberal use of terms like "Jews", "Zion" and "Goyim" conveniently deflects blame onto a target group, while allowing the perpetrators to openly demonize and discredit the document, thus hiding in plain sight.  Because of the target, one can easily envision elements of the Roman Church, notorious for its hatred of Jews over centuries, planting this document both to publicize its agenda, as well as place blame on a despised ethnic group.  This would also explain the Church's support of the Nazis, whose philosophy was based in part on The Protocols.  Not only did the Third Reich match much of the agenda put forth in the document, but its persecution of the Jews was equally desirable.  Furthermore, the location of discovery on a park bench in Odessa, the Ukraine, provided another layer of deflection, if needed, by implicating elements of the Orthodox Church.

Third, The Protocols' overwhelming focus on gold, economics and control of the money supply would implicate some group deeply involved in banking.  In the West, this points directly at the Knights Templar, the Knights Hospitaller and the Knights of Malta, all three historically linked to the formation and promotion of the Western banking system.  Certainly, the Roman Church feared the Templars enough to launch a pogrom on the group in the 1300s, and research has shown strong evidence that they went underground and continued to influence financial systems in the West, perhaps even into the present day.

Fourth, even a superficial reading of The Protocols leaves one with the strong impression that the history of the past century and even current events are indeed being directed by some entity that prefers to remain hidden, except that its agenda can be clearly discerned running like a thread through so many influential events.

After reading The Protocols, it is also instructive to study the history of the demise of European monarchies and rise of fascism/socialism in the 20th century, as well as to re-examine authors such as Henry Ford, Aldous Huxley, George Orwell, and T. S. Eliot.  The many parallels and similarities are inescapable.

In conclusion, it should be clear now that The Protocols have been purposely maligned in order to both hide their agenda in plain sight, as well as provide sufficient distractions for those seeking the responsible party.  It is important for the reader to carefully guard against being misled, as that is a primary purpose of this document.

It is my purpose in writing this series to destigmatize research in this area.  By not allowing oneself to be distracted with the need to blame any one group, the document provides both predictive power to see the direction of current events, and a means to fight back against this massive fraud and attempt to enslave humanity.  It is also possible to detect the reasons why so many thinkers and researchers perceive panic on the part of the elite, as they struggle to maintain humanity on the path they have set for us.

In the realm of free thought and speech, there is no voice so offensive that we cannot learn something from it.  The fact that The Protocols appear to be manifesting themselves on the nightly propaganda broadcasts makes it all the more important that the aware mind investigate any avenue that provides understanding and defense against the onslaught.  It also makes us more sympathetic to those who have been ensnared in this agenda unwittingly.  The Progressive movement is not entirely responsible their plight, though we cannot hold them blameless for failure to educate themselves.

In the spirit of free inquiry, I implore the reader to place The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion on his reading list.  If nothing else, it provides historical perspective on many key events in the past 100 years.  At best, it provides a way forward in fighting a pernicious evil that has usurped humanity's growth for far too long.  It also provides tests for identifying the works of this evil in current events, and like a kitchen light, causes the cockroaches to scatter.

It is an old axiom that naming one's fears takes away their power.  By clearly identifying what haunts us, we are empowered to defeat it.  Demystifying our global predicament is a major step in correcting it.  It is my contention that The Protocols hold a major key to doing just that.

It Ain't Art Till It Hurts

In my career, I have been a writer, producer, director, actor, designer, sculptor, painter, poet, musician, composer, cinematographer, videographer, photographer, critic, and reviewer.  I have studied art, art history, theater, film, and language.  I have been a patron and collector.  And in every case, I have assiduously avoided glorifying the profane and shocking my audience.

I love art.  I am an artist.  I create provocative things that are pleasant and edify.

I hate contemporary art.

I detest Mark Rothko and Roy Lichtenstein.  I would kindle my hearth with Jackson Pollock if I could afford the price of admission.  I find Andy Warhol detestable and pedestrian.  I think much of Edward Albee is disposable.  I find much of Philip Glass' later work to be a parody of his earlier genius.  And pretty much anything produced in any art form since the late 70s is vile and corrupt.

That's the short answer.

At some point in the history of art, beginning around the turn of the 20th century, art took a dark and foreboding turn into the nihilistic and desperate.  With the decay of the education system across the board, artists were forced to do anything to get attention, though once gotten, they had no idea what to do with it.  So they pissed on crucifixes, shat on canvasses, shot spastic out-of-focus rubbish, and pounded their tail ends on keyboards like children unable to express themselves with good diction.

The critics, unable to utter coherent phrases, oohed and ahhed over these sophomoric tantrums as if they were timeless masterpieces.  They convinced the well-heeled to drop obscene amounts of money on these trash heaps, which they did because they, too, were uneducated and slovenly.

Across the aesthetic spectrum, crass practitioners reinforced each other's errors.  The idiots created rubbish, which the critics hailed as genius, which the nouveau riche bought in a craven attempt to look chic.

All the while, the uncultured cretins pressed the concept that art was not objective, that art was "expression", and that art was nearly anything removed from context and well lit with a glass of wine and a few slices of over-ripe cheese.

The fact is, art is a language that has grammar and vocabulary developed over centuries of human experience.  It can be spell-checked and graded just like any high school essay.  Most especially, once you are trained in the language, you recognize slang and poor usage immediately.

When schools (at any level) are stressed financially, without fail the first thing to be jettisoned is the art department.  Not that it matters much, since most art teachers are clueless about the fundamentals, nor how to relate them to the world at large.

Most people anymore are unaware that art has its own grammar, vocabulary and tropes, like any language.  It should be taught as a language and used as a language.  It has genres and traditions, like any literary system, and it has a profound effect on society because it transcends boundaries like no other language can.

The grammar of art includes balance, harmony, rhythm, variety, emphasis, gradation, movement, pattern, and proportion.  These create the syntax of art - the composition of the visual sentence into which meaning is poured.

The vocabulary of art is space, line, shape, form, color, texture, and value.  These are the words that carry meaning and emotion.  They create depth, breadth, heighth, weight, and significance.

On top of these are the tropes, such as myth, legend, history, religion, humanity, and dozens of other tales and emotions.

At best, contemporary art is a jumble of vocabulary without structure or meaning.  In the case of Jackson Pollock and many others, it is literally letters and words completely out of context, highlighting form without function, and entirely devoid of meaning.

By the time the art world had devolved to Andy Warhol, art had become glorification of common objects far beyond any true significance.  At this point, the mundane and profane had triumphed over the aesthetic and beautiful.  It was akin to speaking jibberish interlaced with profanities.  In other words, it was not only meaningless, it was offensive.

The purpose of this devolution of art is horrific in its simplicity.  It is a concerted effort to reduce the human mind to its most base level and remove any possibility of rising above it.  Beethoven has become Snoop Dogg.  Michaelangelo has reduced to Millie Brown.  William Shakespeare has rotted out to Hamilton.

Make no mistake, this has been a planned train wreck.  If humans are unable to understand the great works of the past, much less approach or exceed their artistry, then they will be entirely too stupid to challenge the ruling class.  How gratifying it must be for the Master Class to profit from the swine wallowing in the slime, literally immersing cultural icons in feces and urine and celebrating it as transcendent.

Soon, if now already, humanity will be cut off from its heritage, unable to grasp the basics, much less interpret the message.  It does not matter the medium - whether words or paint, stone or music.  Once divorced of history and culture, the masses become nothing more than malleable objects and playthings of the self-appointed gods.

If you have children or grandchildren, it is vital that they receive proper education in the arts - all arts.  They must be taught the grammar and vocabulary of art, no matter what medium.  They should not be allowed to graduate without having written a story, acted in a play, recited a poem, thrown and fired a pot, painted a canvas, and sung a song.  They should know not only the structure of the language, but at least have spoken a few paragraphs of the great masters.

