The norm-deviation tolerance test for authoritarianism
On everyday dogmatism, knowledge and power
Johan Eddebo
If you think about it, you know perfectly well what you’re allowed to say.
You know what most people will nod in agreement with, and what, on the other hand, will amount to a social transgression if it’s spoken out loud.
Of course, in every society, there will be certain things that are not only part of the consensus, but that you just can’t say without committing some kind of faux pas.
All groups will have certain boundaries for acceptable discourse, and there will be fundamental positions, narratives or factual claims they for various reasons really don’t like having questioned. This goes for the average individual as well, who is hard-wired to avoid cognitive dissonance in relation to his fundamental beliefs and the basic principles of the worldview he lives by, especially in times of pronounced uncertainty.
There’s nothing particularly strange about this, as long as it’s kept within reasonable limits.
But when such a set of socially acceptable positions and mandated answers expands enough, in the group and in the society alike, you eventually get to a point where power over the discursive environment pushes aside the legitimate search for truth. This state of affairs is undesirable for many reasons, but not least since it limits the group’s or the society’s abilities to effectively respond to challenges and threats in a dynamic environment.
In such a situation, the scope of those positions, ideas and opinions you can’t deviate from can get so broad and so detailed that it encompasses the major part of an entire worldview. It then covers almost everything within the field of human experience, from child-rearing and medicine to politics and religion, with the effect that the space for rational reflection, dissent and discovery almost vanishes.
You see this in cults as well as in authoritarian political systems.
Authoritarianism and the framework of norms
In a sense, the most important hallmark of authoritarian institutional structues is nothing less than a situation where the level and scope of socially mandated ideas and associated behaviours meaningfully limit the freedom necessary for the healthy self-determination, agency and psychic integrity of the individual (which if they get widespread also stymies many adaptive processes within the broader society).
Something like this basic conception can be seen throughout almost all contemporary analyses of the subject. In Madness and Civilization, Foucault specifically argues that authoritarian structures differ from merely repressive ones in that they also involve the management of perceptions and ideas (1961), and key to Goffman’s concept of the total institution is an overarching and unquestioned “language of explanation” that shapes behavioural patterns and renders them meaningful (Goffman, E. Asylums: Essays on the Condition of the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates, 1961, p. 67-68).
And in parenthesis, the intensity of these cognitive and discursive mechanisms for producing the socially required behaviour is then proportional to the injurious outcomes, to stress and to trauma, an early exploration of which is not least found in Freud’s Civilization and its Discontents (1929). This relates to the effects on the individual of a disrupted “internal locus of control” and our basic need for a certain level of agency. All the same, an important thing to note is that the authoritarian organizational structure as well as the “authoritarian personality” are most reasonably understood as a kind of defense mechanisms, as societal and individual adaptations to stress and trauma. You could compare them to inflammation, which serves a clear and limited purpose, yet which becomes destructive when rampant or persistent.
Anyway, my humble proposal today is then that these “everyday dogmas” of the authoritarian social structure is something quantifiable (or near-enough so), and by taking a closer look at them, we can with relative ease devise a kind of litmus-test for a society or group’s overall level of authoritarianism.
The norm-deviation tolerance test
First, you need a basic overview of how people in the group or society generally view themselves and the world around them. What are the normative perspectives here?
You’ll then find that there’s a core set of narratives, ideas or factual claims that are more or less considered to be certain knowledge. Beyond that, there will be a (likely) broader set of positions that make up the generally accepted, yet less certain, points of view. And finally, there will be a periphery of positions that are more or less up for grabs, and around which most opinions and perspectives are tolerated (as long as they do not also interfere with the previous two levels too much).
All of this is quite normal for any society, group, tradition of knowledge or scientific paradigm.
So how can we tell when we’re moving into authoritarian territory, and power dynamics start to significantly impact on the free exchange of ideas?
With the above in mind, there are three relatively simple questions that can be helpful in this regard.
- How extensive is the core set of positions that is taken to be certain?
First of all, we may ask what the scope is of that normative core set of “narratives, ideas or factual claims” that is considered to be unassailable knowledge. Is it relatively narrow, or does it extend broadly, beyond structurally important metanarratives or values, and reach into everyday life and the normal experiences of the human being? One example of the latter would be Goffman’s observations from the mid 20th century asylum, where narratives of scientific certainty were taken to determine the exact timing of meals, how to arrange and decorate the interior milieu, how many minutes an individual was to be allowed to sleep and so forth.
- What is the warrant for this core set of positions?
It’s important to note that an extensive set of positions taken to be certain isn’t always an expression of authoritarianism – they may be held for entirely epistemically valid reasons. An extensive set of positions taken to be certain knowledge might for instance be an aspect of a productive research programme that has amassed an impressive set of conclusions using appropriate evidence.
