370

The Scarlet Letter of Covid19

Todd Hayen

“Wearing a mask is an act of love.” I have about a dozen similar little snippets of wisdom collected over the recent weeks, as I am sure most of you have also witnessed if you are a frequent visitor of Facebook. If wearing a mask is an act of love, what would not wearing a mask be an act of? I have often heard it directly referred to as an act of extreme selfishness, among other equally shaming descriptions.

Early on mask wearers described those they encountered who do not wear masks as “dismaying, confusing,” or “selfish” these descriptions have now evolved to “hateful, moronic, disgusting,” or “unconscionable.”

Wearing, or its reverse, not wearing, a mask no longer seems to be a medical choice—something to ward off Covid-19 transmission, but it has become more of a social, or political, statement—a device to indicate “who is with us” and “who is against us.”

In 1850 Nathaniel Hawthorne’s novel The Scarlet Letter was published. The story is set in mid 17th Century puritanical Massachusetts and presents what is possibly one of the first tales of public shaming to come out of the Americas. A young woman in Boston has given birth to a child with no identified father. She is brought before the public and, through a decree brought down by the community authorities, is required to wear a scarlet letter “A” prominently displayed on her clothing whenever in public.

The Scarlet Letter is meant to mark her as an adulteress, carrying all the shame and humiliation the designation “adulteress” would connote during that particular period of religious fundamentalism.

Humans, probably since the earliest of times, have always gravitated toward the identification of “other” in their culture — in primitive, less civilized times, certainly due to the potential danger of warring, or conflicting, tribes in close proximity.

A fear of “other” has been etched in the collective unconscious, and we certainly have seen examples of this in our recent, and not so recent, history. However, differing from ancient times where close contact with a group of people who could very well hurt you in a variety of ways. Generally today such a great threat does not exist; therefore there is no real purpose behind identifying those who “don’t fit in,” yet we still are anxious to know.

This defining element of “not fitting in” has become rather irrelevant to its initial purpose, which predicated if you didn’t fit in you could be the source of serious trouble. Today that typically is no longer the case. Today, “not fitting in” at its best could simply mean “different” or unfamiliar. Yes, we have developed a keen sensitivity to “unsafe” people, and our internal radar often is given the task to identify danger by how people dress, by the way they present their bodies (hair, lack of hygiene, etc.) their mannerisms, even their language and use of it.

However, much of this “profiling” is again unnecessary, and largely inaccurate, in our modern day, and it seems that more often than not a negative designation must be placed on those who are different in order to see them as a threat and attempt to control them through hate, vilification, and/or shame — this designation must be artificially produced, or irrationally applied, yet it must seem rational at the moment of its application.

In Hawthorne’s Scarlet Letter, Hester Prynne, the protagonist of the story, must be perceived as the enemy before she can be publically shamed. Birthing an illegitimate child, or more precisely, engaging in the sexual act with a man she isn’t married to, goes against the religious mores of Prynne’s culture. There is, then, a weak appearance of “reason” to fear her otherness, and thus to then shame her, or to even hate her. She is marked due to her violation of a cultural, in this case also religious, standard of the time. She herself, however, is not shameful. Her shame is placed upon her due to an external doctrine.

The reason to shame her becomes secondary to the idea that the people who are shaming are searching for “other,” compelled by a collective unconscious and archaic need to establish safety and control through the identification of the “unsafe”—the “other.” If you can identify them, then you can project hate and disgust on that individual or group, and thus feel a modicum of control—your immediate environment is a bit safer if you feel you have some control over it.

When applying this idea to the problem of wearing masks, and the identification of “unsafe other” to those who don’t wear masks, don’t mask wearers have a valid point in castigating that nonconforming group? If it is so clear, according to the mainstream narrative, that Covid-19 is spread predominately by people who do not wear masks, why in the world would people choose to not wear a mask, and thus selfishly spread their disease to everyone they come in contact with?

This supposition does not stand up to scrutiny for several reasons; the first and foremost is that not everyone has disease to spread. In order to transmit a disease, sans or avec mask, you must first have it. This first problem is easily solved by the mainstream narrative’s efforts to make sure we understand that you don’t have to have symptoms to be a carrier of virus (some reports I have read say 45% of all disease is acquired by asymptomatic people, how they came to that conclusion is beyond my logic reasoning, but most people seem to believe this), thus everyone is then a potential carrier.

Regardless of what the mainstream media has to say, there certainly are people who don’t buy into their rhetoric, and quite possibly many non-conforming no-mask-wearers are among these people. Therefore a no-mask-wearer very likely may not be selfish at all. If they don’t believe they have the virus, then not wearing a mask won’t hurt anyone. But this question is never asked (why the noncompliant choose not to wear a mask) and thus the noncompliant become identified as “unsafe other” — evil, selfish, moronic, idiotic, (fill in the blank) maybe even as bad as a “Trump supporter.”

Thus they are a person who doesn’t care about anyone but themselves. They wear the scarlet letter “No Mask” and are then designated as the one to hate, the group to disown, the ones not for, but against. The group to, eventually, be destroyed. For good reason. Never mind the disease, the good reason to destroy them is that they are in the group to hate, to fear, and they are easily marked—they are “other.”

Needless to say this compulsion of the collective unconscious to “seek out other and destroy” has been demonstrated in history too often to even begin to comprehend its prevalence. However, some prominent illustrations come immediately to mind — the Star of David required by Jews to wear during the Nazi regime in Germany, and not a mark to necessarily shame its wearer (although certainly it did) but clearly an identifier of “other.”

Obviously the color of a person’s skin, or a person’s religion, or sexual orientation is a mark of “other” to fear. We have been a species of mistrust, and our efforts to identify “other” as having cultural differences, ethnic differences, sexual differences, or even ideological differences, have found a variety of clever devices.

Some of these marks are obvious marks that are forcibly enacted by decree or law (such as wearing the Star of David in Nazi Germany, and possibly the mandate of wearing masks), other marks are simply physiological attributes such as skin color and physical differences, others, such as religion or sexual orientation are a bit more difficult to identify.

But we typically have found clever ways to make this identification as easy on us as possible, thus a quick and facile action can ensue—hate, persecution, violence, the list goes on. “The reason to take action” is often flimsy and ultimately irrational. Very often the reason is so obscure, and historically irrelevant (such as tribal differences that go back many generations), that if perpetrators are confronted with “why” they can give no logical explanation—for them “other” just is a threat needing attention.

The mask-wearing phenomena is interesting on several counts; one is that it seems to be a completely artificial concoction. Another is the opposing idea that there is good logical argument for wearing one.

It does look as if there is a conscious manipulation of an archaic psychological complex (the innate fear of “different” deeply seated in a very old truth about neighboring tribes), i.e., “taking advantage of a psychological, although illogical, propensity” in order to push along the agenda of the manipulators — but who or what is the manipulator? I leave that question up to the reader, and other authors, to contemplate.

We again have seen historically the manipulation of a populace to hate “other” that is fabricated by the state. The most obvious in recent years is the Nazi vilification of the Jews. Even more recently Muslim’s have been similarly targeted as “other to be feared” by the US Government. Mexicans and immigrants in general have been as well.

Many people believe that other marginalized peoples, races, people of certain sexual orientations, other religious groups as well as women, have been purposely and maliciously marked as “other” by the state. The rationalization for this action generally comes under the insistence that it is for the “good of the people.” Therefore the groups identified as dangerous are to be avoided, chastised, abused, shamed and even violently harmed for being the “enemy.”

This all may seem like a stretch to some people, and yes, it can be subtle—at least a conscious and nefarious intention or agenda behind it can be subtle. With regard to the mask-wearing/not wearing phenomena the process has happened so quickly it is relatively easy to follow its progress. In the beginning, mask-wearing was considered unnecessary in the effort to minimize disease transmission.

In fact, several official reports were clear that masks simply could not prevent the tiny virus particles to reach the inner sanctum of the human body where it would wreak havoc—a popular analogy was the dubious efficacy of throwing dirt at a chain-link fence in order to reach the other side. Then the tables begin to turn, as “case” numbers began to escalate during the horrid spectre of “the second wave” — mask-wearing became a new focus.

However, an interesting thing happened with the public. They began to take it all very personally.

Seeing someone not wearing a mask did not translate to a logical response such as avoiding that mask-less person to lessen the possibility of infection, but rather the response was to mark that person as the selfish enemy who was purposefully trying to spread disease, or at least didn’t care about that possibility. Again, it didn’t seem that people even considered the person a physical threat, but more an emotional one, as someone that isn’t decent.

Vilification became the weapon to attack this marked enemy with, that and shaming, as well as denigration. “They are out to destroy us, the decent people who care about life, grandma, community and what is good in the world.” That is what marking “other” is all about—identification of the enemy, either moral enemy, or physical enemy.

The eminent Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung made popular a phrase, “participation mystique,” which had already been invented by Lévy-Brühl, a French scholar and philosopher who lived in the early part of the 20th Century.

Roughly, and simply speaking, “participation mystique” refers to a collective human compulsion to project an identity on to a group of people that is largely imaginative or symbolic. This is probably where a concept like “herd mentality” originates, or even a more common phrase we are hearing these days, “sheeple” — people who seem to follow blindly an official narrative.

It also applies to “conspiracy theorists,” “tin foil hat wearers,” and in the context of this article, “selfish no-mask-wearers.” This projection that Jung speaks of is generally unconscious, or at least the impetus for it is. What becomes the basis for fear, hate, disgust, or whatever other derogatory term and emotion that sputters forth when confronting the object of the projection is again unconscious and archaic in origin.

If any group of people can be identified as other, and conscious manipulative propaganda from a controlling entity has always been good at marking groups that are unsympathetic to the entity’s agenda as “other,” then it is easy to conjure up this magic of unconscious projection in a group as they move against another, identified and marked, group.

The hallmark of this projection is its lack of objective reality; however, there is almost invariably a “hook to hang the projection on”, i.e., some sort of “real thing” that inspires the imaginary story to take form. For example, the Japanese did indeed attack Pearl Harbour in 1941, that is the objective reality hook, but the imaginary story that was conjured up through this unconscious projection was that the Japanese were an inferior race, sub-human, and as such deserved to be wiped off the face of the earth. Much of the propaganda of World War II in the Pacific Theatre was to depict the enemy in precisely that light.

The US Government, in its effort to create a group of people to hate and fear presented to the American people every manner of propaganda imaginable that depicted the Japanese enemy in ways that were easily identified as offensive, dangerous, treacherous, and ugly. The Japanese were more easily identified as “other” than the Germans due to their physical features being Asian and not European, their culture essentially being more foreign than the Eurocentric Germans. Therefore it was deemed, through this negative projection, more justifiable to destroy them completely as the US attempted to do with the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

With regard to mask-wearing there seems to be such a concerted effort to create this “objective truth” hook to hang this “participation mystique” projection onto. So many sensationalized reports of masks being the saviour that will pull us out of this nightmare we have gotten ourselves into proliferate the mainstream media. These “objective truths” are flimsy at best.

So many contradictions have arisen, the controversy regarding mask’s efficacy continues to oscillate back and forth from one scientific camp to the other. One thing is certain though, the projection of “undesirable, unsafe, other” has been firmly established. The objective, scientific, “hook” itself has become a backstory.

We know this because if the hook, the supposed truth regarding the possible spread of disease, was really the reason for the hatred of no-mask-wearers then there would be much less socially denigrating ways to manage it as we would realize there was nothing to hate. We would truly all be in this together. We would be more amenable to healthy dialogue and discussion without fear or anger. We would be more willing to look at all possible scientific explanation and remedies in an effort to resolve our predicament without needing to decide that any of our fellow humans are a danger, are selfish, or deficient in basic human compassion and empathy.

I am not insisting that this projection of the “unsafe other” on to no-maskers is a result of the nefarious agenda of the “powers that be,” although if history is any indication of this possibility we certainly have many examples to support the idea. However, the projection due to “participation mystique” is a collective human trait that really requires no external encouragement, although it is very easy for those in power to manipulate to their benefit. It is human nature and is a common function of the “herd.”

Since it is human nature, it certainly is controllable. We must all strive to be more conscious, more aware of the powers that internally, or externally, propel us into behaviour that is not only consciously irrational, but unproductive and ultimately quite dangerous.

Todd Hayen is a registered psychotherapist practicing in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He holds a PhD in depth psychotherapy and an MA in Consciousness Studies. He specializes in Jungian, archetypal, psychology.

can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

Unlike the Guardian we are NOT funded by Bill & Melinda Gates, or any other NGO or government. So a few coins in our jar to help us keep going are always appreciated.

Our Bitcoin JTR code is: 1JR1whUa3G24wXpDyqMKpieckMGGW2u2VX

4.6 18 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
370 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Jul 21, 2020 2:08 PM

For example, the Japanese did indeed attack Pearl Harbour in 1941, that is the objective reality hook, but the imaginary story that was conjured up through this unconscious projection was that the Japanese were an inferior race, sub-human, and as such deserved to be wiped off the face of the earth.

 
I’m not sure who “attacked” Pearl Harbour – whether it was the Japanese or whether the Americans “attacked” themselves. Whatever, the evidence shows that Pearl Harbour like 9/11 and a number of other bombings was a bombing of an evacuated area, aka, a staged event, where death and injury were faked.
 
Presumably, it had to be some sort of arrangement between the two countries one way or another – just like the fake nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki – see Death Object: Exploding The Nuclear Weapons Hoax. Those at the top don’t really care about whether propaganda is pushed out that their “people” are sub-human. They don’t identify with their “people”, they identify with those at the top. It’s the global power elite against the plebs, nationality, etc doesn’t seem to play much of a role at the top – although no doubt it does to some degree.

richard
richard
Jul 21, 2020 12:42 PM

I could see where this was heading from the start and when I came across “star of david” I thought -confirmed.

Tim Drayton
Tim Drayton
Jul 21, 2020 11:04 AM

In his own inimitable fashion, Patrick Bet-David discusses face masks and the recent obsession with case numbers rather than fatalities:
 
https://youtu.be/XFnUGSr3fw0

Reg
Reg
Jul 21, 2020 9:44 AM
Tim Drayton
Tim Drayton
Jul 21, 2020 11:17 AM
Reply to  Reg

Had an interesting experience this morning. I ran to catch a bus here in Cyprus this morning. I am sorry to say, after great reflection I have now decided to comply with the requirement to wear face masks on buses in the form of a folded-up tea towel clipped in place at the back of my neck. Having run, I sat down panting and put on the face covering as described. I immediately noticed that due to my heavy breathing I was becoming stifled by my own expelled gas even under a loose-fitting tea towel and had to pull the towel forward to be able to breathe. Heaven knows what the effect would have been if I was wearing the favoured surgical muzzle. I could well have fainted.