In fact, when was the last time you went to the museum, enjoyed a play, or attended the symphony?  The best teacher is example.

Hate The Hate - Illogic 101

Your honor, respected members of the jury, I intend to prove that the defendant committed an illegal act called assault on my client.  I further intend to prove that because the defendant hates plaid Bernuda shorts, he committed a MORE illegal act - what we call a hate crime.

Among the most absurd and idiotic concepts to roll out of Western culture in the past few decades is the concept of "hate crime".  What the West has devolved into is a war of adjectives, where such incompatible ideas as "free speech" and "hate speech" can be held in one's mind simultaneously.

The concept of "hate crime" has two components: feelings and greater wrong.  Think of "hate crime" as similar the to Catholic Church's concepts of venial and mortal sins, some sins are greater than others.

Let's just examine the crime of murder for a moment.  All murders involve the means, motive and opportunity to commit the crime.  These are the three things investigators try to prove in an investigation.

Murder is further divided into degrees (first, second and third) and manslaughter, or crime of passion.  First degree murder requires the existence of mens rea, or the guilty mind.  In other words, a murderer is aware he is committing a crime.  It also requires malice aforethought.  Malice.  Hatred, Anger.

Long established Western law already assumes that a murderer has malice aforethought.  They are committing a crime out of hate or anger, and taking the time to think about it in advance.

So how in the hell can someone commit a hate crime if hate is already part of the equation?  If a murderer kills a black man because he hates blacks, that is a motive.  The hate part is already included in the definition of the crime.

Furthermore, if the punishment for murder is life in prison or death, then how can convicting someone of a hate crime make the punishment even worse?  The whole concept from top to bottom is contradictory, and is nothing more than a social hot-button used to try and convict someone in the media before they receive a trial.

In the case of hate speech, we have even more contradictions.  In this case, it is not unusual to hear someone rail in support of free speech, but then condemn hate speech.  How does a human hold these contradictions in a single brain without exploding?  Either speech is free, or it is not.  There can be NO exceptions for speech which one doesn't like.

Hate speech is also a completely arbitrary thing.  What you consider hateful could be music to my ears.  There is no established criteria for "hate", any more than there are solid legal definitions for "love".  Emotions cannot be defined or categorized.  They are irrational and as such apply differently to different people at different times.

If I allude to William Shakespeare by saying we should kill all the lawyers, have I committed a crime?  I have taken no action and caused no one harm.  I've only expressed an opinion, at the most extreme, and quoted a literary passage at the most benign.  And even if we assume that I could commit a crime through speech, is it worse because I have singled out one group, rather than insulting everyone everywhere?

Perhaps the vast majority of society agrees with me that we should kill all the lawyers.  Have I committed hate speech if the majority agree?  Or is hate speech only reserved for a select few or privileged minorities?

In the extreme case, I could be charged with hate speech against hate crimes for what I've written here.  It sounds absurd now, but the definition is completely arbitrary and is subject to the whims of society.

Here in the Muslim-dominated world, there is something similar.  It is called blasphemy.  It is an arbitrary designation for speech that assumes the accuser can speak for God.  The accuser pretends to know that God is offended by another's speech and can convict and even kill the accused based on this conceit without ever having to place God in the witness stand to find out if he was offended.

The West is far more secular and blasphemy laws went out quite some time ago because they were so absurd and arbitrary.  However, hate crime has taken its place and, like blasphemy laws, is used to persecute people that are hated by the establishment.

And here we come to the crux of the problem.  Hate crimes are not actually crimes, but rather a means of persecution against individuals or parties that are out of favor with the establishment.  Any CONTENT of speech that the establishment fears can be shut down by simply labeling it "hate".  There is no formal definition of criteria, just the emotional appeal to the masses.

Since the masses, on the whole, are quite stupid, they are easy to stir up with trigger phrases like hate crime or hate speech, and the establishment can rest assured that no one will think critically about what is actually being done.

Throughout time, governments and rulers have always come up with some term to punish rivals and thinkers.  Whether it's blasphemy, hate crime, sedition, or any of a number of other terms, most people only pay lip service to free speech and never internalize it enough to see when freedom is being attacked.

Hate crime is indeed a crime, but not in the sense of describing a murder or speech, but in the sense of how it is used to silence criticism in ostensibly free societies.  The definitions are vague for a purpose, so that the finger of accusation can be turned on whatever group or ideas are out of favor with the ruling class.

It is time to recognize hate crime for what it is, a crime of hate against the disfavored members of society.  The entire concept should be eradicated, or at the very least turned back upon the ruling elites, for it is they who are actually committing crimes of hate.

As I've said before, a revolution does not occur from within a system.  That is reform.  A revolution occurs when those outside the system see the criminal behavior of those within and tear down the entire system in favor of something more amenable to actual freedom.

If nothing else, hate crime is only a means to create favored victim classes in society to provide entertainment for the elites - and safety by redirecting and venting unrest.

Home On The Range

If you've never had the job of taking care of a herd of cows, then you probably are unaware of the work involved to run a large group of animals that you intend to sell or kill at some point,

I spent some part of my youth as an actual cowboy.  We had about 400 head of cattle, more or less depending on the time of year.  Even during the school year, there was work to do before and after school, moving the herd from field to field to prevent over-grazing, rounding them up for shots and parasite dusting, throwing hay and feed in the winter months, and hauling cows to the auction on Saturday mornings in Schulenberg or Gonzales.

Folks don't realize how much work is involved here.  Four hundred animals is a lot of time and effort, and most of it is rote chores that even the animals get used to.  They know when it's time to go to another field, or get their shots, or line up for slaughter, and they willingly assemble for the events.

This morning, I saw two articles that made me think back on the cowboy days.  The first said that 25% of fopolledlks  thought robots would make better politicians, the other article said the average American dies $62,000 in debt.  I don't know about you, but I didn't even have to go further than the headlines to start seeing the correlations to running cattle.

The first thing is that we no longer have surveys, we have polls.  Have you noticed that?  It may seem like a subtle difference, but bear with me.  A survey - to me anyway - implies asking people what their opinion is.  Lord knows all free people have opinions.  A poll, however, is (in cowboy talk) what you do when you cut the horns off of cows so they can't hurt you.  Getting head-butted by a cow is painful enough, but when it includes hard spiky things that puncture your flesh and rip up organs, well that's quite a different story.

Basically, polling is disarming a cow.  There are any number of ways to do it - fire, saw, chemicals, breeding - but the end result is a much less dangerous cow.

The next thing I though about was how great it would have been to have robots do all the dirty work.  They don't get tired, feel overworked, need meals, and they always do the job right because their decision-making processes are precisely controlled.  All that would be needed is to train the cows to follow robots instead of cowboys - and a couple of good dogs - and life would be so much more relaxing on the farm - at least for the herd owners.

The next thing I though about is the fact that each cow represents a pretty hefty investment.  Even breeding them, which you'd think gives you free cows, requires selecting which cows and bulls to breed to give you the best results, and that requires separating the herd into breeding pens.  Plenty of work to do.

Then there's the hay, which you have to grow, bail and collect in a barn, or buy and store in a barn.  And you'll want to supplement the grass and hay with molasses-covered cottonseed hull, or Purina pellets for extra nutrition and to fatten up the cows before auction to make sure you get the most money out of them.

In any event, those cows owe you quite a bit of money by the the time you sell them, so you wait for the best market prices and try to keep the cows as fat as possible so they paid off in the end.

Yep, reading those two articles reminded me a lot of being a cowboy.  They also reminded me a lot of modern humans.  From a certain point of view, we are all cattle.  We need to be polled to make us less dangerous.  We need to be rounded up from time to time to get our shots and be deloused.  We need to be moved from field to field to make sure we don't overgraze.  We need to be kept nice and fat so we fetch a good price at auction.