The important matter is then whether the warrant for these conclusions is based in authority or epistemically appropriate evidence. But even so, if these positions cannot be questioned without the risk of social transgression, irregardless of their warrant, we’re dealing with matters of power rather than knowledge, which leads us to the third question:
- What happens when you commit a transgression?
This is probably the most telling factor involved. If you deviate from the cognitive norms; if you question the positions taken to be certain or the consensus among the broader set of generally accepted points of view, what happens then?
Will you face a rational response of evidence and arguments open to the critical examination of the matter at hand, or is the response rather one of thinly-veiled fallacies combined with some form of punitive measures such as social domination or ostracization?
If the individual or group you’re facing is attempting to punish you for the perceived transgression, either for themselves, or as representatives of a larger power structure, you’re dealing with an immediately authoritarian response whose intensity you can then measure.
And if you know the scope of the positions, the questioning or transgression of which elicits a certain level of aggression or punitive measures, then you also know how extensive the “authoritarian sphere” is. In other words, while it might be acceptable to have a certain narrow set of unassailable positions, the transgression of which generates an intensely hostile response, it’s starting to become a problem when you get socially ostracized for condiment choices.
Anyway, put this together however you want, tally the score and stick whatever labels you like on the possible outcomes. The important question is whether the discursive conditions in your group or society meaningfully limits your freedom; the freedom necessary for the healthy self-dermination, agency and psychic integrity of yourself as a human being.
These are crucial matters in a situation where mainstream society seems to increasingly be taking on authoritarian characteristics. This also filters down into groups within society, including those of dissidents. Authoritarianism as a defense mechanism arguably seems to breed more of the same when everyone circles their wagons in uncertain times.
We’ll make you feel the Jim Jones vibe
As if to drink their poison
Somehow better than what we becomeBy vaporizing any of this wishful unsafe trip
Catch the very essence draining
On this slowly sinking shipMoving on towards horizons
What’s conceived will never be
I’m thinking of saying anythingAnd clinging
Johan Eddebo is a philosopher and researcher based in Sweden, you can read more of his work through his Substack.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
Perhaps you are indeed risking a ‘faux pas’, but the people who look at you askance know that you’re right, and they also know that they lack the courage to tell you so.
A ‘faux pas’ used to be a serious thing when the people around you knew what they were talking about, but today it really isn’t so terrible to make stupid people feel uncomfortable. As we all know, being stupid entails risks.
“You will own nothing and be happy.” The Anal Schwab
We already own nothing. As to being happy, maybe they will put the happy dust in the chemtrails. Why do I say we already own nothing? One should read the amazing and frightening free book, The Great Taking, by the brilliant David Rogers Webb, which he wrote as a service and warning to the entire planet.
https://thegreattaking.com/
One might also listen to his interview with Greg Hunter as an introduction to a complex agenda. To say the least, I am not a big fan of Trumptard Greg Hunter. However, being one of the self- admitted duller knives in the rack, he often elicits in his interviews (when he keeps his mouth shut most of the time) a presentation which is more easily understandable by people new to a particular topic. This is one of Webb’s better, in depth interviews.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/C2x2doH1ob0Z/
“To prevail, a majority is not necessary, only an irate, tireless minority starting brush fires in people’s minds.” -Samuel Adams
However, such a minority can become an infection on society, and even come to determine many beliefs.
Absolutely none of these supposed journalists told the the truth about anything of any importance. I can kind of understand the moon landings..it took me 30 years to work that one out…but when I did, I wrote about it on the internet 9/11…and covid and loads of stuff – and I am usually deleted before anyone has a chance to read what I write as a mad conspiracy theorist. Now I am trying to say, it is an extremely bad idea to go to war with Russia
What do the Jouranlists Say???
War War More??
I am not particularly impressed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do2lRPabX08
(‘War, War, War, War, War. It’s the Revolving Door)
You can’t even figure out Murray is a lying spook and Assange is his asset/actor.
Traditional authority over others appears to prefer people never knowing perfectly well what’s allowed, in word or deed, only that there are norms to which we must continually adapt. That way, we’re always walking on egg shells, afraid of stepping on land mines, and thus led to take our cues from authority, unaccountably and arbitrarily able to change the rules of language games (Wittgenstein) and the social conduct they shape, and dispossess us of autonomous knowledge and action.
Following Foucalt, ancient monolithic models of authority of monarchs and priesthoods have given way to modern sciences of social engineering establishing ‘disciplinary’ discourses for rule by experts (technocrats) micromanaging adaptation of docile subjects to impenetrable, Kafkaesque bureuacracy, behind which grand projects and great resets may hide in plain sight of those under siege to such machinery of survival.