Reg
Reg
Jul 21, 2020 11:25 AM
Reply to  Tim Drayton

We are not meant to block our bodily functions, Tim. It’s not natural. Same as keeping a bird in a cage. It’s torture. The mask tyrants know that but because of their twisted psychological make-up and the overarching agenda of the elites we are going through a toxic time. The poison needs to be flushed out. Soon. Otherwise we’re doomed.

Tim Drayton
Tim Drayton
Jul 21, 2020 12:33 PM
Reply to  Tim Drayton

PS – I believe I have had this disease – the symptoms all matched those described. I would be prepared to pay to have a test done and if it turns out I have antibodies and am thus immune and cannot give it to anybody else, could I not be exempted from this charade?

Reg
Reg
Jul 21, 2020 4:44 PM
Reply to  Tim Drayton

Well, maybe what you had was not a “new” disease. And the American CDC is adding everything to its list of symptoms for this brand new plague. You could have a bad hangover and they’ll call it covidchok.

goldhoarder
goldhoarder
Jul 23, 2020 10:24 PM
Reply to  Tim Drayton

No. Not until you get your biochip and shot.

Rachel
Rachel
Jul 21, 2020 12:29 PM
Reply to  Reg

if you look at figure 1 of the first study it shows the masks have a negative effect. this is what i would expect since they reduce sun exposure and the flu is involved with vitamin d. it would be quite a substantial reduction perhaps 60% of the light hitting aan alreacy clothed persons skin.

Norbertrand
Norbertrand
Jul 21, 2020 8:42 AM

The mask wearing is a form of ritual and nowhere was this more evident than the recent Spanish ‘ceremony’ to honour the covid deaths.
 
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7CxwQxDIVk&w=1149&h=646%5D
 
Very reminiscent of this scene …
 
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_b-zpSnoHs&w=1149&h=646%5D
 
 

Superbuggg
Superbuggg
Jul 21, 2020 8:11 AM

For flying door to door London-Berlin with no mask my buddy said I was “…selfish, egoistic and irresponsible”, which is kinder than his earlier comments that those who did not wear masks were “…fucking arseholes, fucking disgusting”, that he wants “…kill them all”, and that they at least deserve prison! Hah! B.o.n.k.e.r.s.

Rachel
Rachel
Jul 21, 2020 12:44 PM
Reply to  Superbuggg

knowledge of the real causes of poor health is what can dispell the fear of viruses. otherwise people will fall for the scam. fruits and salads help detox the lymph system. when this gets clogged up people experience cold and flu symptoms. for example the body will expel mucus thru the nose as an alternative root of elimination.

Reg
Reg
Jul 21, 2020 4:46 PM
Reply to  Rachel

All talk of natural health-giving ways to live is banned in this Brave New World.

Rachel
Rachel
Jul 21, 2020 5:23 PM
Reply to  Reg

wtf?

Reg
Reg
Jul 21, 2020 5:33 PM
Reply to  Rachel

I just meant you get banned on YouTube and other mainstream places if you even hint at boosting your immune system with natural stuff. They say it’s against covidchok rules.

Rachel
Rachel
Jul 21, 2020 8:31 PM
Reply to  Reg

nutrition doesnt boost the immune system. it feeds the body. there is no immune system. such a notion is built out of the fraudulent germ theory.

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Jul 21, 2020 7:23 AM

I am not insisting that this projection of the “unsafe other” on to no-maskers is a result of the nefarious agenda of the “powers that be, …

 
I am.
 
Everything said about masks in the above article is no doubt true but masks are also part of the propaganda campaign to divert people from the fundamental truth about this alleged pandemic.
 
The alleged COVID-19 pandemic is, like 9/11 and other events, a Trauma-based Mind Control Psychological Operation.
 
It is also an operation of the type Problem > Reaction > Solution.

 
Like 9/11 it involves two major streams of propaganda: one directed to the masses and one to the skeptics.
 
PROPAGANDA STREAM 1 – MASSES
COVID-19: Pandemic
9/11: Terrorists crashing planes into buildings which subsequently collapsed, resulting in the deaths of 3,000 people and injury to 6,000
 
PROPAGANDA STREAM 2 – SKEPTICS
COVID-19: Virus but not pandemic and response inappropriate
9/11: Inside job where buildings were brought down using controlled demolition resulting in the deaths of 3,000 people and injury to 6,000
 
REALITY
COVID-19: No virus, no nothing
9/11: Buildings were damaged and demolished, faked planes, staged deaths and injury
 
Reality gets in the way of a good psyop – you don’t want to be chasing a virus wherever it leads if anywhere – seriously, no one believes it went from Wuhan to Bergamo to the Ruby Princess, and infected poor old Boris just at the time his wife was delivering their baby, etc, all by itself or by deliberate means. No one believes that, do they? Nor do you want to manage airliners lumbering around the skies directing them into buildings or killing people for real when you don’t want them dead. One of the most important elements of psyops is CONTROL. They want complete control of the story and they do it through making it all about “story” (involving a number of actors) as much as humanly possible rather than have “reality” involved … except where wanted. They don’t want a virus and all they wanted on 9/11 was to bring buildings down.
 
MULTIPLE PROPAGANDA MINI-STREAMS TO MISLEAD AND DIVERT PEOPLE FROM FUNDAMENTAL TRUTH
 
COVID-19:
Masks are but one element of the propaganda strategy designed to both:
— divert people from the fundamental truth that there is no virus so all palaver about response is completely irrelevant
— foment disharmony in their divide-and-conquer approach to us
 
Others include but are not limited to:
 
— Quarantine
— Schools closing
— Restaurants closing
— People working from home
— Visiting old people
— Business owners going out of business
— Food delivery
— Where and how long virus remains active
— People losing jobs
— Social distancing
— Animals
— Sanitising
— Reliability of tests
— Isolation of virus
— Numbers of dead from COVID
— Rising and falling of numbers
— Numbers geographically
— What people have really died from or are really suffering from
— Asymptomatic carriers
 
9/11:
— Israel’s participation (it was a massive global every-man-and-his-dog-involved exercise and – regardless of which entities were involved – the US government is the primary culprit of course)
— What brought the buildings down – thermite, thermate, nanothermite, nuclear, DEW, etc
— What crashed into the buildings – airliners, military jets, missiles, etc
— PNAC document (makes perps look evil enough to kill all those poor people in the buildings)
 
 
HOW THEY TELL US RIGHT IN OUR FACES THAT THEY’RE PSYOPPING US – COVID-19 AND 9/11
 
COVID-19:
— The credibility of every single media story presented about alleged COVID patients is undermined by serious anomalies.
For example, look up patient, Tara Jane Langston, 39, or see links to two media stories about her under Point 5 here:
https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/blog/coronavirus-hoax-jan-2020
 
The credibility of alleged “miracle survivor” stories is undermined by serious anomalies. (Also see Point 5 at above link.)
 
9/11:
— The credibility of the alleged 6,000 injured is initially undermined by the number itself – (how would 6,000 people have been injured?) and then by the images which clearly favour “drill”-injured scenarios.
For examples, see Point 6 here:
https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/blog/coronavirus-hoax-jan-2020
 
— The credibility of alleged “miracle survivor” stories is undermined by serious anomalies.
(See Point 8 at link above)

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Jul 21, 2020 12:26 PM
Reply to  Petra Liverani

Oops! The video I meant to link for for Problem > Reaction > Solution was this one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO-kQN2ynf8.

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Jul 23, 2020 3:14 AM
Reply to  Petra Liverani

Oops again:
 
Under 9/11 with regard to the injured and “miracle survivor” stories the Point 6 referred to is at this link, not the coronavirus link:
https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/3000-dead-and-6000-injured-a-lie.html

DunGroanin
DunGroanin
Jul 21, 2020 2:02 AM

Tod you wrote

“ My article is not about whether one should or should not wear a mask, it is about how the rest of us treat people who don’t wear them.”

In response to my comment yesterday below.

The responses to my comments should be clear to you that the majority here are decided that masks should not be worn. And they appear to believe you believe that too.

You refuse to confirm that!

So how about considering the other facet ’how the rest of us treat people who DO wear them’?

Reg
Reg
Jul 21, 2020 5:50 AM
Reply to  DunGroanin

Dun, why won’t you take the magic vaccine when it comes out?

DunGroanin
DunGroanin
Jul 21, 2020 11:44 AM
Reply to  Reg

Because I wasn’t born yesterday and don’t buy snake oil or their touts who aim to push people into untested medication for safety never mind efficacy of such.

The many existing drugs (out of patent) which have been used across thousands of medical practitioners dealing with Covid illnesses across the world are now being assessed with meta analysis and a quite a few will form new protocols for treating these getting ill enough for treatment – along with many fewer therefore being pushed onto dangerous ventilators which requires induced coma and the severe complications associated with that which sees almost half die and most of the rest damaged long term.

BCG is safe over the long term usuals of it and data available. ANY new vaccine or medication is inherently unproved to be as safe.

That’s why Reg.

Reg
Reg
Jul 21, 2020 4:51 PM
Reply to  DunGroanin

Well, your snake oil salesmen are pushing this covid world order agenda. Soon you won’t have a life unless you’re injected with their aluminium-glyphosate-mercury-foetaltissue-formaldehyde solution. Your social score will go down if you rebel even though you believe religiously in this cult.

DunGroanin
DunGroanin
Jul 22, 2020 12:25 AM
Reply to  Reg

Don’t tell me what I believe Reg.
The only way the snake oil sellers win, is if they are able to keep the virus spread dangerously.

They can only do that if people are encouraged to pretend there is no danger and they do don’t need to take precautions- like masks in crowded public spaces for instance.
Or passing on to other people.

So who exactly is working for the interests of the snake oil charlatans?

People like you and others here and it seems the author too – that is who.

Andy B
Andy B
Jul 20, 2020 11:30 PM

Not sure the ‘Scarlet Letter’ thing is necessary – I’ve no patience with having children via adultery. It was a defining factor in my childhood, and lead to intense misery and basically robbed me of my childhood. If men should ‘keep it in their pants’, then women have an equal responsibility to keep their legs closed. The book was fiction, by the way.

Superbuggg
Superbuggg
Jul 21, 2020 8:04 AM
Reply to  Andy B

Vulgar! “I’ve, my, me, my”

Carey
Carey
Jul 21, 2020 11:10 PM
Reply to  Superbuggg

Hear, hear. Soemthing I’ve noticed especially with the younger set is this obsession with self.. read any article by one of them and the words you
mention appear usually in the very first sentence.
 
#we’rehosed
 
C.

DavidC
DavidC
Jul 20, 2020 7:24 PM

“…some reports I have read say 45% of all disease is acquired by asymptomatic people…”.
 
Isn’t 100% of all disease acquired by asymptomatic people?! 100% of people with Covid-19 will die. 100% of people who haven’t had Covid-19 will die!
 
Oh my God! I’m going to die!

DavidC
 

Todd
Todd
Jul 20, 2020 8:56 PM
Reply to  DavidC

Yeah, David, you caught a confusing sentence…it is not clear…I meant that “acquired from asymptomatic people”…like “the groceries were delivered by truck”…”45% of all disease is delivered by asymptomatic people” or “transmitted by”, etc…you are right, it is quite confusing, and probably grammatically incorrect. Sorry.
 

Marilyn Shepherd
Marilyn Shepherd
Jul 20, 2020 10:17 PM
Reply to  Todd

Asymptomatic is healthy

Todd
Todd
Jul 20, 2020 10:22 PM

Yeah…you would think so, eh? Apparently not according to the mainstream narrative.

DavidC
DavidC
Jul 20, 2020 10:38 PM
Reply to  Todd

Hi Todd, please don’t think I was being critical! It’s a very good article and I most definitely agree with what you’ve written. It was just that the way that particular sentence was written I found very funny!
David

Todd
Todd
Jul 20, 2020 10:43 PM
Reply to  DavidC

Thank you David…yes, it is funny…I am embarrassed by the error, but you are right, it’s irony is funny…!! Thank you!! Your comment reminds me of a remark I hear Dr. Judy Mikovitz make in some of her interviews…about how we are being told to stay away from healthy people.

DavidC
DavidC
Jul 20, 2020 11:09 PM
Reply to  Todd

She’s right on the mark with that one, I’ll have to remember it! Cheers Todd.

Binra
Binra
Jul 20, 2020 9:50 PM
Reply to  DavidC

Yes but the overall death rate is only one per person.

Todd
Todd
Jul 20, 2020 10:22 PM
Reply to  Binra

Funny 🙂

DavidC
DavidC
Jul 20, 2020 10:38 PM
Reply to  Binra

Lol! Oh my God I’m still going to die!
 
DavidC

John
John
Jul 20, 2020 6:48 PM

The corona scare is made possible by primal fear, but it is enforced by appeal to the highest ideal, responsibility for the other (appeal to love and unselfishness). Notice the incompatibility between the two, of the lowest and the highest, of what divides, and that what unites.
 
Fear divides, though one can be united in fear, it is an explosive and unreliable unity, it evaporates as soon as the cause of fear is removed, a cause which is in the mind. If fear produces temporarily a unity, that unity is merely temporarily enforced by a type of feeling which is an awful dictator. And that unity based on fear is, to say the least, not at all product and expression of higher intelligence and capacities.
Of fear, no good thing can be said, it is destructive, explosive, it debilitates ones capacity of judgement and hampers ones capacity of action. It debilitates the whole being.
It is not true that fear is evolutionary functional, our bodies signals pain when it is in danger, with our reason we also can tell when we are in danger in cases where the body does not signal danger. Fear has no positive and productive qualities at all, without fear the response to danger, if it needs to be product of reason and intiution is of a higher intelligence. Or better said, there is no intelligence at all in fear.
Worry is related to fear, while fear paralyzes the mind, and at times even the body, worry is of a pseudo rational apparently reasonable type. Worry is an evolutionary habit, product of the capacity of reasoning and its ability of looking back and foreseeing. It is a habit which does not aid one bit to a solution, and even can delay a solution. It is a temporary habitual evolutionary formed counter productive obsession which is a mix of feeling and reason.
 
Responsibility for the other though is of an opposed nature to the above, it has to do with the good, with what unites, with love and respect, with empathetic intelligence, reason, etc. It produces and is an expression of all what fear is not.
 
Concluding: fear being of the lowest nature, debilitating, involuntary (when the habit is formed), overwhelming, destructive and fully unnecessary, and totally devoid of intelligence, worry being an unproductive pseudo rational form of fear.
Love and attraction (related to taking responsibility) on the other hand being of a higher toward the highest nature, constructive, productive, product of intelligence and ever growing intelligence, and while mostly free at times and places absolutely necessary.
 
Fear paralyzes, shrinks, it takes away, it turns development back, it is regressive, it can produce instant and utter debilitation if the fear becomes all powerful.
Love and attraction produces growth, it extends, it aids intelligence, it is progressive.
 