If you can train folks to follow robots, it sure frees up the Masters quite a bit.  They don't have to worry about the cowboys going rogue or taking the wrong day off.  In fact, you can automate the entire process of herding the masses so you can sit back on the porch and drink mint juleps and talk about the weather.

And if Americans are dying thousands of dollars in debt, then WHOOPIE!  That means you've completely harvested all the value out of them.  Nothing to pass on to the next generation to give them a head-start.  That little bit of debt doesn't matter, since you created the money out of nothing and you get to reclaim anything of value from their estate through taxes and foreclosures.

Yessiree, we are all cows, folks.  We are herded and maintained just like cows.  We are disarmed and castrated, just like cows.  We are fed and jabbed just like cows.  We are bought and sold, just like cows.  And just like cows, our entire lives are nothing more than profit centers for the Ranch Owners.

Hell, we even get branded with IDs and numbers, just like cows.

This System is ubiquitous.  It is everywhere. You cannot be a little bit part of the herd without being all in.

So tell me now there's nothing wrong with the System.  Tell me now that there are people and ways to fix the System.  Tell me there's no conspiracies or elites.  Sorry, but if you've ever taken care of a herd of cattle, then you know exactly what our world is like: 200-some-odd ranches with 7 billion cows and certain rich ranchers trying to buy up the rest of the competition.

It's a fact of life and you either accept it or try to change it.  There really is no middle ground.

When Terror Strikes

It is both shocking and entertaining.

Shocking because I never expected the Empire to collapse so quickly and over such piddling issues, and entertaining because of the circus of finger-pointing and the puffball Street Meat Media hyperventilation all over itself.

I guess I always figured the US would collapse by degrees - a little here, and little there - and that the issues would be a bit more serious, say like the economy or something.  Never in my wildest dreams did I think that the collapse would be over completely fabricated issues with the internal factions spying on each other.  This show makes Watergate look sedate by comparison.

Don't know about you, but as far as I am concerned, the whole Russian thing is a red herring.  I mean, hell, the Obama State Department set up the meeting between Jeff Sessions and the Russian ambassador while Sessions was a Senator.  If he had been mentioned as a Trump appointee at the time, it was only in the most theoretical sense.

In any case, meeting ambassadors is hardly a nefarious activity.  I've met the Russian ambassador to Indonesia on numerous occassions, even going to the official residence a couple of times for function and attending National Day celebrations one year.  It's part of the job on both sides to entertain and be entertained, perhaps even discuss a little business.

Everyone pointing a finger has one pointed right back.

The real cause of all this, and the thing that not one breathless puffball has or will mention is the fact that over 1,700 pedophiles have been arrested in the past two months, and the arrests are getting higher and higher up the political food chain.

Yes, the real cause for all this wailing and gnashing of teeth is that the (very) long-standing network of baby-bangers and kiddie killers is under dire threat by the Trump DOJ and FBI.  Trump has put his finger on a live wire and the current is coming from all directions in the halls of power.

The pedophile issue cuts across party lines, involves big names at all levels of power, and most shockingly gets into boardrooms and bankster dens all over the world.  The evil bastards involved will rather collapse the US and bring the entire world to its knees than have their dirty little secret get exposed.  If it gets loose, it will bring down royalty, celebrities, captains of industry, and nearly every center of power and control in the world.

It's that serious.
44
Pedophilia among the upper echelons serves several purposes.  One, it demonstrates to themselves how much power they have, to be able to snatch children off the streets, use them for pleasure and kill them with impunity.  Two, it seals the inner circle as a bond of silence, since no one would dare rat on another out of fear that they all will go down.  And three, it serves a dark purpose as a kind of majick, which regardless of what us reasonable people think, they actually take very seriously.

In the first case, these (for lack of a better term) people isolate themselves with their own hubris.  Thinking they have command over life and death, and the ability to use human beings for their entertainment, they feel powerful and above all others on the planet.  The one major weakness they have, though, is the ever-present fear of being exposed, and so they seek to expand the bondage to as many people in as many fields as they can to prevent exposure.

In the second case, pedophilia creates a bond of allegiance among these creatures.  Their dark secret becomes their feeling of belonging, since their degenerate personalities make them abhorrent to most of us.  Like anyone, they crave a sense of belonging, but instead of creating the belonging out of fraternity or genuine like, they must use this horror as a shared experience to create a foul replica of normal relationships.

In the final case, these creatures have so deluded with their feelings of superiority that they have come to attribute their success to the imbibing of "spirit" from the lives they destroy.  They have convinced themselves that a causal relationship exists through some form of ritualistic soul eating, thus reinforcing their belief system.

This system has existed for centuries, maybe even millennia, and has been used to create and reinforce a tight cabal of slimy characters who have remained hidden due to a successful campaign of mutual fear.

However, beginning with the revelations of abuse within the Roman church, and spreading through the Jimmy Saville episode in the UK, and now coming to light with PizzaGate, the walls are closing in on these sub-human creatures.  So afraid are they of exposure that they will create any diversion, including war and mayhem, to keep the shadow across their depravity.

Stanley Kubrick had intended a series of films depicting and exposing these grotesque characters.  Full Metal Jacket dramatized the mind control.  The Shining showed us the initiation.  Eyes Wide Shut exposed the ritualistic nature.  The final film, A.I.: Artificial Intelligence would have thrown light on the pedophilia, though after his death Steven Spielberg quickly obfuscated the theme with an inane oddly symbolic Pinocchio story with the subtle message that it was all lies.

As rational and stable humans, we are now tasked with ignoring the diversionary tactics of Russiophobia, Muslim invasion and economic collapse.  These are all intended to prevent us from looking in the one direction that can and will destroy the entire cabal: pedophilia.  The fact that the Street Meat Media have steadfastly ignored PizzaGate and the 1,700 arrests in the past two months is a sure sign that the elite are terrified and all the furor around and against Trump has, at its core, genuine terror on the part of the cabal.

Trump is truly immaterial to us, though he is a lightning rod for them.  If Trump's only positive effect on the world is to expose the pedophile network that is the ruling elites, then history will consider his presidency to have been a roaring success.

We normal humans have a bias against exposing deep, painful truths.  We would rather busy ourselves with daily life and ignore the elephant squatting squarely in the middle of the room.  However, our species can never advance until we have finally and completely eradicated this pus at the center of society's festering wound.

If you live in the States, then take a hard look at the 2016 election map at the beginning of today's column.  Notice those isolated blue areas.  Those are the centers of the network for the Western Hemisphere: the LA entertainment/media center, and the New York banking center.  Then look at the red areas.  Those are the normal humans who must be informed and activated to keep pressing the issue, no matter how much pain the cabal inflicts on us.

This is the key to the true revolution.   

Asking The Right Questions

In concept, I have no problem with robots.  The idea of having tireless machines doing the necessary labor to free up humans for higher pursuits sounds vaguely Star Trekky and Utopian.

Suppose robots tilled the soil, picked the fruits, delivered it to your door.  Suppose they built our houses, trimmed our lawns and rattled the pots in the kitchen.  Suppose they operated the generators, purified the water and produced our clothing.  Suppose anything we wanted or needed was delivered promptly to our doors around the clock every day of the year by machines that needed no sleep or vacations.  Suppose robots did everything for us so that we were completely freed of drudgery and able to pursue self-enrichment and art for the rest of our lives.

There'd be no need for money.  Who would you pay?  Everything is done by self-repairing and -replicating machinery.  The farms and factories would run themselves with virtually zero human input - oh, maybe the occasional check-in to see if the robots' self-diagnostics were sufficiently tweaked.  Maybe a handful of folks, on a rotating basis, to scan the error reports for problems the machines couldn't handle.