The medium is the message, as McLuhan said, but the logic of electronic media under authoritarian control is not to build some global village of pluralism but a wasteland of literacy and the panopticon, where we’re being talked to or at by unilateral programming rather than talking with others in mutual understanding and common interests determined by dialogue, discussion, debate, and direct democracy.
Anti-social media of the digital (c)age refines the resultant idiocy or privation from loss of “convivial society” (Illich), so that we never know what to expect from others’ customized conditioning, thus leaving us prey to the surveillance-security state ‘saving us from ourselves’. “We’ll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything…believe(d) is a lie.” (William Casey, CIA Director, 1981-87)
The endgame is for authority, and its problems of enforcement for the law of rule behind the rule of law, to be abolished in favor of implanting us with the very machinery of control to which we once adapted.
The following was written as a comment to a current article to CHD. I regard it as my best brief summary of the cv-1984 scamdemic. The coming bird flu scamdemic 2.0, makes it more relevant than ancient history, particularly in regard to the WHO attempted global power grab this month.
The average “global citizen,” even the more educated ones, do not have enough understanding of molecular biology or even basic chemistry to understand that the scamdemic was totally built on hoax and fraud. The Wuhan “lab leak” theory, always popular by most conservatives in the USA, was put into place prior to the rollout of the scamdemic, our Overlords knowing that the original theory, a natural outcome of a love child between a bat and a pangolin would fall apart. The first thing to understand is that purportedly pumping money into purported gain-of-function research (which may have been just massive money laundering) does not mean success in the purported weaponization of the research.
The entire cv-1984 scamdemic was not even a house of cards but rather a house of dog poop built one card on top of another.
1) At its base is the fact that this virus has never been isolated.
2) It is quite impossible to determine a genetic sequence either of DNA or RNA without reasonably pure isolation of the organism in question.
3) The lung glop from people purportedly infected with this novel disease without successful purification of the “causative virus” was then sequenced. The sequencing came out with over a million potential possibilities, and the fragments of the sequencing were then “reconstructed” by advanced computers to form possible viral genomes. Then a committee voted on which one they regarded as most probable, the vote based on earlier fraudulent data and expectations.
4) The rt-PCR test was an important piece of fraud by the imposter Christian Drosten. The brilliant scientist, Kary Mullis, who deservedly won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry (not medicine) in the 90s, hollered from the roof tops that it should never be used for medical diagnosis. He was appalled by its use to diagnose AIDS. He died a few months prior to the rollout of the scamdemic. I suggest that one read his book, which is surprisingly well written.
5) CV-1984 was not more lethal or contagious than the “traditional” influenza. The use of toxic protocols (not the least of which was Rundeathisnear in all US hospital by decree and intubation, raised the mortality figures greatly. If one looks at the CDC figures during the height of the scamdemic, the traditional flu (whether caused by a virus or something else) took a long deserved vacation and almost disappeared from its statistics. In short, CV-1984 cause of death, when not really caused by motorcycle accidents or gunshots, was the traditional flu rebranded.
6) Finally we have the reverse placebo effect, effected by an incredibly intense global media fear porn campaign, which caused patients who survived their respiratory illness to claim that “this was nothing like the flu illnesses I have had in the past.”
This entirely fraudulent scamdemic and fake toxic vaccines had multiple objectives; a significant depopulation, enhanced disability (including mental) especially of children, excuse for the world’s central banks, particularly the Fed, to print epic amounts of fiat ($5 trillion), resulting in the current price inflation issue, a breakdown of supply chain structure, destroying small business to the advantage of the giant box and internet retailers, and fast food chains resulting in the ongoing destruction of the middle class. I could go on, but I think that is sufficient for this comment.
The drivers of the covid terror regime were
-pervasive global industrial poisoning, driven by greed
-quest for even more control and exploitation
-insanity of the war on microbes in allopathic medicine.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/our-species-genetically-modified-witnessing-humanity-march-toward-extinction-viruses-friends-not-foes/5763670
Outstanding!
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/may/25/another-pandemic-is-absolutely-inevitable-says-patrick-vallance-covid
“Vallance owns a deferred bonus of 43,111 shares worth £600,000 in GlaxoSmithKline, a company which is working on developing a COVID vaccine.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Vallance
They keep shilling the war drive.
Off-topic!! Why do ‘likes’/thumbs-up clicks by me sometimes get rejected with “you’ve already voted for this comment” messages when I haven’t?. This has extensively been happening to me for a week or so now, whether I’m logged-in or not.