What kind of people would combine these two, fear and love, by their character and expression utterly incompatible states of consciousness and its type of expressions. Combine them so to produce legitimization.
The preferably spontaneous and born out of love character of taking responsibility when combined with fear is turned into a rigid enforcement under the dicatorship of one the most negative and destructive of human habits and its expressions, that of fear. Which is the result of taking that what is purely negative and dictatorial, fear, to corrupt that what is of a higher and positive nature, which of course produces a fake masquerade, and a victory of the lower over the higher, a surpression of the higher by means of the lower.
 
Such combining is an expression and indication of the nature of our authorities and institutional establishments, to take that what overwhelms, what paralyzes, what detroys, what is devoid of intelligence, so to corrupt your highest capacities, al of it packed with a layer of the glamour of un-selfishness, and sold by a masquerade pretending the highest intentions, being the wisest of man, being elites.
 
 
 
 

Carey
Carey
Jul 21, 2020 11:12 PM
Reply to  John

So, in summary: ?
 
 
yeesh.

Jerry
Jerry
Jul 20, 2020 6:05 PM

“The World Health Organization and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) now include face masks in their recommendations for slowing the spread of the virus”: Mayo Clinic
 
Slowing the spread was to allow hospitals time to prepare and not become overwhelmed. Knowing now that the COVID-19 death rate is more like the seasonal flu than the Kansas (Spanish) Flu, and hospitals are prepared, the desire to ‘slow the spread’ and not reach herd immunity as soon as practicable, can only be to buy time for the mRNA injection.
 
Fauci’s recent recantation was that masks were not initially recommended because of shortages for health staff. So why didn’t he recommend cloth masks for the public?
 
An alternative spin of events is found in the first link, above, where the Mayo clinic says initially “experts didn’t know the extent to which people with COVID-19 could spread the virus before symptoms appeared. Nor was it known that some people have COVID-19 but don’t have any symptoms.” Then why straight into social distancing??
 
 
 
 
 

Todd
Todd
Jul 20, 2020 6:20 PM
Reply to  Jerry

Jerry…in four short concise paragraphs you laid out something that is so clear, rational and logical to me I couldn’t even begin to find a substantiated contrary response. So why doesn’t everyone, or at least the majority, feel the same way? As a psychologist this question and what it implies is most mysterious element of this Covid phenomenon.

Binra
Binra
Jul 20, 2020 11:40 PM
Reply to  Todd

The idea of a virus is a mental construct of an interpreted experience or ‘accepted meaning’ that extends or indeed explicates an inner conflicted sense of unresolved fear. We fill our world with our own shadow denials – as if by casting them out we have ‘escaped’ at least a compartmentalised sense of distance and control.
 
Of course to Modern Man, the world Out There is the Only reality and mental or psychic ability is only valid in terms of hijacking and manipulating it to reinforce the means to keep our denials from coming back into our minds – or in general terms escape the consequences of our thought and behaviour.
 
The hugely disproportionate measures of reaction are the ‘shocking proof’ that it must be terribly real. For they would never do that unless it was real.
So if it is more fearful than shutting down life as we knew it – then a terrible fear operates as replacement or override of a mind that doesn’t want to question and understand anything except how to survive it.
 
Feared truth is defended against by obfuscation, irrationality and magical beliefs.
The idea of contagion was a psychic idea of possession, corruption or curse, long before the attribution of cause to certain diseases to a viral response of cells to toxins and stress.
 
The strangeness is for my part a sense of different realities splitting as a result of different responses or capacities to abide fear – and indeed take responsibility for our thought and attention. It would seem that the media is the key to the transmission of the virus.
 
‘Imagine a virus so contagious and deadly that you have to be tested to know that you had it!’.
 
Not my original quote that – nor the other response on overall death count – I had the laugh of that from Andy Kaufman.
 
“One will accept what he is willing to accept. He cannot be asked to accept anymore, for he will not even hear the request that he accept it. This is why you must be attentive to your own mind. For you are accepting that which you are willing to accept, but you are not accepting all that you want to accept, because you are not yet fully willing”. (NTI).

Carey
Carey
Jul 21, 2020 11:15 PM
Reply to  Binra

snoozy

Carey
Carey
Jul 21, 2020 11:15 PM
Reply to  Jerry

Jerry: in my opinion it’s *not supposed* to make sense; it’s supposed to make us
crazy as f*ck, especially over time as the narrative is continually altered.

Aldous Hexley
Aldous Hexley
Jul 20, 2020 5:28 PM

This is amusing and serious with details on masks and the numbers game being played. 422,000+ views.
 



 

Ruth L
Ruth L
Jul 20, 2020 9:16 PM
Reply to  Aldous Hexley

Aldous – your video guy is a natural – hilarious!

Aldous Hexley
Aldous Hexley
Jul 20, 2020 11:16 PM
Reply to  Ruth L

Hi Ruth. This guy Patrick Bet-David seemed familiar because I saw his interview with Dr. Judy Mikovits some months back. His interview was then taken down by youtube, and he maintains this was because it went viral into 2+ million views. Youtube complained she was being inaccurate (with her strong attack on Gates and Fauci).
 
With further search I now find, as Bet-David indicates, there are many many videos of Judy Mikovits..I had no idea she is so famous, and apparently views are split on how accurate she has been in her remarks on Fauci and Gates.
 
Bet-David, explaining his response to his interview with her being taken down, is an entrepreneur who likes controversy and has a vast following.
 
A search on Judy Mikovits will show the numerous interviews she’s done. Maybe that’s why O-G has avoided her.
 

John
John
Jul 20, 2020 4:43 PM

The corona virus scare is also part of the divide and rule game. It divides people in public, the work space, social space, and also the private sphere, it divides physically and mentally, and it touches them financially and economically. Then people who are unwilling, or partially unwilling, not fully convinced come into conflict with others. And even if such unwilling or not fully complying people would try to avoid conflict, they have a high risk of meeting dictatorial people in some of these spaces and spheres. And even if such people would try to avoid unnecessary conflict by means of not engaging in discussions, they can still be recognized by not wearing a mask, or not keeping appropriate distance, or doing it just not exactly good enough for some people.
Divide and rule, extended into all spheres of human life, extended into all modes of expressions (mental/physical), extended also into detailed instructions.
So, combined with the collective primal fear instinct, extending it into all modes of human expression, except these modes which are not recognized by society, the higher spiritual modes of consciousness, the corona virus scare extends into all general domains of human expression.
 
Now add to the above other means of division and inevitable self caused division (the latter being not top down orchestrated, but initiated by individuals themselves). There is both the top down orchestrated setting up and individually initiated division of whites against blacks, blacks against whites, secular and christian against muslim, male and female against each other (in the case of derailled overblown feminism), and political left against right, and the Western world against Russia. Thus hatred and fear deeply penetrates all of society, regarding multiple subjects distributed day and night by the media.
 
While people can choose to not engage in the hatred caused by above orchestrated forms of division, they can choose for tolerance and attraction, the all penetrating, the all affecting Corona virus scare is almost unavoidable in general, if fully avoidable at all.
 
Even sites like this site doing good work, they aid in division in as far as they cause serious conflict. The unwilling, those not convinced, those who does no comply in some minor or major way can be used to legitimize more serious control.
This is not to say that the work is not good, but all media channels, also alternative become to some point channels of distribution of hate or its milder form, irritation, and consequently division.
 
Keeping the above in mind, on the very highest levels of orchestration, they know human nature, they are very well aware of its underlying primary tendencies towards fear, hate and division. Of which human history is the proof. And they deliberately and instinctively use it. Because hatred and fear, which leads to serious conflict, reduces ones capacity of development, it stalls development of society at large, and of the specific level of the individuals in it, it reduces the level collectively, and stalling of that development and reducing of the level is necessary in order to maintain power.
And all of this orchestration, they do it by means of appeals to humanism, empathy, responsibility, reducing hatred, etc, in order to masque it, to empower it, to give it the appearance of high minded worthiness.
 
In reality though, ‘the high minded worthiness’ is not at all in possession of any of such elites and of doubtful nature on somewhat lesser level, which are very much subject to corruption, and it is not in possession of their unfortunately fooled ordinary man believers. These are masquerades of those how are fooled into it, and those who are cynical and corrupt, and those who are completely false and deceptive.
The real situation is not about the responsibility of prevention of the mass spreading of a dangerous virus, which in as far as there is something going on, is not of a level which legitimizes what is currently going on.
The real situation, and opportunity is about the prevention of being contaminated with fear and hate, and it is the potential and responsibility of any individual of whatever status and capacities, directed by his own judgement, allowing no forceful interference of any other individual or collective. A contamination which kills more people, has killed more people, en will continue to kill more people, and has stalled evolution and development to an extent no virus is ever capable of.

Felix Culpa
Felix Culpa
Jul 20, 2020 4:25 PM

This article’s premise is faulty. That (implied) premise is “Let’s just return to the status quo ante and not do this ‘new normal’ thing.” The fault in the premise is that nothing in this world stays constant, but is subject to change and changers- and that includes ideas which will develop. If they are bad ideas they will grow worse; if good; better.

“Being different”, not”fitting in” is euphemistic mantra and a train of the oligarchs whose media used to relentlessly preach it.

The oligarchs got off that train and abandoned the mantra once it got them to their destination, namely, using human rights language to strip from law recognition of marriage and the family- a healthy society’s fundamental cell.

Oligarchy cannot rule where the family is respected in law and culture but will be subject to regulation. “Give us unlimited sexual appetite license and we won’t complain about your economic policy is the esoteric agreement struck between the oligarchs and their proxy fighters of which homosexuality promotion is now the vanguard- the torch being passed from feminism. ( Remember: bad ideas will develop into worse ones.) The exoteric explanation made to the public was xenophobia is indistinguishable from a refusal to abandon the distinction between normal and abnormal acts- whether in the realm of finance where sterility ( usury- abnormal) and fertility (the marriage act begetting and oriented to children- normal) get inverted.

Mr. Hayden’s essay begins, however, on a deeply incisive note. The new mantra “Wearing a mask is an act of love” is a crucial finding with regard to the new train the oligarchs have hopped on. For the tyrant, subjectivity preaching is useful when you are not in power. When relativizing everything gets your foot in the door and you’ve now seized institutional power, objectivity mimicry becomes the new normal: Now we are to be unified under the tyrant: “We are all in this together” “No hate speech”, “Wearing a mask is an act of love.”

To upend this villainy, you have first to understand the mind behind it. That mind is a guilty conscience and since “I am a man, nothing human do I consider alien to me” applies, we all know how guilt is attemptedly assauged when repentance is not sought: through projection. “I am not victimizing anyone; I am the one being victimized!”

Since oligarchy has the family ( and therefore the moral and natural law and the Catholicism which witnesses to its truth) in its crosshairs, it seizes upon the family’s position as its own. And as the moral man’s reasons for not wearing a mask in our context could only be two: For reasons of health and out of love for my fellow man ( he won’t set him a bad example by caving to fear of the powerful), those are the exact reasons then that the oligarchs will appeal to as their own. As they steal work’s surplus value from the labourer, so they steal their human victims’ ground of objection. And put that victim on the defensive able only to protest his innocence against his being cast into the role of tyrant under full media, finger-pointing glare.

How clever! It’s called accusatory inversion. But once you get wise to the psychology, you demystify the game and it loses its power.

In previous posts, I have argued that this battle we are in is a spiritual battle at root. A battle over the soul wherein the sick soul, guilt-ridden, wants to force the healthy soul to pronounce health sickness and sickness health.

Moral relativism promotion brought us to this day; it is incapable of leading us out.

Todd
Todd
Jul 20, 2020 6:30 PM
Reply to  Felix Culpa

I read your post here with great interest…and I must read it again because I am having trouble seeing my views, from my article, as conflicting with yours. I “think” I agree with everything you say here. Possibly we are talking about two different things, I am not sure. All I am trying to address in my article is a known psychological phenomenon that causes people to behave in a particular way that is largely driven by unconscious powers—projection of “hate”, “fear” etc on to a person or group that is marked as the receiver of the projection. I note that this “human” proclivity is natural in its foundation (if you believe in Jung’s concepts of the collective unconscious) but is easily manipulated but other factions such as culture and government…I think that is the part you are addressing here in your response, a part I made conscious effort to avoid. Am I correct? I would love to hear a more succinct explanation as to why you believe my thesis to be faulty. I apologize if I am not capable of seeing it here in what you write…that is not your fault but my own. Thank you!

Felix Culpa
Felix Culpa
Jul 21, 2020 12:06 AM
Reply to  Todd

Thank you for the kind reply. You are right, that was the part I was addressing- the “why” behind the “how”, if you will.

As to the fault in your premise, I found it the advancement of moral relativism; an endorsement fatally undermining your rational and morally certain conclusion that:

“We must all strive to be more conscious, more aware of the powers that internally, or externally, propel us into behaviour that is not only consciously irrational, but unproductive and ultimately quite dangerous.”

Earlier you had written:

“Obviously the color of a person’s skin, or a person’s religion, or sexual orientation is a mark of ‘other’ to fear. We have been a species of mistrust, and our efforts to identify ‘other’ as having cultural differences, ethnic differences, sexual differences, or even ideological differences, have found a variety of clever devices…”

Do you not imply in the above that good and evil are relative to the outlook of the “other” and that there is no objective ground upon which fear or mistrust is based? G.K. Chesterton spoke of “things that constitute a valid list”. Sesame Street (but only at its outset) did the same thing with its “one of these things just doesn’t belong here” children’s song. Ethnic difference just doesn’t belong on the above list, I would argue. Ethnic difference is not a moral category; the others always have moral repercussions, by contrast. A phenomenon like BLM, wherein ethnic difference gets weaponized and harnessed to a wicked agenda, is not understandable but only aided by a blurring of the distinction between ethnic and sexual difference ( where sexual difference does not mean male or female but sexual behaviour) and ethnic and ideological difference.

You speak of “the other” and a natural human tendency to fear and mistrust this other. Well and good. But is a natural fear of-or even finding funny- the hitherto unknown face of the other, the same thing as sneering at the (now unfashionable) other who is your fellow man? Or is that a moral problem born of social engineering? These distinctions are not made in your essay.

But distinction-making; noting apart “this” from “that” is not only a valid but a necessary form of taking cognizance of “otherness”, no?

The point bears repeating. There is a valid form of discriminating ( as of behaviour: approving normal; disapproving abnormal) and an invalid form of discriminating ( as of sneering at persons for their immutable and involuntary characteristics like skin colour: a difference always normal).

