Seperate-ness, Freedom and Individuality

One reason a person would want to be a part of a separate group away from the rest of humanity is because they have a superiority/inferiority complex.

These two qualities are quite similar to what Socrates said about pain and pleasure. They are joined at the hip --- you cannot have one without the other. 

Now, let me state that, as long as it's used constructively ---  I don't think there is anything wrong with having a superiority/inferiority complex.  In fact, I think having one can lead to a state of creativity.  The alien-ation that is brought about from the chaos of the "dis-order" leads to a heightened state of sensitivity and awareness.

That being said... one must not forget that reality always presents us with double-edged swords.  The other side of the superiority/inferiority complex is blindness. Nature doesn't grant people inferior qualities without also giving them some superior characteristics, nor superior without inferior.

Once we see this for what it is... an epistemological or knowledge problem... we can begin to understand the problem with having a superiority/inferiority complex in an inclusive and separated group that mirrors many of our own beliefs.

If this group has a large amount of money, that means they have a lot of power --- at least in this day and age. If this is true, this also means they have a lot of political and technological power. If we acknowledge these points, we see how we could have a possible recipe for a nightmare.

Does this mean that we should embrace the alternative view that all people are equal? No. This idea also has grave limitations.

This doesn't contradict the political philosophies of the enlightenment that sought to grant people POLITICAL FREEDOM. In fact, it is precisely what is most needed in the real world.

Political freedom is most needed because of one reason.... PEOPLE ARE NOT EQUAL. They are different, and it's because of this that each should be granted political equality to flourish, to PURSUE eudaemonia.

No one puts it better than Emerson in this paragraph:

There is a time in every man's education when he arrives at the conviction that envy is ignorance; that imitation is suicide; that he must take himself for better, for worse, as his portion; that though the wide universe is full of good, no kernel of nourishing corn can come to him but through his toil bestowed on that plot of ground which is given to him to till. The power which resides in him is new in nature, and none but he knows what that is which he can do, nor does he know until he has tried. Not for nothing one face, one character, one fact, makes much impression on him, and another none. This sculpture in the memory is not without preestablished harmony. The eye was placed where one ray should fall, that it might testify of that particular ray. We but half express ourselves, and are ashamed of that divine idea which each of us represents. It may be safely trusted as proportionate and of good issues, so it be faithfully imparted, but God will not have his work made manifest by cowards. A man is relieved and gay when he has put his heart into his work and done his best; but what he has said or done otherwise, shall give him no peace. It is a deliverance which does not deliver. In the attempt his genius deserts him; no muse befriends; no invention, no hope.

This is also why the idea behind the United States was such a unique one. Unfortunately, most Americans just mouth or "act" like they care about it today.

The reality is, most Americans will give up their freedom for security.

The security of a paycheck--- no matter who they are taking it from or what they have to do or say to get it.

The security of a group --- no matter how much that group does things that are distasteful or that violate what one thinks is wrong.

The security of a reputation--- no matter how phony it is.

As long as Americans are like this --- they will continue to piss away one of the greatest political projects that has ever been developed in human history.

They will continue down the inevitable road of degeneration where they are HUMANLY equal rather than politically free. A road of "self" love and "self" glorification that is bought through the words, smiles and flattery of others. They will pave their souls flat with what is acknowledged to bring happiness by public opinion.

No Need...

No need. No need to give advise. No need to impress. No need to be a spy. No need to fight wars in foreign countries for "freedom" when it no longer exists in ones own country.

Someone real. Someone that's paradoxically NEEDED in a world of complete bullshit.

A Money Making "Classic"

This guy actually deserves the credit of the word "classic."

Of course, not in the same way as a book like Reminiscences of a Stock Operator---
(a true "classic" book...) but, --- he really did produce a "classic" infomercial that will entertain for years. (Much better than a home video showing how your friend scraped the mirror on your $250,000 car --- don't forget to mention how it's being filmed in the garage of your multimillion dollar house!)

The one thing I really like about Tom --- (and others that are similar,) is at least they don't make a show of their humility. Yes... maybe his system was bullshit. But at least he made people laugh.