Is Off-G doing this or is it being done to Off-G by a.n. authoritarian ‘other’? FWIW hacked wordpress sites is old news and evidently still a problem for many..
it really doesn’t matter… I doubt anyone pays attention to the comment votes and it is a social media game that shouldn’t be here IMO
Spot on! You get my “Up” vote! (lmfao)
‘The Authoritarian Personality’ (1950) written by Adorno and his cronies and paid for by the American Jewish Committee was a crucial moment in the destruction of the family. A regular family structure was pathologised as “fascist” (at the same that these people were Paperclipping thousands of Nazis into the heart of the deep state).
A child “free” of parental authority isn’t living in some kind of paradise – they are at the mercy of the state with its vaccines and gender transitioning. Look at how they’ve been trying to get children to accept these while circumventing parental approval or even knowledge. It’s not just the state of course – look at how susceptible children are to corporate advertising as well.
‘The Authoritarian Personality’ stands as a 1,000+ page bible for laying down the post WW2 moral guidance manual re: antisemitism. This was a “scientific” study to “establish” the “inherent antisemitism” of the ever contemptible mases. It even sported an “F scale” (for “fascism”).
Interestingly, this gargantuan tome was reprinted in full for the first time in almost 70 years in the curious year of 2019.
This certainly trashes the claim that some make regarding how Adorno has been “marginalised”. He is practically an industry now. And the fact that this enormous slab of a book has just been re-released only shows how convenient it is to the ruling class.
It will not be a surprise that Adorno and the rest of the Frankfurt School (“Cultural Marxists”) were promoted by the CIA. I have always thought that a “Marxism” that avoided class could not be genuine.
https://thephilosophicalsalon.com/the-cia-the-frankfurt-schools-anti-communism/
Right now there are billions of people working together, the internet itself being the perfect example of inclusive, self-existing, self-organising, decentralised or disseminated control. This is what Foucault would call “governmentality”. Right now there are billions of people working together who are neither conscious of their working together, or who will not admit they are working together as a synergetic conscious whole. Call this “unconscious governmentality”. The core set of assumptive positions is unknown to everybody even when it is in position as materially instantiated economic activity. Call this the “unknown episteme” or normative set of assumptions everybody shares as unconsciously internalised as unaware.
Nobody can deviate from the normative principles if they do not know what they are! This is much closer to the Foucault of the “order of things” or the “order of laws” than the above. You’ve got to do your archaeology or genealogy of knowledge production to uncover the episteme, something we have never done and probably will not do. Then even as the whole human population coordinates in internalised and unconscious rule-following global synergy then nobody deviates from the oeconomic norm, not ever. Even deviation becomes normative as recuperated! Significant deviation would signal collapse of the normative or discursive order that nobody knows existed. But it does exist. And it would collapse.
The proper functioning of the internet requires the proper functioning of every part of the internet in synchrony and synergy. It does not require that everybody be consciously aware of their particular role, just that they do their bit. Even if that is in a transacted commentary. The reasons for anyone doing their bit, the narrow narrative story they may tell to themselves, or to others, online or offline, in order to justify their enaction holds neither necessary or sufficient conditions for the proper functioning of the whole.
Can you see what I am getting at? We get so self-absorbed in what we say that we forget that whatever we say we are constituting a bigger reality than mere local or nonlocal discursivity. The bigger reality of the internet, the economy, and even anthropology are constituted not by what we say together, but what we do together. That is the active normative order of the whole technological system that is not limited to this or any other narrative order. The whole of the narrative or discursive order, the whole of the technical order, the whole of the economic order, the whole of the anthropological order constitutes the same epistemic order. Call that “unconscious geogovernmentality.”
There is a taboo against questioning the core set of expostulated principles, there always has been. “The principles are not in question” is even a legal maxim. Yet they must be, because they produced this global synergetic shitshow that nobody even seems to know about. And if they do, they cannot or will not think it through. Bodies are really-real. The world we co-create throughout the interaction of our bodies is really-real. The rhetoric we produce about that interactive interconnectedness is increasingly narcissistic as identitarian disengagement from the world of bodies and activities. Yet the embodied interactivity has reached singularity of which we cannot speak. We manage our own delimited perception as personal perspectival individuality. Our bodies are hardwired by cognitive dissonance for cognitive dissonance.
Sounds like rational totalisation and reduction to the authority of unconscious internalised rule to me. How do I deviate from the anthropological authoritarianism which I find terrestrially totalised if and when I question the underlying principles of its metaphoric formative framework? I guess I do not. I guess I cannot.
We are all riding bias-cycles’ of one kind or another. Victims of our unconscious framework and the subtle forms of programming.