If there was no human labor, no person giving up a part of their life and talents to produce some necessity, and everything one could imagine came to the door within minutes of ordering, what would things cost?  After all, machines would mine the raw materials, refine them, recreate and train themselves, constantly maintain and upgrade the infrastructure of civilization - and all without a human even batting an eyelash in the direction of manual labor.  What would there be to pay for?

We wouldn't need governments because the machines would be self-regulating.  We wouldn't need banks or financial institutions.  There would be no markets to trade goods that are automatically distributed according to whatever is needed at any given location.

Machines would feed themselves and the rest of us with electricity that they produce as a matter of course.  They would refine, process and package our goods, collect the trash, recycle it and produce something else with the materials.

The machines would routinely maintain parks and recreation areas.  They would scurry out at night to repair roads, cars and aircraft every night, so that the next day, everything was in perfect operating order.  They would operate the amusement parks, constantly swim around the oceans clearing trash and pollutants.  They would fan out across the Solar System, using whatever resources locally available to pre-build colonies that we would blithely inhabit once they were fully operational.

Humans would thus be free to study and learn, think and create art, explore and aspire.  No longer constrained by government or labor, humanity would blossom into a benign race of hyper-intellectuals, focused entirely and for life on developing our minds and souls, each of us becoming demi-gods aided and abetted by semi-autonomous creations.

When you think about it, it sounds wonderful.  There would be no elites, everything we need and want would be provided in lavish amounts completely free of cost of any kind.  Money would vanish, becoming a quaint old idea.  Every individual would be free to consume the entire creative output of humanity and then add new concepts and ideas to the greater good.

It sounds wonderfully idyllic.  It sounds too good to be true.

We must assume two possible outcomes: 1) all of humanity, collectively and individually, grows to the next level of self-actualization, or 2) an elite determines that it is the sole beneficiary of this paradise and the rest of us need to be eliminated.

Given the history of humanity, I suspect the latter scenario is the most likely.

Whatever the outcome, we have taken the first steps towards this destination.  The EU has passed legislation granting robots "electronic personhood," and the concept of universal guaranteed income is being bandied about as a solution for displaced labor.

At some point on this path, money must become obsolete; after all, who needs cash when everything costs nothing?  Governments and corporations become redundant, because the production and distribution systems are completely automated.  Eventually, a whole bunch of people become unnecessary to those who fancy themselves the rulers - and certainly more valuable than the rest of us.

It seems to me the real conversation here is NOT what will happen to humanity when the machines take over, but what will happen to the elites?

If there is no need to governments, money or economy even vaguely resembling what we know now, doesn't that really make the elites redundant?  Doesn't the complete democratization of knowledge and necessities really mean there is no place for an elite?

Perhaps we are now witnessing the end of Controllers.  Perhaps the fear and loathing many of us have noticed on the parts of the elite is really the horrifying realization on their part that they are quickly becoming superfluous buffoons who are powerless to control resources, and thus the rest of us.  What happens when there are only a few thousand self-proclaimed and out-moded elites and a few billion of the rest of us who are suddenly freed from the day-to-day grind and have time to think, read and ponder?

Suppose the Neo-Populist movement sweeping the world is just the opening salvo across the bow of the elite class, and that at some level - mostly subconscious at this point - we all realize what is coming and what it could mean for all of us?

Perhaps we are asking the wrong question here.  It is not what the elites will need with us when the future arrives, it is what we will need with elites when we are all members of that class?

What Dreams May Come

Elections are basically akin to head transplants - the face changes but the system remains the same.  I say this because there is an increasing use of the term "revolution" in reference to the Trump Phenomenon.  It is not.  It is what one might consider a last-ditch effort to reform a system from the inside, which is virtually impossible.

Political systems, like most human organizations, calcify over time; that is, a significant number of people at the top, who have benefitted most from the system paradigm have a vested interest in keeping that system in place.  Those who wish to maintain systems as they are were once called "conservatives," and those who wish to reform systems were once called "liberals."  That was before the corruption of the language by media and political forces.  In either case, the two sides agree that the fundamentals of the system should survive, and what is disputed are the interpretations and implementations within the system.

The important distinction is that neither of these two sides whats to change the core beliefs of the system.  Everyone agrees that the central assumptions of the system are valid.

The revolutionary is the one who wants to completely dispose of the system altogether and install a new one.  Obviously, this is a radical move, for it dismantles all of the core assumptions and beliefs in favor of a completely new paradigm.  The American, French, Texas and Cultural Revolutions can truly be called such, since they did away with all of the original paradigm and installed newly formed ones from "whole cloth."

The Trump Phenomenon, and its predecessors like Ron Paul, Ross Perot, etc., are "conservative" movements.  They seek to restore a former interpretation of the ruling paradigm.  This is not a revolutionary act, so much as a reforming or restoring one.  In other words, the battle is not over the underlying structure, but rather over semantics and interpretations.  As the Trump campaign slogan strongly implies, the basic idea is not to destroy the system, but to "conserve" an older implementation of it.

It is fair to say that Trump has presented few specifics on how he plans to return to a perceived state of prosperity.  Instead, he is supported by a broad and non-centralized base of interests who feel the system has gone askew and no longer benefits the greater good, but rather supports an increasingly narrow group of "insiders."  This is an interesting phenomenon because it means the movement cannot be decapitated.  If you remove the candidate, the movement behind him will continue and likely strengthen.  This, more than anything, is what is terrifying the current set of insiders.

Clinton, on the other hand, is supported by a cult of personality.  It is the person, rather than the ideology, that is the central rallying point.  Like the Bernie Sanders phenomenon, removing the candidate would certainly mean the rallying point would simply evaporate.  Even more basic, Clinton supporters feel they are part of the "inside" group and will derive a direct benefit from her personal leadership.

Contrast this with Trump, who appears to have gelled a broad set of beliefs that the system is being improperly implemented and needs to be repaired.  This set of beliefs does not depend on Trump, but rather has been catalyzed by him.  With every perceived success he has, the movement feels empowered and is increasingly not dependent on the man, but on the knowledge that there is a large and powerful group who feel the same.

What all this implies is that a Clinton loss would leave a lot of grumbling, but eventual capitulation.  Conversely, a Trump loss will likely further energize the support behind him.  In other words, the Clinton centralized personality cult would submit and eventually fall in line, whereas the Trump phenomenon would further energize, even without a central leadership figure.  Clinton supporters would offer little resistance, but Trump supporters may well become the seeds of a true revolution.

I say revolution advisedly, because this kind of movement cannot be stopped.  There is no leadership structure and no centralization of power.  There is only a broad set of unifying concepts that have already been empowered just by the fact that Trump has come this far, thus clearly demonstrating the power of the movement behind him.

The US election is only one of the most visible movements.  The symptoms of broad-based revolutionary spirit has been evident in the Brexit vote, the Catalonia independence movement, the German AfD surge, the wildly popular Russian nationalism (in the person of Putin), Duterte in the Philippines, and the growth of the Texas and other state independence movements in the US.  The establishment has realized all too late that not only can it not control this global phenomenon, but any attempts to attack and behead it only increases the strength and resolve of this force.

A Trump loss, much to the horror of the establishment, will likely energize his support base, and most certainly if there is any hint of impropriety.  The usual tools, such as thought control through "political correctness" and use of media to steer and refocus the narrative are not working.  This "silent majority" have moved past the regular channels and have seen similar movements score victory after victory around the globe.

Proof of this has been evident in the media's attempts to focus on Trump the man.  They have ridiculed him mercilessly, and it repeatedly backfires.  Conversely, the Clinton narrative has been completely focused on her personal health, public record and scandals.  There have been no Wikileaks on Trump, but the leaks on Clinton have dogged her campaign.

I believe that the establishment has only one choice, and that is to let Trump win and do as much damage control until the opportunity comes to restart its agenda.  They are perfectly aware that a misstep at this point could easily lead to a full-on actual revolution, in which the very system they are jealously protecting is completely destroyed and a new paradigm and elite evolve.