I'm sure this sort of format would work wonders if you wanted to sell a "classic" method to a bunch of willing lapdogs who want to learn day trading.

It seems to already be working for Penny Stocks... among other things.

Stasi Influence on Canada & United States - The Informant Society

Here is an interesting book.

When you read through it, you'll discover that many of the techniques described are similar to what the Stasi was doing.

The increased sophistication of the modern day Stasi was learned from the past failures of totalitarian states. What caused their inevitable breakdown? A significant part was that past totalitarian regimes looked excessively threatening or oppressive.

Today's modern day technological dictatorships have become very good at giving people the appearance of freedom. We hear endless talk about freedom of speech in modern day "democracies." Freedom of speech is important and political correctness is a massive problem.

BUT. 

What if we actually live in a country of "political thought correctness," and to top that off --- what if technology exists that can literally influence human thought and behavior? To see further evidence of this technology, please see here, here, here and here.

Add to this that the majority of people are completely ignorant of the existence of such technology.

Below is a video talk given by a lady who wrote a book called Stasiland.

Stasi Takedown - Must Watch Videos

Besides the videos below, see here for more about Zionist vigilante violence. I don't agree with everything that is presented in the videos below, but they provide a decent introduction to what is going on in Canada and the United States. See here for more about classified technology. See here for more about smearing political enemies. See here for more about discrediting people with hi-technology video editing. See here for more about covert agents infiltrate the internet to manipulate, deceive, and destroy reputations. See here for front businesses set up near political dissidents.

The system has been set up to find those who are politically knowledgeable and awake to their lies. They have set up tons of websites that are fronts. Once they find you, they get nanotechnology inside you, then they contact people around you and begin to stalk, harass and slander you all while shooting you with electromagnetic weapons. The internet is a part of this program. The internet is being used like Mao's Hundred Flowers Campaign. It is very important that you learn about this.

Essentially, it is a strategy of allowing a stage of liberalization and relative amounts of free expression in order to locate where their political opponents are. They are beginning to clamp down now. This is a Communist strategy and many of the techniques they are using come right out of East Germany. See here, here, here and here for the connections between Jews, Bolsheviks, the Cheka and the Stasi. The modern day Homeland Security is an extension of this.

At the beginning of the second video, he talks about a one world fascist dictatorship. I don't know if that's the ultimate goal. Though one could argue that some people have access to advanced technology that already makes this a reality. Border and country names are pretty much meaningless with this technology.

Regarding the race and religious tensions in the first video, that is one technique that is used, though certainly not all the time. The whole point is to target politically knowledgeable people, isolate them, and keep people fighting so they cannot bond together and become strong. The divide and conquer idea is very real.

Also, regarding putting miniature electromagnetic weapons in cars etc. mentioned in the second video, I don't agree with this at all. This can all be done remotely. For further information, please see here. See here for more about the company that is behind a lot of this. See here for more about nanotechnology, see here for more about the DARPA tracking grid. See here for more about RFID chips fuse with human brain cells and can be controlled. See here for more about data mining and the potential loss of freedom. See here for more about DARPA smart dust. See here for more about a technocracy run by elites. See here for more about Judas Goats and Cointelpro websites that look for people that value freedom. See here for more about the alternative media and Homeland security. See here for the origins of Homeland Security. See here for the connections between Transhumanism, eugenics, and political control.

I would also recommend that you go back and watch this video, you will see connections between the Unabomber, computers, the internet, DARPA, the military, the intelligence community, the universities and the aerospace industry.

The stalking game reminds me a little bit of Videodrome or the Hunger Games.

America Wake Up! Depleted Uranium and the Politics of Radiation

"Three Quotations for Little John Stuart Mill"

Sometimes a person can say something more powerful in three quotations than someone else says in a whole letter. Not me of course. I'm too "humble" to embrace a title of such distinction. I will leave it to a couple of writers.

First, let's take two quotes from a book I saw mentioned on a freedom and liberty lovers website. The website owner is a man of pure humility and truth. His truth and humility are so obvious that you wouldn't even need to read his brain with super-secret satellite technology to know it. But I don't know, I'm a horrible judge of character.