I have a very liberal opinion on this: Nothing can be “obstructive” in any way if it contributes to a better understanding of the world. If we want to grasp the world in its entirety, we must also consider “unwelcome” sources. Every one of us is ready at any time to confront the repulsiveness and laws of the world. We shy away from neither the light nor the shade.
Only the Jews stubbornly and persistently refuse us access to our alleged “blind spots”, and this must naturally arouse and provoke suspicion and mistrust. Their principle is not at all to enrich the world through enlightenment – but on the contrary to leave it in stupidity and derangement, indeed to keep it trapped in it. They really think they can fool us forever?
In fact, this is where undreamt-of malignant forces can be seen that want to hinder and even kill any enlightenment, inner development, cultural-spiritual and social progress with the “Holocaust” club. Unlike the Jews, we were prepared to admit our part in world events. What else are they asking of us? They don’t want to “liberate” us, they want to enslave us.
Can you please not refer to this in terms of ‘Jews versus the world’, it really does set the conversation back. Thanks, A2
Would it be fair to generalize and say that “climate change” / “global warming” is really a mask for religious Veganism? And so perhaps Judaism, either ethnically or ideologically, puts on the persona of apartheid “Zionism”. . Or would the relationship be reversed? Is this a “chicken vs. egg” argument? Conflation? It’s all very confusing …
Nope. Because the Jesuits are in control and Zionism is their cats paw.
All religions are one. Sects of the same Death Cult. Zionists are secular, non religious but play the villain part (yet again just like in the BuyBull) to keep people’s eyes off the Vatican, Holy See and the supranational orgs.
Generally, the Jewish people are clueless and line up for poison injections like dutiful slaves.
Is-Ra-El had huge spikes in all cause mortality deaths after the injection rollout. This isn’t about religion it’s about a death cult who use religions and faux nation states to disguise their central control mechanisms and further their agendas.
“mainstream society seems to increasingly be taking on authoritarian characteristics.”
Having lived through several decades in which various novel superstitions were invented and flourished briefly — British Empire, Thousand Year Reich, American Exceptionalism, Cholesterol and Con-19 — I reflect on humanity’s progress and conclude that species Homo have not done too badly in the astonishingly brief 2Million years since our ancestors developed an improved ankle-bone so that we could walk upright and free our hands for experiment. As your mast-head image clearly shows, in every classroom there is an individual ready to put up his hand up and have his say.
“But please Sir!”
I feel i’ve been in authoritarian institutions
all my life…
First there was Family with its “Because I Say So !:
Then there was Schooling with its “We’ll Teach You What To Think !”
and “Shut Up !”, and “Sit Still !”
(I was either Too Young or Too Old for the Latest War –
so i Missed Out !)
Then there was Working For The Man –
“You can book out, but you can Never Leave !”
So while we were fighting for Britain’s freedom at the front in mud and grenades exploding around us, you were jumping over and under all the time.
And then you criticise you had to work, and then you whine over you cannot leave the British Empire who owns 1/3 of the world.
The North Pole are waiting for you. There may be some people like you there.
There are ways of surviving authoritarianism.
At school I painted and cut out dozens and dozens of what looked like an ape’s footprints in black, and taped them so they looked as if they had walked vertically up a wall, across the ceiling and vertically down the other side.
Next day in school assembly, the headmaster, thinking he was asserting his authority effectively, said, “Would the person who placed the feet all over the walls and ceiling in Classroom 9 please take them down”.
The entire assembly, except for the headmaster, erupted in laughter.
He really shouldn’t have said anything.
I won.
Genuine authority is one thing, but authoritarianism is a challenge to be resisted.
I don’t think “mainstream society seems to increasingly be taking on authoritarian characteristics”, I think the mainstream rich ruling fucks are getting more authoritarian and most people are like the proverbial boiling frog, simply accepting the increased heat until they can’t no more. Look at history, man, not to mention now, most people have no interest in challenging “authority” and simply do what they’re told. The latest big example being the fake Covid-19 pandemic, and remember this the 2020’s, not 1900 or 1 A.D. It ain’t gonna change. We still having fucking Kings, Queens, Princes and Princesses. I can’t get over that one, man. I mean, who fucking died and made them King? Good grief. I often refer to the quote from Margaret Meade, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”. Fuck everybody else, they’re either not going to help, or they’re going to be on the other side, and there are way more of them than us. The only question people should be asking is “are you one of us, or one of them?”
(Commenting pending until article is no longer current.)
Agreed, the “mainstream” goes wherever it is channeled by its directors. Directors may be malicious but are usually competent — otherwise they would not last long because everyone wants to climb to the top of the greasy pole. Unfortunately todays directors are inheritors from previous directs , and have no ability; there are too many nephews and nieces at the top, still malicious but now incompetent. People who are malicious but incompetent tend to become control freaks. I believe this is at the root of the present malaise of the West.