In hindsight, I would speculate that the deciding factor was the elite installing Obama in the White House.  They obviously felt that by putting a black man in the hot seat and giving him a Nobel Peace Prize mere days into his first term would placate the masses.  On the contrary, it solidified the opposition and the phenomenon metastasized globally.

It remains to be seen exactly how desperate the establishment is at this point, but given how close they've come to their globalist goals, one must assume that they are truly panicked and in a corner.  Like any wild beast, they are now unpredictable and demonstrably willing to use deadly force to maintain their privileged positions.

The next month should prove most interesting.  If this were a game of poker, and in many ways it is, then the time has come to start showing cards.  The bet has been called and they had better have four aces, because a bluff would mean certain defeat and probably an end to the corporatist/globalist movement for decades to come, if not forever.

Tax Man Be Damned

Marco Polo

Folks who've been around here for a while already know that I am back into a major project, thus causing my unusual silence this past week.

Never one to hold still, I am now partnering up with some good folks to bring cabaret to Jakarta - something heretofore unknown.  In fact, a search for "cabaret in Jakarta" will return one hit for one show on one night last year at a rented venue.  Well, we can't have that, so I'm going to open a new venue with original shows and create a whole new form of cabaret unique to Indonesia.

But in the meantime...

I am really cheesed off at the whole damn tax situation - not just here, but globally.  I'm even more cheesed off at those slave-minds who dribble platitudes like, "Gotta pay your fair share," and "Taxes allow the government to operate."

For the latter, one EXCELLENT reason to banish taxes altogether.  Never met a government worth the price of admission.  All they are is make-work for folks who don't create anything but paper-trails and headaches.

As for the former, I could get hopping mad about that one.  My fair share of what?  Murder, mayhem, lying, cheating, corruption, graft, and a dozen other choice accusations.

Taxes do not pay debt, they pay private corporations called "Central Banks" for the pleasure of using their money.  They can issue it in great huge piles and fast as they want to, and we all pay the price in inflation and debt service for the rest of our natural lives (and maybe beyond).

Taxes are a mechanism for social control.  They are a means to bend your personal habits to satisfy the international banksters.  They have NOTHING to do with repaying government costs or debt.  The banksters WANT us in debt, so they are happy to shovel out more cash to keep governments running.

Instead, taxes are used to force you and me to adjust our behaviors.  If the banksters don't want us to smoke, they get the governments to make new laws and raise taxes on cigarettes to make them too expensive for us little folk.

This makes sense to the banksters, not because they give a good holy damn about our health, but because nicotine protects the pineal gland - and thus the brain - from remote control through brain-wave entrainment through media and other electro-magnetic outlets (cell towers, etc.).

Beef is too healthy.  Makes us strong and all the protein builds muscle.  Can't have that, so the banksters want to raise taxes on beef until it is just too damn expensive to eat.

The one I really love is when a population starts to get too wealthy and independent, they spring all these new rules on you, or suddenly remeber rules that have been hiding for years, and then tell everyone they have to fork over penalties to shovel great piles of cash back out of the common man's hands.

This last one is especially egregious.  In Indonesia, they suddenly sprang this (obviously) little known procedure that requires everyone to file property tax receipts with their annual income tax returns.  But hey, at least they are nice about it, you have until September to fess up and pay a 2% penalty, or December to get a 3% penalty.

Keep in mind, this is NOT about paying the taxes.  When you buy a house or car here, you go down to one of the State banks and pay the VAT and get a receipt for payment, called a bukti.  No, this is all about not having attached a copy of the bukti to your annual income tax.

Considering NO ONE I know has ever done this, nor even knew it was required, everyone is running around in sack-cloth and ashes trying to figure out how to pay the penalties, which are levied against the purchase value of the property.

To call a spade a spade, this is complete and utter bullshit.

What this is - and no one in "government" will admit it - is an attempt by the banksters to cool down inflation.  Since the economy here is no longer running at a growth rate of 7%, as in years past, they need to siphon cash out of the market to cool things off, and this previously UNKNOWN regulation has been trotted out to basically yank millions of rupiah out of each and every person who owns property.

This is nothing more than social control and has nothing to do with the government's ability to pay debt or add services.  In fact, since the freakin' amnesty program started, the public services have gotten considerably worse, as if to show everyone how the poor widdle gummint can't pay to keep things going and needs to steal more money from us.

Bullshit.

Taxes are, and always have been, a means of controlling populations, from the time King George III raised the Stamp and Tea taxes and caused the American Revolution, to modern-day efforts to control out eating and smoking habits.  Taxes have nothing to do with paying government debts.

Let's take, for instance, the US.  In the first half of 2016, the US government COLLECTED a record US$1.4 trillion in taxes!  Under the Obama administration alone, the US government has collected US$20 trillion in tax revenues, while at the same time, leaving the country US$9 trillion deeper in debt.  The current US debt is US$19 trillion.  That means that Obama could have paid off the national debt and had a trillion or so left over to play with, but that's not the point, is it?

No.  If taxes were meant to pay down debt and offer public services, most countries would not have any debt.  But that's not the game the banksters play.  They want us bent over a debt barrel so they can harvest us for their pleasure.  And frankly, a government that can't operate on a trillion a year ain't worth having, is it?

By comparison, Indonesia's national debt is US$222 billion, or IDR4 quadillion, or just 27% of GDP.

It's time all these slave-minded folks who talk about "our fair share" and "supporting government services" get hog-tied and force-fed reality.

Taxes are nothing more than a control mechanism.  Since the banksters are more than happy to print money and pay national bills, for a price, and use the strings and levers of government to make us all dance to their tune, there is obviously no incentive for anyone IN government to admit they are stealing our money for nothing.  Hell, it's not even money.  It's just paper with fancy colors and pictures all over it.  It has no value at all, but what we invest int it.

Best to let the great Marco Polo, who brought the concept of paper money back from China in the 1200s, tell us all about it:

"How the Great Kaan Causeth the Bark of Trees, Made Into Something Like Paper, to Pass for Money All Over his Country: The Emperor's Mint then is in this same City of Cambaluc, and the way it is wrought is such that you might say he hath the Secret of Alchemy in perfection, and you would be right!  And the Kaan [Kublai Khan] causes every year to be made such a vast quantity of this money, which costs him nothing, that it must equal in amount all the treasure in the world.  And all the while they are so light that ten bezants' worth does not weigh one golden bezant.  Now you have heard the ways and means whereby the Great Kaan may have, and in fact has, more treasure than all the Kings in the World; and you know all about it and the reason why."

Hmmm...and who is kicking the world's economic blessed assurance these days?

As George Carlin reminds us, it's all bullshit and it's bad for you.

Thinking Our Way To Freedom

One of our loyal FarceBook fans called us out on our assertion yesterday that we don't need leaders.  Let's let R.E. state it in his own words:

"trusting and focused are better words... most of us see the world as too complicated to navigate on our own and we are right. We can be ever vigilant and forego police... but you have to sleep sometime. We can forego government in totum but then we sit in a minor spot to grow our food, until fate or another person takes it away... the "birthright" is an illusion, just like honest government and security"

Points well taken and definitely worth a response.

While I greatly respect R.E., I must first state unequivocally that there is no such thing as security, nor safety for that matter.  It is all an illusion, and the sooner we are disabused of it, the sooner we can free ourselves and our minds.  My view of security is best represented by my own experience.  I used to have a gorgeous 1970 Pontiac Catalina 400 rag top with a custom-designed and installed Blaupunkt sound system that I did myself.  People said I was crazy putting that system in a rag top, but they were aghast that I left the top down and the doors unlocked most of the time - weather permitting.

I explained that with a rag top, getting in would take about 10 seconds, no matter how many precautions I took.  So better to just leave it open so that I would only lose the stereo, and not the top also.