I have read your essay again, and do not find it sufficiently alive to the above and necessary distinction making, even when you write elsewhere:

“other marks are simply physiological attributes such as skin color and physical differences, others, such as religion or sexual orientation are a bit more difficult to identify…. ‘The reason to take action’ is often flimsy and ultimately irrational”

Too vague to be of help? What is “difficult to identify” about “sexual orientation” as opposed to skin colour, for example? The first is a euphemism for morally- problematic behaviour and the latter is an immutable, involuntary and innocent physical trait. George Soros has doled out a lot of his ill-gotten cash to promote the former as the latter, via media darling BLM in order to use anti-discrimination legislation to attack Catholics and outlaw their ability to practice their faith in the public square. Is that why it is now “difficult to identify” the difference between skin colour and homosexual acts?

Oligarchy rears its head again.

Because, of course, distinction-making is gravely difficult to understand when maintaining your livelihood depends upon not understanding crucial distinctions.

Therefore, our present-day fort of folly can only fall if people with hard heads and soft hearts ( and not the reverse- abnormal if usual today- thanks to social engineering) are willing to take the financial hit to bring that fort down. Only financial daring of this kind answers chutzpah.

The oligarchs’ demand to don the physical mask was preceded by their demand to don the ideological mask which blurs necessary distinctions. The physical mask serves as a kind of ‘note to self” to not so much as think of wandering off of oligarchic reservations of thought again and known as “major media” outlets, as was done in 2016 en masse.

The American sociologist Anne Hendershott reminds us that “Deviance is constant”. In so noting, she is observing that there has never been missing from human affairs the categories of good and evil. This is another way of saying that moral relativism is a fiction, all that changes is what gets named good or evil and that in turn depends upon who’s in the institutional driver’s seat.

We know good rule when evil gets called evil and good gets called good. We know bad rule when good gets labelled evil and evil gets labelled good. We live in an age where usury flys under the flag of “financial genius” and a husband and wife who welcome and raise children to know, love and serve God as “deplorable”. Cui bono applies.

Abuse of language always signals abuse of power. Restoration always begins by calling things by their right names and the drawing up of things which constitute a valid list.

Congratulations again on your brilliant and insightful opening.

Todd Hayen
Todd Hayen
Jul 21, 2020 2:58 AM
Reply to  Felix Culpa

Your reply here is brilliant and worthy of careful consideration. Thank you very much…I will read it several times in order to fully understand its implications. I may not fully get it right now, regarding how it applies to my article, and what I will say here may be thoroughly disappointing…
 
I think my thesis regarding the projection onto other is not as complicated as what you present here. I think what you say here is very relevant…and it’s more thorough investigation into the “otherness” of race, sexual orientation, religion, is highly pertinent, but I am not sure if that subtlety and detail is necessary to support my idea in this particular article. I may be missing something, but I’m not sure.
 
I am essentially saying that ANY identification of difference can be the spring board for identifying a person or group as “other”…the detail, yes, is in the projection of whatever is projected for whatever reason…all the things you bring up are wonderful analyses into those “reasons”…but the identification of “other” can be mind numbingly simple…nearly anything that is a mark. What the mark is, how it got there, etc. is not really all that important.
 
That being said, however, the reasons underlying the projection itself…why it is hate that is projected, why fear is projected, anger, whatever is complicated, and I believe is what your response is referring to so eloquently…and yes, I made absolutely no effort in my essay to address those things. Actually I did touch on it with my comments on tribalism and our archaic fear of other for various “other” identifications like color of skin, or even the color of beads worn but not in the detail you are presenting here. The details as to why a mark causes the stirring up of hate etc. is far to complex to go into.
 
Keep in mind, from a Jungian point of view, unconscious material formed into a complex is often highly irrational in its formulation of desired action or projection. It is essentially “stupid” in its “reasons” to react. It typically is based on something rational, but the outcome may make no sense at all to a rational person…such as a man who is terrified of masked people because he was terrorized by a raccoon when 3 years old and that trauma, and complex formed by it, goes underground into the unconscious. A simplistic example, but an illustration.
 
I do believe there is a very important place for all that you have said here, but I stand by my essay’s choice to “keep it simple” and stick to the basic tenet that people project hate toward a “marked other”…why, how, etc they come to this is a discussion that would require quite a long article, if not a whole book, to explore! I also stick to my conclusion…as simple as it is, that if we uncover our largely irrational, or irrelevant, unconscious “reasons” to project, we will come out better for it…we then can react where and how it is appropriate to react, rather than blindly rely on a system that tells us what to do, whose “reasons” are obscure and hidden in the unconscious, and more than likely no longer rationally apply to a current situation.
 
I hope my response is not a cop out…maybe I missed your point entirely…thank you again for your wonderful response!!

Felix Culpa
Felix Culpa
Jul 21, 2020 4:39 PM
Reply to  Todd Hayen

Did Carl Jung believe there was such a thing as objective truth?
Do you?

Todd Hayen
Todd Hayen
Jul 21, 2020 7:07 PM
Reply to  Felix Culpa

I would say Jung believed in an objective reality, I am not sure what you mean by “truth”…in a very simplistic nutshell, Jung believed in an unconscious, both a collective unconscious (which is what made him different than Freud) and a personal unconscious. And he believed in a conscious realm, and then an over arching “self.” He believed in a subjective reality as well, and it is arguable, considering things he is documented as saying, that he believed that a person’s subjective reality could also be their objective reality. This is where we venture into metaphysics.
 
To tell you the truth, I am not sure what I believe regarding “reality”…I do, personally, believe in a universal truth. If you are familiar with ancient Egyptian cosmology, I believe in what they call ma’at. But that’s another story.

Felix Culpa
Felix Culpa
Jul 21, 2020 11:21 PM
Reply to  Todd Hayen

You have told me of Jung’s perceptions and your own.

But truth is not one’s perception of things; rather, all thought is an attempt to discover whether one’s perceptions are true or not.

If a man does not care if his perceptions are true or not, only that they are his, then he is a man without interest in thinking.

Here’s an example of unthinking: praising someone for their words while simultaneously maintaining that you fail to understand them.

And I can see how you, a follower of Jung, would learn such a patronizing and thoughtless attitude.

Jung patronized, not to say preyed upon, his clients with the psychoanalysis he learned from Freud.

And what is psychoanalysis? The Catholic sacrament of Confession for sale.

Freud and Jung could bring their wealthy clients under their control by simultaneously manipulating their vices and absolving them of the guilt which flowed from those actions.

Their split was born of rivalry of securing the wealthy, libertine Americans who flocked to these celebrities of their day.

Still, you are right that Jung recognized objective reality and even insisted upon its importance- only for others and not himself.

When Jung went to Freud for absolution for seducing a female patient and Freud reciprocated by shutting down Jung’s analysis of Freud’s dream of his wife and sister-in-law, because he knew he would lose the upper hand in their relationship, the relationship collapsed. Jung’s stated reason? “Freud was placing personal authority above truth.” (Memories, Dreams, Reflections C.G. Jung)

As to Metaphysics, it is about Ultimate Reality and not what these two were into.

Todd
Todd
Jul 22, 2020 12:15 AM
Reply to  Felix Culpa

I was trying to have a polite conversation with you, obviously that is not a mutual desire. I will not respond again.

Felix Culpa
Felix Culpa
Jul 22, 2020 2:53 AM
Reply to  Todd

Honest argument as incivility, eh? You’re about 100 years too late:
“ ‘Good taste’, the last and vilest of human superstitions has succeeded in silencing us where all the rest have failed.”
G.K. Chesterton

John
John
Jul 20, 2020 8:21 PM
Reply to  Felix Culpa

It might be true that bad ideas grow worse, but not that good ideas grow better. Or at least, the latter might go through a temporary cycle of distortion and abuse. So at least, a deliberation on that is required.
Good ideas are conceived in a light, and that light may be bright or dim, and what in between, so the light shown on an idea can distort the idea.
Take for instance the emancipation of females, an idea based on equality in terms of worthiness and rights of every human being. The idea is originally conceived by humanists, philosophers, poets, etc. The idea is consequently promoted and conceived by activists, they scale it down to their capacity of comprehension. It is then promoted and implemented in society through debate and unfortunately, violence. Then, the idea is even more scaled down, and distorted and twisted, and it becomes the vessel of contemporary professionalized demagogy, leading to derailed aggressive feminism. The idea becomes the vessel not of emancipation, but a power struggle in the opposite direction, and a vessel of abuse for al kinds of interests which are opposite or by far not part of the original idea.
So, the original idea is good, the implementation is scaled down, already subject to inevitable twists, and finally the idea is fully twisted and corrupted through the inherent multiple ways of explaining, the inherent difficulties of perfect implementation in practice, and delilberate distortion and twisting, proceeding after the incapacity of conceiving it in the best light. Of course, how far this derailment of an idea, of it growing bad (being conceived highly distorted) will go depends on how people are willing to twist and turn and abuse it, but scaling down, is an inevitable product of implementation, unless all people become original conceivers.
 
On a sidenote, in Platonism, there exist no bad ideas, there are only distortions and twists of immutable originals, the distortion being the product of the quality of conception. So that a bad idea consists of a distortion of a good original, or a more purer form, which again is caused by philosophical sophist logic, or from corruption caused by wrong motives (motive of power for instance), or some severe incapacity.

Felix Culpa
Felix Culpa
Jul 21, 2020 12:24 AM
Reply to  John

A good idea is one, like an acorn, with potential to turn into a mighty oak. I do not mean to suggest that this process is impervious to skullduggery. Ideas, even good ones, may be weaponized and the good they are capable of delivering derailed, so thanks for highlighting that point.
As to the distortion of a good original, I think Aquinas nailed it with the definition of evil as the absence of a due good.

JohnEss
JohnEss
Jul 20, 2020 3:35 PM

Could I ask Admin why my post of reply to Gezzah Potts is awaiting approval, please?
 
I have tried reposting but the same response is received.
 
Have I transgressed some OG law of which I am unaware?
 
Thank you.

Admin1
Admin
Admin1
Jul 20, 2020 3:40 PM
Reply to  JohnEss

The software just takes against certain comments sometimes. Or maybe you had more than two links?

JohnEss
JohnEss
Jul 21, 2020 1:30 AM
Reply to  Admin1

Thank you for your explanation.

There were no links in the comment.

I have received an email notification that my comment has been uploaded.

Thom
Thom
Jul 20, 2020 2:56 PM

I note a large majority of people still not wearing masks in shops here in England this morning despite the impending edict. Boris Johnson’s project fear has failed. I guess he has to make them compulsory before the bosses notice!

Rachel
Rachel
Jul 20, 2020 4:07 PM
Reply to  Thom

fear? surely not. that could cause adrenal fatigue. he’s not trying to wear the elderly down with months of propaganda about a fantasy “deadly virus”? https://youtu.be/Cdq80ijbj-I

IANA
IANA
Jul 20, 2020 2:22 PM

A important issue raised in today’s UK Column was regarding a woman with asthma who contacted her local heath centre about exemption from mask wearing as upon test she experienced breathing problems.
 
Apparently she was informed that the GP’s at the surgery have been instructed by the NHS hierarchy that no medical exemptions are to be issued. Under this NHS directive whatever your medical condition you will not be granted an exemption from wearing a mask. Item begins at approx 32.20 in.
 
Not only medical martial law but medical tyranny is being imposed.
 

Steve Hayes
Steve Hayes
Jul 20, 2020 3:35 PM
Reply to  IANA

One does not require a doctor’s note or medical certificate. One can simply assert one is exempt.

MiriamW
MiriamW
Jul 20, 2020 4:00 PM
Reply to  Steve Hayes

Yes, I believe that’s correct. I saw UK Column as well and I think that it is perhaps unreasonable to expect GPs to write notes for all of us who are exempt. Shop owners/door goons should respect anyone who says that they’re unable to wear a mask as bus drivers have been doing in our experience.
 
A badge or exemption card probably helps (both my partner and I have carried them since this nightmare began.) There are lots of sites with downloadable images and a search on Google images brings up a lot to choose from.

Tomoola Sitchin
Tomoola Sitchin
Jul 20, 2020 8:25 PM
Reply to  MiriamW

If you don’t want to wear a mask then doing so will be harmful. Exempt yourself, others including the prize clowns in government do not have the moral right to make you wear one.

Tomoola Sitchin
Tomoola Sitchin
Jul 20, 2020 8:22 PM
Reply to  Steve Hayes

Doctor’s won’t give you a note in any event, just medically exempt yourself, it works on the buses in my locale and will work in the shops.

IANA
IANA
Jul 20, 2020 9:20 PM
Reply to  Steve Hayes

There are going to many frightened vulnerable people in this country like the lady in question who will be confused by what is arguably a very confusing (probably deliberately so) policy.
 
That she has genuine health concerns so has sought to reach out only to be denied by the gauleiters of the NHS appears heartless. Why try to deny that which is a callous response to one very worried woman by such a glib response?

Steve Hayes
Steve Hayes
Jul 21, 2020 11:40 AM
Reply to  IANA

If you think being factual and legally accurate is glib, all I can say is you are way to fashionable for me.

Rachel
Rachel
Jul 20, 2020 4:26 PM
Reply to  IANA

people have the right to informed consent. certainly an exemption assumes these drs have a say and coneding authority over ones own health. why would the nhs be in a position to exempt someone from an illegal instruction? http://drrimatruthreports.com/the-sources-of-the-law-the-right-of-informed-consent

Sebastian
Sebastian
Jul 20, 2020 6:22 PM
Reply to  Rachel

This is the only I could find.
 
The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Wearing of Face Coverings on Public Transport) (England) Regulations 2020 
 
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/592/contents/made

IANA
IANA
Jul 20, 2020 9:21 PM
Reply to  Rachel

I’m unclear of your response Rachel but will take a look at your link.

PWL
PWL
Jul 20, 2020 1:47 PM

Lots of talk about facemasks in shops, but no sign on government web pages of actual legislation. If it’s not an amendment to the main body of coronavirus restrictions regulations, I’m assuming it should be something titled like its relation “Coronavirus: Health Protection (Coronavirus, Wearing of Face Coverings on Public Transport) (England) Regulations 2020”.If anyone can find it, let me know.

Steve Hayes
Steve Hayes
Jul 20, 2020 4:03 PM
Reply to  PWL

A search of the government’s website found no such legislation. https://www.gov.uk/search/all?keywords=face+coverings+shops+law&order=relevance
I suspect that the reason for this is it does not yet exist and will turn up as a Statutory Instrument just prior to the parliamentary recess on Wednesday.

PWL
PWL
Jul 20, 2020 10:01 PM
Reply to  Steve Hayes

Thank you. That would be the thing I’d expect to see.

MiriamW
MiriamW
Jul 20, 2020 4:03 PM
Reply to  PWL

It’s here:
 
In England, you must by law wear a face covering in the following settings:
 

 
Measures can be taken if people do not comply with this law. Transport operators can deny service or direct someone to wear a face covering. If necessary, the police and Transport for London authorised officers can issue fines of £100 (halving to £50 if paid within 14 days). Shops and supermarkets will be expected to encourage compliance with the law (as they would do more generally) and can refuse entry. In both cases, if necessary, the police have the powers to enforce these measures, including through issuing a fine of £100 (halving to £50 if paid within 14 days).
 