Pretty much all kings and queens anywhere, ever, have claimed divine descent or divine decree. The story goes that under the royal throne of the UK there is a stone from the “Temple of Solomon” – quite a long way from the Brit-ish isles. “Brit” also happens to be in the Hebrew language but is surely a coincidence!
The UK has a cross in its flag and is a kingdom under Jehova, dictator and judge- god of the Jews as well as Christians and Muslims, like several other Euro states with little to no indigenous ethnic or cultural connection to the middle east. Funny that.
Ah…Is this why the queen traveled the world without a passport?
Which God. Kingdom under which God? It seems this God is Satan who is also a God.
Satan wanted to be the One God instead of God in envy over what God had created.
Satan was thrown down to the earth with his demons and asked to try to do it better.
Therefore we have all this:
“Its better that the earth was flat and ugly with two hairy testicles Atlantic and Pacific hanging under a pancake.”
“Its better everything is equal and straight lines, when everything on our round globe bend and bow after the golden ratio.”
“Its better we make cyborg and avatar robots of our personal data, this way we can have eternal life.”
But it did not end up better yes. Why? Because Satan was, is and always will be a deceiver and a liar.
What are you smoking?
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/What-is-the-0XL4CrmETOeUeqIpuoR_Uw
Authoritarians don’t listen.
Authoritarians are spiritually empty.
Authoritarians cannot feel Love.
Authoritarians have minimal empathy.
Authoritarians are devoid of humility.
Authoritarians RULE! Okay?
Believe nothing.
Trust no one.
Check everything in your own experience.
“It’s not my revolution if I can’t dance” (Emma Goldman).
https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/15591.Emma_Goldman
< Believe nothing.
Trust no one.
Check everything in your own experience. >
Life is too complicated to act without belief and trust. And life is too short to check everything.
But maxims are good guides. Here are a few more:
Test everything, and hold fast to what proves good — Bernard Shaw, Revolutionist’s Handbook.
Ye shall know the Truth, and the Truth shall set ye free.
Faith, Hope and Charity — and the greatest of these is Charity — New Testament.
The human engine runs on hope as the motor engine runs on petrol — A Kommandant in Auschwitz, circa 1940.
Those suggestions are my maxims, or rough guides as it were.
They work for me.
We have seen Emma dancing in the streets nearby both 9/11 and Emma dancing in streets nearby just after JFK’s suicide when he shot himself in the back head in the backseat of a open car to get maximum eternal attention of himself.
We already know Emma’s revolution preferences where she can dance!
Normally, humans have a natural instinct for knowing when they have gone too far, and not only to make legitimate concerns public through provocation, but to shame other people through vulgar primitivism. These creatures have no social concerns whatsoever, but are clearly addicted to attention. Perverse as they are, they even expect to be loved in return.
“Ernie’s” brain was incapable of distinguishing between these two variations for the rest of his life; he mistook his subterranean exhibitionism for “social criticism” and was accordingly, as if by divine intention, overrun by a truck. https://de.zxc.wiki/wiki/Ernst_Wilhelm_Wittig
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaking
“Ernie” is the short form of Ernest, which in turn is a variation of the German Ernst. Ernest Hemmingway bragged about having shot over 100 Germans during the war. In the eyes of the post-war generation, he was of course not seen as a primitive, sadistic, perverted and mentally ill mass murderer, but as a “liberator” and hero.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest
< Ernest Hemmingway bragged about having shot over 100 Germans during the war. >
I would like to see evidence for that; not for his bragging but for his score. One hundred would be a very creditable score indeed for a WW1 infantryman armed with a single-shot breach-loading rifle. For a non-combatant ambulance driver invalided out of the war after only a few weeks in service, his score should have been in the Guinness Book of Records.
< Ernest Hemingway was an American who served as a Red Cross ambulance lieutenant in Italy in 1918. He was severely wounded after spending only a few weeks at the front. He later became one of the most renowned American writers, winning the Nobel Prize for literature [mainly fiction] in 1954. >
https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/hemingway_ernest
http://whale.to/c/ernest_hemingway_shot_122.html
Whether his insane “boasting” corresponded to the facts, I cannot judge.
Thanks for your Link, Ernie. I see I got the wrong war: not WW1 when Hemingway came in as a non-combatant and was invalided out early, but WW2 when EH came in late with his fellow Yanks to watch them mop up what was left of the German army (mostly schoolboys of 16-18) after the Bear had chewed up Hitler’s Wehrmacht at Kursk, 1943. The heading to your Link runs:
< Ernest Hemingway shot 122 German POWs >
and it mentions:
< One of them tried to escape on a bicycle. The retreating German was about 16 or 17 years old. Hemingway shot him in the back with a standard M1 rifle of the US Army >
“The Yankee ethos is stoic and a killer” — DH.Lawrence, on U$ Literature.