In fact, no one ever touched my car.  At one point, a BMW next to it was trashed in a parking garage, but not a scrap of paper was missing from my car.  I owned that car for 10 years and never had a problem.  My experience confirmed, to me at least, that the more you try to protect something, the more challenge it presents to someone to break it.  Thus, the best security is none at all.

So, having dispensed with that argument, let's turn our attention to the idea that we need leaders because life is so complex.

Balderdash.

I view life as a three-dimensional matrix, and it greatly simplifies life and makes it rather manageable, without sacrificing the detail needed to function effectively.

Imagine a cube divided into seven sections on all planes - 7x7x7.  That means there are 343 smaller cubes within the larger one.

The X axis I label the Seven Deadly Sins.  OK, it's a hangover from my Catholic catechism, but it neatly sums up all the evil in the world.  To refresh our memory, the seven deadly sins are: Pride. Envy. Wrath, Gluttony and Lust. Sloth and Greed.  Honestly, can you think of any bad emotion that doesn't fit in one of those categories?

The Y axis are the seven Virtues.  Again, to refresh: Prudence, Justice, Moderation, Fortitude, Faith, Hope, and Love (charity).

On the Z axis, we have the seven Plots (a la Christopher Booker): Overcoming Monsters, Rags to Riches, The Quest, Voyage and Return, Comedy, Tragedy, and Rebirth.

To fully grasp the nature of this matrix, take a moment now to pause, reflect and internalize.  Can you think of any human situation that does not fall within at least two of these categories?

I didn't think so.

So that means that all of human society, history, art, and civilization can be plotted somewhere within this matrix of 343 choices.  Everything you do, from waking up in the morning to cooking dinner falls within two or three of these axes.  If you really want to encompass Life, the Universe and Everything, then simply label the axes: Motive, Opportunity and Means.

In a nutshell, this means that everything we know, have known or could know is summed up in 343 points within a 7x7x7 cube.

See how simple life really is?

Knowing this, and having the matrix firmly in our minds, what need do we have for leaders?  They are nothing more than points in the matrix, just like us.  Everything they do is a point in the matrix, just like us.  Everything the want is a point in the matrix, just like us.  So how, exactly, are they qualified to lead?  After all, they are just like us.

The fact of the matter is that no one is more or less qualified to lead us than ourselves.  With a few basic rules of conduct, everyone should be allowed to do whatever they want within the confines of their property, which includes their bodies and any space that they own.

The elite know this.  That is why they try so hard to keep us stupid, take away our property (or prevent us from owning any) and make every aspect of human behavior a crime.  It is the only way to control us, and our complicity is the only way we are controlled.

What it all comes down to is that our lives are nothing more than 343 variables.  To the extent that we can control any of them means that we have more security than before.  To the extent that we can't control them, but delegate someone else to handle the issue means we have an illusion of control and security, because once you delegate a variable to someone else, you have multiplied your problem exponentially.  How the delegate handles your variable depends on where they are in the matrix.  Now you have added their matrix to yours and increased the variables at least 343 times.

The fact is, no one is better at watching out for you than you.  Every time you delegate a personal responsibility to another, you make the situation less controllable.  In modern society, we have delegate so much personal power to others that life seems to be so complex and out of control.  In fact, it IS out of control, but it is NOT complex.

Time to take some of that power back.  Stop letting "leaders" take your power to use for their ends.  You have the sum of human knowledge right here on the internet.  You have a personal responsibility to educate yourself.  You are the one person that can delegate your power.  One tiny little change in the way you think can change the world.  And with the thousands of readers here, we have a force multiplier.

We don't need others to lead us, we need to lead ourselves.  Start reading, turn of the TeeVee, take responsibility for your life.  It's really quite simple.  All it requires is looking with different eyes - eyes that we once had as children, but lost due to training.

The only powe someone else has over us is what we give them.

In some ways, 50 Shades of Gray laid it in front of us, but we missed the point for all the steamy sex.

Oops...isn't sex in the matrix?

The Grand Cock Fight

It seems that the majority of people hollering about diversity have no idea what it is.  The concept of open borders and racial quotas and stuffing as many different kinds of people in a room as allowed by fire code is NOT diversity.  If you are someone who believes it is, then hang on, you are about to get an education.

Diversity means a variety, a range, a set of different things.  Mom's vegetable medley is not diversity, the ingredients are diverse.  Once they are mixed into a lump, they are not longer diverse, but part of a new whole.  Diversity is not forcing all different kinds of people to live together and like each other.  That is social engineering.

Not that we know what diversity is NOT, let's look at what it really is, and see why all this whining and chest-beating over "diversity" is completely wrong.

If I try to force you to live with 20 people from other cultures, I am not practicing diversity.  I am trying to create a homogeneity from diverse subjects.  When people talk about forcing one group to accept another, they are actually being the complete opposite of diverse.

Diversity is when you allow people to live apart in their own cultures and with their own kind.  When you support and encourage people to be different, you are being diverse.  Real diversity is enjoying and relishing the differences.

Synthesis is when you pour a variety of things or people into a confined space and make them adopts each other's characteristics, so that a new whole emerges that is not equal to the sum of the parts.

Forcing Germans to accept Muslim neighbors is not diversity.  Diversity is leaving the Germans and the Muslims alone and allowing them to have their own separate identities and cultures.  A German no more wants to have the local mosque hollering at all hours of the day, mutilate their children's genitals and eliminate dogs, any more than a Muslim wants to wear liederhosen, eat pork sausage and do the chicken dance.  These are incompatible cultures, and the truly diverse person recognizes and celebrates the incompatibilities.

The whole idea that we all have to live together and get along is ludicrous.  Why?  What point does it serve?  If I don't like pork sausages, I move somewhere that doesn't have them, or I shut up and let the local folks enjoy their dinners.  You do not move into someone else's culture and immediately force them to accommodate your tastes.

This wrong-headed "diversity" movement is creating more problems than it could ever solve.  When cultures are left alone and folks can live however they want in their lands, everyone is happy and leaves everyone else alone.

When incompatible cultures are forced together and the local culture is told at the point of a gun that it must accommodate the invading culture, no matter how distasteful, then one is creating a recipe for war.  Anyone who reads history knows that.

However, diversity is not what the elites want.  They don't care whether Germans and Muslims can live in harmony and peace.  That's not what they want.  They want chaos, terror and hate, because there's profit in it.

In the world, there are three basic types of people: natives who are a product of a culture, tourists who want to sample foreign culture, and travelers who immerse themselves in foreign culture.  What all three have in common is that they perceive "My" culture and "Their" culture, and at the end of the day they can go "Home" to a culture that is distinctly their own.

THAT is diversity.

The thing that is called "diversity" by certain groups today denies on basic principle that is the basis of peace and harmony: Home.  It denies me the right to go someplace where I can be with people like me   It is denial of a fundamental right of human beings to call one group "us" and another group "them."

The ultimate goal of the "diversity" nuts is to create a synthesis of all peoples and cultures, so there is no longer an "us" and "them."  We all look, act, eat, worship, talk, and live the same, so no one is "above" or "below" another.  Little do they know that this is an unachievable goal.

I have lived in many places and with many cultures.  The one thing I have found everywhere is that everyone needs someone to shit on.  It is a fact of human nature and it ain't gonna change any time soon.  Every single person on Earth defines themselves as being better than this one, but worse than that one.

Even if the entire world looked alike and had all the same things, people would find something that separated them from someone else.  I don't care how idealistic or hopeful you are, it will not change the human condition.

In Indonesia, where everyone has brown skin, dark eyes and black hair, they define each other on character traits of groups, on clothing styles, on architecture, on location, on food.  To an observer, you would think everyone would be happy because they all look alike and live on islands, but that is definitely not the case.  There is no homogeneity here, no matter how similar folks may seem to a third party.