The exemptions (next paragraph) are the same as those for public transport and there is no mention of anyone needing a doctor’s note. (After all this is nothing to do with health.)
 
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/face-coverings-when-to-wear-one-and-how-to-make-your-own/face-coverings-when-to-wear-one-and-how-to-make-your-own

Steve Hayes
Steve Hayes
Jul 20, 2020 4:07 PM
Reply to  MiriamW

Your links are not to a law. The first is to a parliamentary statement. The second is to government guidance.

MiriamW
MiriamW
Jul 20, 2020 4:20 PM
Reply to  Steve Hayes

Fair enough, but the thing is, this guidance mentions a £100 fine enforced by police so how does that work ?
 
Hasn’t this deliberate Government confusion over the difference between ‘guidance’ and law been exposed as part of Simon Dolan’s legal challenge to the lockdown?

Steve Hayes
Steve Hayes
Jul 20, 2020 4:33 PM
Reply to  MiriamW

The confusion never existed. Guidance is always labelled as guidance. Laws are passed by parliament (although the Coronavirus Act 2020 unconstitutionally gave the government the power to amend that law by ministerial fiat).
 
In the Simon Dolan case, the government defended itself from the charge of violation of the right to an education by pointing out that the government had not passed any law denying anyone an education. That was of course nothing more than legal spin, but they had a judge who was determined to prefer the government’s case.

MiriamW
MiriamW
Jul 20, 2020 4:49 PM
Reply to  Steve Hayes

The confusion may not have existed but most people were (and probably still are) confused by the difference, judging by the enthusiasm with which some schools, and now shops, cafes and salons have enforced what are only ‘guidelines’.
 
The link on the Govt w/s begins ‘In England, you must by law wear a face covering’ which most people will interpret as meaning it will be against the law not to and they risk being fined for non-compliance after 24 July.
 
You may well be right that the Statutory Instrument may not yet exist and it will be rushed through in time but that won’t help anyone on Friday when arguing the toss with the door goon at Asda!

Tomoola Sitchin
Tomoola Sitchin
Jul 20, 2020 8:29 PM
Reply to  MiriamW

The goons who run my local pub have just decided to make all their staff wear masks. I won’t be patronising it, until they see sense.

Cicatriz
Cicatriz
Jul 21, 2020 2:03 AM
Reply to  MiriamW

You’re supposed to be confused, this is nonlinear warfare at its finest.

Rachel
Rachel
Jul 20, 2020 4:50 PM
Reply to  MiriamW

the document must be prefaced with a warning it contains signs of a lock down eg. masks, ‘vaccines’, torture etc.

PWL
PWL
Jul 20, 2020 10:03 PM
Reply to  MiriamW

Thanks. This is what I mean. There’s plenty written and spoken about it, but the law (it’ll be a Statutory Instrument) doesn’t exist yet – as far as I can tell.

Sebastian
Sebastian
Jul 20, 2020 6:24 PM
Reply to  PWL

The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Wearing of Face Coverings on Public Transport) (England) Regulations 2020 
It would easily apply to shops

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/592/contents/made 

PWL
PWL
Jul 20, 2020 10:04 PM
Reply to  Sebastian

Thanks. I’m expecting to see exactly that sort of thing, but specifically for face coverings in shops.

Lucan Grey
Lucan Grey
Jul 20, 2020 7:54 PM
Reply to  PWL

Likely this. It looks wide enough
 
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/7/schedule/22
 
6(1) probably.
 
The Secretary of State can restrict by declaration. No SI required.

PWL
PWL
Jul 20, 2020 10:06 PM
Reply to  Lucan Grey

Thanks. I think they are going to be an extention of the restriction regulations – so it’s plucked out of thin air whichever way. My point is that so far, although there’s a lot of talk about it, there doesn’t yet seem to be a regulation.

Steve Hayes
Steve Hayes
Jul 21, 2020 3:36 PM
Reply to  Lucan Grey

6(1) refers to specific premises, not a general category, such as in this case all retail outlets.

Lucan Grey
Lucan Grey
Jul 21, 2020 4:23 PM
Reply to  Steve Hayes

“A direction under sub-paragraph (1) may be issued in relation to—
(a)
specified premises, or
(b)
premises of a specified description.”
 
🙂

Steve Hayes
Steve Hayes
Jul 21, 2020 4:55 PM
Reply to  Lucan Grey

Prior to this coronavirus madness, no court would have interpreted those words so widely as to include all retail outlets. They would have expected specificity, as previous public laws always did. However, after the Simon Dolan case, I have a depressing feeling that your interpretation may well be correct. Of course none of this should have been open to interpretation as parliament should have scrutinised it and we should all know the intended scope of the words prior to it becoming law.

Matt
Matt
Jul 20, 2020 12:52 PM

Apparently this whole Covid thing is a “system test”. It’s a stress test on all manner of system parameters. What people need to understand is that democracy, communism, socialism etc are all the SAME thing. The system runs them all. The global order has been here for a long, long, long time. It’s not ‘coming’…it’s here. That people are totally in the dark as to their real role IN THE SYSTEM is a very large contributing problem to their frustration and unhappiness. The vast majority of ‘people’ are citizens of the system. Citizen = human capital. If they had been aware of this 20 years ago, 30 years ago and made changes to their association with the system, they would be in better positions. If you’re running around like a headless chook yelling about masks…it’s too late.
 
There is a pretense of human rights. The system will give you that illusion. But your most important duty is to know the law…because the sly thugs in charge wrote it. If you don’t know the law then you will only and always be a dependent on the big system. You NEED the system. You’ve bound yourself to it. For thousands of years, you have used its currencies, allowed its ideas to influence your actions, followed its written laws, scheduled your lives using its time, built its colonies, constructed its cities, worked for its corporations, voted for its politicians, fought its wars, expanded its empires, used its legal systems, believed that its private, political corporations were your governments, and done everything possible to better the big system in every way imaginable. Using simple social engineering techniques and working towards modifying your behaviour for systemic maximum benefit, you now spend the vast majority of your lives working for the system instead of living for yourselves.
 
To the fat controllers, the plebs…the human capital, ignorant of their position, really are a laughable bunch. They are begging the system to make the system better so that their lives can go back to normal. The system is only interested in your human capital. And if the system wants to lead you from one paddock to the next, it will.
 
Saving yourselves by begging the system to stop ‘tackling so hard’, Sir, is pointless. Very few people will realise this. Most will assume the system is there to help them…and if not now…because it seems the mean bunch in Government are messing things up…then later…later the system will be better. Nope. For thousands of years, the control of human beings has been a perfected art form. It’s called Statecraft. Living free requires all kinds of sacrifices. You only get one crack in this life, as far as we know. Nobody knows what’s truly next. Most people are fine handing over the fruit of their labour to overlords…if they can watch football, or if they can drink an overpriced coffee on the side of the road. Most people are down with lifetime mortgages and shrug it off…that’s life. It’s only life because they’re lazy.
 
Anyway…just my take on it. It’s messy. The cities are deplorable places crammed with hive minded automatons. If you kind of get where I’m coming from you know you’re surrounded by people with zero sense of community. That’s just another of the things ‘bred out’ of modern man. Things suck right now for sure. But ignorance has got us here.

Eyes Open
Eyes Open
Jul 20, 2020 1:35 PM
Reply to  Matt

Tedious beyond belief.

This nightmare is being driven by neoliberalism. Gates, Big Pharma and their shareholders are not socialists, they’re capitalists.

Matt
Matt
Jul 20, 2020 1:57 PM
Reply to  Eyes Open

Socialists, capitalists, communists, neoliberals, liberals…all the same. These buzzwords are cons of the one big system.
 

Matt
Matt
Jul 20, 2020 2:11 PM
Reply to  Eyes Open

Communism, socialism, liberal, neoliberal, capitalist…….all just buzzwords created to con you by the one big system. They are all the same thing controlled by the same people.

JohnEss
JohnEss
Jul 20, 2020 2:38 PM
Reply to  Eyes Open

There is a bigger picture than the Gates of hell and the drug companies.

Tomoola Sitchin
Tomoola Sitchin
Jul 20, 2020 8:36 PM
Reply to  JohnEss

Yes you are getting near the mark and most of the bright people on this site have not yet sussed out what is the real problem Waiting in the wings is the great depopulator, Bill Gates with a motley selection of genocidal witches brews, that will be laughingly called vaccines. We are in very deep trouble.
 
 

Tomoola Sitchin
Tomoola Sitchin
Jul 20, 2020 8:32 PM
Reply to  Eyes Open

Tedious it may be for the cognitively dissonant, but is nevertheless spot on.
 

JohnEss
JohnEss
Jul 20, 2020 2:36 PM
Reply to  Matt

Excellent post.
 
And in my opinion, wholly valid points throughout.
 
I have long distrusted “the system” and recognised it for the manipulative organism it really is. Many things are an illusion; fairness, equality, justice are a few examples.
 
Human livestock is exactly what most of us are and the above post documents just how real and present the Matrix is and has been for centuries.

Matt
Matt
Jul 20, 2020 3:58 PM
Reply to  JohnEss

Right. This system morphs and reshapes in various places all around the world all the time. The West has enjoyed responsibility free, ‘do what you want’ living for 70 years. It’s been a haven for unbridled ego tripping, lax morality and a million other pleasures by design. Not even 911 had people really asking questions. But that’s design too. The West became ‘me, me, me’ while duty and solemn responsibility took a backseat. The Royal Institute of International Affairs wrote in 1937 that China would police the world. It’s known that America will eventually burn itself out with debt. It’s known that China has been incubated by Western globalists for a long, long time to emerge as the production centre of the world. Those Western globalists made and China what it is now. This has all come to pass. And it was all documented decades ago. This is happening.
 
Is it any surprise that this ‘virus’ was staged in Wuhan, China? And then made a bee-line for the West, specifically (surprise surprise) New York City? China solved the spread by clicking its fingers. Presto. Gone. Meanwhile, the West remains baffled. Its all by design. The memos were handed out to the respective parts of the world well in advance. Its all organised. The really duped in the West are looking at China/ HK as we speak and saying ‘how did they do it?’ ‘what are we doing wrong?’. Meanwhile, western media is training people to see China as some kind of boogeyman. But China’s just part of the act…just part of the system. All the same thing. Its just that if you’re in the West you’re being disenfranchised right now. In China…there’s a new millionaire made every week. Chinese pride grows. They are unified and ethnocentric…authoritarian. The West looks like chumps. They are individualist and weak. They’ve lost their own societies and traditions. By design.
 
Personally, I think it’s just a roll reversal of sorts…one that was documented and written about long ago. If you’re in charge of the big system, you plan these things. You’ve got it all worked out. China will enjoy some sunshine for a while…the West will sulk because their toys are being confiscated. And on the big system goes. What was it, a century and a half ago that France was a big player? We’ve had (still have) the British Empire. Then there was Rome, Babylon, Egypt. All the world’s a stage and all these ‘nations’…corporations…play their role.
 
Top of the pyramid I dunno. A small circle of family dynasty crackpots? It’s kind of hard being a pleb. You don’t know much stuff. You get bossed around. Stay true to your family. Stay as centred as possible. Trust yourself and your feelings. Because there’s not many other people out there who care or who you can rely on. You sure can not rely on the State to behave itself.
 
 

LKing
LKing
Jul 20, 2020 6:18 PM
Reply to  Matt

Hi Matt, I’m very interested in your perspective. Can you point me to any books or anywhere to learn more about the problem(s) and solution(s) as you see them? Thanks in advance.

One love, LKing

Matt
Matt
Jul 20, 2020 6:36 PM
Reply to  LKing

You could try listening to Alan Watt. NOT Alan Watts. But Alan Watt. You can find him on the ‘debess’ youtube channel.

LKing
LKing
Jul 20, 2020 7:30 PM
Reply to  Matt

Thank you, listening now.

Kate
Kate
Jul 20, 2020 8:32 PM
Reply to  Matt

Also on his site – cuttingthroughthematrix.com

LKing
LKing
Jul 20, 2020 9:10 PM
Reply to  Kate

Thanks Kate! I will visit the site as well.

Rhys Jaggar
Rhys Jaggar
Jul 20, 2020 12:48 PM

I absolutely will not wear a mask for five reasons:
 

  1. Medically they are absolutely useless in preventing transmission of SARS-CoV2.
  2. All the testing regimens purporting to document ‘case numbers’, ’causes of death’ are corrupt, fraudulent and untrustworthy.
  3. Medical Professionals have broken the Hippocratic oath en masse, from fraudulent ‘clinical trials’ purporting to show remdesivir was superior to hydroxychloroquine, to Chief Medical Officers lying about projected case numbers, to claiming that there is significant risk to healthy people under the age of 50.
  4. The media have become unquestioning yapdogs to propagandists and are absolutely unworthy of being able to say that they convinced me of anything to do with Covid19.
  5. The UK Government capitulated to foreign pressure after clearly showing that they had seen through the scam right at the start.

 
I would order Bill Gates’ entire family to face the following restrictions upon pain of bumping them all off:
 

  1. None of them will travel beyond 30 miles of Seattle for the rest of their lives.
  2. All of them will wear masks 24/7/365 until I say otherwise.
  3. None of them will engage in any sexual practices at all. Ever again.
  4. All of them will be chipped so that their every movement can be recorded and, if they breach their lockdown order, they can be arrested and locked up without trial.
  5. All will be the first guinea pigs for coronavirus ‘vaccines’, ensuring that if there are going to be deaths and/or sterilisations as a result, then it is the Gates family that suffers the consequences.
  6. Every financial transaction each family member makes will be published on the internet on a daily basis so that there is zero privacy in any regard for the Gates family forevermore.
  7. The Gates family will be banned from eating any food produced organically, biodynamically, using permaculture or any other natural and healthy way and will be forced to have a diet solely consisting of GM food sprayed at least 3 times with RoundUp, lab-manufactured meat and fruit sprayed with inordinate amounts of chemicals. Everything they eat will have been produced in the USA by large corporate entities with a bad track record of promoting human health.
  8. The Gates family’s sole liquid refreshments will be bottled water, unhealthy fizzy drinks (to accelerate the rotting of their teeth) and US manufactured alcohol. None of them will ever drink Bordeaux wine, Scotch whisky, Russian vodka, any decent beer, champagne etc etc. Ever.
  9. The Gates family will be denied healthcare until such time as the NHS coup in the UK is reversed. If that means they all die, too bad…
  10. Bunker busting missiles will be programmed to bomb the Gates estate if a single miscreant action by any one of the family triggers it.

 
See how the psychotic monopolist likes that eh?