He did it in the ambulances.
why would anyone need to look further when their goverment and their scientists are constantly and relentlesly telling them what they need to do .they believe them and trust their science .they just do what they are told to do to help everyone
Usually, the response begins with the ‘transgressor’ being judged ‘weird’. and if not known for belonging to some fringe group, thought harmlessly eccentric. Some may label you ‘mental’.
If you dare honesty and tell people you think asymmetrically to the norm, they may assume you are retarded.
Dangerous or innocuous, the response from ‘normal’ people will involve an attempt at forcing conformity.
English People, even English People from Leeds, like Liz Truss, have recently had a bad press. I accept that Liz Truss was competing with the Fire Sales Man from Stoke on Trent to say some really horrible things about Russians. I assumed that the Russian Girl Martina Zacharova would go out clubbing with Liz Truss after the photoshoot – both knowing it was all just a stupid game…and not spit in each others faces, nor bomb the sh1t out of Ukraine and Palestine.
So as The Russians are Extremely Annoyed with us English shooting our Missiles from Ukraine using our British Soldiers, cos most Ukrainian soldiers are Dead, into Russia killing Russians just doing their normal business in their Russian Supermarkets – much the same as Sainsburys…
If the people in control of our English Politicians, don’t stop doing it, The Russians might shoot back and destroy a Sainsbury’s Supermarket close to or actually in London, possibly involving a nuclear bomb.
None of this has anything whatsover to do with the vast majority of English or Russian people…who just want to try and lead normal lives and don’t want to kill anyone, just bring the evil bastards to trial who are trying to kill us all.
THE REAL REASON SUNAK CALLED AN EARLY ELECTION IN JULY – ANDREW BRIDGEN MP
https://twitter.com/i/status/1793568491456668057
Tut tut tonyopmoc – Mary Elizabeth Truss was born in Oxford not Leeds, a city I love and have adopted as my home-town in England.
As if Starmer’s law degree originating from one of Leeds’ four universities and the wretched Rebekah Reeves being elected by the good people of this wonderful city isn’t bad enough, you have to tell atrocious lies to try to associate the city with Liz Truss.
How do you sleep at night? (btw – wonderful link above, thanks).
This is timely. I finished a 4 part series on the astrology of the U. S. Election. The final part the interesting. I was reaching a handful of readers now suddenly hardly anyone is seeing. Thing I’m being shadow banning even on alternate sites. Either that I’m truly not synching with anyone.i don’t think that is the case. I spent many long hrs on this and aggravated my carpal tunnel badly from all the rewrites. If you could even just let me know if u can see it it would be appreciated https://open.substack.com/pub/karlskellenger/p/astrology-of-the-2024-presidential-a5d?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=fjmlo
Astrology is just another religion..sometimes maybe using psychic powers like telepathy, mind reading. I’m not knocking it cos, so far as I am aware very few people who are into astrology, lose the plot, become aggressive or go to war. If you can make money out of it, by telling your fan club their future, who am I to complain. They are not causing me a problem.
I plead Guilty to avoiding posts on Astrology, Numerology and Kabbalah. Sorry, nothing personal. As a matter of fact I have a scientific belief that the stars influence us and reciprocally, I have a religious belief that we influence the stars. But I have no belief in numerology.
I see it, UK ISP, will read later, thanks.
Read it now, all 4 parts. Excellent work, you must have burned the midnight oil for many weeks. Great that it is accessible to non astrology types. I look forward to the next parts. Edith, Where is Edith? Should take a look too.
Actually, you can say anything you want right now, pretty much, as long as you accept the consequences for so doing.
If you don’t want to work for scum like Starmer and his drones, you can say outrageously accurate and horrible things about them.
If you don’t care what Bill Gates, Tony Blinken, Van der Leyen, Rupert Murdoch etc etc think, you can say pretty much anything short of ‘Jews are a bunch of genocidal psychopaths that think they are a master race’ and you’ll get it printed somewhere, even if it marks you out as ‘unsound, ‘dangerous’, an ‘enemy of the State’ or whatever.
Ultimately, everyone must decide what they are prepared to say, depending on what their priorities are.
Obviously, if you have young children, you’ll say less than if you are financially independent, retired and beyond caring what prostitutes in the media, politics and banking might think.
The PTB rely on the fact that they can keep a critical mass of people quiet.
Revolutions occur when their methods of doing that break down suddenly…..
Haven’t you had the knock on the door yet?
We have. No its not you we want to speak to…
The last time, I said he’s not here. Why didn’t you just phone him up.