There is no way in hell the "diversity" movement, as it is currently defined, will ever succeed.  There are only three possible outcomes: the outsider assimilates, the host culture is assimilated, or a synthetic new culture is created.  In none of these cases can diversity be said to have succeeded.

New York City is a perfect example of "diversity."  Neighborhoods, even only a couple of blocks square, take on the culture of the people who live there.  There's a Greek area, an Italian area, a Russian area, and a Jewish area.  Within those areas, there are native restaurants and shops, the native language is spoken, and gangs form as a kind of native law enforcement.  This is the result of "diversity."  None of them get along, and peace is only maintained by each group respecting the territory of the others, and having their own respected in return.

"Diversity" is a fantasy.  It's a Utopian pipe-dream of everyone living together, holding hands and singing Kumbaya.  And it has one defining feature: it fails every time it is tried.  It is not how people are wired.  We are cheetahs whose spots are set and will never change.  The spots will never become stripes, no matter how much it is decreed from on high.

It is clear, at least to me, that there is a group of elites who find it suitable to thrust all these cultures into one arena.  Like oil and water, they will never mix, and ultimately the cultures will clash violently until the proverbial last man stands.

Perhaps that's the goal: get us all to eradicate each other so that the elites are the last remaining culture, and they win by default while having "clean" hands.

It's like a grand cock fight.  The two bantams battle to the death, while the spectators bet on which will win.  Ultimately, the cocks lose and the spectators win, no matter how you slice it.

I prefer real diversity.

In The Blink Of An Eye

I want to look at something that has been on my mind for some time.  It's a thought experiment regarding global energy and replacement technology.  The premise is that a new and amazing technology has come along that generates huge amounts of electricity without pollution and with small amounts of cheap, readily available raw materials.

For the purposes of this exercise, we'll assume that Dr. Rossi's E-CAT device is real and viable and commercially available.  We'll also use publicly available data showing that ExxonMobil has a total of 75,300 employees, and extrapolate on that.  We'll also use ExxonMobil's 2014 annual revenues of US$32.5 billion, as a data point.

According to the Wiki-bible, the world consumed 13,371 mega-tonnes of oil-equivalent in 2012, or 5.6 x 10e20 joules from all sources.  Total energy expense for 2011, was US$6 trillion, or roughly 10% of the gross global output that year (likely more each year since).

With these numbers, we see that ExxonMobil's 2014 annual revenues are but 0.54% of annual expenditures.  Using that as a guide, then ExxonMobil's 75,300 employees could be seen as roughly 1% of the global energy labor force.  This would mean that there are about 70 million people worldwide employed in the energy industry, which feels about right, since that is approximately 1% of the world's population estimate.  Taking a WAG (wild-ass guess), let's say the global average annual income of all those folks is US$10,000.  That's an annual total of about US$700 billion in wages.  A sizable chunk of change, if you ask me, especially when you grab 30% for taxes.

Now, along comes Alternative Fuel X (AFX).  It can produce 1Mw of electricity per year for a cost of US$10,000, with little or no maintenance, in a space about the size of a 40-foot container.  Using a conservative estimate for Western countries, 1Mw can supply about 750 houses.  So, AFX can supply electricity to 750 houses for about US$14/year, plus the cost of transmission lines from the generator.

Houston, Texas, to pick a random example, has roughly 718,000 houses.  That means we need 1,000 of our AFX generators to supply every family in the city.  Since the AFX can be installed just about anywhere, we don't need high-tension power lines, sub-stations, or any of that really expensive and high-maintenance equipment to deliver power.  Just 750 high-capacity lines running from the AFX to each of its houses from the parking lot at the local strip center where the box is installed.  Total cost: US$1 million plus cable to install, and about US$500/year to maintain.

Each house now has ample power that is clean, quiet, virtually uninterrupted, and can be maintained by one or two guys in the neighborhood working an hour each week.  Total cost to each house is probably around US$20/year, plus tax.  At that rate, the generator is paid for in one year (no bond issues or other financing needed) and the cost of maintenance is included.

This is a whole lot of data to crunch in your head, and we haven't even gotten into all the ancillary issues, such as power plant workers, linemen, truck and tool manufacturers, even secretaries, real estate, and the thousands of other variables involved in running the computer you are using right now.

Can you imagine what a shock something like the AFX would have on the global economy?  We've only considered home electricity, since AFX wouldn't replace internal combustion engines - at least not right away.  Even if AFX replaced just 10% of global power consumption in the first five years or so, the ripple effect would be enormous.

The price of oil would become almost meaningless to most folks.  Entire job classifications would vanish.  Alternatives such as solar and wind would become useless.  A number of very large global corporations would see their revenues slashed.  Huge government bureaucracies would become even more pointless than they already are.  Municipal bond markets, tax revenues, environmental conservation groups and their bureaucracies...all suddenly unnecessary.

Furthermore, using more or less the same reasoning process, add the economic disruption that will be caused by robots, 3-D printing, add high-temperature super-conductors.  All of these technologies, including AFX are real and are coming to market very fast.

An AFX device in every parking lot, and a robot and 3-D printer in every home would replace just about every service and blue-collar job you can imagine.  It wouldn't take long before there are 3 billion unemployed and angry people in the world, no matter how cheap and wonderful the technology sounds.

Given all this, and the many other technologies that are coming or haven't been invented yet, and we are looking at a mass economic displacement that will be studied for thousands of years if humanity survives it.

And you wonder why the elites of the world are so desperate to preserve the status quo right now?

All You Need Is Cash

UPDATE: And so it begins...

There has been a lot of speculation and noise about the end of cash lately.  This is one of those staple conspiracies that has been around since at least the 70s, as far as I can remember.  However, now there seems to be a new push for it, as events seem to be heading is a rather alarming direction.

The old cashless conspiracy said that central banks want to rid the world of cash in order to track and trace every single transaction and ensure that every diddle of tribute is paid.  It would, they say, also eliminate criminal transactions, though no one ever talks about the subsequent rise of alternative currencies and/or barter that would then step in.

In any event, the EU and US are making rather serious rumblings about the end of cash, and nations like Denmark are moving rather swiftly in that direction.  Is this to end all privacy?  Or is there fear and loathing on the part of the "elites" that is bringing this issue to the forefront?

If you answered "fear and loathing," you not only made Hunter S Thompson happy, you hit the nail on the head.  The "elites" are freaking out, and ending cash is one of the last weapons they have to avert full and complete (and uncontrollable) economic meltdown.

One of great weaknesses of the "elite" is that they think they can control everything; all natural processes are fully within their control, as they have become so disconnected as to think of themselves as gods.  In their conceit, they set off down a course years ago to control the economies of the world to the point where everyone would be lulled to sleep because investments always made money, prices were always stable and everyone had their share of gee-gaws.  Yes, if every belly was full and no hand idle, they could siphon off our labor and build their dream homes in the stars.

One thing about pride...it always goeth before the fall.

One thing about Nature...She resists being controlled.

Things have gotten out of hand.  The "elite" have discovered that organic systems have all sorts of fail-safe buttons installed that keep them balanced to their own rules.  They cannot and will not be dictated to by anyone, no matter how much technology and money you throw at Her.

To the point: the global economy has begun to spiral far out of the "elite" control systems.  Economic systems are natural organizations and they will find their own balance.  For decades, indeed most of the last century,  a dedicated group of megalomaniacs thought they could control the world.  As with all natural systems, they can be held in check for a while, but the errors begin to build up until they are no longer controllable.  Furthermore, when the errors inevitably correct themselves, the result is far worse than if the system had been allowed to adjust itself all along.  At this point, the reset has been artificially delayed since at least the 70s.  The inflation that swept Reagan into office was supposed to run it's course, but artificial fixes were put in place.  Those fixes have been compounded for 50 years now, and the bill is coming due.