Gezzah Potts
Gezzah Potts
Jul 20, 2020 1:51 PM
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar

My phone really liked your comment Rhys – gave you 4 upvotes at the same time!
I really liked it as well. We need more people like you!
Because, what’s coming is going to be very ugly and very unpleasant, and too many people refuse to look at the accumulated evidence right in front of them.

Tomoola Sitchin
Tomoola Sitchin
Jul 20, 2020 8:45 PM
Reply to  Gezzah Potts

The real wonder is that there people who gave Rhys’s post down votes. Utterly bewildering or possibly they are paid to be stupid.

Ort
Ort
Jul 20, 2020 10:25 PM

Or else they’re lesser members of the Gates family trying to prove their bona fides to the head of the clan.

Marilyn Shepherd
Marilyn Shepherd
Jul 20, 2020 10:27 PM
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar

I would add Tedros and Neil Ferguson to that regime

Steve Hayes
Steve Hayes
Jul 20, 2020 12:01 PM

Here in England, as the SAGE minutes show, the government has deliberately used fear as a way of eliciting compliance with its directions. The global shift early in June from the recommendation against mask wearing for the general population, to the recommendation for mask wearing clearly indicates coordination. Indeed, the World Health Organisation’s reversal of its position on this has been reported as being due to “political lobbying”, which makes perfect sense as the scientific research had not (and has not) changed. This lack of scientific research to support mask wearing by the general population is implicitly admitted by authorities, such as Patrick Valance, the UK’s senior scientific advisor, who gave evidence on this just last week to the House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology. He was unable to cite any scientific evidence for mask wearing to prevent viral transmission, and was reduced to saying that masks appear to be a barrier and therefore might make people feel better. And this is a line that the corporate media have repeatedly taken, suggesting that wearing masks is an act of altruism to make others feel safe. So initially they were using “the science” as their preferred rhetorical device, now they are using morality as the preferred rhetorical device. The shift has occurred precisely because authority after authority, for month after month, used “the science” rhetoric to say that mask wearing was ineffective, but now they want to make people wear masks they cannot say “the science” so they have to resort to moralising. This shift clearly shows coordination by the authorities and it shows equally clearly that scientific evidence is not driving the responses to the coronavirus.

Cicatriz
Cicatriz
Jul 20, 2020 4:01 PM
Reply to  Steve Hayes

Wasn’t there an article in The Guardian that actually straight up said something like the mask argument isn’t about facts, it’s about morals?
 
TBH, this has felt like emotional manipulation since the beginning.

Steve Hayes
Steve Hayes
Jul 20, 2020 4:14 PM
Reply to  Cicatriz

SAGE has a sub-committee of behavioural scientists, advising the government on how to manipulate the public. This is scientific advice the government have been following.

Tomoola Sitchin
Tomoola Sitchin
Jul 20, 2020 8:46 PM
Reply to  Cicatriz

The Guardian only does propaganda, hence our host.

Cicatriz
Cicatriz
Jul 20, 2020 10:40 PM

Yes, I know. My point was that even The Guardian admitted there were no facts supporting it’s position but it was rather a moral argument. This I to be find ludicrous as the moral argument to wear face masks only has any validity if they’re shown to be of benefit.

Rachel
Rachel
Jul 20, 2020 5:16 PM
Reply to  Steve Hayes

it is nonsense. the masks are scaring people, obviously extremely harmful. they had been wearing masks for years in china so there is evidence of their harmful effects.

Gezzah Potts
Gezzah Potts
Jul 20, 2020 10:43 AM

Went to my local shopping centre earlier, and even tho mandatory facemasks don’t begin in Melbourne until midnight on Weds night, I noticed that easily 80% of people in the streets and in the Centre itself wore masks already.
I also noticed several people giving me hard stares. I can imagine things getting to the point like in the United States, where people without masks have been physically attacked in shops for not wearing a one, or stopping from even entering a store by a security guard.
Given the fully lobotomised, propagandised state of the majority here in Australia, I already know the same will be happening here. I also took note of your paragraph about vilification and denigration of…. the other.

MiriamW
MiriamW
Jul 20, 2020 12:35 PM
Reply to  Gezzah Potts

Everyone wearing a mask looks like they have a hard stare to me, one of the many bad things associated with it. Maybe it’s just the effect of covering the other features or maybe they are pissed off with ‘having’ to wear one. Unless they shout (mumble?) abuse, we can’t really know so keep smiling while you can.
 

Gezzah Potts
Gezzah Potts
Jul 20, 2020 1:24 PM
Reply to  MiriamW

Thanks… some of the Facebook groups I’m on here in Australia are passing round the names of lawyers who will be challenging the $200 fines in court as being unlawful.
I know, keep smiling😁

MiriamW
MiriamW
Jul 20, 2020 4:09 PM
Reply to  Gezzah Potts

That’s good to hear – only challenge and resistance has any chance. Things sound grim in Aus. I have 2 friends in Sydney who I suspect are Covidiots so I’ve been putting off emailing them.

JudyJ
JudyJ
Jul 20, 2020 3:18 PM
Reply to  MiriamW

About three weeks ago the BBC Radio 2 hourly news bulletin began a story with “An argument involving face masks has occurred on a London commuter train”.
 
As most people would, I immediately assumed it was a mask wearer v. a non-mask wearer. But it wasn’t. It involved two men, both wearing masks. Apparently one of the men thought the other one was giving him an unacceptable look [from behind his mask] and challenged him about what his problem was. Perhaps he was just admiring his mask but his scrutiny was misinterpreted!
 
That was all that was reported and, unfortunately, I was unable to find out any more about it.

MiriamW
MiriamW
Jul 20, 2020 4:13 PM
Reply to  JudyJ

From a long time ago, a poem I heard called Barnsley Bus stop:
 
Who art staring at, bastard?
Who art staring at, bastard?
Who art staring at, bastard?
Who art staring at, bastard?
 
Maybe it’s having its moment in the sun!

ZenPriest
ZenPriest
Jul 20, 2020 4:27 PM
Reply to  MiriamW

To me they look like pathetic and frightened sheep.

MiriamW
MiriamW
Jul 20, 2020 7:16 PM
Reply to  ZenPriest

Yes, there is something bovine about it – very sad.

Mishko
Mishko
Jul 20, 2020 8:59 PM
Reply to  MiriamW

To quote M.A.S.K.:”Masked cruisaders, working overtime, fighting crime!”

JohnEss
JohnEss
Jul 20, 2020 2:48 PM
Reply to  Gezzah Potts

I feel for you in VIC, Gezzah.
 
I see no end in sight without massive, orchestrated pushbacks, coordinated on a global scale.
 
And the heavily governed Aussies won’t be in for that.
 
Interestingly, I lived in QLD for many years, where I played in many bands. The QLD pubs would always kick off on Friday and Saturday nights, as the patrons became inflamed by their Bundy and Coke, with some terrific blues going down.
 
Plenty of real Aussie blokes and no shortage of fighting spirit then, mate.
 
Where is it now?
 

Marilyn Shepherd
Marilyn Shepherd
Jul 20, 2020 10:30 PM
Reply to  JohnEss

They turned into a bunch of snivelling weenie wagging sooks.

Gezzah Potts
Gezzah Potts
Jul 20, 2020 11:34 PM
Reply to  JohnEss

I know there’s been protests in Germany, Serbia, The Netherlands, United States and some smaller ones here in Australia, but nothing co-ordinated on a global scale, and I’m just so *%@#* that so many in this country are so vegetated. They can’t even think rationally anymore.
As for people in Victoria. WTF? The clear majority gushing over everything Andrews does and literally lapping up every word he says like it’s gospel.
Interesting that in the media, one of the very very few talking sense has been Alan Jones. You already know about it, but Tottnews is excellent, but as for the rest of the morally bankrupt ‘media’….
I see no end in sight either John, and I Don’t see any large scale protests in Australia.
At all. Period. Unless its been cynically hyped by the filth media.

JohnEss
JohnEss
Jul 21, 2020 2:16 AM
Reply to  Gezzah Potts

You are correct.

I was on a phone call with a Melburnian a couple of weeks back and he expressed his desire for tougher measures from his dear premier.

He made reference to McGowan of WA, stating that he was needed over there to run Victoria and lock it down.

“Our bloke could learn a lot from him.”

Etc.

Etc.

Be careful what you wish for…

JohnEss
JohnEss
Jul 20, 2020 3:32 PM
Reply to  Gezzah Potts

I feel for you in VIC, Gezzah.
 
I see no end in sight without massive, orchestrated pushbacks, coordinated on a global scale.
 
And the heavily governed Aussies won’t be in for that.
 
Interestingly, I lived in QLD for many years, where I played in many bands. The QLD pubs would always kick off on Friday and Saturday nights, as the patrons became inflamed by their Bundy and Coke, with some terrific blues going down.
 
Plenty of real Aussie blokes and no shortage of fighting spirit then, mate.
 
Where is it now?
 

Rachel
Rachel
Jul 20, 2020 3:35 PM
Reply to  Gezzah Potts

the aussies are so soft. cowtowing to the covid cult.

Gezzah Potts
Gezzah Potts
Jul 20, 2020 11:37 PM
Reply to  Rachel

I agree with you 100% Rachel. And I live here. I hear its just as bad in NZ and the UK.

Marilyn Shepherd
Marilyn Shepherd
Jul 20, 2020 10:29 PM
Reply to  Gezzah Potts

What morons, why do they think 4 million pple can get sick from 3,000 pple in quarantine, fuck Aussies are stupid

Reg
Reg
Jul 21, 2020 4:53 AM

Next time I see an Aussie beating his chest about where he comes from I’m going to laugh in his face, slap him a bit and order him to sit down and shut up. I can only take so much comedy.

Opus Dei
Opus Dei
Jul 22, 2020 2:02 AM
Reply to  Reg

the movie ” A Cry in the Dark” cinched it for me, the level of ignorance and prejudice it highlighted was profound.. even to this day they still believe the : Chamberlain’s are guilty, ditto for the treatment of the Aborigines ..so yeah.. great place to live

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Jul 21, 2020 12:23 PM

It’s not just us Aussies, Marilyn. Not just us. It’s the whole world.

ZenPriest
ZenPriest
Jul 20, 2020 10:22 AM

In this spiritual war, our opponents will quickly label our actions as hateful. Unfortunately most people worry too much about what others think, and this stops them acting in the way they know is right.
Imagine that, not standing up for a principle you believe in, because of what hateful and ignorant people think of or say about you?
Know your enemy, know thyself. Know which side you are on, and be under no illusions that this is a war.
It is easier to not fight, but then nothing worth having never came easy.
It’s time to pick sides, if you’re still on the fence.
We must stand firm against oppression, tyranny, control – the latest Fascism. We must be willing to endure all hatred, scorn and ridicule, if we are to prosper.

Nick
Nick
Jul 20, 2020 11:32 AM
Reply to  ZenPriest

So how can the oppressors be safely identified?

ZenPriest
ZenPriest
Jul 20, 2020 11:34 AM
Reply to  Nick

You serious? Anyone pushing this BS agenda for a start. But they can be resisted at all levels. I recommend making life a misery for any mask nazis that appear. Don’t even give a single inch.

ZenPriest
ZenPriest
Jul 20, 2020 11:35 AM
Reply to  Nick

A keen intellect with some basic knowledge of history, politics and psychology.. should be able to put 2 and 2 together as to who is behind all this.
I’ll give a hint it’s the same people that were behind nearly all atrocities.

Dors
Dors
Jul 20, 2020 6:21 PM
Reply to  ZenPriest

Related to it, Buckminster Fuller and Milton Friedman said things along the lines : you never fight directly against the existing system: you just provide a mouse hole in it:
 
example 1: under a monarchy, you place an advisory body to the monarch
 
When time comes, you can make everything pass through this advisory body, leaving the monarch powerless
 
example 2: in a democratic system, you keep the medical field a highly regimented authoritarian system
 
When time comes, you declare a medical emergency that is to regiment the whole society under a few technocrats.
 
So, I thought about a possible slogan of a movement that would counter that trend. I thought of “Bring Back Balance.” But if I were to be confronted by angry faces due to my breaking of some rules and regulations, I can hardly imagine the words “Bring Back Balance” to be received well. Let’s think of some other phrase. If I were to run through the streets during lockdown and yelling to the accidental observers , “People For Health!”?
It sounds less confrontational. “People For Health”: you’re for health, you’re at the forefront; it’s just that the people would take care of it. People are sick of this current state. People taking health problems in their own hands can be a new mouse hole.

Zen Priest
Zen Priest
Jul 21, 2020 7:19 AM
Reply to  Dors

Too vague in my opinion. How about citizens against lies. I think trying to avoid confrontation is counter productive. Citizens and lies have strong connotations.

JGerhard
JGerhard
Jul 20, 2020 10:04 AM

In general, the only people still alive that were taught critical thinking and value it and individuality are GenXers, see the popular McKinsey chart on the 4 generations.
But most of them have now assimilated into the herd or lead it instead.
Boomers don’t care anymore, the whole thing is done for them anyway, and the dumbed down, Uber PC tribal Y/Z are a hopeless, lost case in that regard, for which their cocooning Boomer/Xer parents deserve a part of the blame.
 
The authoritarian and cybernetics know this full well and have perfectly timed and framed the opportunity as such.

Rachel
Rachel
Jul 20, 2020 10:38 AM
Reply to  JGerhard

the boomers once ate grapefruit for breakfast. it is time they let go of their cigars and united behind their guacamole hippy dips. that is what will see them saved from the covid gas chambers. https://youtu.be/r1pfzNIAlVI

JGerhard
JGerhard
Jul 20, 2020 11:08 AM
Reply to  Rachel

The boomers will be used as guinea pigs for the various rushed vaccines.

Tomoola Sitchin
Tomoola Sitchin
Jul 20, 2020 11:42 AM
Reply to  JGerhard

Yes, the boomers will be given the strongest brew, that will do its job in rather less than two years. X-ers will get a five year time line and the rest will get the ten years at the most dose. Job done by 2030, now there’a big surprise. All very neat when you think about it. A big thank you to Bill Gates.
 
 
 

covidiot
covidiot
Jul 20, 2020 12:09 PM

you know this, how?

Tomoola Sitchin
Tomoola Sitchin
Jul 20, 2020 3:00 PM
Reply to  covidiot

Because I’m not a Covid idiot. It’s a matter of joining the dots. All this has been been a long time in the making. You need to do your own research, but a good place to start is the “Rockefeller Lockstep 2010” document.

covidiot
covidiot
Jul 20, 2020 3:20 PM

you assume I’m unaware of it, but one thing it most certainly does not contain is your two-year / five-year / ten-year plan.
 
people whose argument consists of saying “you need to do your own research”, are usually full of shit. if they had references to support their claims, they would provide them, but they don’t.