The book is titled "The Earl of Chesterfield's Letters to His Son" by the Earl of Chesterfield:

Below are the two quotes:

1. Manners must adorn knowledge, and smooth its way through the world. Like a great rough diamond, it may do very well in a closet by way of curiosity, and also for its intrinsic value.

2. It is commonly said, and more particularly by Lord Shaftesbury, that ridicule is the best test of truth.

Next, we'll look at a quote from Friedrich Nietzsche in his book titled the Gay Science. I picked this quote because it explains --- at least to me --- why someone might choose to do something "strange" from the viewpoint of today's ever-present, satellite spying, brain-reading eyes and ears.

A question that might be heard while reading further might sound like: "Ethics? You mean, you actually still think about that ridiculous stuff?"

The truth is I don't know if I believe in it. But, at least I still think about it. At least I haven't set it on fire and cast it into the sea --- because the conversation and the tug-of-war are still alive in me.

I cannot say that I'm "certain" that I've found "happiness" like so many others I see around me. I don't do something because everyone else is doing it, nor because it's easy or because everyone else says I should.

The quote below adds to what I mentioned on Mr. Humility's website about a thought plucked from my brain. The title of the post on the site was "The Wrong Route is Easy, The Right Path is Hard." I mentioned the following to a question from one of his friends:

I said: 

I would say this is more of an aesthetic rule of ethics that is hard to verbalize with the certainty of science. What you said is binary. A way of thinking that wants to simplify the world and compartmentalize people so we can make better predictions on human behavior. It isn’t that simple, like what Aristotle says about ethics, we don’t have the same certainty in this area as others. It might be better to say that when it comes to ethics this is so:

"Often the wrong route be easy” whereas often the “right path will be hard.” I would say it applies more to the ethical realm and not the scientific. Science is about utility, the path of least resistance. In ethics, if something doesn’t seem to agree with what we feel to be right, should one resist? I guess this is the question.

Here is Nietzsche's quote. It's a perfect fit for a bunch of herd-like hyenas that seem to believe in nothing and are incapable of taking anything seriously.  A quality that is just as contemptible as taking everything seriously.

"Noble and common.—Common natures consider all noble, magnanimous feelings inexpedient and therefore first of all incredible. They blink when they hear of such things and seem to feel like saying: "Surely, there must be some advantage involved; one cannot see through everything." They are suspicious of the noble person, as if he surreptitiously sought his advantage. When they are irresistibly persuaded of the absence of selfish intentions and gains, they see the noble person as a kind of fool; they despise him in his joy and laugh at his shining eyes. "How can one enjoy being at a disadvantage? How could one desire with one's eyes open to be disadvantaged? Some disease of reason must be associated with the noble affection." Thus they think and sneer, as they sneer at the pleasure that a madman derives from his fixed idea. What distinguishes the common type is that it never loses sight of its advantage, and that this thought of purpose and advantage is even stronger than the strongest instincts; not to allow these instincts to lead one astray to perform inexpedient acts—that is their wisdom and pride."

I would like to further mention to all the certain and happy ones --- and even more so to the humble and honest ones, a little bit about what I think the last man is about.

It's about a lack of a soul. 

"Ha,ha... the soul!"

"Don't worry about it," you say. "We don't have one of those anyway."

"Science hasn't found it." 

And yet,  we still talk about the importance of esteeming the "self," though we can no more find this "self" that is to be esteemed with modern day science.

I think the last man is about banishing the idea of the soul, or integrity, as they are strongly correlated --- for wealth, health, utility and public opinion.

The last man hops around the modern day scientific wasteland. He's always doing his best to make the most seemingly "rational" decisions that will best preserve and extend his life. Often these decisions mean compromising integrity for comfort, wealth and recognition. This preserver and extender cares no more about truth, only what others think is true. The appearance of truth is what is important to him.

He is "other" directed in the truest sense. He is driven by the need and recognition of the public for his opinion and reputation of himself, and because of this, he will do anything to get the public to look at him with adoring eyes. 

We have all been like this at least once in our lives. When we are in the thick of it, often we don't know until someone points it out to us.