My wife said, I think you should let them in..So the four of them (dressed as if they were here to clean our gutters) trooped in to our front room…to interrogate me..I said I can’t hear a word you are saying.
Please take off your mask – and he did.
Not my experience. They are shadow banning at the microscopic level. No new voices will be heard. The revolution will be a chaos of destruction which is exactly what they want.
Its the drunk destructive progressives verses the hard working conservatives, and i’m not certain whos going to win yet.
This is true. In the last 8 years an entire Censorship Industrial Complex, (a government/private partnership) has been constructed.
‘Jews are a bunch of genocidal psychopaths that think they are a master race’.
Not all Jews. And not all Englishmen. Not even all Anglo Americans.
Remember: Rabbi Hillel of Babylon was a pious Jew. Rabbi Yeshuah of Nazareth was a pious Jew. And Baruch Spinoza of Amsterdam was a secular Jew. Among many others.
I could also name many good Englishmen and Anglo Americans.
“Of such crooked wood as humankind nothing straightforward can be made.” — Immanuel Kant, Anthropologist.
Yeah, it’s really unhelpful to discuss it in these ridiculous binaries, I agree. It brings the whole discussion down about 50 IQ points to the level of coarse state propaganda from the 1930s. Obviously it’s utterly counterproductive in terms of ‘waking people up’, as the OP clearly desires, yet he continues. He appears not to be able to help himself.
He pushes every hoax, every psyop, every divide and conquer. Every faux binary.
You can’t get into an Oxford lab working in cancer (how to make it) and mess around with faux viruses (cancer cell cultures for vaccines) unless you are a Blue Lodge member pushing every psyop possible.
Covid is real.
PCR works.
NATO vs BRICS,
America evil, Is-Ra-El evil
Jews are evil.
Just vote for the “right” candidate.
Vote locally. Just keep voting.
Courts are legit.
Government is legit.
Viruses are real.
Germ theory is real.
Contagion is real.
Media isn’t mind control.
Inciting a revolution.
RJ is 100% BS. Yet, so many people still fall for these divide and conquer narratives. He won’t tell anyone the fraud of governments. And how they have no lawful authority. Doesn’t spread that info.
Researcher, while you’re entitled to your private opinions about anyone, can you please not write defamatory accusations like this? It’s going too far, really, and I don’t think it really helps anything. It just comes across as name calling, and the whole chat disintegrates into ‘he said/she said’ ad hominem.
Maybe you think I’m 100% in the pocket of this or that shadowy organisation, fair enough, all I ask is we keep it tasteful. Unsupported personal attacks are just bullying really, and we don’t want to encourage bullying btl
Thanks, A2
He’s blaming “psychopaths” none of whom are JEWISH. How dishonest is that? Zionists are secular. Meaning they aren’t Jewish. They aren’t Jews. They don’t practice Judaism.
Jews aren’t a race, that’s a Nazi psyop from the 1930’s. So OG is now condoning the Jew psyop. Congrats.
None of that, please. You already know I’ve pulled Rhys up on that very point, above, making the point you’re making here. These sorts of posts get heavily upvoted, which I don’t think is organic (one of the reasons i’m happy to do without votes tbh, I think they’re misleading and broken). Let’s try to treat each other as humans and be nice, please. There’s no need for this. Thanks, A2
Too bad that Nazareth was not any kind of settlement ( it was a burial site) until a century or three after the supposed magic Jew godman allegedly showed up in Palestine out of a virgin womb, to pay for our sins and get us all into debt while failing to abolish any of the things the writers of this nonsense decry.
Your attempt to denigrate the good rabbi Yeshuah is rational but irrelevant to the central mystery of Good vs Evil. It is like the simple minded 19th century rationalism of the servant Smedayev in The Brothers Karamazov:
“How could God create Light before he created the Sun and Moon. Hah! Hah!”
In the 20th century scientists discovered that God created not only our Sun and Moon but billions of other suns; however all these suns (and their moons) arrived many millions of years after God said: Let there be one big flash of light; and there was Light!
ps Spinoza was a secular Jew who has been described as “The man who was intoxicated with the idea of God”. Put that in your rationalist pipe and smoke it.
Maybe not all, but most. We are again down at the 500 million out of 8 billion.
Read my lips!
Go ahead, give it to us, the revolution.
I fall into the ‘retired’ bracket you describe.
I posted nothing ‘naughty’ at the start of the recent reign of terror due to concerns about repercussions, such was the feeling of authoritarian oppression
Then I got so angry at was was being done I started to post things on here and elsewhere.
I wish I shared your confidence in TPTB.
Let’s hope they remain an annoying but mostly harmless cunch of bunts.