Zen Priest
Zen Priest
Jul 21, 2020 7:25 AM
Reply to  covidiot

The answers are clear as day to anyone who has done the research. You would literally have to be a retard or to notice the obvious.
The reason people like me say do your own research is because it serves a crucial purpose. True knowledge comes from seeking with your own eyes, not believing what you’re told.
Actually there are clues all over this forum. On any article. You obviously fail to notice things.
If you want to just be told everything, you are anti knowledge and are lacking the intellectual capacity to debate with those who think for themselves.

Nick
Nick
Jul 20, 2020 11:35 AM
Reply to  JGerhard

You do a lot of psychologising about whole groups, without evidence. How about a sure way to avoid being part of the dreaded herd, to actually know you are not assimilated into it?

Norbertrand
Norbertrand
Jul 20, 2020 9:57 AM

The mask wearing agenda is quite simply a global Asch Conformity Experiment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYIh4MkcfJA
… with a sprinkle of Milgram …

Brian Sides
Brian Sides
Jul 20, 2020 9:32 AM

The you must wear Masks it is mandatory you could be fined coming from Government.
It Ii nothing to do with any virus or protecting people or stopping the increase in infection.
Nothing to do with reducing cases or saving lives.
If it was the government would not have waited so long to introduce the law that compels it. The government would not be saying you can make your own masks at home and it does not matter what you use or how you make them. Cut up an old shirt a tea towel or anything you like. Use some elastic to make loops for the ears. What a joke are people so stupid. You might as well ware a party hat. This is about control and gauging how much control they have. It is about maintaining the narrative and extending the con until a second wave can be manufactured. People must not comply. Only by non compliance can a signal be sent to the government that the jig is up.

JohnEss
JohnEss
Jul 20, 2020 2:57 PM
Reply to  Brian Sides

It pains me to link to Trickipedia but in this case, I make the exception to make the point…
 
“Simple Simon Says..”
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Says

George Mc
George Mc
Jul 20, 2020 9:18 AM

“Wearing a mask is an act of love.” I have about a dozen similar little snippets of wisdom collected over the recent weeks….

 
Jeezzuz – has the media truly descended to THAT level of insulting nullity? I have – purposely – not been watching it. So when will the film industry start churning out its COVID mask lurve stories? COVID thrillers. COVID comedies etc. ?
 

JohnEss
JohnEss
Jul 20, 2020 3:00 PM
Reply to  George Mc

Universal Studios and The Gates of Hell Foundation present…
 
“The War We Had To Have“
 
Coming soon to your reality…

Tomoola Sitchin
Tomoola Sitchin
Jul 20, 2020 3:04 PM
Reply to  George Mc

It descended to that level of banality and stupidity decades ago.

Steamin, psycho
Steamin, psycho
Jul 20, 2020 5:34 PM

If Monty Python had just begun as a new programme it would be seen as a documentary , it is all getting rather silly

Mishko
Mishko
Jul 20, 2020 9:02 PM
Reply to  George Mc

An act of Sado-Masochistic love.

Marilyn Shepherd
Marilyn Shepherd
Jul 20, 2020 10:32 PM
Reply to  George Mc

Hey they told little kids for weeks they would kill granny and grandpa if they visited them

IANA
IANA
Jul 20, 2020 7:56 AM

Human nature is tribal. We as a group like to identify and be surrounded generally by people who are similar, ‘our own’. Not unreasonably it was that way for thousands of years. It also provides comfort in allowing us to externalise and understand ourselves in terms of the common other. A form of pyschological security.
 
When external entities wish to control us they first seek to destroy this commonality and seek division of this into smaller and smaller groups. This makes us easier to control.
 
It is very much a ‘modern’ phenomenon that the traditional view of ourselves is a bad thing. Largely it has formed the basis for Western policy since the 50’s where the demographic of western Europe has changed dramatically. We are told this is a good thing. ‘Diversity is our strength’ – pretty much like war is peace, work makes us free etc.
 
So I don’t accept the generality of the article in that seeing differences in people is a ‘bad thing’. Its what makes us what we are – diverse.
 
But that is different to the force identity imposed on use through the wearing of masks or yellow stars etc. These are not cultural differences or expressions of individuality they are labels imposed to highlight this ‘difference’. They are designed to show that we are different.
 
It is the demonisation of differences that is the driver. This is reflected in the ‘we are all one’ type of thinking which seeks to deny cultural differences and achievements and the moral equivalence that all cultures are equal. Quite clearly they are not.
 
And quite why those who choose not be masked should celebrate and be proud of that fact. They are demonstrating the ability to think critically and make their own decisions whatever they may be right in the face of adversity.
 
It is the same people who are telling us that to be different is wrong (in the expression of not wearing a mask) as those who tell us all cultures are equal and ethnic nationalism is must be destroyed.

Russ
Russ
Jul 20, 2020 8:43 AM
Reply to  IANA

The mass terror offers those who submit to it the opportunity to wipe out all prior identifications and principles leaving just a blank slate, which then becomes the basis for one total identification with the Covid religious cult to the total exclusion of all else. In this way it’s highly reminiscent of the near-ecstasy with which many Germans who hadn’t previously been Hitler supporters cast away their prior identifications and embraced the new regime and its Volksgemeinschaft (“community of the people”).
 
By converting to the Covid cult anyone who was sick of all difference can cause it to cease to exist in their mind, replacing it with a pure Manichean one-of-us/Other, good/evil dichotomy.

Eyes Open
Eyes Open
Jul 20, 2020 9:38 AM
Reply to  Russ

Yes. The Nuremberg Rallies served this purpose; to pull those with internal conflicts and moral reservations on board.

Nick
Nick
Jul 20, 2020 12:04 PM
Reply to  Eyes Open

That suggests the ritual of clapping the NHS

Nick
Nick
Jul 20, 2020 12:04 PM
Reply to  Russ

Doesn’t Marxism do that, by creating the dichotomy of noble worker vs evil employer?

covidiot
covidiot
Jul 20, 2020 12:45 PM
Reply to  Nick

people don’t like being slaves. deal with it.

kevin
kevin
Jul 20, 2020 5:12 PM
Reply to  covidiot

From what I’ve seen over the past few months, I would say the majority don’t mind being slaves at all.

covidiot
covidiot
Jul 20, 2020 7:27 PM
Reply to  kevin

I was referring to the Good Old Days, when the slaves were considerably less stupid than they are now.

Rachel
Rachel
Jul 20, 2020 9:31 AM
Reply to  IANA

imperialism is not a culture but an anti culture. you can go to any country in europe and find the same pork and potato stodge served up as a ‘traditional’ ‘national’ dish. no the culture had already been largely destroyed under guise of the nation state, a tradition of imperialism, fox hunting and bratwursts aka hot dogs.

IANA
IANA
Jul 20, 2020 9:41 AM
Reply to  Rachel

Rachel I made no reference to ‘imperialism’ you have made that leap.
 
‘culture had been destroyed under the nation state’ – there is simply no evidence for that. Ireland was a nation which retained a national culture although that is also being destroyed by the globalists in govt there. When it was under the yoke of the British Empire it still retained its culture and did so throughout its 800 years of oppression.
 

Tomoola Sitchin
Tomoola Sitchin
Jul 20, 2020 11:52 AM
Reply to  IANA

Yes Irish culture may have struggled through 800 years of English imperialism. Now if Ireland was still in the UK , would its culture have survived Thatcher, Blair and Johnson, you decide.
 

IANA
IANA
Jul 20, 2020 12:51 PM

Makes no difference. Ultimately the same group are in control there as here. Same policies same national destruction.

Nick
Nick
Jul 20, 2020 12:16 PM
Reply to  Rachel

No, internationalism seeks to destroy nation states and thus all the cultural independence, identity and diversity you want to defend. Supra-national political entities like the EU, which famously seeks federal control and open borders, are likely the most powerful agents of this process of deracination and assimilation. Their anthem and manifesto is Lennon’s ‘Imagine’. Internationalism is today’s imperialism, but its supporters have globalist or leftist beliefs, not nationalist ones. Those ashamed of their own national cultures have been assimilated and recruited into this elitist, utopian mission or fantasy.

Steve Hayes
Steve Hayes
Jul 20, 2020 1:01 PM
Reply to  Nick

The European Union’s anthem is Beethoven’s Ode to Joy.

covidiot
covidiot
Jul 20, 2020 3:44 PM
Reply to  Steve Hayes

don’t confuse us with the facts.
 

Ort
Ort
Jul 20, 2020 10:20 PM
Reply to  Steve Hayes

Yeah, but I think they lifted it from “A Clockwork Orange”.

ZenPriest
ZenPriest
Jul 20, 2020 11:42 AM
Reply to  IANA

In-group preference is naturally occurring in nature, for it is beneficial to the species. This has been labelled racism by those seeking to divide and conquer us.
It’s that simple.
Satirically, these people practice in-group preference at least as much as any other group (the most actually).
Now just answer the ‘who’ to know what you’re dealing with.

Steve Hayes
Steve Hayes
Jul 20, 2020 12:38 PM
Reply to  ZenPriest

Satirically, these people practice in-group preference at least as much as any other group (the most actually).

I suspect you mean ironically.

ZenPriest
ZenPriest
Jul 20, 2020 1:43 PM
Reply to  Steve Hayes

No, it was intentional. I consider it a great piece of satire.
In my interpretation of irony, it would only be ironic if these people were not aware of it.

Steve Hayes
Steve Hayes
Jul 20, 2020 1:47 PM
Reply to  ZenPriest

Satire is a critique. For it to be satirical, they would have to be trying to show that their position is immoral and hypocritical and intellectually incoherent. They aren’t. They are being sincere.

ZenPriest
ZenPriest
Jul 20, 2020 2:32 PM
Reply to  Steve Hayes

the use of humour, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people’s stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.
 
I accept that definitions and interpretations vary, but this is closer to mine of satire. Satire has always been difficult to define, in other words it is open to interpretation.
 
I think satire is often used in / as critique, perhaps that’s why you think satire is critique.

Nick
Nick
Jul 20, 2020 12:01 PM
Reply to  IANA

The multiculturalist certainly says all cultures have ‘equal’ value, except for the superior multiculturalism he preaches. He believes he has risen above his own culture and history, and so can be the impartial judge of all others. He recoils in horror from the primitive little Englander or tattooed gammon. As a noble citizen of the world, he’ll never put or serve his own little nation or people first, unlike the dumb monoculturalist or nationalist he fears and despises. No matter how advanced or barbaric, each culture or people belonging to it has equal and thus zero value under the elite rule of the multiculturalist. He is logically and politically the enemy and destroyer of all diversity, yet so delusional and arrogant he poses as its great defender and champion. The multiculturalist opposes and oppresses all cultures, starting with his own.

covidiot
covidiot
Jul 20, 2020 12:49 PM
Reply to  Nick

what the f*** is a “gammon”?

John Pretty
John Pretty
Jul 20, 2020 10:44 PM
Reply to  covidiot

It’s a word that racists use to describe white people.
 
They think it’s clever.

Nixon Scraypes
Nixon Scraypes
Jul 20, 2020 10:25 PM
Reply to  Nick

You’ve certainly pinned the multi~culti bastard down, and by rights he should stay there. But of course he won’t. The smug,self adoring narcissi

Nixon Scraypes
Nixon Scraypes
Jul 20, 2020 10:48 PM
Reply to  Nixon Scraypes

~cist. *?*! Just as I was getting going! Omniscient self deluding fantasist,how does he do it? By nicely sidestepping reality,he can bathe in the warm waters of his own ego. These people seem to be taking over an increasingly artificial world which seems to be usurping the real one. De~hanced reality, trans~inhuman nightmare,take it away!

Todd
Todd
Jul 20, 2020 1:34 PM
Reply to  IANA

IANA…I am sorry you got the impression that my article was saying differences in people was generally a bad thing. What I was trying to get across is exactly what you say in this comment…it is the demonization of differences that is “bad”. And in some cases even that is simply a function of protection, so more specifically it is the unconscious demonization that is the problem—many times unconscious systems are irrational and based on irrelevant criteria. In our sophisticated and evolved culture (yes, we still have a way to go) differences and diversity are in many cases welcomed as it should be…but if we have a compulsion to project hate it is easy to mark and identify the group that will be receiving the projection. Your comment is very articulate and well presented…and from my perspective supports my views very well. Thank you.

IANA
IANA
Jul 20, 2020 2:39 PM
Reply to  Todd

Todd thanks for the response. Sorry I misconstrued your article I will read it again. Having been always interested in the works of Jung I can understand your reference to the unconscious and its apparent irrational responses. That’s always an interesting perspective. The ‘compulsion to project hate’ is a very interesting insight also and experience teaches that such responses are always borne in error. Doesnt stop us making them though. Thanks for an interesting article and the kind words.
 

Todd
Todd
Jul 20, 2020 3:17 PM
Reply to  IANA

Well…the article is obviously not perfect, I may have been confusing or unclear at times…even the phrase “compulsion to project hate” sounds harsh out of context. Hate is a protective impulse, but also is caught up in Jung’s belief that we propel away from ourselves the things within us that we refuse to integrate, that are too ugly for us to accept as being part of who we are. Even though I give rational reasoning as to why we may fear “difference” and “other” ultimately we are still dealing with a matter of “non integration”. If we accepted our own fear, accepted our own ability to hate, and integrated that shadow into our whole, then we would have no reason to project it onto others.

IANA
IANA
Jul 20, 2020 10:44 PM
Reply to  Todd

Yes I agree with the general assumption of the desire to mitigate our failings by ‘integrating the shadow’ in our ‘whole’. First maybe we would need to define what is ‘our whole’. Human nature can be seen ultimately as a juxtaposition of 2 opposing forces. ‘We’ dont get to consciously do anything in the light of this reality because ultimately we are subect to these forces although (such as in the pursuit of Jungian ‘enlightenment’) we may be aware of our role within this dichotomy seeking to overcome it. In being subjective to these forces though really we have no free will. We either choose one or the other and that is the only ‘free’ bit there is. We are a slave to good or to evil.
 
This maybe understood more clearly in our irrational responses where we react rather than properly respond. This response may be borne of many things but ultimately it is a spontaneous reaction as an illustration of us as subject to a thought or idea that we are not ready or able to deal with. The truly interesting point in this is where these thoughts emerge from.
 
If we were truly ‘whole’ then we would not be subjective in the true sense to such reactions as we cwouldn’t be subject to a part of ourselves. We would be by definition whole.
 
What I’m essentially saying is that it is not in our gift ‘to integrate’ any part of ourselves as a conscious act. We must align with the force that can.
 

Todd
Todd
Jul 21, 2020 12:13 AM
Reply to  IANA

You do know your stuff! Thank you…this probably isn’t the forum for a Jungian discussion, and you are welcome to contact me personally if you like…I would ask a few questions about what you say here…first, the idea of integration that Jung proposes is basically the process of making the unconscious conscious. He generally refers to the unconscious as “shadow” although his use of that word often is confusing as it can also mean the darker elements of an archetypal force (which is unconscious!). “Whole” is not really meant to be definitive…just inclusive of the entire psyche, which includes both personal and collective material.
 