Over the past couple of decades, every trick in the economic handbook has been tried.  They confiscated trillions of dollars in taxpayer money.  They raised and lowered rates.  They adjusted policy and shifted blame, but the compounding errors in the system have built to the breaking point.  The only game the "elite" have left, besides outright confiscation of all private property (unpopular), is something called 'negative interest rates.'

Now, I don't know about you, but 'negative interest rates' sounds absurd.  I had to look it up to be sure it was a real thing.  Sure enough, this is one of those economic back-stops that is held in limbo as a theoretical means to halt deflationary spirals. They idea is that with negative rates, banks charge customers to save money, rather than pay interest.  This encourages spending, and of course banks are encouraged to be less restrictive with lending.  Just two insy-winsy little problems with this idea: customers pull their cash and stuff it in the mattress, and loose lending is what got us here in the first place.

Most importantly, when customers start seeing their savings being depleted, instead of running out and spending, most folks will withdraw the cash and horde it.  This compounds (again) the problem negative rates are supposed to fix.  Folks pull their money but don't spend it, and banks quickly nose-dive into insolvency.  The only way around this is to make sure folks don't have cash to pull out.  If all your money is electronic blips, then it is rather hard to store them under the mattress.  The end of cash ideally means that all money is visible to the "elite" and they can enforce their policies on us ruminant animals to force us to spend or save, whatever they need to save the world today.

The one thing none of the articles discuss concerning "negative interest rates" is that when folks lose faith in the system (e.g. - don't have cash to do as they please), then they create alternative "organic' systems to fix the problem.  We see this in the so-called 'black markets.'  Anytime something is made illegal, there is an immediate birth of an underground economy to supply not only the illegal items, but all the ancillary services that go into supplying it.

What it boils down to is this: economies have 'seasons' where things grow and die on a regular cycle.  When those cycles are interrupted, alternative channels open up, just like water running downhill.  And like the water, when it is dammed up, it will build pressure behind it until the blockage breaks and a massive wall of water continues it's trek to the lowest level.  The global economy has been dammed by central bank and "elite" meddling, and the resulting decades-long pressure has built to a devastating release.  Nothing can be done to hold back the result.

The current move to ban cash can thus be seen as a desperate attempt on the part of the "elites" to defy Nature.  Their control over society has been predicated on their delusional belief that they are gods and their technologies have given them the power to control that which cannot be controlled.

Those with 'eyes to see and ears to hear' should already be moving out of the way of the inevitable rush of Nature re-balancing itself, whatever that means to the individual.  Genies cannot be put back in the bottle, so what civilization has thus far achieved will survive in some form, but the overlords of society are about to be swept away by their own egos.  Unfortunately, everyone gets wet when the dam breaks, but those in the path of the resulting wave are sure to be killed by it.

On the dark side, rough times are coming.  On the bright side, the age-old "elites" are about to be destroyed by their own hands.  How we fill the resulting power vacuum will determine the centuries to come.

The Meaning Of Life

Mu

Gaining and holding power is a deceptively simple thing.  It is absolutely dependent on ignorance.  More specifically, it requires either the fact or illusion of knowing something that no one else does, and the desire of others to possess that knowledge.

Whether you run a religion selling the image that you monopolize some Universal truth and only you can show me how to find it, or you are a bankster selling the illusion that acquiring wealth is a secret process and you are depent on me to make that happen, all power and control stem from the same root - complete ignorance and dependency.  In fact, the Secret to Life, the Universe and Everything is convincing as many people as possible that you have a vital secret and the only way anyone else can learn it is through you.

Religion, easily the greatest scam of all time, is nothing more than an individual receiving secret knowledge that only he can interpret and pass on.  People have paid billions of dollars and spent their entire lives trying to learn the Secret, little realizing that the big secret is the process itself.

Governments are absolutely dependent on secrets.  As fast as you form a government, it starts creating secrets, and thereby creating power and control, as a means to keep people in line.  As long as the people believe that government has all the answers, they will spend their lives begging government to release just a little of that information to them.  Witness the whole UFO scam or global warming or whatever you care to choose.

The whole body of intellectual property is based on ignorance.  If I discover some new technique, process or fact, I want to control knowledge of that thing in order to enrich myself before anyone else figures it out.  My getting rich depends on your ignorance of my fact and your desire to get it  Government inserts itself into the equation by offering to help me protect my fact long enough for me to get rich off of it.

Parents use ignorance to control their children.  How many times have you been told, or said, "You'll understand when you get older"?  Why do children yearn to grow up?  It's all based on control of information and the desire to obtain it.  Children are controllable only so long as you keep them ignorant.  Once they have information, they no long need you to guide and steer them.

And so it is that the 'elite' are in a panic these days.  They have built elaborate command and control systems based solely on the illusion that they are authorities through whom we must go to obtain information.  Only the 'elite' know certain things and we must be initiated into the fold in order to touch the hidden wisdom.

The system is beautifully self-perpetuating, too.  After all, if you spend years of your life and a small fortune seeking knowledge, and when you find it, it is so incredibly simple and benign, are you going to tell the whole world?  Or are you going to perpetuate the system so that you can be reimbursed for all your trouble and expense to find the secret?  Chances are pretty good you won't tell anyone.

It's like this: you spend six years of your life and hundreds of thousands of dollars to get your MBA because you want to know the Secret of Finance.  At some point in your career, you realize that it's all just a big scam, a confidence game.  Now, you are faced with two choices: either you tell the entire world what a joke it all is, or you look out at those masses of folks with fist-fulls of money wanting to buy your Secret.  What do you do?  More than likely, despite any impulse toward truth and light, you continue the scam so that you can pay off your student loans and buy that mansion up the street and stuff it full of designer gee-gaws.

The people who really profit from these confidence games are the ones who start the scams.  They just sit back and reap a lifetime's profit from watching piles of people scrambling up the hill to get your Secret.  They even measure it and show us the results of our scramble.  It's called Consumer Confidence, and they sit there and laugh at us rubes stepping on each other to get just a little taste of...nothing.

Pick any religion, it's the same scam.  The pope sits on a mountain of writhing souls all clamoring to understand the Great Secret.  But only the pope knows there is no Secret.  It's just a fairy tale told again and again so that you and I will do anything, obey anyone, follow any edict, just to have a small taste of the Big Secret.

In the end, all power and control is like the Zen puzzle - what is the sound of one hand clapping.  Mu.  Nothing.  If a tree falls and no one hears it, does it make a sound?  Mu.  Nothing.

That is the Big Secret to Life, the Universe and Everything.  It's 42.  It's meaningless clap-trap designed specifically to keep masses of people completely and totally focused on obtaining your Big Secret.  It's Mu.  Nothing.

Any power game involves you believing that I have a key to something you want.  In the end, my power is predicated solely on how much you are willing to give and give up in order to get what you think I have.  It's so deceptively simple that most people never figure it out.  They layer piles and piles of hopes and dreams on top of their never-ending struggle to obtain some Secret.  If they ever get there, they realize there was no Secret in the first place, but now they must perpetuate the scam in order to be made whole again.

And so it goes on down through history.  People arguing over the meaning of obscure texts.  People killing and maiming to get just a little closer to the Secret.  All of it to find out that you had everything you needed before you started.

What a cruel joke it all is, and how cynical and evil one must be to dangle such carrots before our eyes for fun and profit.

Perhaps the internet will finally be the Great Liberator one day.  Perhaps we will amass all of human knowledge and experience and realize en masse that it was all pointless in the first place.  All we had to do was to sit down on the stream bank and watch leaves float down to the distant ocean.

What will that moment be like?  Will humanity commit mass suicide at that point, realizing that all of our collective striving was for nothing?  Or will we laugh at our foolishness as we all head for the beach to build a massive bonfire and dance till dawn?

In the end, there is only one answer:

Mu.