Where is the unconscious in your explanation? And what are these two forces? Good and Evil…are they external? Are they separate? Such as “God” and “Satan”? Jung saw the psyche as a “stacked” structure, just for clarity in explanation. The “bottom” of the stack is the undifferentiated psychoid state…this is where “God” or the “divine” “reside”…then the collective unconscious, then the personal unconscious, then the conscious. His idea of integration was to bring the two unconscious “states” into the conscious mind…there is a lot of muck in both the collective AND the personal unconscious…lots of shadow through eons of human existence, and certainly through personal post natal experience (don’t get me started on past lives).
 
Anyway…this is a very simplistic explanation with lots of flaws and details missing…such as ego, super ego, etc. etc. …
 
Thanks!!!

IANA
IANA
Jul 21, 2020 1:14 PM
Reply to  Todd

Todd thanks for the response.
 
My take on the unconscious is that similar I think to yours or Jung’s that part of the mind that remains hidden. Jungian understanding as you say further applies a hierarchy to that adding in things like the superego and ego etc some of which I agree with. The collective unconscious or superego etc. reminds of de Chardins noosphere. Not really sure what is meant by the collective unconscious or the superego. Perhaps an oversoul. I used to have sympathy which those kind of ideas but not so much now.
 
I am not sure its really necessary to try to qualify or quantify the spiritual realm in those terms beyond our ‘normal’ understanding that within that exists that of which this world is a pale reflection.
 
I am happy to in the knowledge that we possess the ability to discern what arises from that realm by means of our connection to our creator – the conscience. The bible speaks of not prying too deeply into that world and now I am older I can see the wisdom in that advice. So I do look at the things of this world through the prism of God and Satan.
 
Jung never seemed to venture that far – I don’t know why. I found that limiting. He work is littered with spiritual reflection but he seems to see those things in a detached way rather than as experiential knowledge. I am probably doing him a disservice there.
 
Anyway yes I don’t want to distract from the blog so can ping you an email if you wish to chat further?
 

Nixon Scraypes
Nixon Scraypes
Jul 20, 2020 3:28 PM
Reply to  IANA

Well said, I started to feel I was wading through slush after a while with all that p.c. stuff and gave up.

Russ
Russ
Jul 20, 2020 6:56 AM

Good analysis of part of the mass insanity. In this case as with all the other elements, it begins with top-down propaganda but the locusts* rise ardently to embrace it and incorporate it into their collective hysteria.
 
[*A locust swarm coheres when, under environmental stress, millions of formerly individual grasshoppers undergo a phase change and become one collective organism seemingly governed by one collective brain. The swarm then goes on the destructive rampage.
 
It seems like the “civilized” masses, on account of free-floating economic and political fears and inklings of looming ecological collapse, already were like a pressure cooker ready to blow. With its campaign of mass psychological terror over the Coronavirus the system found a way to direct the steam which didn’t immediately threaten its own power and which instead opened lots of opportunities for plunder and police state escalation.]
 
As a practical matter, I recommend counterattack rather than defensiveness. I respond to any contention of the maskists by substituting “totalitarianism” for “Covid-19” and turn the tables accusing those who submit of committing every recklessness and wickedness of which they accuse the non-conformists. That’s just one example.
 
Anyone who knows anything about the history knows totalitarianism is far worse than any epidemic could ever be, and that literally nothing is worth running any significant risk of the total domination of the police state. That’s been the beating heart of my opposition to the terror campaign since day one. (Of course I quickly found a long list of other reasons to oppose it as well.

Nick
Nick
Jul 20, 2020 12:36 PM
Reply to  Russ

You deplore the ‘system’ as totalitarianism, but it still seems anonymous or almost mystical. I’d say its actual members and supporters are all those who treat opposing opinion as taboo or threat, and work to silence or delete it. Their authority cannot be questioned, not even by those sceptical of masks. To fight such a system, we must defend our traditional right to freedom of thought and expression. We must become ‘free speech extremists’, to use the wonderful label given to Paul Joseph Watson. Hopefully the rise of totalitarian authority will awaken and convert at least some of Watson’s legions of haters into his supporters. PJW will almost certainly be banned from twitter very soon, but there are many other fighters who understand and oppose the system and who inspire us to join them. But first, of course, you must escape the control of the frightening words of power the system uses to shackle minds and ward off and silence dissenters, words like ‘alt-right’.

covidiot
covidiot
Jul 20, 2020 12:55 PM
Reply to  Russ

It seems like the “civilized” masses, on account of free-floating economic and political fears and inklings of looming ecological collapse, already were like a pressure cooker ready to blow. With its campaign of mass psychological terror over the Coronavirus the system found a way to direct the steam which didn’t immediately threaten its own power and which instead opened lots of opportunities for plunder and police state escalation.
 
that’s a very plausible theory, concisely explained.

Howard
Howard
Jul 20, 2020 3:41 AM

To the extent this article is correct in its suppositions, it reinforces my lifelong sense of being of another species altogether. I simply cannot, and never could, relate to the thinking put forth as characteristically human.
 
As the expression has it, I “cannot wrap my head around” the notion that someone who doesn’t follow my lead might be a threat to my well being. Indeed, I would be more leery of someone who did follow my lead. It’s irritating even when a puppy dog does it.
 
I cannot conceive of anybody thinking someone not wearing a mask is threatening. I could understand them thinking it’s unfair they have to wear a mask but the next guy doesn’t. But actually a threat to them? Do people think that?

ZenPriest
ZenPriest
Jul 20, 2020 11:28 AM
Reply to  Howard

No one thinks of it themselves. They don’t think of it ‘first’. They were told that by ‘important people’ and now they ‘think’ it. See the difference?
These are sheep of the highest order, whose fear of life means they seek out masters to tell them how to think and behave. They never made that switch between child and adult.

Nixon Scraypes
Nixon Scraypes
Jul 20, 2020 10:54 PM
Reply to  ZenPriest

That’s it in a nutshell. All these people so afraid of dying…… Because they’ve been afraid to live.

Howard
Howard
Jul 21, 2020 2:58 PM
Reply to  ZenPriest

I think I really am of another species, and not just metaphorically. I wasn’t like that as a child, let alone as an adult. I’ve mentioned in another context that at around 4th grade I decided that conscription was wrong – no one told me that (indeed, my dad was in the army and would have never accepted that position).
 
I attribute my viewpoint (aka “patting myself on the back”) to one thing primarily: as a child I hated sports – and was singularly bad at them (so much so that my dad gave up trying to integrate me into a little league paradigm). By avoiding sports, I was never exposed to the kind of peer pressure as a child which, I believe, leads to the kind of thinking we see everywhere today.

Nick
Nick
Jul 20, 2020 12:41 PM
Reply to  Howard

Tommy Robinson likely doesn’t follow your lead. Hopefully you don’t find him threatening, unlike the UK establishment, the entire left and their supporting media and academic complex. Whatever people think about Tommy, he’s certainly an expert and pioneer in cancel culture.

Todd
Todd
Jul 20, 2020 1:49 PM
Reply to  Howard

In a word Howard, yes. People do think like that. But not all of them. You certainly may not agree with depth psychology’s tenets, but basically it proposes that much that drives humans in their day to day activities, their behaviours, their thoughts, and feelings lies in the unconscious. Carl Jung, one of the founders of depth psychology, believed that much of this “unconscious” was made up of collective systems that all humans shared, and thus much of it was rather archaic.
 
My article touches on this “idea”—that there is a system that is unconscious that has a propensity to act in a particular way. It is an observation, anyone may certainly disagree with it, but the theory answers a lot of questions regarding the “why” people do what they do that seems so irrational.
 
Your comment here indicates that you may be a quite conscious person, because consciousness is the cure to “bad, irrational, unconscious complexes” ruling your life. Jung also called this “consciousness” integration and individuation. As you say in your comment, if you cannot imagine someone being a threat to you because they don’t follow your lead, it indicates that you are being driven by your own conscious, and rational, view of the world.
 
As for this being a human “characteristic”…the theory states that we do all have these unconscious systems running all of the time…and our work is to make them conscious (which is easier said than done) and not allow them to rule our lives.

Howard
Howard
Jul 21, 2020 2:49 PM
Reply to  Todd

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my comment. I still don’t understand people. Even though there really is a threat to those, like me (and most of those who comment on OffG), from the people who blindly accept the necessity of wearing face masks – and will just as blindly accept the necessity of mandatory vaccination – I would never resort to censuring them or compelling them to abandon their masks (or their delusions).
 
Yet they apparently think nothing of compelling me, via government mandate, to do what they think is best for them. The age old maxim – Might Makes Right – is alive and well and infecting every society on Earth. It will be the death of us yet.

Todd
Todd
Jul 21, 2020 3:09 PM
Reply to  Howard

Once again Howard, you and I are on the exact same page with this. I believe much of this response and reaction we see in people that seems so inconsistent is due to deep unconscious systems…as I present in my article…triggered, of course, by the obvious external events, manipulation, propaganda, and coercion we experience in the conscious world. It is a complicated mess.

Calamity Jane
Calamity Jane
Jul 20, 2020 3:13 AM

The fact that there is no new disease called Covid gets swept under the rug with these articles.

Arby
Arby
Jul 20, 2020 7:15 AM
Reply to  Calamity Jane

And then we have to point that out. There’s too much work to do.

Rachel
Rachel
Jul 20, 2020 9:57 AM
Reply to  Calamity Jane

the disease is as old as the sunday roast, the wiener shnitzle and the vegetable biryani. the destruction of biophotons in the wuhan wok and the french frier. feudal peasent food dressed up with custard and a cherry on top for the pseudo rich aristopeasantry.

covidiot
covidiot
Jul 20, 2020 1:08 PM
Reply to  Rachel

there’s no such thing as “biophotons”. it’s just some BS you heard from a Youtube video, and incorporated into your delusional worldview.
 
cooking food is a fact of human evolution, which predates modern humans by several million years. they wouldn’t exist without it. try subsisting on a diet of raw potatoes, and see how it works out for you.
 
it’s a safe guess that most of the time, mediaeval peasants had better nutrition than very many people in modern industrial society. maybe your disdain for them is just class bigotry.

Tomoola Sitchin
Tomoola Sitchin
Jul 20, 2020 11:55 AM
Reply to  Calamity Jane

Yes, they could be seen as controlled opposition.

15v15
15v15
Jul 20, 2020 2:37 AM

Until now I weare a mask when I do dusty works on home, such as, rinsing objects to be painted…after all, until now none I know or none who I ask know even ONE person with a trace of Covid

covidiot
covidiot
Jul 20, 2020 1:12 PM
Reply to  15v15

that’s what’s so insidiously evil about this disease. the symptoms are so undetectable, you don’t even know you have it, right up until you no longer do. it’s as if it never happened. what could be more terrifying than that?

aspnaz
aspnaz
Jul 20, 2020 2:34 AM

evil, selfish, moronic, idiotic, (fill in the blank) maybe even as bad as a “Trump supporter.

Wow! It’s as if he has read my personality profile. Spooky!

Charlotte Russe
Charlotte Russe
Jul 20, 2020 2:08 AM

 
DEJA VU
 
“For example, the Japanese did indeed attack Pearl Harbour in 1941, that is the objective reality hook, but the imaginary story that was conjured up through this unconscious projection was that the Japanese were an inferior, sub-human, and as such deserved to be wiped off the face of the earth……..” Most people forget the series of events leading to the attack on Pearl Harbor:
 
“Tension between Japan and the United States increased dramatically when Japan seized French Indo-China (now Vietnam) in July 1941. Japanese troops poured into Indo-China, and the Japanese military began preparations to attack the Philippines and British and Dutch colonial possessions in South-East Asia. President Roosevelt responded to Japanese aggression in Indo-China by placing an embargo on the sale of American oil and petroleum to Japan, and freezing Japan’s assets in the United States. The British government and the Dutch government-in-exile followed the lead of the United States in imposing economic sanctions on Japan. By August 1941, Japan faced an almost total embargo on the oil and rubber it needed to continue its undeclared war on China, and to pursue further military aggression in South-East Asia……..Hence the simultaneous attacks on Pearl Harbor, Singapore, Hong Kong, the Philippines, and Malaya.” https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/07/what-prompted-japan-s-aggression-before-and-during-world-war-ii.html
 
 
The emergence of COVID-19 like the onset of imperialist wars do not occur in isolation from all previous incidents or without an intended agenda. “Event 201” clearly points this out.  A coronavirus like pandemic exercise was hosted by The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation on October 18, 2019.  “The exercise illustrated the pandemic preparedness efforts needed to diminish the large-scale economic and societal consequences of a severe pandemic.”  In other words, releasing a virus and KNOWING the intended consequences was a well-planned action, similar to the well thought-out Project for the New American Century (PNAC) 20 years earlier leading to the invasion of Iraq…..
 


aspnaz
aspnaz
Jul 20, 2020 2:38 AM

You appear to have missed the trigger: the US dumped Japan as an ally and switched to supporting China, cutting Japan off from its overseas resources.

Charlotte Ruse
Charlotte Ruse
Jul 20, 2020 4:40 AM
Reply to  aspnaz

After Japan was sanctioned it retaliated and joined the Tripartite Pact.

aspnaz
aspnaz
Jul 20, 2020 6:40 AM
Reply to  Charlotte Ruse

The USA declared its allegiance to China in 1937, dumping Japan during the Japanese invasion of China. Prior to that time the Japanese and USA had been allies. In Japan this was seen as betrayal, and indeed the Yasukuni shrine displays all the letters between the US and Japanese leadership. The evidence is there for all to see how they were betrayed.
 
The Tripartite pact was a long time later, 1940, after Japan had suffered from lack of resources and was sufficiently weakened to be looking for an alternate ally to help with their war supplies.
 
Sorry, but you can’t just join the story half way through and pretend Japan were the outright badies. Regardless of whether you are a fan of Japan, the one thing they did have was honour which manifested itself in their contempt for POWs, believing that POWs lacked honour because they did not die fighting. Basically the USA double crossed the Japanese after encouraging them to invade China.
 
Another thing to bear in mind is that the winners always write the history books. But, Japan has a whole museum that is effectively dedicated to the treachery of the USA, the Yasukuni Shrine. Even after double crossing them, the USA then went on to drop nuclear weapons on them.

Charlotte Ruse
Charlotte Ruse
Jul 20, 2020 11:08 AM
Reply to  aspnaz

It appears you didn’t open the link that I cited in my original post.
https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/07/what-prompted-japan-s-aggression-before-and-during-world-war-ii.html

aspnaz
aspnaz
Jul 20, 2020 11:28 AM